Do Catholic Teachings On Predestination Logically Conclude with OSAS?

[EricFilmer]

In another thread currently examining the biblical merits (or lack thereof) of the Once Saved, Always Saved doctrine, William C claims that Catholics are obligated to believe in OSAS. What is more, he has claimed that 1) this is a logical conclusion and 2) that it is a de fide Catholic teaching which can be found in Ott’s Fundamentals of the Catholic Faith . Because this aspect of that thread discussion was going off-topic, I decided to transfer it here to a thread of its own.

The question is, is it possible to be in a state of grace and then fall from it and therefore reject the gift of salvation God offers? The OSAS position (at least the one being examined for the sake of the discussion at hand) is that such a fall from a graced state (however one wants to define “graced state”) is impossible.

My stance is that, although the Catholic Church has historically taught about predestination, its version is notably different from that of the Calvinist persuasion. More specifically, the Catholic version has always maintained that during ones earthly life, one has the free will to reject God’s gift of salvation and, consequently, end up in hell (if there was no reconciliation with God prior to his death). For an overview of Catholic teaching concerning predestination and free will, please read this article by Tim Staples: Predestined for Freedom.

In my next post, I will display the relevant quotes from the exchange between William C and myself.

 

[EricFilmer]

EricFilmer;9762811:

Based on what you said in your earlier post, you seem to be saying that once God chooses someone to be saved, that person automatically believes in Christ.

That is what I’m saying, Eric, and it is what you must believe de fide.

EricFilmer;9762811:

If that is the case then you need to work that one out, because the concept of God forcing someone to believe is not found anywhere in Scripture, and is not found in the many verses I cited which detail what the Bible says it means to believe in Christ.

The dissonance in this thread is unbelievable.

You are required to believe de fide that God predestines some to salvation; they will not fail to attain the kingdom; that is OSAS, and you are required to believe it, AND you attack it!

EricFilmer;9762811:

Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love him (James 1:12, RSV).

If I am saved and “once saved, always saved”, then why do I need to endure trials?
If I do not have free will, then why is there a “test”? What purpose does a test serve to someone who is already predetermined to pass or fail?

You’re required to believe in predestination to salvation de fide, so ask yourself that question.

EricFilmer;9770080:

This is no disconnect. If you continue to state otherwise then you need to demonstrate such a disconnect with quotations from what I have posted and quotations from Tim Staples’ article or a Catholic magisterial document. For someone participating on a debate forum you certainly seem to have some strange notions as to what constitutes a proper rebuttal. For the record, your unsubstantiated opinion is not

a proper rebuttal.

I’m not having a conversation with Tim Staples, but with you, and I’m pointing out to you the logical conclusion of Catholic predestination to salvation; namely, it’s identical to OSAS. That’s because in Catholic predestination to salvation, salvation cannot be lost.

EricFilmer;9770080:

Are you suggesting that the OSAS doctrine that your been supporting in this thread is “identical” to the Catholic one I presented in Post #156

? If so then explain your denial of free will.

What I am asserting Eric is the logical conclusion of Catholic predestination to salvation; namely, it’s identical to OSAS. That’s because in Catholic predestination to salvation, salvation cannot be lost.

EricFilmer;9770080:

Once again, the issue at hand is free will which is something that you reject.

There is no

Catholic definition of predestination which denies that humans have the free will to participate or not participate in God’s plan of salvation.

That’s absurd. The Catholic statement of predestination states that God **“has predestined some to eternal blessedness.”

Not the possiblity of, not the potential of, but the certainty and reality of eternal blessedness. **

Are you denying that is the statement of Catholic Predestination?

EricFilmer;9770080:

If you continue to state otherwise then back it up with proper documentation from an official Catholic source

. Your unsubstantiated and misinformed opinion concerning Catholic teaching does nothing to advance your position in this thread!

You’ll find it in Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.

 

[EricFilmer]

My current responses to William C’s statements from the above post.

1) If your version of OSAS rejects the notion of free will, and free will is an essential aspect of the Catholic teaching concerning predestination, then clearly explain the process you used to “logically deduce” your version of OSAS from the Catholic version. Moreover, if my position is “absurd” and a denial of logic then clearly explain the logical fallacy that I have committed (as demonstrated with actual quotes of mine).

2) This concerns your statement, “The logical conclusion of Catholic predestination to salvation; namely, it’s identical to OSAS. That’s because in Catholic predestination to salvation, salvation cannot be lost” as well as “You’ll find it in Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.”

First of all, “lost salvation” is too vague a term. As I clarified in this thread and in the original thread, the question from a Catholic perspective is whether or not a person who is in a state of grace (and therefore stands to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven) has the free will and the ability during his earthly life to fall from a state of grace, and therefore reject the gift of salvation (and end up in hell if there was no reconciliation with God).

In light of all this, provide a quote from Ott that states that a person does not have the free will and the ability to fall from a state of grace during his earthly life.

 

[Bballer32]

First of all, the concept of OSAS is impossible because no where in the bible does it say “will be saved” in that context but rather it says “might” or “some” indicating that not everyone is saved.

Catholics believe in predestination, which is that we are all predestined to be with Jesus. Calvin believed in pre-predestination, which is that you’re already judged by the time you are born and cannot change it. Well, this takes away the whole purpose of sin and the Crucifixion because there would be no need to be freed from sin if we are predestined from birth.

Now, to answer your question. Yes, you can fall away from the state of grace. “Of forgiveness be not overconfident, adding sin upon sin. Say not:‘Great is his mercy; my many sins he will forgive.’ For mercy and anger alike are with him; upon the wicked alights his wrath.” (Sirach 5: 5-7) In this passage, one can relate to many OSAS believers because many of them have sinned mortally and have not gotten it removed, but still continue to proclaim salvation. Sirach reminds us that in order for us to stay with salvation, we must ask of forgiveness through confession, try to sin no more, and realize that our paths can change to matter what.

Don’t confuse God’s Mercy with His Justice.

Another quote to use for non-Catholics (Sirach isn’t in the Protestant “bible”). “the love of many will grow cold. But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.” (Mt. 24: 12-13) Christ doesn’t say “the one who makes a single confession of faith” but the one who continues to believe even after falling away.

We must “work out [our] salvation with fear and trembling.” (Phil 2:12) Here Paul reminds us that our salvation is a process and requires fear of the Lord suffering through trials, not some phony Praise and Worship service that declares everyone in the room is saved and can go ahead and have “fun” with their lives. No, this is not how it works.

Hope i helped

 

[EricFilmer]

First of all, the concept of OSAS is impossible because no where in the bible does it say “will be saved” in that context but rather it says “might” or “some” indicating that not everyone is saved.

Catholics believe in predestination, which is that we are all predestined to be with Jesus. Calvin believed in pre-predestination, which is that you’re already judged by the time you are born and cannot change it. Well, this takes away the whole purpose of sin and the Crucifixion because there would be no need to be freed from sin if we are predestined from birth.

Now, to answer your question. Yes, you can fall away from the state of grace. “Of forgiveness be not overconfident, adding sin upon sin. Say not:‘Great is his mercy; my many sins he will forgive.’ For mercy and anger alike are with him; upon the wicked alights his wrath.” (Sirach 5: 5-7) In this passage, one can relate to many OSAS believers because many of them have sinned mortally and have not gotten it removed, but still continue to proclaim salvation. Sirach reminds us that in order for us to stay with salvation, we must ask of forgiveness through confession, try to sin no more, and realize that our paths can change to matter what.

Don’t confuse God’s Mercy with His Justice.

Another quote to use for non-Catholics (Sirach isn’t in the Protestant “bible”). “the love of many will grow cold. But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.” (Mt. 24: 12-13) Christ doesn’t say “the one who makes a single confession of faith” but the one who continues to believe even after falling away.

We must “work out [our] salvation with fear and trembling.” (Phil 2:12) Here Paul reminds us that our salvation is a process and requires fear of the Lord suffering through trials, not some phony Praise and Worship service that declares everyone in the room is saved and can go ahead and have “fun” with their lives. No, this is not how it works.

Hope i helped

Thanks, Bballer32

 

[EricFilmer]

To those desiring to participate in this thread:

Just so things stay on focus, if you have comments regarding the biblical merits (or lack thereof) of OSAS, please post them in the thread entitled How to Refute “Eternal Security” or “OSAS”.

I would like the thread at hand to examine whether or not a person can take the Catholic Church’s teachings concerning predestination and logically derive the OSAS doctrine from them. As I stated in Posts 1 & 2, it is my position that the Church’s teachings concerning free will make such a deduction impossible.

 

[Mystophilus]

My stance is that, although the Catholic Church has historically taught about predestination, its version is notably different from that of the Calvinist persuasion. More specifically, the Catholic version has always maintained that during ones earthly life, one has the free will to reject God’s gift of salvation and, consequently, end up in hell (if there was no reconciliation with God prior to his death). For an overview of Catholic teaching concerning predestination and free will, please read this article by Tim Staples: Predestined for Freedom.

311 Angels and men, as intelligent and free creatures, have to journey toward their ultimate destinies by their free choice and preferential love. They can therefore go astray.

1730 God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.”

1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. By free will one shapes one’s own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.

1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.

As further noted in your Catechism, it is this very freedom which makes humanity responsible for sin: had their actions been predestined by God, their sin would be God’s fault.

 

[bzkoss236]

My current responses to William C’s statements from the above post.

1) If your version of OSAS rejects the notion of free will, and free will is an essential aspect of the Catholic teaching concerning predestination, then clearly explain the process you used to “logically deduce” your version of OSAS from the Catholic version. Moreover, if my position is “absurd” and a denial of logic then clearly explain the logical fallacy that I have committed (as demonstrated with actual quotes of mine).

2) This concerns your statement, “The logical conclusion of Catholic predestination to salvation; namely, it’s identical to OSAS. That’s because in Catholic predestination to salvation, salvation cannot be lost” as well as “You’ll find it in Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.”

First of all, “lost salvation” is too vague a term. As I clarified in this thread and in the original thread, the question from a Catholic perspective is whether or not a person who is in a state of grace (and therefore stands to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven) has the free will and the ability during his earthly life to fall from a state of grace, and therefore reject the gift of salvation (and end up in hell if there was no reconciliation with God).

In light of all this, provide a quote from Ott that states that a person does not have the free will and the ability to fall from a state of grace during his earthly life.

Well, William is also misquoting that line. What I gather from just that line is that “some” are predestined to blessedness, this in no way implies all, or even most. What this says to me is that (if this is true) God predestines certain people for His will to be carried out. I would take this to mean people like Mary, since Mary was freed from sin before she was born, she was predestined for heaven, even more so because she became the mother of our Lord. And in this sense of predestination, I would say that the “some” is very few.

 

[Contarini]

In another thread currently examining the biblical merits (or lack thereof) of the Once Saved, Always Saved doctrine, William C claims that Catholics are obligated to believe in OSAS. What is more, he has claimed that 1) this is a logical conclusion and 2) that it is a de fide Catholic teaching which can be found in Ott’s Fundamentals of the Catholic Faith . Because this aspect of that thread discussion was going off-topic, I decided to transfer it here to a thread of its own.

The question is, is it possible to be in a state of grace and then fall from it and therefore reject the gift of salvation God offers? The OSAS position (at least the one being examined for the sake of the discussion at hand) is that such a fall from a graced state (however one wants to define “graced state”) is impossible.

My stance is that, although the Catholic Church has historically taught about predestination, its version is notably different from that of the Calvinist persuasion. More specifically, the Catholic version has always maintained that during ones earthly life, one has the free will to reject God’s gift of salvation and, consequently, end up in hell (if there was no reconciliation with God prior to his death). For an overview of Catholic teaching concerning predestination and free will, please read this article by Tim Staples: Predestined for Freedom.

In my next post, I will display the relevant quotes from the exchange between William C and myself.

I regret not having followed this discussion. William’s basic mistake is that he confuses predestination to eternal life with regeneration. The Catholic belief is that not all the regenerate are among those elect to eternal life. The elect will not fall away, but many of the regenerate may fall away.

Calvinism identifies regeneration with predestination, so that only the elect are ever regenerate.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Well, William is also misquoting that line. What I gather from just that line is that “some” are predestined to blessedness, this in no way implies all, or even most. What this says to me is that (if this is true) God predestines certain people for His will to be carried out. I would take this to mean people like Mary, since Mary was freed from sin before she was born, she was predestined for heaven, even more so because she became the mother of our Lord. And in this sense of predestination, I would say that the “some” is very few.

That is not the classic Western Catholic understanding of predestination.

Predestination applies to all those who are saved–all who are saved were predestined to be saved. In Catholic theology (and in most thoughtful, sophisticated forms of Calvinism as well) this does not violate free will, though it may violate a strictly “libertarian” conception of free will.

It appears to be open for Catholics to believe that predestination is based on God’s foreknowledge of what we will do. I have a very Thomist friend who is suspicious of whether this view is actually orthodox, but in fact the majority of Catholics today seem to hold it and the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia treats it as an open question.

It’s beyond question, however, that the majority view among major theologians of the Latin Catholic tradition, ever since St. Augustine, has been that God’s choice to predestine a person for salvation is logically prior to God’s eternal knowledge of that person’s actions. This is certainly what Aquinas believed.

As I said, this does not imply OSAS in any way, because in Catholic theology a person may be regenerate and yet not be among those chosen for eternal salvation.

Edwin

 

[EricFilmer]

I appreciate all the (name removed by moderator)ut and comments that this thread has generated. They have been very helpful to the discussion.

Naturally, I would also like to see William C come on board to defend his comments from the the initial OSAS thread, which I have conveniently presented in Post #2.

The creation of this current thread was announced in a post directed to William C in the other OSAS thread, as can be seen in Post #172 therein. But even if he overlooked the invitation (and to be fair, he was fielding a lot of posts at the time), I designed the title of this thread in a manner that accurately paraphrased his assertion, so hopefully he will notice it when glancing through the apologetics forum list.

Seeing as the initial OSAS thread has now been closed down, it is my hope that those who were participating in it will consider themselves freed up to engage this thread’s discussion (along with, naturally, anyone else who wants to).

Of course, I realize that it was only yesterday that I made the announcement of this new thread, so naturally a little patience on my part is in order, as is symbolized in this picture:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[William_C]

1. If your version of OSAS rejects the notion of free will, and free will is an essential aspect of the Catholic teaching concerning predestination, then clearly explain the process you used to “logically deduce” your version of OSAS from the Catholic version. Moreover, if my position is “absurd” and a denial of logic then clearly explain the logical fallacy that I have committed (as demonstrated with actual quotes of mine).

You are over-complicating this, Eric. It’s not that hard.

The Catholic church teaches predestination to salvation because it’s a biblical teaching.

The Biblical statement regarding those predestined to salvation is that they will attain the kingdom.

The Catholic statement regarding those predestined to salvation is that they will attain the kingdom, if it weren’t, it wouldn’t be stated that those predestined to salvation are predestined to salvation.

That’s OSAS, anyway you look at it. If you don’t believe it is, then what is it, for you?

2) This concerns your statement, “The logical conclusion of Catholic predestination to salvation; namely, it’s identical to OSAS. That’s because in Catholic predestination to salvation, salvation cannot be lost” as well as “You’ll find it in Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.”

First of all, “lost salvation” is too vague a term. As I clarified in this thread and in the original thread, the question from a Catholic perspective is whether or not a person who is in a state of grace (and therefore stands to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven) has the free will and the ability during his earthly life to fall from a state of grace, and therefore reject the gift of salvation (and end up in hell if there was no reconciliation with God).

In light of all this, provide a quote from Ott that states that a person does not have the free will and the ability to fall from a state of grace during his earthly life.

You’re still complicating this.

Catholic predestination to eternal blessedness is just that, and nothing else.

It’s not, “predestined to the possibility of eternal blessedness,” nor **“predestined to the the potential of eternal blessedness,” **but "predestined to eternal blessedness."

If the latter of those is not what is meant in the doctrine, then the name of the doctrine should be changed to reflect what is meant.

 

[William_C]

I regret not having followed this discussion. William’s basic mistake is that he confuses predestination to eternal life with regeneration. The Catholic belief is that not all the regenerate are among those elect to eternal life. The elect will not fall away, but many of the regenerate may fall away.

Calvinism identifies regeneration with predestination, so that only the elect are ever regenerate.

Edwin

There’s no confusion, Contarini. I’m referring to the predestined to “eternal blessedness,” and have been referring to them throughout the discussion.

 

[William_C]

Well, William is also misquoting that line. What I gather from just that line is that “some” are predestined to blessedness, this in no way implies all, or even most. What this says to me is that (if this is true) God predestines certain people for His will to be carried out. I would take this to mean people like Mary, since Mary was freed from sin before she was born, she was predestined for heaven, even more so because she became the mother of our Lord. And in this sense of predestination, I would say that the “some” is very few.

Not misquoting at all. You’re assuming my statements.

Try reading them instead.

 

[William_C]

**a note to all of you.

Keep your responses/statements short, and to the point.

I absolutely will not respond to multiple paged posts.

I don’t have the time.**

 

[Contarini]

There’s no confusion, Contarini. I’m referring to the predestined to “eternal blessedness,” and have been referring to them throughout the discussion.

Right. But according to Catholic theology, you can experience regeneration without being among those “predestined to eternal blessedness.”

If you claim that Catholic theology implies OSAS, you are confused. Period.

If you’re simply saying that the Catholic argument “OSAS takes away free will” applies just as strongly to views of predestination Catholics are required to hold, then that’s a serious argument (I don’t think I accept it, but Catholics do need to be reminded that predestination is a doctrine in their tradition). I think the “OSAS takes away free will” argument is a bad one anyway.

 

[William_C]

Right. But according to Catholic theology, you can experience regeneration without being among those “predestined to eternal blessedness.”

Yes, I know that.

Contarini:

If you claim that Catholic theology implies OSAS, you are confused. Period.

The Catholic doctrine of predestination to eternal blessedness is OSAS.

If you don’t believe it is, then what is it?

Contarini:

If you’re simply saying that the Catholic argument “OSAS takes away free will” applies just as strongly to views of predestination Catholics are required to hold, then that’s a serious argument (I don’t think I accept it, but Catholics do need to be reminded that predestination is a doctrine in their tradition). I think the “OSAS takes away free will” argument is a bad one anyway.

There’s no need to consider “free will” in Catholic predestination to eternal blessedness.

Predestination to something by God means the outcome is an absolute certainty.

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

The Catholic doctrine of predestination to eternal blessedness is OSAS.

If you don’t believe it is, then what is it?

We may now briefly summarize the whole Catholic doctrine, which is in harmony with our reason as well as our moral sentiments. According to the doctrinal decisions of general and particular synods, God infallibly foresees and immutably preordains from eternity all future events (cf. Denzinger, n. 1784), all fatalistic necessity, however, being barred and human liberty remaining intact (Denz., n. 607). Consequently man is free whether he accepts grace and does good or whether he rejects it and does evil (Denz., n. 797). Just as it is God’s true and sincere will that all men, no one excepted, shall obtain eternal happiness, so, too, Christ has died for all (Denz., n. 794), not only for the predestined (Denz., n. 1096), or for the faithful (Denz., n. 1294), though it is true that in reality not all avail themselves of the benefits of redemption (Denz., n. 795). Though God preordained both eternal happiness and the good works of the elect (Denz., n. 322), yet, on the other hand, He predestined no one positively to hell, much less to sin (Denz., nn. 200, 816). Consequently, just as no one is saved against his will (Denz., n. 1363), so the reprobate perish solely on account of their wickedness (Denz., nn. 318, 321). God foresaw the everlasting pains of the impious from all eternity, and preordained this punishment on account of their sins (Denz., n. 322), though He does not fail therefore to hold out the grace of conversion to sinners (Denz., n. 807), or pass over those who are not predestined (Denz., n. 827). As long as the reprobate live on earth, they may be accounted true Christians and members of the Church, just as on the other hand the predestined may be outside the pale of Christianity and of the Church (Denz., nn. 628, 631). Without special revelation no one can know with certainty that he belongs to the number of the elect (Denz., nn. 805 sq., 825 sq.).

Predestination in the old Catholic Encyclopedia

 

[EricFilmer]

You are over-complicating this, Eric. It’s not that hard.

The Catholic church teaches predestination to salvation because it’s a biblical teaching.

The Biblical statement regarding those predestined to salvation is that they will attain the kingdom.

The Catholic statement regarding those predestined to salvation is that they will attain the kingdom, if it weren’t, it wouldn’t be stated that those predestined to salvation are predestined to salvation.

As I have previously stated in this thread and the initial thread, Catholicism teaches predestination, but there are differences in the details concerning the Catholic understanding of it when compared to Calvinism. More specifically, the Catholic Church’s definition of predestination teaches that there is an interplay between salvation and human free will, while your definition of predestination (if I understand it correctly) denies free will. But the claims that you have been making is that Catholic teaching on predestination logically lead to your “no free will” version of OSAS.

In light of all this, you are saying that a Catholic teaching on salvation which hinges upon free will somehow logically leads to a OSAS doctrine which denies free will. Hence, I’m not “over complicating” the situation, but asking you to support your stance by resolving what seems to be a pretty big contradiction.

That’s OSAS, anyway you look at it. If you don’t believe it is, then what is it, for you?

I will answer this by presenting here what I posted in the previous thread:

The Catholic Teaching on Predestination

For a good overview of the Catholic teaching on predestination, I invite people to read Tim Staples’ article, Predestined for Freedom. Here are some notable quotes from this article:

For Catholics, when God “establishes his eternal plan of ‘predestination,’ he includes in it each person’s free response to his grace” (CCC 600). Thus, anyone who is finally saved will have been predestined by God because it was God’s predestined plan and God’s grace that went before him and enabled him to be saved.

God’s will is immutable; therefore, God’s will is always accomplished. The mistake is to reject free will because of this truth. We have already seen that it is God’s will for all to be saved (2 Pt 3:9, cf. 1 Tm 2:4, 1 Jn 2:1-2). But it is also true that some men will not be saved (cf. Mt 7:13, 25:46; Rv 21:8). This implies the freedom to choose to serve God or not (cf. Dt 28:15, Mt 19:17-22). All of this must be understood within God’s predestined plan. How do we reconcile all of this? We conclude that God’s will has an antecedent and a consequent nature. It is God’s antecedent will that all be saved. However, as a consequence of God’s gift of free will, some reject God’s antecedent will. It then becomes God’s consequent will for that soul to go to hell. God’s will is accomplished and our free will, which is revealed in Scripture, is preserved. It is God’s predestined plan for us to have free will (CCC 600).

You’re still complicating this.

Catholic predestination to eternal blessedness is just that, and nothing else.

It’s not, “predestined to the possibility of eternal blessedness,” nor **“predestined to the the potential of eternal blessedness,” **but "predestined to eternal blessedness."

If the latter of those is not what is meant in the doctrine, then the name of the doctrine should be changed to reflect what is meant.

Nothing you stated here refutes what I have posted. Once again, the issue at hand is whether or not the traditional understanding of predestination must rule out (from a logical perspective) the interplay of free will. Scripture clearly teaches that it is God’s will that all be saved while at the same time teaching that only some will end up being saved. From the Catholic perspective, these two statements are not in conflict with one another, because humans have the free will to reject the gift of salvation (see again Staples’ above comments about the distinction between God’s antecedent will and consequent will). In light of this, Catholic teaching cannot logically lead to your understanding of OSAS because (among other reasons) this discrepancy in Scripture cannot be resolved without an appeal to free will.

 

[William_C]

Nothing you stated here refutes what I have posted. Once again, the issue at hand is whether or not the traditional understanding of predestination must rule out (from a logical perspective) the interplay of free will. Scripture clearly teaches that it is God’s will that all be saved while at the same time teaching that only some will end up being saved. From the Catholic perspective, these two statements are not in conflict with one another, because humans have the free will to reject the gift of salvation (see again Staples’ above comments about the distinction between God’s antecedent will and consequent will). In light of this, Catholic teaching cannot logically lead to your understanding of OSAS because (among other reasons) this discrepancy in Scripture cannot be resolved without an appeal to free will.

There are both Catholic and non-Catholic ideas regarding predestination.

And then there’s God’s revelation of predestination in which He asserts that predestination to salvation is based upon His choice, and that His choice is made in eternity, and that His choice is eternally fixed and will not fail to come to pass (Jn 6:39 ff; 10:27-28; (Rom 8:29ff; Eph 1:3ff; 1 Pet 1:1ff, etc.), and that salvation is not out of the individual (Eph 2:8ff).

Which individual “free” will, by the way, is **SO VERY FREE **that no individual has the wherewithall to come to Christ, nor to choose to believe in Him except God grants the that the individual will.

ISTM that the putting Catholic predestination is a misnomer.