Does Romans 9 condemn Unconditional Election as heresy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aidanbradypop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Long, wordy and the colours make it nearly unreadable, but while I think he did okay in countering the Calvinist position on double predestination, he failed to properly affirm the Catholic position. Predestination is a revealed dogma, but the Church has not defined how this happens. However, unconditional election to glory is the Thomist school and is indeed acceptable Catholic thought, that is, it is permitted for a Catholic to hold that God, for no reason other than his sovereign will, elects certain people to glory and bestows upon them the graces he knows they will freely respond to to attain salvation.

And as a matter of fact, both the Thomists and Molinists use Romans 9 as a support text.
 
porthos11 said:
Long, wordy and the colours make it nearly unreadable, but while I think he did okay in countering the Calvinist position on double predestination, he failed to properly affirm the Catholic position. Predestination is a revealed dogma, but the Church has not defined how this happens. However, unconditional election to glory is the Thomist school and is indeed acceptable Catholic thought, that is, it is permitted for a Catholic to hold that God, for no reason other than his sovereign will, elects certain people to glory and bestows upon them the graces he knows they will freely respond to to attain salvation.
Click to expand...
Yeah I kind of came away with the same thoughts that you gained. He did a wonderful job at countering Calvinism, but didn’t hit the ball out of the park when it came to Church teachings on the matter. Kudos though for the time and effort he placed in his blog
 
aidanbradypop said:
Yeah I kind of came away with the same thoughts that you gained. He did a wonderful job at countering Calvinism, but didn’t hit the ball out of the park when it came to Church teachings on the matter. Kudos though for the time and effort he placed in his blog
Click to expand...
And this is unfortunate, because many Catholics, upon hearing the word “predestination” almost instinctively think “Calvinist” and “heresy” without realizing that the mystery of predestination is indeed taught by the Church, even if the Church has wisely refrained from defining the exact mechanics of the mystery.

Predestination is de fide, so denying it would just be as heretical as affirming double predestination.
 
porthos11 said:
And this is unfortunate, because many Catholics, upon hearing the word “predestination” almost instinctively think “Calvinist” and “heresy” without realizing that the mystery of predestination is indeed taught by the Church, even if the Church has wisely refrained from defining the exact mechanics of the mystery.

Predestination is de fide, so denying it would just be as heretical as affirming double predestination.
Click to expand...
We are all predestined to God, but our will may decide otherwise. :eek:
 
aidanbradypop said:
We are all predestined to God, but our will may decide otherwise. :eek:
Click to expand...
You are referring here to predestination to grace, which is part of the teaching on predestination. However most of the arguments surround predestination to glory, that is, to final salvation. The Thomist and Molinist schools specifically try to address the question of predestination to glory and they both affirm grace and free will.

On the question of predestination to glory, the Church teaches us that God does ordain certain people to glory (not just grace). That’s the dogma. On the how though, the theories are that it may be unconditional (as the Thomists hold) and without consideration of foreseen merits, or conditional (as taught by the Molinists) in light of foreseen merits in a given order of grace. On the latter question, the Church has not ruled but has permitted Catholics to hold either or both positions and had long forbidden the two camps from accusing each other of heresy.
 
porthos11 said:
You are referring here to predestination to grace, which is part of the teaching on predestination. However most of the arguments surround predestination to glory, that is, to final salvation. The Thomist and Molinist schools specifically try to address the question of predestination to glory and they both affirm grace and free will.

On the question of predestination to glory, the Church teaches us that God does ordain certain people to glory (not just grace). That’s the dogma. On the how though, the theories are that it may be unconditional (as the Thomists hold) and without consideration of foreseen merits, or conditional (as taught by the Molinists) in light of foreseen merits in a given order of grace. On the latter question, the Church has not ruled but has permitted Catholics to hold either or both positions and had long forbidden the two camps from accusing each other of heresy.
Click to expand...
Examples among many would be Abraham and Moses
 
Could someone please link to the Church’s teachings on the subject please, because I am one of those who was under the impression that predestination was a no-no >_>
 
ProdglArchitect said:
Thank you very much ^^
Click to expand...
In some respects Catholicism and Calvinism agree (e.g., Catholic theologians from Thomas Aquinas to Robert Bellarmine have taught unconditional election) and in some they disagree (the Church does not teach that all believers are predestined to persevere in the faith). In some respects Catholicism and Arminianism agree (the Church teaches universal redemption) and in some they can disagree (the Church allows for the possibility of unconditional election).

ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/TULIP.htm Great way of explaining it by Jimmy Akin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top