R
rose321
Guest
Respectfully thank you for your kind reply agree!! Peace
- Status
J
jim1130
Guest
I believe the poster was wanting your definition as a starting point to the discussion. Your reply seems to indicate something nefarious or something ignorant. It was merely a question to initiate dialogue, I.e. wanting your definition as a starting point.
R
RedFan
Guest
Did you really mean “proper” here? Or just “forgiveable”?
(I’m not sure of the sense in which Judas was “chosen” by Jesus; can you clarify? Do you mean as an apostle, or as a betrayer? If the former, do we have any reason to suspect that Jesus knew at the time Judas became an apostle that he would one day betray Jesus?)
Last edited:
K
Kei
Guest
Our earliest parents lived in a sinless world, a world where God was present readily; they had one command, broke it and sinned, and so the world lost that light; God is hidden from the World.
But Christ came, being the Light of the World. He established baptism, which rids us of our original sin and brings the light of Christ into the world from the inside.
I think if we want to call it unjust we are not understanding what original sin is.
But Christ came, being the Light of the World. He established baptism, which rids us of our original sin and brings the light of Christ into the world from the inside.
I think if we want to call it unjust we are not understanding what original sin is.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Yes, I do. The claim that @Latin is making is that, since a particular Archbishop is said to hold to a particular theological stance that the Church doesn’t teach, and since Pope Francis chose him for a particular role, then that implies that Pope Francis himself believes in that particular theological stance.
I’m claiming that this logic is defective – as defective as asserting “since Jesus chose Judas to be an apostle, and Judas betrayed Jesus, that means that Jesus desires us to be betrayers; since Jesus chose Peter to be an apostle, and Peter denied Jesus, that means that Jesus desires us to be deniers.” That logic just breaks down.
As Catholics, we assert that Jesus did know. In John 6, we read:
E
Edward_H
Guest
It’s part of the lesson that our relationship with God, Our Father, isn’t as some of the protestants preach…“me and Jesus in my pocket”. That what we do has ripples - good or bad - in the world.
The “effects” of original sin are with us, and are mainly a lack of perfect dominion over our passions…Our will and our intellect can gain ground…but there will be until we die a struggle to dominate our passions.
It’s not unjust to us…we aren’t worth spit on clay so to speak…so claiming that we’ve been wronged in some way is itself a sign of original sin…the pride in us comes out and we claim we’re a victim!!
A greater disposition of humiity will evaporate the idea that original sin is an unjust effect on us.
The “effects” of original sin are with us, and are mainly a lack of perfect dominion over our passions…Our will and our intellect can gain ground…but there will be until we die a struggle to dominate our passions.
It’s not unjust to us…we aren’t worth spit on clay so to speak…so claiming that we’ve been wronged in some way is itself a sign of original sin…the pride in us comes out and we claim we’re a victim!!
A greater disposition of humiity will evaporate the idea that original sin is an unjust effect on us.
Last edited:
R
RedFan
Guest
Yes, @Latin’s logic is faulty, but not for the reason you mention. Francis could have chosen Ladaria for reasons unrelated to, and despite, his theological stance on this issue, and Jesus could have chosen Peter and Judas for reasons unrelated to, and despite, their betrayals. But that doesn’t mean either Francis or Jesus did so. We don’t know. We can’t know in Jesus’s case.
Knowing that one of twelve is a devil is different from knowing which one of twelve is a devil. The reference to Judas is John’s, not Jesus’s – and we cannot know whether it is commentary or not.
L
Latin
Guest
God bless you Gorgias and God bless every readers of the CAF.Latin:
Are you sure about that?
Are you sure about that? By this logic, we would have to say “if Jesus didn’t believe it was proper for people to abandon Him, he would not have chosen Peter (who denied him) and Judas (who betrayed him).”
See how that logic doesn’t work?
Thank you for your post.
I always read your posts, I know you have great knowledge in Catholic Theology.
I also believe we all have some room to improve our Theological knowledge.
.
I’m sure that Archbishop Luis F. Ladaria, Jesuit theologian openly teaching Universal Salvation, it is common knowledge, maybe not common knowledge for everyone.
.
It is only my opinion that Pope Francis appointed him for the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith because he has the same view on the subject.
.
If I would be Pope Francis I would do the same, but I do not make a federal case on this subject.
In Catholic Soteriology I have far bigger fish and MANY OF THEM to fry to prove God’s Justice, His love and Mercy DEMANDS that He MUST save every human person.
.
Continue
Last edited:
L
Latin
Guest
Continuation
.
I agree with you Gorgias, the Church rejected Universal Salvation, but I also know, on what ground the Church rejected Universal Salvation.
.
I show you it as follows:
THE “REASONS” THE CHURCH REJECTED UNIVERSAL SALVATION, AND THE REASON PEOPLE HAVE TO GO TO HELL ???
.
A TIPTOE THROUGH TULIP James Akin
.
Quote: Thomas Aquinas wrote, "God wills to manifest his goodness in men: in respect to those whom he predestines, by means of his mercy, in 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. End quote.
.
Quote from Augustune: Yet why he chooses some for glory and reprobates others has no reason except the divine will. ST I:23:5. End quote.
.
Now James Akin speaking: (A tiptoe through TULIP)
Quote: One may say that although the sufficiency of the atonement is not limited, its efficiency is limited.
This is something everyone who believes in hell must acknowledge because, if the atonement was made efficacious for everyone, then no one would end up in hell. – Something to think about. End quote.
.
This is above the best and clearest explanation I ever read on the reason the majority of the human race going to the pains of hell for all eternity; because God “failed” to make Christ’s sacrifice efficacious for everyone.
If God would made the atonement efficacious for everyone, then no one would have to go to hell.
.
Johns Salza Catholic Apologist in the Mystery of Predestination teaching about the same notion.
The section on efficacious Grace endevers to show that for those whom he chosen, he sends efficacious Grace that infallibly makes man freely choose God.
The chapter on sufficient Grace speaks of God sending sufficient grace to all people that is sufficient to Grant them salvation.
But at the same time, Salza explains it really is not sufficient, and nobody can be saved this way.
.
I don’t know how anyone cannot see the incredible contradictions and the impossibility of the above teachings.
Yet I didn’t see it either until I started an intensive study of the above teachings for the reason to DEFEND it, and while I studied it I realized, I trying to defend a theological impossibility.
.
God bless you Gorgias and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Latin
.
I agree with you Gorgias, the Church rejected Universal Salvation, but I also know, on what ground the Church rejected Universal Salvation.
.
I show you it as follows:
THE “REASONS” THE CHURCH REJECTED UNIVERSAL SALVATION, AND THE REASON PEOPLE HAVE TO GO TO HELL ???
.
A TIPTOE THROUGH TULIP James Akin
.
Quote: Thomas Aquinas wrote, "God wills to manifest his goodness in men: in respect to those whom he predestines, by means of his mercy, in 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. End quote.
.
Quote from Augustune: Yet why he chooses some for glory and reprobates others has no reason except the divine will. ST I:23:5. End quote.
.
Now James Akin speaking: (A tiptoe through TULIP)
Quote: One may say that although the sufficiency of the atonement is not limited, its efficiency is limited.
This is something everyone who believes in hell must acknowledge because, if the atonement was made efficacious for everyone, then no one would end up in hell. – Something to think about. End quote.
.
This is above the best and clearest explanation I ever read on the reason the majority of the human race going to the pains of hell for all eternity; because God “failed” to make Christ’s sacrifice efficacious for everyone.
If God would made the atonement efficacious for everyone, then no one would have to go to hell.
.
Johns Salza Catholic Apologist in the Mystery of Predestination teaching about the same notion.
The section on efficacious Grace endevers to show that for those whom he chosen, he sends efficacious Grace that infallibly makes man freely choose God.
The chapter on sufficient Grace speaks of God sending sufficient grace to all people that is sufficient to Grant them salvation.
But at the same time, Salza explains it really is not sufficient, and nobody can be saved this way.
.
I don’t know how anyone cannot see the incredible contradictions and the impossibility of the above teachings.
Yet I didn’t see it either until I started an intensive study of the above teachings for the reason to DEFEND it, and while I studied it I realized, I trying to defend a theological impossibility.
.
God bless you Gorgias and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Latin
Last edited:
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
We swam
The lustrous seas
Where shadows
Rolled and swelled
So serpentine
Along that endless boundary
Where vapor fades
Into the twilight sky
Of winter’s bitter mysteries
Covering the frozen shores
And this lifeless garden place
With sparkling so diamond etched
And death encased
Beneath eternal emptiness
Which now lies sleeping
In gathered quiet
Of its cosmic cradle grave
So laced with
Shimmer of the cooling cobalt stars
Above this empty garden place
That remnant
Of a catastrophic birth
Where a crystal serpent
Fell to earth
And shone
And spoke in spring
And dazzled spring and paradise away
And shattered
In one instant
The Oneness of the light
Into these trillion points
To illume
This deluge
Of Creation’s
Shadow Fall
Flooding all
Downward to those
Monstrous, darkened ocean depths
Of the great abyss
Into those forty centuries
Of night
Of agony
Of longing for the sun
Until might rise
One ray of Hope
To fill the firmament again
With redemption’s
Gentle light
And heal us
Of the serpent’s
Ancient bite
The lustrous seas
Where shadows
Rolled and swelled
So serpentine
Along that endless boundary
Where vapor fades
Into the twilight sky
Of winter’s bitter mysteries
Covering the frozen shores
And this lifeless garden place
With sparkling so diamond etched
And death encased
Beneath eternal emptiness
Which now lies sleeping
In gathered quiet
Of its cosmic cradle grave
So laced with
Shimmer of the cooling cobalt stars
Above this empty garden place
That remnant
Of a catastrophic birth
Where a crystal serpent
Fell to earth
And shone
And spoke in spring
And dazzled spring and paradise away
And shattered
In one instant
The Oneness of the light
Into these trillion points
To illume
This deluge
Of Creation’s
Shadow Fall
Flooding all
Downward to those
Monstrous, darkened ocean depths
Of the great abyss
Into those forty centuries
Of night
Of agony
Of longing for the sun
Until might rise
One ray of Hope
To fill the firmament again
With redemption’s
Gentle light
And heal us
Of the serpent’s
Ancient bite
B
Benadam
Guest
Hi Latin, I have wondered about this
eternal security scandalizes those with a child like love for God so avoid sin to avoid hell, and even some who avoid sin because it offends God . If it were true, what would be the good in revealing it?
eternal security scandalizes those with a child like love for God so avoid sin to avoid hell, and even some who avoid sin because it offends God . If it were true, what would be the good in revealing it?
L
Latin
Guest
God bless you Someone429 and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Tank you for your post.
I’m sure that God saves all human beings, I can prove that with Catholic Soteriology from many different angles. – In my opinion: Anyone who knows Catholic Soteriology, and they have some logic they know that too.
.
I didn’t get into the salvation of the fallen angels, but I know one of the great Scripture scholars of the early church, Origen (third century), use to teach, the fallen angels will be saved too.
.
AS I MENTIONED ORIGEN, IT IS INTERESTING TO KNOW:
The Lamb’s Supper by Scott Hahn Page 48
Quote: One of the great Scripture scholars of the early church, Origen (third century), urged Christians TO RESPECT CHRIST’S PRESENTS IN THE GOSPEL as they RESPECT HIS PRESENCE IN THE HOST.
“You who are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries know, when you receive the body of the Lord, how you protect it with all caution and veneration lest any small part fall from it, lest anything of the consecrated gift be lost.
For you believe, and correctly, that you are answerable if anything falls from there by neglect.
But if you are so careful to preserve His body, and rightly so, HOW DO YOU THINK that there is LESS GUILT to have NEGLECTED GOD’S WORD that to have NEGLECTED HIS BODY?” End quote.
.
ACCORDING TO ST. JEROME
This famous excerpt from Jerome’s Commentary on Isaiah (Nn. 1.2: CCL 73, 1-3) is used in the Roman Office of Readings for the Feast (liturgical memorial) of St. Jerome on September 30.
In it, St. Jerome firmly insists that IGNORANCE OF THE SCRIPTURE IS IGNORANCE OF CHRIST.
A strong exhortation from a Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church to Christians urging all to recognize that serious Bible study is a necessity, not an optional luxury. End quote.
.
God bless you Someone429 and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Latin
Tank you for your post.
I’m sure that God saves all human beings, I can prove that with Catholic Soteriology from many different angles. – In my opinion: Anyone who knows Catholic Soteriology, and they have some logic they know that too.
.
I didn’t get into the salvation of the fallen angels, but I know one of the great Scripture scholars of the early church, Origen (third century), use to teach, the fallen angels will be saved too.
.
AS I MENTIONED ORIGEN, IT IS INTERESTING TO KNOW:
The Lamb’s Supper by Scott Hahn Page 48
Quote: One of the great Scripture scholars of the early church, Origen (third century), urged Christians TO RESPECT CHRIST’S PRESENTS IN THE GOSPEL as they RESPECT HIS PRESENCE IN THE HOST.
“You who are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries know, when you receive the body of the Lord, how you protect it with all caution and veneration lest any small part fall from it, lest anything of the consecrated gift be lost.
For you believe, and correctly, that you are answerable if anything falls from there by neglect.
But if you are so careful to preserve His body, and rightly so, HOW DO YOU THINK that there is LESS GUILT to have NEGLECTED GOD’S WORD that to have NEGLECTED HIS BODY?” End quote.
.
ACCORDING TO ST. JEROME
This famous excerpt from Jerome’s Commentary on Isaiah (Nn. 1.2: CCL 73, 1-3) is used in the Roman Office of Readings for the Feast (liturgical memorial) of St. Jerome on September 30.
In it, St. Jerome firmly insists that IGNORANCE OF THE SCRIPTURE IS IGNORANCE OF CHRIST.
A strong exhortation from a Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church to Christians urging all to recognize that serious Bible study is a necessity, not an optional luxury. End quote.
.
God bless you Someone429 and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Latin
Last edited:
G
Gorgias
Guest
Commentary, yes… but part of inerrant Scripture.
G
Gorgias
Guest
I’m not seeing where it’s ‘contradictory’.
Unless, of course, it’s in your (interesting) spin on it, that “sufficient grace” is a perfection of God, but “efficacious grace” is a failure of God.
I would disagree that it’s a failure. Rather, it’s something that proceeds from God’s gift of free will. If God wishes to honor the gift of free will, then He must allow us to choose and to receive the consequences of our choice. (If there are no consequences – that is, if every choice leads to the same consequence – then there is no free will, per se… just the appearance of free will.)
On the other hand, if God allows universal salvation, then He has taken away the gift of free will. Therefore, the fact that Christ’s sacrifice is not efficacious for everyone isn’t a failure, it’s actually an affirmation of the gift of free will.
Therefore, it is not the case, as you claim, that “God mercy and love demands that He must save every person.” (Rather, it’s the case that God’s mercy and love demands that He must allow each person to choose freely and bear the consequences of that choice.")
L
Latin
Guest
God bless you Benadam and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Thank you for your post.
.
There is an Infallible Eternal Security in Catholic Soteriology, called God’s Gift of Final Perseverance, which is an Eternal and Infallible Protection of every Child of God, called to Eternal Life, this gift received at Initial Justification at Baptism. – DE FIDE Dogma of the Catholic Church.
.
Without the above aide of God, The Gift of God’s Final Perseverance, every child of God called to Eternal Life would end up in hell. – Formal teachings of the Catholic Church. + Infallible teachings of the Trent.
.
Also it is the teachings of the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Divine Providence.
.
Life everlasting promised to us, (Romans 5:21); but unaided we can do nothing to gain it (Rom.7:18-24).
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12510a.htm
.
God bless you Benadam and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Latin
Last edited:
L
Latin
Guest
God bless you Gorgias and God bless every readers of the CAF.Latin:
I’m not seeing where it’s ‘contradictory’.
Thank you for your post.
Without seeing the big picture of Soteriology and every step in it, I agree it is hard to understand and to see the contradictions in it.
.
I SHOW YOU GORGIAS THE BIG PICTURE OF SOTERIOLOGY AS FOLLOWS
.
The Catholic Church affirms predestination as a DE FIDE Dogma (the highest level of binding theological certainty).
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
THE CATHOLIC DOGMA. – The predestination of the elect.
.
Consequently, the whole future membership of heaven, down to its minutest details, has
been IRREVOCABLY FIXED FROM ALL ETERNITY. Nor could it be otherwise. For if it
were possible that a predestined individual should after all be CAST INTO HELL or that
one not predestined should in the end REACH HEAVEN, then God would have been
MISTAKEN in his foreknowledge of future events; He would NO LONGER be omniscient.
.
.
(2) The second quality of predestination, the DEFINITENESS of the number of the elect,
follows NATURALLY from the first. For if the eternal counsel of God regarding the
predestined is UNCHANGEABLE, then the number of the predestined must likewise be
UNCHANGEABLE and DEFINITE, subject NEITHER to ADDITIONS nor to
CANCELLATIONS. Anything indefinite in the number would eo ipso imply a lack of
certitude in God’s knowledge and would DESTROY His omniscience.
.
THE THEORY OF PREDESTINATION prævisa merita
THIS THEORY, CHAMPIONED BY all Thomists and a few Molinists (as Bellarmine, Francisco Suárez, Francis de Lugo):
Asserts that God, by an absolute decree and without regard to any future supernatural merits, predestined from all eternity certain men to the glory of heaven, and then, in consequence of this decree, decided to give them all the graces necessary for its accomplishment. End quote.
.
KEY TO UNDERSTAND SALVATION
If God’s will would be to save everyone; with an ABSOLUTE DECREE and to give them ALL THE GRACES NECESSARY for their salvation God could save every member of the human race, in the same way as He saves His chosen ones.
.
Continue
Last edited:
L
Latin
Guest
Continuation
.
WHAT IS GOD’S REASON HE DOES NOT SAVE EVERYONE?
.
A TIPTOE THROUGH TULIP James Akin answer the question.
Quote: Thomas Aquinas wrote, "God wills to manifest his goodness in men: in respect to those whom he predestines, by means of his mercy, in 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. End quote.
.
Quote from Augustune: Yet why he chooses some for glory and reprobates others has no reason except the divine will. ST I:23:5. End quote.
.
ON THE ABOVE GROUND the Church REJECTED that God saves the entire human race.
.
I hope Gorgias you can see above and as follows the CONTRADICTIONS and the MONUMENTAL INJUSTICE.
.
On a selected people God shows His mercy by chosen them to heaven, and on the rest of the people to show His Justice, chosen them to eternal sufferings in the pains of hell for all eternity. – I call this the MOTHER OF CONTRADICTION and a MONUMENTAL INJUSTICE.
.
.
THE ABOVE EXPLANATION’S LOGICAL AND NECESSARY RESULTS:
FIRST RESULT:
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Predestination of the elect.
Quote: For the absolute predestination of the blessed is at the same time the absolute will of God “not to elect” a priori the rest of mankind (Suarez), or which comes to the same, “to exclude them from heaven” (Gonet), in other words, not to save them. End quote.
.
SECOND RESULT:
Now James Akin speaking: (A tiptoe through TULIP)
Quote: One may say that although the sufficiency of the atonement is not limited, its efficiency is limited.
This is something everyone who believes in hell must acknowledge because, if the atonement was made efficacious for everyone, then no one would end up in hell. – Something to think about. End quote.
.
Johns Salza Catholic Apologist in the Mystery of Predestination teaching about the same notion.
The section on efficacious Grace endevers to show that for those whom he chosen, he sends efficacious Grace that infallibly makes man freely choose God.
The chapter on sufficient Grace speaks of God sending sufficient grace to all people that is sufficient to Grant them salvation.
But at the same time, Salza explains it really is not sufficient, and nobody can be saved this way.
.
Of course, how could they be saved when they all predestined to hell from all eternity?
.
But even if some of them would be saved for a period of time, God would have to take care that they all die in the state of mortal sin, because even if one of them would die in the state of grace would end up in heaven and God would instantly lose His omniscience.
.
Continue
.
WHAT IS GOD’S REASON HE DOES NOT SAVE EVERYONE?
.
A TIPTOE THROUGH TULIP James Akin answer the question.
Quote: Thomas Aquinas wrote, "God wills to manifest his goodness in men: in respect to those whom he predestines, by means of his mercy, in 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. End quote.
.
Quote from Augustune: Yet why he chooses some for glory and reprobates others has no reason except the divine will. ST I:23:5. End quote.
.
ON THE ABOVE GROUND the Church REJECTED that God saves the entire human race.
.
I hope Gorgias you can see above and as follows the CONTRADICTIONS and the MONUMENTAL INJUSTICE.
.
On a selected people God shows His mercy by chosen them to heaven, and on the rest of the people to show His Justice, chosen them to eternal sufferings in the pains of hell for all eternity. – I call this the MOTHER OF CONTRADICTION and a MONUMENTAL INJUSTICE.
.
.
THE ABOVE EXPLANATION’S LOGICAL AND NECESSARY RESULTS:
FIRST RESULT:
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Predestination of the elect.
Quote: For the absolute predestination of the blessed is at the same time the absolute will of God “not to elect” a priori the rest of mankind (Suarez), or which comes to the same, “to exclude them from heaven” (Gonet), in other words, not to save them. End quote.
.
SECOND RESULT:
Now James Akin speaking: (A tiptoe through TULIP)
Quote: One may say that although the sufficiency of the atonement is not limited, its efficiency is limited.
This is something everyone who believes in hell must acknowledge because, if the atonement was made efficacious for everyone, then no one would end up in hell. – Something to think about. End quote.
.
Johns Salza Catholic Apologist in the Mystery of Predestination teaching about the same notion.
The section on efficacious Grace endevers to show that for those whom he chosen, he sends efficacious Grace that infallibly makes man freely choose God.
The chapter on sufficient Grace speaks of God sending sufficient grace to all people that is sufficient to Grant them salvation.
But at the same time, Salza explains it really is not sufficient, and nobody can be saved this way.
.
Of course, how could they be saved when they all predestined to hell from all eternity?
.
But even if some of them would be saved for a period of time, God would have to take care that they all die in the state of mortal sin, because even if one of them would die in the state of grace would end up in heaven and God would instantly lose His omniscience.
.
Continue
Last edited:
L
Latin
Guest
Continuation
.
CONTINUATION OF THE CATHOLIC DOGMA Predestination of the elect.
Quote: Considering that not all men reach their supernatural end in heaven, but that many are eternally lost, there MUST EXIST a twofold predestination:
(a) one to heaven.
(b) one to the pains of hell.
However, according to present usages to which we shall adhere in the course of the article, it is better to call the latter decree the Divine “reprobation,” so that the term predestination is reserved for the Divine decree of the happiness of the elect.
.
(Did you notice Gorgias; We call predestination to hell; decree the Divine "reprobation, of course this is still predestination to hell.) In the brackets added.
.
The COUNTERPART of the predestination of the good is the decree the Divine "reprobation."
.
The conceptual difference between the two kinds of reprobation lies in this:
.
The Catholic reprobation is NEGATIVE REPROBATION.
Merely implies the absolute will not to grant the bliss of heaven, though not positively predestined to hell, yet they are absolutely predestined not to go to heaven (cf. above, I, B).
.
.
The Calvinistic reprobation is POSITIVE REPROBATION.
Calvinistic reprobation means the absolute will to condemn to hell. End quote.
.
Continue
.
CONTINUATION OF THE CATHOLIC DOGMA Predestination of the elect.
Quote: Considering that not all men reach their supernatural end in heaven, but that many are eternally lost, there MUST EXIST a twofold predestination:
(a) one to heaven.
(b) one to the pains of hell.
However, according to present usages to which we shall adhere in the course of the article, it is better to call the latter decree the Divine “reprobation,” so that the term predestination is reserved for the Divine decree of the happiness of the elect.
.
(Did you notice Gorgias; We call predestination to hell; decree the Divine "reprobation, of course this is still predestination to hell.) In the brackets added.
.
The COUNTERPART of the predestination of the good is the decree the Divine "reprobation."
.
The conceptual difference between the two kinds of reprobation lies in this:
.
The Catholic reprobation is NEGATIVE REPROBATION.
Merely implies the absolute will not to grant the bliss of heaven, though not positively predestined to hell, yet they are absolutely predestined not to go to heaven (cf. above, I, B).
.
.
The Calvinistic reprobation is POSITIVE REPROBATION.
Calvinistic reprobation means the absolute will to condemn to hell. End quote.
.
Continue
Last edited:
L
Latin
Guest
Continuation
.
THE MAJORITY OF CATHOLIC THEOLOGIANS STRONGLY CONTESTING THAT APART FROM the chosen ones for the reason to God show His mercy, the rest of the human race absolutely predestined not to go to heaven, as the result to the pains of hell for all eternity for the reason to God show His justice.
.
Please Gorgias listen carefully, the Catholic Theologians explaining the contradictions and the monumental injustice that apart from the elect the rest of the human race end up in hell.
.
CONTINUATION OF THE CATHOLIC DOGMA Predestination of the elect.
Quote: Whatever view one may take regarding the reprobation, it cannot be harmonized with the dogmatically certain universality and sincerity of God’s salvific will.
.
For the absolute predestination of the blessed is at the same time the absolute will of God “not to elect” a priori the rest of mankind (Suarez), or which comes to the same, “to exclude them from heaven” (Gonet), in other words, not to save them.
.
How can that will to save be called serious and sincere which has decreed from all eternity the metaphysical impossibility of salvation?
.
He who has been reprobated negatively, may exhaust all his efforts to attain salvation: it avail’s him nothing.
.
Moreover, in order to realize infallibly his decree, God is compelled to frustrate the eternal welfare of all excluded a priori from heaven, and to take care that they die in their sins.
.
Is this the language in which Holy Writ speaks to us?
.
No; there we meet an anxious, loving father, who wills not “that any should perish, but that all should return to penance” (2 Peter 3:9).
.
Lessius rightly says that it would be indifferent to him whether he was numbered among those reprobated positively or negatively; for, in either case, his eternal damnation would be certain.
.
The reason for this is that in the present economy exclusion from heaven means for adults practically the same thing as damnation.
.
A middle state, a merely natural happiness, does not exist. End quote.
.
I hope Gorgias the Catholic Theologians made the CONTRADICTIONS and the MONUMENTAL INJUSTICE loud and clear, the way we all of us can understand and can see.
.
God bless you Gorgias and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Latin
.
THE MAJORITY OF CATHOLIC THEOLOGIANS STRONGLY CONTESTING THAT APART FROM the chosen ones for the reason to God show His mercy, the rest of the human race absolutely predestined not to go to heaven, as the result to the pains of hell for all eternity for the reason to God show His justice.
.
Please Gorgias listen carefully, the Catholic Theologians explaining the contradictions and the monumental injustice that apart from the elect the rest of the human race end up in hell.
.
CONTINUATION OF THE CATHOLIC DOGMA Predestination of the elect.
Quote: Whatever view one may take regarding the reprobation, it cannot be harmonized with the dogmatically certain universality and sincerity of God’s salvific will.
.
For the absolute predestination of the blessed is at the same time the absolute will of God “not to elect” a priori the rest of mankind (Suarez), or which comes to the same, “to exclude them from heaven” (Gonet), in other words, not to save them.
.
How can that will to save be called serious and sincere which has decreed from all eternity the metaphysical impossibility of salvation?
.
He who has been reprobated negatively, may exhaust all his efforts to attain salvation: it avail’s him nothing.
.
Moreover, in order to realize infallibly his decree, God is compelled to frustrate the eternal welfare of all excluded a priori from heaven, and to take care that they die in their sins.
.
Is this the language in which Holy Writ speaks to us?
.
No; there we meet an anxious, loving father, who wills not “that any should perish, but that all should return to penance” (2 Peter 3:9).
.
Lessius rightly says that it would be indifferent to him whether he was numbered among those reprobated positively or negatively; for, in either case, his eternal damnation would be certain.
.
The reason for this is that in the present economy exclusion from heaven means for adults practically the same thing as damnation.
.
A middle state, a merely natural happiness, does not exist. End quote.
.
I hope Gorgias the Catholic Theologians made the CONTRADICTIONS and the MONUMENTAL INJUSTICE loud and clear, the way we all of us can understand and can see.
.
God bless you Gorgias and God bless every readers of the CAF.
Latin
Last edited:
G
Gorgias
Guest
That’s because you’re misunderstanding what you’re reading, I’m afraid.
What you’ve written here isn’t “predestination”, which the Church accepts, but Calvinistic “double predestination”, which the Church rejects (and rightly so).
If this were what the Church taught, then you would be correct: it would be contrary to the nature of God, and therefore, a contradiction.
But, happily, it’s not what the Church teaches. God destines no one to damnation.
So… no contradiction.
This is precisely the part that Calvin teaches and the Church rejects. If this is the hinge of your argument, then you’re arguing against something the Church doesn’t teach.
- Status