Predestenation?

[Redbandito]

Matt16_18:

The Catholic Church does not embrace such a narrow definition of the elect. Adult Catechumens go through the Rite of Election before they receive the Sacraments of Initiation.

This is why I was trying to avoid introducing the word “elect” into this thread about predestination. Calvinists and Catholics have a very different view of who constitutes the elect.

Matt, I am not a Calvinist. I was baptized Catholic as a child, and came back to the Church at the age of 21. The “Rite of Election” does not necessarily mean that all who go through are among the elect. The elect, or the saints, are the people who ultimately end up in Heaven. I appreciate your feedback, but I just don’t think your argument is supported by “Catholic teaching”.

 

[Fiat]

Dear Fellow Catholics:

I have been following this thread with great interest, but I am still unsure how to view predestination. If the Elect are guaranteed their salvation, then why does St. Paul in his letter to Timothy state that he endures all things for the elect’s sake, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim 2:10).

It seems that many Calvinists find support for their notions of predestination from St. Paul, particularly Romans 9 and Ephesians 1. Yet in Timothy, St. Paul suggests that salvation does not automatically belong to the elect.

Peace,
Fiat

 

[Matt16_18]

Redbandito:

I am not a Calvinist.

I understand that.

The “Rite of Election” does not necessarily mean that all who go through are among the elect.

As I said before, the Catholic Church does not embrace such a narrow view of the elect as you are proposing. It is true that sometimes the Church does speak of the elect as those who are in heaven. But she also speaks of the elect as those who are members of the Church Militant because of the graces received from the Sacrament of Baptism.

For example:
1025 To live in heaven is “to be with Christ.” The elect live “in Christ,” but they retain, or rather find, their true identity, their own name.

For life is to be with Christ; where Christ is, there is life, there is the kingdom.​

A person that is in a state of sanctifying grace on earth is also counted among the elect, since that person is also alive in Christ because of the graces received from the Sacrament of Baptism.1308 … we must not … forget that the baptismal grace is a grace of free, unmerited election and does not need “ratification” to become effective …Persons that have been born again through baptism are counted among the elect. But such people can lose their state of sanctifying grace by committing mortal sin. We could say that a man can lose his “election” through unrepentant mortal sin – which is something that a Calvinist will vehemently deny since Calvinists generally believe in the false doctrine of OSAS.

 

[Redbandito]

Matt16_18:

We could say that a man can lose his “election” through unrepentant mortal sin – which is something that a Calvinist will vehemently deny since Calvinists generally believe in the false doctrine of OSAS.

Actually, a Calvinist does not believe in OSAS. A Calvinist believes in Perserverance of the Saints. There is a difference.

 

[Matt16_18]

Fiat:

I have been following this thread with great interest, but I am still unsure how to view predestination. If the Elect are guaranteed their salvation, then why does St. Paul in his letter to Timothy state that he endures all things for the elect’s sake, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim 2:10). … in Timothy, St. Paul suggests that salvation does not automatically belong to the elect.

Great example!

The elect are NOT guaranteed their salvation, as Paul is clearly teaching. The elect that Paul is referring to in 2 Tim 2:10 are those who are members of the Church Militant that are in a state of sanctifying grace. These Christians can lose their salvation if they commit unrepentant mortal sin.

Mature Christians like Paul offer up their sufferings for the sake of the elect, and these personal sacrifices build up the weaker members of the body of Christ in both the Church Militant and the Church Suffering. The members of the penetential orders of the Church are those who embace the vocation of offering up their sufferings for the sake of the elect. But every Catholic in a state of grace can all do this too. “Offer it up!”

A Calvinist will deny what Paul is teaching because Calvinists believe in the false doctrine of “Once Saved, Always Saved”. OSAS Protestants generally deny that personal suffeing has any redemptive value, and that is one reason they are so prone to embace the false gospel of health and wealth. When was the last time an OSAS Protestant founded a penitential order? Such a thing would be inconceivable to the typical OSAS Protestant.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Fiat:

Dear Fellow Catholics:

I have been following this thread with great interest, but I am still unsure how to view predestination. If the Elect are guaranteed their salvation, then why does St. Paul in his letter to Timothy state that he endures all things for the elect’s sake, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim 2:10).

It seems that many Calvinists find support for their notions of predestination from St. Paul, particularly Romans 9 and Ephesians 1. Yet in Timothy, St. Paul suggests that salvation does not automatically belong to the elect.

Peace,
Fiat

In that same passage of 2Tm2 it says:
12 if we endure, we shall also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us
is this talk of someone who believes Heaven is in the bag for the “elect”?

Also a few verses down it says:
20 In a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and earthenware, and some for noble use, some for ignoble. 21 If any one purifies himself from what is ignoble, then he will be a vessel for noble use, consecrated and useful to the master of the house, ready for any good work.
22 So shun youthful passions and aim at righteousness, faith, love, and peace, along with those who call upon the Lord from a pure heart. 23 Have nothing to do with stupid, senseless controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. 24 And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing, 25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth, 26 and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.
When I read this I remember Romans 9 where it talks about “vessels fitted for destruction” which calvinists point to, but in light of these words I get a different picture.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Redbandito:

Actually, a Calvinist does not believe in OSAS. A Calvinist believes in Perserverance of the Saints. There is a difference.

From what I understand there is a difference, but its basically the same idea. They assume they are elect and believe that the elect will persevere no matter what, even if they sin huge sins they will for sure repent in time. On the other hand non Calvinist protestant OSAS believe there is no need to repent and even total rejection of the faith at death doesnt have any bearing on their salvation.

 

[Matt16_18]

Redbandito:

Actually, a Calvinist does not believe in OSAS. A Calvinist believes in Perserverance of the Saints. There is a difference.

There are at least two distinct versions of OSAS heresy, the Calvinist version that asserts that men live without free will and that the frozen chosen of the “elect” are guaranteed their salvation through “irresistible” grace . The other common variation of the OSAS heresy is the antinomian version of OSAS that is rife among the Baptist sects.

The big difference between Calvinist OSAS and antinomian OSAS is that the Calvinists believe that the elect must manifest good works, because if they don’t, that would be evidence that they are not counted among the elect. The antinomianists believe that once a man is “saved”, there is no sin that a Christian could commit that would make him lose his salvation – including unrepentant mortal sin. Both versions of OSAS are heresy, and both versions of OSAS deny that scriptures teach that a Christian can be damned for committing the mortal sin of unrepentant apostasy.

When the two Protestant camps of OSAS believers fight amongst themselves about which version of OSAS is correct, they often frame the debate as Calvinism vs. Arminianism. Both camps fail to see the truth that all versions of OSAS are blasphemy since they deny that a Christian can commit the unforgivable sin.By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith, among them Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.
1Tim 1:19-20

whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin
Mark 3:29

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Matt16_18:

There are at least two distinct versions of OSAS heresy, the Calvinist version that asserts that men live without free will and that the frozen chosen of the “elect” are guaranteed their salvation through “irresistible” grace . The other common variation of the OSAS heresy is the antinomian version of OSAS that is rife among the Baptist sects.

The big difference between Calvinist OSAS and antinomian OSAS is that the Calvinists believe that the elect must manifest good works, because if they don’t, that would be evidence that they are not counted among the elect. The antinomianists believe that once a man is “saved”, there is no sin that a Christian could commit that would make him lose his salvation – including unrepentant mortal sin. Both versions of OSAS are heresy, and both versions of OSAS deny that scriptures teach that a Christian can be damned for committing the mortal sin of unrepentant apostasy.

When the two Protestant camps of OSAS believers fight amongst themselves about which version of OSAS is correct, they often frame the debate as Calvinism vs. Arminianism. Both camps fail to see the truth that all versions of OSAS are blasphemy since they deny that a Christian can commit the unforgivable sin.By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith, among them Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.
1Tim 1:19-20

whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin
Mark 3:29

Here is one of my new favorite verses, from Rev22:
18 I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,

19 and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will** take away his share** in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
Its clear from the last few verses of the Bible a person can lose their “share” in the “tree of life”.

 

[Redbandito]

Matt16_18:

There are at least two distinct versions of OSAS heresy, the Calvinist version that asserts that men live without free will and that the frozen chosen of the “elect” are guaranteed their salvation through “irresistible” grace . The other common variation of the OSAS heresy is the antinomian version of OSAS that is rife among the Baptist sects.

The big difference between Calvinist OSAS and antinomian OSAS is that the Calvinists believe that the elect must manifest good works, because if they don’t, that would be evidence that they are not counted among the elect. The antinomianists believe that once a man is “saved”, there is no sin that a Christian could commit that would make him lose his salvation – including unrepentant mortal sin. Both versions of OSAS are heresy, and both versions of OSAS deny that scriptures teach that a Christian can be damned for committing the mortal sin of unrepentant apostasy.

When the two Protestant camps of OSAS believers fight amongst themselves about which version of OSAS is correct, they often frame the debate as Calvinism vs. Arminianism. Both camps fail to see the truth that all versions of OSAS are blasphemy since they deny that a Christian can commit the unforgivable sin.By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith, among them Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

1Tim 1:19-20

whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin
Mark 3:29

Exactly!

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Redbandito:

Actually, a Calvinist does not believe in OSAS. A Calvinist believes in Perserverance of the Saints. There is a difference.

Hmmmm…according the Easton’s Bible Dictionary:

**Perseverance of the saints - ** their certain continuance in a state of grace. Once justified and regenerated, the believer can neither totally nor finally fall away from grace, but will certainly persevere therein and attain everlasting life.

Seem’s like OSAS to me, no?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Fiat:

Dear Fellow Catholics:

I have been following this thread with great interest, but I am still unsure how to view predestination. If the Elect are guaranteed their salvation, then why does St. Paul in his letter to Timothy state that he endures all things for the elect’s sake, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim 2:10).

It seems that many Calvinists find support for their notions of predestination from St. Paul, particularly Romans 9 and Ephesians 1. Yet in Timothy, St. Paul suggests that salvation does not automatically belong to the elect.

Peace,
Fiat

The confusion derives from the word “elect” having different connotations depending upon the context, even within Catholic theology.

For example, this is what St. Augustine taught regarding the elect:

We, then, call men elected, and Christ’s disciples, and God’s children, because they are to be so called whom, being regenerated, we see to live piously; (“On Rebuke and Grace” (De Correptione et Gratis), Ch 22)

So, one Catholic connotation of “elected” is “regenerated and living piously.” However, St. Augustine continues…

… but they are then truly

what they are called * if they shall abide* in that on account of which they are so called. (ibid.)

Here St. Augustine distinguishes between the men we “call” elected and those who are truly what they are called, that is, truly* elected*.

He continues…

But if they have not perseverance

,–that is, if they continue not in that which they have begun to be,–they are not truly called what they are called and are not; for they are not this in the sight of Him to whom it is known what they are going to be,–that is to say, from good men, bad men. (ibid.)

So, those who are truly regenerated in Christ and live piously are called “elect” because they have “have begun to be” elect. However, only those who persevere to the end of the life are truly elect.

St. Augustine explains further…
But those who do not belong to this number of the predestinated, whom…the grace of God brings to His kingdom,–those, then, who do not belong to that most certain and blessed number, are most righteously judged according to their deservings. For either they lie under the sin which they have inherited by original generation, and depart hence with that inherited debt which is not put away by regeneration, or by their free will have added other sins besides; …Or they receive the grace of God, but they are only for a season, and do not persevere; they forsake and are forsaken. For by their free will, as they have not received the gift of perseverance, they are sent away by the righteous and hidden judgment of God. (ibid, Ch. 42)

St. Augustine makes clear…

If, however, being already regenerate and justified

, he relapses of his own will into an evil life, assuredly he cannot say, “I have not received,” because of his own free choice to evil he has lost the grace of God, that he had received. (ibid, ch 9)

Now the Calvinist view of “perseverance of the saints” as I quoted from Easton’s Bible Dictionary in a post above indicates that once justified, you necessarily persevere to the end (“once saved always saved”). On the contrary, St. Augustine taught no such doctrine. Instead, he explicitly admits that some who are truly regenerated and justified may receive God’s grace yet not persevere.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

As was mentioned above, Catholics should not presume to be among the truly elect, but instead should pray for the gift of final perseverence and work out their salvation in fear and trembling as St. Paul teaches. Thus, Catholics reject the teaching of “once saved always saved.”

Regarding this, St. Augustine taught:

I HAVE now to consider the subject of perseverance … I assert, therefore, that the perseverance by which we persevere in Christ even to the end is the gift of God; and I call that the end by which is finished that life wherein alone there is peril of falling. Therefore it is uncertain whether any one has received this gift so long as he is still alive. For if he fall before he dies, he is, of course, said not to have persevered; and most truly is it said. … For if any one … have righteousness … if even faith, and fall away, he is rightly said to have had these virtues and to have them no longer; for he was … righteous, or he was … believing, as long as he was so; but when he ceased to be so, he no longer is what he was. … And the believer of one year, or of a period as much shorter as may be conceived of, if he has lived faithfully until he died, has rather had this perseverance than **the believer of many years’ standing, if a little time before his death he has fallen away from the stedfastness of his faith.

**(A Treatise on the Gift of Perseverance, ch. 1,
www.newadvent.org/fathers/15122.htm )

 

[Redbandito]

itsjustdave1988:

Hmmmm…according the Easton’s Bible Dictionary:

Seem’s like OSAS to me, no?

There is a distinction to be made. I think these differences were pointed out earlier in the thread. The Baptist understanding of OSAS is more that once I have made my altar call, it does not matter what sin I have committed, I will be saved. The Reformed Presb. understanding of Perserverance of the Saints seems to be more that the elect will be known by the fact that they do not commit grave sins. This is because of the irresistable grace that they receive. So, while the two assume the same thing, I believe they take different ways of getting there.

 

[Contarini]

Actually, many Baptists hold the “Calvinist” view. Some are Calvinists in their view of predestination, others are not, but still believe that you can’t lose saving faith, and saving faith will inevitably lead to your doing good works and progressing in holiness.

I know all too well how many Baptists hold the antinomian view–I grew up surrounded by such people. But it’s only fair to point out that this is not *the *Baptist position. Generally speaking, the ultra-fundamentalist independent Baptists are sounder on this than the Southern Baptists.

Edwin

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Catholic Dude:

Here is one thing that I was thinking about, but I dont know how predestination as seen by some can work.

From Titus3:
3 For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by men and hating one another; 4 but when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, 6 which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life.

8 The saying is sure. I desire you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to apply themselves to good deeds; these are excellent and profitable to men.

As Catholics we believe Baptism to be a saving act (forgives all sins), the Bible, Councils and Church Fathers teach this. At the same time we know that not all Baptized will go to Heaven due to future sins. How does predestination work in this case? IF God predestines somone to have their sins forgiven BUT they end up going to hell how can this make sense IF people claim predestination means they are predestined to heaven? The only thing I can think of is that predestination spans different degrees and also that our actions do hold some bearing on the matter.

At least in RC theology, a distinction is made between predestination to grace, & predestination to glory.​

Does that help ?

It’s difficult to see how our actions can influence the decree of predestination, as predestination is decreed “before the foundation of the world” ##

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Fiat:

Dear Fellow Catholics:

I have been following this thread with great interest, but I am still unsure how to view predestination. If the Elect are guaranteed their salvation, then why does St. Paul in his letter to Timothy state that he endures all things for the elect’s sake, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim 2:10).

It seems that many Calvinists find support for their notions of predestination from St. Paul, particularly Romans 9 and Ephesians 1. Yet in Timothy, St. Paul suggests that salvation does not automatically belong to the elect.

Peace,
Fiat

Because the action of St.Paul is a (God-ordained) means whereby the election of the elect is assisted. To be elected to salvation by God, is perfectly compatible with action by man - the state of election is certain, because it is God’s doing. Any uncertainty in the matter is purely on our side - how our acts contribute to the perseverance of the elect, wherby their elect state is at length made perfect in the life of Heaven, may be obscure to us; it does not follow that it is obscure to God.​

Election is a gift, not a guarantee - it is founded on the perfect faithfulness of God, not on any human desert. If desert had any part to play, none of us could be saved.

The difficulty with talking about it as a guarantee is IMHO that it tempts one to be careless. Belief in one’s election should be an incentive to greater zeal for God - not less: not because there is the slightest uncertainty about whether or not His Kingdom will come, but precisely because it is utterly certain that it will. It is because the elect are certain of salvation, that endurance on behalf of it is possible. Conversely, it is because God is most merciful & gracious to us sinners, that we should never sin: not because God is not merciful, but because we do not know when we shall die, nor in what state. Again, the uncertainty is on our side - not God’s.

That is why presumption is so uncalled-for - it is the electing God Who is faithful, not man: the elect are in no way better than the rest of mankind: the difference between the elect and the rest, is made by God’s Love, not by the (non-existent) goodness of the elect.

How men act, God knows, though men may not: and their doings - our doings - have an effect on the elect, for their good, even if the human agents do not intend this. Which is why “all things work together for good to them that love God”. There is nothing uncertain about the acts of God - so there is nothing uncertain about election. And there is certainly nothing determinist in it either.

Election belongs to God, if it belongs to anyone. ##