Predestination/Calvinism

[SyCarl]

I think she answered that here, here and here.

So do you or she believe that these two saints and doctors of the church believed in a God who is a “schizophrenic psychopathic despot”?

 

[PRmerger]

So do you or she believe that these two saints and doctors of the church believed in a God who is a “schizophrenic psychopathic despot”?

No, I don’t believe that these 2 saints believed in a schizophrenic psychopathic despotic god.

And, presuming to answer for benedictus2, I would say she doesn’t believe these saints believed this either.

To my understanding, neither of these 2 saints proposed that a god creates a soul that’s been predestined to hell.

That, Sycarl, is a god that’s a schizophrenic psychopathic despot.

 

[SyCarl]

To my understanding, neither of these 2 saints proposed that a god creates a soul that’s been predestined to hell.

That, Sycarl, is a god that’s a schizophrenic psychopathic despot.

Did they teach that God predestined or chose some for eternal life? If so, it seems to logically follow that by not chosing the rest they have been predestined to hell.

Aquinas writes on the question of whether God rebrobates any:

I answer that, God does reprobate some. For it was said above that predestination is a part of providence. To providence, however, it belongs to permit certain defects in those things which are subject to providence, as was said above. Thus, as men are ordained to eternal life through the providence of God, it likewise is part of that providence to permit some to fall away from that end; this is called reprobation. Thus, as predestination is a part of providence, in regard to those ordained to eternal salvation, so reprobation is a part of providence in regard to those who turn aside from that end. Hence reprobation implies not only foreknowledge, but also something more, as does providence, as was said above. Therefore, as predestination includes the will to confer grace and glory; so also reprobation includes the will to permit a person to fall into sin, and to impose the punishment of damnation on account of that sin.

ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/summa.FP_Q23_A3.html

Is God’s choice based on foreknowledge that those chosen will accept His grace? Not according to Aquinas.

On the contrary, The Apostle says: “Not by works of justice which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us.” But as He saved us, so He predestined that we should be saved. Therefore, foreknowledge of merits is not the cause or reason of predestination.

I answer that, Since predestination includes will, as was said above, the reason of predestination must be sought for in the same way as was the reason of the will of God. Now it was shown above, that we cannot assign any cause of the divine will on the part of the act of willing; but a reason can be found on the part of the things willed; inasmuch as God wills one thing on account of something else. Wherefore nobody has been so insane as to say that merit is the cause of divine predestination as regards the act of the predestinator. But this is the question, whether, as regards the effect, predestination has any cause; or what comes to the same thing, whether God pre-ordained that He would give the effect of predestination to anyone on account of any merits.

Accordingly there were some who held that the effect of predestination was pre-ordained for some on account of pre-existing merits in a former life… The Apostle, however, rebuts this opinion where he says: “For when they were not yet born, nor had done any good or evil . . . not of works, but of Him that calleth, it was said of her: The elder shall serve the younger.”

Others said that pre-existing merits in this life are the reason and cause of the effect of predestination… But against this we have the saying of the Apostle, that “we are not sufficient to think anything of ourselves as of ourselves.” Now no principle of action can be imagined previous to the act of thinking. Wherefore it cannot be said that anything begun in us can be the reason of the effect of predestination.

And so others said that merits following the effect of predestination are the reason of predestination; giving us to understand that God gives grace to a person, and pre-ordains that He will give it, because He knows beforehand that He will make good use of that grace, as if a king were to give a horse to a soldier because he knows he will make good use of it. But these seem to have drawn a distinction between that which flows from grace, and that which flows from free will, as if the same thing cannot come from both. It is, however, manifest that what is of grace is the effect of predestination; and this cannot be considered as the reason of predestination, since it is contained in the notion of predestination. Therefore, if anything else in us be the reason of predestination, it will outside the effect of predestination… Thus we might say that God pre-ordained to give glory on account of merit, and that He pre-ordained to give grace to merit glory. In another way, the effect of predestination may be considered in general. Thus, it is impossible that the whole of the effect of predestination in general should have any cause as coming from us; because whatsoever is in man disposing him towards salvation, is all included under the effect of predestination; even the preparation for grace… Yet predestination has in this way, in regard to its effect, the goodness of God for its reason; towards which the whole effect of predestination is directed as to an end; and from which it proceeds, as from its first moving principle.

ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/summa.FP_Q23_A5.html

We cannot pretend to understand how or why God does anything except to say that it will be good and just. Just because it may not appear so to us does not mean it isn’t good and just because we cannot understand God’s ways or thoughts. We are trying to impose our own human standards on the infinite God.

Did God create angels and men? Why then did He create them with the capacity to sin? Did God know that Adam would sin when He created him? If so we did He create him in that way? By creating Adam knowing that he would sin did He not create men knowing some would go to hell because they would not all believe? How is there any real difference between this and predestination to hell?

I don’t pretend to be able to understand all of this but am content in knowing that whatever God has willed or done is good and just according to His purpose.

 

[cooterhein]

Ted Kennedy is a strange one. When he was younger he was so opposed to abortion. One wonders whether the change is for political convenience. Which is sad as it means a sell out. The devil must have paid a good price

Heeeeyyyy!!! We’re talking politics now? Good times. So rare on these forums.

 

[benedictus2]

I have made my point that God can both predestine and grant freewill. In your view, where would Augustine’s and Thomas Aquinas’ views on predestination fall?

In another thread Pete Holter (another CAF member) tried to explain St Augustine’s difference to Calvins and said it is more nuanced.

But I must say that the way I say it, I really cannot see a major difference.

In the original of my post 258 (which I made in another thread) I said that I was not sure if St Thomas factored the fact that God is in the eternal now in his thesis on Predestination. I think factoring that in makes a difference on how we view salvation.

The way St Thomas put it, God withholds the grace from some men because God already knows that they will reject the grace.

I do not think this is quite a true presentation of the Catholic position.

As I said before, the Catholic Church was pretty open on the how of predestination. What she affirms is predestination to salvation but not to damnation.

If you have the time, please read my post 258 and 259 as this is how I tried to reason the seeming conflict between grace and free will.

 

[benedictus2]

LOL! What does elvis have to do with this?

Perhaps he wants to take you for a twirl in his blue suede shoes and rock the jail house down.

 

[benedictus2]

I think she answered that here, here and here.

Thanks very much PR.

 

[benedictus2]

So do you or she believe that these two saints and doctors of the church believed in a God who is a “schizophrenic psychopathic despot”?

No I don’t think they do. But based on what I know of St Augustine’s and St Thomas’s I think that if you strip the slight nuances you can come up with the same God as Calvins.

I don’t know if either have considered the fact that since God is the only one doing the creating and He already knows that some will reject His will, then it follows that God knowingly creates people who will reject His will.

This will not be a problem is they said that grace is not always efficacious. Because if Grace is always efficacious then God knowingly created people that will surely be damned to hell.

I may be misrepresenting St Thomas and St Augustine here so if there is anyone out there who thinks I got their premises wrong then please correct me.

I refer you to my post 393
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7397227&postcount=393

 

[JustaServant]

No, I don’t believe that these 2 saints believed in a schizophrenic psychopathic despotic god.

And, presuming to answer for benedictus2, I would say she doesn’t believe these saints believed this either.

To my understanding, neither of these 2 saints proposed that a god creates a soul that’s been predestined to hell.

That, Sycarl, is a god that’s a schizophrenic psychopathic despot.

And that is exactly the problem people have with their theology, Protestant and Catholic. Its sad that many Reformed christians do not see how their theology comes off to the “unknowledgable”.
Isn’t it better to leave these matters to God, who is love, and concentrate on feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, giving to the poor?

 

[benedictus2]

Did they teach that God predestined or chose some for eternal life? If so, it seems to logically follow that by not chosing the rest they have been predestined to hell.

Hi SyCarl,

I will ignore your succeeding quotes from St Thomas because I have already stated that I do not agree with him on this matter.

As for the point that scripture supports predestination to heaven so therefore reprobation must be true, well I think that is a wrong conclusion to draw.

Notice how, while there are scriptural verses supporting predestination to salvation, everyone is hard pressed to provide support for predestination to damnation. The quotes that everyone supply for the latter, all relate to temporal punishment and does not equate to hell.

I think that is quite telling.

So let me give an explanation of how I understand predestination to salvation and why I think my take is more Biblical.

Firstly I affirm predestination to salvation and negate predestination to damnation.

Here’s why.

This whole discussion centres on the economy of salvation.

Now we cannot talk about salvation without bringing in the reason for why we need salvation – therefore sin, particularly original sin.

But if there is no getting away from creating sinful men because of the fall, then God does this knowing full well that they will be sinful. So why create them at all.

Here, I think St Thomas contradicts himself.

God is love. St Thomas says that to love is TO WILL THE GOOD OF THE OTHER.

If God is love, then God wills the good of everyone. If God’s will is paramount, then His willing our good is paramount. Can reprobation be referred to as willing our good? If that is so then hell must be good.

St Augustine said that God made us for Himself. If God made us for Himself then our end is meant to be Him. How then can He will for us to be damned? Would that not go against His own will?

**So here’s how I think predestination to heaven works and why I think the Bible is silent on predestination to damnation.

God predestines some ( think of our Lady, the Saints) to heaven not for themselves but as a way to bring about the recapitulation, so that every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.**

In short it does not necessarily mean that those who are predestined are the only ones who will be saved.

**I think the best way to illustrate this is to think of the recent bird or swine flu outbreak.
**
In such emergencies, the first ones to be vaccinated will be the health care workers, firemen, police, etc. In other words those needed to maintain an orderly society and those that will be bearing the brunt of the epidemic because they will be dealing with those who become ill.

Even before the outbreak, this is a policy that is already set in place by any good government. These people we can say are the “predestined” because prior to the outbreak we know that they will be given the vaccine.

But these people are not given the vaccine for themselves alone. They are only inoculated first because they will be needed to care for the population. They will be the ones to ensure that the sick are attended to.

I think predestination to heaven works in the same way. There are indeed those who are predestined but God did not choose them merely for themselves but so that He can accomplish His plan for our salvation.

Our Lady, the Apostles, the Saints all have a role to play in bringing us to Him, because how God effects salvation is by forming the Body of Christ, which is after all the Communion of Saints.

You can see this particularly in our Blessed Mother’s case, in how instrumental she has been in the conversion of so many.

We can also see this in how God effected salvation via a Church. He first picks a few men, but these few men will in turn proclaim His Gospel and become fishers of men.

So I think all those verses that support predestination to heaven have been misinterpreted in some way.

 

[benedictus2]

And that is exactly the problem people have with their theology, Protestant and Catholic. Its sad that many Reformed christians do not see how their theology comes off to the “unknowledgable”.
Isn’t it better to leave these matters to God, who is love, and concentrate on feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, giving to the poor?

I agree with you to some extent. But I think this wondering about the will of God and the hows and whys of salvation is part and parcel of the fact that God made us intelligent creatures. Faith and Reason compliment each other.

And here is another why I think this is so. Because God is Truth and He has put that desire for Truth deep in our beings.

 

[benedictus2]

Did God create angels and men? Why then did He create them with the capacity to sin? Did God know that Adam would sin when He created him?

Yes.

If so we did He create him in that way? By creating Adam knowing that he would sin did He not create men knowing some would go to hell because they would not all believe?

Because God is able to bring about an even greater good.

At every Easter Vigil, the Exultet is chanted which goes,

O happy fault
O necessary sin of Adam,
which gained for us so great a Redeemer!

I often think of it as a game of chess between God and the devil.

The devil makes a move thinking I will win this game, I will corrupt His precious creature.

But God knew this would be his move so He smiles and thinks, I’ll checkmate him with my Son.

How is there any real difference between this and predestination to hell?

The difference is Christ.

Because we Catholics (and Scriptures) say that Christ died for all, therefore the Grace of Salvation is available to all. But free will allows us to reject this grace.

If there is no Grace, and God left it at creating men after the fall, then certainly we have been predestined to hell.

But because God is Love, then His love triumphs.

Here is something that I think illustrates how God deals with us.

When the GPS Satellite Navigator first came out, our IT manager was the first one is our company to have one. One day he gave me a lift home and I was truly fascinated by this little contraption.

After punching in our location and then punching in our address, the machine calculated a most direct route. But I told my friend to take a different route and all through-out our trip, this voice toldl us we’ve gone the wrong way and starts to recalculate our route and to re-orient us to our destination.

I was so amazed by this and then I thought, wow, that is exactly how God deals with us.

In our hearts He has implanted the coordinates to heaven. We know the way. But every so often we take a detour here, a wrong turn there. And at everyone point He recalculates to direct us back to our true destination. The more waylaid we get the harder the return becomes because we could end up in ditches, traffic and dead end streets. But always, His grace is there re-calculating our navigation system to lead us home.

When we were driving from France to Spain, my brother-in-law’s GPS kept saying “Route Recalculation”. I wondered then how many route recalculations God will have to do before I finally make it home.

 

[PRmerger]

Did they teach that God predestined or chose some for eternal life? If so, it seems to logically follow that by not chosing the rest they have been predestined to hell.

I don’t think your conclusion naturally follows, SyCarl. God could predestine the elect, and leave the others to work out their salvation with fear and trembling.

 

[PRmerger]

Did God know that Adam would sin when He created him? If so we did He create him in that way?

We Catholics answer that question every Easter Vigil: So we could have so great a Redeemer.
*felix culpa! *
“O happy fault,
O necessary sin of Adam,
which gained for us so great a Redeemer!”

 

[JustaServant]

I agree with you to some extent. But I think this wondering about the will of God and the hows and whys of salvation is part and parcel of the fact that God made us intelligent creatures. Faith and Reason compliment each other.

And here is another why I think this is so. Because God is Truth and He has put that desire for Truth deep in our beings.

I understand that. But I have to wonder about a theology that makes determinations as to who is and who is not ‘elect’. I mean if one truly believes their doctrine, what is the point of being pro-life? The aborted babies were probably unelect anyway Why help the poor and downtrodden? If they are unelect, it seems useless. What a depressing way to look at the world around us.
Good heavens if the early Church thought this way Christianity would have been a forgotten cult.
The whole theology makes life useless and meaningless.

 

[JReducation]

Merry Christmas everyone!

A good friend invited me to comment on this thread. I have to admit that reading every post is a daunting task, so I read the first 10-15 and that last 10-15. That kind of gives me a sense of where the conversation was going. If I say something that has been said, in between the two ends, please excuse me.

In order to discuss predestination there are several points that we must take into consideration. Some of them have been hinted at, but not quite broken open. One must remember that the Church’s teaching on this subject predates the scriptures. The whole idea that “I have to say this in a manner that is consistent with the bible” is a half truth or a half effort. We have to speak to this point in a manner that is consistent with the faith of the Church. The New Testament was written to reflect the faith of the Church. There were many writings at the time and they were not allowed into the canon, because they failed to reflect the faith of the Universal Church at the time.

Having said that, we have to go back into history and ask ourselves what did the early Christians believe when they used the word “predestination”? Without getting deep into exegesis, it is very interesting to note that they were very Jewish in their usage of the term, even though the term, as we know it today, is a translation of a translation. The earliest uses of this term date back to the Old Testament, the term in Hebrew translates into “chosen”.

When the first-generation Christians speak of predestination, they are speaking of those who are chosen for salvation. That being said, everyone of the Apostolic writings and the Fathers of the Church tell us that all are chosen for salvation, because Christ dies for all.

Therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas is correct. St. Thomas read the scriptures through a Jewish lens. God loves all men and creates all men to be happy. Augustine is also right when he tells us that all are created to return to God. Both theologians are expressing God’s will. They are not saying anything new. They are saying what Jesus had already said, Paul had repeated and later the Fathers. All have been chosen or predestined for salvation, meaning that salvation is available to all.

The term “predestination” sneaks into Christian theology with the use of Greek. As we know, much of the NT is either written in Greek or translated into Greek very early. The translators were Gentile Christians, not Jewish Christians. To the Gentile Christians, the term “chosen people” was foreign to them. To the Jewish Christians, it was a reference to Israel. They preserve the meaning, but use the Greek verb “to predestine”. When you were predestined, you were chosen. All men have been chosen to go to heaven. God creates all men to be happy.

How to explain those who go to hell . . . as St. Thomas explains, God wants all men to be happy. God gives man free will to choose what makes him happy. In the end, the soul who goes to hell is not sent there by God, but chooses to go there, because he will never be happy in heaven. Heaven is contrary to his will. Such as soul will only be happy in eternal misery. It reminds me of the often used expression, “He’s not happy unless he’s miserable.” We’ve all met that kind of person. The soul who goes to hell is just as much loved by God as the one who goes to heaven. God will not inflict on the soul what is contrary to its free will. If eternity with God is contrary to the will of the individual, God will not impose it.

God is not an unmerciful God who creates souls to go to hell. He creates souls to be happy. Because he is eternal, he knows what the soul will choose as its eternal reward. God, who is all love, like the father in the Prodigal Son, allows his sons and daughters to choose, even what is contrary to his will for them. Some return and others do not.

One final note, Mary was not predestined to go to heaven, nor were the Apostles. She was chosen to be saved and to be the Mother of the Son. Mary, like every human being, responds with her own choice. Because God lives outside of space and time, he saw Mary’s choice and selects her to be the Theotokos. But the Thetokos must be free of Original Sin, so that the human nature of the Son is never contaminated. Christ’s redemptive act on the cross saves Mary, just as it saved those prophets and patriarchs who lived long before him. Mary is saved, because she chose to love of God. Her Immaculate Conception is a show of God’s glory and a statement about Christ’s unblemished human nature.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[benedictus2]

Hi JR,

That was a well thought out post. Thanks for joining us.

I would like to make a few comments regarding the points your raised.

Therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas is correct. St. Thomas read the scriptures through a Jewish lens. God loves all men and creates all men to be happy. Augustine is also right when he tells us that all are created to return to God. Both theologians are expressing God’s will. They are not saying anything new. They are saying what Jesus had already said, Paul had repeated and later the Fathers. All have been chosen or predestined for salvation, meaning that salvation is available to all.

When I was reading the Thomist and Augustinian view of predestination, it struck me how similar it is to Calvinism.

I think what I found problematic is in both views (unless I completely misunderstood it), grace is always efficacious.

If grace is always efficaciouus then it erodes free will.
IF grace is always efficacious, then that means that God willfully withheld this efficacious grace from men conceived in sin. Without such a grace, how then is man supposed to give a yes to God?

If as you wrote above St Thomas said that God loves all men and creates all men to be happy. If Grace is always efficacious, then does it not follow that for those unable to say yes to God this grace has been withheld?

If this grace has been withheld, then how can we say that God created all men and wants all men to be happy?

I was wondering if you could take the time to read my post 258, 259 and 393 as I would like to know if there is any error in the way I have presented the Thomist view.

How to explain those who go to hell . . . as St. Thomas explains, God wants all men to be happy. God gives man free will to choose what makes him happy.

But here again the problem raised by the proposition that all grace is efficacious rears its head. With a sinful nature, without the efficacious grace, does it not mean that he has left the soul to go it’s sinful way so in effect willing their damnation?

One final note, Mary was not predestined to go to heaven, nor were the Apostles. She was chosen to be saved and to be the Mother of the Son. Mary, like every human being, responds with her own choice.

If grace is always efficacious as per St Thomas and St Augustine then we can say that Mary was predestined, i.e. chosen. I think we affirm that when we say that the woman whose seed will crush the head of the serpent is Mary.

The apostles and the Saints are predestined in the sense that they are chosen but not that they are chosen for themselves. Rather they were chosen because this is the way God runs the economy of salvation.

Because God lives outside of space and time, he saw Mary’s choice and selects her to be the Theotokos. But the Thetokos must be free of Original Sin, so that the human nature of the Son is never contaminated. Christ’s redemptive act on the cross saves Mary, just as it saved those prophets and patriarchs who lived long before him. Mary is saved, because she chose to love of God. Her Immaculate Conception is a show of God’s glory and a statement about Christ’s unblemished human nature.

That is beautiful explanation of the Immaculate Conception.

Peace!

Cory

 

[benedictus2]

I understand that. But I have to wonder about a theology that makes determinations as to who is and who is not ‘elect’. I mean if one truly believes their doctrine, what is the point of being pro-life? The aborted babies were probably unelect anyway Why help the poor and downtrodden? If they are unelect, it seems useless. What a depressing way to look at the world around us.
Good heavens if the early Church thought this way Christianity would have been a forgotten cult.
The whole theology makes life useless and meaningless.

Yes, that is true.

This is why I always say, bow to the Magisterium. The Church cannot err on on this.

I think there is an assumption that St Augustine’s and St Thomas’s view is the Catholic Church’s teaching. But that is not necessarily the case.

As I wrote in post 393 the Catholic Church has come to a clearer understanding with regards this matter and have rejected some of the tenets of St Augustine and consequently St Thomas’s as well.

God is Love. Any discussion on the whys and hows of salvation should have that as the first premise.

 

[cooterhein]

If grace is always efficaciouus then it erodes free will.

What’s your definition of free will? Are you making the usual argument for libertarian free will and the non-existence and/or inconsistency of compatibilism?

 

[benedictus2]

What’s your definition of free will? Are you making the usual argument for libertarian free will and the non-existence and/or inconsistency of compatibilism?

That one is always free to choose good or to choose evil.