Predestination in Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jkuehn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jkuehn

Guest
Has God predestined some people for heaven and some for hell? And we just want to become Christian when God calls us? If so, what’s the justification for that/ why would a just God rule that way? (Romans 9:29 for those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his son)
 
Wouldn’t it be cruel if determinism were true? People would ultimately have no free will. If God decided it ahead of time, He could make the decision to put certain people in hell and nothing they did could ever change that. Prayer does have an effect. Think of Abraham asking for mercy upon Sodom and Gomorrah, and God relenting so as to to save some of them.

God knows who will choose Him because all things are present to Him. But he never interferes with our free will.
 
There is determinism, but not like Calvanism. God set things in motion such that, while man still retains free will, all of the events in history have been slanted to be the best possible result. You have the highest chance possible for you to make it to Heaven, and so does everyone else. He knows who will be saved and who will not, but still gives people the chance to make those choices themselves.

Does that make sense? 😅
 
With God, man’s will-our choices-are always involved. From the catechism:
600 To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy. When therefore he establishes his eternal plan of “predestination”, he includes in it each person’s free response to his grace: “In this city, in fact, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.” For the sake of accomplishing his plan of salvation, God permitted the acts that flowed from their blindness.
 
Jkuehn said:
Has God predestined some people for heaven and some for hell?
Click to expand...
No. That’s what Calvinism asserts. The Catholic Church asserts that God predestines no one for hell, but wishes all to be saved.
And we just want to become Christian when God calls us? If so, what’s the justification for that/ why would a just God rule that way?
Click to expand...
Umm… what? God calls all to be saved. Without that call, we cannot respond to His grace. But, He calls everyone, so there’s not some sort of “I don’t want to be Christian – ooh! now I do!” dynamic… 🤷‍♂️
 
By the 7th century the Church subscribed (to the present day) to the semi-Augustinian view:
  1. Man is totally incapable of repenting on his own
  2. God, through the inspirations of the Spirit, enables man to repent (also sometimes known as prevenient grace).
Prevenient grace (from the Latin “to come before”) was discussed in the fifth chapter of the sixth session of the Council of Trent (1545-1563) which used the phrase: “a Dei per dominum Christum Iesum praeveniente gratia” (rendered “a predisposing grace of God through Jesus Christ”).[13] Those who turned from God by sins are disposed by God’s grace to turn back and become justified by freely assenting to that grace.
  1. The creature can - through the exercise of free will - use this grace from God in order to turn from his wicked ways and seek forgiveness (ordinarily, through the sacraments)
 
Last edited:
I probably have this kind of thinking from some stories in the bible about God harden some people’s heart so everything will go as He planned. i.e : Pharaoh and the religious leaders of Israel during Jesus time.

Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

Exo_10:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him:
 
Last edited:
While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled." – John 17:12 (NIV)
Click to expand...
Whether or not everyone is predestined to either go to Heaven or to Hell prior to birth is a matter of debate with no clear answer (the answer either way is only clear to the believer). However, none can dispute the fact that, according to the Bible, some have been and more may be.

Some argue that this was not referring to Judas, as the literal translation of the “one” (from the NIV translation) from the Greek υἱός ἀπώλεια is “son of perdition”, but rather this was referring to the devil. However, this would have to be inaccurate in this context. By the time that Jesus said these words, Judas had already accepted the money from the Sanhedrin, and “satan had already entered him” (John 13:27). By the fact that satan had entered Judas, and shortly after (and before the resurrection) Judas went and hung himself, he would have been lost.

In order to support the position that this verse is referencing Satan, one must posit that Judas was saved, despite the presence of Satan in him. Otherwise, Christ was in error saying that “None had been lost”. Otherwise, regardless of whether the verse was specifically referencing Judas or Satan, Judas had not been given to Christ to save, and thus had been doomed to destruction.

It’s the “Judas Paradox”
 
Last edited:
So if some could have been doomed to destruction, does that mean they must not have had free will? Or did they have free will but chose evil, and God knew this but didn’t make it happen? But if that’s true, then how could God have a divine plan if he can’t make certain things happen since they would be interfering with free will?
 
God spoke thru the Prophets. Prophecy had to be fulfilled. Judas IMHO was just a pawn in God’s End Game.

We believe God exists both in the Past, Present, and Future.

We can go back to Exodus. Pharaoh was going to let the Hebrews leave Egypt, but God hardened his heart. That was a subverting of Pharaoh’s free will. One can talk circles all day around this, but the fact remains “Pharaoh was going to let the Hebrews leave Egypt” and God said “NOT YET”

Was it Babylon’s original Free Will and intent to take the Jews into Captivity? No. God caused Babylon to turn their attention to the Jews and attack and ultimately take them into Captivity.
 
And…when I broached this subject to a former Superior it got me in trouble. She said I was trying to be “too intellectual.” Me, of all people, trying to be too intellectual! I can’t even spell worth a dang! Peace to all you intellectuals out there!
 
Jkuehn said:
Has God predestined some people for heaven and some for hell? And we just want to become Christian when God calls us? If so, what’s the justification for that/ why would a just God rule that way? (Romans 9:29 for those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his son)
Click to expand...
Predestination is an extremely difficult theological concept, but it is part of the deposit of faith. If one tackles the question of predestination, one cannot simply reject it, especially as a kind of knee-jerk reaction to Calvinism. Essentially, there are two teachings, de fide, that constitute Magisterial teaching, and therefore are not to be rejected.
  1. God, through an eternal resolve of his will, predestines certain people to eternal blessedness.
  2. God, through an eternal resolve of his will, AND, in light of their foreseen demerits, reprobates certain people to hell.
Because predestination is Catholic dogma, so must reprobation. Plus, the Church requires us to affirm ALL of the following concepts in formulating theories on predestination and reprobation:
  1. God’s sovereignty and the resolve of the divine will (this means, God does play an active role in predestining or reprobating people, and that this decree is infallibly secured).
  2. Man’s free will (we are required to affirm that the plan of predestination includes man’s free will, and that man freely uses his will to cooperate or reject God’s grace).
  3. The necessity of grace.
  4. The universal desire of salvation (this is rooted in Scripture, and on this ground, we must reject Calvinist double-predestination).
Within these parameters, the Church has given theologians room to play, but the Church herself, probably in her wisdom, has determined that she cannot or will not define any particular framework as dogmatic, only which are acceptable. Two of the most known are the Thomist school (as taught by Banez) and the Molinist (held by the Jesuits).

The Thomists teach predestination without consideration of foreseen merits, and so hold that God decides from eternity to bring Mr. X. to heaven, and so provides necessary graces that he knows Mr. X will freely respond to, and thereby bestows those graces on Mr. X so as to ensure his salvation. Essentially, it’s 1/2 of Calvinism, and is acceptable in Catholic thought.

Molinists on the other hand teach that God predestines after consideration of foreseen merits, and through what they call his “middle knowledge”, God knows how all people respond to various orders of grace, and out of nothing but his sovereign will, freely lays out one fixed order of grace (this one). Therefore, those he sees as responding to his grace he predestines to heaven, and those he sees as rejecting that grace, he reprobates.

While recognizing neither system as perfect, I lean towards the Molinist position, but I wouldn’t go so far as to call myself a Molinist. Because reprobation is required Catholic belief, I cannot tend towards the Thomist position, because it doesn’t have a good explanation for it without making it effectively equal to Calvinist double-predestination.
 
Thank you for your thoroughal answer! That answers a lot of questions. About those last two schools of thought, I see how the thomist one is flawed, but what is debatable about the molinist one?
Thank you!
 
What some people find difficult with the Molinist thought is that they have to rely on the notion of “middle” knowledge, something the uniquely Molinist. God’s natural and free knowledge (between which the Molinist “middle” knowledge fits) is generally accepted, including by Thomists.

Middle knowledge, however, is not contrary to Catholic teaching, which makes the Molinist position on predestination acceptable as well.
 
How do you reconcile an all-knowing God with free will? He knows exactly what’s gonna happen to each person, and therefore knew who would end up in heaven and who in hell, and so willingly created humans knowing full well how many would go to hell.

If there’s a God, which I sincerely doubt, it seems Calvin was closer to getting it right about him than most other religions
 
What is middle knowledge? The idea that humans can only access a certain amount of knowledge?
 
It seems to me that an all-knowing God is compatible with free will of humans because all-knowing doesn’t necessarily mean all-controlling. While God is present in the past, present and future, he can see all the choices that humans make with their free will. Just because he can see our choices doesn’t mean he determines them.
 
so basically you use your free will to choose whether you follow God or not, and God judges you based on that, but since he’s present in all time we call his judgment predestination bc he judges you at all times past present and future / before you actually go through with it bc he knows you will. Could that be correct?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top