What is a Molinist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter asquared
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

asquared

Guest
I think I know what a Thomist is, I am just old enough to remember Thomas Aquinas and I was taught by Dominicans, but who or what is a Molinist?
 
40.png
asquared:
I think I know what a Thomist is, I am just old enough to remember Thomas Aquinas and I was taught by Dominicans, but who or what is a Molinist?
Click to expand...
He plays third base for the Chicago White Sox.

I’m sorry, I couldn’t resist. And how old are you that you remember St. Thomas Aquinas? :confused:
 
Well, it’s basically this. Thomists say that God predestines without considering the merits/demerits of man. Molinists say God predestines with the consideration of the merits/demerits of man by means of “middle knowledge”.
 
40.png
Apolonio:
Well, it’s basically this. Thomists say that God predestines without considering the merits/demerits of man. Molinists say God predestines with the consideration of the merits/demerits of man by means of “middle knowledge”.
Click to expand...

In addition to which, Molinism is not the same thing as Molinosism (more often, though not quite adequately, called Quietism.​

BTW, Molinism is not as satisfactory as Thomism - Molinism makes predestination dependent on the creature: which is silly, to put it mildly. Even though both schools of thought, and others, are allowed.

Aquinas was a Dominican - Molina was a Jesuit. That almost explains the difference in their ideas about predestination. Jesuit theology has often been accused of conceding far too much to unregenerate human nature - which can hardly be said of Aquinas. OTOH, Aquinas did not have to deal with the mistakes made by Protestant theologians, unlike the Jesuits. ##
 
Wait, Catholics believe in predestination? Sounds like Calvinism, which I think totally undermines God’s all-righteous attribute.
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
Wait, Catholics believe in predestination? Sounds like Calvinism, which I think totally undermines God’s all-righteous attribute.
Click to expand...
Catholics can and do believe in predestination, but not in double predestination as taught by Calvin. God’s grace is always sufficient, but it does not force us. Sufficient grace is given to every man to be saved, but not all men will accept Christ. Intrinsically efficacious grace is given to those that God calls and predestines for salvation. Efficacious grace does not force a man to do God’s will, but in its nature and abundance “enables” man to desire to do God’s will in such a way that he will accomplish what God wills for him.

Double predestination means that those that are not among the elect are predestined for eternal punishment. This is indeed against God’s nature and will. Much more could be said on this topic. James Akin’s book The Salvation Controversy is an excellent resource in this area.
 
Without reading the Catholic encyclopedia, here’s my attempt at explaining Molinism, or middle knowledge.

Luis Molina, a Jesuit, tried to reconcile the belief in free will with belief in God’s ability to control events in the world. If God were able to simply force things to happen the way he wants them to, the people involved would no longer be free agents. But in Scripture God tells of how he governs the world, sets events in motion, raises up and brings down leaders, etc. Molina posited that God did not just force things to go his way. He doesn’t make people do what he wants. He does however, know what people will do when faced with certain conditions/circumstances. By using this knowledge (middle knowledge) God still controls events in the world, even though they were all caused by the free decisions of the humans involved in them (this being especially pertinent to the predestination controversy, but applicable to most everything). This, in his opinion, preserves both Divine Providence and free will.
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
Wait, Catholics believe in predestination? Sounds like Calvinism, which I think totally undermines God’s all-righteous attribute.
Click to expand...

No. 🙂​

For Calvin, God’s Sovereignty and Honour seem to be paramount: there is nothing unjust in reprobation - which is what it sounds as though you may have in mind - simply because it is God’s will to reprobate. And because it is his will, it cannot possibly be unjust. So predestination is perfectly righteous - utterly mysterious, but perfectly righteous. He is very insistent that God is just, and that it is quite intolerable for anyone to question God’s justice; for God owes us nothing - Calvin has a very strong emphasis on God’s grace.

He devoted a whole treatise to the subject, in “The Eternal Predestination of God”, in which he defends his doctrine against views which, most unfortunately, verge on Pelagianism. So he makes mincemeat of his two Catholic adversaries. Pelagianism is a constant temptation, it seems - not least for the Jesuits in the 17th century. Had Calvin been measured against a Thomist, some of his ideas might have taken a very different form.

There is nothing whatever peculiar to Calvin in having a doctrine of predestination - so it is an enormous pity that “predestination” seems to mean, for most people, “reprobation to eternal death” - that is part of his doctrine, and, in a different form, is (I think) part of Catholic doctrine as well. Personally, I think it deserves far more attention than it seems to receive - it is after all based in Scripture, as well as in the Fathers. ##
 
I have always ben very weak on this subject actually, but it seems that there have been many good examples of predestination in the Old Testament. I am trying to work it out as to how this has played out in a practical manner.

The people of Israel are going astray…Yahweh sends prophets… the people of Israel don’t want to hear about it…God warns that if they don’t repent such and such a thing will happen, God “sees” what will happen if the -Assyrians/Babylonians/Philistines/what have you- are permitted to have their way, He “knows” their nature! The prophets proclaim this, they are told what to say by God. God is giving them an even break.

The Israelites don’t repent and a just God lifts His protection from them as violators of the Covenant. Then it happens. God does not “send” the invaders to punish the people of Israel, He knows that they will come.

In all of this the people of Israel/Judea are free to change their ways, up to that one point…

+T+

The Immaculate Conception would have to be the biggie in Predestination. God predestines her to say yes!

God does not predestine anyone to say no, apparently.

In a sense, if the BVM is loveable to us it isn’t pure chance.

I am unclear about how the churches of the East view all of this, but at this point I am just trying to work it out the way you guys are describing it.
 
  • **A Friend Asks Whether I am Thomist or Molinist**
    To which I humbly reply:
    1. The question (Molinist or Thomist) has almost become an anachronism in theology since the Popes wisely refused to side with either school in the details of the workings of grace, freedom and predestination.
    2. This is because “God is not in time. His transcendence places Him in an eternity which has neither past nor future, but only an eternal present,” an eternal Now. (Henri Rondet)
    3. Thus all questions about whether God grants his grace “before” or “after” a prevision of what he knows we will do with it are by definition non-sense.
    4. What is certain and what we must know is that Christ died for all human beings and that we have all been given “more than enough grace to save our souls” (St. Francis de Sales). Note:* “more than enough…”*
    5. The realities of both grace and freedom are ultimate mysteries and can only be understood in the Beatific Vision. How much more their intimate reconciliations! Thus it is a playful hubris which seeks to “resolve” what cannot be understood or “known” until the Beatific Vision, assuming anything of it at all is proper to be known ever.
    TCRNews.com
 
Ian McClave said:
  • A Friend Asks Whether I am Thomist or Molinist
    To which I humbly reply:
    1. The question (Molinist or Thomist) has almost become an anachronism in theology since the Popes wisely refused to side with either school in the details of the workings of grace, freedom and predestination.
    2. This is because “God is not in time. His transcendence places Him in an eternity which has neither past nor future, but only an eternal present,” an eternal Now. (Henri Rondet)
    3. Thus all questions about whether God grants his grace “before” or “after” a prevision of what he knows we will do with it are by definition non-sense.
    4. What is certain and what we must know is that Christ died for all human beings and that we have all been given “more than enough grace to save our souls” (St. Francis de Sales). Note:* “more than enough…”*
    5. The realities of both grace and freedom are ultimate mysteries and can only be understood in the Beatific Vision. How much more their intimate reconciliations! Thus it is a playful hubris which seeks to “resolve” what cannot be understood or “known” until the Beatific Vision, assuming anything of it at all is proper to be known ever.
    TCRNews.com
Click to expand...


  • Gotta tell ya, I’ve been reading about Thomists vs Molinists vs Cavlinists vs Arminains for a long time (and a few others I won’t mention here). I think you summed it up perfectly with what you posted. Bravo! 👍
 
thanks for the answers, as I expected I got more than I need. So I know who Thomas is and who Molina is, who is Quiet? personally I always had a soft spot for Toad. I am so old that not only do I know who Thomas Aquinas is, I took 4 years of latin in high school. I also remember when Jesuits were the bedrock of orthodox catholic higher education, now that’s old.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top