Which dogmas do we have that with certainty excludes universalism?

[MarkRome]

Development of doctrine did happen. The kernel was obviously there, that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all God, but the formal doctrine of the Trinity, where we understand procession, spiration, personhood, and hypostasis did not come until later. The word Trinity isn’t found in the Bible, neither is hypostatic union.

Like transubstantiation. The Church always taught that the bread and wine became the body and blood of Christ, but it wasn’t until later that the Church applied philosophical thought to understand what takes place with the bread and wine.

 

[Hodos]

The word Trinity isn’t found in the Bible, neither is hypostatic union.

The word Trinity describes several teachings within the Bible in a succinct manner. The same is true of the hypostatic union. They are theological definitions that describe what is already observed in scripture. That is why I stated that doctrine isn’t developed. It is received through the revelation of Christ in the flesh and confessed by the Church.

Like transubstantiation. The Church always taught that the bread and wine became the body and blood of Christ, but it wasn’t until later that the Church applied philosophical thought to understand what takes place with the bread and wine.

Not a great example. The use of Aristotelian philosophy to define the mystery of the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist by the scholastics actually served to muddy the waters and create further disagreement.

 

[MarkRome]

They are theological definitions that describe what is already observed in scripture.

Not exactly. It sounds like you are a Sola Scriptura Christian as you reference the primacy of Scripture. Am I correct? Remember, even Arius argued from Scripture to support his heresy prior to Nicaea.

What is the development of doctrine? John Henry Newman said that Catholic teaching has become more detailed and explicit over the centuries. The later statements of doctrine remain consistent with earlier statements. This is why hypostatic union is considered a development of doctrine. Note that hypostasis is a philosophical term, not a theological term, that was applied to a theological concept.

The use of Aristotelian philosophy to define the mystery of the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist by the scholastics actually served to muddy the waters and create further disagreement.

No, the Church clarified. And transubstantiation is dogma.

 

[Hodos]

Not exactly. It sounds like you are a Sola Scriptura Christian as you reference the primacy of Scripture. Am I correct? Remember, even Arius argued from Scripture to support his heresy prior to Nicaea.

Yes, I do believe in the principle of Sola Scriptura, yes. But I frequently find that Catholics have no idea what Sola Scriptura teaches (this is frequently true of uneducated Protestants as well, so don’t take that as an insult). We do not disbelieve in creeds or confessional documents. Where they are firmly grounded in scripture as the Nicene Creed, Apostle’s Creed, and Athanasian Creed are, for example, we uphold them.

Remember, even Arius argued from Scripture to support his heresy prior to Nicaea.

Yes, but as was demonstrated by both Alexander of Alexandria and later Athenasius, he did so by ignoring some scripture in favor of others. The conclusion of the council of Nicea is binding, because they are faithful to the scriptures, and not just particular verses, but all of it.

What is the development of doctrine? John Henry Newman said that Catholic teaching has become more detailed and explicit over the centuries.

As I stated before, I agree that heresy forces orthodoxy to clarify doctrine. But again, this is not a case of innovating from what has been handed down. It is a case of receiving the doctrine that was handed down by the apostles and confessing it. I hope that clarifies.

 

[MarkRome]

Yes, but as was demonstrated by both Alexander of Alexandria and later Athenasius, he did so by ignoring some scripture in favor of others. The conclusion of the council of Nicea is binding, because they are faithful to the scriptures, and not just particular verses, but all of it.

The Catholic Church was faithful to God’s revelation, both written and oral. It took the great desert monk St. Anthony coming in to defend the nature of Christ.

But again, this is not a case of innovating from what has been handed down. It is a case of receiving the doctrine that was handed down by the apostles and confessing it.

Hypostatic Union, Trinity, Transubstantiation, homoousious. Not found in the Bible. There was some pushback about even using homosouios in the creed because it is not used in Scriptures.

Transubstantiation is not an innovation. It was also passed down by the apostles. They just didn’t have the terminology for like they didn’t for the Trinity (nor even used the word Trinity).

 

[Latin]

… where is your source?

Here is the source.

Fallen man cannot redeem himself, (De fide dogma). – It is God’s responsibility to save all of us.
.
There is a supernatural intervention of God in the faculties of the soul, which precedes the free act of the will, (De fide dogma).
.
CCCS 1996-1998 His call to eternal life is supernatural, coming totally from God’s decision and surpassing all power of human intellect and will.

Post prævista merita contradicts the above dogmas and many other teachings of the Catholic Church.
.
The Catholic dogma
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA The predestination of the elect explains.

Ante prævisa merita
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 thisdecree, decided to give them all the graces necessary for its accomplishment.
.
“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.

.
The COUNTERPART of the predestination of the good is the decree the Divine 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).
.
Calvinistic reprobation means the absolute will to condemn to hell.

.
Catholic theologians view on the decree the Divine reprobation:

Whatever view one may take regarding the internal probability of negative 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 avails 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.
.
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.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Predestination​

.
God bless

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Post prævista merita contradicts the above dogmas and many other teachings of the Catholic Church.

This is from another thread number 1.

And Molinists and the Greek Fathers held to post praevisa merita. Notably John Chrysostom.

Whatever view one may take regarding the internal probability of negative reprobation, it cannot be harmonized with the dogmatically certain universality and sincerity of God’s salvific will.

Augustine had this to say.

“Felix said: You call Manichaeus cruel for saying these things. What do we say about Christ who said: Go into eternal fire? Augustine said: He said this to sinners. Felix said: These sinners - why were not they purified? Augustine said: Because they did not will [it]. Felix said: Because they did not will it - did you say that? Augustine said: Yes, I said it, because they did not will it.”

So it’s not God’s desire that sinners get damned: they don’t want to be saved.

 

[avemariagratiaplena]

If all this is true and from my reading of the Council of Orange with St. Prosper and St. Paul I think it is, is there any solution except that God has really saved everyone? I know a prayer says “salvation is the Lord’s, salvation is the Lord’s!” like it is a gift from Him He either gives or not, if He doesn’t give we are lost and if He does we are saved. But didn’t St. Thomas say there were two wills? One that is like before and one after, so before God wanted to save all but after He did not in fact gift the gift to save all.

" In the same way God antecedently wills all men to be saved, but consequently wills some to be damned, as His justice exacts."
https://www.newadvent.org/summa/1019.htm

Would this satisfy it? I don’t know how to resolve

 

[Dan_Defender]

Since the Catechism, CCC section 1033 to 1037, teaches us that hell indeed exists, and our ending up there is a real possibility, this would exclude a certainty of universal salvation.

Exactly. Those who think Hell is empty are in grave error IMO.

 

[Latin]

So it’s not God’s desire that sinners get damned: they don’t want to be saved.

1 Cor.4:7 For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?
.
THELOLOGICAL FACTS

First fact: There is nothing in us what God did not infused into us.
.
Second fact: Only the things, incudes our will, can come out from us, what God first infused into us.
.
Third fact: There is absolutely nothing can come out from us what God did not infused into us.
.
Fourth fact: If God infused obedience into us, we are obedient and obedience comes out from us.
.
Fifth fact: If God infused disobedience into us, we are disobedient and disobedience comes out from us.
.
Sixth fact: We are 100 % the way God created us.
.
Catholic Soteriology:
The three Divine or Theological Virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity are infused with Sanctifying grace, (De fide dogma). – Conditions of our faith, hope, nobility and our obedience.

CCCS 1996-1998 His call to eternal life is supernatural, coming totally from God’s decision and surpassing all power of human intellect and will.
.
There is a supernatural intervention of God in the faculties of the soul, which precedes the free act of the will, (De fide dogma).
.
CCC 308 The truth that God is at work in all the actions of his creatures is inseparable from faith in God the Creator.
God is the first cause who operates in and through secondary causes:
"For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
Far from diminishing the creature’s dignity, this truth enhances it.
.
God acts through secondary causes, yet all alike postulate Divine concurrence and receive their powers of operation from Him, efficacious in that all things minister to God’s final purpose, a purpose which cannot be frustrated (Contra Gent., III, xciv);
.
CCC 307 God thus enables men to be intelligent and free, causes in order to complete the work of creation, … Though often unconscious collaborators with God’s will, they can also enter deliberately into the divine plan. They then fully become “God’s fellow workers” and co-workers for his kingdom.
.
Because God himself operates in our will He causes all our actions and we all freely do what we want to do and we don’t even realize, we are freely cooperating with His graces.
.
As we see above @Julius_Caesar, you have described a wrong god who is not able to govern, his children sitting on his throne, he is not the creator and the governor of the universe.

If an omniscient God wants obedience from his children, He infuse into his children: CCCS 1990-1991; … In this gift, faith, hope, charity, and OBEDIENCE TO GOD’S WILL are given to us. – And then His children, we are all obedient.
.
God bless

 

[Maximian]

Citation please

 

[christofirst]

David Bentley Hart makes as strong an argument as I’ve seen for the certainty of an empty hell, but he’s admittedly placed himself outside most of Christianity on this matter.

I accept that the Biblical references and Church teachings about hell are given to serve as a warning for us, but I don’t see them as necessarily teaching that any of us will without a doubt end up there. Nor do I see them as indicating with certainty a hell crowded with countless souls, as some maintain.

I sometimes get the feeling that some of us are actually hoping that hell will be very crowded, and this I simply cannot understand in light of Christian charity.

I do hope for an empty hell, and there are Biblical references and Church teachings to support this hope.

 

[Montrose]

I do hope for an empty hell, and there are Biblical references and Church teachings to support this hope.

That would require everyone who has ever lived and will live until the end of time would have to die in a state of grace. Frankly, I think that is impossible.

 

[Mmarco]

Julius_Caesar:

So it’s not God’s desire that sinners get damned: they don’t want to be saved.

1 Cor.4:7 For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?
.
THELOLOGICAL FACTS

First fact: There is nothing in us what God did not infused into us.
.
Second fact: Only the things, incudes our will, can come out from us, what God first infused into us.
.
Third fact: There is absolutely nothing can come out from us what God did not infused into us.
.
Fourth fact: If God infused obedience into us, we are obedient and obedience comes out from us.
.
Fifth fact: If God infused disobedience into us, we are disobedient and disobedience comes out from us.
.
Sixth fact: We are 100 % the way God created us.
.

The point is that God infused free will into us, and this is the reason why free will is 100% into us.

 

[Johann_du_Toit]

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

 

[christofirst]

That would require everyone who has ever lived and will live until the end of time would have to die in a state of grace. Frankly, I think that is impossible.

I understand your point, but to that I say, as Our Lord teaches us in the Gospel: The things that are impossible with men are possible with God.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Because God himself operates in our will He causes all our actions and we all freely do what we want to do and we don’t even realize, we are freely cooperating with His graces.

Does everyone have sanctifying grace? No.

Not everyone is in a state of grace besides this.

As we see above @Julius_Caesar, you have described a wrong god who is not able to govern, his children sitting on his throne, hi is not the creator and the governor of the universe.

Or I’m describing a patient God who calls many and yet few are chosen. One thing you leave out is God’s patience.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

I understand your point, but to that I say, as Our Lord teaches us in the Gospel: The things that are impossible with men are possible with God

Didn’t He also say that many are called but few are chosen?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Fifth fact: If God infused disobedience into us, we are disobedient and disobedience comes out from us.

I really like how concupiscence is out of your facts.

 

[christofirst]

Didn’t He also say that many are called but few are chosen?

I believe the point of such a teaching is to get us to repent and follow Our Lord, and not to come to the conclusion that hell will necessarily be crowded. I see these kinds of teachings as more of an admonishment or a wake up call than a prediction.