ICTHUS Posted October 30, 2003 Author Share Posted October 30, 2003 *sigh* Can anyone find a decent Catholic refutation of the 5 points of Calvinism? Total Depravity Unconditional Election Limited Atonement Irresistible Grace* Perseverance of the Saints *Irresistible grace is the one I'm particularly interested in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted October 30, 2003 Author Share Posted October 30, 2003 I suppose it would be too easy to say its a mystery.... yep, I figured that wouldn't work. I never was one for mystery novels, Cmom! :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Icthus, My 10/27 post on this thread provides a really brief refutation of irrestitible grace. I have more I can post, but I won't have time until next week, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdewolf2 Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Here are just a few links to sites refuting Calvinism: A Tiptoe Through TULIP Resisting and Cooperating With God Predestinarianism Calvinism Protestantism Predestination and the Catholic Church Predestination A Catholic Perspective on Predestination PREDESTINATION AND THE ELECT Predestination Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donna Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 but it is a mystery. what is wrong w/ that, i think it's beautiful. even in heaven no one can fully understand the beatific vision. it's fine to delve deeply into doctrine. but as proverbs says 'fear of the lord is the beginning of wisdom'; humility goes before honor and learning. i hope all of us are praying to find out the truth. icthus i don't mean to belittle your suffering, but, to maybe get a different perspective, do you need to understand completely the process of digestation before you are willing to eat? no; you will eat and be fed in the meantime. i am a convert so i understand needing above all to come to the truth. but i pray the holy face of jesus to get you distracted from this for a little while. and it's hard, hard, hard because of what's going on at home. god bless you, dear son of mary; let the holy mother care for you now, to whatever degree you are able. my feeble prayers for your peace of soul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted November 1, 2003 Author Share Posted November 1, 2003 Ok, the main problem with Calvinist soteriology as I see it so far, is that it basically says that God is responsible for Evil, which is in direct contravention of His goodness and holiness. Having said that, I also see a problem with Catholic soteriology in that grace is not the beginning of salvation, but a choice of man to assent to grace... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted November 1, 2003 Author Share Posted November 1, 2003 Okay, question: Why is it heterodox to believe that we are dead (i.e. dead in sin, and in serious trouble) before actual grace hits us. My thoughts on this would be that we are slaves to original sin, but that the prevenient actual graces of God, which are offered to all mankind, make us capable of responding to the call of God unto justification. However, we can destroy or resist the action of those prevenient actual graces (for instance, when I was a kid and getting picked on, I could have allowed those times to make me bitter and hateful of everyone I met, including my parents, rather than allowing them to break me to the point where I needed Jesus) by our own attitudes and actions, thus keeping ourselves in that state of slavery to original sin and unwillingness to choose the good for ourselves. does that make sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 Icthus, Sorry it's taken me so long to respond, I haven't been feeling well. Ok, the main problem with Calvinist soteriology as I see it so far, is that it basically says that God is responsible for Evil, which is in direct contravention of His goodness and holiness. Yes, that is a major problem, but it isn't the only one. As I stated before, Calvinist soteriology also denies the free will of man, holds that (fallen) man is intrinsically evil (incapable of good), says that God pre-ordains people to suffer for eternity in hell, at least leads to the conclusion (if it doesn't directly say it) that if a person is one of the 'elect' his actions, no matter how heinous, have no bearing on his salvation, etc., etc.. Having said that, I also see a problem with Catholic soteriology in that grace is not the beginning of salvation, but a choice of man to assent to grace... No, that is not the Catholic position. It's All Grace! Yes, we have to respond to God's gift of salvation, because God loves us so much He will not force us. From the beginning, God created man to be in union with Him, to share in His divine life (cf. 2 Peter 1:4). With this intent, He created man, including a free will. God had a purpose in mind for creation from the beginning and created according to His infinite wisdom. In that wisdom, He created man with free will and chose to respect that free will in order than man might come to Him in love. It is grace that we were even created, grace that we can take our next breath, it is grace that God sent His Son to solve our 'sin problem,' grace which calls us to Him, and grace which allows us to respond to that call. It is grace that God loves us enough to respect our freedom. Calvinist soteriology sets up a false dichotomy between grace and the will. The two are not opposed, much less mutually exclusive. Why is it heterodox to believe that we are dead (i.e. dead in sin, and in serious trouble) before actual grace hits us. Well, it depends on what you mean by this... If you mean that we are separated from God by sin and can only be reunited with Him through the grace of Christ's life, death, and resurrection, it isn't heterodox. If you mean that due to the Fall, man is inclined toward evil, and often chooses against the good, it isn't heterodox. If, however, you mean that the Fall rendered all men utterly evil, it is heterodox because even lived experience shows us that this is not true. Man definitely has an inclination to evil, but that is not the same thing as saying that he has no choice in the matter (i.e. will necessarily choose the evil). Once again, the free will of man is denied (which, as discussed, is a problem). I know I did not answer your question about irressitible grace. I promise I will get to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted November 9, 2003 Author Share Posted November 9, 2003 Well, it depends on what you mean by this... If you mean that we are separated from God by sin and can only be reunited with Him through the grace of Christ's life, death, and resurrection, it isn't heterodox. If you mean that due to the Fall, man is inclined toward evil, and often chooses against the good, it isn't heterodox. If, however, you mean that the Fall rendered all men utterly evil, it is heterodox because even lived experience shows us that this is not true. Man definitely has an inclination to evil, but that is not the same thing as saying that he has no choice in the matter (i.e. will necessarily choose the evil). Once again, the free will of man is denied (which, as discussed, is a problem). I know I did not answer your question about irressitible grace. I promise I will get to it. A Calvinist would respond with a resounding "show me Scripture" Lived experience, according to them, has no basis on doctrine. So how does one prove, from Scripture, that man is not utterly evil. All the Scriptures, especially in Romans 3, seem to indicate the Calvinist position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katholikos Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 A Calvinist would respond with a resounding "show me Scripture" Lived experience, according to them, has no basis on doctrine. So how does one prove, from Scripture, that man is not utterly evil. All the Scriptures, especially in Romans 3, seem to indicate the Calvinist position. And a Catholic would retort, where in the Bible does it say that God's revelation is limited to Scripture? The answer: it doesn't. And there was no Christian "Scripture" per se until the Church was nearly 400 years old. The Catholic Church tells what is Scripture (the inspired Word of God) and what Scripture is (the writings that belong in the Bible). The Holy Spirit told the Catholic bishops and the bishops told us. Protestants haven't a clue about what should be listed in the table of contents. The Church wrote the New Testament, selected and canonized the contents, canonized the Greek Septuagint Scriptures she had inherited from Jesus and the Apostles, and formed the Bible at the close of the fourth and beginning of the fifth century A.D. If you see Calvinism in the Scriptures, it's because you are reading Calvin's interpretation back into them. But Christianity isn't based on the Scriptures -- it's based on the teaching of the Apostles through the Catholic Church. If the Church doesn't teach it, the Apostles didn't teach it, and its not in the NT -- but, of course, the Scriptures can be twisted (2 Peter 3:15-16). The Apostles were not Calvinists! Calvinism is merely one of the many interpretations given to the Scriptures 16 centuries or more after the Church wrote them. Jesus and the Apostles taught Catholicism, not Calvinism. And that's what's in the NT. The Apostles didn't write one thing and teach another! JMJ Likos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katholikos Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 (edited) duplicate post deleted Edited November 10, 2003 by Katholikos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Icthus, A Calvinist would respond with a resounding "show me Scripture" Lived experience, according to them, has no basis on doctrine. So how does one prove, from Scripture, that man is not utterly evil. All the Scriptures, especially in Romans 3, seem to indicate the Calvinist position. First, truth cannot contradict truth. To set revelation in opposition to reason is to set up a false dichotomy. Second, Scripture does not support the Calvinist position. Can something that is wholly evil worship God? Could that worship be in any way acceptable to God? Can something in the very image of God be by nature (even fallen nature) completely lacking in all good? If man after the fall became inherently evil, how could Enoch walk with God? Or David be called "a man after [God's] own heart"? Romans 3 says that no one is righteous. First, the construct seems to be more of hyperbole than a statement of fact. Second, to say that our nature has been tainted, not destroyed, is not to say that man is righteous but rather that he is capable of righteous acts. The two are not the same thing. A person can be steeped in evil and still be able to recognize and choose something that is true, and good, and beautiful. To say that man is utterly evil is to say that he is completely incapable of recognizing truth, beauty, and goodness, that he is utterly incapable of choosing the good, and that he is incapable of love or true compassion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted November 17, 2003 Author Share Posted November 17, 2003 Okay, here goes. Calvinism as I understand it doesn't teach that man is utterly and completely evil (at least not in the malicious, vicious sense of the word, like Satan is). It simply teaches that he is so cloaked in sin that he is dead in his transgressions and incapable of wanting to come into relationship with God, and must be regenerated by Gods grace before he may do so. So why is this wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katholikos Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Okay, here goes. Calvinism as I understand it doesn't teach that man is utterly and completely evil (at least not in the malicious, vicious sense of the word, like Satan is). It simply teaches that he is so cloaked in sin that he is dead in his transgressions and incapable of wanting to come into relationship with God, and must be regenerated by Gods grace before he may do so. So why is this wrong? Simple answer: Because God, Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, did not teach it to the Apostles and the Apostles did not teach it to the Church. The Apostles were Catholics, not Calvinists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now