Total Depravity

[Dave]

Can any of my fellow Catholics here give me some good refutations of the doctrine of total depravity, which Martin Luther dreamed up?

[jasJis]

Mankind's ability to recognize Good in Natural Law, and choose it, even without contact from those who know God.

[Dave]

Cool, thanks.

[PatrickRitaMichael]

I don't know about Lutherans, but Calvinists believe in 'common grace,' which is different from saving grace. So what jas is saying, the ability to observe natural law, is this grace from God, nothing from our depraved human natures.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I probably would not try to refute total depravity in general since there is a sense where this is compatible with Catholic teaching (eg., "grace is necessary for man to do any supernaturally good act, to love God, to fulfill God's commandments, to gain eternal life, to prepare for salvation, to rise from sin, to avoid sin, and to persevere "). But I would try to identify some key points in the persons understanding of justification and salvation and deal with those. For example if the person is a Calvinist they hold to the doctrines of TULIP. (TULIP = Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited Atonement, Irrestible grace, Perseverance of the saints). I think to quibble over total depravity alone would be kind of futile since there are many other soteriological presuppositions that the person has that need to be addressed. The Catholic understanding would not make sense unless you first addressed some other issues.

This is just my opinion based on my limited experience.

[phatcatholic]

the following is a quotation from this article, which i find helpful:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ludwig Ott wrote, concerning the Fall, in his Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Rockford, IL: TAN Books, 1974 {orig. 1952}, tr. Patrick Lynch):

The Reformers.....admitted the reality of original sin, but misunderstood its essence its operation, since they regarded it as identical with concupiscence which corrupts completely human nature.....

Original Sin does not consist, as the Reformers.....taught, in 'The habitual concupiscence, which remains, even in the baptised, a true and proper sin, but is no longer reckoned for punishment.' The Council of Trent teaches that through Baptism everything is taken away which is a true and proper sin, and that the concupiscence which remains behind after Baptism for the moral proving is called sin in an improper sense only. That sin remains in man, even if it is not reckoned for punishment, is irreconcilable with the Pauline teaching of Justification as an inner transformation and renewal........

The wounding of nature must not be conceived, with the Reformers and the Jansenists, as the complete corruption of human nature. In the condition of Original Sin, man possesses the ability of knowing natural religious truths and of performing natural morally good actions.....Man, with his natural power of cognition, can with certainty know the existence of God. The Council of Trent teaches that free will was not lost or extinguished by the fall of Adam. {pp. 108,110,112-113}

In other words, in Catholic theology man is not "totally depraved," does not have an essential "sin nature," and possesses a free will.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

more articles on the subject can be found here.

i hope this helps...........pax christi,

phatcatholic

[M.SIGGA]

Mankind's ability to recognize Good in Natural Law, and choose it, even without contact from those who know God.

I also agree with LaudateD, but this a really amesome response!

[Laudate_Dominum]

I also agree with LaudateD, but this a really amesome response!

Agreed, I rather enjoyed that response.

Thanks Jas! :cool:

Edited February 8, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[jasJis]

Wow. Praise comin' from book-smart people.

I'm overwelmed. :blush:

Edited February 8, 2004 by jasJis