Thomist theory of grace and predestination

Started by Quaremerepulisti, November 22, 2016, 09:27:40 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Non Nobis on November 28, 2016, 11:58:29 PM
But willingness to will, praying to have grace, is itself a good thing and so must be caused by God.

Willingness to will (as distinct from prayer) isn't an ontological "thing" properly so-called.

QuotePraying here is for the WILL (and grace) to overcome temptation and avoid sin.  This is praying for something good that one doesn't have.  But praying itself is a prior good, and doing it requires God's help (whether it is supernatural grace or general help).

With respect to prayer, admitted; with respect to willingness to will, denied.

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Michael Wilson on November 29, 2016, 07:30:43 AM
I was thinking of the woman who appeared to her friend after she died (whether true or not is not important), and told her that she was in Hell, and then went through her life to the final act of her life: she and her husband were taking a drive in the countryside on a Sunday; she hadn't assisted at Mass that morning, as she hadn't practiced her faith in years; as they were driving by a Church, she suddenly received an inspiration: "You could stop and make a visit"; she reacted: "No, I wont, I'm finished with all of that for good"; shortly after, the couple were in an accident and they were killed; she died impenintent and ended up in Hell.
Was her rejection of that suggestion an act of the will?

Sure, insofar as she willed to continue on her drive instead of stopping at Church.  Note that she had a prior unwillingness to will this though; which, had it not been there, the grace would undoubtedly have been successful.  Then, kneeling in Church, she would have received a further inspiration: you need to repent of your sins and go to confession.  Without a prior unwillingness to do that, that grace would have been successful too.


Non Nobis

#47
Quote from: Michael Wilson on November 28, 2016, 07:28:32 AM
Non Nobis,
QuoteA man goes to hell because of his own free final impenitence. God (as I understand this) could have chosen to PREVENT final impenitence (working by His grace).  But if God chose to NOT prevent it (to permit it), then in fact the final impenitence will happen; but how does this make it God's fault? The sinner had a real opportunity, and threw it away.  If he took the opportunity, he would only be doing it with God's grace, but he still had an opportunity either way.
Planning what final impenitence is not prevented/is permitted does amount to predestination, but it does not take away man's fault.
As I understand the Thomistic position on grace, 'sufficient grace' gives man the "potential" to act, but not the act itself. If God does not give him and additional grace, the soul (or the angel) will reject the grace and will fall. How is this then not the fault of God? 

When a man sins, there are two wills involved: 1) God's, permitting him to sin 2) man's, sinning.  Though God's permission entails man's sinning, it does not change what is going on in man's will.  "Entails" does not mean "forces". The fault is in man's willing, not in God's permission.

It's not a fault in God's will that when He permits evil (not giving grace), it must in fact happen (entailing).  This is so because otherwise good would happen without God's grace: which is absurd. This is just a logical conclusion that something must happen, it is not a cause forcing it to happen.

Quote from: Michael Wilson on November 28, 2016, 07:28:32 AM
My impression is that the Thomists are all about the sovereignt of God and man's absolute dependence on Him except when it comes to the salvation of a soul; then they insist that men respond to sufficient grace without God's help.

On the contrary, they insist that man CANNOT respond (not resist, accept) to sufficient grace without God's help.

Man can freely either reject grace or accept(see footnote*) sufficient grace.

* Man doesn't even have to think or write about God's part here, but the underlying reality is that he only freely accepts grace because God is working in his will.

Man is not expected to be good without grace; God freely gives the necessary grace when He does cause good in man's will.
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!

Non Nobis

#48
Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on November 29, 2016, 09:50:53 AM
Quote from: Non Nobis on November 28, 2016, 11:58:29 PM
But willingness to will, praying to have grace, is itself a good thing and so must be caused by God.

Willingness to will (as distinct from prayer) isn't an ontological "thing" properly so-called.

QuotePraying here is for the WILL (and grace) to overcome temptation and avoid sin.  This is praying for something good that one doesn't have.  But praying itself is a prior good, and doing it requires God's help (whether it is supernatural grace or general help).

With respect to prayer, admitted; with respect to willingness to will, denied.

Willingness to will (not resisting) is good as opposed to evil (regardless of its difference from just "willing" or its philosophical categorization). How can you say otherwise?  Doesn't all good come from God?
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Non Nobis on November 29, 2016, 11:33:10 PM
When a man sins, there are two wills involved: 1) God's, permitting him to sin 2) man's, sinning.  Though God's permission entails man's sinning, it does not change what is going on in man's will.  "Entails" does not mean "forces". The fault is in man's willing, not in God's permission.

There is no fault in man's willing in this case, since he could not do otherwise than he did: given the preconditions set up by God (His permission), man's avoidance of sin is metaphysically impossible.  No one can be held to account for failing to do the impossible.

QuoteOn the contrary, they insist that man CANNOT respond (not resist, accept) to sufficient grace without God's help.

And so, when God denies this help, and thus man does not respond to sufficient grace and sins, he sins due to an insufficiency of Divine help.

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Non Nobis on November 30, 2016, 12:06:34 AM
Willingness to will (not resisting) is good as opposed to evil (regardless of its difference from just "willing" or its philosophical categorization). How can you say otherwise?  Doesn't all good come from God?

All actual good comes from God.  But willingness to will is good only hypothetically, not actually.


Non Nobis

Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on November 30, 2016, 11:12:59 AM
No one can be held to account for failing to do the impossible.

Just because willing good is impossible doesn't mean willing evil is impossible.

Don't both the Thomistic and non-Thomistic views say that while a man IS resisting (has NOT stopped) it is impossible for him to will good NOW, because efficacious grace is not in him?  Yet he can freely will evil.

The Thomistic view is that STOPPING resistance itself requires grace, but regardless of what it TAKES to stop, the absence of efficacious grace to will the final good makes it impossible.  Yet it is possible to will evil.

(In other words, I think you hold that efficacious grace IS working in a man's will when he chooses good, so if it is not there choosing good is impossible.  Yet choosing evil is possible.)

Satan is held to account for the evil he wills, even though he can't will good.
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!

Non Nobis

#52
Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on November 28, 2016, 08:58:49 PM
Quote from: An aspiring Thomist on November 28, 2016, 04:31:06 PM
Quare, what exactly do you mean by hypothetical act of willing?

It's a statement that if conditions X should obtain, then I will will Y.  This isn't an actual act of willing Y, since conditions X aren't present.  But it is a willingness to will Y, unlike the contrary that Y will not be willed, conditions X or no.

So, for instance, I can say that, if tempted, I will pray to God for help and rely on His help alone and not on my own feeble strength, and then afterwards give all credit to Him for overcoming the temptation.  This statement is not, in itself, an act of virtue in overcoming temptation and avoiding sin.  It is, however, a hypothetical act of virtue and thus, when tempted this is what is going to happen through God's grace, however with God working the actual willing and doing.

Anyone can make the statement "if conditions X should obtain, I will will Y".
But it's meaningless unless you seriously intend to do that in the future.  Intending to do something under certain circumstances in the future is an act of the will.

Telling God that you intend to accept martyrdom rather than deny the faith, should this ever be necessary, is an act of the will (He knows how firmly you make the resolution), and is virtuous even if not as virtuous as martyrdom itself.

Willingness (or willing) to will in the future is a good act of the will, even if not as good as the final willing.
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Non Nobis on November 30, 2016, 11:26:05 PM
Anyone can make the statement "if conditions X should obtain, I will will Y".
But it's meaningless unless you seriously intend to do that in the future.  Intending to do something under certain circumstances in the future is an act of the will.

Telling God that you intend to accept martyrdom rather than deny the faith, should this ever be necessary, is an act of the will (He knows how firmly you make the resolution), and is virtuous even if not as virtuous as martyrdom itself.

Willingness (or willing) to will in the future is a good act of the will, even if not as good as the final willing.

It is not.  An real act of the will must have an actual object, not merely a hypothetical one.

Non Nobis

#54
Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on December 01, 2016, 09:50:43 AM
Quote from: Non Nobis on November 30, 2016, 11:26:05 PM
Anyone can make the statement "if conditions X should obtain, I will will Y".
But it's meaningless unless you seriously intend to do that in the future.  Intending to do something under certain circumstances in the future is an act of the will.

Telling God that you intend to accept martyrdom rather than deny the faith, should this ever be necessary, is an act of the will (He knows how firmly you make the resolution), and is virtuous even if not as virtuous as martyrdom itself.

Willingness (or willing) to will in the future is a good act of the will, even if not as good as the final willing.

It is not.  An real act of the will must have an actual object, not merely a hypothetical one.

So willing to die a martyr in the future if asked to deny your faith, and willing to deny  your faith under the same conditions are both neither good nor bad, and in no way acts of the will???  They are both willing now the conditional willing of something in the future; but that is an object of sorts, something that the will CAN will.

"Willing to will" here doesn't mean something vague and hazy, it means purposely exerting the will here and now.  The will itself does something, it is not inert.

Perhaps there is a passive "willingness to will" (e.g. if you don't explicitly think about martyrdom, but are ready for it) but it still belongs to the will and is GOOD.  With Scripture we speak of "a man of good will", even if his will is not acting. Goodness is from God.
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Non Nobis on December 01, 2016, 10:11:43 PM
So willing to die a martyr in the future if asked to deny your faith, and willing to deny  your faith under the same conditions are both neither good nor bad, and in no way acts of the will???  They are both willing now the conditional willing of something in the future; but that is an object of sorts, something that the will CAN will.

To be a real act of the will, something real and actual must be willed, not an "object of sorts". 

It is not an act of virtue for us to say, from the comfort of our living rooms and facing no persecution whatsoever, how we'd be willing to die a martyr.  If it were, everyone could become a Saint by building what St. Teresa of Avila called "castles in the air" without ever actually having to do anything.  Spiritual life then becomes another chapter to "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty".  I can be a missionary to Alaska, the Pope, anything I want to be.  No, we aren't willing martyrdom in this instance.  God has to give the grace of martyrdom for this to mean anything.

Yet it is evil for us to determine we would not be willing to die a martyr if necessary.  Obviously we would refuse the grace if offered.


Non Nobis

#56
Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on December 02, 2016, 05:14:35 PM
It is not an act of virtue for us to say, from the comfort of our living rooms and facing no persecution whatsoever, how we'd be willing to die a martyr.  If it were, everyone could become a Saint by building what St. Teresa of Avila called "castles in the air" without ever actually having to do anything.  Spiritual life then becomes another chapter to "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty".  I can be a missionary to Alaska, the Pope, anything I want to be.  No, we aren't willing martyrdom in this instance.  God has to give the grace of martyrdom for this to mean anything.


But God knows what is in our heart (our intellect and will). If He knows we are just making "castles in the air", He knows we are pretty much just using our imagination and our will accounts for little, if anything.  But if a priest knows he is going to be a missionary among murderous savages, he can use his will so strongly that it may even be a resolution, even if not the will for martyrdom here and now.  God knows these things. Do you think they matter nothing to God? Isn't a resolution an act of the will? Is a firm resolution to do something if a certain condition is met not a resolution at all?  Does a "man of good will" mean nothing?

Priests make vows, to never even marry, even if they "fall in love".  I think this (as it is in the priest) is an act of the will. We will even now to go to confession in the future if we commit a mortal sin.  Or, when we are in the state of mortal sin, we firmly will to go to confession as soon as we possibly can - this is enough for God to forgive us if we die before we can! I don't understand why you don't see these things as acts of the will.

The will NOW to have the courage in the future to do something good leads us to pray NOW for the courage then. Of course it may not be as good as the actual will THEN, but it is still good.  St. Therese wanted to be a missionary.  Do you think that accounted for nothing with God, who knew the love with which she willed it (when she was no longer just an imaginative child)?

I think you are incorrectly restricting the object of the will to what is "here and now". At most that is one sense of "to will something", and the most solid and provable. But it is not the only sense - and most certainly not to God. An act of love is an act of the will (when it is not only words).
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!

james03

QuoteThis is Molinism, which says that efficacious grace is extrinsically efficacious - that is, it depends upon the Free Will whether or not it is efficacious - as opposed to Thomism, which says that efficacious grace is intrinsically efficacious - that is, the Free Will will always and infallibly co-operate with efficacious grace, because God infallibly wills it so.

Just like Molinism, you say that grace is not either efficacious or inefficacious until the Free Will of man determines it; whereas in Thomism, efficacious and merely sufficient grace are really two distinct orders of grace, because the former always and intrinsically moves the Free Will to co-operate with God, whereas the latter does not.
Will you do me the courtesy of reading what I wrote, as in "ALL GRACE IS EFFICACIOUS".  Grace does not depend on man AT ALL.  There is only Grace and it is always efficacious.  It accomplishes its immediate task.  When God gives you a grace to have the consequences of sin before your intellect, the consequences of sin will be before your intellect.  Note there is zero involvement by man.  The Grace is always efficacious.
QuoteThe problem with your view is what I said earlier: you are making man more responsible for his salvation than he is; whether or not a man is saved depends first and foremost upon his Free Will, whereas in scripture God is the first cause of our salvation.
False.  Go back to my example.  Take away the Grace God gave the man: putting the consequences of sin before his intellect.  Take that Grace away.  Is the man saved?  No.  What was the First Cause in the causal chain I put forward?  Your objection is false.
"But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God (Jn 3:18)."

"All sorrow leads to the foot of the Cross.  Weep for your sins."

"Although He should kill me, I will trust in Him"

Quaremerepulisti

Quote from: Non Nobis on December 02, 2016, 10:26:52 PM
But God knows what is in our heart (our intellect and will). If He knows we are just making "castles in the air", He knows we are pretty much just using our imagination and our will accounts for little, if anything.  But if a priest knows he is going to be a missionary among murderous savages, he can use his will so strongly that it may even be a resolution, even if not the will for martyrdom here and now.  God knows these things.

Right, but there's a difference between willing something based on conditions we know will happen in the future (which is a resolution properly so-called) versus a willingness to will something based on conditions we don't know will happen in the future.

QuoteI think you are incorrectly restricting the object of the will to what is "here and now". At most that is one sense of "to will something", and the most solid and provable. But it is not the only sense - and most certainly not to God. An act of love is an act of the will (when it is not only words).

Yes, but an act of love is an act of the will for something here and now.  Sure, the love with which St. Theresa desired to be a missionary counted for a lot.

Non Nobis

Quote from: Quaremerepulisti on December 04, 2016, 03:39:26 PM
Quote from: Non Nobis on December 02, 2016, 10:26:52 PM
But God knows what is in our heart (our intellect and will). If He knows we are just making "castles in the air", He knows we are pretty much just using our imagination and our will accounts for little, if anything.  But if a priest knows he is going to be a missionary among murderous savages, he can use his will so strongly that it may even be a resolution, even if not the will for martyrdom here and now.  God knows these things.

Right, but there's a difference between willing something based on conditions we know will happen in the future (which is a resolution properly so-called) versus a willingness to will something based on conditions we don't know will happen in the future.

The priest who is going to be a missionary doesn't know for certain that he will be called to be a martyr. He may not even be able to go at all. The priest who resolves not to marry may never fall in love.

The greatest saints who truly give their whole will to God resolve (more strongly than we do) to do whatever God asks in the future, no matter what the circumstances.

...
You just aren't convincing me on this issue.
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!