Church Contradiction on Baptism of Desire

[james03]

The main false assumption (regarding grace) is this: since resistance to grace is an evil, non-resistance must be a good which must therefore come from God, the source of all good.

Exactly how is this an assumption of Congruentism?

God arranges the conditions of man (Vincent Terranova is born to a Trad family) so that he will freely cooperate with the various graces He sends.  There is no sufficient/efficacious distinction, or no "enabling" grace.  There's just Graces.  Period.

[james03]

 

I'm saying that as far as He is concerned wills to save all men; but He wills that the creature makes (under His grace) a free election to choose Him and eternal salvation; or to reject Him.

It's binary.  Are you saying God CAN'T save this person, or that God COULD save him, but does not provide enough Graces?  You see, PPM blows up.

[james03]

Not "all else" - those who are damned to eternal torments are not just left in their natural state. They are positively punished for their sin.

I was talking about up to the point of their death, which you can see by the context.

[Michael Wilson]

I'm saying that as far as He is concerned wills to save all men; but He wills that the creature makes (under His grace) a free election to choose Him and eternal salvation; or to reject Him.

It's binary.  Are you saying God CAN'T save this person, or that God COULD save him, but does not provide enough Graces?  You see, PPM blows up.

It doesn't blow up if you accept the fact that man can resist God's grace, and that God ordinarily doesn't override man's free will.
God could save all men and all Angels even the damned right now; but He doesn't. God wanted to save all of them, but it was necessary for them to freely co-operate with His grace.
Look James,
I'm tired of saying  the same thing over and over again to you; I'm going to drop out of this discussion.

[Non Nobis]

And this is incorporated into the Church's teaching on predestination.  Predestination only concerns the elect.  All else are left to their natural state.  Predestination is an act of Mercy.

Not "all else" - those who are damned to eternal torments are not just left in their natural state. They are positively punished for their sin. "Eternal torments" are not the natural state. (The state they are in does not include only the absence of Sanctifying grace, but also eternal torments).

Not "all else" - those who are damned to eternal torments are not just left in their natural state. They are positively punished for their sin.

I was talking about up to the point of their death, which you can see by the context.

I don't see it; "predestination only concerns the elect" refers primarily to man's final destination, not the state of his soul during life.

I have to stretch the context to cover text in a previous post "By Divine Providence, God allows fallen man to remain in his fallen state, which is really man's natural state" to make sense of what you are saying.  As your quote above stands, the context "predestination" refers to eternal destination not state in life before death.

Even if "natural state" refers to the state of the soul before death, it is not true that "all else are left in their natural state".  Some of the non-predestined have no original sin, and had Sanctifying Grace and lost it. They are in a worse state (even before death) than the "natural state", by their own doing, not by being left there by God.

[james03]

It doesn't blow up if you accept the fact that man can resist God's grace, and that God ordinarily doesn't override man's free will.

God can send graces to save any man, without overriding his free will.  I agree, God normally doesn't override man's free will.  I can think of only one example, when He hardened Pharoah's heart.

You can't answer the question:  For those who fall, is it that God CAN'T save them, or that God WON'T save them?

[Non Nobis]

(James be sure to see my post before your last one)

....God normally doesn't override man's free will.  I can think of only one example, when He hardened Pharoah's heart.

St. Thomas does not explain hardening Pharoah's heart as overriding man's free will at all:

Spiritual blindness and hardness of heart imply two things. One is the movement of the human mind in cleaving to evil, and turning away from the Divine light; and as regards this, God is not the cause of spiritual blindness and hardness of heart, just as He is not the cause of sin. The other thing is the withdrawal of grace, the result of which is that the mind is not enlightened by God to see aright, and man's heart is not softened to live aright; and as regards this God is the cause of spiritual blindness and hardness of heart.

...Now although the sun, so far as it is concerned, enlightens all bodies, yet if it be encountered by an obstacle in a body, it leaves it in darkness, as happens to a house whose window-shutters are closed, although the sun is in no way the cause of the house being darkened, since it does not act of its own accord in failing to light up the interior of the house; and the cause of this is the person who closed the shutters. On the other hand, God, of His own accord, withholds His grace from those in whom He finds an obstacle: so that the cause of grace being withheld is not only the man who raises an obstacle to grace; but God, Who, of His own accord, withholds His grace. In this way, God is the cause of spiritual blindness, deafness of ear, and hardness of heart.

...
Reply to Objection 1. Blindness and hardheartedness, as regards the withholding of grace, are punishments, and therefore, in this respect, they make man no worse. It is because he is already worsened by sin that he incurs them, even as other punishments.

God punished Pharoah by withdrawing grace; this did not override free will, but removed the light of grace.

[Non Nobis]

It doesn't blow up if you accept the fact that man can resist God's grace, and that God ordinarily doesn't override man's free will.

You can't answer the question:  For those who fall, is it that God CAN'T save them, or that God WON'T save them?

On behalf of Michael (partly), I would say that indeed God WON'T save them but you have to ask WHY: it is because of man's free willed sin.

St. Thomas: "reprobation includes the will to permit a person to fall into sin, and to impose the punishment of damnation on account of that sin."

God doesn't start by saying "I won't save personX (and then whatever that implies)",  He says "I will eternally permit personX to die in sin and account of that sin I will not save him" The will to permit comes first. (This is how I see things now)

[james03]

this did not override free will,

Yes it did.  St. Thomas only says it is a punishment for sin.

On behalf of Michael (partly),

Michael can't answer.  It's check mate.

He says "I will eternally permit personX to die in sin and account of that sin I will not save him" The will to permit comes first. (This is how I see things now)

That's fine, but the elect would sin if God did not save them.  He chooses not to save the reprobate, as in, permit them to fall into sin.  He also allows the elect to fall into sin, but He sends them Grace to repent.

[Non Nobis]

this did not override free will,

Yes it did.  St. Thomas only says it is a punishment for sin.

St. Thomas speaks of "sin", "cleaving to evil", "turning away from the light".  These are caused by man.  A man cannot sin if his will is not free. Free will is an essential part of the nature of man. There is no evidence here that "mind is not enlightened by God to see aright, and man's heart is not softened to live aright" refers to the overriding of free will; even if these mean a man does will evil, he does it freely, or it is not sin.

You can say "yes it did" as you like, but St. Thomas does not support this.

[Gardener]

I'd be interested in any Fathers of the Church which claim God caused Pharaoh to sin. They don't exist to my knowledge.

God cannot be the first cause of evil: not always, not 3 times, not once. If one believes that even once God was the first cause of evil, based on a misreading of Scripture, then they believe Calvinism or some variant which is not compatible with the Catholic Faith.

The rain is the cause of the ground softening. Not-rain hardening the ground is not a per se cause of the rain, in a positive sense. It is a negative causation, rather, with the thing opposite the rain -- dryness -- acting as the causation of hardening.

15 And Pharao seeing that rest was given, hardened his own heart, and did not hear them, as the Lord had commanded.

Ex 8:15

Ver. 15. Pharao hardened his own heart. By this we see that Pharao was himself the efficient cause of his heart being hardened, and not God. See the same repeated in ver. 32, Pharao hardened his heart at this time also; likewise chap. ix. 7, 35, and chap. xiii. 15. (Challoner) --- This is the constant doctrine of the holy fathers, St. Augustine, ser. 88, de Temp. q. 18, 28, 36; St. Basil, orat., "that God is not the author of evil;" St. Chrysostom, hom. 67, in Jo.; &c. Hence Origen, periar. 3, says, "The Scripture sheweth manifestly that Pharao was hardened by his own will; for God said to him, thou wouldst not: if thou wilt not dismiss Israel." Even the priests of the Philistines were so well convinced of this, that they said, (1 Kings vi. 6,) Why do you harden your hearts? God therefore hardened them only by not absolutely hindering their wickedness, and by punishing them with less severity, as they did not deserve to be corrected like dear children, Hebrews xii. --- Perdition is from thyself, Osee xiii. 9. As cold naturally congeals water, so we of ourselves run to evil. Thus God cast Pharao into the sea, by permitting, not by forcing, him to enter, Exodus xv. 4. How shocking must then the blasphemous doctrine of Zuinglius, (ser. de provid. 5,) Calvin, (Instit. 8, 17,) &c., appear, who attribute every wicked deed to God, though they pretend at the same time that he is not unjust, even when he commands and impels a man to commit murder or adultery. Idem facinus puta adulterium...quantum Dei est auctoris, motoris, impulsoris opus est, crimen non est; quantum hominis est, crimen ac scelus est. (Zuinglius, sup.) The light of reason may suffice to confute such absurdity. (Worthington)

http://haydock1859.tripod.com/id386.html

[Cantarella]

... the numbers are fixed; ...

That is what makes me ask, "What is the point in doing good, evangelising, etc?"

Of course, if it's only the numbers that are fixed, and I want to be in that number, then that means pushing someone else out!

One of the qualities of Predestination is immutability which means that the number of the Elect is fixed, or as the link Michael Wilson posted states that: "the whole future membership of heaven, down to its minutest details, with all the different measures of grace and the various degrees of happiness, has been irrevocably fixed from all eternity". Nor could it be otherwise. For if it were possible that a predestined individual should after all be cast into hell or that one not predestined should in the end reach heaven, then God would have been mistaken in his foreknowledge of future events; He would no longer be omniscient. Hence the Good Shepherd says of his sheep (John 10:28): "And I give them life everlasting; and they shalt not perish forever, and no man shall pluck them out of my hand."

The error is in confusing the immutability of Predestination with the fatalistic sense present in Calvinism for example, which totally eliminates human will in cooperating or refusing God's grace. God's foreknowledge does not force upon a soul unavoidable coercion. Holy Scripture tells us about the Book of Life, which is a list with the names of all the Elect, in which no name can be added or erased. We know that God is the First Mover of Grace and that He chooses whoever he wishes to give such Grace, regardless of merits. We know not the parameters He uses for choosing. That is the true mystery of predestination. For any soul to be justified it is necessary that God has chosen it. The Council of Trent teaches infallibly and quite emphasizing that a soul is unable to receive the grace of Justification without first receiving the Divine call:

Jesus Christ Himself continually infuses his virtue into the said justified,-as the head into the members, and the vine into the branches,-and this virtue always precedes and accompanies and follows their good works, which without it could not in any wise be pleasing and meritorious before God . . . God forbid that a Christian should either trust or glory in himself, and not in the Lord, whose bounty towards all men is so great, that He will have the things which are His own gifts be their merits.

If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.

[Cantarella]

"What is the point in doing good, evangelising, etc?"

The Elect does not know who they are. It may be that God uses YOU as a witness to the Faith and an apostle for a chosen soul, as Faith comes by hearing. That is our call and the rest is in God's hands.

14 How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not believed? Or how shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear, without a preacher?

15 And how shall they preach unless they be sent, as it is written: How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, of them that bring glad tidings of good things!

16 But all do not obey the gospel. For Isaias saith: Lord, who hath believed our report?

17 Faith then cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of Christ.

[james03]

I agree, God withdraws His grace to harden the heart, He does not override Free Will in that case.

[Cantarella]

I agree, God withdraws His grace to harden the heart, He does not override Free Will in that case.

Orestes Brownson, a convert from Protestantism and probably the best apologist for the Faith America has ever produced, says:

Undoubtedly men may innocently adhere to error, but it does not therefore follow that they are in spirit members of the Church; for a man, though not in sin by reason of his error, may yet be in error by reason of his sin. It may be, that, if he had complied with the graces given him, and which are given to all men, he would have had the opportunity of being enlightened and brought to the knowledge of the truth. It is possible, then, that the reason why a man is not an actual member of the Church is his own fault, not, indeed, that fault of not knowing what he had no opportunity of learning, but of not complying with the graces given him and with which he was bound to comply, and we presume no one will pretend that he is in spirit a member of the Church, who through his own fault is not an actual member.

The withdrawal of Grace is a punishment for sin, which inevitably leads to both spiritual blindness during this earthly exile and eternal damnation after death. The traditional Thomist view on the the Damnation of the Reprobate is that "God's eternal decree includes both the permission to sin and the punishment of sin without regard to future demerits, but God is not the cause of sin, as Scripture teaches. This means that the permission and the punishment come from God, but the defect (the sin) comes from man".

A good way to put way would be: God causes and determines the final end of the Elect, but He merely permits the fate of the reprobate, who damn themselves as in "free fall" for their sins.