Calvin & Catholic Book

[M.SIGGA]

Does anyone know of a good book to recommend that talks about Calvinism and the Catholic Church/Catholic doctrine? Thanks.

[Apotheoun]

Although it is not just about Calvinism and Catholicism, I recommend Johan Adam Mohler's book, [u]Symbolism: Exposition of the Doctrinal Differences Between Catholics and Protestants As Evidenced by Their Symbolical Writings[/u]. It is a comprehensive treatment of the differences between Catholicism and the main branches of Protestantism.

[url="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0824516656/absolutsearch05/104-3567189-4347914"]AMAZON: Symbolism Exposition of the Doctrinal Differences between Catholics and Protestants as Evidenced by their Symbolical Writings[/url]

God bless,
Todd

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

Didn't Jimmy Akin just write a book titled: "The Salvation Controversy"? I think it deals with Calvinism.

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='thedude' date='Dec 31 2004, 10:26 PM'] Didn't Jimmy Akin just write a book titled: "The Salvation Controversy"? I think it deals with Calvinism. [/quote]
yes, it does, although it is more of a general overview

[cathqat]

It really depends on what issues concern you most.

As a former Calvinist, I can definitely say that one of the most important books I have ever read was [url="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1889334316"][i]The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism[/i] by Louis Bouyer (now back in print, ISBN: 1889334316)[/url].

[i]The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism[/i] is a critically engaged yet remarkably sympathetic analysis of the Protestant Reformation by a Lutheran who converted to Catholicism. In the first half he praises the key positive principles of the Reformation, showing how they are good, true, and fundamentally Catholic. In part two he shows how those same great principles have been continuously and inevitably undermined by and among the Reformers (and their heirs) as a result of Protestantism's failure to properly critique and throw off the nominalistic philosophical framework of the late medieval period. He clearly explains how the positive principles of the Reformation and Protestantism can only be sustained and flourish within the Catholic Church.

Whether Protestant or Catholic, you should read this book. It is absolutely crucial to understanding what unites & divides Protestants and Catholics, and how to preserve untainted the truths we hold most dear.

(Bouyer wrote other good books on Catholic-Protestant issues, too, like [i]The Word, Church And Sacrament in Protestantism And Catholicism[/i].)

I know that many Calvinist converts have also benefitted from Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange's [i]Predestination[/i], which appears to be a presentation of Thomist thought on the subject, but I did not read it. I prefer the work of [url="http://www.johnpaulii.edu/fulltimemc.html"]Margaret Harper McCarthy[/url] (also a former Calvinist) on predestination, but it may be difficult to get a copy of her dissertation (you should try contacting her through the school linked). I think the issue of nominalism is much more fundamental.

Catholics United for the Faith has a very good (and free) [url="http://www.cuf.org/nonmemb/justification.pdf"]"Faith Fact" on justification called "It Works for Me."[/url] I have found this helpful in discussions with Calvinists. Catholic Answers also sells a must-have [url="http://www.catholic.com/"]audiotape/CD interview with Scott Hahn called "Faith Alone: Is It Justifiable?" that is one of Hahn's best works[/url]. Both of these are, in my opinion, a better introduction than Jimmy Akin's [i]Salvation Controversy[/i]. (No insult intended: the "Faith Fact" was partially based on an article from Jimmy's webpage.)

It is also worthwhile to be familiar with the [url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/ORANGE.HTM"]Council of Orange (http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/ORANGE.HTM)[/url], the Council of Trent on justification, and the [url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/sub-index/index_lutheran-fed.htm"]Catholic-Lutheran Joint Declaration on Justification[/url].

I emphasize these good sources on the issues of nominalism and justification because, despite the fact that Calvinists [i]think[/i] predestination is the most important issue, these issues are really the most crucial. Nominalism is the true root of most Protestant difficulties.

[phatcatholic]

excellent post cathqat........welcome to the Apologetics board!

[cathqat]

Thanks, phatcatholic!

I had to muddle through lots of dense sources for years when I was becoming Catholic, and even after becoming Catholic. It's next to impossible for a non-Catholic to sort out what Ludwig Ott's [i]Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma[/i] is talking about! I desperately wish I'd had some of these items at the time, because, like I said, I myself spent too long thinking that predestination was the main issue when nominalism was the root of the problem the whole time.

I remember the first time I read Bouyer's book, thinking, "Why didn't anyone ever give me this book before?! I spent years trying to figure all this out!" I read the whole thing in about two hours, then reread it. And because it was out of print at the time, I took the library book immediately to the copy shop, photocopied every page, and bound it. Every Protestant and every Catholic should read this book.

[cathqat]

By the way, if you're looking for an excellent Catholic book about a well-known Calvinist theologian, you can always check out [url="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0898703980"]Hans Urs von Balthasar's [i]The Theology of Karl Barth[/i][/url]! This is not on the predestination issue, nor is it a systematic treatment of Calvinism as such, but it is an excellent book about nature & grace. Barth himself admired the book, and that's saying something.

"In his great work on Barth, Balthasar traced the development of Barth's theology from his commentary on Romans to the early sections of his Church Dogmatics, and payed particular attention to Barth's anti-Catholic polemic based on the rejection of [i]analogia entis[/i] (the analogy of being, any likeness between God and the creature discloses a still greater unlikeness). Balthasar was responsive to Barth's vision of biblical theology as God's own witness to his self-revelation, but argued that [i]analogia entis[/i] fulfilled such a vision rather than undermined it."

"Written in 1951 (with a second edition in 1961), this book takes its place within an impressive array of attempts to wrestle with Karl Barth's theology from a Catholic point of view. The book adopts the twofold strategy of presenting an exposition of 'the whole of Barth's thought,' while doing so for the purpose of a confessional dialogue among theologians. Not to be construed as an 'Introduction to the Theology of Karl Barth,' Balthasar's effort is to provide a Catholic response which, though not 'official,' nonetheless seeks to express a common direction and movement within Catholicism. [i]The Theology of Karl Barth[/i] shows how a rethinking of basic issues in fundamental theology --concerning the relation of nature and grace, philosophy and theology, the 'analogy of being' and the 'analogy of faith'-- might lead to a rapprochement between the two great rivers of Christianity, without compromising the center of gravity of either. In the process the book makes a major contribution to renewed understanding of Christianity in a secularized modern world."

This may be too academic for some tastes, though.

[phatcatholic]

can you explain further what you mean by the statement that the real issue is nominalism instead of predestination? you may want to briefly define these two terms as well.

thanks

[M.SIGGA]

Really, thank you all for the numerous titles. I'm doing a little bit of personal research and learning at the moment. I attended a Reformed Protestant school for 8 years before going to Catholic high school. The reformed-religious education, which the school provided each year for every grade, contributed to the foundation of my understanding of Christian faith. Although I went to CCD classes throughout the period and later Confirmed, I am very recently discovering through reading different sources and being an RCIA sponsor, that I have an underline Protestant understanding of grace and salvation, and my Catholic knowledge/belief is somewhat lacking, especially concerning total inability, unconditional election, and irrestistable grace; all from the TULIP acronym. I wasn't formally taught the 5 points of Calvinism in the same manner as a one would instruct an adult student, but the ideas were presented as facts of Scripture through Bible readings, critical thinking, etc. I already purchased and read [i]The Lutheran World Federation -Roman Catholic Joint Declaration on Justification[/i], which was awesome, and I'm carrying a printout of these to Barnes&Nobles.

Pax Christi

[cathqat]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Jan 1 2005, 07:43 AM'] can you explain further what you mean by the statement that the real issue is nominalism instead of predestination? you may want to briefly define these two terms as well.

thanks [/quote]
Whew! Where to begin, phatcatholic? I mean, I wrote down the book titles so I wouldn't have to explain nominalism!

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11090c.htm"]Here's an old Catholic Encyclopedia article on nominalism, realism, and conceptualism[/url]

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalism"]A Wikipedia article on nominalism (not Catholic)[/url]

[url="http://web.archive.org/web/20030604071155/http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ229.HTM"]A Dave Armstrong (Catholic) collection of sources on the influence of nominalism on Luther, Calvin, & early Protestant thought[/url]

[url="http://falcon.ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ409.HTM"]Dave Armstrong on [i]Protestantism: Conceptual and Developmental Errors[/i][/url]

[b]To oversimplify, nominalist philosophy is the root of Protestantism's "either-or" dichotomies in opposition to Catholicism's "both-and" attitude, e.g. the idea that God's grace precludes human participation, that God's freedom precludes human freedom, etc. (This is why Icthus and others, for example, cannot accept that Catholics really believe in salvation by grace alone.)[/b]

Two sources that I consider [b]absolute must-reads[/b] are the aforementioned [i]Spirit & Forms of Protestantism[/i] by Louis Bouyer and chapters 14 & 15 of Servais' Pinckaers' [i]Sources of Christian Ethics[/i] (on "Freedom of Indifference" and "Freedom for Excellence").

"No phrase reveals to clearly the hidden evil that was to spoil the fruit of the Reformation than Luther’s saying that Occam [widely regarded as the father of nominalism, though that is debated] was the only scholastic who was any good. The truth is that Luther, brought up on his system, was never able to think outside the framework it imposed.... This unhappy association of the great religious affirmations of the Reformation with the disastrous [i]a priori[/i] principles of nominalism not only led Protestants to a one-sided development of their own insights to the neglect of the complementary aspects of Christian truth; it ended by strangling in Protestantism itself its own finest principles..." --Louis Bouyer

[url="http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0097.html"]Here is a great review of Bouyer's book: [i]Why Only Catholicism Can Make Protestantism Work: Louis Bouyer on the Reformation[/i] by Mark Brumley (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0097.html).[/url]

As a side note, I also highly recommend Henri de Lubac's [i]The Mystery of the Supernatural[/i] and chapter 4 of Max Weber's [i]The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism[/i].

The latter, though not written by a theologian (which means he sometimes fails to understand or express some points well), provides a brilliant insight into the effects of Calvinist double-predestinarian theology in the lives of believers (and even on the unbelieving heirs of their thought). How do believers assure themselves of their election as opposed to their reprobation? Calvinism rejected all the things in which Catholics found salvific assistance, moral assurance, and comfort. If a person was decreed a reprobate, no one and nothing could direct or assist him to heaven: no sacraments, no church, no friends or family, not even God himself. As the Calvinist sees it, you're already either elect or reprobate, but how do you know which?

[quote]So far as predestination was not reinterpreted, toned down, or fundamentally abandoned, two principal, mutually connected, types of pastoral advice appear. On the one hand it is held to be an absolute duty to consider oneself chosen, and to combat all doubts as temptations of the devil, since lack of self-confidence is the result of insufficient faith, hence of imperfect grace. The exhortation of the apostle to make fast one's own call is here interpreted as a duty to attain certainty of one's own election and justification in the daily struggle of life....

On the other hand, [i]in order to attain that self-confidence intense worldly activity is recommended as the most suitable means. It and it alone disperses religious doubts and gives certainty of grace[/i]....

The [Calvinist] religious believer can make himself sure of his state of grace either in that he feels himself to be a vessel of the Holy Spirit or the tool of the divine will. In the former case his religious life tends to mysticism and emotionalism, in the latter to ascetic type action... Calvinism definitely belonged to the latter. The Calvinist [like the Lutheran] wanted to be saved [i]sola fide[/i]. But since Calvin viewed all pure feelings and emotions, no matter how exalted they might seem to be, with suspicion, faith had to be proved by its objective results in order to provide a firm foundation for the [i]certitudo salutis[/i]. It must be a [i]fides efficax[/i]....

If we now ask further, by what fruits the Calvinist thought himself able to identify true faith? the answer is: by a type of Christian conduct which served to increase the glory of God.... Only one of the elect really has the [i]fides efficax[/i], only he is able by rebirth ([i]regeneratio[/i]) and the resulting sanctification ([i]sanctificatio[/i]) of his whole life, to augment the glory of God by real, and not merely aparent, good works.... [i]Thus, however useless good works might be as a means of attaining salvation... they are an indispensible sign of election. They are the technical means, not of purchasing salvation, but of getting rid of the fear of damnation. In this sense they are occasionally referred to as directly necessary for salvation or the [/i]possessio salutis[i] is made conditional on them.

In practice this means God helps those who help themselves.[/i] Thus the Calvinist, as it is sometimes put, himself creates his own salvation, or, as would be more correct, the conviction of it....

[The Catholic who sins may receive moral assurance of being in a state of grace when he repents and confesses.] For [the Calvinist] such friendly and human comforts did not exist. He could not hope to atone for hours of weakness or of thoughtlessness... as the Catholic or even the Lutheran could. The God of Calvinism demanded of his believers not single good works, but a life of good works combined into a unified system.... For only by a fundamental change in the whole meaning of life at every moment and in every action could the effects of grace transforming a man from the [i]status naturae[/i] to the [i]status gratiae[/i] be proved.[/quote]

Short version: The only way to really alleviate the anxiety of the possibility that you might be one of the reprobate was to work your ass off all the time! It's no wonder Lutherans often accused Calvinists of believing in salvation by works. That's exactly how they were expected to act.

[cathqat]

phatcatholic, oh, I didn't write anything about predestination!

Traditional Calvinists believe that predestination is "double," i.e. that God has chosen to make some people for heaven (the elect) and chosen some people for hell (the reprobate). This [i]decretum horribile[/i], at least after Adam's sin, has nothing whatsoever to do with anything the people have themselves done or will do; the decree was so even before they ever existed and without any view to whatever choices they may have made.

Within this double predestinarian view, there are infralapsarians and supralapsarians. Supralapsarians order God's plan thus: (1) Elect some, reprobate the rest, (2) Create, (3) Permit Fall, (4) Provide salvation for elect, (5) Call elect to salvation. Infralapsarians, on the other hand, it thus: (1) Create, (2) Permit Fall, (3) Elect some, reprobate or pass over the rest, (4) Provide salvation for elect, (5) Call elect to salvation. They differ on whether God's double decree ante- or postdates the Fall.

There are also "four point Calvinists" and "Amyraldians." (I know less about this part because I was definitely a hardcore supralapsarian Calvinist.) [url="http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/sup_infr.htm"]C.f. this Calvinist article[/url].

[url="http://www.mslick.com/tulip.htm"]Here is a really short presentation of "TULIP," the five points of Calvinism, by a Calvinist.[/url] For more thorough investigation, I recommend R.C. Sproul's [i]Chosen By God[/i], David Steele's [i]The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, Documented[/i], and Lorraine Boettner's [i]Reformed Doctrine of Predestination[/i]. NB: Please remember that these are all Calvinist books, not Catholic books.

Non-Calvinist Protestants, like Methodists, are usually "Arminians." They do not subscribe to double predestination. [url="http://www.cresourcei.org/tulip.html"]This chart contrasts TULIP with Wesleyan Arminianism (from an Arminian perspective).[/url]

There are many different acceptable Catholic understandings of predestination. The most commonly known are "Thomism" and "Molinism," which are a little similar to Calvinism and Arminianism respectively, but without the absolutely off-limits doctrines (e.g. positive reprobation). C.f. [url="http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/tulip.htm"]Jimmy Akin's "A Tiptoe Through TULIP"[/url] for more information about "how close a Catholic can get to Calvinism." ([url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/TULIP.htm"]Same article here.[/url]) It presents a Thomist view and recommend's Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange's book [i]Predestination[/i].

For myself, I am more interested in the recent Catholic developments in the theology of predestination than in schools like Thomism & Molinism; the predestination of all things in Jesus Christ; the kind of thing that runs in the [url="http://www.communio-icr.com/"][i]Communio[/i][/url] journal (e.g. [i]"Through Whom All Things Were Made": Creation in Christ[/i] by Juan Martínez Camino, [Summer 2001; Volume 28, no. 2]). Or, like I mentioned, the dissertation by Margaret Harper McCarthy.

[url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19860528en.html"]The Mystery of Predestination in Christ[/url] by Pope John Paul II

[phatcatholic]

thanks man!