Limited Atonement

[ICTHUS]

I'm gonna show this to someone smarter than me.

Good idea, hyper!

On that note, let us examine how the Catechism treats of Predestination:

(my reference: 257, 484 , 600, 1007, 2012,2782,2823)

257 "O blessed light, O Trinity and first Unity!"93 God is eternal blessedness, undying life, unfading light. God is love: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God freely wills to communicate the glory of his blessed life. Such is the "plan of his loving kindness," conceived by the Father before the foundation of the world, in his beloved Son: "He destined us in love to be his sons" and "to be conformed to the image of his Son," through "the spirit of sonship."94 This plan is a "grace [which] was given to us in Christ Jesus before the ages began," stemming immediately from Trinitarian love.95 It unfolds in the work of creation, the whole history of salvation after the fall, and the missions of the Son and the Spirit, which are continued in the mission of the Church.

II. . . . Born of the Virgin Mary

487

What the Catholic faith believes about Mary is based on what it believes about Christ, and what it teaches about Mary illumines in turn its faith in Christ.

Mary's predestination

488

"God sent forth his Son," but to prepare a body for him,125 he wanted the free cooperation of a creature. For this, from all eternity God chose for the mother of his Son a daughter of Israel, a young Jewish woman of Nazareth in Galilee, "a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary":126

The Father of mercies willed that the Incarnation should be preceded by assent on the part of the predestined mother, so that just as a woman had a share in the coming of death, so also should a woman contribute to the coming of life.127

600 The Scriptures had foretold this divine plan of salvation through the putting to death of "the righteous one, my Servant" as a mystery of universal redemption, that is, as the ransom that would free men from the slavery of sin.397 Citing a confession of faith that he himself had "received," St. Paul professes that "Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures."398 In particular Jesus' redemptive death fulfills Isaiah's prophecy of the suffering Servant.399 Indeed Jesus himself explained the meaning of his life and death in the light of God's suffering Servant.400 After his Resurrection he gave this interpretation of the Scriptures to the disciples at Emmaus, and then to the apostles.401

604

By giving up his own Son for our sins, God manifests that his plan for us is one of benevolent love, prior to any merit on our part: "In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins."408 God "shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us."409

605

At the end of the parable of the lost sheep Jesus recalled that God's love excludes no one: "So it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish."410 He affirms that he came "to give his life as a ransom for many"; this last term is not restrictive, but contrasts the whole of humanity with the unique person of the redeemer who hands himself over to save us.411 The Church, following the apostles, teaches that Christ died for all men without exception: "There is not, never has been, and never will be a single human being for whom Christ did not suffer."412

At this point, I will stop briefly: My beliefs concerning predestination fully acknowledge the above statement, in bold. I believe that Christ died for all men, without exception, but that not all men will be saved by His dying for them. Thusly, whilst Christ died for all men, His atonement is limited in its efficacy, to only the Elect.

2782 We can adore the Father because he has caused us to be reborn to his life by adopting us as his children in his only Son: by Baptism, he incorporates us into the Body of his Christ; through the anointing of his Spirit who flows from the head to the members, he makes us other "Christs."

God, indeed, who has predestined us to adoption as his sons, has conformed us to the glorious Body of Christ. So then you who have become sharers in Christ are appropriately called "Christs."34

The new man, reborn and restored to his God by grace , says first of all, "Father!" because he has now begun to be a son.35

(Me) Hmm, this is interesting! Here the Church quotes from St. Cyprian, who says we are PREDESTINED by God!!

2783 "He has made known to us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure that he set forth in Christ . . . to gather up all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. In Christ we have also obtained an inheritance, having been destined according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will."98 We ask insistently for this loving plan to be fully realized on earth as it is already in heaven.

Conclusion: Predestination (an orthodox conception of it, mind you) is a Catholic teaching. Anyone denying it is a heretic. :P

[ICTHUS]

i think he's using "reformed" as reference to the teachings of john calvin.

it is not an unorthodox catholic position to say that god has positively elected some to spend eternity with him.

WErd

[p0lar_bear]

OK, so...God created all men. God created man with an intended end. That end is eternal union with Him in heaven. There is only one "kind" of man, only one "kind" of human nature (i.e. there is not a sort of human nature intended for heaven and another sort of human nature intended for hell). If some men hae a different end, they would be, in fact, a different type of being. However, as it stands, there is only one human nature, and by that nature, we are intended for union with Him That means all men.

Love requires free will and a choice. The union that God desires with man is a union of love. Man must chose to love God in order to attain the union God desires with man. Ergo, God gives man the choice to chose God or not-God.

I submit two points as unavoidable truths:

1. There is (by God's choice in creation) only one human nature, which has as it's intended end eternal union with God.

2 For that union to be a union of love (as God desires), man must make an act of the free will to choose God.

In order for predestination (meaning God, by an act of His Will, only intends to save certain people) to be true, point number 1 would have to be false.

In order for irresitable grace (meaning that the grace God gives to the "elect" cannot be denied) to be true, point number 2 would have to be false.

Do you dispute that there is only one human nature?

That the intended end of that nature is union with God?

That the union is one of love?

That love requires a free act of the will?

[phatcatholic]

icthus,

maybe this line of thinking will help:

God's grace is potentially efficacious for all mankind.

or put another way:

God's grace, in and of itself and regardless of our acceptance or rejection of it, is effective enough to bring salvation to us all. however, wether his grace achieves its intended purpose depends on our reaction to it.

that said, read the following articles, 5 times each, and call me in the morning:

Catholic Predestination

Predestination, Salvation, and Damnation: Calvinism and Catholicism Contrasted

A Tiptoe Through TULIP

pax christi,

phatcatholic

[ICTHUS]

icthus,

maybe this line of thinking will help:

God's grace is potentially efficacious for all mankind.

or put another way:

God's grace, in and of itself and regardless of our acceptance or rejection of it, is effective enough to bring salvation to us all. however, wether his grace achieves its intended purpose depends on our reaction to it.

that said, read the following articles, 5 times each, and call me in the morning:

Catholic Predestination

Predestination, Salvation, and Damnation: Calvinism and Catholicism Contrasted

A Tiptoe Through TULIP

pax christi,

phatcatholic

There is no such thing as "effective enough" - it is either effective, or it isint. You are advocating semi-pelagianism.

Edited December 18, 2003 by ICTHUS

[ICTHUS]

OK, so...God created all men. God created man with an intended end. That end is eternal union with Him in heaven. There is only one "kind" of man, only one "kind" of human nature (i.e. there is not a sort of human nature intended for heaven and another sort of human nature intended for hell). If some men hae a different end, they would be, in fact, a different type of being. However, as it stands, there is only one human nature, and by that nature, we are intended for union with Him That means all men.

Love requires free will and a choice. The union that God desires with man is a union of love. Man must chose to love God in order to attain the union God desires with man. Ergo, God gives man the choice to chose God or not-God.

I submit two points as unavoidable truths:

1. There is (by God's choice in creation) only one human nature, which has as it's intended end eternal union with God.

2 For that union to be a union of love (as God desires), man must make an act of the free will to choose God.

In order for predestination (meaning God, by an act of His Will, only intends to save certain people) to be true, point number 1 would have to be false.

In order for irresitable grace (meaning that the grace God gives to the "elect" cannot be denied) to be true, point number 2 would have to be false.

Do you dispute that there is only one human nature?

That the intended end of that nature is union with God?

That the union is one of love?

That love requires a free act of the will?

OK, so...God created all men. God created man with an intended end. That end is eternal union with Him in heaven. There is only one "kind" of man, only one "kind" of human nature (i.e. there is not a sort of human nature intended for heaven and another sort of human nature intended for hell). If some men hae a different end, they would be, in fact, a different type of being. However, as it stands, there is only one human nature, and by that nature, we are intended for union with Him That means all men.

Agreed.

Love requires free will and a choice. The union that God desires with man is a union of love. Man must chose to love God in order to attain the union God desires with man. Ergo, God gives man the choice to chose God or not-God.

Agreed. I do not see, though, how this choice cannot be foreknown from all eternity, and therefore predestined by God.

1. There is (by God's choice in creation) only one human nature, which has as it's intended end eternal union with God.

Agreed.

2. For that union to be a union of love (as God desires), man must make an act of the free will to choose God.

Agreed, with the above reservation.

In order for predestination (meaning God, by an act of His Will, only intends to save certain people) to be true, point number 1 would have to be false.

But predestination is not false, for Scripture plainly teaches it! (Romans 8:28-30, just to name one verse). Now, having said that, God foreknows our decision to accept or reject His grace, from all eternity, and predestines us to Eternal Happiness or Eternal Reprobation, accordingly. This does not negate our free will, it only says that our use of our free will is within Gods predestinative plan!!

In order for irresitable grace (meaning that the grace God gives to the "elect" cannot be denied) to be true, point number 2 would have to be false.

I am not advocating irresistible grace, I am advocating that those whom God has Elected to spend eternity with Him will infallibly be saved.

God's grace, in and of itself and regardless of our acceptance or rejection of it, is effective enough to bring salvation to us all. however, wether his grace achieves its intended purpose depends on our reaction to it.

Granted, however, as said above,our acceptance or rejection is part of Gods foreknowledge and predestination thereof.

[phatcatholic]

icthus,

i would have to disagree w/ ur perception of my last post. i think maybe you are reading too much into what i wrote. using correct vocabulary is very important in a discussion like this, so i may not have chosen my words wisely.

allow me to articulate it this way:

God's grace is sufficient for all man kind, but it is only ultimately efficacious for the elect.

believe it or not, that is an orthodox statement. this is all presented in the third article that i provided in my last post. all three are very informative and very helpful in explaining this convoluted topic.

pax christi,

phatcatholic

[Muschi]

J'ai une question..........

Ok all, I have a question. WHO are the Elect?

Are they those who God foreknew would choose him?

or

Are they those who GOD CHOSE before time?

eh? I'm a little "fuzzy" here in this area.

Thanks! - God bless! - Muschi

[Azriel]

J'ai une question..........

Ok all, I have a question. WHO are the Elect?

Are they those who God foreknew would choose him?

or

Are they those who GOD CHOSE before time?

eh? I'm a little "fuzzy" here in this area.

Thanks! - God bless! - Muschi

Muschi - I think you nailed it.

God knows who will choose him ... because he is outside of time.

That statement is way different than:

God chose certain people to be with him.

That statement negates free will.

[ICTHUS]

God's grace is sufficient for all man kind, but it is only ultimately efficacious for the elect.

Now, THIS is a statement that I agree with!!

Now, to explain it the way a Calvinist would understand: The atonement is only limited in the sense that it will only be efficacious for the Elect. *edit* the graces that the atonement merited, however, are applicable and available to all Mankind who ever, or would ever, live. Thus, the atonement can be said to be SUPERABUNDANTLY generous, in providing for the salvation of the Elect. It more than provided for their salvation, it provided for the possibility of salvation of even those who were not saved, so that they are without excuse!

Edited December 19, 2003 by ICTHUS

[ICTHUS]

Muschi - I think you nailed it.

God knows who will choose him ... because he is outside of time.

That statement is way different than:

God chose certain people to be with him.

That statement negates free will.

But Azriel, by necessity of logic, if God is the origin of all things, then He must have fore-ordained who would choose Him.

[Azriel]

But Azriel, by necessity of logic, if God is the origin of all things, then He must have fore-ordained who would choose Him.

Sorry, I can't follow that logic.

To me, it would be a great cosmic joke. Why would any of us try? Free will would not exist. Hope would not be possible.

I guess I'm just not intellectual enough to follow this debate.

[phatcatholic]

azriel,

the three articles i included in an earlier post are very helpful. you may need to read them a couple of times.........but that's ok. i read them a couple times myself.

i think the hardest part w/ a discussion like this is the vocabulary. you have to know exactly what a person means by the words that they chose, and you have to make sure that you chose the words that reflect exactly what you mean.

for instance, icthus, others may profit from learning exactly what you mean by the word "for-ordained" and how it differs from words like:

--predestined

--predetermined

--for-knowledge

i hope this helps,

phatcatholic

[p0lar_bear]

Foreknowledge is not the same as predestination (i.e. God chose certain men to be with Him in heaven). Knowing something will or will not happen does not mean that one directly wills it.

But Azriel, by necessity of logic, if God is the origin of all things, then He must have fore-ordained who would choose Him.

NO. That is in no way a necessity of logic. God created man with an intended end, but His also created man with free will. He desires that all men would come to salvation, but, in His infinite wisdom, knows that some will choose otherwise. His foreknowledge in no way interferes with our free will.

Again, if God predestined (i.e. chose by an act of His will) that certain people would choose Him, He would necessarily have to chose by an act of His will that certain people would not. This would mean that there are two kinds of man, with two different ends chosen by the will of God.

Azriel is right, your definition cannot co-exist with free will.

[ICTHUS]

Okay, so this debate has progressed thus far:

We now agree, and have established that the atonement is limited in the sense that Christ died for all men, but that His atonement is limited in its efficacy, to only the Elect, so that the graces from His atonement will only be accepted by the Elect, but are/were readily available to the Reprobate.

Knowing something will or will not happen does not mean that one directly wills it.

This is true, except that we are dealing with God here. For this statement to be true, it is necessary for something (namely, the Divine Plan of Salvation) to either pre-exist before God, or to be uncreate. So, you will need to establish that the Divine Plan according to which all things unfold in the universe either pre-exists before God, or is uncreate with God.

My position is that the aforementioned Divine Plan has its origin within the infinite Intellect of God, and thus, God, in effect, positively predestines some souls to eternal Life, writing their names in the Book of Life, leaving the others to perish by their own sin. God predestines no one to Hell, He simply does not predestine them to Heaven.

Edited December 19, 2003 by ICTHUS

[Azriel]

azriel,

the three articles i included in an earlier post are very helpful. you may need to read them a couple of times.........but that's ok. i read them a couple times myself.

i think the hardest part w/ a discussion like this is the vocabulary. you have to know exactly what a person means by the words that they chose, and you have to make sure that you chose the words that reflect exactly what you mean.

for instance, icthus, others may profit from learning exactly what you mean by the word "for-ordained" and how it differs from words like:

--predestined

--predetermined

--for-knowledge

i hope this helps,

phatcatholic

Thank you. I'm in the process of reading those articles.

In the meantime, I can fully comprehend what polarbear is saying. What he is saying is making logical sense to me.

[ICTHUS]

Thank you. I'm in the process of reading those articles.

In the meantime, I can fully comprehend what polarbear is saying. What he is saying is making logical sense to me.

bump. Polar bear, please answer my objection.

As far as I can tell, my position is orthodox (from reading those articles).

I think I'm a Thomist in my soteriology..

[phatcatholic]

yea, i think ur orthodox too bro

[ICTHUS]

Is polar bear going to respond?

[Aloysius]

:wacko: woah! you just made my brain go insane. and that rymes!

so your saying that because of the nature of God, His knowledge of whether or not people will persevere to the end unto eternal life is integrated into His active will therefore because He knows they make it, He predestines them to make it. So He always knew who would make it to Heaven in the end, and because He has known that eternally throughout all of existence, It is in fact part of His nature to know this, and so He somehow predestines them who destined themselves and you really can't figure out which came first, but God's must've come first, but was it the free will or the predestination? it's like the chicken and the egg.

that's a mind-blowing concept, i like it. i'm not sure i got it across correctly, but nonetheless, it's very intrigueing.

So God has foreknowledge of who will attain eternal salvation. God therefore predestines those people. but God existed and predestined those people before they even had the chance to use their free will, but it still doesn't affect their free will because if they had not exercized their free will God would not have predestined them.

IT IS THE CHICKEN AND THE EGG :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

:cool: