Are Parts Of Jansenism Compatible With Catholicism?

[Resurrexi]

Do you think parts of Jansensim are compatible with Catholicism?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Like what?

I'm not an expert on Jansenism.

[thessalonian]

There are "truths" in everything.

[Myles Domini]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1125734' date='Nov 22 2006, 05:56 AM']
Do you think parts of Jansensim are compatible with Catholicism?
[/quote]

Why are you asking? I hope you're not falling into Jansenism? You've always been quite rigorous but that would be a grave error. Of course Jansenism is partly compatible with Catholicism, it grew out of 17th century Catholicism but so what? As Thess says there's truth in everything. The important things to remember about Jensenism is not what it has in common with the true faith but what it does not.

I dont know how well you'll understand this explanation but...Jansenius is in fundamental error about the orders of grace and nature. In fact he makes no distinction between them, even formally (imagining a world of pure human nature without grace). Because of this Jansenius makes grave errors in his understanding of original sin. Jansenius thought that all the preternatual gifts of grace given to man in his state of original justice e.g. freedom from concupisence were not in fact gifts but essential to man. The fall thus for Jansenius involves as much of a destruction to human nature as Calvin posited albeit from a different angle. For Jansenism our nature is totally depraved. As you would expect Jansenius' understanding of nature has equally errenous implications for his soteriology and the gratitiousness of salvation.

For example, if its our nature to be in a state of grace and not a gift added to nature then God would be unjust not to save us. So salvation is no longer a free gift but an act of neccessity. The difference with orthodox Catholic theology is that the preternatural gifts were not part of our nature but gifts it is not demanded of God to save us for having forfeiting these. It would not be unjust for God to allow us to suffer the consequences of our actions. If Jesus had not come to pay the infinite debt of original sin it would not have been against the order of justice (some say it would've been against mercy I disagree but thats a side issue). Catholic orthodoxy says we can suppose God would come to save because it was His intention to offer us the beatitification vision but the difference with Jansenism is that its understand of nature would take the decision away from God's will and make it a question of justice/nature for the Divine.

Bottom line: Jansenism was condemned in 1641 by the Holy Spirit and the following year Urban VIII renewed the condemnation in the Bull "In eminenti". So stay away from Jansenius and his followers.

[Resurrexi]

I was thinking more of the parts of Jansenism which say one should make great preperation before recieving a sacrament.

[Myles Domini]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1126178' date='Nov 22 2006, 09:08 PM']
I was thinking more of the parts of Jansenism which say one should make great preperation before recieving a sacrament.
[/quote]

Why do you need to turn to Jansenists for advice on that? Are there no Catholic books that recommend that we prepare ourselves thoroughly to recieve the sacraments?

[Resurrexi]

I wasn't actually going to read any Jansenist books on it, I just kind of agree with that philosophy of taking great preparation to recieve a sacrament and want to know if that's ok.

Edited November 22, 2006 by StThomasMore

[jswranch]

From USCCB last week:

[url="http://www.usccb.org/dpp/Eucharist.pdf"]“Happy Are Those Who Are Called to His Supper”: on Preparing to Receive Christ Worthily in the Eucharist[/url]

Edited November 23, 2006 by jswranch