[jo kus]

Harley, Thanks for the link. I would agree that from your link, it appear that Arminianism strays dangerously close to at least Semi-Pelagianism. Although it might appear that a Catholic could agree with the 5 Remonstrant points, this isn't quite true - just as we could similarly re-word your own TULIP and be pretty close in belief.

First of all, unlike Arminianism, we do believe in Predestination! We believe that the Elect are irresistibly led by God (if one would look back on their life, they would see God's effect. We can't see it very well from our point of view since we can't see into the future).

For example, "God, by His eternal resolve of Will, has predestined certain men to eternal blessedness". DE FIDE!

"God, by an eternal resolve of His Will, predestines certain men, on account of their foreseen sins (a bit different then the first one), to eternal rejection" DE FIDE!

As you probably know, St. Augustine defended predestination against the Semi-Pelagians who thought one could come to God after Baptism without grace. Predestination is a part of the Divine Plan of Providence.

The big "problem", however, is whether God has taken the Predestination of the Elect with or without the consideration of the merits of the man. Many early Catholics would say "no", such as St. Augustine and St. Aquinas. However, more recent Catholic theologians would say God MUST take it into account, as God sees everything as one "NOW", thus, makes decisions "simultaneously" with out actions in time. This is an open question in Catholicism and one can hold either point of view - as I have said before. This appears to be a difference between us and Arminianism. Of course, we do not believe that God predestines the reprobate, which Calvin taught. Thus, I say that Catholics fall in between the two extremes of Calvinism and Arminianism.

With this said, thus, Catholics would see that #1 and #2 could be potential sticking points with the Remonstrants. Number one has the potential to turn to Semi-Pelagianism, and #2 suggests that God MUST consider our merits when determining His elect - we do not teach either point infallibly. I would say 3, 4 and 5 are pretty much in line with our beliefs. However, with TULIP, 2, 4 and 5 are pretty close, 3 we can reword to say "efficacious" graces save but not sufficient graces. Number one, we'd reword that one to say "inability to choose God alone without His help".

My knowledge of Protestantism seems to be stuck in classical Protestantism, and I admit that I need to do some more reading to when Protestantism split between the two schools noted above. I have purchased the 5 volume set of Pelikan's The Christian Tradition, A history of the Development of Doctrine, and have read the 4 books - but not the last one, which covers from 1700 to now. Maybe I should read it? But I should know better, as the 4th book does cover the Remonstrants and the Reformed Theology, as well as toucing on the Anabaptists.

Sorry, there is already enough to know as a Catholic, with Scripture, Tradition, the Fathers, the Catechism, the Liturgy and Sacraments, and 2000 years of history!

Regards

[annalex]

But you would agree, wouldn't you that the Arminian 1 and 2 as formulated here lack precision necessary to firmly rule them outside of the Catholic teaching?

[HarleyD]

There are a few minor technical differences but they all spring from the same fountain of free will. Consider this statement:

Thus Roman Catholics and Arminians walk hand in hand on this central issue.

Among the "decrees" of the Council of Trent (1563), which is the standard of the Roman Catholic Church, we find the following statement about freedom of the will written in opposition to the most critical recovered biblical doctrine of the Reformation:

"If any one shall affirm, that man’s freewill, moved and excited by God, does not, by consenting, cooperate with God, the mover and exciter, so as to prepare and dispose itself for the attainment of justification; if moreover, anyone shall say, that the human will cannot refuse complying, if it pleases, but that it is inactive, and merely passive; let such an one be accursed"!

"If anyone shall affirm, that since the fall of Adam, man’s freewill is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed"!

In other words, although many evangelicals differ from Rome on the critical doctrine of Sola Fide (Faith Alone), so I fully embrace them as brothers and sisters (lest you think I don't), yet a large number of us have abandoned the biblical/Reformation principle of Sola Gracia (Grace Alone) since many believe that ultimately, salvation rests on whether or not they cooperate with God. This is just bad theology and it affects our view of God's sovereignty because the modern view sees man as ultimately choosing his salvation rather than God. The Reformation position on freewill was one of the core doctrinal reasons where Protestants differed and broke off from Catholicism. Have evangelicals gone full circle and abandon the very truths for which we recovered during the Reformation?

So what did the Reformers teach on free will? Lets have a look at what Augustine and the Reformers had to say. (Doctrines that are solidly grounded in the scripture. 1 Cor. 2:14, Rom 8:7, Romans 3:10-12)...)

Saint Augustine writes, that freewill, without God's grace and the Holy Ghost, can do nothing but sin. "He argued that fallen man still has a free will (liberium arbitrium) but has lost his moral liberty (libertas). The state of original sin leaves us in the wretched condition of being unable to refrain from sinning. We still are able to choose what we desire, but our desires remain chained by our evil impulses. He argued that the freedom that remains in the will always leads to sin. Thus in the flesh we are free only to sin, an empty freedom indeed. Therefore we are not only partly dependent upon grace for our conversion but totally dependent upon grace." ( R.C Sproul on Augustine)...also see Augustine's "A Treatise On The Predestination Of The Saints"

John W. Hendryx