Replies

Augustine about Pelagius-"Certainly He did not make them so; nor did He foresee that He would make them so, but that they would be so"

Jokus about Augustine-THIS is what Pelagius says...That God didn't make man good - but that man would BE so.

To ensure I have not missed anything let's just take the entire passage...

"Therefore," says the Pelagian, "He foreknew who would be holy and immaculate by the choice of free will, and on that account elected them before the foundation of the world in that same foreknowledge of His in which He foreknew that they would be such. Therefore He elected them," says he, "before they existed, predestinating them to be children whom He foreknew to be holy and immaculate. Certainly He did not make them so; nor did He foresee that He would make them so, but that they would be so." Let us, then, look into the words of the apostle and see whether He chose us before the foundation of the world because we were going to be holy and immaculate, or in order that we might be so. "Blessed," says he, "be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us in all spiritual blessing in the heavens in Christ; even as He hath chosen us in Himself before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and unspotted." [Eph. 1.3.] Not, then, because we were to be so, but that we might be so. Assuredly it is certain,—assuredly it is manifest. Certainly we were to be such for the reason that He has chosen us, predestinating us to be such by His grace. Therefore "He blessed us with spiritual blessing in the heavens in Christ Jesus, even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and immaculate in His sight, predestinating us in love to the adoption of children through Jesus Christ to Himself." Attend to what he then adds: "According to the good pleasure," he says, "of His will;" in order that we might not in so great a benefit of grace glory concerning the good pleasure of our will. "In which," says he, "He hath shown us favour in His beloved Son,"—in which, certainly, His own will, He hath shown us favour. Thus, it is said, He hath shown us grace by grace, even as it is said, He has made us righteous by righteousness. "In whom," he says, "we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace, which has abounded to us in all wisdom and prudence; that He might show to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure." In this mystery of His will, He placed the riches of His grace, according to His good pleasure, not according to ours, which could not possibly be good unless He Himself, according to His own good pleasure, should aid it to become so. But when he had said, "According to His good pleasure," he added, "which He purposed in Him," that is, in His beloved Son, "in the dispensation of the fullness of times to restore all things in Christ, which are in heaven, and which are in earth, in Him: in whom also we too have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who worketh all things according to the counsel of His will; that we should be to the praise of His glory."

The error of Pelagius was to say God uses His foreknowledge to elected us before the foundation of the world by looking through that "corridor of time". Pelagius wanted to say it was that God looked down and saw who was good. You want to say that God looked down and saw who would accept Him. There isn't any difference.

The Orthodox just simply reject most of Augustine's teaching. However for the Catholics who supposedly revered Augustine it becomes more problematic.

Amen. It all gets back to the most basic error -- to presume that man is intrinsically good and wants to obey God.

But Paul is correct. "There is none righteous; no not one."

All error begins with a misreading or a complete disregard of Genesis. The fall was complete and is indelibly stamped in the hearts of all men.

Only God can give a new heart.

"Consider the work of God: for who can make that straight, which he hath made crooked?" -- Ecclesiastes 7:13

And our faith is in Him who rose from the dead to prove the truth of God...

"That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;
Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain." -- Phil. 2:15-16

As I quoted originally, St. Augustine wrote that Pelagius says "nor did He {God} FORESEE that He {God} WOULD MAKE THEM SO - BUT THAT THEY WOULD BE SO." St. Augustine says Pelagius taught that God's foreknowledge has nothing to do with a man being good. Man was good on his own account. Have I not made that clear that this is not Catholic teaching? Christ Himself says in Scripture that we can do NOTHING good without Him. This is infallibly taught by the Council of Trent - but taught well before by the Church.

As I have stated before, the Catholic Church does not have a infallible stand regarding HOW God determines WHOM He imbues His efficacious graces upon (He gives sufficient graces to all), predestining them to eternal life. Augustine and Aquinas believe that God's foreknowledge of one's utilization of His graces do NOT determine God's choices. But Molinarism says that man's merits ARE foreseen and ARE part of the formula. WE as Catholics can believe either point of view - the Church condemns neither position.

The Elect are predestined by God. Whether God uses His knowledge of our turning to Him or not to decide if we will be of the Elect is undetermined by the Church. Again, St. Augustine is only one voice within the Tradition. There are others who teach things more in line with Molina. We revere St. Augustine, who is currently (from our point of view) enjoying eternal union with the Father in heaven. But it doesn't follow that St. Augustine taught everything that the Church later declared as official teaching.

Regards

The error of Pelagius was to say God uses His foreknowledge to elect us before the foundation of the world by looking through that "corridor of time". Pelagius wanted to say it was that God looked down and saw who was good. You want to say that God looked down and saw who would accept Him. There isn't any difference. The Orthodox just simply reject most of Augustine's teaching. However for the Catholics who supposedly revered Augustine it becomes more problematic.

BINGO! Great posts, Harley, both here and in 3269! The argument I have been getting on this is that God chooses us, AND, we choose God, AND, that since God is outside of time, these two things happen exactly simultaneously. How does that work? It's a mystery. I'm not mocking, because there really are mysteries when it comes to God. It's just that I am still struggling with this particular mystery. :) My view is that scripture fully supports that in real time, from either God's or our POV, that He chose us first, and only that led to us ever choosing Him.