Posted on 05/17/2011 9:08:45 AM PDT by Salvation
Featured Term (selected at random):
The thought of St. Augustine and his followers. In a more technical sense, the theological explanation of St. Augustine, approved by the Church, of man's fall, divine grace, and the freedom of the will in co-operating with the grace of God. Within Augustinianism, there are numerous schools of thought, all part of the Church's theological pluralism.
As my dear late mother used to say, he — along with his echo chamber here — is more to be pitied than scorned. May the Holy Spirit change their hearts and show them the Way.
The Holy Spirit has entered my heart and shown me the light of Christ, alone. I have escaped from the "religion of men" and offer to you the same escape, should He grant that to you. And, in fact, it is God who is blessing and keeping me, as compared to a man-made organization wound up in itself, claiming exclusivity yet practiciing doctrines of demons. May God grant you escape from Rome, my FRiend.
.......
But these brethren of ours, about whom and on whose behalf we are now discoursing, say, perhaps, that the Pelagians are refuted by this apostolical testimony in which it is said that we are chosen in Christ and predestinated before the foundation of the world, in order that we should be holy and immaculate in His sight in love. For they think that "having received God's commands we are of ourselves by the choice of our free will made holy and immaculate in His sight in love; and since God foresaw that this would be the case," they say, "He therefore chose and predestinated us in Christ before the foundation of the world." Although the apostle says that it was not because He foreknew that we should be such, but in order that we might be such by the same election of His grace, by which He showed us favour in His beloved Son. When, therefore, He predestinated us, He foreknew His own work by which He makes us holy and immaculate. Whence the Pelagian error is rightly refuted by this testimony. "But we say," say they, "that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work." But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, "We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who worketh all things." [Eph. 1.11.] He, therefore, work-eth the beginning of our belief who worketh all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;" [Rom. 11.29.] and of which it is said: "Not of works, but of Him that calleth" [Rom. 9.12.] (although He might have said, "of Him that believeth"); and the election which the Lord signified when He said: "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." [John 15.16.] For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe
Right on target Harley
Thanks, I looked it up on what I have saved, but didn’t find it. Looks like this second thread is a hit, though. Gotta visit and copy your page now.
Of course there is no mention of “Mass” because it wasn’t called that until much later. However, later in the epistle, there is an anaphora or eucharistic prayer.
WHAT are you talking about and where are you getting that from?
"Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter" (Isaiah 5: 20).
Excellent post, Harley.
May we assume that Rome is now acknowledging Scripture as the highest authority of doctrine? Let the housekeeping begin!
I don’t speak for “Rome” any more than any other Catholic FReeper does.
Then may we assume that for you to quote Isaiah to me was YOPIOS? You can't have it both ways, my FRiend.
LOL! It was a valid use of Scripture to warn against such upside-down rants against Christ’s Mystical Body, the Church.
But, I was not addressing the Church, only the Roman Catholic cult. And, either you are speaking for the Roman view on Isaiah or you are using YOPIOS. You are not in a position to determine a "valid use of Scripture". Recall, that is not your domain; only headquarters determines the true meaning of Scripture. Just checking to see which it is.
“”Everyone who believes in “free will” is a Pelagius according to Augustine””
Perhaps you did not realize that Blessed Augustine wrote retractions of some things he wrote earlier in his life
Here is some writings from Blessed Augustine
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1513.htm
“It is to be confessed, therefore, that we have free choice to do both evil and good”
“Thus also He made man with free will; and although ignorant of his future fall, yet therefore happy, because he thought it was in his own power both not to die and not to become miserable. And if he had willed by his own free will to continue in this state of uprightness and freedom from sin, assuredly without any experience of death and of unhappiness he would have received by the merit of that continuance the fullness of blessing with which the holy angels also are blessed; that is, the impossibility of falling any more, and the knowledge of this with absolute certainty “
On the contrary, I'm well aware that Augustine wrote a retraction of some of the things he wrote earlier. In fact, not only did he write a retraction, he actually recalled some of his writings and destroyed them. Now that's faithfulness.
However, you overlook one item. The Treastise on the Predestination of the Saints was written as one of the last works of Augustine. So your timeline is skewed. Augustine believed in the "free will" of men early in his Christian faith. It was only later in his Christian faith did he abandoned the heresy. Please consider this writing from Augustine in which he discusses this:
Harley- “”He could have rejected; concerning whom, on this account, the prophetic testimony is recorded, although declared long subsequently, “Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated,”’ [Mal. 1.2,3. Cf. Rom. 9.13.] I carried out my reasoning to the point of saying: ‘God did not therefore choose the works of any one in foreknowledge of what He Himself would give them, but he chose the faith, in the foreknowledge “”
Actually this is where Augustine still was wrong because he states that God could be moved by choice of faith in his foreknowledge.
If God knows everything in one Now there is no choice other than good in his foreknowledge since He already knows.
Foreknowledge to God does not mean thinking and than creating in succession,it means knowing all at once,thus knowledge of evil is not a created predestined evil or God would be moved from good to evil having both evil and good in His essence. This is a Zeus God,not Christ
Blessed Augustine did not consider that God is not moved to choose anything other than His essence -which is love or He would be moved.
Saint Thomas Aquinas rightfully points out
AS love is to good, so is hatred to evil; we wish good to them whom we love, and evil to them whom we hate. If then the will of God cannot be inclined to evil, as has been shown , it is impossible for Him to hate anything.
2. The will of God tends to things other than Himself inasmuch as, by willing and loving His own being and goodness, He wishes it to be diffused as far as is possible by communication of His likeness. This then is what God wills in beings other than Himself, that there be in them the likeness of His goodness. Therefore God wills the good of everything, and hates nothing.
4. What is found naturally in all active causes, must be found especially in the Prime Agent. But all agents in their own way love the effects which they themselves produce, as parents their children, poets their own poems, craftsmen their works. Much more therefore is God removed from hating anything, seeing that He is cause of all.*
Hence it is said: Thou lovest all things that are, and hatest nothing of the things that Thou hast made (Wisd. xi, 25).
Some things however God is said, to hate figuratively (similitudinarie), and that in two ways. The first way is this, that God, in loving things and willing their good to be, wills their evil not to be: hence He is said to have hatred of evils, for the things we wish not to be we are said to hate. So it is said: Think no evil in your hearts every one of you against his friend, and love no lying oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith the Lord (Zach. viii, 17). But none of these things are effects of creation: they are not as subsistent things, to which hatred or love properly attaches. The other way is by God’s wishing some greater good, which cannot be without the privation of a lesser good; and thus He is said to hate, whereas it is more properly love. Thus inasmuch as He wills the good of justice, or of the order of the universe, which cannot be without the punishment or perishing of some, He is said to hate those beings whose punishment or perishing He wills, according to the text, Esau I have hated (Malach. i, 3); and, Thou hatest all who work Iniquity, thou wilt destroy all who utter falsehood: the man of blood and deceit the Lord shall abominate (Ps. v, 7).*
That is unless man's choice is ALWAYS against God. If that is the case, as scriptures teaches, then man and God is at enmity with one another. Man will never do the things of God. God is good and wishes to reconcile this relationship no matter how poorly treated He is by man. And since God is so good and so perfect, He cannot look upon imperfection.
Everything you see around you, all the millions of Christians who have been saved throughout the ages, are simply God calling a people out for Himself by His grace. Man, who strives with God, will NOT come to Him unless God calls Him. So in one aspect you're correct, EVERYTHING that is done is done by God for good-to achieve His end purpose of calling His people.
But you're assuming that God would not be good unless He called EVERYONE equally. I believe that is a wrong assumption. If that were the case everyone on the Damascus Road would have seen and heard the same thing Paul saw. God choose who He wants to reveal Himself to.
Foreknowledge to God does not mean thinking and than creating in succession,it means knowing all at once,thus knowledge of evil is not a created predestined evil or God would be moved from good to evil having both evil and good in His essence. This is a Zeus God,not Christ
And this statement proves my point. You believe that if something REALLY bad happens then it certainly can't be God because God is "good". Yet the scriptures tells us that ALL things work together for good with those who love the Lord and are called according to His purpose.
Thus if something really bad happens to us you may chalk it up to fate, bad luck, ying-yang, or something else. Scripture on the other hand teaches that all things are meant to benefit us, including the bad things.
Consider the following in Amos:
Amo 4:7 "I also withheld the rain from you when there were yet three months to the harvest; I would send rain on one city, and send no rain on another city; one field would have rain, and the field on which it did not rain would wither;
Amo 4:8 so two or three cities would wander to another city to drink water, and would not be satisfied; yet you did not return to me," declares the LORD.
Amo 4:9 "I struck you with blight and mildew; your many gardens and your vineyards, your fig trees and your olive trees the locust devoured; yet you did not return to me," declares the LORD.
Amo 4:10 "I sent among you a pestilence after the manner of Egypt; I killed your young men with the sword, and carried away your horses, [fn] and I made the stench of your camp go up into your nostrils; yet you did not return to me," declares the LORD.
Amo 4:11 "I overthrew some of you, as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and you were as a brand [fn] plucked out of the burning; yet you did not return to me," declares the LORD.
Blessed Augustine did not consider.....Saint Thomas Aquinas rightfully points out
This article isn't about Aquinas. It is about Augustine. And it makes an untrue claim that Augustine believed in free will. He may have in his earlier days but as he grew in his faith he understood this to be heretical doctrine-so much that he destroy many of his life's works. And he learned this to be a heretical doctrine from Cyprian, one of the great pillars of the early church. As Augustine correctly points out, we are saved NOT because we believe in God. Rather, as the scriptures and Augustine teaches, we are saved to believe in God and foster good works. If Aquinas believed otherwise, then he was simply a heretic and Augustine would have told him so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.