[HarleyD]

"Hey Harley! Up to your old tricks again?"

Up to my old tricks???? Is there something in Augustine's writings on Predestination you disagree with? I thought I would be applauded for posting a early Church father's writing. ;O)

Here is the RCC stance on election from newadvent:

"If it be asked why the name elect was given to the members of the Church Militant, we may assign a double reason: first, they were freely chosen by God's goodness (Rom., xi, 5-7, 28); secondly, they must show in their conduct that they are choice men (Ephes., iv, 17). In the sentence "many are called, but few are chosen", the latter expression renders a word in the Greek and Latin text which is elsewhere translated by elect (Matt., xx, 16; xxii, 14). It is agreed on all sides that the term refers to members of the Church Triumphant, but there is some doubt as to whether it refers to mere membership, or to a more exalted degree. This distinction is important; if the word implies mere membership in the Church Triumphant, then the chosen ones, or those who will be saved, are few, and the non-members in the Church Triumphant are many; if the word denotes a special degree of glory, then few will attain this rank, and many will fail to do so, though many are called to it. The sentence "many are called, but few chosen" does not, therefore, settle the question as to the relative number of the elect and the lost; theologians are divided on this point, and while Christ in the Gospels urges the importance of saving one's soul (Luke, xiii, 23, 24), he alternately so strengthens our hope and excites our fear as not to leave us any solid ground for either presumption or despair."

Quite different from Augustine's view. My how times have change. If the RCC cannot understand the meaning of election, then I don't see how they can understand the meaning of sin. Augustine didn't seem to have a problem.

And truly, with all due respect, I don't need to have someone tell me what Augustine believed as your author tries to do. I can read his writings myself.

[jo kus]

"If the RCC cannot understand the meaning of election, then I don't see how they can understand the meaning of sin. Augustine didn't seem to have a problem."

I don't think the issue is so simple. It really revolves around grace and free will. How much of each is present in man?

Luther said man has no free will to do good. Man is like a horse who is either "ridden by God or the devil". Calvin said that original sin annihilated free will and that the Redemption did not restore it. Of course, Trent opposed this by saying that man has moral freedom in spite of original sin, while also saying that freedom worked with grace. In actuality, there are several Catholic 'systems' of grace : Thomism and Molinism are two. In other words, there is still work among theologians on the particulars of the relationship between grace and free will.


by the way, earlier I had stated that Augustinianism was refuted by the Church. I would like to state that I was mistaken, I was thinking the extreme forms of predestination that Pelagians took up. Sorry for the confusion.

Regards