Religion: August 2005 Archives

four point calvinist

| | Comments (5)

(continued from the comments box in the previous post)
My good friend Kathryn writes:

I consider myself a "4 Point Calvinist"... .
(accepting all the doctrines below except for "Limited Atonement")

1. T ~ Total Depravity of Man (effect of the fall)
Calvinism - Total Depravity of Man

2. U ~ Unconditional election (God's choice to save some but not all from the effects of the fall)
Calvinism - Unconditional Election

3. L ~ Limited Atonement (Christ died for only the elect that God chooses to save)
Calvinism - Limited Atonement

4. I ~Irrestisitble Grace (Grace given to the elect to receive salvation which is effectual and irresistible)
Calvinism - Irresistible Grace

5. P ~ Perseverance of the Saints (the ability of the saints to persevere in saving grace)
Calvinism - Perseverance of the Saints

I must confess, reading the theology links she sent me to explain these doctrines gave me a major headache. Even though it is in English, it is still a foreign language, a specialized use of terminology, and I don't quite understand what is being taught. Nor do I see the Biblical connections, nor even how the oral and written tradition from the time of the Reformation quite connects all these doctrines to the desires of Christ for His people.

Patty Bonds (sister of Protestant evangelist James White) has written a bit about how there is a cultural and language divide between Protestant and Catholic Christians - where we both use the same word to mean very different things.

Maybe that is part of what I don't get - I don't speak Calvinist. Although I was raised Protestant, I was raised High Church Anglican, and on my journey home, I wandered through Baptist and Pentecostal Christianity, and flirted with Orthodox (Chasidic) Judaism. I didn't study Calvin, I only read a little Luther,knew of Zwingli only from references to his government of Zurich in the novel Hawaii. While I loved the liturgical language of Cranmer, I found his theology more of an apologetic for Henry VII and Elizabeth I that for Christianity.

The theological problem I have with Calvinism is that, to my eyes and ears, it seems to deny God's gift to us of free will. I would appreciate anyone who might be able to offer me more insight on this. I have other issues, as well. But free will is the most important one. I also sense some common ground with Manicheism and Donatism in Calvinism, but it could also be my misunderstanding of the language of his theology. I am willing to listen to commentary. I also have a question. Is the common understanding of "Perserverance of the Saints" translate into "Once saved, always saved'?

I am reading a book right now on the history of heresies through the ages (Dissent from the Creed by Richard Hogan. One observation that the book makes is that dogmas are promulgated usually in response to a heresy of some kind that questions an accepted but inarticulated item of faith. It makes for some very interesting reading. I have only gotten to the 700s and Iconoclasm so far, and I have had to repeatedly resist the temptation to skip ahead to the present times. I'll try to put up a book review when I'm finished with it - put so far so good. Not a fast read, by any stretch. Very dense and meaty.

I am also going to try to take some time and go through the Catechism to investigate the entirety of the Church's teachings on Salvation. I worry about taking bits out of context, whether those bits be scripture or tradition. I'm not sure where I will find the time, but I sense that this is important.

Thanks again for all the prayers. Please pray not only for me, but for Kathryn and for all those who seek the truth that Jesus promised when He told Peter (and all of us) "I am the Way, the Truth and the Light" (John 14:6)
The Catholic Encyclopedia entry on Calvin
further addendum (pulled from the comments box)
Jimmy Akin on TULIP

many are called?

| | Comments (4)

Most of us converts, sooner or later, end up with one sticking point or another on our journey into the Church. For some, it is the doctrine of purgatory. For others, it might be the role of Mary, or praying through the saints, or some Catholic devotional practices that to an outsider seem totally weird. It is rare for the emotional acceptance and the intellectual acceptance of Catholicism to be on the same place at the same time. Often, they aren't even in the same continent! It is also amusing to note how often the issues that start out as the biggest barrier often end up as the strongest conviction - at least that is what I have seen as I have read conversion stories. Would you believe that my biggest problem with Catholicism was the Church's teaching on sexual ethics?

I'm not a professional apologist, I'm basically a well-read and thoughtful convert. I can give the answers to the objections that I had to the faith, but it is much harder to think through issues that weren't a problem for me! There is so much that I don't know, that I haven't investigated, that I take on faith. Roma locuta est. Some things I accept because Rome has spoken. To my mind, the point of my profession of faith was that I recognized the authority passed on from the Apostles in an unbroken chain. I may be (and often have been) disobedient. I'm a sinner, not a saint, though I hope and pray that I'm improving with age. I hope that I can avoid trying to justify my sins by arguing that the Church is wrong to call them sins. I'm glad that the church will still have me - that she is a hospital for sinners not just a museum for saints. I pray that I will be granted the time I need here on this earth to "work out my salvation in fear and trembling".

I have a friend, a devout Christian friend, who has asked me a question that I have tried to answer to the best of my poor abilities. It has to do with salvation - not necessarily her own salvation, but the salvation of others. I personally have not given a lot of thought to the salvation of others - maybe I should? But my personal attitude is to share the Truth as I have found it, to pray for those others, and to leave their salvation in the hands of God.

My friend has questions about a section of the Catechism. She was reading through the Luke E.Hart Series, What Catholics Believe, Section 5 Jesus Christ:(Published by Knights of Columbus)

"Because adherents of other religions do not acknowledge that salvation comes through Christ, and sometimes do not even accept anything like the Christian understanding of salvation, this does not necessarily mean that they cannot receive the salvation offered through Christ. (CCC) 1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery." Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.
Scripture teaches that God "wants all men to be saved" (1 Tim. 2:4 ). Christ's salvation is intended for all. (CCC) 605 At the end of the parable of the lost sheep Jesus recalled that God's love excludes no one: "So it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish." He affirms that he came "to give his life as a ransom for many"; this last term is not restrictive, but contrasts the whole of humanity with the unique person of the redeemer who hands himself over to save us. The Church, following the apostles, teaches that Christ died for all men without exception: "There is not, never has been, and never will be a single human being for whom Christ did not suffer."
Her question:

So, does the Catholic church teach and believe that it is not necessary to have faith in Christ to have eternal life in Christ, be born again, saved from sin, death, hell and the grave, etc......?

I know that God is certainly "able" to save anyone, but has God Himself not said that if we do not know the Son, we cannot know the Father? Would God not somehow supernaturally reveal Himself as Christ to such a person as described above if he or she were never able to hear the gospel, or to intellectually understand it ? ( like, for example a mentally handicapped person).

(me again) I have to believe that God will reach out somehow and save those who seek him with sincerity. I prefer to leave the details to Him. But I also worry, with my friend, that the two paragraphs of the CCC quoted above can be interpreted in a manner that encourages indifferentism, the false ecumenism that haunts our culture. I don't think that the Church has ever said that it doesn't matter who one worships or how one worships. Quite the contrary. I think that she has repeatedly said that once one is convinced of the truth of the doctrines and dogmas, that the church is the pillar and foundation of that truth (1 Timothy 3:15), then obedience delayed is obedience denied.

But do these statements mean, for example, that an Islamist terrorist who believes that suicide bombing is the will of God, may yet end up in Heaven? Please remember that the operative verb is "can be saved" - not "will be saved". Very important fine point of meaning!
I think that what the CCC states is that such a scenario is not impossible - that a moment of death conversion is possible (though I would find it highly unlikely but I have to remember that I am not God - thank God!). Is that fair? Is that just? That a man who finally receives the Word at the last moment should have the same reward as one who has spent a lifetime working for the Lord? That Cardinal Newman and Oscar Wilde should both eventually claim a place at the banquet table of the Lord? (after whatever time is spent getting the dross burnt off in Purgatory, of course).

Consider the parable of the workers in the vineyard Matthew 20:1-16
1 The kingdom of heaven is like to an householder, who went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.

2 And having agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.

3 And going out about the third hour, he saw others standing in the marketplace idle.

4 And he said to them: Go you also into my vineyard, and I will give you what shall be just.

5 And they went their way. And again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did in like manner.

6 But about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing, and he saith to them: Why stand you here all the day idle?

7 They say to him: Because no man hath hired us. He saith to them: Go ye also into my vineyard.

8 And when evening was come, the lord of the vineyard saith to his steward: Call the labourers and pay them their hire, beginning from the last even to the first.

9 When therefore they were come that came about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.

10 But when the first also came, they thought that they should receive more: And they also received every man a penny.

11 And receiving it they murmured against the master of the house,

12 Saying: These last have worked but one hour. and thou hast made them equal to us, that have borne the burden of the day and the heats.

13 But he answering said to one of them: friend, I do thee no wrong: didst thou not agree with me for a penny?

14 Take what is thine, and go thy way: I will also give to this last even as to thee.

15 Or, is it not lawful for me to do what I will? Is thy eye evil, because I am good?

16 So shall the last be first and the first last. For many are called but few chosen.

February 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28    
The WeatherPixie

About this Archive

This page is a archive of entries in the Religion category from August 2005.

Religion: July 2005 is the previous archive.

Religion: September 2005 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.