Do Catholics Believe in Predestination? w/ Fr. Gregory Pine
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 чер 2024
- Fr. Pine talks about what the truth about predestination is.
🟣 Join Us on Locals (before we get banned on YT): mattfradd.locals.com/
📖 Fr. Pine's Book: bit.ly/3lEsP8F
✝️ Show Sponsor: hallow.com/mattfradd
🖥️ Website: pintswithaquinas.com/
🟢 Rumble: rumble.com/c/pintswithaquinas
👕 Merch: shop.pintswithaquinas.com
🚫 FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: www.strive21.com/
🔵 Facebook: / mattfradd
📸 Instagram: / mattfradd
We get a small kick back from affiliate links. - Розваги
"I'm feeling giggly."
Well you can always console yourself with the fact that no matter how giggly you are, you will never be as giggly as Father Mike.
Haven't been this early since my birth.
Thats really early
As a premie I'm stealing this for comedic purposes ty
I don't think it's good to overthink this or even over theologise. I think the double predestination belief of calvanists can lead to trying to work out the mind of God, which is madness. Personally I think it's deeply mysterious and that my focus should always be on obeying God.
I think you are closer to God on this than many theologians. I am serious. Peace to you.
Living without mystery is not being fully alive....who has known the mind of God?
@@matt8637 thank for the encouragement. Blessings to you fellow traveler
As a Protestant who’s been “battling” (in love) Calvinist and Reformed theology for a few months now (there are many in my area who sadly ascribe to these), I am very grateful for this video. It helped me clarify my own thoughts on predestination by hearing your verbiage used.
One quote I will definitely hold onto is this:
_”God is giving grace sufficient [for] salvation, but he doesn’t…give grace efficient [for] salvation.”_ - Father Gregory Pine
10:02
All the love to my Calvinist and Reformed brothers in Christ, btw; however, I think their version of God is not a good or loving thing. And mishandling his character like this leads to a mishandling of his plan; a mishandling of our eternal purpose; a mishandling of our earthly mission; and a mishandling of our obstacles - like trials, tribulations, and powers - that seek to test us or hinder us.
The problem is that according to Augustine and his followers, *all* human action that individually cooperates with God's active will can only ever be the result of the grace that God Himself allots and is *never* the result of human will. Thus, there is no meaningful difference between a "sufficient" amount of grace and an "efficient" amount of grace, because the human will does not have the capacity to choose anything that facilitates salvation apart from the direct power of God's grace.
@@galaxyn3214I don’t think you understand Augustinian well. My simple question I would ask you is what do you make of common justice system? Do you believe that someone who has gone against law should be punished according to the gravity of their act?
@@johnosumba1980 What do I supposedly misunderstand about Augustine's theology?
@@galaxyn3214 from your comment you don’t show that Augustine believe that all humans are given sufficient grace to seek God.
@@johnosumba1980 I did not comment on whether or not Augustine taught that "humans are given sufficient grace to seek God," I commented on Augustine's teachings that the human will has no capacity to choose salvation or damnation through its own power.
I said it before, I'll say it again: I love this guy!!
Hey bro, want to do an interview with me one day? Haha God bless.
This has to be the last place I would of thought Nogla would be watching videos but it’s actually him.
@@nathanhays1866 yup lmao
Nogla Catholic confirmed?
Great explanation, Fr. Pine. Thank you !
As usual
Predestination only concerns God because He is the only one who can percieve it. I always act as I have the free will to accept Gods grace and try not to worry myself with that concept of predestination simply because it is not in my power.
I have been praying and seeking this hard today. Praise you Lord!
Thank you so much for this wonderful movie again!
Greetings also to Fr. Augustinus (from the Netherlands) there in Fribourg :)
Thanks 👍 You make me smile 🙏✝️😃
I would highly recommend to read Father Most book about this topic. Neither Thomist nor Molinist, total game changer.
"In brief, the solution will be as follows. There are three logical stages in the process of predestination:
1) The universal salvific will, which is sincere and extremely strong.
2) The reprobation of all whom God foresees will gravely and persistently resist grace: Reprobation after and because of foreseen demerits.
3) Predestination of all others, in whom God does not foresee grave and persistent resistance.7 This decree of predestination is a continuation and positive carrying out of the initial universal salvific will. The cause of this decree is not human merits-up to this stage, God has not looked at human merits, for, in the logical series at which God looks, merits are neither a cause nor a condition-the sole cause of this decree of predestination is the goodness and generosity of the Father who from the beginning wanted to save all and, at this point, actually decrees the salvation of all who do not resist gravely and persistently. No positive condition needs to be placed by man in order that God may predestine, because the strong universal salvific will continues in its course by its own force. A grave condition would have to be placed by man to interrupt the course of this will, but, precisely because this will continues in its course by its own force, nothing is required from man that it may continue, and at the proper point, decree predestination. For without predestination, that salvation which God willed from the beginning and still wills to confer could not be had: Predestination before consideration of merits."
www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=214
Great video. I like the daisy chain analogy. Can you do a sequel and talk about what it means to be elect? :)
Thank you
Thank you.
Looking forward to this one, an interesting topic and will be nice to hear the beliefs regarding it and compare it to Protestant and even Islamic perspectives of predestination.
Thanks very much ! I am a Presbyterian but have struggled with all of this ... this makes great sense !
I have no idea what any of this means. The only thing I think I might understand is this - God dumps a heap of Grace onto me so that I choose to love Him and be sorry for my sins, but that Grace doesn't MAKE me love Him. If I choose to, I can still go to Hell. But God doesn't want me (or anybody) to go to Hell, hence all the Grace. Is that right? Did I understand that correctly? If not, please correct me using small words.
This young padre has a lot of descriptions and definitions of God's mysterious actions .
I have no standing with which to offer an opinion, but here goes. We say the questions about God creating something so heavy he could not lift it and God’s ability to create a square circle are nonsensical and therefore not real questions. To resolve the seeming paradox of God’s knowing what I am going to do where I am going to end up from inception versus the belief in free will I wonder if perhaps that is sort of a nonsensical question. What if God deigned it that in creating free will He did so in a way that He does not know what we will do? And instead perhaps God has create a system of love, grace, and mercy that enables us to use our free will to come into eternal communion with Him.
Something I've been trying to wrap my head around: what about the necessary things that rely on the contigent things? Would that not insinuate that the things we define as "contingent" are actually also necessary?
Only God is metaphysically necessary.
@@_Dovar_ what does that mean?
What if it's backwards. What if the saved have free will and the condemned have no will?
This subject makes me feel dumb. 😅
@@carolynkimberly4021 This is true lol
I am from Brazil and follow this channel. Can you give me synonymous for the word "pints"?
It is a British phrase, as in a "pint of beer," or a certain number of fluid ounces of beer.
I believe in predestination to a point. i.e. David went into a walled city to save them. Saul heard about it & was headed to get David. David heard about Saul & asked God 2 questions. God knew the answers & gave them to David & he left the city. So, God knew what was going to happen, it was predestined. But it didn’t come to fruition because David left.
@MordoBeast what’s your point, or do you have one?
The antecedent/consequent wills of God is just a way of distinguishing (for purposes of understanding) different aspects of God’s one will; however these ‘aspects’ are not really distinguishable, rather they both comprise God’s one single & eternal will. God’s one single & eternal will is that a portion of humanity not resist God’s offer of salvation, via means of receiving grace that ensures they are saved. Through God’s power, this portion chooses God; iow, this portion is ensured through grace to not resist grace. The totality of humanity receives the same grace, & God ensures the two portions that comprise the whole respond to this grace differently. One portion does not resist this grace, one portion does.
It is possible that these portions respond differently, but it is not ultimately revealed thus, because the antecedent (say, condition of possibility) & consequent (say, actualized eternity) are merely ‘aspects’ from our vantage of the same continuous & unchanging will of God.Because God’s will is continuous & unchanging, what is revealed of God’s will is that not all that’s possible is actual; it was possible that God willed our world without taint of sin, but he did not actually do so. Since he has not done so, it is not possible that his will change.
Likewise, whilst it was possible that God could have saved all, this has been revealed as not actual; God’s ensuring that a portion resist his grace is what’s actual over/against ensuring that all not resist his grace.
Lest we see ‘ensuring’ as being too direct, remember that God’s action is undergirded by the ‘dominating indifference’ (analogically speaking) of his freedom. He can never be implicated because he doesn’t have to do anything at all, for anyone; he already is everything he wants. God sees Christ in a portion of his creation, & it is fitting & good that he love them unto salvation; in Christ, God sees God in the world & God cannot cease to love his own goodness, his own essence. But because the other portion is good in one aspect (his handiwork) & insufficiently good in another (their sin) God’s liberty is indifferent to them & thus his will remains free to love them or not love them unto salvation. He is free to elevate them unto grace, or leave them lie where they lay, in their sin.
Again, it was possible that he would love them unto salvation, but this has not been revealed as actual. His single & unchanging will is that they not be loved unto salvation.
Because Christ is good under all aspects (indeed, is the Good as such) it is not possible that God cease to love his church or to abandon her unto other than he has willed for her. Those who see God face to face cannot fail to love him in response.
But, not all see God face to face; not all are ensured the (actuality) of the beautific vision though all can be said to be offered its possibility (from our veiled vantage) but not its actuality (from God’s vantage of eternity).
That some are ensured to never enter into the promise is only to admit that it was possible for them, though this possibility never be realized. It was simply never possible (from God’s perspective) that your father or mother, or daughter or son, or friend or classmate make it into heaven. God has never willed this.
Thus what it means for humanity as a whole is to be both saved & damned, always.
A human’s power is that they can both create & contain, cultivate & continue a contradiction to God that carries into eternity. To be human is to wield evil against Good. Some humans are ensured to never wield evil forever, but rather to enjoy blessedness which is absent its contradiction. Some are ensured that evil overcomes their vision of the Good & they exist as contradictions to all Goodness. Whether one affirms their existence (as negation, contradiction, or as an absence of Goodness or its own positivity of evil) is neither here nor there. Either way, some continue in-and-as contradiction to Goodness forever. Goodness always has as its opposite, its contradiction, forever.
If one could see as God sees, one would see all those who are to be eternal contradictions to his Goodness, & God sees it fit to punish all contradictions to his Goodness, but does not see it fit to annihilate the contradictions or to curtail them, but rather contain.
Therefore to see as God *is to see it fit to punish your father or miffed, daughter or son, friend or classmate who exist as contradictions to the Goodness which you blessedly share & know in its essence. You do not see it fit to annihilate or curtail, but to contain them in a punishment. You will will this as God has willed it, for this is what God calls good.
This is standard Thomistic Catholic theology, and I am somewhat disappointed at our good Fr Pine at waffling on these points, though only slightly. It is better, though, that people not be led astray with an imprecise way of speaking or relating God’s eternal and immutable will.
God loves some unto salvation, some he does not. It has always been thus, for this is at the bottom of all reality.
(Nor is it correct, eternally speaking, to pray for the salvation of all, since this is opposite to what God has revealed; and no one should every pray against his will, not in this or in any other thing. We only do this on ‘this side’ of things because we don’t know who gets in or out, who will belong to which portion from eternity. Some of these prayers you are praying for your children or family members will never be answered, simply because they cannot be.)
that isn't self-emptying love on God's part. that isn't goodness. that isn't what Jesus Christ preached. on those grounds, I cannot accept your standard Thomistic theology.
God here comes off as something far from humanity. He's like an eldritch being from lovecraft or unloving machine that just sacrifices his children for something "greater"
Priests just always glance over the untold agony of hell seemingly having no sympathy for those that have been and are being tortured in unfathomable ways forever. Who ultimately, could not do anything without God's grace, and their evil just comes off as more of an excuse. If I drop a ball, should I get mad and punish the ball for falling to the ground? Why didn't the ball suspend itself in the air miraculously? Priests continue to talk about God's love, but it all just feels like such a lie like a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Why should we value eachother if God is so content to abandon and throw us in the fire for some greater good or something. He doesn't seem to exemplify what he teaches and I know he's bound by nothing, but a little consistency wouldn't hurt.
Fr. Gregory Pine, would you be willing to respond in some way to Scholastic Answers videos on double predestination? He is a Thomist and claims double predestination is a Catholic Dogma.
According to the theory of Single Predestination, does God's providence afford everyone an opportunity at salvation, or does God plan for only some of his creations to have a chance at salvation?
It just seems obvious to me that, if God "initiates" and "provokes" predestination, without reference to "merit", surely, if he is to be an all-good being, he must afford everyone, equally, a chance at salvation.
Maybe that is, in fact, the Catholic doctrine, I was just unable to establish a clear understanding after watching the video.
In many ways the doctrine of single predestination that is presented here is functionally and effectively the same as the reformed doctrine of predestination. I would be very interested in hearing a reformed response to this video to compare and contrast the doctrines.
You are absolutely correct. If you say you don’t affirm double predestination but then describe your doctrine in a way that logically entails it, it doesn’t make a difference.
Predestination has been hijacked by many philosophers to mean something it doesn’t. It’s actually very simple. Predestination is for believers. He whoever believes (literally anyone can do this) is predestined to be conformed
to the image of the Son. I can predestine that anyone who comes to my party will hear my speech. I’m not predetermining who will come, I’m predetermining what will take place for those who come.
I've talked to many "reformed" that stick to a hard line double predestination with no free will. Single predestination from the Catholic perspective is not compatible with unconditional election, irresistible grace, or limited atonement. The Catholic belief is there is a condition you must meet, which is participation in grace. Also that the grace can be resisted due to God's permissive will affording us free will. And that Christ's atonement is meant for all people even if all people do not ultimately receive it.
And so there's no misunderstanding about "work based salvation", the Catholic view of grace is that it is the work of God. Participating in God's grace is not a form or work because God is the one doing the work on us, to mold us into the image he always willed us to be. I don't know if any of that squares with Calvinism, but feel free to tell me otherwise
@danielnoel3540 they are not the same because Protestants believe some people are created to go to hell which is not the same to Catholic belief of all having been created for heaven but one has to choose (freewill) either to go to heaven or not.
@thepokkanome what you describe is essentially in line with my own beliefs. I have long pondered reformed doctrines (I'm a protestant but I am not a calvinist nor do I consider myself armenian) and I think that the doctrines of total depravity, unconditional election, and perseverance of the saints are all well aligned with scripture. However, the doctrine of limited atonement does not align well with many scriptures in my eyes (Heb. 10:10, 2 Pet. 3:9, John 3:15-17). I believe that God's grace is freely offered to all and it is only by that grace that one can be saved. Furthermore, I believe that individuals have access to that grace only through faith. That access is not merit based, or work based, after all if it was of works then it could not be by grace. Frankly, the more I hear catholic theology, from the lips of catholics, the more I find that it isn't that different from many protestant doctrine. I have always been shown a strawman of catholicism that doesn't seen to resemble what I hear from Matt and Fr. Gregory.
@@danielnoel3540 I can second that to some extent. Last year I had the pleasure of working beside a Calvinist who was passionate about converting me from Catholicism. It honestly game me an opportunity to dig into what the Church truly believes and in the end there are really just some finer points of theology that separate us but they do seem to all boil down to Free Will. Catholics hold two apparent contradictions together where as many reformed and Calvinist protestants do not. I kept running into this. Also there was a deep disagreement about creation being good. Some of those I was having discussions with maintained nature had no intrinsic value and was only there to be used by us. They would go back to total depravity and I never could get to the bottom of that one which seems all too strange to me. What are your thoughts on Free Will? Do you think it's compatible with TULIP. My understanding has been that the Church has always held those beliefs but with subtle but vastly consequential differences and much comes down to Free Will.
A good video also from Fr. Gregory which goes hand and hand with this discussion is this one on Free Will. It is such a delicate interesting conversation and contains great mysteries of Grace and Free Will. As Catholics we believe predestination and Free Will coexist and do not contradict one another. Not an easy thing to reason through but both these videos do a great job. ua-cam.com/video/ikdPPZpCFyU/v-deo.html
So, the Catholic notion is basically summed up like this: God created human nature "in such a way" that it may be said to be ultimately "autonomous." It's the "in such a way" that I think overly assumes without argument. Of course, it may SEEM that we ultimately make self-determining decisions. But we, as even Catholics admit, know this isn't entirely true. That is why Fr. Pine carefully says that God is not "surprised" when a creature makes a decision. Why? Because of what Fr. Pine supposed earlier, that God creates and sustains each thing's nature.
But what does this "sustaining" pertain to? In what sense may we definitely separate the exact point by which we (and our wills) are differentiated from God. Now, I'm not suggesting we "are" God. That is, we do share God's "substance." However, I ask, how does God, at the core, "interact" (so to speak) with our "souls?" How is one's soul (and therefore will) created and sustained (and - many would admit at the very least - directly guided by many factors, external and internal) yet so separated and autonomous in such a way as to be ultimately self-determining?
Examining the logic of causality/interconnectivity of being/ontologically, that there is a type of compatibilism rather than leaving all to just an intuition towards ultimate, self-determining "free will." Compatibilism, however, still affirms predestination in its most logically conclusive state. God has ultimate self-determinism over all things. Man, whose will is shaped and molded by God's hand, God nevertheless uses towards his own good purpose, creating and sustaining the will "in such a way" as to give the creature a genuine subjective experience of reality.
The difference between the two camps is this: Catholics think the "core" of human nature is self-determining/ultimately autonomous. Calvinists believe that even the "core" of our soul/nature/will is shaped and molded, like a river, in the hand of God. One is about human nature itself the other is about the way by which human nature is moved. I think the side of "how it's moved" gives a more logically consistent yet surprisingly more simple way of understanding the mystery of how God "causes" things to happen.
GOD does not "move your will", this would be choosing favorites. GOD helps those who ask for HIS help more than others who do not ask. This is humility
Calvinists are liars, and outside of Grace, as the HOLY GHOST could never dwell inside a liar who makes JESUS into Satan.
Grace comes only with TRUTH, and therefore, those outside the TRUE CATHOLIC Faith have no Grace at all.
We all have access to the same TRUTH given by LORD JESUS, and if you choose Calvinism you are making GOD your enemy, and all HE can do is try to humble you in some way.
Our salvation is in our hands alone, as we are required to ask GOD for help, and admit we cannot do it alone. If we lose this attitude, we will all Fall.
Once we are in Union with GOD, and have the HOLY GHOST within us, then we can access the Grace we need to overpower sin and curses acquired.
Be careful in thinking too much about predestination ,as the WORD of GOD tells a different story completely than this.
If we are severed from TRUTH, we are severed from GOD, and we are outside of HIS Grace.
Sinners get nothing from GOD other than being humbled over and over again.
So GOD does help certain people more than others, and this is because these people ask for it, and this is the only reason.
Therefore, our salvation is all in out own hands, as "GOD wants nobody lost"
Not Much was really said in a lot of words.
What I want to hear is a cosnervative criticism of the faith, for lines like Luke 3:11 and “if a man steals your coat offer him your shirt” etc
do you want to hear a criticism or an answer to the criticism?
In the ancient world where people had to memorize most things in life, the use of the figure of speech was common. They just mean to be generous when you have excess. Jesus also says "Help those in need". Most people forget that Jesus added "in need" and examples of those in need were widows and orphans.
I have a question in regards to the idea that God offers grace to everyone, and the separation between saved and unsaved is how the person responds. If this is true, what is the precise thing that separates the saved person from the unsaved? If it is by God's mercy that led the saved person to a heart capable of accepting His grace, then that would still be God deciding who is saved or not since God afforded that mercy to one person and not the other. But if it is not God's grace, then is the saved person just "built different" in some way? Even then, God created us and He knows every little thing about every neuron in our brains, so He would have had oversight during our formation and development and thus insight into our future temperaments. Even in this way it seems like God is directly choosing who is saved and who is not.
Apologies if he already answered some of these questions in the video and I didn't catch it. I am a Protestant who has been trying to learn more about Catholicism. I am having doubts about my Protestant beliefs but there are still some issues (like above) that I keep running circles around. If someone could help that would be great. Thanks!
It is God's mercy and grace. That is Catholic teaching.
The next question naturally will be - if God decides, by His mercy and grace, who will go to Heaven, then does He not also decide who will go to Hell?
The response here is that the individual who goes to Hell does so because of their mortal sin(s) for which they, by definition, are responsible for. Unlike supernatural acts of charity, mortal sins (like all actual sin - mortal and venial) are done completely independent of any kind of "grace to sin" or antecedent action on the part of God.
Could God have given grace to that individual such that they would be saved? Could God, in other words, have predestined that individual? Yes He could have but chose not to. Permitting the unrepentant mortal sin is different from causing the unrepentant mortal sin.
Granted there will be many more questions - the problem is you are entering territory within Catholicism where the issue has not been settled. Look up the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Predestination for a sense of the giga complexity of theological debate around this issue.
I would encourage you to join RCIA. Catholicism is the Church founded by Christ and possesses the fullness of means which will help you to live perfectly to the praise of God's glorious grace (Eph 1) and conformed to the image of God's Son (Rom 8) for the glory of God.
Ask the Blessed Virgin Mary to intercede for you and obtain the Divine Grace for Christ to be formed in you (Gal 3) just as Christ was formed in her womb.
I'm a Protestant as well, though not a Calvinist, and I think when you ask, "is the saved person just 'built different' in some way," you're accidentally assuming a sort of materialistic determinism.
Plenty of atheists don't believe in free will, because they figure that, since the body is all that we are, all our actions are determined by chemical reactions in our brain. When you put vinegar and baking soda together, they don't "choose" to explode, there's no other possibility -- and our brains are simply a more complex version of that.
But Christians believe we are not just bodies, but body-soul composites. We are not merely our brain chemistry. And so, to have legitimate free will, there must be a soul. For Christians who believe in free will, we would say *we* are the cause of our actions. Nothing determines our actions other than our own choices. This is called "agent causation," as the agent himself is the cause of his actions.
So, we would say that God gives sufficient revelatory grace to everyone. Everyone has what they need to come to faith in Christ. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that a passive person is bound to eventually be overwhelmed by God and become saved. However, God leaves us just enough freedom that we may obstinately reject him if we so choose. God puts the gift in our lap, but he allows us the ability to take it and throw it out the window. This decision to reject God is not determined by God or our brain chemistry or personality or anything else. A saved person is not "built different" than an unsaved person; an unsaved person just freely made a terrible decision.
Thank you guys for your answers, they're helping me form a more concrete explanation. Obviously I need to do more delving into the issue.
this theological problem is one of the reasons that led me to believe confidently in universal salvation. God is love. God is good. there is no room in God for this kind of predestination ante praevisa merita that arbitrarily applies only to some. the self-emptying God of Jesus Christ, who leaves the ninety-nine sheep to go after one, is not the same as the deity which decrees in its absolute sovereignty that some will be saved and the rest will be damned.
@@gandalfthegreatestwizard7275 Although I can sympathise with the motivation behind that position, I think there is a problem with the consistency of it. It has been revealed to us by God that not all of the angels were predestined and that some will, and indeed already are, damned.
Texts could be multiplied for proof of this but one classic text is found in Revelation 20:10 "...the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
If you are a member of the Church, that the Devil and His Angels were first, created good by God, then fell by their own wickedness, and are now and forever will be damned - has been solemnly defined in many places by the Church, see, for instance, Denzinger No's 428-429.
The question I am raising therefore, about consistency, is as follows: What is the relevant difference between rational animals (men) and rational spirits (angels) which means that the latter can be damned, but - because of the nature of God which is the same whether He deals with men or angels, none of the former can be damned?
I find the teaching on predestination difficult to understand but what I find even more puzzling is why does God consider someone who is in Hell to be the better option than either not having created that person in the first place or annihilating that person. How is suffering for an eternity the better option for such a person?
Same doubt here.
God creates us all with the intent and wish that we go be in communion with him and go to heaven, where we may be in communion with him for eternity. So you've got a false premise there. It is not God who creates us to go to hell. Our damnation comes from us, ourselves.
@@csongorarpad4670 God knows the destiny of everyone he creates before they even come into existence. Therefore God knows when someone chooses damnation even before they come into existence. So why would a good God allow that?
@@ctarabocchia I used to have this same doubt, why would God even bring into existence someone who He knew would reject salvation and choose hell. Then one day i thought of this, part of the creation of humans involve the free will of other humans eg. we are co creators with God, as per the gift of sexuality. The soul who chooses hell was created by God but also from the sexual union of their parents which God permits and respects because of the gift of free will. Those parents were created by their parents and so we go back through contingent creations until we get to the first necessary humans, endowed with the human soul by God. When God decided to bring humanity into creation, bestowing on an animal the gift of a human soul with reason and free will, part of the consequence of humanity existing was humans who would reject the divine plan. In other words, why is there something rather than nothing, because God is love, and humanity was created out of love (because this is better than not existing) but consequentially there would be brought into existence (through human co-creation) those who from the beginning of their existence God knew would reject his offer of salvation. I guess the issue still remains though, why/when does God create the human soul, that is co-created at the moment of conception? idk if this even makes sense. it seems God respects human free will way too much.
God allows some to be damned so that Christ, as just judge, can manifest the eternal divine justice within himself aeviternally in heaven. The primacy of Christ explains why it is fitting for God to cause some to be saved and allow others to be damned. We aren't the main characters of the universe, he is. All of this was made as a gift for the Son.
So, according to my understanding of this theological system, God gives grace to those He wills to save, and does not give grace to those that He does not will to save, and thus God actively predestines some to salvation and passively predestines everyone else to damnation.
From a consequentialist perspective, this is still effectively double predestination, and I cannot think of any way that it isn't.
As someone who is Reformed, I agree. This is *exactly*, what we mean by double predestination.
No that is not what he said nor what Catholics believe. God gives everyone enough grace to seek him. What one does with that grace is what makes the difference, another thing that you need to know is that God knows whether you will use that your grace to attain salvation or not.
@@johnosumba1980
>"What one does with that grace is what makes the difference,"
Ah, but there's the rub, according to this theological system (as I understand it), the human will does not have the capacity, in itself, to do anything to move towards salvation, which means it cannot "cooperate with grace" in the sense that it has the power to choose salvation or damnation.
@@galaxyn3214 but all have will and sufficient grace from God. So all can.
@@johnosumba1980 The system does not entail the will choosing grace, the system entails the grace God that gives modifying the will.
Aquinas affirms that God does in fact reprobate some men.
8:00
Seeming how God in the prophets seems to be doing something rather just foreseeing a future oracle we must come to the conclusion that history it self and our human will has to be bound to fulfill the promises and prophecy’s of God. We can not have free will then by definition free will is the ability to make any choices free of any sort of destiny. But as we see in the Old Testament prophets as well as revelation etc the means of which God fulfills His plans is through the will of man or man wills only acts to the sovereignty of God this reconciles verses were we read in Roman’s 9 or Ephesians 1 or it states we are chosen by Gods sovereign election to the responsibility of man to come to repentance we see in John 3:16. Or as Jesus puts it “all that the father gives me will come to me” or all who were destined to be saved will seek and be saved. The will of man is bound and can only act to the sovereignty of God. In other terms if we went back in time to the beginning and new the whole course of future of every event and yet change one or two small things in the course of history would that not alter what we would of foreknown, so then if the will of man can act out of the sovereignty of God as independent and creating its own destiny then how could God ever fulfill His promises and plans if he has billions of different anomalies acting out of his sovereignty creating there own destiny. Unless you are suggesting God let’s all this different anomalies create there own destiny and act out of His sovereignty all through out history and just makes do with whatever reality they created and only acts sovereignly once he wants to fulfill a prophecy or promise but the latter seems illogical seeming how important every small detail is to accomplishing Gods plan and being His own means to accomplishing His own plan. For example Jospeh’s brothers jealousy over his cool jacket leads to The Lord delivering Israel out of Egypt.
S is predestinating grace offerred to all not just the elect? If it isnt it wouldnt be very compassionate.
That would be so depressing if we did lol
yes we do. aquinas said Predestination is causality. because God is the cause of every person in heaven, but not in hell.
Then there’s no agency in omission, and thus no sin. Try arguing that with a Thomist. They will freak out, but they exactly argue that about negative predestination. It’s sophistry.
Why using the word predestined intstead of destined or made to be saved but able to be condemned.
Predestined sounds like theres no free will
Fr., your cassock is super loud lol. cant u guys make that out of silk? viscose? something
Calvinists: God predestined everything, but that doesn't take anything away from our free will!
Cazholics: No! In actuality, God predestined everything, but that doesn't take anything away from our free will!
That's not what's being said at all. Catholics believe that God gives grace to all, but you can choose from your own will not to act on it. In Calvinism, God gives grace to some, and you cannot resist God's grace if it is given to you.
Essentially, a Catholic would deny the doctrine of irresistible grace. Which is impossible in Calvinism.
@@harrygarris6921 Well, cooperating grace is irresistible. Operating grace is resistible, but is only *resisted* if cooperating grace isn't given. Effectively, if God wants you to receive grace, you will.
@@syedhasanahmed3514 Well, maybe. The idea that there are multiple forms of grace and some are resistible and some aren't is one theory for how this system works.
@@harrygarris6921the Catholic Church actually hasn’t taken a position on this since the Pope at the time of the De Auxillis controversy wimped out on it. You’ve described molinism, but the Thomistic position is accepted in the Church. Thomism is Calvinism in practice. It’s disgusting.
I write as someone in an Evangelical church that leans reformed. I have spent time in a Presbyterian church. I've read a fair amount on this subject. I think that Fr. Pine's explanation, and the Catholic explanation, is way too nuanced and has too many parts and too much subtly. I believe that is what is the problem. The Apostle Paul speaks about being chosen by grace, not by works (Romans 11:6). Everything we have is of grace. "...for His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us [a]by His own glory and excellence. Through these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world on account of lust." 2 Peter 1:3-5
Saint Pail was Catholic and gave his life for you tor you to have a Catholic Church
Saint Paul also talks so much about works it is incredible, and nowhere does he say that you are saved by Faith.
Grace is only the HOLY GHOST within your Soul and this is only possible through the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation for anybody
As far as Aquinas being a reliable teacher of anything, I agree with you, he is terrible and purposely misleading souls to Hell
"Be careful of the babble that they call knowledge" Here Saint Paul is talking about so called philosophy
You have to choose to follow the path that Saint Paul did, and not the path the Aquinas did, and get be baptized into the Catholic Church, and the BODY OF CHRIST
Otherwise, you will have no Grace at all
JESUS came down here to die for something, and Protestants act like they do not need GOD for anything
So you need to admit that Grace comes from following all the TRUTH of GOD, and becoming Catholic, and only then can you access any Grace at all
So I dont know what you have read, but go back to JESUS, your only Teacher
You need to stop sinning, and this is only possible through GOD, and the Graces of the HOLY GHOST within your Soul
No pagan has the HOLY GHOST within their Soul, as this would mean that we do not need JESUS dying for all sins to be saved
The Apostles gave their lives for you to have a Church, and it is not the Presbyterian or evangelical, and you should know this
Predestination is a stupid lie from Hell, and you should know this too
If GOD picked people to be saved, this would be unjust and GOD is perfectly JUST
GOD helps those who are humble, and turn toward HIM, instead of being turned away, and to themselves
You need to follow the process of attaining Mercy like all Saints did, get Baptized into the body of Christ, and live in TRUTH
The you can get Graces, which are extra help from GOD
If you die with no HOLY GHOST, then you go to Hell
If you die with the HOLY GHOST, you pass through Judgment
And living on this Earth, you pass from Death to Life with the Catholic Church
The Catholic Church is in the wrong hands now, as we all know, but it is still the only place for salvation
Nobody outside the real Faith has any Grace, so they are all Spiritually dead (like a zombie, it is your choice to be a zombie or in union with GOD)
as we see today in the terrible condition of this world with a fake Catholic Church occupied by Communist who want souls damned to Hell
But we can access all the real Catholic teachings very easily through the Apostles and the WORD of GOD
One important clarification: Reformed and Calvinist are not interchangeable. Leaving aside the question of whether or not one must believe in double predestination in order to be a Calvinist, one certainly does not need to believe in double predestination as a Reformed Christian. Anglicanism is Reformed, but it does not confess nor require double predestination.
That's interesting, I had never heard that before. I do know that Calvinists consider themselves the only "reformed" protestants and they think that Anglicans and Lutherans are a different thing rather than being under the same "reformed" umbrella. So there might be some debate among the people who consider themselves "reformed" over who is actually "reformed".
Are you a molonist?
@@harrygarris6921 those who make claims that the only type of Reformed Christian is a Calvinist are, bluntly put, not well-informed. Most often, the sort of people who make such claims are Baptists who loosely hold to some sort of understanding of "TULIP", which means that Jacob Arminius is literally more of a Calvinist than they are.
@@a.d1287 I am.
@@barelyprotestant5365 Yes, well. Reformed baptist calvinism is the form that most of us living in 21st century America are familiar with. I'm vaguely aware that anglicans and lutherans and old school mainline calvinists exist, but they've had next to no cultural relevance in quite some time.
7:49 you don´t understand it because it´s bs. Humans keep creating gods and giving them characteristics to make them powerful. You gave your god the characteristic of all-knowing, and now you struggle to reconcile that with reality. Muslims have the same problem.
As a Reformed, i would like to say that we do not believe God gives the reprobate a negative grace to reprobation. This is a Neo-calvinist idea and has no grasp on the Reformed Orthodox. We believe that God gives the elect efficient grace to salvation and withholds grace from the reprobate. Inasmuch God chooses the reprobate to withhold grace from we say he elects the reprobate. We do not believe God infuses reprobation into anyone. We believe that if a man is saved it is by Gods efficient grace and that if a man is damned it is by his own will and choice.
Sounds like Aquinas his view. Would you agree with me that a lot of Calvinists are completely wrong on this?
@@SicilianusThomismus They certainly are, yes. I’m actually working on a video wherein I will demonstrate that both the Reformed, & plenty of Catholics (Thomists, Jesuits, Cisterians, Mercederians, etc) affirm a distinction between negative and positive reprobation, wherein the latter is on the basis of sin/demerits, & the former is not (based solely on the will of God). In this, I’d argue against Fr. Gregory Pine. He seems to be misrepresenting Calvin & the Reformed on this point, as many Catholics often have (unfortunately) done so on this point.
@@scholasticismreformed166 but it also not really easy to represent calvinists about this.
@@SicilianusThomismus it really is, actually, just by reading our primary sources. The only thing there is that a lot of it is in Latin, but there are still translated, English sources saying the same thing.
"The ELECT" means something, and this is to be a ROMAN CATHOLIC, a real Catholic and submit to a lawful POPE
As we see today, we do not have a real POPE, so the Chair of Peter is empty
But we need to be Roman Catholic, and live in TRUTH that the Apostles gave us, and only then can we become the ELECT, and only then can we attain Grace, forgiveness or any good thing
You are correct in the process of Grace and the sinners who refuse it
GOD does not operate inside anybody outside of TRUTH and all sinners have chosen to be slaves of Satan, as we see today
We will only get help from GOD, the HOLY GHOST, also called Graces, when we admit we need HIS Help, and become a real Catholic
Without Humility and the Graces from the HOLY GHOST, nobody can be saved
GOD loves us all equally, but HE only helps those who humble themselves, and turn to the Catholic Church for LIFE
Otherwise, you will be tumbling down into the Abyss of sin like all pagans do
"If it is hard for the Just man to be saved, what will happen to the sinner?"
(1 PETER 4:18)
I don't feel like this video helped at all.
I think it is better described as God predestined believer to adoption and salvation. He chose for mankind to be able to be saved through His Son, received by faith. Predestination is not predestined to have faith.
Paul: All men are justified by grace as a gift... to be received by faith.
Calvinists do not believe in "double predestination"
I do not Believe on Predestination unbiblical
I’m pretty sure Paul talks about predestination, buddy.
@@Sim0n-kv8jb what verse buddy
@@edwardmagdalena1383 Romans 8:29-30, Ephesians 1:4-5
So much good truth here but at 7:28 , he refuses to answer the actual question posed at the beginning of the video! Yes there is a mystery here and none of us fully understand it, but don’t pretend to have a doctrine on the topic then avoid answering the question!
Calvinism affirms unconditional election (to an eternal destiny) for all people. In contrast, he says we can resist the predestination. So God’s predestination or election is conditional upon what we do. Fine. This is contra Calvinism. Got it. But then immediately after, he says our resisting is also part of the plan. So now we are back to Calvinism!? Which is it? I thought the Roman church is supposed to say those headed to heaven are unconditionally elected to that end but those heading to hell are not? I was hoping for an explanation of how God could exercise his total power and freedom to unconditionally save some and then just ignore or not know about (!?!?) others. This doesn’t seem consistent with the glorious, high doctrine of God that Rome teaches.
Isn’t this a case of everybody understanding what the Bible teaches and what it implies-that God is sovereign over ALL things and knows all things (including your eternal destiny) and no creature can limit his freedom. But only the calvinists are willing to “bite the bullet” of what is written down in scripture so everybody else is dodging? We just want to pretend God isn’t sovereign over damnation. It’s too sad. Well, I’d rather confess the truth.
BTW, Reformed Christians strongly affirm that this doctrine must be handled with care. See Westminster Confession 3.8: “The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care,[82] that men, attending the will of God revealed in his Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election.[83] So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God;[84] and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel.[85]”
Fr Gregory is complicating a very simple issue, inappropriately using a Philosophical framework that doesn't clarify anything. The Question: Why is there a Hell, if Christ died for All? The answer is; Jesus died only for the Elect that God chose before the beginning of the world. After the Fall, All who were born were sinners and worthy of Hell. GOD chose the Elect to save through Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Scripture Alone and through Christ Alone! Many think that GOD is improperly saving some while at the same time inappropriately sending most to Hell. Pastors are charged to preach the Gospel to all since, there is no way to definitively determine who GOD Chose. Only the Elect will respond to GOD' call because everyone else couldn't care less about GOD and most reject him and Christ. Unfortunately Catholics believe that works will have an impact on their Salvation which is absolutely False. Read Scripture Matthew 7: 21-23 and weep. Father Gregory believes in predestination as I defined and that position is Scriptural. This isn't the complicated rocket science that, FR Gregory is manipulating by trying to define it out of existence!!
Christ is the saviour of all, especially those who believe. Limiting it to a certain number of elect is evil, not Scriptural, and illogical. It makes Christ something less than the saviour of the world.
It isn't my word but the Scriptural Word of GOD that you need to debate, not me. If you don't know what Scriptures, I'm speaking about then you need to study and understand the Word Of God and not just read it.
Chris himself limited it by allowing a Hell or do you believe that Christ dying for all limited his power to save?
@@jakehccc1 I believe, according to the Scriptures, that Christ died for all and that nothing limits his power to save, which is why all will be saved. Eternal hell is an imposition on the Scriptures that is not in the text except through faulty translation.
Eternal Hell may be a lot of things but it's not an imposition an unreasonable burden and uncalled for in Scripture. Where you get the idea that Hell isn't a consequence and everyone who dies goes to heaven is a Bazaar interpretation, that no student of Scripture could possibly hold. Adolph Hitler is in Heaven? Pol Pot went to heaven along with Jeffrey Dolmer?