Why do Catholics have a problem with Calvinism?

[simonpeter]

Shalom,

Predestination, original sin and depravity, limited atonement, etc. are all biblical. So why do people take issues with Calvinism?

Just out of curiosity ... don't mean to start a fight.

Simon Peter

 

[RDKirk]

Shalom,

Predestination, original sin and depravity, limited atonement, etc. are all biblical. So why do people take issues with Calvinism?

Just out of curiosity ... don't mean to start a fight.

Simon Peter

Both sides of that issue can haul out verse after verse, which is why it's been an argument for 500 years. If there were a simple "it's biblical" answer, the issue would have been settled 499 years ago.

Nor is it a Protestant vs Catholic issue, because it wasn't even on the list Luther nailed to the door (which is why it's "Calvinism" and not "Lutherism").

 

[Needing_Grace]

Here's my problem:

Double predestination = God is the author of evil

Westboro Baptist Church one of the fruits of Calvinism, albeit a piece of really, really bad fruit. This video from the Lutheran Satire explains it better than I ever could...and it explains exactly why this Catholic says that Calvinism is the worst of the worst of the heresies to come out of the Reformation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEIqEYP_ZvM

 

[Needing_Grace]

Both sides of that issue can haul out verse after verse, which is why it's been an argument for 500 years. If there were a simple "it's biblical" answer, the issue would have been settled 499 years ago.

Nor is it a Protestant vs Catholic issue, because it wasn't even on the list Luther nailed to the door (which is why it's "Calvinism" and not "Lutherism").

Luther's issues were specific and he retained much of what is Catholic. Calvin rewrote the religion from the ground up.

 

[RDKirk]

Luther's issues were specific and he retained much of what is Catholic. Calvin rewrote the religion from the ground up.

I have found, participating and watching these battles over the last 20-odd years, that Calvinism requires a view of the fundamental nature of God that is fundamentally very peculiar...as peculiar and perhaps very similar to the view of the nature of God that Muslims have.

It's like dealing with Chinese pinyin pronunciation of Latin characters--looking at the same symbol and having an utterly different sound for it.

 

[catholicbybirth]

Shalom,

Predestination, original sin and depravity, limited atonement, etc. are all biblical. So why do people take issues with Calvinism?

Just out of curiosity ... don't mean to start a fight.

Simon Peter

I have a problem with Calvinism as I have trouble with every religion that was created by a human after a religion that was founded by Jesus Christ (Catholicism).

Why throw out the baby with the bathwater? IOW, why start another religion if one is already in existence, one that has not changed any teachings since Jesus started it, one that has been corrupted. Why not just correct the corruption.

When government is corrupted, as it is now, do we throw out the form of government we have now and set up a government that we claim to be from the founding fathers but is very different from what is in the Constitution, unless you read it with a different bias than what the founding fathers had.

Janice

 

[Rhamiel]

Shalom,

Predestination, original sin and depravity, limited atonement, etc. are all biblical. So why do people take issues with Calvinism?

Just out of curiosity ... don't mean to start a fight.

Simon Peter

well, Catholics and Calvinists agree on Original Sin, atleast we both agree that there is Original Sin, I am not sure we agree on all it entails

a lot of the differences are in minor changes in understanding

like both Catholics and Calvinists believe that Original Sin has broken the relationship between God and man and that we are spiritually dead before we are regenerated by the Holy Spirit
Calvinists believe that man is "totally depraved" while Catholics put emphasis on the fact that people are made in the image of God

 

[Rhamiel]

also, lots of Calvinists are very very vitriolic about their view of the Catholic Church

 

[RDKirk]

well, Catholics and Calvinists agree on Original Sin, atleast we both agree that there is Original Sin, I am not sure we agree on all it entails

a lot of the differences are in minor changes in understanding

like both Catholics and Calvinists believe that Original Sin has broken the relationship between God and man and that we are spiritually dead before we are regenerated by the Holy Spirit
Calvinists believe that man is "totally depraved" while Catholics put emphasis on the fact that people are made in the image of God

"Total Depravity" is an issue, though not insurmountable.

IMO, the insurmountable issue is Limited Atonement. Underlying that concept is the belief that God deliberately creates most people with the absolute inherent inability to gain faith.

 

[Rhamiel]

"Total Depravity" is an issue, though not insurmountable.

IMO, the insurmountable issue is Limited Atonement. Underlying that concept is the belief that God deliberately creates most people with the absolute inherent inability to gain faith.

that is true
in a way, Catholics agree that without the grace of God, man can do nothing that is good


yeah, the idea of Predestination, in the Calvinist understanding anyway, is very peculiar (good choice of words) among Christians
from my debates on CF and in real life, many Calvinists do not consider those who do not agree with them on this (both Catholics and Protestants) to be real Christians
not all think this way, but more then a handful do

 

[RosaryChaplet9]

I don't have a problem with Calvinism because I actually read the Bible.

 

[Needing_Grace]

"Total Depravity" is an issue, though not insurmountable.

IMO, the insurmountable issue is Limited Atonement. Underlying that concept is the belief that God deliberately creates most people with the absolute inherent inability to gain faith.

Total Depravity is part and parcel of the theology as a whole.

Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists all agree that everyone is born in a state of original sin, but how that state affects the human person is strongly different. While Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists all agree that one cannot come to faith in Christ apart from God's call, Catholics and Lutherans agree that the call is universal and that we can reject while Calvinists would say that only those who are of the elect will hear the call and respond to it. This is because Catholics see our wills as weakened and inverted but not completely depraved like Calvin (and to some extent Luther).

I've heard it described as it being the difference between the Theology of Glory (Calvin) and the Theology of the Cross (Luther derived from Augustine).

 

[MKJ]

Total Depravity is part and parcel of the theology as a whole.

Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists all agree that everyone is born in a state of original sin, but how that state affects the human person is strongly different. While Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists all agree that one cannot come to faith in Christ apart from God's call, Catholics and Lutherans agree that the call is universal and that we can reject while Calvinists would say that only those who are of the elect will hear the call and respond to it. This is because Catholics see our wills as weakened and inverted but not completely depraved like Calvin (and to some extent Luther).

In my discussions with Calvinists, the reason they are ultimately unwilling to let go of this idea that not everybody is called is that they take it as "proven" that some will go to Hell, and they consider the idea of God letting go of any control as impinging on his total control and omniscience. If people really get a choice, in their view, it makes God dependent on something we do - he has to respond to our choices and actions and weave them into his total plan.

 

[Needing_Grace]

In my discussions with Calvinists, the reason they are ultimately unwilling to let go of this idea that not everybody is called is that they take it as "proven" that some will go to Hell, and they consider the idea of God letting go of any control as impinging on his total control and omniscience. If people really get a choice, in their view, it makes God dependent on something we do - he has to respond to our choices and actions and weave them into his total plan.

That's the theology of glory.

It's where Calvin starts. What brings glory to God? This is a terrible starting place because it makes us toys in some game of self-glorification on the part of God (a god I don't recognize from Scripture or Apostolic Tradition, btw) and don't you dare question it!

Luther started at the Cross, which is a better starting place as it puts context onto everything...

Catholics start with the Trinity, which is the best starting place because it not only puts a context onto everything, it explains why God gave us free will in the first place. God is love and wants love, so He creates us to share in that divine life. Even though we screwed it up, God, in His boundless love, sought to rescue everyone through the Cross.

 

[RDKirk]

It's where Calvin starts. What brings glory to God? This is a terrible starting place because it makes us toys in some game of self-glorification on the part of God (a god I don't recognize from Scripture or Apostolic Tradition, btw) and don't you dare question it!

And that is why I spoke earlier about Calvinists having a peculiarly different view of God's fundamental nature.

Ultimately, I do believe that God's actions will bring Him glory, but I'm not sure that Jesus paid such a cost for only a deliberately limited result.

BTW, when I say Jesus paying such a cost, I'm including the cost of the Lord of Creation--a being who once could play jax with solar systems and use galaxies as stepping stones volunteering to have his consciousness squeezed into a human body--something like a man agreeing to have his consciousness squeezed into a slug: Who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped.

Is the "effect" of Jesus' atonement deliberately so limited in potential? Or doesn't it have the potential to be effective for every human being--even if God pre-knows those whom it will ultimately avail?

 

[simonpeter]

thanks for all the replies.

Isn't it a fact that some people go to hell? God, being omniscient, would have known that. So doesn't double predestination necessarily follow? Else, it would make god look helpless. Besides, everybody is born in a state of sin - so 'choosing' God would be impossible unless God first chose us. Wouldn't this also point to Calvinism?

 

[Chany]

thanks for all the replies.

Isn't it a fact that some people go to hell? God, being omniscient, would have known that. So doesn't double predestination necessarily follow? Else, it would make god look helpless. Besides, everybody is born in a state of sin - so 'choosing' God would be impossible unless God first chose us. Wouldn't this also point to Calvinism?

It would also mean that God is unjust. It does not take a degree in philosophy to realize that you can't hold someone accountable for something if you are physical forced to do something.

Let's say that my friend, Sam, implants my brain with a device as a fun prank. The device totally eliminates my ability to control my physical actions. Sam, however, can control my actions with a controller. Sam, being the gamer that any of my friends would be, treats me as a character in a Grand Theft Auto game. I rob a store, steal a car, lead the cops on a wild and dangerous case, and punch a cop.

Obviously, someone must be held responsible. The responsible individual will go to jail for a long time. The prosecution is trying to decide whether I should be charged. Should I?

 

[RDKirk]

thanks for all the replies.

Isn't it a fact that some people go to hell? God, being omniscient, would have known that. So doesn't double predestination necessarily follow? Else, it would make god look helpless. Besides, everybody is born in a state of sin - so 'choosing' God would be impossible unless God first chose us. Wouldn't this also point to Calvinism?

Or unless God installed a back door into each of us.

Adam fell, but Adam was originally perfect. I have read Calvinism apologetics, but I still don't see where the perfect creation became totally depraved without even the possibility that God left a "back door."

From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.

27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being. -- Acts 17

He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the hearts of men; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end. -- Ecclesiastes 3

If it is simply not possible for man to "seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him," then why does this verse say that's why God placed the evidence of Himself in creation?

Why did God set eternity in our hearts, if not as a "back door" for Him to use to reach us?

Is God merely playing "stump the dummy" with human beings? Dangling Himself in front of all of us--displaying Himself in nature and putting a desire for Him within all of us--tantalizing us--with the intention of denying Himself to most of those He's tantalizing?

This is where I come again to the peculiar view that a Calvinist must have of the nature of God.

 

[Chrystal-J]

My problem with it as a Christian religion is it's "faith based" salvation. (Once saved always saved.) When the bible clearly says faith with-out works is dead. (James 2:14-26)

 

[Rhamiel]

thanks for all the replies.

Isn't it a fact that some people go to hell? God, being omniscient, would have known that. So doesn't double predestination necessarily follow? Else, it would make god look helpless. Besides, everybody is born in a state of sin - so 'choosing' God would be impossible unless God first chose us. Wouldn't this also point to Calvinism?

God presents us with an opportunity for salvation

Calvinists believe that the Grace of God is irresistible
Catholics believe that you have to choose to cooperate with grace

we both agree that God acts first
but the dispute comes in about how humans respond to grace