On Calvinism and Thomism (clip) 

From a Reformed background, now examining Catholicism, and leaning towards conversion, I was pleasantly surprised to see the similarity in Aquinas’ writings on predestination. This video tremendously helped me to narrow down some points of contention to study discerningly. Thanks!

this was a good video! i actually really appreciated it as someone who is reformed.

Really good video very informative for a 7 minute video. Would love to see more videos comparing thomism and reformed thought such as this one

Can thomists be supralapsarian or would that be a weird hybrid of thomist-Scotism (considering that it keeps all other parts of thomism)

From a calvanist prospective God can desire one thing and Arrange(predestine) another. Such examples Adam and Eve, God didn't will them to sin but it was His permissive will that allowed them to sin. Some may object and say that God does not will sin. I agree. However, this is not what I am saying. I am saying that God wills the circumstances to exist that make sin possible but that He is not responsible for the sin that occurs. When people sin, God uses it, and other sins, for His glory and purpose. Still a very good video helping others know the difference. Thanks!

Do you recommend a certain book or article that deals with sufficient and efficient grace? And is sufficient grace coterminous with prevenient grace?

Need a book to cover Calvinism vS Thomism lol. Especially since Thomism is Catholicism

How do you spell those names at 6:56 ?

I find the Calvinist position on Christian Worship (ie their rejection of the Mass) to be a far worse thing then their mistakes on predestination.

Hmm not sure reprobation is identical in both. Perhaps Reformed theology developed to disavow double predestination/active reprobation in favor of passive reprobation (and thus affirm Trents asymmetry between reprobation and election), but Calvin seems to hold it. The online RTS article Aquinas and Calvin on Predestination: Is There Any Common Ground? by Cavalli (a Protestant), specifically the last 2 sections on reprobation and double predestination makes the contrast. A sample: "In Calvin’s theology, “permission and volition are one in the mind of an…utterly sovereign God.” [citing Muller here]. Therefore, reprobation cannot be a passive act of the Almighty. Thomas prefers to speak of God’s permitting the reprobate to fall away." "For Calvin reprobation is not by bare permission. It is the result of God’s deliberate action amenable to his will. In his Commentary on Romans, Calvin makes a statement even some Calvinists are uncomfortable with: “Solomon also teaches us that not only was the destruction of the ungodly foreknown, but the ungodly themselves have been created for the specific purpose of perishing (Prov. 16:4).” Many flinch at such a remark and either ignore it or try minimize its force by limiting Calvin’s position on reprobation to God withholding grace and leaving the non-elect to themselves. Calvin does indeed speak of God “choosing some and passing others by” but his doctrine of predestination is broader than this. Calvin’s statement above is entirely in keeping with his view that God’s determination to reject some is made irrespective of sin for the ultimate purpose of magnifying his justice..." "For Calvin, election and reprobation stand in a symmetrical relationship since they both proceed from the one will of God. This is not to suggest that election and reprobation are symmetrical in every way; only that the destinies of the elect and reprobate are determined by God’s will apart from merit or demerit. McGrath writes, “For Calvin, logical rigor demands that God actively chooses to redeem or to damn. God cannot be thought of doing something by default: he is active and sovereign in his actions.” ... Thomas, following Augustine, teaches the reprobate are abandoned (or passed over) by God and left to the ruin due their sins, but Calvin insists the reprobate are rejected for no other reason than God willed it. In his annotations on Romans 9, Calvin affirms both election (electio) and reprobation (reprobatio) as positive decrees of God. Men are deliberately rejected and actively hardened."

Have you looked at John Davenant's views? Seems to contradict some of your issues with Calvinism, though admittedly a minority position.

How is this congruent with the clear and explicit teaching that God desires all to be saved and that He is the savior of all? Conditional election makes more sense I feel.

Where does Aquinas state that reprobation is ante praevisa demerita? Many commentators end up saying this, pretty much, but AFAIK not St. Thomas. The problem is, of course, that it is not at all evident how this is not God abandoning prior to being abandoned and I'm not sure the typical Bañezian line of fallen creatures somehow eo ipso "defecting" does too much (and, crucially, doesn't apply to the sin of Adam, with important implications for the rest of us).

thomism => baby cry