Thomism does not teach that man has no say in the matter; or that his choice does not affect his salvation. Other sorts of discussion can be really interesting, but can leave a person confused where the boundaries are. I’ll check out the Catholic Encyclopedia shortly. A materialist might say that if this view of QM constitutes the true description of nature, then the future is not predestined because the only causes that exist are physical causes, and these don’t specify uniquely what the future will be, even if the state of the universe were completely specified in the present. They both say God provides the grace but man must correspond.

It’s also worth remembering that one standard Molinist contention — from the very beginning — is that Thomas Aquinas’s view of predestination leads to Molinism and not to Thomism, which would be perhaps better called Banezianism, after Domingo Banez, one of the great commentators on Aquinas; and that the dispute between the two groups sometimes had as much to do with the …

It isn’t that it is not true, but that they don’t want to be locked into Aristotle.

Currently I don’t have strong opinions regarding which of the permitted Catholic positions on the relevant issues are correct. There is a tendency among many Calvinist authors to treat biblical language as if it is a lot less ambiguous than is really the case. I teach twelfth grade Moral Theology and our class recently spun out of control with a Thomist/Molinist debate on the issue of predestination and efficiency of grace.

nota bene: I’m on the other side of the Tiber, so take with a grain of salt as far as application to Catholic theology is concerned. Here are some sources that may be helpful (in increasing order according to difficulty and length): [LIST=1] Molinism is a school that is part of Thomism in the general sense (it originated in commentaries to Aquinas), yet it must be born in mind that, here, Thomism and Molinism oppose each other. I think it would be a bit misleading to call this a “philosophy of quantum mechanics.” Quantum mechanics provided me an example that it is possible to provide meaningful explanations of forms of “causation” that don’t fit into deterministic models, which also convinced me that it was possible to speak meaningfully about God through analogy, even though what we mean in both cases is a bit mysterious (witness Einstein’s frustration: “God does not play dice with the universe.”).

The Church upholds the authority of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas in their teachings on grace and free will. For official apologetics resources please visit, Lawrence Feingold on God’s Universal Salvific Will, Freddoso’s translations of some of Molina’s disputations. I’ve heard this from modern Dominicans as well; Molinists are considered “Thomistic” in the broader sense of the term, as opposed to the narrow use of “Thomist” refering to a specific school of Thomistic thinkers of the day.

It’s not specifically about Thomism and Molinism, but they do come up a lot, and it’s fairly easy to read:

I’ve read lots of stuff on Molinisim and Thomisim and just when I think I’m beginning to get one of these —> :newidea: I get confused and end up doing this —> :doh2: Somebody help before I go completely—> :whacky: So, we really do make real choices, and they really do affect other people, yet all of this was planned, all of this was forseen and planned for and around, and as William Lane Craig the Protestant Molinist points out, for the intent that all that might be saved, will be saved.

ISTM that St. Thomas was the teacher par excellence on how to speak rigorously about the mysteries of God (even surpassing his sources, Pseudo-Dionysius and St. John Damascene). – Most Informative Blog Here are the two paradigmatic objections simplified: Molinist: God must first look to see how we will respond to His grace before he decides how he will create the world and distribute grace. They both say God provides the grace but man must correspond. Is this close?

As Ludwig Ott helpfully points out in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, the dispute revolves around two poles: divine universal causation and God’s universal salvific will.

That piece explored how close one could get to Calvinism while remaining within the bounds of Catholic teaching.

Aristotelianism is also a scientific theory which is why both the Orthodox and Lutherans have qualms about using Aristotelian language for the conversion of the elements in the Eucharist.

The question in my mind is how predestination works. Then again, the materialist will argue that Karol’s parents brought him into existence and circumstances (such as the loss of his parents and the multiple invasions of his homeland) brought about the mindset that would be set on bringing down “the evil empire” (even though he was not the only person in all of history to have experienced those same circumstances, but he was the only one to do something incredible about it).

I need something a 4th grader can understand.

God’s universal salvific will is the idea that God desires that all men be saved (1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9). I just read it, and it is excellent. *]Congregatio de Auxiliis God then creates the world that would lead to Tony being saved, as opposed to the Thomist answer that God forces the “activation” of Grace on Tony through efficient Grace. In other words, Thomism says God provides the Grace and the person has no say so in the matter. What do you think of Pontificator’s thoughts? Molinism is a system of thought that seeks to reconcile the sovereignty of God and the free will of man. stood. Can somebody give me, or direct me to a concise, clear and easily understandable discussion of these two principles?

Molinism says that God provides the Grace and the person either says yes or no.

A novel which illustrates this quantum molinism is Connie Willis’ excellent _To Say Nothing of the Dog_. Is this close? God bless.

We all know you are a tried and true Deppist. Start reading Jimmy's best-selling book The Fathers Know Best in under a minute!

This is the one that I always thought of as being closest to physics. *]Freddoso’s essay on Luis de Molina What this ultimately has meant is that the interpretation of St. Thomas and St. Augustine has been freed from the rigid emphasis on efficient causality versus free will and has focused more on final causality. Question: "What is Molinism and is it biblical?"

These positions are very nuanced, and an official debate went on for many years in the Church regarding them (see 4 below).

Lewis basically propounds a view that, since God is outside of time and space, “causation” as we see it doesn’t really apply to prayer, because we believe that B follows A and C follows B, but we also believe that we can pray for Z to happen. Also, what does either school have to say about God’s desire to save all of humanity and not just particular individuals or groups? which deals with whether certain things are “special miracles”. That is, they are motivated by some of the same factors, but Arminianism and Calvinism are very much further apart than Molinism and Thomism. [INDENT]Thomist: But if that is true, then God does not cause everything, and he must wait on human decisions before deciding what to cause. Ed Peters,

but I was simply curious. Seeing as the Incarnation and the Eucharist are similar types of miracles, it would stand to reason that if QM could “explain” the Eucharist, then it could “explain” God becoming man.

Most Dominicans I know fall squarely into the “Molinist” camp, and use St. Thomas’ teachings to explain and defend that position. The human decision is in some sense uncaused since it is (logically) prior to God’s causal activity and an action of the Creator is somehow dependent on the actions of creatures!

Molinism has been controversial and criticized since its inception in Molina's concordia. Catholics believe that prayers and rosaries, prompted by Our Lady of Fatima, were the cause of the downfall of communism in Russia, whereas historians, politicians, and economists will point to the inevitability of economic collapse brought about by Stalinist policies in communist Russia. But let’s keep in mind what the lesson is here: our real conceptual limitations do not translate into conceptual limitations on reality. *]Garrigou-Lagrange’s book Predestination

Molinists, following Molina, said that it’s not that God uses a different form of Grace to “force” certain people to accept the power of Salvation, but rather He chooses the world and circumstances in which certain people will be saved, and then they “activate” the sufficient Grace.