But that doesn’t substitute for actual metaphysics, and to think that QM is going to do metaphysical work that it can’t possibly do is just the sort of materialism that plagues modern society. I’d also like to recommend C.S. 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. Not that I’m going to show it to my 4th grader, but that’s evidently the level I operate on. stood. When are you going to acknowledge your 3 Blog Award Wins: 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. The article, which I’ve read before, seems to confirm that Thomism shares at least some ideas with Calvinism. If God only causes some people to freely cooperate, then how can we say that he desires all to be saved?[/INDENT]. Also, it is often assumed that certain terms are synonyms, when in fact they may not be. [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. God bless. God predestines the Saved because He dwells in Eternity, outside of time, and all moments in time are present to Him at once. I also don’t agree with the traditional Molinist position mostly because I don’t buy into the “middle knowledge”, i.e. It’s important to remember that both sides claimed to be upholding Aquinas. I believe that predestination exists, for Scripture says that it does. To my mind, Molinism is analogous to Arminianism, and Thomism is analogous to Calvinism. I understand that this is a 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. which deals with whether certain things are “special miracles”. It’s “popular” theology, but that doesn’t mean it’s shallow. I don’t personally know any Dominicans who hold to the view of the Banezian “Thomists”, though it used to practically be a party line for them. Whereas with Molinism one’s salvation is more dependant on whether the individual chooses to cooperate with God’s Grace.

What are the others? The flaw in Cajetan’s reasoning, at least as it seems to me, is that he carried the notion of causation beyond its analogical limits, effectively making God a cause among causes (or a being among beings) in near-Scotist fashion. but I was simply curious. Given the practical orientation of my work–which involves defending the liberty of opinion that Catholics have rather than trying to prove one particular school of thought correct–I have not had the occasion to do that research. The 2006 Catholic Blog Awards

At some point I may have the leisure, or the personal motivation, to do a systematic review of this area, but thus far I have not. that God picks the world situation that will save those He will save. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. 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.