What do you think?
Rate this book
Grace, Predestination, and the Permission of Sin: A Thomistic Analysis
Grace, Predestination, and the Permission of Sin seeks to analyze a revisionist movement within Thomism in the 20th century over and against the traditional or classical Thomistic commentatorial treatment of physical premotion, grace, and the permission of sin, especially as these relate to the mysteries of predestination and reprobation.
The over-arching critique leveled by the revisionists against the classic treatment is that Bañezian scholasticism had disregarded the dissymmetry between the line of good (God's causation of salutary acts) and the line of evil (God's permission of defect and sin).
The teaching of St. Thomas is explored via intimate consideration of his texts. The thought of St. Thomas is then compared with the work of Domingo Bañez and the foremost 'Bañezian' of the 20th century, Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange.
The work then shifts to a consideration of the major players of the revisionist treatment, including Francisco Marín-Sola, Jacques Maritain, and Bernard Lonergan. Jean-Herve Nicolas is also taken up as one who had held both accounts during his lifetime.
The work analyzes and critiques the revisionist theories according to the fundamental tenets of the classical account. Upon final analysis, it seeks to show that the classical account sufficiently distances God's causal role in regard to free salutary acts and His non-causal role in regard to free sinful acts. Moreover, the revisionist account presents significant metaphysical problems and challenges major tenets of classical theism, such as the divine omnipotence, simplicity, and the exhaustive nature of divine providence.
Finally, the implications of the traditional view are considered in light of the spiritual life. It is argued that the classical account is the only one which provides an adequate theological foundation for the Church's robust mystical and spiritual tradition, and in particular, the abandonment to divine providence.
The over-arching critique leveled by the revisionists against the classic treatment is that Bañezian scholasticism had disregarded the dissymmetry between the line of good (God's causation of salutary acts) and the line of evil (God's permission of defect and sin).
The teaching of St. Thomas is explored via intimate consideration of his texts. The thought of St. Thomas is then compared with the work of Domingo Bañez and the foremost 'Bañezian' of the 20th century, Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange.
The work then shifts to a consideration of the major players of the revisionist treatment, including Francisco Marín-Sola, Jacques Maritain, and Bernard Lonergan. Jean-Herve Nicolas is also taken up as one who had held both accounts during his lifetime.
The work analyzes and critiques the revisionist theories according to the fundamental tenets of the classical account. Upon final analysis, it seeks to show that the classical account sufficiently distances God's causal role in regard to free salutary acts and His non-causal role in regard to free sinful acts. Moreover, the revisionist account presents significant metaphysical problems and challenges major tenets of classical theism, such as the divine omnipotence, simplicity, and the exhaustive nature of divine providence.
Finally, the implications of the traditional view are considered in light of the spiritual life. It is argued that the classical account is the only one which provides an adequate theological foundation for the Church's robust mystical and spiritual tradition, and in particular, the abandonment to divine providence.
344 pages, Hardcover
First published November 17, 2019
1 person is currently reading
51 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
March 18, 2024
This book provides an excellent overview of the positions of Aquinas, the classical Thomistic tradition (as expressed in this book through the positions of Domingo Báñez and Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange), and what the author refers to as, following Steven Long, the revisionist Thomistic view (represented here by figures such as Francisco Marín-Sola, Jacques Maritain, and Bernard Longergan) on the issue of grace, predestination, and God’s antecedent permissive decree.
O’Neill defends the view of the classical Thomist tradition on predestination as in complete conformity with the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas on predestination and the Divine attributes. He also shows where certain attempts made by the Thomist revisionists to try to distinguish between God’s causal activity in good human acts (the line of good) and God’s activity, or lack thereof, in evil human acts (the line of evil) are speculatively problematic or fail as faithful interpretations of Aquinas’ system. Although their attempts to sharpen the dysentery between the lines of good and evil are laudable and pious, the consequences of their approach ultimately raise more difficulties (both in number and severity) than those posed to the classical Thomistic tradition, following Aquinas.
For anyone looking for the solution of Aquinas and the Thomistic tradition to the age old problems of reconciling free-will and predestination, God’s Omnipotence and His innocence in the face of permitting human’s to commit sin, this book is absolutely essential.
O’Neill defends the view of the classical Thomist tradition on predestination as in complete conformity with the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas on predestination and the Divine attributes. He also shows where certain attempts made by the Thomist revisionists to try to distinguish between God’s causal activity in good human acts (the line of good) and God’s activity, or lack thereof, in evil human acts (the line of evil) are speculatively problematic or fail as faithful interpretations of Aquinas’ system. Although their attempts to sharpen the dysentery between the lines of good and evil are laudable and pious, the consequences of their approach ultimately raise more difficulties (both in number and severity) than those posed to the classical Thomistic tradition, following Aquinas.
For anyone looking for the solution of Aquinas and the Thomistic tradition to the age old problems of reconciling free-will and predestination, God’s Omnipotence and His innocence in the face of permitting human’s to commit sin, this book is absolutely essential.
Displaying 1 of 1 review