predestination & the preterite [Re: MDMD(3)--Just a thought]

[Paul Mackin]

When I said it was ODD about Augustine tending toward
double predestination, I meant odd only in the sense that
he is so prominent in Catholic thought (a Father of the Church) 
and yet I had just got done saying that Catholics tend
toward the milder version of predestination, as Vaska
goes on to elaborate.

				P.

			


Vaska wrote:
> 
> >From Paul Mackin:
> >Steven Maas (CUTR) wrote: (concerning the centrality of predestination
> >I alleged)
> [snip]
> >> Are you saying that adherents of [Reformed Dutch] believe that no matter what
> >> they do in their lives it is predetermined whether they will go to heaven
> >> or hell?  What incentive does this give them to behave any way other than
> >> on their whims?
> >>>>>It's a very extreme doctrine but roughly what theSynod of Dort decided.
> The >elect and the preterite have no control of their respective destinies.
> St. >Augustine (ODDLY) is associated to some degree with this position,
> 
> Don't know about how odd it is: Augustine was really big on predestination
> and took the Bible as his autority on that.  Gruesome stuff, most of it; the
> scary bit is that Augustine has it right about the God of the Bible [some
> traces of that are in the New Testament as well].  The Catholic church has
> been downplaying this side of Augustine for a few centuries now, but he was
> as "Calvinistic" about it as any Reformed Dutch churchman on a roll.
> 
> Now, for some Gnostics the god of the Bible was a second-order deity, the
> blind Samuel, a god who had to be repudiated before one could establish a
> personal relation with the god of the gnostic Jesus.  In _GR_, Pynchon has
> some trouble with that too.  And, with Eric, I believe Pynchon takes these
> things fairly seriously; even heart-wrenchingly so, perhaps.
> 
> I really like your reading of how Pynchon's using theological dogma -- to
> hammer home the point that the preterites' fate is undeserved.
> 
> Vaska