From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
To say Molina attempted to reconcile Augustinism with Baianism is very strange, as he was seemingly strongly opposed to Baianism, which itself was a rigorous interpretation of Augustinism. It seems to me a counter-sense. Furthermore, to state that "These doctrines, although in harmony with the prevailing feeling of the Catholic Church of the period" is also very unlikely: large sectors of the Church, not least Dominicans and Jansenists, but most of traditional Augustinists and Thomists opposed the very new interpretation of Molina, who was accused by some of reviving Pelagianism, by claiming that a "sufficient grace" given to everybody was... sufficient for man's redeemal, and that each one, chose, by free-will, to accept it or not (while Augustine claimed that man needed an efficacious grace, which was not given to everybody — and, according to Blaise Pascal's Provincial Letters (I and II), some neo-Thomists and Dominicans claimed that God bestowed to all men a "sufficient grace," but that it was not really sufficient, as to it had to be added an "efficacious grace" by which man would possess the will to pray: that is, all men have the sufficient capacities to pray, but they will only have the will to pray if blessed by the grace). Note that all this topic is very complex, since if Augustine claimed an "efficacious grace" could only save man, he at the same time alleged that this grace did not cancel man's free will (although it could not be resisted by man!). Spirals31 (talk) 19:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
