This book is primarily a treatise on the Thomistic understanding of predestination. In that it does a very good job. Fr Lagrange does a good job of spelling out the difficulties in our understanding of predestination and how attempts were made to resolve these difficulties. The author does a great justice in the preface by pointing out that it is impossible to completely resolve these difficulties this side of Heaven.

The cornor stone of Thomasim, according to the book, is predilection and this is repeated constantly through out the book. The universal will of God to save is scarecly touched on in the book and God's love is touched upon even less except in the context of predilection. Virtually every objection is met with the quote of predilection.

Other recognized schools of predestinational thought, I belive, are not very well presented, contrary to what the author claims. They are received by the author only in as much as they mimic Thomism. The scrutiny that the author applies to these other systems is not equally applied to Thomism. This is why I decided to only give it 3 stars rather then 4. I can see how very easy it would be for Luther and Calvin to come up with their views if this is what they had to start with. The author does not do a very good job at all dealing with the differences arrived at by Luther and Calvin. He merely states that they are false then moves on. With the authors constant hammering of predeliction I think it would be very difficult for him to do otherwise.

Reading this book left me with more questions then answers. Maybe that is unavoidable when dealing with this subject.

I must admit that I approached Father Lagrange's work with skepticism, but after I finished his work on the difficult issue of Predestination I was completely stunned. Being from the Reformed tradition I strongly believe in the doctrines of election and predestination and affirm that they are biblical tenets of the faith. Nevertheless, I was compeletely uninformed concerning the two schools of thought on this issue which exist within the Catholic Church. The first school is the Molinist school which is very similar in many respects to Protestant Arminianism, while the second is the Augustinian/Thomistic school, which is very similar to Protestant Calvinism. Although I knew that the Church was very Molinist in it's practices, I did not know where these practices originated from. Furthermore, I was completely unaware that there were many who still believed in traditional Augustinian ideas regarding grace and predestination.

Lagrange begins his work by laying out the history of the doctrine of predestination in the Church. He starts by analyzing scripture then works his way up through history analyzing the writings of many of the Church's greatest theologians who wrote about predestination including, Augustine, Aquinas, Duns Scotus, Bellarmine, Suarez, Molina, and many others. Lagrange shows that several of the councils convened in the sixth century to deal with the issue of election did in fact support the Augustinian viewpoint. Father Lagrange uses documented evidence from the Coucil of Orange to show how the Church of the 6th century condemned Pelagianism and Semi-pelagianism and upheld traditional Augustinianism.

In the second part of this book Lagrange sets out to uphold and clarify the traditional Thomistic teaching on predestination. Many of his arguments were fascinating and intriguing. I love his work on the doctrines of grace and premotion. Lagrange argues that grace does not destroy free will, but perfects it and that grace is not irresistable but instrinsically efficacious. Lagrange emphatically affirms the absolute gratuity of predestination and constantly makes reference to the same quote of Augustine which states "No one thing would be better than another, unless it were loved more by God." According to Lagrange, the only reason one individual chooses God and another does not is because God has loved the one more than the other. It is a hard truth indeed, but one that is ratified by scripture.

The one negative side to this book is that it does contain a lot of vague and intellectual terminology. It may be hard for anyone who is not familiar with Augustine and Aquinas to follow Lagrange's reasoning since he continually refers to their writings and their ideas. Nevertheless, this book is a valuable resource for anyone wishing to understand the other Catholic school of thought on predestination. Every Reformed Protestant should read this book in order to understand that not all Catholics adhere to the Molinist train of thought; The Catholic Church has in fact taught predestination throughout it's 2,000 history and this is beautifully illustrated by Father Lagrange.

Yes, this is about as scholarly a work as you will ever read on one of the most perplexing paradoxes in all of Christian theology - the omnipotent, sovereign God versus man's free will.

And Father Garrigou-LaGrange explains it well in this book. His 50-plus years of teaching at the highest levels shows itself, as the book is excellently written and the materially is expertly outlined and presented.

He starts with a few basic principles with which all conclusions about predestination must adhere, for example:
- That God wills to save all men and that He predestines nobody to damnation
- That all we have we have received from God
- That God works in man to will and accomplish according to His good will, yet our will is still free
- That God wills nothing that is impossible (not even His command to obey the commandments)
- That no created being would be better than another if God did not will a greater good for that being (predilection)
- That God is the cause of all good and the author of NO evil
- and much more.

Then, by applying the above principles he refutes the predestination teachings of the Pelagians, Semi-Pelagians, Molinists, Jansenists, and protestants. He follows with explanations of the Catholic (Augustinian and Thomistic) view and answers to objections.

But this book is not an easy read, seemingly having been written for educated people - priests, professors, and seminarians. It is well worth your time and effort (have some aspirin ready, though, for the inevitable headaches!).

On a side note, this book was a pleasure to read because it is classic Catholic theology written by a great teacher in classic Catholic style - heavy on theology and light on sarcastic criticism. Let us point out where we are right; let us explain where the others are wrong. Let us reconcile those passages of Scripture which SEEM to contradict; let us see how, when thoroughly examined, those passages harmonize and give us God's own truth. Let us not, as many protestants (sadly) do, take hold of one side of the paradox, and ignore or demote the other. It is a book like this that shows how the Catholic Church is truly Biblical on account of its acceptance of ALL Scripture as inspired; on account of its refusal to ignore or demote passages which do not fit into a pre-conceived interpretation; and its refusal to elevate one Biblical author (Paul, for example) over another or over all of the rest.

Five stars.

I found this play really intriguing, in that one 16yr old's fate was held in the hands of tweleve people off the street who really didn't care about this kid's future. They judged a person on some pretty dodgy evidence and were biased against his ethnic background - which was shocking! This play made me realise that some people are so insensitive - some of the jurors were talking about their families, their jobs and sports - were not taking the situation seriously or with any consideration. However, there was one juror who had enough guts and empathy for the 16yr olds sake, to stand up and vote "not guilty". I was pleased that this guy had the courage to stand up for his opinions, even though he was the only one. Eventually the other eleven jurors were convinced by the 8th juror that they had prejudice towards the boy. I believe that the kid was not guilty and that the jurors made the right decision in the end. Thanks for listening!

"12 Angry Men" was the last play I read in my Drama Literature class. It is very well worth reading because of its brilliance. It is a play that you should either read or watch performed, whether it's the television version or the play version. The reasons are these:

1. The story centers around twelve jurors who consist of ordinary people who must decide whether to vote the defendent as guilty or innocent. They must decide carefully, though, because if they vote guilty, they might send an innocent person to death, but if they vote not guilty, they might send a murderer out on the streets. The whole plot and story is a very good look at our justice system.

2. The characters are well developed, realistic, and interact together very well. You never do know the names of the characters, but you do get to see the ways they interact together, whether they are sympathetic or stubborn, or whether they seek justice or have no mercy. Some are passive, some are angressive, and some are young, some are old, and some are rich, some are poor.

3. Themes of this play include stubborness, standing alone, conflicting personalities, common sense, and anger. Common sense is an especially significant theme with the way the jurors study whether the evidence is reasonable and make their arguements over it.

4. The story, simple setting, and believeable characters work out very well. It's not dull, and in contrary it's very interesting.

All in all, this play is well worth picking up or seeing performed. Please don't miss out on this cleverly written play.

this is a wonderful play about the trial-by-jury system in which one man sees beyond stereotypes. An excellent work and definitely worth reading

The book had its good points and it also had it bad points as most books do. Twelve Angry Men was a go getting attention grabber. I personally as a teen-ager enjoyed the book.

In our literature class, we did the play Twelve Angry Men. I really enjoyed it! I played Juror Number 3 and it was a really fun role to play. This book tells about how people can make false accusations without knowing all the facts. It was a play that makes you think about how people think.