This will be my last argument on this topic. Then I'd acually like to say something nice about Calvinists...but for now, here goes...
When the debate over free-will and sovereignty is framed, as it usually is, in terms of the debate between Medieval Catholic emphasis on the priesthood, the sacrament, the miracle of transubstantiation and the power of the church against the Protestant emphasis on the grace of God, the Grace of God and the Grace of God, it is not hard to see why many protestants lean toward Calvin.
But what struck me as I started looking into the history of the early church, was how many early church fathers would seemingly have been very comfortable with the views of Arminius. The debate between Augustine and Pelagius again will find most humble readers of scripture side with Augustine. But Augustine was fighting that battle in the 4th century. Much history and theology existed prior to that skirmish.
For this, my next to last venture into this question, I mainly want to quote a number of voices of the early church.
JUSTIN MARTYR c.100-165 A.D.
"God, wishing men and angels to follow His will, resolved to create them free to do righteousness. But if the word of God foretells that some angels and men shall certainly be punished, it did so because it foreknew that they would be unchangeably (wicked), but not because God created them so. So if they repent all who wish for it can obtain mercy from God." Dialogue cxli
“…if the human race does not have the power of a freely deliberated choice in fleeing evil and in choosing good, then men are not accountable for their actions, whatever they may be. …God did not make man like the other beings, the tress and the four legged beasts, for example, which cannot do anything by free choice. (First Apology)
TATIAN the Syrian. ca. 170 a.d.
Thus the wicked man is justly punished, having become depraved of himself; and the just man is worthy of praise for his honest deeds, since it was in his free choice that he did not transgress the will of God. (Address to the Greeks)
IRENAEUS of Gaul c.130-200
"If then it were not in our power to do or not to do these things, what reason had the apostle, and much more the Lord Himself, to give counsel to do some things and to abstain from others? But because man is possessed of free-will from the beginning, and God is possessed of free-will in whose likeness man was created, advice is always given to him to keep fast the good, which thing is done by means of obedience to God." (Against Heresies, book 4,4)
…for God made man free from the beginning, so that he possessed his own power just as his own soul, to follow God’s will freely, not being compelled by God. For with God there is no coercion; but a good will is present with Him always.
…those who have not obeyed will not be found worth to possess the good, and will receive deserved punishment; for God did kindly bestow the good upon them, but they did not guard it carefully, nor regard it as something precious, but were contemptuous of his most eminent goodness…God therefore, has given good, … and they who work with it will receive glory and honor, because they have done good when they were able to do otherwise, But those who do not do it will receive God’s just judgment, because they did not do good when they were able to do it. (Against Heresies, 4, 37)
CLEMENT of Alexandria c.150-215
"But nothing is without the will of the Lord of the universe. It remains to say that such things happen without the prevention of God; for this alone saves both the providence and the goodness of God. We must not therefore think that He actively produces afflictions (far be it that we should think this!); but we must be persuaded that He does not prevent those that cause them, but overrules for good the crimes of His enemies." (Stromata 4,12)
…those already chosen, those predestined by God who knew before the foundation of the world that they would be just….( Stromata, 7,17,107,3)
ORIGEN c.185-254
"Now it ought to be known that the holy apostles, in preaching the faith of Christ, delivered themselves with the utmost clearness on certain points which they believed to be necessary to everyone . . . This also is clearly defined in the teaching of the church that every rational soul is possessed of free-will and volition." De Principiis Preface
"There are, indeed, innumerable passages in the Scriptures which establish with exceeding clearness the existence of freedom of will." De principiis Bk 3 ch. 1
…He knew what would be, without being altogether the cause of the coming to be of each ot the things which he knew would happen….(Commentary on Genesis, 3,6)
Eusebius ca 315
…we will not concede to the interpretation which some make: that something absolutely must come about because what is foreknown must necessarily be about to take place. For we do not say that because it was foreknown that Judas would become a traitor, it was therefore of utter necessity that Judas became a traitor. (Preparation for the Gospel, 6,11)
Bottom line is, prior to Augustine, there were many voices which would seem to favor a view that genuine free will existed, that absolute predistination is not a biblical and apostolic necessity, and would seemingly take issue with some of Calvin's 5 points. I am only guessing, but it seems to me that Total Depravity might find a qualified acceptance, unconditional election might find a nuanced hearing, limited atonement probably never have crossed their minds, irresitible grace would probably be rejected, and perseverance of the saints would likely be questioned. I could be wrong of course, but that is what I see.
It is interesting that the Eastern church has little real interest in the Calvinist/Aminian squabble because the debate between Augustine and Pelagius was a Western problem.
But if truth it determined not only by scripture, but also by how the consensus of the whole church of 2000 years has looked upon scripture, it seems that the majority of the church would not agree with Calvin's five points. Much of Roman Catholicism, all of Eastern Orthodox theology and a significant portion of Protestants do not agree with Calvin. And a bit of a case can be made that the early church might not have let Augustine go quite as far as he did in his battle with Pelagius. Those who were closest to the aposles and the New Testament era seem not to incline toward absolute predistinarianism. Hence I feel comfortable not inclining there either.
If I am swimming against the Protestant tide on this issue, it is nice to know I am not alone.
No comments:
Post a Comment