Divine sovereignty and human freedom across the traditions

Program / Course 8: God, Trinity, and Creation / Lesson 7.2

What you will learn

• Define sovereignty, predestination, monergism and synergism.
• State the Reformed, Lutheran, Arminian, Catholic and Orthodox positions in terms each would accept.
• Identify the biblical texts each side relies on and how it reads those it finds hard.
• Distinguish the question of salvation and grace from the wider question of providence and freedom.

The big idea

All traditions say that God is sovereign and that human beings are responsible. They differ on how the two fit. The Reformed hold that God ordains everything, including who will be saved, and that human freedom is real but is not the power to choose otherwise against God’s decree. Arminians and Wesleyans hold that God’s sovereignty includes giving humans real freedom to accept or refuse grace. Catholics and Orthodox hold that grace and free will cooperate, with different emphases. The disagreement is deep, and each side has serious arguments and serious texts.

Key terms

Sovereignty

God’s supreme authority and power over all things. All traditions affirm it. They differ on how it is exercised.

Predestination

The teaching that God has determined beforehand the destiny of creatures, especially the salvation of some. The meaning varies by tradition.

Election

God’s choice of persons for salvation. Reformed theology teaches that it is unconditional; Arminian theology teaches that it is conditioned on God’s foreknowledge of faith.

Monergism

From Greek for one working. The teaching that God alone works salvation in a person, including the first movement of the will.

Synergism

From Greek for working together. The teaching that God and the human will cooperate in salvation, with grace always first.

Prevenient grace

Grace that goes before and enables a person to respond to God. Taught in Catholic, Orthodox and Wesleyan traditions in different forms.

Compatibilism

The view that divine determination and human freedom, rightly understood, do not conflict.

Pelagianism

A teaching condemned in the early fifth century that human beings can obey God and begin their salvation without grace. All traditions reject it.

Background

The dispute is old. Augustine, writing against Pelagius in the early fifth century, stressed that grace comes first, that the human will is wounded by sin, and that God chooses those he saves. The Council of Orange in 529 affirmed that even the beginning of faith is a gift of grace, while declining to teach that God predestines anyone to evil. Many Greek fathers, and in the West the monk John Cassian, emphasized the cooperation of the will, and Cassian was later criticized as semi-Pelagian by the Augustinian side. The matter has never been simple.

At the Reformation the debate took sharper form. Luther’s Bondage of the Will (1525) answered Erasmus and argued that the human will cannot turn itself to God. Calvin taught double predestination and the sovereignty of God in all things. In the early seventeenth century in the Netherlands, Jacobus Arminius and his followers questioned some Reformed teaching. In 1610 they stated their views in the Remonstrance, and the Synod of Dort in 1618 and 1619 rejected them and stated the Reformed position in five points, later summarized as TULIP.

Catholic teaching at the Council of Trent in 1547 rejected both the view that free will is destroyed by sin and the view that humans can be saved without grace. John Wesley in the eighteenth century revived an Arminian line in the Church of England and began the Methodist movement. Today these positions are held in various forms across the churches, and conversations among them are frequent.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: The Reformed position

Reformed theology teaches that God has from eternity ordained whatever comes to pass, that he has chosen some people for salvation without reference to their merit or foreseen faith (unconditional election), and that those whom he chooses are brought to faith by irresistible grace and preserved to the end. Key texts are Romans 8:29 to 30, Romans 9:10 to 24, Ephesians 1:4 to 5 and John 6:44. The human will is held to be in bondage to sin, so that the sinner will not turn to God unless God changes the heart.

Reformed writers hold that this does not remove human responsibility. People choose what they want, and they are accountable for it. This is a compatibilist view of freedom. The Westminster Confession says that God from eternity ordains all things, yet so that he is not the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away. Critics, including Arminians, ask how this can be consistent. Reformed writers reply that Scripture teaches both and that the human mind cannot fully reconcile them.

Step 2: The Lutheran position

Lutherans share the claim that the will in its fallen state cannot turn itself to God and that faith is wholly a gift. The Formula of Concord (1577) teaches that salvation is entirely by grace and that God elected those who would be saved in Christ. But Lutherans do not teach that God predestined some to damnation. They say that election is a comfort for believers and not a doctrine for speculation about the reprobate, and they leave the question of why some believe and others do not as a mystery.

This puts Lutheran teaching between the Reformed and the Arminian. Lutherans resist the Reformed doctrine of irresistible grace and limited atonement, and they resist the Arminian claim that the choice rests partly with the sinner. They hold that the Word and sacraments are the means by which the Spirit works faith, and that grace can be resisted.

Step 3: The Arminian and Wesleyan position

Arminians hold that God desires the salvation of all (1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9) and that Christ died for all. God gives to everyone a grace that enables them to respond, which Wesleyans call prevenient grace. Election is understood as God’s choice, in view of his foreknowledge, of those who will believe, or as the election of the church as a body in Christ. Grace can be resisted, and some hold that a believer can fall away.

Arminians insist they are not Pelagians. They hold that human beings cannot respond without grace and that salvation is wholly a gift. What they deny is that God’s sovereign will determines each person’s choice. Reformed critics reply that making the final difference lie with the sinner gives him something to boast of. Arminians reply that receiving a gift is not earning it.

Step 4: The Catholic and Orthodox positions

Catholic teaching, from the Council of Trent, holds that grace goes before and enables the human will, which can cooperate or resist. Within this framework Catholics have two main schools. The Thomists, following Aquinas and Domingo Banez, hold that God moves the will by a premotion that does not remove its freedom. The Molinists, following Luis de Molina, hold that God knows what free creatures would do and arranges the world accordingly. The Church has allowed both schools. On predestination, Catholic teaching holds that God predestines the elect to glory but does not predestine anyone to sin, and speaks of reprobation as God’s permission of final impenitence.

Orthodox theology teaches synergy, the cooperation of the divine and human wills. Grace is a gift and always first, but the human person must freely receive it. The East has generally not followed Augustine’s later teaching on predestination, and Orthodox writers such as John of Damascus teach that God foreknows but does not predetermine human choices. Orthodox thinkers avoid the language of irresistible grace. They also warn against reading the Western debates onto the East, since the Eastern fathers did not frame the question in the same terms.

1. Which biblical texts do I find the most natural support for my current view?
2. Which texts on the other side do I find hardest to explain?
3. What practical difference does it make how I understand election?
4. What does it mean to say that a gift can be received without being earned?
5. How should believers of different views treat one another?
6. Which tradition’s account of freedom seems clearest to me, and what is its hardest question?

Examples

Different perspectives

Reformed

Reformed theology teaches unconditional election, compatibilism and the perseverance of the saints. It draws on Augustine, Calvin and the Synod of Dort. Reformed theologians insist that God’s sovereignty is a comfort, since salvation is secure, and that the doctrine produces humility and gratitude.

Lutheran

Lutherans teach that salvation is by grace alone, that the will is bound without grace, and that election is in Christ. They refuse to teach a double predestination and emphasize the means of grace. They regard the Reformed claim of irresistible grace as going beyond Scripture.

Arminian and Wesleyan

Arminians and Wesleyans stress God’s universal love, universal atonement, prevenient grace and genuine human response. They are common in Methodist, Holiness, Pentecostal and many Baptist churches. They hold their view as a defense of God’s goodness and human responsibility.

Catholic

Catholics teach the priority of grace and the reality of free cooperation, and allow both Thomist and Molinist explanations. The Council of Trent condemned both the view that free will is destroyed and the view that grace is unnecessary. Catholic teaching holds that God wills all to be saved, while predestining the elect to glory.

Orthodox

Orthodox teaching holds synergy, divine initiative and human cooperation, with grace as a free gift. It avoids a doctrine of unconditional predestination to damnation. Orthodox theologians often say that the Western debates are rooted in Augustine’s later thought, to which the East gives lesser authority.

Why it matters

This is among the most divisive questions in Protestant history, and it touches the Catholic and Orthodox churches as well. It matters for how Christians think of assurance, evangelism, prayer and God’s character. Knowing the positions from the inside can help a student read primary texts with understanding, avoid caricature, and see how many believers hold different positions with equal sincerity.

Common misunderstandings

Knowledge check

Think it through

1. How would you explain to a friend from another tradition why you hold your view without belittling theirs?
2. Which of the positions in this lesson was new to you?
3. Can a person hold that God is in complete control and that people are free? What would have to be true?

Independent assignment

Four texts, four readings

In your own notebook, write about 500 words. Choose four of the texts named in this lesson, such as Romans 9, Ephesians 1, 1 Timothy 2:4 and John 6:44. For each, write how a Reformed reader and an Arminian reader would read it. Then add one sentence on how a Catholic or Orthodox reader might approach it. Do not send this to anyone.

Further study

• John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion Read Book 3, chapters 21 to 24, on predestination.
• James Arminius, The Works of James Arminius Read selectively for the Arminian case.
• Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will Read the opening sections and the argument against Erasmus.
• John Wesley, Sermons on Several Occasions Read the sermon Free Grace.
• Council of Trent (1545-1563), Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent Read the decree on justification.
• John of Damascus, An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith Read the chapters on providence and free will.
• Romans 9 Jacob and Esau, the potter and the clay.
• Ephesians 1:4 Chosen in him before the foundation of the world.
• 1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved.