Luther and Erasmus: The Controversy Concerning the Bondage of the Will

Protestant Reformed Theological Journal ^ | April 1999 | Garrett J. Eriks

[HarleyD]

Unfortunately for most Protestants, they first see priests in vestments, bishops with long beards, icons on church walls; and once they get that first whiff of incense, they run out the doors.

LOL. It's really because of bad knees. ;O)

[Kolokotronis]

"I am glad to see that Orthodoxy has room for a good debate on an important issue."

Debating theological points is one of the things we love to do...and we do it well.

[HarleyD]

In our parish we have one fellow in the seminary and another entering this coming August (not bad for a tiny little parish!) who are both former evangelicals, Baptists I think.

That explains why the Baptists are becoming more Calvinistic. ;O)

[Agrarian]

As far as I am aware, neither Meyendorff nor his students ever rose to the challenge of responding to Romanides' rather devastating critique. Pelikan is diplomatic in his section on this, and doesn't come down on one side or the other -- perhaps because he didn't at the time understand how central Palamas's role is in summarizing the consensus patrum.

There has recently, BTW, been a wonderful book published by St. Tikhon's Seminary by their most first-rate professor there. It is a translation of many of St. Gregory Palamas's sermons for Sundays and feasts. One is struck by their simple directness, lack of ostentation, and brilliant summary of the paristic tradition.

Because we have so few of his writings available in English, we often don't appreciate just how central he was.

[Agrarian]

"LOL. It's really because of bad knees."

I assume that you are referring to the length of our services, and the need to stand throughout?

[Kolokotronis]

Ah, FK, you need more +Gregory Palamas. You'll never get that M.Div in Orthodoxy Theology at this rate:

"After our forefather's transgression in paradise through the tree, we suffered the death of our soul - which is the separation of the soul from God - prior to our bodily death; yet although we cast away our divine likeness, we did not lose our divine image. Thus when the soul renounces its attachment to inferior things and cleaves through love to God and submits itself to Him through acts and modes of virtue, it is illuminated and made beautiful by God and is raised to a higher level, obeying His counsels and exhortations; and by these means it regains the truly eternal life. Through this life it makes the body conjoined to it immortal, so that in due time the body attains the promised resurrection and participates in eternal glory."

And this:

"Death, properly speaking, is this: for the soul to be unharnessed from divine grace and to be yoked to sin ... Let us cast away, let us reject all things, bid farewell to all things: to all relationships, actions and intentions that drag us downward, separate us from God and produce such a death. He who is frightened of this death and has preserved himself from it will not be alarmed by the oncoming death of the body, for in him the true life dwells, and bodily death, so far from taking true life away, renders it inalienable."

[annalex]

bad knees

In addition to the obligatory Sunday Novus Ordo Mass I try to attend a daily Latin Mass on one week day. I am 51, slightly overweight and not of athletic build even in my better days. Kneeling really hurts me. The pain is at the lower back and at the shoulders as I try to balance the weight of my belly by pressing my elbows against the backrest of the pew in front of me, in order to push the body forward and not collapse till the butt finds support agains the edge of the seat. The monks used to have a contraption that swings out form under the seat to support the thighs; we the damned moderns do not get that, and in justice I don't think we should.

The Mass consists of kneeling throughout, interrupted by standing up for the two gospel readings and a walk to the communion rail, -- where, of course, you kneel again. Unlike the High Mass, that is sung in full voice and involves elaborate processions, the daily Mass is austere and almost inaudible. Basically, you observe a priest, his back to you, hushedly pray to God in a language you are not exactly fluent in, for about one hour as you kneel and ache, and observe the body of Christ crucified in the fractured bread. Beside the communion, the lay participation is limited to the said kneeling and an occasional "et cum spiritu tuo". The audial high point is "non sum dignus" -- "I am not worthy" proclaimed by the priest, and he means all of us by that.

Yesterday I was startled by two penitents shuffle on their knees along the aisle past me, toward the foot of the altar, where they paused and shuffled out just before the communion was offered.

If Catholicism is about any kind of usurpation of the glory of God, we have a funny way of showing it.

[jo kus]

Symeon the New Theolgian put it this way:

I enjoy St. Symeon. His mix of praxis and theology is very well done. He certainly deserves to be ranked with the "Theologian"...

Regards

[jo kus]

I am the very soul of patience as you all know! :)

LOL, now we must work on humility!

Regards

[jo kus]

Most of Protestantism is easy. You keep saying that we are supposed to be Christ-like, but I really wonder if you have any clue what that means? Christ is nothing like any of of us. For us to become Christ-like, everyithing that defines us must die, because neither you nor anyone of us eve comes close. So, I would worry, especially if I had deliusions of having been saved by a lucky draw.

Very good points. Many verses go right over their heads, such as :

Those who belong to Christ Jesus have CRUCIFIED their flesh with its passions and desires. Gal 5:24

Another one of those meaningless verses for those who travel the wide road to "salvation"...

The path to hell is paved with good intentions...

Luther made it easy. That's why it spread like wild fire: no more fasts, no more confessions and, best of all, pecca fortiter (sin bodly), sin all you want...easy, just be yourself, you have been "elected" from before aeons, so "don't worry, be happy." What virtue! And all that made to look like theology.

That was all gravy. People didn't care so much about theology. The Reformation spread because of greed. All they wanted was to grab a piece of the Church's wealth when Luther and the protesters left the Church. This was VERY prevalent in England, where the practice remained practically the same, without a Pope. It was basically a change of wealth from one hand to another, while killing all the priests who still held allegiance to the Catholic Church. And to think, Henry VIII was once called a "defender of the faith"...

Regards

[blue-duncan]

"Catholic priests are married to one wife, Christ's church,"

Then the church is in a polygamous, adulterous relationship since it is the Bride of Christ.

I think the warning in 2Pe 3:16 is well taken.

[HarleyD]

Actually I was being facetious. I remember growing up in the few churches I attended they use to have kneeing rails that would swing out from under the pews. During service they would be swung out and people would kneel to pray.

Many churches no longer have these devices as they are "cost prohibitive". We can give money to missions but cannot afford to pay to kneel to God. Too bad.

[Kolokotronis]

"Because we have so few of his writings available in English, we often don't appreciate just how central he was."

Which, of course, is all the more reason for you " xenoi" to learn the mother tongue! (Not you, Alex; you aleady know it better than I do!)

[kosta50]

If there is one thing that Orthodoxy does *not* believe, it is that God is simple

Agrarian, I am not sure I understand what you are trying to say, but St. John of Damascus (An Exact Exposition of Orthodox Faith, Book I, numerous references) and other Fathers make it clear that Orthodoxy always taught that God was indeed simple, uncompound, and indivisible.

[Kolokotronis]

Your comment struck me as odd also, A. Here is a more modern expression of the same concept as Kosta alludes to from Met. Hierotheos of Nafpaktos:

"About God we can use both affirmative and negative expressions, because by the first His existence is affirmed, and by the second His transcendence is shown in relation to His created works. There is no likeness between uncreated and created, between God and His creatures. The being of God is simple, unknowable and inaccessible to man and altogether impossible to interpret, because it is beyond all affirmation and negation."

[kosta50]

While there is a school of thought in Hellenistic Judaism that personifies Wisdom, it is not clear from the very few verses that this Wisdom IS of the Essence of God Himself - just that this Wisdom was present with God during Creation

Gnostics, for one, used the word Sophia (Wisdom) in the context of a "deity" and also as a Gnostic implant to make their "gospels" appear genuine. But Wisdom is also taught by the Eastern Church when not referring to the Hypistases as Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, but as Wisdom, Word and the Spirit of God.

Clearly, the Wisdom of God, His Word, and His Spirit share one common (divine) nature, essence or ousia which is indivisible and One. There is only one divine Nature and three divine Hypostases., just as there is one nature of an entity known as "jo kus" which is made known to the world vka his wisdom, word and spirit, all equally human, and all equally "jo kus."

How can we know a nature unless through its energies? Unless I communicate with you you cannot know me. So it is a mistake to confuse nature with energies that make the nature known to others. But is it also naïve to think that your wisdom word or spirit is any less human than the other two. The reason the East stresses Trinity more than the Catholic West is because it is through the divine Hypostatic Economy that God accomplishes our salvation in real time.

[Forest Keeper]

If a person ACTUALLY read the following, tell me how they would STILL come up with OSAS?

Since I have only said it a hundred times, you should know by now that I follow "Perseverance of the Saints", not the plain meaning of OSAS. However, I have also come to learn that some people who proclaim OSAS actually interpret it as POTS. So while their view is correct, it makes it more difficult to use in a debate. In any event, Paul is clear that we are not to go on sinning. Nobody here believes otherwise.

Those on the rock [are] those that when they hear, receive the word with joy, but these have no root, who for a while believe and in time of temptation fall away. Luke 8:13

A "belief" with no root is not a true belief, it is a false belief. Luke is talking about people who have a false faith, NOT a true faith that went away.

I know this, that after my departing grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30Also from among your own selves, men shall arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after themselves. Acts 20:29-30

Do you say that Judas had true faith at one time, but simply "fell away"? If you say 'yes', then you also have to believe that when satan entered into Judas, satan kicked out the Holy Spirit that lives within all true believers. Is that what happened?

They profess that they know God, but in works they deny [him], being abominable and rebellious and reprobate unto every good work.: Titus 1:16

Yes, the false believer is mentioned many times in scripture. These people never had true faith to begin with.

For judgment without mercy shall be done unto the one that has showed no mercy; and mercy boasts against judgment. My brethren, What shall it profit though someone says [that] they have faith and do not have works? Shall faith be able to save them? James 2:13-14

Paul and James do appear to take different approaches to this issue. But all is still well. James refers again to someone who "says" he has faith, a person with a false faith. Works are fruits of a true faith, not something totally independent of faith. The last sentence is really "Shall [SUCH FALSE] faith be able to save them?". Obviously not.

...Certainly, if having separated themselves from the contaminations of the world, by the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they again entangle themselves therein and are overcome, their latter end is made worse for them than the beginnings. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known [it], to turn back from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it has happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog returns unto his own vomit, and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. 2 Peter 2:[20]-22

This is more of the same thing. Some had professed to having faith, but did not really have it. Verse 22 shows this. If the "dog" and the "sow" return to what they were, then they were never changed, never regenerated. If they had true faith, they would have been changed into a new creation. They would no longer be a "dog" or a "sow".

Look to yourselves, that we not lose those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a fulfilled reward. Whosoever rebels and does not abide in the doctrine of the Christ, does not have God 2 John 8-9

Is your point that John is saying that we should rely on ourselves for perseverance?

This is from ALMOST EVERY book of the New Testament. Either you haven't read it, or you read over such verses and ignore them. Thus, you have a set of beliefs that you twist the Bible to fit your pattern.

All of these verses fit just fine to me. They distinguish between true faith and a false faith, and confirm that God intends His elect to persevere. They will. I would disagree with what you appear to be saying and say that these verses are NOT meant to glorify men, and their brave free will decisions to choose to persevere. They show us what a true believer looks like, just like Jesus' Sermon on the Mount.

If man was not meant to know God's revelation in truth, then Christ made a mistake that the US Constitution did not fail to make - a living organization that could interpret the written rule for people of today.

We agree that there should be a living organization to interpret scripture for people of today. You might call it "fallible men", I would call it "Holy Spirit".

[Forest Keeper]

PS Those who are dead in sin need not apply (because there aren't any).

Not even a few? :) How about this:

Eph. 2:1-5 : 1 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.

Even Paul admits that he was among the dead in his transgressions and sins. He sure seems to be saying that we all are like that during our lives.

[Forest Keeper]

Where does it say in the NT that "sola scriptura" is all you need?

Here is one example:

2 Tim. 3:16-17 : 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Only scripture is mentioned in order to be "thoroughly equipped". That sounds like everything we need to know to me. Here is another:

Rev. 22:18-19 : 18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

If scripture is not to be added to or subtracted from, then it must be all we need.

[Forest Keeper]

God wants all men to be saved, on the condition that they WANT to be saved, to be loved and to love, to give of themselves. Some do not want to give of themselves to others.

Wouldn't man's justice say to blame the manufacturer? :) But seriously, when you add on this condition, it sounds a lot more reasonable. I would say that this "wanting" to give of oneself comes directly and only from God.

How does God do anything "before" anything when He is outside of time?

God may "BE" out of time, but He certainly does operate "IN" time. We can say that God led around Moses "before" He led the Apostles. Likewise, the Bible speaks of predestination, and gives the view of God acting "before" the births of the writer and audience.