Bondage of the Will
Luther’s chief error in “Bondage of the Will” is that of
confounding the different philosophical categories of will (thelo) and power
(dynamis). Both are essential human
properties, results of creation, but radically different in essence. The will has no power whatsoever. Power has no will whatsoever. Willing or wishing is an activity of the
conscious thought process (nous). Power
is a muscle process, supported by skeletal structure, and the like.
In the complexity of the rational or voluntary muscular
system and central nervous system, the two must coordinate in the decision
process. The human spirit is also
involved, albeit mysteriously.
That being said, Luther draws the correct conclusion, man has
absolutely no power to take the first step (nor the last one either, nor any
steps in between) toward salvation, no matter how much man wills such
salvation. The real work has all been
done by God. Yet, part of that Divine
work is to create man with the ability to respond to the exclusively Divine
salvific acts. This response is
absolutely necessary. So the
resurrection of Christ imbues mere man with the possibility of becoming perfect
man.
On the other hand, the Catholic point, is also true: baptized
people do inevitably will and act in response to the salvific acts of God in
Christ and the Holy Ghost. This is the
very meaning of faith, which derives from the root, pathos. Nevertheless, man’s power is miniscule, so
whatever is willed may not be possible to affect. In spite of human weakness, the resurrection
of Christ make synergy with God a possibility.
We are much more than an interpersonal decision process between two
vastly unequal parties. We are Christ’s
very body and blood.
Since, Catholics and Lutherans are actually in agreement
about this point, the debate is moot. I
am unaware that Catholics discuss will or works in unbaptized people. For the truly baptized Christian, works,
although puny, are inevitable and necessary.
“What shall I render to the LORD for all his benefits to me?”
Moreover, “Bondage of the Will” is excessively argumentative
and rude. To be fair, the opposing
documents may also have been excessively argumentative and rude. It is what it is; it is the style of the sixteenth
century: standards of behavior differ from age to age.
Can we please move on now, without refighting every
sixteenth century debate? Both Catholic
and Lutheran churches are radically different than they were in the sixteenth
century. I’m frankly ashamed of much
that goes on under the name of Lutheran today: some of which is so absurd that
it must be considered anti-Lutheran, anti-Church, and anti-Christ.
If we wish to make progress, we must strive to engage each
other as we are, and not as we once were.
Anything less than that is intellectually dishonest.
[1] If
you have been blessed or helped by any of these meditations, please repost,
share, or use any of them as you wish.
No rights are reserved. They are
designed and intended for your free participation. They were freely received, and are freely
given. No other permission is required
for their use.
No comments:
Post a Comment