Free will question

[DeaconDean]

Someone made the statement:

I believe in free will

But, how is it one can believe in something that was condemned as heresy by Innocent I and both the Synods of Carthage, and Milivan in AD 418:

"1 May, 418, in the presence of 200 bishops, the famous Council of Carthage, which again branded Pelagianism as a heresy in eight (or nine) canons (Denzinger, "Enchir.", 10th ed., 1908, 101-8)." -Catholic Encyclopedia, Pelagius and Pelagianism.

and later by the Counsel of Ephesus in AD 431?

"When the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus (431) repeated the condemnation pronounced by the West (cf. Mansi, "Concil. collect.", IV, 1337)," -Ibid

Free will is a basic doctrine of Pelagus, Semi-pelagians, Jacob Arminus, and Socinus. Actually, Socinus called it "free agency."

Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, and Arminianism all believe in free will, how is it one can believe in something that was condemned as heresy?

Is this not an inconsistancy?

Was the doctrine of Free will as a heresy ever reversed?

Many thanks.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

Someone made the statement:



But, how is it one can believe in something that was condemned as heresy by Innocent I and both the Synods of Carthage, and Milivan in AD 418:

"1 May, 418, in the presence of 200 bishops, the famous Council of Carthage, which again branded Pelagianism as a heresy in eight (or nine) canons (Denzinger, "Enchir.", 10th ed., 1908, 101-8)." -Catholic Encyclopedia, Pelagius and Pelagianism.

and later by the Counsel of Ephesus in AD 431?

"When the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus (431) repeated the condemnation pronounced by the West (cf. Mansi, "Concil. collect.", IV, 1337)," -Ibid

Free will is a basic doctrine of Pelagus, Semi-pelagians, Jacob Arminus, and Socinus. Actually, Socinus called it "free agency."

Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, and Arminianism all believe in free will, how is it one can believe in something that was condemned as heresy?

Is this not an inconsistancy?

Was the doctrine of Free will as a heresy ever reversed?

Many thanks.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Much of the the Roman Church, but certainly not all, had moved away from Augustine long before the Counter Reformation and Trent.

Here are some of the Canons of Trent:
CANON II.-If any one saith, that the grace of God, through Jesus Christ, is given only for this, that man may be able more easily to live justly, and to merit eternal life, as if, by free will without grace, he were able to do both, though hardly indeed and with difficulty; let him be anathema.

CANON III.-If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.

CANON IV. If any one shall affirm, that man’s freewill, moved and excited by God, does not, by consenting, cooperate with God, the mover and exciter, so as to prepare and dispose itself for the attainment of justification; if moreover, anyone shall say, that the human will cannot refuse complying, if it pleases, but that it is inactive, and merely passive; let such an one be accursed"!

CANON V.- If anyone shall affirm, that since the fall of Adam, man’s freewill is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed"!

CANON VI.-If any one saith, that it is not in man's power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil God worketh as well as those that are good, not permissively only, but properly, and of Himself, in such wise that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of Paul; let him be anathema.


They RCC further confirmed this anti-Augustine position in its struggle against Jansenism, which was a Roman Catholic movement (not associated with Protestantism) that held very closely with Augustine the Doctrine of predestination. It was condemned by Rome, but that is not a big surprise after Trent.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

 

[CCWoody]

Wouldn't this be a better question to ask Catholics or are you refering to a Calvinist that believes in "Free Will?"

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[mlqurgw]

We all are Pelagiuns naturally. Every false system of religion is based in free-will. It doesn't really matter whether it is called Christianity or Confucianism, and everything in between, all have this one thing in common. The question of the Philippian jailer flows from the natural inclination that I must do something to be saved. It springs from a notion seen in the act of our first parents seeking to make coverings for themselves. We just can't allow that God could or would be reconciled to us entirely outside of ourselves by the work of another. We must have some part to play in it. It is actually a matter of pride. Rather than admitting our utter inability we hang tenaciously to some idea that we are able to do something, no matter how small it is. We falsely imagine that we can, at least in part, appease God and gain some measure of favor with Him by something we do. That is why Christianity has sunk into the state it now is in. Free-will thinking permeates even the very soundest of us. How often we do religious things in order to gain something from God. God will bless me if I do this thing or that. God give me grace to rely totally on Christ and seek nothing from God but what He has already gotten for me as my Surety, Substitute and Savior.
Of course, even though it may be condemned in order to seem as though we are orthodox in our theology, we will always strive to fit it in somehow.

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

We all are Pelagiuns naturally. Every false system of religion is based in free-will. It doesn't really matter whether it is called Christianity or Confucianism, and everything in between, all have this one thing in common. The question of the Philippian jailer flows from the natural inclination that I must do something to be saved. It springs from a notion seen in the act of our first parents seeking to make coverings for themselves. We just can't allow that God could or would be reconciled to us entirely outside of ourselves by the work of another. We must have some part to play in it. It is actually a matter of pride. Rather than admitting our utter inability we hang tenaciously to some idea that we are able to do something, no matter how small it is. We falsely imagine that we can, at least in part, appease God and gain some measure of favor with Him by something we do. That is why Christianity has sunk into the state it now is in. Free-will thinking permeates even the very soundest of us. How often we do religious things in order to gain something from God. God will bless me if I do this thing or that. God give me grace to rely totally on Christ and seek nothing from God but what He has already gotten for me as my Surety, Substitute and Savior.
Of course, even though it may be condemned in order to seem as though we are orthodox in our theology, we will always strive to fit it in somehow.

Hey mlqurgw,

You said it so well above. It is our natural inclination to hold tenaciously to free will and balk and fight against God's sovereign election and predestination.

We may recover for a generation or two, but then we rebel once more against so grat a truth as this.

Thankfully we have been given the grace to know and believe this wonderful truth. I pray that the Lord will once again bring these great doctrines to the fore in His Church. It is only then that we will se true revival and Reformation again.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

 

[bradfordl]

We all are Pelagiuns naturally. Every false system of religion is based in free-will. It doesn't really matter whether it is called Christianity or Confucianism, and everything in between, all have this one thing in common.

Very well said. From the animist to the zoroastrian, we all want to find a way to control events ourselves.... or to be god ourselves.

 

[DeaconDean]

If anyone shall affirm, that since the fall of Adam, man’s freewill is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed"!

So if I read what was posted and this along with it, then the dicision reached by the Counsel of Trent, basicly reversed the rulings of the Snyods of Carthage and Milivan, and the Counsel of Ephesus?

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[heymikey80]

SBut, how is it one can believe in something that was condemned as heresy by Innocent I and both the Synods of Carthage, and Milivan in AD 418:

"1 May, 418, in the presence of 200 bishops, the famous Council of Carthage, which again branded Pelagianism as a heresy in eight (or nine) canons (Denzinger, "Enchir.", 10th ed., 1908, 101-8)." -Catholic Encyclopedia, Pelagius and Pelagianism.

and later by the Counsel of Ephesus in AD 431?

"When the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus (431) repeated the condemnation pronounced by the West (cf. Mansi, "Concil. collect.", IV, 1337)," -Ibid

Free will is a basic doctrine of Pelagus, Semi-pelagians, Jacob Arminus, and Socinus. Actually, Socinus called it "free agency."

Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, and Arminianism all believe in free will, how is it one can believe in something that was condemned as heresy?

Is this not an inconsistancy?

Was the doctrine of Free will as a heresy ever reversed?

Salvation through a free will is something different from free will itself. I forgot who it was, Warfield or Hodge, who said something to the effect of, "I've no trouble accepting that people have free will. However, it's no help when it comes to salvation."

Second, it takes a long, long time to narrow down to what "free will" exactly means to any given person. And of course, any terminology that has a number of different options, can't be rejected on its own.

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."