Did Augustine believe in predestination? Part II- Predestination

And if he had willed to teach even those to whom the word of the cross is foolishness to come to Christ, beyond all doubt, these also would have come.  Chapter 14 of On the Predestination of the Saints



Prolegomena:  We should probably start by defining predestination.  The church is united in its belief that man does not seek God unless God first initiates a relationship. Both would agree that  faith is a gift from God- referring to Phil 1:29, he writes "[Paul] shows both [believing and suffering for Christ] are the gifts of God, because he said both were given.  And he does not say "to believe on Him more fully and perfectly," but "to believe on him" (Augustine, On the Predestination of the Saints, chapter 4) . There are two sides the predestination coin.  I'll attempt to flesh them out to show what predestination is and how Augustine believed in it.


1.  Irresistible Grace- God's grace cannot be effectively resisted.  If God decides to save someone, he will eventually succeed.  Because not all are saved, God must not attempt to save everyone.  Calvinists and Lutherans hold to this view.  Arminians and Catholics do not.

2.  Unconditional Election- God chooses who he will save regardless of whether they would have chosen him.  Arminians and Catholics would say God is all knowing (as would Calvinists and Lutherans) and chooses who he will save based upon whether or not they would have rejected him if given a chance. Calvinists and Lutherans by contrast say Therefore the mercy by which he freely delivers and the truth by which he righteously judges, are equally unsearchable. -Augustine On the Predestination of the Saints, Chapter 11.  We simply do not why he saves who he saves.


The Arminian and Catholic response to these points is defended by man having a free will.  The Calvinists and Lutherans by contrast see a "bondage of the will" to quote Martin Luther.  I dealt with Augustine's view of free will and how it differs from the modern notions of free will in the previous post.  We will focus on Augustine's writings on these issues and see that he was a forerunner to Calvin, Luther, and the Reformation on this issue.

When we talk about what Augustine believed regarding a given issue, we of course mean the final position that he arrived at.  All scholars recognize that he changed his position on some issues.  Even the Pope would agree.  The works I will refer to are taken from his latter works. 

In chapter 7 of Predestination he changed his position that faith originated with us And it was chiefly by this testimony that I myself was convinced when I was in a similar error, thinking that faith whereby we believe on God is not God's gift, but that it is in us from ourselves, and that by it we obtain the gifts of God, whereby we may live temperately and righteously and piously in this world.  For I did not think that faith was preceded by God's grace, so that by its means would be given to us what we might profitbably ask, except that we could not beileve if the proclamation of the truth did not precede; but that we should consent when the gospel was preached to us I thought was our own doing, and came to us from ourselves.  Later he states touches on his former believe in conditional election I carried out my reasoning to the point of saying:  'God did not therefore choose the works of anyone in foreknowledge of what He himself would give them but he chose the faith in the foreknowledge that he would choose that very person whom He foreknew would believe on him. 

Then he explains why he believed he had been in error I had not yet very carefully sought, nor had I yet as found, what is the nature of the election of grace, of which the apostle says, "A remnant are saved according to the election of grace. (see Rom 11:5)".  Thus, we have Augustine changing his views.  But, to what?

In chapter 11, he writes "Many hear the word of truth; but some believe, while others contradict.  Therefore, the former will to believe, the latter do not will." Who does not know this?  Who can deny this?  But, since in some the will is prepared by the Lord, in others it is not prepared, we must distinguish what comes from God's mercy, what comes from his judgement."  Note, here he is saying that God prepares some wills to believe and not others.

Here is mercy and judgement- mercy towards the election which obtained the righteousness of God, but judgement to the rest which have been blinded...Therefore mercy and judgement were manifested in the very wills themselves.  A few sentences later he writes but to the rest who were blinded, as is there plainly declared, it was done in recompense".  The part that sticks out to me is how this spiritual blindness is God's judgement.  He punishes them by preventing them from seeing him.

This passage from the Enchiridion is a clear example of "double predestination".  101As the Supreme Good, he made good use of evil deeds, for the damnation of those whom he had justly predestined to punishment and for the salvation of those whom he had mercifully predestined to grace. 102 But, however strong the wills either of angels or of men, whether good or evil, whether they will what God willeth or will something else, the will of the Omnipotent is always undefeated  God does not simply save some and leave the rest to perish to their own devices.  He uses the deeds of the wicked to bring further condemnation on them.

As will be outlined below, in Chapter 14 of Predestination, Augustine explains All whom He teaches, He teaches in mercy, while those whom He teaches not, in judgement he teaches not.  Augustine sees ignorance of God as judgement.

Some object to God punishing those he has rejected and hardened.  Augustine quotes Paul as many Calvinists do today when confronted with this objection For who resists his will? does the apostle answer "O man what thou has said is false? No; but he says, "O man, who are thou that repliest against God?

He holds the view that we can never know why some elected and not others in Chapter 16.  But why he delievers one rather than another- "His judgements are unsearchable, and his ways past finding out.(Rom 11:33)  For it is better in this case for us to hear or to say, "O man, who art thou that repliest against God? (Rom 9:20) than to dare to speak as if we could know what He has chosen to be kept secret.

He writes But, unto them which are called, (I Cor 1:24) in order to show that there were some who were not called  in chapter 3.

B.  A modern example:  The bread and butter of the Arminian response to all of this is I Timothy 2:4 where Paul writes that God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.  In the Enchiridion, section 103 Augustine writes In any case, the word concerning God, "who wills all men to be saved", does not mean there is no one's salvation he does not will...but by all men we are to understand the whole of mankind, in every single group into which it can be divided... As an aside- before dismissing Augustine's view of this passage, we should ask ourselves, are there examples in the New Testament where "all" does not absolutely mean all?  In Matthew 10:22, Jesus warned we will be hated "by all" because of his name.  If every single person in the world does not hate you, are you being unfaithful to God?

 II Irresistible grace


 In chapter 13 of Predestination, he writes All that the Father giveth me shall come to me (referring to John 6:37).  What is the meaning of "shall come to me,", but, "shall believe in me"?  After commenting a little more on the passage, he elaborates, What is the meaning of, "Every man that hath heard from the Father and hath learned cometh to me,  except that there is none who hears from the Father, and learns, who cometh not to me (John 6:44-45)?  For if every one who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes, certainly everyone who does not come has not heard from the Father... For no one has heard and learned, and has not come; but every one, as the Truth declares, who has heard from the Father, and has learned, comes.
     On the issue of learning, Augustine explains the Son teaches of the heart along with the Spirit.  And if there is some thought that this teaching can be resisted, he writes at the end of the chapter This grace, therefore, which is hiddenly bestowed in human hearts by Divine gift, is rejected by no hard heart, because it is given for the sake of taking away the hardness of heart.  Augustine then proceeds to write an entire chapter explaining why the Father does not teach all that they may come to Christ.  


III.  Examples of Both

95. Then what is now hidden will not be hidden: when one of two infants is taken up by God's mercy and the other abandoned through God's judgment--and when the chosen one knows what would have been his just deserts in judgment--why was the one chosen rather than the other, when the condition of the two was the same? Or again, why were miracles not wrought in the presence of certain people who would have repented in the face of miraculous works, while miracles were wrought in the presence of those who were not about to believe. For our Lord saith most plainly: "Woe to you, Chorazin; woe to you, Bethsaida. For if in Tyre and Sidon had been wrought the miracles done in your midst, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes."200 Now, obviously, God did not act unjustly in not willing their salvation, even though they could have been saved, if he willed it so  In this part of the Enchiridion, he shows that God could have brought some people to repentance but chose not to.  
 
So, what we have is a man that does not believe we are able to choose God from our own free will,  that we are unable to resist his grace, and that God elects not to attempt to save people who might believe under certain circumstances.  It's hard to be more Calvinist than that.

Did Augustine believe in predestination? Part I- free will

When, however, we speak of a free will to do what is right, we of course mean that liberty in which man was created. Chapter 81 of On Grace and Rebuke (aka On Admonition and Grace) written near the end of his life

One of the objections I've heard to Augustine believing in predestination is that he taught on free will.  For example, the all-knowing, always correct Wikipedia article on him says, "The Catholic Church considers Augustine's teaching to be consistent with free will. He often said that any can be saved if they wish".  Apparently, it does not look good to have one of the Catholic Church's two greatest theologians holding to one of the distinguishing doctrines of Reformers such as Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin.

Augustine did write at length on free will.  He had titles to his works such as On Free Choice (Will), On Grace and Free Will (Choice) .  But, I do not think his view of free will is the same as our contemporary view.

We view free will as the ability to decide on a course of action and do it.  For example, I decide I will not make an angry comment to another person and do not do it.  Augustine seems to stop his definition of free will at the first part- the decision.

In chapter 17 (16 in some versions) of On Grace and Rebuke, speaking on the taming of the tongue in James he sarcastically asks, Why should I pray to God that it be accorded me, if it may be had of man? Ought we not to object to this prayer lest injury be done to free will which is self-sufficient in the possibility of nature for discharging all duties of righteousness?  Later, speaking on the petition to lead us not into temptation, he comments, ...yet our will alone is not enough to secure its being done...2  He seems to be view the will as being able to do, go, and say whatever it wants, provided it does so within the confines of a prison cell.  The will appears to be free internally but enslaved externally to the flesh.  It's irrelevant if the will is free in regards to sin, it does not have power to do as it wishes For I suppose a blind man would like to see, but is unable; but whenever a man wishes to do a thing and cannot, there is present to him the will, but he has lost the capacity (chapter 59 or LI). 

He sees sin as destroying free will in chapter 30 of the Enchiridion (aka On Faith, Hope, and Love)
For it was in the evil use of his free will that man destroyed himself and his will at the same time. For as a man who kills himself is still alive when he kills himself, but having killed himself is then no longer alive and cannot resuscitate himself after he has destroyed his own life--so also sin which arises from the action of the free will turns out to be victor over the will and the free will is destroyed.

A few sentences down, he arrives at a conclusion that teaches freedom is relative He serves freely who freely does the will of his master. Accordingly he who is slave to sin is free to sin. But thereafter he will not be free to do right unless he is delivered from the bondage of sin and begins to be the servant of righteousness. One only goes from being enslaved to sin to enslaved to Christ. There is no absolute freedom to chose. 

Later, in chapter 75 of On Rebuke and Grace, he refers to Ambrose' teaching that man's will is prepared by God.  He deals with Pelagius' quote of Xystus by referring to his teaching on sanctification that it is indeed through God's love that men are to be like God-- even the love which is she abroad in our hearts, not by any ability of nature or the free will within us, but by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.  Here he teaches free will does not even play a role in perfecting us. 


In chapter 105 of the Enchiridion, Augustine describes man as passing through 3 phases regarding sin and free will:
1.  during creation, we had the ability to sin or not to sin posse non peccare et posse peccare
2.  after the fall, we only had the ability to sin  posse peccare
3.  after the establishment of the kingdom, we will not be able to will iniquit

To summarize, our wills, free or not, are powerless to choose God unless he enables them todo so.  Needless to say, this does not prove that Augustine held to predestination which I would describe as a combination of the doctrines of Irresistible Grace (if God decides to save someone, they will eventually yield to his grace) and Unconditional Election (God chooses some for undeserved salvation and others for deserved damnation regardless of whether they would have chosen him).  This post is simply to show that Augustine does not view free will in the same way it is debated among Calvinists, Lutherans, Catholics, and Arminians.  I will deal with Augustine's views on these topics in the future.