Quickies on Justification and Predestination

Both Luther (an Augustinian monk) and Calvin cite Augustine time and time again, and it seems that their theological views (especially on justification) are supported by the venerable father of the western church.

But there is a clear break between Augustine and the magisterial reformers, especially on the doctrine of justification.  Of course, they all agreed that God graciously justifies us, not as something we earned (though we receive by faith), but as freely given.

However, Luther and Calvin both treat righteousness as merely an external element (something imputed to us), that we are not righteous but only regarded as righteous (more Luther than Calvin [especially considering Luther's conception of "alien righteousness], but Calvin's notion of justification seems to be in line with this "externalist" framework).  On the other hand, Augustine considers God not merely treating as though we are righteous but as actually imparting or infusing His righteousness into us.  So it is still a reception of something "undeserved", but there is a real, internal change that occurs inside the one who receives the grace of God through faith.  I get tired, then, of hearing contemporary Reformed folk speak as if Augustine is on their side when there is this important difference (and where Augustine's view here fits more with the Council of Trent).

One final remark.  It's too bad that Calvin is either reduced to TULIP (which is anachronistic, since the Canons of Dort were established after Calvin's death) or to the doctrine of predestination.

Calvin's treatment of predestination (in Book III of the Institutes) isn't a stand alone doctrine but is interwoven in his theology of redemption through Christ.  The current frenzy over predestination stems from later Calvinists who take Calvin's account and just run with it (such as Beza).  I find that I cannot talk to many Reformed folk without having the discussion become centrally about (some extreme version of) divine sovereignty and election.  I find it refreshing that Calvin had much more to say about other topics.

Now I don't subscribe to Calvin's "double predestination" view, but I think there is also much confusion when I hear folk talk about the "free will vs. predestination" issue.  I won't go into the issue here (since it doesn't have much to do with my concerns in this blog), but I take it that Christians should adopt a doctrine of predestination--and with many other doctrines (such as the atonement), there are a multitude of rival conceptions such that it would be improper to say that there is such a thing as the doctrine of predestination.*

*(I say all this as a libertarian about human freedom)