In his answer he does not assert, as regards the first proposition,
that God forces us to evil; “the wicked,” he says, “do what they wish,
perhaps even with good intentions, but God allows them to sin even
in their good works.” Of this, according to him, his opponents must
be aware and therefore ought not to act with so much assurance and
certainty as though they were really performing good works. Everyone
should rather say: “Who knows whether God’s grace is working this
in me?” Then only does man acknowledge “that he can do nothing of
himself”; only thus can we escape Pelagianism, which is the curse
of the self-righteous. “But because they are persuaded that it is
always within their power to do what they can, and therefore also to
possess grace [here he is utilising some of the real weaknesses of
Occamism], therefore they do nothing but sin all the time in their
assurance.”[510]
Luther does not here ask himself what else man is to perform in order
to possess the grace of God, beyond doing what he can, humbling
himself and praying for grace, as all preceding ages had taught. He
is still looking for an assurance of salvation by some other method.
Only at a later date does he learn, or thinks he learns, how it is
to be obtained (by faith alone). Here he merely says: “It is the
greatest plague to speak of the signs of possessing grace and thereby
to lull man into security.” He has not yet found the assurance of the
“Gracious God,” as he is to express it later.
Meanwhile he proceeds, ostensibly following St. Paul, to denounce the
principle “he who does what he can,” etc., like wise freewill and the
possibility of fulfilling the law.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account