The doctrine of predestination in the works of St. Theophan the Recluse

How to understand the words of the Apostle Paul: “Whom He predestined, them He also called, and whom He called, them He also justified; and those whom he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:30)? Where were Calvin, Luther and even St. Augustine mistaken when speaking about predestination to hell and heaven? Saint Theophan the Recluse wrote about this in his writings.

For whom He foreknew
and predestined to be like that
the image of His Son.

(Rom. 8:29)

The grace of God and the will of man

2015 marked the 200th anniversary of the birth of the great teacher of the Russian Church, a remarkable ascetic, one of the most brilliant and influential spiritual writers of the 19th century, St. Theophan the Recluse. The saint was not a theologian in the narrow sense of the word, not a theoretician of armchair scholarship, but spoke in an open language accessible to everyone, without lowering the dogmatic accuracy and truth of the teaching he expounded. The theological commission of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy noted that he was a theologian who found “such exact formulas as Russian Orthodox dogmatics had never had before.”

The saint’s works acquire particular significance in the 21st century, during the period of the revival of the Russian Church, Orthodox culture and Christian life in Russia. In his works, Saint Theophan also touches on issues that we have to face today when catechesising people with already established religious views under the influence of para-church or non-Orthodox teachings. One of these difficult topics is the question of God’s predestination, which “is a combination together of Divine grace and human will, the grace of God that calls, and the human will that follows the call,” extending to all humanity, “the existence of which is testified by the Holy Scriptures, misunderstanding of which leads many into the disastrous abyss of error.”

Today, people who were previously fond of the Protestant faith are also turning to Orthodoxy, while “For many, the concept of “Calvinist” is almost identical to the definition of “a person who pays great attention to the doctrine of predestination””.

Without correctly resolving for themselves the question of the relationship between grace and freedom, such people (unexpectedly for others) express extremely incorrect thoughts about predestination. That is why during catechesis this topic must be given special attention. At the same time, it is important to understand the reasons and essence of the misconception being overcome. Hieromartyr Irenaeus of Lyon, pointing out the importance of preparedness and competence to refute false knowledge, writes: “My predecessors, and much better than me, could not, however, satisfactorily refute the followers of Valentinus, because they did not know their teaching.” At the same time, in the process of catechesis, it is important to consistently and correctly reveal the positive teaching of the faith in accordance with the mind of the Holy Orthodox Church. Therefore, overcoming the erroneous views of people who deviate from the truth, according to Saint Theophan, consists “in an objective, impartial study of their errors and, most importantly, in a firm knowledge of the Orthodox faith.”

If you succeed in the world, will you be saved?

Let us consider the reasons and essence of the mentioned misconception. Indeed, the Swiss theologian of the late Reformation period, Jean Calvin, who acquired such significant authority in Europe that he began to be called the “Pope of Geneva,” characterizes predestination How " God's eternal command by which He determines what He wants to do with every person. For He does not create everyone in the same conditions, but He ordains eternal life for some and eternal damnation for others.”(The founder of the Reformation, Martin Luther, and another figure of the Swiss Reformation, Ulrich Zwingli, also taught about the unconditional pre-established determination of life and, therefore, the salvation or destruction of a person.)

Calvin believed that God “ordains eternal life to some and eternal damnation to others.”

Moreover, within the framework of Calvinism, a person could indirectly judge his predestination for salvation by worldly prosperity: the Lord blesses those elected to heavenly salvation with prosperity in their earthly life, and the achievement of material well-being has come to be considered a very important sign of a person’s proximity to salvation.

In developing his doctrine of predestination, Calvin, considering biblical history, argues that even the fall of Adam occurred not as a result of God's permission, but by His absolute predestination, and since then a huge number of people, including children, have been sent by God to hell. Calvin himself called this point of his teaching “ a terrifying establishment", insisting that God not only allows, but wills and commands, that all the wicked who are not predestined to salvation should perish. In his compendium of faith, Instructions for the Christian Life, the Genevan Reformer states:

“Some speak here of the difference between “will” and “permission,” arguing that the wicked will perish because God allows it, but not because He wills. But why does He allow it, if not because He wishes? The statement that God only allowed, but did not command, that man should perish is in itself implausible: as if He did not determine in what state He would like to see His highest and noblest creation... The first man fell because God decreed it necessary.” ; “When they ask why God did this, they must answer: because He wanted it.”

Obviously, according to this point of view on predestination, “man himself... remains only a passive spectator of his own salvation or condemnation,” his spiritual and moral responsibility for his actions disappears, since the most important attribute of responsibility is human freedom. “If all human actions are necessary and inevitable as predetermined by God Himself,” Prof. rightly notes. T. Butkevich, how can you put responsibility for them on people. If all actions, both good and evil, are necessary; if some people are predestined by God to salvation, and others to eternal damnation, then it is obvious that the culprit of the evil that dominates the world is God alone.” If God Himself predetermined the fall of man by virtue of His desire, why did He bring His Only Begotten Son as a propitiation sacrifice? The famous Orthodox exegete prof. N. Glubokovsky, explaining this issue, emphasizes: “The evangelist does not at all attribute the fate of those who are perishing to Divine predestination and rather emphasizes their personal guilt.”

In fact, freedom is a property of man’s Godlikeness, and “the question of the relationship of grace to human nature and freedom is a question of the very essence of the Church” (E. Trubetskoy). It is interesting to note that Calvin's theological views are traced by scholars of the history of the Reformation to St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo. Thus, H. Henry Meeter, professor of biblical studies at Calvin College, in his work “Basic Ideas of Calvinism” notes: “The theological views of Calvin and other figures of the Reformation are considered as a revival of Augustinianism ... But it was Calvin in modern times who systematized such views and justified their practical application ". John Calvin himself, discussing predestination, directly writes in his confession: “I, without any doubt, with Saint Augustine I confess that the will of God is necessary for all things and that everything that God has decreed and willed inevitably happens.”

In this regard, it is necessary to touch upon some provisions of the teaching of St. Augustine, to whom the Genevan reformer refers and who, of course, had a great influence on the development of theological thought in the West.

Augustine: Man is incapable of loving God

In his work “Historical Doctrine of the Fathers of the Church » Saint Philaret of Chernigov, considering the teaching of Blessed Augustine, notes: “Relying on his own experience of difficult rebirth by grace, breathing a feeling of reverence for grace, he was carried away by a feeling beyond what was proper. Thus, as the accuser of Pelagius, Augustine is, without a doubt, a great teacher of the Church, but, while defending the Truth, he himself was not entirely and not always faithful to the Truth.”

In his statement of doctrine, the Bishop of Ipponia proceeds from the fact that humanity is called to replenish the angels who have fallen from God (perhaps even a large number):

“It was the will of the Creator and Provider of the universe that the lost part of the angels (since not all of their multitude perished, leaving God) would remain in eternal destruction, while those who at that very time were invariably with God would rejoice in their most certain, always known bliss . Another rational creation, humanity, perishing in sins and disasters, both hereditary and personal, had to, as it was restored to its previous state, make up for the loss in the host of angels that had formed since the time of the devil’s destruction. For the resurrected saints are promised that they will be equal to the angels of God (Luke 20:36). Thus, the heavenly Jerusalem, our mother, the city of God, will not lose any of its many citizens, or perhaps will own even more.”

However, according to the views of Blessed Augustine, after the Fall, man is not able to free himself from the shackles of evil, sin and vice and does not even have the free will to love God. Thus, in one of his letters, Blessed Augustine points out: “Through the severity of the first sin, we lost our free will to love God.” Original sin is the cause of man's complete inability to do good. The direct desire for good in a person is possible only through the omnipotent action of God’s grace, “but grace is a consequence of predestination itself,” which directs the will of man, due to its superiority over it:

“When God wants something to happen that cannot happen otherwise than by human desire, then the hearts of people are inclined to desire it (1 Sam. 10:26; 1 Chron. 12:18). Moreover, He inclines them, Who miraculously produces both desire and accomplishment.”

Augustine believes that human free will does not play a significant role in the matter of salvation, and projects his personal experience onto all of humanity

A strict ascetic and zealous Christian, Blessed Augustine, after an era of stormy youth, having experienced the full brunt of the struggle with overwhelming passions, was convinced from the experience of his life that “neither pagan philosophy, nor even Christian teaching, without the special internally active power of God, can lead him to salvation ". In developing these thoughts, he comes to the conclusion that human free will does not play any significant role in the matter of salvation, while the Latin thinker projects his personal experience onto all of humanity. The most important thing in the teaching of Blessed Augustine is the position that with the general damage to human nature, salvation is achieved solely by the irresistible action of God's grace.

Considering the apostolic words about God, “Who wants all people to be saved” (1 Tim. 2: 4), Blessed Augustine rejects their literal understanding, arguing that God wants to save only the predestined, for if he wanted to save everyone, then all would find salvation. He's writing:

“The Apostle very rightly remarked about God: “Who wants all men to be saved” (1 Tim. 2:4). But since a much larger proportion of people are not saved, it seems that God’s desire is not fulfilled and that it is the human will that limits the will of God. After all, when they ask why not everyone is saved, they usually answer: “Because they themselves do not want it.” Of course, this cannot be said about children: it is not in their nature to desire or not to desire. For, although at baptism they sometimes resist, yet we say that they are saved, even without wanting to. But in the Gospel, the Lord, denouncing the wicked city, speaks more clearly: “How often have I wanted to gather your children together, as a bird gathers its chicks under its wings, and you did not want to!” (Matthew 13: 37), as if the will of God was exceeded by the will of man and, due to the resistance of the weakest, the Strongest was unable to do what he wanted. And where is that omnipotence with which He did everything He wanted in heaven and on earth, if He wanted to gather the children of Jerusalem and did not? Don’t you believe that Jerusalem did not want her children to be gathered by Him, but even with her unwillingness, He gathered those of her children whom He wanted, because “in heaven and on earth” He did not want and do one thing, but another wanted and did not do it, but “does whatever he wants” (Ps. 113:11).”

Thus, Blessed Augustine elevates the salvation of people to the desire and determination of God Himself regarding the elect, completely denying the desire of the Creator to save all people. “Worse than that,” notes Hieromonk Seraphim (Rose), “the logical consistency in his thought leads St. Augustine to the point that he even teaches (albeit in a few places) about “negative” predestination - predestination to eternal damnation, which is completely alien to Scripture. He clearly speaks of “the category of people who are predestined to destruction,” thus professing the extreme doctrine of double predestination. According to this, God created those whose destruction He foresaw then “to show His wrath and demonstrate His power. Human history serves as an arena for this in which “two communities of people” are predestined: one to reign eternally with God, and the other to suffer eternally with the devil. But double predestination applies not only to the city of God and the city of earth, but also to individual people. Some are predestined to eternal life, others to eternal death, and among the latter are infants who died without Baptism. Therefore, “the doctrine of double predestination to heaven and hell has ... the last word in Augustine’s theology.” This is an inevitable consequence of his view of God the Creator as the autocratic God of grace."

At the same time, paradoxically, God does not determine the commission of evil, He does not want the angels to sin or the first people in Paradise to break the commandment given to them, but, in accordance with the teachings of St. Augustine, they themselves wished for this: “when the angels and people sinned, that is, they committed not what He wanted, but what they themselves wanted.” Man was originally created by God able not to sin and not to die, although not incapable of sinning and dying. Adam “lived in Paradise as he wanted as long as he wanted what God commanded. He lived without any lack, having in his power to live like this always,” and, as St. Augustine asserts: “it is not sin that belongs to God, but judgment.”

From the writings of the Latin theologian it is clear that “he created a theory about how Divine action achieves its goal without the consent of man... that is, the theory of autocratic grace,” and bases predestination not on the foreknowledge of God, but, according to the remark of St. Philaret of Chernigov, “so that to be true to his thoughts about human nature, he had to admit unconditional predestination.” Thus, predestination in the teaching of St. Augustine is unconditional, that is, it is not based on God’s foreknowledge of future destinies, as he himself explains:

“Foreknowledge without predestination can exist. After all, God, by predestination, foreknows what He Himself is going to do. Therefore it is said: “He who created the future” (Isaiah 45; Sept.). However, He can also foreknow what He Himself does not do, such as, for example, any sins... Therefore, the predestination of God, relating to good, is, as I said, the preparation of grace, while grace is a consequence of predestination itself... He does not say: to foretell; He does not say: to foreknow - for He can also predict and foreknow the deeds of others - but said: “he is able to do it”, which means not the deeds of others, but His own.”

According to the views of the largest representative of Western patristics, the predestined, due to the omnipotent Divine desire, can no longer lose salvation: “in the system of St. Augustine... those predestined to salvation can go astray and lead a bad life, but grace can always direct them to the path of salvation. They cannot perish: sooner or later, grace will lead them to salvation."

God not only wants us to be saved, but also saves us

Many outstanding thinkers of Christian times devoted their works to the topic of God’s predestination; Saint Theophan (Gorov) also touches on this topic, setting out the essence of the subject according to the teachings of the Eastern Church. The reason for the fall of angels and primordial people was not the pre-eternal predestination that deprived them of freedom, but the abuse of the will with which these creatures were endowed. Nevertheless, both angels and people after the fall are left in existence and are not removed from the chain of creation according to the action of grace determined from eternity, explains the Vyshensky Recluse:

“This grace has entered into the plans of the world. The angels fell and were left in their fall due to their extreme persistence in evil and resistance to God. If they all fell, this link would fall out of the chain of creation and the system of the world would be upset. But since not all fell, but a part, a link of them remained and the harmony of the world remained indestructible. Man was created alone with his wife in order to give birth to the entire number of persons who could form a human link in the system of the world. When he fell, this link fell out and the world lost its order. As this link is necessary in the order of the world, it was necessary, either by putting to death, as defined, the fallen, to create new ancestors, or thereby provide a reliable way of restoration to the first rank. Since the fall occurred not due to, let’s say, the failure of the first creation, but because created freedom, especially the freedom of the spirit physically united with the body, combined within itself the possibility of a fall, then, having begun to repeat creation, it would perhaps be necessary to repeat it without end. Therefore, the wisdom of God, guided by boundless goodness, decided to arrange a different way for the fallen to revolt.”

Revealing the Orthodox faith, Saint Theophan pays special attention to the truth that God does not want the fall and destruction of anyone, and for humanity who has fallen away from the truth he has established a single path to salvation in the Lord Jesus Christ, thus desiring and giving salvation to everyone.

“God is our “Savior” not only because he desires salvation, but because he created the image of salvation and saves all those who are saved in this way, actively helping them to use it. Desiring salvation for everyone, God wants everyone to come to the knowledge of the truth about salvation, namely, that it is only in the Lord Jesus Christ. This is an urgent condition for salvation."

In Vyshensky’s explanation of the Holy Scriptures, “where necessary, interpretation is carried out together with an apology against the understanding of them by heterodox faiths.” In a commentary on the well-known words of the Apostolic Epistle, he repeats that God desires salvation for those who are not chosen only and determined by this chosenness, which is why the apostle calls it Savior of all. Having opened for everyone the blessed path to achieving salvation and providing the necessary gracious means to follow this path, the Lord calls on everyone to take advantage of this priceless gift:

“God not only wants everyone to be saved, but also created a wondrous image of salvation, open to everyone and powerful to save everyone.”

“God is the Savior of all men,” because “he wants to be saved by all men and to come into the understanding of truth” (1 Tim. 2:4) - and not only wants to be saved by everyone, but also created a wondrous image of salvation, open to everyone and always strong to save anyone who wants to use it."

Revealing the essence of Orthodox teaching, Saint Theophan explains that, desiring and giving salvation to everyone, God leaves everyone the freedom to voluntarily choose the good part, without acting forcibly against the desire of the person himself:

“God the Savior wants everyone to be saved. Why is it that not everyone is saved and not everyone is being saved? “Because God, who wants everyone to be saved, does not bring about their salvation by His omnipotent power, but, having arranged and offered everyone a wondrous and unique way of salvation, wants everyone to be saved, willingly approaching this way of salvation and using it wisely”; “This whole path is the path of free, rational will, which is accompanied by grace, confirming its movements.”

The Lord calls everyone, but not everyone responds to this call, as the Savior Himself says about this: “Many are called, but few are chosen” (Luke 14:24). The all-merciful God does not want to deprive anyone of salvation, but those who perish, rejecting grace, doom themselves to spiritual death. The kingdom is acquired by the faithful, who have accepted the grace-given means given by God and who live by the law of spirit and faith.

“Not everyone is saved, because not everyone heeds the word of truth, not everyone is inclined to it, not everyone follows it - in a word, not everyone wants to” ; “God’s saving will, saving God's power and God’s saving dispensation (the economy of salvation) extends to everyone and is sufficient for the salvation of everyone; but in fact, only the faithful are saved or made partakers of these salvations, that is, only those who believe in the gospel and, after receiving grace, live in the spirit of faith. So God, who is always willing and always strong to save everyone, is in reality the Savior only of the faithful.”

According to Orthodox soteriology, God saves a person, but not without the person himself, for he does not violate the will of people. However, if in the matter of salvation everything depended solely on God, explains Saint Theophan, then, of course, there would be no perishing and everyone would find salvation:

“God does not force anyone to be saved, but offers a choice and saves only the one who chooses salvation. If our will were not required, God would have made everyone saved in an instant, for He wants everyone to be saved. And then there would be no people dying at all”; “If everything depended on God, then in an instant everyone would become holy. One moment of God - and everyone would change. But such is the law that a person must desire and seek for it himself - and then grace will no longer abandon him, as long as he remains faithful to it.” .

The gospel has been revealed to the whole world, but not all people follow God’s calling, and even those who followed, that is, those who were called, notes Saint Theophan, “not all make good use of freedom on the “narrow path” to salvation, not all remain faithful, while those chosen to the end remain faithful:

“Everyone is called; but from called not everyone will follow the calling - not everyone becomes called. Called one should be named who has already accepted the Gospel and believed. But even this number is not all favorites, not all are predestined to be conformed to the Son in right and glory. For many do not remain faithful to the calling and either sin in faith, or in life “they are both blasphemers” (1 Kings 18:21). But those chosen and appointed remain faithful to the end.”

Not everyone, having heard the gracious call, embarks on the path of salvation, and not everyone who comes here to the Church of God achieves the blessed goal, but, according to the Word of God, only the faithful unto death (Rev. 2:10), why, given that the Lord is called Savior of all, for he calls everyone to salvation, only a few gain the Kingdom - this chosenness is determined not only by grace, but also by the desire of the person himself:

“Some of them are predestined to salvation and glory, while others are not predestined. And if this needs to be distinguished, it is necessary to make a distinction between vocation and vocation. Those chosen and appointed in a special way undergo the act of calling, although the word of calling announces the same to everyone. Having begun here, this distinction of the chosen ones continues later and in all subsequent acts on the path of salvation, or approach to God, and brings them to the blessed end. What exactly this difference is cannot be determined; but not in the grace alone that accompanies the word of calling, but also in the mood and acceptability of those called, which is a matter of their will.”

Of course, the economy of our salvation is a great mystery, but this salvation is directly related to our desire and decision, and is not accomplished mechanically against the will of people:

“Nothing happens mechanically, but everything is done with the participation of the morally free determination of the person himself”; “In a state of grace it is given to him (the sinner. – Auth.) to taste the sweetness of good, then it begins to attract him to itself as something already known, known and felt. The scales are equal, in the hands of a person there is complete freedom of action."

In the Orthodox teaching on salvation, therefore, special attention is paid to the need for intentional volitional effort on the part of the believer: “The Kingdom of Heaven is taken by force,” says the Savior, “and those who use force take it” (Matthew 11:12), - in this work from The one who is being saved requires the highest effort of strength. It is impossible to acquire the Kingdom without the complete conscious aspiration of man himself, since, according to the patristic word, where there is no will, there is no virtue. “In freedom, a certain independence is given to a person,” explains the Vyshensky Recluse, “but not so that he is self-willed, but so that he freely submits himself to the will of God. Voluntary submission of freedom to the will of God is the only true and only blessed use of freedom.” Success on the path to salvation is the fruit of free effort throughout the life of a Christian who has entered this field. Revealing in detail the essence of the beginning of spiritual life, Saint Theophan points out what is expected of each person for his grace-filled rebirth:

“What exactly is expected of us. We are expected to 1) recognize the presence of the gift of grace within ourselves; 2) we understood its preciousness for us, so great that it is more precious than life, so that without it life is not life; 3) they desired with all their desire to assimilate this grace to themselves, and themselves to it, or, what is the same, to be imbued with it in their entire nature, to be enlightened and sanctified; 4) decided to achieve this by deed and then 5) brought this determination into fulfillment, leaving everything or detaching one’s heart from everything and betraying it all to the all-effects of God’s grace. When these five acts are completed in us, then the beginning of our internal rebirth begins, after which, if we relentlessly continue to act in the same spirit, internal rebirth and insight will increase - quickly or slowly, judging by our work, and most importantly - by self-forgetfulness and selflessness" .

Become one of the predestined

The teaching of the Eastern Church affirms the need for co-operation (synergy) of Divine grace and human freedom, since only in the unity of human consent with the will of God and voluntary following the path of salvation is the acquisition of the Kingdom achieved by those who “seek grace and freely submit to it.” A person is not able to achieve perfection and salvation on his own, since he does not have the forces necessary for this, and only with the assistance of God does this become possible and feasible. The actual renewal of man, thus, takes place in inextricable interaction with the grace of God. At the same time, both the enlightening and saving action of grace does not deprive the meaning of human freedom and the need for self-determination:

“The truly Christian life is arranged mutually - by grace and by one’s desire and freedom, so that grace, without the free inclination of the will, will not do anything to us, nor can one’s desire, without strengthening it by grace, succeed in anything. Both of them agree on one matter of organizing Christian life; and what in every deed belongs to grace and what to one’s desire is difficult to discern in subtlety, and there is no need. Know that grace never forces free will and never leaves it alone, without its help, when it is worthy of it, has a need and asks for it.”

The building of spiritual life is created on the basis of the regenerating action of grace and the active determination of the believer, “the tension of a person’s strength is a condition for their grace-filled strengthening of the joint action of grace with him, but the condition is again only, so to speak, logical, and not temporarily preceding. This can be seen from the words of Bishop Theophan, which categorically affirm the joint and inseparable nature of the action of freedom and grace.” The relationship of predestination to Divine foreknowledge is indicated in the apostolic letter in the following words: “Whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son... And whom He predestined, them He also called, and whom He called, them He also justified; and those whom he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Commenting on this message of the Apostle Paul, the incorrect understanding of which was the basis for the false doctrine of predestination, Saint Theophan explains that the Orthodox understanding of the omniscience of God, including His foreknowledge of the destinies of people, never rejects the free will of man and his conscious participation in his salvation. Predestination is the incomprehensible action of the beginningless God, and it is determined by the harmony of the eternal Divine properties and perfections. The omniscient God foreknows and predetermines accordingly. Possessing knowledge of all things, God knows the past, present, and future as a single whole, and as He knows, He determines how it will be. Because of this, the cause of predestination is the free actions of man, not limited by the foreknowledge of God, since man himself realizes his personal choice. God, foreseeing the result of this choice and subsequent actions, determines according to this, that is, predestination itself is a logical consequence of the free actions of man, and not vice versa:

"He (God. – Auth.) knows the beginning, the continuation, and the end of everything that exists and happens - he also knows his final determination of the fate of everyone, as well as the entire human race; He knows who will be touched by His last “come” and who will be touched by “depart.” And as he knows, so he determines it to be. But just as, knowing in advance, He foretells, so, determining in advance, He predetermines. And since the knowledge or foreknowledge of God is by no means true and true, His definition is unchangeable. But, touching free creatures, it does not restrict their freedom and does not make them involuntary executors of its definitions. God foresees free actions as free, sees the entire course of a free person and the general result of all his actions. And, seeing it, he determines as if it had already happened. For he does not simply predetermine, but predetermines by foreknowing. We determine whether a person is good or bad by seeing the deeds he has done before us. And God predetermines according to deeds - but to deeds foreseen, as if they had already been done. It is not the actions of free persons that are the consequence of predestination, but predestination itself is the consequence of free deeds.”

God, explains Saint Theophan, by virtue of this foreknowledge, predetermines the chosen ones to be such and, accordingly, to receive a part in eternity. “God’s predestination embraces both the temporal and the eternal. The Apostle indicates what those who were foreordained were predestined to do, namely, that they should “be conformed to the image of His Son.”

These two converging actions—foreknowledge and predestination—exhaust God’s eternal destiny for the people being saved. Everything said above applies to everyone. Salvation, according to Orthodox teaching, notes Saint Theophan, is a free moral action, although it is possible only with the help of God’s grace. Everyone is called by God, and everyone who wishes can be among the predestined:

“God foresaw what we would desire and what we would strive for, and accordingly he made a decree about us. Therefore, it's all about our mood. Maintain a good mood - and you will find yourself among the chosen ones... Strain your efforts and jealousy - and you will win your election. However, this means that you are one of the chosen ones, for the non-elected one will not be jealous.”

Thus, for rebirth, a person himself must relentlessly strive for the Source of salvation, and in case of a fall, hasten to rise through repentance, so as not to lose his calling, for grace is not a self-acting force that alienatedly forces people to virtue.

“Be faithful and bless God, who called you to be conformed to His Son apart from you. If you remain like this until the end, then have no doubt that God’s boundless mercy will meet you there too. If you fall, do not fall into despair, but hasten through repentance to return to the rank from which you fell, like Peter. Even if you fall many times, get up, believing that, having stood up, you will again enter the host of those called according to providence. Only unrepentant sinners and hardened unbelievers can be excluded from this host, but even then not decisively. The thief is already on the cross, in last minutes life, was captured and taken by the Son of God into paradise."

According to the summing up and precise statement of Archimandrite Sergius (Stragorodsky), later Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', “it is very instructive, we say, to get acquainted with the disclosure of this side in the writings ... of the Right Reverend Theophan, so deeply imbued with paternal teaching ... According to the presentation of the Right Reverend Theophan, the inner essence of the mysterious man's renewal constitutes his voluntary and final determination of himself to please God. “This decision,” says Bishop Theophan, “is the main point in the matter of conversion.” As we see, the Right Reverend Theophan, in this description of the true content of dogmatic concepts concerning the question of salvation, completely correctly expresses the teaching of the holy fathers of the Church,” in contrast to heterodox scholasticism, which teaches about “self-propelled righteousness, which is established in a person and begins to act in him in addition to and even almost contrary to his consciousness and will."

Wealth does not indicate predestination to salvation, just as tribulation does not indicate the opposite.

It is also important to note that, according to the Vyshensky Recluse, external success and wealth, of course, do not indicate a person’s predestination to salvation, just as sorrows do not indicate the opposite determination.

“Everything that happens to them (to the faithful. – Auth.), even the most regrettable, (God. – Auth.) turns them to their benefit, writes Saint Theophan, “... patience already requires support, because it does not quickly turn out what you want - the most luminous and blessed; but the need for such support is greatly increased by the fact that the external situation of those waiting is extremely deplorable... God, seeing how they completely surrender themselves to Him and thereby testify to their great love for Him, arranges their lives in such a way that everything that happens to them turns out to be for their good , spiritual good, that is, in the purification of the heart, in the strengthening of good character, in the case of self-sacrifice for the Lord's sake, highly valued by the truth of God and preparing an invaluable reward. How natural is the conclusion from here: therefore, do not be embarrassed when you encounter sorrow, and do not weaken your hopeful mood! .

At the same time, Vyshinsky the Recluse points out that the success and comforts of this world can lead away from God even more than sorrow and oppression: “Aren’t the charms of the world strong? Don’t they even take away more from God and loyalty to Him?” .

This is the doctrine of God’s predestination, the deep knowledge of which, in full agreement with the teaching of the Orthodox Church, was shown in his works by Saint Theophan the Recluse, which became a stumbling block for supporters of the false idea of ​​predestination as an unconditional predestination in the life of every person.

Predestination(lat. praedestinatio, from prae - before, before and destinare – determine, assign) – predestination.

Calvin J. Instruction in the Christian Faith. P. 409.

Right there. P. 410.

Right there. P. 404.

No branch of modern Calvinism has officially rejected this doctrine. Cm.: Vasechko V.N. Comparative theology. P. 50.

Hilarion (Alfeev), bishop. Orthodoxy. T. I. Publishing house Sretensky Monastery, 2008. P. 535.

Butkevich T., archpriest. Evil, its essence and origin: In 2 volumes. T. 2. Kyiv, 2007. P. 49.

Glubokovsky N.N. The teaching of the Holy Apostle Paul on predestination in comparison with the views of the book of the Wisdom of Solomon // Christian Reading. St. Petersburg, 1904. No. 7. P. 30.

Trubetskoy E.N. The religious and social ideal of Western Christianity in the 5th century. Part 1. Worldview of St. Augustine. M., 1892. P. 162.

Within the Calvinists, a division soon occurred into infralapsarians and supralapsarians, the first of whom assumed that God decided to select the worthy only from the time of the Fall he foresaw; supralapsarians considered the Fall to be concluded in the predetermination of God. “Supralapsarians and infralapsarians are two directions in Calvinism that differ in their interpretation of the doctrine of predestination. According to the infralapsarians, God made the decision to save one part of humanity without any merit on the part of these people and to condemn the other without any guilt only after the fall of Adam (infra lapsum). The supralapsarians believed that the divine decision to condemn some and save others existed from eternity, so that God foresaw (supra lapsum) and predetermined the very fall of Adam.” – Leibniz G.V. Description and deep analysis of your life and conversion of the blessed one. Augustine gives in the first nine chapters of the Confessions.

“Augustine is imbued with the conviction that from the first days of infancy until the moment when grace touched him, all his actions were an expression of his sinfulness... Thus, Augustine’s entire past life seems to be one continuous insult to God, a time of darkness, sin, ignorance and lust, when the very attempts to resist sin were in vain and did not lead to anything, because, trying to get up, he invariably fell and sank deeper into the sucking mud of vice.” – Popov I.V. Proceedings on patrolology. T. 2. The personality and teaching of St. Augustine. Publication of the Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra, 2005. pp. 183–184.

Sergius (Stragorodsky), archimandrite. The teaching of St. Augustine on predestination in connection with the circumstances of his life and work // Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment. 1887. No. 2. Part 1. P. 447.

“But although human nature is distorted and corrupted, it is not completely damaged. God, says the blessed one. Augustine did not completely withdraw His graces, otherwise we would simply cease to exist.” – Armstrong Arthur H. The Origins of Christian Theology: An Introduction to Ancient Philosophy. St. Petersburg, 2006. P. 236.

The formation of the doctrine of the relationship between grace and freedom, up to the approval of the theory of the autocratic action of grace, occurs in the views of the blessed. Augustine step by step. Cm.: Fokin A.R. Brief essay teachings of Blessed Augustine on the relationship between free human action and Divine grace in salvation (according to the works of 386–397) // Augustine, blissful. Treatises on various issues. M., 2005. P. 8–40.

Augustine, blissful. Creations: In 4 volumes. T. 2: Theological treatises. St. Petersburg; Kyiv, 2000. P. 58.

Seraphim (Rose), hierom. The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church. Platina, CA: Saint Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1983. P. 18.

Pelican Ya. Christian tradition. History of the development of religious doctrine. T. 1: The emergence of the Catholic tradition. M., 2007. P. 284.

Feofan the Recluse, saint. Interpretations of the messages of St. Apostle Paul. Epistle to the Romans. M., 1996. P. 535.

Right there. P. 536.

Feofan the Recluse, saint. Interpretation of the first eight chapters of the Epistle of St. Apostle Paul to the Romans. Quote From: Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. 1980. No. 3. P. 67.

Feofan the Recluse, saint. The path to salvation. Quote By: Khondzinsky Pavel, archpriest. The teaching of St. Theophan about grace and “pure love” in the context of the ideas of Blessed Augustine // Bulletin of PSTGU: Theology. Philosophy. 2012. Issue. 6 (44). P. 26.

“God does not force us, He gave us the power to choose good and bad, so that we could be good freely. The soul, as a queen over itself and free in its actions, does not always submit to God, and He does not want to forcefully and against the will to make the soul virtuous and holy. For where there is no will, there is no virtue. It is necessary to convince the soul so that it will become good of its own free will.” – John Chrysostom, saint. Conversation on the words: “And we saw His glory...” (John 1: 14) // Christian reading. 1835. Part 2. P. 33.

Feofan the Recluse, saint. Outline of Christian moral teaching. M., 2002. P. 52.

Feofan the Recluse, saint. What is spiritual life and how to tune in to it. P. 125.

Message from the Patriarchs of the Eastern Catholic Church on Orthodox faith// Dogmatic messages of Orthodox hierarchs of the 17th–19th centuries about the Orthodox faith. Publication of the Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra, 1995. P. 149.

Feofan, saint. Letters on the Christian Life. M., 2007. pp. 190–191.

Zarin S.M. Asceticism according to Orthodox Christian teaching. T. 1. St. Petersburg, 1907. P. 12.

“Avoiding any polemics with Western interpretations of the negative direction, the saint offers only a complete doctrine of faith and moral teaching in the Epistle of the Apostle Paul. On the positive side, he explains the text according to the wisdom of the Holy Orthodox Church, and pays great attention to the edification of readers.” – Krutikov I.A. Saint Theophan, Recluse and Ascetic of the Vyshensk Hermitage. M., 1905. P. 145.

Rev. John of Damascus in his “Accurate Exposition of the Orthodox Faith” writes: “God foresees everything, but does not predetermine everything. Thus, He foresees what is in our power, but does not predetermine it; for He does not want vice to appear, but He does not force us to virtue.” – TIPV. 2.30.

St. Gregory Palamas about the predestination of God: “Predestination and Divine will and foreknowledge coexist from eternity with the essence of God, and are beginningless and uncreated. But none of this is the essence of God, as stated above. And all this is so far from being the essence of God to him that the great Basil in “Antirritiki” calls God’s foreknowledge of something to have no beginning, but [to have] an end when what is foreknown reaches [its fulfillment].” (Against Eunomius, 4 // PG. 29. 680 B). – Gregory Palamas, saint. Treatises (Patristics: texts and studies). Krasnodar, 2007. P. 47.

Feofan the Recluse, saint. Interpretations of the messages of St. Apostle Paul. Epistle to the Romans. pp. 531–532.

Right there. P. 532.

Right there. pp. 537–538.

Right there. P. 537.

Sergius (Stragorodsky), archbishop. Orthodox teaching on salvation. M., 1991. P. 184.

Right there. P. 197.

In the “Epistle of the Eastern Patriarchs on the Orthodox Faith” from 1723, against the false understanding of predestination, it is said: “We believe that the All-Good God predestined to glory those whom He chose from eternity, and whom He rejected, condemned, not because He did not want to justify some in this way, and leave others and condemn without reason, for this is not characteristic of God, the common and impartial Father, “Who wants all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2: 4), but since He foresaw that some would use their free will well, and others poorly, therefore He predestined some to glory, and condemned others... But what the blasphemous heretics say, that God predestines or condemns, without regard in the least to the deeds of those who are predestined or condemned, is we consider it madness and wickedness... We never dare to believe, teach and think in this way... and we anathematize those who say and think like this forever and recognize them as the worst of all infidels.” – Message of the Patriarchs of the Eastern Catholic Church on the Orthodox faith // Dogmatic messages of Orthodox hierarchs of the 17th–19th centuries on the Orthodox faith. pp. 148–151.

Feofan the Recluse, saint. Interpretations of the messages of St. Apostle Paul. Epistle to the Romans. pp. 526–527.

The British belief in fate, which is unusual at first glance, becomes more understandable if we recall the teachings of J. Calvin (1509-1564), who became for the West “the axial figure of the New Age,” according to an article from the encyclopedia “Religion” (“Religion”, 2007). It was he who developed the doctrine of predestination, which later became “the flesh and blood” of Western society, especially its Protestant part.
This is what the same encyclopedia writes about this teaching: “God actively desires the salvation of those who will be saved, and the damnation of those who will not be saved. Predestination is therefore "the eternal command of God, by which He determines what He wills for each individual. He does not create equal conditions for all, but prepares eternal life for some and eternal damnation for others." One of the central functions of this doctrine is to emphasize the mercy of God. For Luther, God's mercy is expressed in the fact that He justifies sinners, people who are unworthy of such a privilege. For Calvin - E.Z., God's mercy is manifested in His decision to atone for the sins of individual people regardless of their merits: the decision to redeem a person is made regardless of how worthy the person is. For Luther, Divine mercy is manifested in the fact that He saves sinners despite their vices; for K. mercy is manifested in the fact that God saves individuals regardless of their merits. Although Luther and Co. defend God's mercy from slightly different points of view, they affirm the same principle in their views on justification and predestination. Although the doctrine of predestination was not central to K.'s theology, it became the core of later Reformed theology. Already starting from 1570, the theme of “chosenness” began to dominate in Reformed theology... [... ]
The doctrine of predestination was not new to Christianity. K. did not introduce a previously unknown concept into the sphere of Christian theology. The late medieval Augustinian school taught the doctrine of absolute double predestination: God destined for some eternal life and eternal damnation for others, regardless of their personal merits or shortcomings. Their destiny depends entirely on the will of God and not on their individuality. Probably, K. consciously adopted this aspect of late medieval Augustinianism, which has an extraordinary similarity with his own teaching.
According to K., salvation is beyond the power of people who are powerless to change the existing situation. K. emphasized that this selectivity is observed not only in the issue of salvation. In all areas of life, he argues, we are forced to confront an incomprehensible mystery. Why are some people more successful in life than others? Why does one person have intellectual gifts that are denied to others? Even from the moment of birth, two babies, without any fault of their own, can find themselves in completely different circumstances... For K., predestination was just another manifestation of the general mystery of human existence, when some receive material and intellectual gifts that are denied to others" (" Religion", 2007).
The doctrine of Calvinism has left a deep imprint on the worldview of almost all Western societies. To this day, it gives the consciousness of their own infallibility and chosenness to the owners of a solid fortune and the consciousness of inferiority, initially predetermined and inevitable torment in hell - to the poor segments of the population (at least its religious part). If God's chosenness is determined by material well-being, then poverty serves as an omen that a person was cursed even before birth, that he cannot earn salvation by any good deeds, that God knows all his actions in advance, that they are all predetermined and condemned. Christ did not die for everyone, but for the elect, who, on the contrary, by the grace of God will go to heaven under any circumstances, even if they are the most notorious sinners. This mercy is determined during life by earthly blessings supposedly given by God, mainly in monetary terms. It is money that measures a person’s success in finding his “calling” given by God. For Orthodoxy, the measurement of God's chosenness according to this criterion remains alien, since greater emphasis is placed on the words of the Bible that it is easier for a camel (in the correct translation - a rope) to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. In Soviet ideology, wealth was seen as a threat to the collectivist foundations of society. In both cases, the emphasis was on the moral side of actions, and not on material rewards for them.
We will not go into detail about whether fatalism is inherent in Orthodoxy. We will give only the candidate’s statement on this matter historical sciences S. Rybakova: “What is Divine Providence[in Orthodoxy - E.Z.]? This is by no means primitive fatalism. Freedom of personal choice is not suppressed or limited by God's Providence: a person is responsible for his deeds and actions. God does not force anyone: man himself determines his destiny, the people determine their history” (Rybakov, 1998). Undoubtedly, there are many works where this point of view would be questioned, especially among the followers of M. Weber. The last half century has shown, however, that M. Weber's theory of active Protestants and passive Buddhists, Catholics, etc. is unable to explain the rapid economic development of those countries whose inhabitants are supposedly not active enough because of their religions (see the chapter “Alternative cultural explanations of impersonal constructs”). Here is how the difference in attitude towards predestination is defined between Protestants and Orthodox Christians in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia: “Theological. F. [atalism - E.Z.], which teaches that God, even before birth, predestined some people “to salvation” and others “to destruction”, received especially consistent expression in Islam (the doctrine of the Jabarites, formulated in disputes of the 8th-9th centuries .), in some Christian heresies of the Middle Ages (in Gottschalk, 9th century), in Calvinism and Jansenism, the orthodox theology of Orthodoxy and Catholicism is hostile to it” (“Great Soviet Encyclopedia”, 1969-1978).
A similar explanation can be found in the “Small Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron,” published before the revolution: “Predestination, the doctrine that the omnipotent will of the omniscient God predetermined some people to good and salvation, others to evil and destruction. [...] The Orthodox Church does not recognize absolute P. and teaches that God wants the salvation of everyone, but rational beings who consciously reject all help from grace for their salvation cannot be saved and, according to the omniscience of God, are predestined to destruction; next, P. refers only to the consequences of evil, and not to evil itself. In the 16th century the doctrine of absolute P. was renewed by Calvin” (http://slovari.yandex.ru/).
The above-mentioned encyclopedia “Religion” explains the difference between the understanding of predestination among Orthodox and Protestants (Calvinists) as follows: “To resolve these disputes [about the doctrine of predestination - E.Z.] it was more precisely defined at several local councils Orthodox teaching, the essence of which boils down to the following: God wants everyone to be saved, and therefore absolute P. [predetermination - E.Z.] or P. to moral evil does not exist; but true or final salvation cannot be violent and external, and therefore the action of the goodness and wisdom of God for the salvation of man uses all means for this purpose, with the exception of those that would abolish moral freedom; therefore, rational beings who consciously reject all the help of grace for their salvation cannot be saved and, according to the omniscience of God, are predestined to exclusion from the Kingdom of God or to destruction. P. refers, therefore, only to the necessary consequences of evil, and not to evil itself, which is only resistance of free will to the action of saving grace. [...] The final development of issues related to P. belongs to Calvin, who showed that the study of the issue of P. is not a purely academic exercise, but has practical significance. Although Calvin did not agree with W. Zwingli's assertion that sin became necessary for the glory of God to be properly manifested, he nevertheless insisted that God chose some for salvation and rejected others, but remained absolutely righteous and blameless in all this . Calvin's successor T. Beza not only adhered to Calvin's doctrine of the double P., but also did not hesitate to assert that God decided to send some people to hell, that he caused them to sin. He was convinced that, despite the absence of any specific instructions on this matter in the Bible, it was possible to determine the logical priority and sequence of God's decisions. He believed that the decision to save some and condemn others logically precedes the decision to create people. From this it follows that God creates some in order to subsequently condemn. This teaching eventually came to be considered by many as the official position of Calvinism” (“Religion”, 2007).
The difference in the worldview of Orthodox and Protestants is most clearly reflected in the following definition of fatalism from the “Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary”: “Theological F. [fatalism - E.Z.] comes from the predetermination of events in history and human life by the will of God; within its framework there is a struggle between the concepts of absolute predestination (Augustinism, Calvinism, Jansenism) and views trying to combine the omnipotence of providence with the free will of man (Catholicism, Orthodoxy)” (“Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary”, 1992).
Thus, Orthodoxy places more emphasis on the free will of man, while Calvinism proceeds from the predetermination of events.
In "Atheistic Dictionary" edited by M.P. Novikov does not say anything about Orthodoxy, but the fatalism of Calvinism and Protestantism in general is emphasized (Calvinism is one of the varieties of Protestantism along with Lutheranism, Zwinglianism, Anabaptism, Mennoniteism, Anglicanism, Baptistism, Methodism, Quakerism, Pentecostalism, the Salvation Army, etc.). d.): “In one form or another, F. [atalism - E.Z.] is inherent in the plural. idealistic teachings, occupies an important place in religion. worldview. Recognition of God as the creator and ruler of the world inevitably leads to the denial of man's ability to influence the course of events, dooms him to passivity and inaction. In the beliefs of different religions, fragility manifests itself to varying degrees. It permeates the creed of Islam. F.'s ideas are clearly expressed in Calvinism. [...]
Catholicism is based on the teaching of Augustine that a person is not free in good, since grace acts in him along this path, but is free in evil, to which his sinful nature attracts him. Protestantism is dominated by the idea of ​​the predetermination of all destinies by the will of God, which turns S[freedom - E.Z.] into an illusion" ("Atheistic Dictionary", 1986).
The German “Herders Conversations-Lexikon” (1st edition, 1854-1857, quoted in the original) states in a similar way: “In der nach-christl. Zeit spielt das F. vor allem im Mohammedanismus, in der Kirchengeschichte durch den gall. Priester Lucidus im 5., den Monch Gottschalk im 9., dann durch Luther, Zwingli und vor allem durch Calvin und Beza, in der Philosophie durch Spinoza, Hobbes, Bayle, die frz. Encyklopadisten und Hegel eine entscheidende Rolle.”
"Meyers GroBes Konversations-Lexikon" (6th edition, 1905-1909) believes that fatalism is one of the characteristics of the Protestant doctrine of predestination. In the definition of the term “determinism” in the “Handbook of Heresies, Sects and Schisms” S.V. Bulgakov also mentions that fatalism is inherent in Calvinism: “Religious determinism, otherwise called fatalism, must be distinguished from strict philosophical materialistic and idealistic determinism. Thus, the religion of the ancient Greeks recognized the existence of fate or fate as a dark, incomprehensible, impersonal force that determines the lives of people, and which not only people, but even the gods themselves are unable to resist. In the east, and later in the west, there was a widespread belief that all the main events in the historical and private lives of people are invariably predetermined by the course of the stars (astrological determinism). This also includes the Mohammedan belief that God, by virtue of the eternal decision of His will, has invariably determined the fate of every person, even down to the smallest circumstances of his life. In the Christian world, this includes the teaching of Calvin and others that denies moral freedom, according to which God unconditionally and invariably predestined some to eternal bliss, others to eternal condemnation” (Bulgakov, 1994).
Thus, the fatalism of Protestantism is noted in pre-revolutionary, Soviet, post-Soviet, and Western reference publications.
A researcher who wanted to prove the original tendency of the Germans towards fatalism would find enough evidence for this thesis in the ancient epic and scientific (historical, sociological, cultural) literature. Thus, a specialist in English literature R. Fletcher writes in his commentary on the ancient Anglo-Saxon epic “Beofulf” (700) that the concept of fate, played out in this work, seems to be a despotic force with no compassion for people, with which it is impossible to fight; Moreover, this concept (called Wyrd) did not die out along with paganism, but entered, in a slightly modified form, into the worldview of the English Puritans (Fletcher, 2004).
AND I. Gurevich notes in the preface to Beowulf that this work “is replete with references to Fate, which either acts as an instrument of the creator and is identical to divine Providence, or appears as an independent force. But belief in Fate occupied a central place in the pre-Christian ideology of the Germanic peoples. [...] Fate was understood not as a universal fate, but as the individual share of an individual person, his luck, happiness; some have more luck, others less” (“Beowulf. Elder Edda. Song of the Nibelungs”, 1975). Accordingly, according to the mythology of the ancient Germans, a person was initially destined to be successful or unsuccessful, happy or unhappy. This is confirmed by the following passage from “The Prophecy of Velva” (“Elder Edda”, VI-VIII centuries, a poetic collection of German myths):
Wise maidens arose from there, three from the spring under the high tree;
Urd is the name of the first, the second is Verdani, - they cut the runes, - Skuld is the name of the third; destinies were judged, life was chosen for people's children, lots were prepared.
We are talking here about the goddesses of fate - the norns, who are responsible for the present, past and future of man (like the ancient Roman parks, the ancient Greek moira). K. Bishop (Australian National University) comments on the words Wyrd bip ful arwd (Fate is always determined) of the Old English poem “The Wanderer” (modern title) as follows: the poem reflects the typical idea of ​​the ancient West Saxons about the inevitability of fate, about the impossibility of pleasing it with prayers, gifts and noble deeds (Bishop, 2007 ). The concept of "Wyrd" ("fate"), as Bishop believes, is not just fatalistic, but also implies an all-encompassing, inevitable predestination, which does not have any meaningful force, but leads everything to destruction and destruction.
In Appendix 2 we presented the point of view of culturologist A.P. Bogatyrev on this issue (the article was written specifically for this monograph at our request). He believes that:
a) Western man has been characterized by fatalism since the times of Ancient Greece;
b) this fatalism intensified significantly during the Middle Ages due to constant epidemics that could not be prevented or stopped (in the 14th century, for example, from a quarter to a third of the population of Europe died from the Black Death);
c) fatalism was especially clearly reflected in the doctrine of predestination among Protestants;
d) it may well be that the corresponding worldview was reflected in the high frequency of “fatalistic” vocabulary.
With a request to clarify the relatively widespread belief in fate in England compared to Russia, we turned directly to A. Wierzbitskaya, who popularized the theory of “fatalism” in Russian grammar. Here is her response, received by email in June 2007: “To take just one of your questions - How many “Anglos” believe in “sud’ba.” To me, the question doesn't make much sense, since there is no concept of "sud'ba' in English. Questionnaires of this kind are based on the assumption that there is a shared concept which can be investigated in different languages. To do semantics cross-linguistically, one needs an appropriate metalanguage.”
On the one hand, her refusal to equate the Russian concept of “fate” with the English “destiny” or “fate” is completely understandable, since each word has its own special connotations. On the other hand, hardly anyone will deny that the English “fate” (this is the word used in the above surveys) is no less fatalistic than the Russian “fate”. Here is how, for example, the concept of “fate” is defined in “Roget’s II: The New Thesaurus” (1995): “1. A predestined tragic end.., 2. That which is inevitably destined...” (Roget's II: The New Thesaurus, 1995), that is, “fate” by its definition is more tragic than “destiny”, it is rather fate, destiny, and it is not for nothing that other meanings of this word are “death”, “destruction”. Wierzbicka herself in one of her works compares “fate” with the Russian word “rock” (Wierzbicka, 1992, p. 66).
Considering the widespread belief of the British in “fate”, it cannot be called an accident that it was in England that gothic novels, the characters of which invariably become victims of fate and otherworldly forces, were born and gained particular popularity, and then - all kinds of mystical thrillers and the horror genre. Until very recently, all this was alien to Russians, mythical creatures were often treated with irony, and even the most negative characters from the other world (such as Baba Yaga, Koshchei the Immortal, devils) often became the subject of humorous stories. This is especially true for works of Soviet times, but already in Gogol the tendency to talk about the otherworldly in an ironic tone is clearly visible.
Based on the results of the analyzes of the frequency of lexemes related to fatalism presented in this work (see below), it should still be recognized that before the revolution, Russian writers more actively used means of expressing the inevitability of fate than Soviet ones, and after the collapse of the USSR, in some respects, return to pre-revolutionary levels. Whether this is a consequence of the secondary spread of Orthodoxy cannot be said with certainty, since the majority of Russians, although they consider themselves Orthodox, usually have no idea about its teachings. For example, 60% of Russians surveyed in 2002 have never even read the Bible, 18% have read it once, only 2% read it regularly (see more detailed statistics and other parameters in the above source). For comparison: 59% of Americans read the Bible from time to time, 37% at least once a week (Gallup, Simmons, 2000); one in three Americans believe that the Bible should be taken literally (Barrick, 2007). It is more likely that the mythologization of consciousness after the collapse of the USSR is due to the influence Western culture through horror films, mystical works, through the spread of all kinds of sects.
Given the Protestant belief in God-given success, especially in monetary terms, it is logical to assume that modern British and American literature on how to achieve one's goals in life would be more or less imbued with mysticism. The way it is. We will demonstrate this using the example of the most famous and popular book on this topic - “Think and Grow Rich” by N. Hill. Although the book was published in 1937, it is still constantly republished in many countries in various versions (full, abridged), and in the USA alone after 1973 it went through over 50 editions, periodically appearing on the “BusinessWeek Best-Seller List” ”(including in 2007). At least 30 million copies were sold worldwide by the end of 2007. There are several sequels. The book was reprinted many times in Russia.
Among various tips on how to achieve your goal (wealth), the author quite seriously gives ways to communicate with the Higher Mind (in order to “beg” from him the desired amount), advises using the sixth sense, talks about the usefulness of telepathy and clairvoyance: “If you pray for something If you are afraid that the Higher Mind will not want to act according to your desire, then you are praying in vain. If you have ever received what you asked for in prayer, remember the state of your soul then - and you will understand that the theory presented here is more than a theory.
The method of communication with the World Mind is similar to the way sound vibrations are transmitted by radio. If you are familiar with the principle of radio operation, then, of course, you know that sound can only be transmitted when its vibrations are converted to a level that is not perceptible to the human ear. A radio transmitting device modifies the human voice, increasing its vibrations a million times. Only in this way can sound energy be transmitted through space. The energy thus converted enters the radio receivers and is reconverted to the original vibration level.
The subconscious, acting as an intermediary, translates the prayer into a Language understandable to the World Mind, conveys the message contained in the prayer, and accepts the answer - in the form of a plan or idea to achieve the goal. Realize this - and you will understand why the words contained in the prayer book cannot and will never be able to connect your mind with the Higher Mind. [...] Your mind is small - tune it to the World Mind. The subconscious is your radio: send prayers and receive answers. The energy of the entire Universe will help your prayers come true. [...]
We have discovered what we want to believe are ideal conditions in which consciousness forces the sixth sense to work (described in the next chapter). [... ]
From what I have experienced in life, the sixth sense is the closest to a miracle. And I know for sure that there is a certain force in the world, or the First Impulse, or Reason, permeating every atom of matter and making clots of energy perceptible to humans; that this World Mind turns acorns into oaks, makes water fall from the hills (making Law responsible for this universal gravity); replaces night with day and winter with summer, establishing for everyone his place and relationship to the rest of the world. This Mind, combined with the principles of our philosophy, can help you too - in transforming your desires into specific material forms. I know this: I have experience - and this experience has taught me" (Hill, 1996).
Such an unusual approach to achieving success should not be surprising: while Soviet schoolchildren were learning logic, American students were learning divine law. If in the USSR it is completely conscious, on state level have abandoned the fatalistic worldview, then in the United States the God-given nature of life's blessings is still promoted. The result is a mystified consciousness, to such an extent that 83% of Americans at the beginning of the 21st century. still believe in the virgin birth (Kristof, 2003).
We do not set ourselves the task of proving the fatalism of the British, Americans or Western people in general in comparison with the Russians. It is enough to demonstrate how easily this could be done on the basis of completely solid and reliable sources, including sociological surveys (which, by the way, ethnolinguists who criticize Russians for fatalism never cite) and the most famous encyclopedias. The materials we have cited on the fatalism of the Protestant worldview are invariably hushed up by critics of the Russian mentality, which is why such criticism is nothing more than a one-sided selection of suitable facts and ignoring the rest.

How to learn to manage people, or If you want to be a leader Solomonov Oleg

Predestination theory

Predestination theory

It can be considered as one aspect of tapestry theory or can be separated into a separate theory. What it consists of can be understood by its name. Our every action, every action is predetermined.

We cannot, of course, completely rely on fate, citing the fact that we cannot be our own masters and decide what to do. We always have the right to choose, however, as they say, what will happen cannot be avoided.

A simple example. All sorts of unforeseen events often happen in life: you are in a hurry somewhere, you are already late, and then, as luck would have it, your trolleybus breaks down, the elevator with you inside gets stuck between floors, your tights or jacket are torn, and you have to hastily sew them up , and this also wastes precious time... In general, as a result, you are late, because of this you are nervous and curse the whole world for nothing. And completely in vain! I have already illustrated the theory of minor mischief with similar situations, but I don’t think it’s superfluous to emphasize once again: you shouldn’t get angry or worry about some unplanned event, it’s not accidental! All this is needed for something, and you just have to understand what exactly it is for. According to this theory of ours, everything in life is predetermined!

Most likely, higher powers made you be late for some very specific purpose: maybe it was necessary so that you would be in the right place at the right time and meet a person whom you would never have met if you had not been late . Or, on the contrary, you were saved from an unwanted meeting, and you safely missed someone. Or maybe your lateness protected you from trouble, saved you from shock or major trouble. That is, all these accidents are far from accidental.

This theory contradicts the statement: “If A had not met B, then he would have met C and would have lived his life just as happily with him!” The theory of predestination insists that our every action is already, so to speak, written in the book of life, that is, this same A simply cannot help but meet B, because he is destined to do so, and there can be no talk of any C . No matter what thoughts spin in our head, no matter what feelings overwhelm us, we will still be in a given place at a given moment in time.

So we come to the concept of fate - according to our theory, it exists, and a person is not able to change it. However, the theory does not call people to inaction and passively waiting for favors from fate, far from it! Water does not flow under a lying stone, you need to fight for happiness and so on, all this is absolutely true. But simply going with the flow, without even trying to flounder, is unworthy of you!

In principle, if a person refuses to fight, preferring to surrender to the will of the waves, if he submits to fate and passively awaits favors from it, then this means that he is not a leader and will never become one. Only the one who always goes forward, who is not afraid to live and believes in himself, can be a leader.

After all, what is fate? It's just a frame, a bare skeleton! You can, of course, leave everything as it is, allowing your fate to have mercy and punish you, humbly accepting all its gifts and punishments, but what kind of life will it be? Or you can add “meat” to the frame, cover it with a beautiful and durable material, varnish, decorate it with something, that is, make a complete work of art from a strange design. If you are destined to connect your life with a certain person and do some things, then you will do all this, but how you will do it is another matter! You are given only a bare diagram, and your task is to revive it, make it work, breathe strength and energy into it!

This theory is especially useful in difficult moments in life, when circumstances are against you and you are unable to change anything. Let's say you are late for a plane: for example, you suddenly became so ill that you were unable to leave the house, or on the way to the airport you were robbed and your ticket was stolen along with your money, or your car got stuck in a traffic jam, and so on. . Be that as it may, circumstances have developed such that you are late for your flight. This is a very unpleasant situation, you feel uneasy, which is quite natural. But is it worth being nervous if you still can’t do anything? Try to accept what happened as a given, learn from this situation maximum benefit for myself. First, think about it: for what purpose were you detained, why was it necessary? Why was it necessary for you not to fly anywhere on this plane?

Perhaps, in this way, higher powers want to teach you a lesson: to show that you are an uncollected person, that you do not know how to calculate time and do everything on time. And most likely, they will achieve their goal - next time you will think through everything to the smallest detail, go to the airport in advance and certainly will not be late for your plane again.

Or maybe they want to teach you how to get out of difficult situations? If you were late for the plane, then you will have to come up with something that would help you make amends to the people who were waiting for you, hoping for you... Or it’s time to break up with your business partners, and your failure to show up for a business meeting will turn out to be a bad thing By the way.

But maybe the reason for what happened is different: who knows, what if this plane is destined to crash? Statistics show that for some reason there are always fewer passengers on planes that have crashed than on regular flights... Many people survived thanks to such “accidents”: someone overslept, someone got stuck in a traffic jam, someone then suddenly an exacerbation of a chronic illness began, and they were forced to hand over their tickets... So if I were you, I would not take the theory of predestination lightly!

Of course, you should not use this theory as a screen to cover up your own irresponsibility! If you didn’t do something important, didn’t fulfill your promise, then it’s your fault, and fate has absolutely nothing to do with it! No theory can justify any human actions, because a theory is designed to help you understand life, find your place in it, learn to appreciate and feel it. I do not urge you to give up the struggle and attempts to fix something, change something. But if you cannot influence events, if circumstances are out of your control, then fighting in this case is a waste of energy and time, but the ability to accept what happened as a given is the only right decision in this situation. On the way to the goal, sometimes you need to make stops - at least to see if you are going the right way and if you are going the right way. Learn to live in the reality that surrounds you.

The theory of predestination is based on the statement that all our actions follow from one another. And if, say, today you want to quit everything and go to the cinema, then this is not by chance, for some reason you need it. Maybe, after watching a film, you suddenly remember something very important to you, or a creative idea will be born in your head that will help you in your work. But perhaps all this is needed not even by you, but by someone from your circle: someone will see you in a movie and fall in love, and why not?

All of us, people, are intertwined and closely touch each other, remember the tapestry theory, and therefore even our impulsive actions, which seem unexpected, absurd, stupid to us, can turn out to be important for other people. And not only for our loved ones! Some passer-by looked at your wonderful hat and decided to buy the same one for himself, went to a hat shop and met a man there, whom he married a year later. If you had not gone to the cinema that day or put on a cap, then a passer-by would not have had the wonderful idea of ​​​​buying something new, he would not have gone to this store, would not have met a certain woman and would not have married her.

Or another example: you were carelessly crossing the street and almost got hit by a trolleybus. Naturally, the situation is unpleasant, but the next day you are unlikely to remember it. But the child, who was looking at you from afar and whom you yourself, of course, did not notice, was shocked, and this incident, quite possibly, will be forever etched in his memory.

Or maybe you were just walking down the street and smiling at your thoughts, without putting anything special into your smile. And another person was walking towards you, he felt very bad and sad, he had some kind of trouble in his life... And suddenly he looked at you and saw your smile! And he felt better, his soul was lighter, this could also happen, right?

Or, let’s say, you were chewing an apple and, having finished it, threw the core on the sidewalk (we’re not talking about your upbringing now!). The poor fellow was following you, completely immersed in his thoughts, and on this very stub he slipped, fell and broke his leg.

It was a terrible situation, but thanks to what happened, this man ended up in the hospital, where he met his first love. She turned out to be a nurse, feelings flared up in them with the same intensity, and in the end they got married. Of course, all this is a set of coincidences. But who knows how the lives of these people would have turned out if you had not thrown the apple core onto the sidewalk... Just, for God’s sake, do not think that I am calling you to such actions!

You can, of course, wonder for a long time: if you had not thrown the stub, the person following you would not have slipped on it and fallen, would not have ended up in the hospital, would not have met his first love... Of course, the theory of predestination insists on the fact that everything you did was predetermined in advance, and even the choice of clothes, path and everything else was not accidental. This theory has many supporters.

This text is an introductory fragment. From the book Psychodiagnostics author Luchinin Alexey Sergeevich

6. Factor analysis. Ch. Spearman's two-factor theory of abilities. Multifactor theory of abilities by T. L. Killey and L. Thurston Test batteries (sets) were created to select applicants for medical, legal, engineering and other educational establishments. Basis for

author

Theory Psychoanalysis, a psychological movement founded by the Austrian psychiatrist and psychologist Sigmund Freud at the end of the 19th century, developed from a method of studying and treating hysterical neuroses. Subsequently, Freud created a general psychological theory that placed at the center

From the book Techniques of Psychoanalysis and Therapy by Adler author Malkina-Pykh Irina Germanovna

Theory Adlerian psychology (Individual psychology) - a personality theory and therapeutic system developed by Alfred Adler - views the individual holistically as endowed with creativity, responsibility, striving for imaginary goals in

author Prusova N V

24. The concept of motivation. Theories of motivation. McClelland's theory of the need for achievement. A. Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory Motivation is a set of human needs that can stimulate him as a member of a work team to achieve certain

From the book Labor Psychology author Prusova N V

25. ERG theory. Two-factor theory of F. Herzberg (according to D. Schultz, S. Schultz, “Psychology and Work”) ERG theory (existence - “existence”, related-ness - “relationships”, growth - “growth”), author K. Alderfer. The theory is based on the hierarchy of needs according to A. Maslow. The author considered the main

From the book PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORIES OF DEVELOPMENT by Tyson Robert

Energy theory or cognitive theory? In Freud's formulation, the primary process refers both to that which is responsible for the distortion of logical, rational thinking in the search for satisfaction, and to the form of mental processes. Of course, how

From the book Motivation and Personality author Maslow Abraham Harold

Theory Category-based theories are mostly abstract, that is, they highlight certain properties of a phenomenon as more important, or at least worthy of more attention. Thus, any such theory, or for that matter any

From the book People Who Play Games [The Psychology of Human Fate] by Bern Eric

E. Theory Enough about “Hello” and “Goodbye” for now. And what happens in between belongs to a special theory of personality and group dynamics that also serves as a therapeutic method known as transactional analysis. And to understand

From the book People Who Play Games [Book 2] by Bern Eric

Theory I think enough has been said about “hello” and “goodbye” for now. We will try to explain the essence of the relationship between them using transaction analysis. In order to correctly understand the following material, we must again return to the principles of this

From the book The Intelligence of Success author Sternberg Robert

Game theory Game theory assumes that the decision process various solutions, especially those that are taken by more than one person, have similarities with games. Sometimes the aspects related to game features are quite simple. For example, when playing chess or checkers, one

From the book Tough Negotiations, or simply about difficult things author Kotkin Dmitry

3. The principle of predetermination Negotiations are won before the words of greeting are heard, even at the preparation stage. This may sound paradoxical and unusual for a modern businessman. We are already accustomed to a pro-Western attitude in negotiations, which

Predestination

An example of predestination and fate can be found in the story of King Cyrus the Great (his future was seen in a dream by his grandfather Cyrus I). At the same time, the idea of ​​predestination was combined among the Greeks and Romans with the idea that a person’s conscious activity could still have meaning. Thus, Polybius in his “General History” constantly emphasizes the role of fate, but it is still possible to break the circle, especially if an outstanding person comes to power. Cornelius Tacitus in one of his books reflects on the problem of “whether human affairs are determined by fate and inexorable necessity or by chance,” citing various opinions on this matter, one of which says that the gods do not care in the slightest about mortals, the other that life circumstances are predetermined by fate , but not due to the movement of stars, but due to the reasons and interconnection of natural causes. But most mortals believe that their future is predetermined from birth. Thus, the worldview of the Greeks and Romans was characterized by duality, rather than complete providentialism.

Predestination in Christianity

Predestination is one of the most difficult points of religious philosophy, associated with the question of divine properties, the nature and origin of evil and the relationship of grace to freedom (see Religion, Free Will, Christianity, Ethics).

Morally free beings can consciously prefer evil to good; and indeed, the stubborn and unrepentant persistence of many in evil is an undoubted fact. But since everything that exists, from the point of view of monotheistic religion, ultimately depends on the omnipotent will of the omniscient Deity, it means that persistence in evil and the resulting death of these beings is a product of the same divine will, predetermining some to good and salvation, others - to evil and destruction.

To resolve these disputes, the Orthodox teaching was more precisely defined at several local councils, the essence of which boils down to the following: God wants everyone to be saved, and therefore absolute predestination or predestination to moral evil does not exist; but true and final salvation cannot be violent and external, and therefore the action of the goodness and wisdom of God for the salvation of man uses all means for this purpose, with the exception of those that would abolish moral freedom; therefore, rational beings who consciously reject all help from grace for their salvation cannot be saved and, according to the omniscience of God, are predestined to exclusion from the kingdom of God, or to destruction. Predestination, therefore, refers only to the necessary consequences of evil, and not to evil itself, which is only the resistance of free will to the action of saving grace.

The question here is resolved, therefore, dogmatically.

Predestination in the Bible

One of the first Russian ships, Goto Predestination (1711), was named in honor of this concept.

see also

Notes

Literature

• Timothy George The Theology of the Reformers, Nashville, Tenn., 1988.
• Friehoff C. Die Pradestintionslehre bei Thomas von Aquino und Calvin. Freiburg, 1926,
• Farrelly J, Predestination, Grace, and Free Will, Westminster, 1964.
• I. Manannikov “Predestination”, Catholic Encyclopedia. Volume 3, Franciscan Publishing House 2007
• Alistair McGrath, Theological Thought of the Reformation, Odessa, 1994.
• The Divine Aurelius Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, on the predestination of the saints, the first book to Prosper and Hilary, M.: Put, 2000.
• Calvin J. “Instructions in the Christian Faith”, St. Petersburg, 1997.

Links

• Foresight and predestination Orthodox encyclopedia “ABC of Faith”
• Predestination and free will in Islam (kalam) Russian translation of Chapter VIII from the book Wolfson H. A. The Philosophy of the Kalam. Harvard University Press, 1976. 810 p.
• The Gottschalk Homepage - English-language site dedicated to the doctrine of predestination by Gottschalk of Orbe. Gottschalk's Latin works are available on the site, as well as a detailed bibliography

While the Lutheran Church arose from a concern with the doctrine of justification, the Reformed Church was born out of a desire to reestablish the evangelical model of the apostolic Church, which we will look at in more detail in Chapter 9. We will now turn our attention to one of the leading ideas of Reformed theology, which has great importance for his political and social theories, - on the concept of divine sovereignty. Reformed theologians considered Luther's interest in personal experience to be too subjective and too individual-centered; They were concerned, first of all, with the establishment of objective criteria on the basis of which it was possible to reform society and the Church. And they found such criteria in Scripture. They had little time to devote to scholastic theology, which never posed a serious threat to the Swiss Reformation.

The doctrine of predestination is often seen as a core feature of Reformed theology. For many, the concept of “Calvinist” is almost identical to the definition of “a person who pays great attention to the doctrine of predestination.” How then did the concept of mercy, which for Luther meant the justification of the sinner, come to be related to the sovereignty of God, especially as expressed in the doctrine of predestination? And how did this evolution take place? In this chapter we will consider the understanding of the doctrine of mercy as presented by the Reformed Church.

Zwingli on Divine Sovereignty

Zwingli began his pastorate in Zurich on January 1, 1519. This ministry almost ended in August of the same year, when Zurich was hit by a plague epidemic. That such epidemics were common in the early sixteenth century should not detract from its drama: at least one in four, and perhaps one in two, inhabitants of Zurich died between August 1519 and February 1520. Zwingli's pastorate included consoling the dying, which naturally required contact with the sick. Being near the dying, Zwingli fully realized that his life was completely in the hands of God. We have a poetic fragment, generally known as the "Pestlied" ("Plague Song"), which is dated in the autumn of 1519. In it we find Zwingli's reflections on his fate. There are no appeals to saints or assumptions about the intercession of the Church. Instead, we find a firm determination to accept whatever God sends to man. Zwingli is ready to accept everything that God puts into his lot:

Do according to Your will, For I lack nothing. I am Your vessel, Ready to be saved or destroyed.

Reading these lines, one cannot help but feel Zwingli’s complete submission to the Divine will. Zwingli's disease was not fatal. Probably from this experience grew his conviction that he was an instrument in the hands of God, completely obedient to His purpose.

We noted earlier that Luther's difficulties with the "righteousness of God" were as much existential as they were theological. Clearly, Zwingli's emphasis on Divine Providence also has a strong existential side. For Zwingli, the question of God's omnipotence was not purely academic, but had direct significance for his existence. While Luther's theology, at least initially, was largely shaped by his personal experience to justify him, a sinner, Zwingli's theology was almost entirely shaped by his sense of the absolute Divine sovereignty and the complete dependence of humanity on His will. The idea of ​​the absolute sovereignty of God was developed by Zwingli in his doctrine of Providence and especially in his famous sermon “De providentia” (“On Providence”). Many of Zwingli's more critical readers noted similarities between his ideas and Seneca's fatalism and suggested that Zwingli only revived Senecan fatalism and gave it a self-critical meaning. Some weight was given to this assumption by Zwingli's interest in Seneca and references to him in De providentia. The salvation or damnation of an individual depends entirely on God, who judges freely from the perspective of eternity. However, it appears that Zwingli's emphasis on divine omnipotence and human impotence was ultimately drawn from the writings of Paul, reinforced by his reading of Seneca, and imbued with the existential significance of his subsequent close encounter with death in August 1519.

It is very instructive to compare the attitudes of Luther and Zwingli to Scripture, which reflect their different approaches to the grace of God. For Luther, the main meaning of Scripture is the gracious promises of God, which culminate in the promise of justification of the sinner by faith. For Zwingli, Scripture is first and foremost the Law of God, a code of conduct containing the demands made by a sovereign God on His people. Luther makes a sharp distinction between law and Scripture, while for Zwingli they are essentially the same thing.

It was Zwingli's growing interest in the sovereignty of God that led to his break with humanism. It is difficult to say exactly when Zwingli ceased to be a humanist and became a reformer: there are good reasons to assume that Zwingli remained a humanist throughout his life. As we saw above (pp. 59-63), Kristeller's definition of humanism concerns its methods, not its doctrines: if this definition of humanism is applied to Zwingli, then we can conclude that he remained a humanist throughout his ministry. Similar remarks apply to Calvin. One may, however, object: how can these people be considered humanists if they developed such an inexorable doctrine of predestination? Of course, one cannot call Zwingli or Calvin a humanist, if we use this term in the meaning that is given to this concept in the twentieth century. However, this does not apply to the sixteenth century. If we remember that numerous writers of antiquity - such as Seneca and Lucretius - developed a fatalistic philosophy, then it becomes clear that there is every reason to consider both reformers as humanists. Nevertheless, it appears that it was at this point in his ministry that Zwingli changed his mind on one of the central issues shared by his contemporary Swiss humanists. If Zwingli was still a humanist after this, he was expressive of a particular form of humanism that might be regarded by his colleagues as slightly eccentric.

The reform program begun by Zwingli in Zurich in 1519 was essentially humanist. The character of his use of Scripture is deeply Erasmian, as is his preaching style, although his political views are tinged with the Swiss nationalism that Erasmus rejected. More important for our consideration is that the Reformation was seen as an educational process, reflecting the views of both Erasmus and the Swiss humanist fraternities. In a letter to his colleague Myconius, dated December 31, 1519, Zwingli, summing up the first year of his stay in Zurich, announced that his result was that “more than two thousand more or less educated people appeared in Zurich.” However, the letter of July 24, 1520 paints an image of Zwingli admitting the failure of the humanistic concept of the Reformation: the success of the Reformation required more than the educational views of Quintilian. The fate of humanity in general, and the Reformation in particular, was determined by Divine Providence. God, not humanity, is the main actor in the Reformation process. The educational technique of the humanists was a half-measure that did not address the root of the problem.

This skepticism about the viability of the humanist reform program was made public in March 1515, when Zwingli published his Commentary on True and False Religion. Zwingli attacked two ideas that were central to the Erasmian reform program - the idea of ​​"free will" (libemm arbitrium), which Erasmus had persistently defended in 1524, and the proposal that educational methods could reform a depraved and sinful humanity. According to Zwingli, providential Divine intervention was required, without which true Reformation was impossible. It is also well known that in 1525 Luther’s militantly anti-Erasmus work “De servo arbitrio” (“On the Slavery of the Will”) was published, in which Erasmus’s doctrine of free will was criticized. Luther's work is imbued with the spirit of the complete sovereignty of God, associated with a doctrine of predestination similar to that of Zwingli. Many humanists found this emphasis on human sinfulness and divine omnipotence unacceptable, which led to a certain estrangement between Zwingli and many of his former supporters.

Calvin on Predestination

In popular perception, Calvin's religious thought appears to be a strictly logical system centering on the doctrine of predestination. No matter how widespread this image is, it has little to do with reality; Whatever the importance of the doctrine of predestination to later Calvinism (see pp. 162-166), it does not reflect Calvin's views on the matter. Calvin's successors later in the sixteenth century, faced with the need to apply a method of systematization to his teachings, found that his theology was eminently suitable for transformation into the more rigorous logical structures defined by the Aristotelian methodology so beloved of the late Italian Renaissance (p. 62) . This led to the simple conclusion that Calvin's thought itself had the systematic structure and logical rigor of later Reformed orthodoxy, and allowed orthodoxy's interest in the doctrine of predestination to be traced back to the Institutes of the Christian Faith of 1559. As will be pointed out below (pp. 162-166), there is some difference on this point between Calvin and Calvinism that marks and reflects a significant turning point in intellectual history in general. Calvin's followers developed his ideas in accordance with the new spirit of the times, which regarded systematization and interest in method as not only respectable, but also highly desirable.

Calvin's theological thought also reflected a concern with human sinfulness and divine omnipotence and found its fullest expression in his doctrine of predestination. In the early period of his life, Calvin held soft humanistic views on the Reformation, which were perhaps similar to the views of Lefebvre d'Etaples (Stapulensis). By 1533, however, he took a more radical position. On November 2, 1533, rector of the University of Paris Nicola Cope gave a speech to mark the start of the new school year, in which he hinted at several important themes associated with the Lutheran Reformation.Although these hints were very careful and alternated with lamentations of traditional Catholic theology, the speech caused a scandal. The rector and Calvin, who probably took part in composing the speech, were forced to flee Paris.Where and how did the young humanist become a reformer?

The question of the date and nature of Calvin's conversion has preoccupied many generations of scholars of his legacy, although these studies have yielded incredibly little concrete results. It is generally accepted that Calvin moved from mild humanistic views of the Reformation to a more radical platform in late 1533 or early 1534, but we know why. Calvin describes his conversion in two places in his later works, but we do not have Luther's wealth of autobiographical detail. However, it is clear that Calvin attributes his conversion to Divine Providence. He claims that he was deeply devoted to "popish superstitions", and only the action of God could free him. He claims that God "humbled his heart and brought him into submission." Once again we encounter the same emphasis characteristic of the Reformation: the powerlessness of humanity and the omnipotence of God. It is these ideas that are associated and developed in Calvin's doctrine of predestination.

Although some scholars have argued that predestination was central to Calvin's theological thought, it is now clear that this is not the case. It is only one aspect of his doctrine of salvation. Calvin's main contribution to the development of the doctrine of grace is the strict logic of his approach. This is best seen by comparing the views of Augustine and Calvin on this doctrine.

For Augustine, humanity after the Fall is corrupt and powerless, requiring the grace of God for salvation. This grace is not given to everyone. Augustine uses the term “predestination” to mean the escheat of the bestowal of Divine grace. It refers to the special divine decision and action by which God bestows His grace on those who will be saved. However, the question arises as to what happens to the rest. God passes them by. He does not specifically decide to condemn them, He just does not save them. According to Augustine, predestination refers only to the Divine decision of redemption, not to the abandonment of the remainder of fallen humanity.

For Calvin, strict logic requires that God actively decide whether to redeem or condemn. God cannot be assumed to do things by default: He is active and sovereign in His actions. Therefore, God actively desires the salvation of those who will be saved and the damnation of those who will not be saved. Predestination is therefore “the eternal command of God, by which He determines what He wills for each individual person. He does not create equal conditions for everyone, but he prepares eternal life for some and eternal damnation for others.” One of the central functions of this doctrine is to emphasize the mercy of God. For Luther, God's mercy is expressed in the fact that He justifies sinners, people who are unworthy of such a privilege. For Calvin, God's mercy is manifested in His decision to redeem individuals, regardless of their merit: the decision to redeem a person is made regardless of how worthy the person is. For Luther, Divine mercy is manifested in the fact that He saves sinners despite their vices; for Calvin, mercy is manifested in God saving individuals regardless of their merits. Although Luther and Calvin defended God's mercy from slightly different points of view, they affirmed the same principle in their views on justification and predestination.

Although the doctrine of predestination was not central to Calvin's theology, it became the core of later Reformed theology through the influence of authors such as Peter Martyr Vermigli and Theodore Beza. From approx. 1570 the theme of “chosenness” began to dominate Reformed theology and allowed Reformed communities to be identified with the people of Israel. Just as God had once chosen Israel, He now chose the Reformed congregations to be His people. From this moment on, the doctrine of predestination begins to perform a leading social and political function, which it did not possess under Calvin.

Calvin sets forth his doctrine of predestination in the third book of the Institutes of the Christian Faith, 1559 edition, as one aspect of the doctrine of the atonement through Christ. The earliest edition of this work (1536) treats it as one aspect of the doctrine of providence. Since the 1539 edition it has been treated as an equal topic.

Calvin's consideration of “the manner in which the grace of Christ is received, the advantages it brings with it, and the results to which it produces” suggests that there is the possibility of redemption through what Christ achieved by His death on the cross. Having discussed how this death can become the basis for human redemption (see pp. 114–115), Calvin moves on to discuss how man can benefit from the advantages that result from it. Thus the discussion moves from the grounds of the atonement to the means of its implementation.

The order of consideration that follows is a mystery to many generations of Calvin scholars. Calvin addresses a number of issues in the following order: faith, regeneration, Christian life, justification, predestination. Based on Calvin's definition of the relationship between these entities, one would expect this order to be somewhat different: predestination would precede justification, and regeneration would follow it. Calvin's order appears to reflect educational considerations rather than theological precision.

Calvin attaches emphatically little importance to the doctrine of predestination, devoting only four chapters to it (chapters 21-24 of the third book in the following III. XXI-XXIV). Predestination is defined as “the eternal command of God by which He determines what He wants to do to each person. For He does not create everyone in the same conditions, but ordains eternal life for some, and eternal damnation for others” (HI. xxi. 5). Predestination should fill us with a sense of awe. "Dectum horribile" (Ill. xxiii. 7) is not a "terrible command", as a literal translation, insensitive to the nuances of the Latin language, might betray; on the contrary, it is an “awe-inspiring” or “terrifying” command.

The very location of Calvin's discussion of predestination in the Institutes of 1559 is significant. It follows his exposition of the doctrine of grace. It is only after discussing the great themes of this doctrine, such as justification by faith, that Calvin turns to consider the mysterious and puzzling category of "predestination." From a logical point of view, predestination would have to precede this analysis; after all, predestination sets the stage for man's election and, consequently, his subsequent justification and sanctification. And yet Calvin refuses to submit to the canons of such logic. Why?

For Calvin, predestination must be seen in its proper context. It is not a product of human reflection, but a mystery of Divine revelation (I. ii. 2; III. xxi. 12). However, it was discovered in a specific context and in a specific way. This method is associated with Jesus Christ himself, who is “the mirror in which we can see the fact of our election” (III. xxiv. 5). Context relates to the strength of the gospel call. Why is it that some people respond to the Christian gospel and others do not? Should this be attributed to a certain impotence inherent in the inadequacy of this Gospel? Or is there another reason for these differences in response?

Far from dry, abstract theological speculation, Calvin's analysis of predestination begins with observable facts. Some believe the Gospel and some don't. The primary function of the doctrine of predestination is to explain why the gospel resonates with some but not with others. It is an ex post facto explanation of the uniqueness of human responses to grace. Calvin's Predestinarianism must be regarded as an a posteriori reflection of the data of human experience interpreted in the light of Scripture, and not as something deduced a priori from a preconceived idea of ​​Divine omnipotence. Belief in predestination is not in itself a part of faith, but the final result of scriptural reflection on the influence of grace on people in the light of the mysteries of human experience.

Experience shows that God does not influence every human heart (III. xxiv. l5). Why is this happening? Is this due to some deficiency on God's part? Or is there something stopping the Gospel from converting every person? In the light of Scripture, Calvin feels able to deny the possibility of any weakness or inadequacy on the part of God or the Gospel; the observed paradigm of human responses to the gospel reflects the mystery by which some are predestined to accept the promises of God and others to reject them. “For some are destined for eternal life, and for others eternal damnation” (III. xxi. 5).

Doctrine of Predestination

It should be emphasized that this is not a theological innovation. Calvin does not introduce a previously unknown concept into the realm of Christian theology. As we have already seen, the “modern Augustinian school” (schola Augustiniana moderna), represented by such representatives as Gregory of Rimini, also taught the doctrine of absolute double predestination: God destined for some eternal life, and for others eternal damnation, regardless of their personal merits or shortcomings. Their fate depends entirely on the will of God, and not on their individuality. Indeed, it is quite possible that Calvin consciously adopted this aspect of late medieval Augustinianism, which bears an extraordinary similarity to his own teaching.

Thus, salvation is beyond the power of people who are powerless to change the existing situation. Calvin emphasizes that this selectivity is not limited to the question of salvation. In all areas of life, he argues, we are forced to confront an incomprehensible mystery. Why are some people more successful in life than others? Why does one person have intellectual gifts that are denied to others? Even from the moment of birth, two babies, without any fault of their own, may find themselves in completely different circumstances: one may be brought to a breast full of milk and thus be nourished, while the other may suffer from malnutrition, forced to suckle almost dry. breast. For Calvin, predestination was just another manifestation of the common mystery of human existence, in which some receive material and intellectual gifts that are denied to others. It does not cause any additional difficulties that are not present in other areas of human existence.

Does the idea of ​​predestination imply that God is freed from traditional categories of goodness, justice, or rationality? Although Calvin particularly rejects the concept of God as an Absolute and Arbitrary Power, from his consideration of predestination emerges the image of a God whose relationship with creation is whimsical and capricious, and whose authority is not bound by any law or order. Here Calvin clearly places himself in line with the late medieval understanding of this controversial issue, and especially with the "via moderna" and "schola Augustiniana moderna" in the question of the relationship between God and the established moral order. God is in no sense subject to law, for this would place the law above God, an aspect of creation, and even something outside of God before creation above the Creator. God is outside the law in the sense that His will is the basis of existing concepts of morality (III. xxiii. 2). These brief statements represent one of Calvin's clearest points of contact with the late medieval voluntarist tradition.

Finally, Calvin argues that predestination must be recognized as based on the incomprehensible judgments of God (III. xxi. 1). It is not given to us to know why He chooses some and condemns others. Some scholars argue that this position may reflect the influence of late medieval discussions of the "absolute power of God (potentia Dei absolute)", according to which the Capricious or Voluntarily Acting God is free to do whatever He wishes without having to justify His actions. This assumption, however, is based on a misunderstanding of the role of the dialectical relationship between the two powers of God - absolute and predetermined - in late medieval theological thought. God is free to choose whomever He wishes, otherwise His freedom will become subject to external considerations and the Creator will be subject to His creation. Nevertheless. Divine decisions reflect His wisdom and justice, which are supported by predestination, and do not conflict with it (III. xxii. 4 III. xxiii. 2).

Far from being the central aspect of Calvin's theological system (if that word can be used at all), predestination is therefore an auxiliary doctrine that explains the mysterious aspect of the consequences of the proclamation of the gospel of grace. However, as Calvin's followers sought to develop and reshape his thought in the light of new intellectual directions, it was inevitable (if this potentially predestinarian style could be justified) that changes were bound to occur in his proposed structure of Christian theology.

Predestination in Late Calvinism

As stated above, it is not entirely true to speak of Calvin as developing a “system” in the strict sense of the term. Calvin's religious ideas, as presented in the Institutes of 1559, are systematized on the basis of pedagogical considerations, rather than a leading speculative principle. Calvin considered biblical exposition and systematic theology to be essentially identical and refused to make the distinction between them that became common after his death.

During this period, a new interest in the method of systematization, that is, the systematic organization and sequential conclusion of ideas, received impetus. Reformed theologians were faced with the need to defend their ideas against both Lutheran and Roman Catholic opponents. Aristotelianism, which Calvin himself had viewed with some suspicion, was now seen as an ally. It became extremely important to demonstrate the internal consistency and consistency of Calvinism. Consequently, many Calvinist authors turned to Aristotle in the hope of finding in his writings on method hints on how to give their theology a firmer rational basis.

Four characteristics of this new approach to theology can be pointed out:

1. Human reason has a primary role in the exploration and defense of Christian theology.

2. Christian theology was presented in the form of a logically consistent, rationally defensible system, derived from syllogistic conclusions based on known axioms. In other words, theology began with first principles from which its doctrines were derived.

3. It was believed that theology should be based on Aristotelian philosophy, in particular on his views on the nature of method; Late Reformed authors are better called philosophical, rather than biblical, theologians.

4. It was believed that theology should deal with metaphysical and speculative questions, especially those related to the nature of God, His will for humanity and creation, and, above all, the doctrine of predestination.

Thus, the starting point of theology was general principles rather than a specific historical event. The contrast with Calvina is quite obvious. For him, theology focused on Jesus Christ and came from His appearance as evidenced in Scripture. It is the new interest in establishing a logical starting point for theology that allows us to understand the attention that began to be given to the doctrine of predestination. Calvin focused on the specific historical phenomenon of Jesus Christ and then proceeded to explore its meaning (that is, in appropriate terms, his method was analytical and inductive). In contrast, Beza began with general principles and then moved on to explore their implications for Christian theology (i.e., his method was deductive and synthetic).

What general principles did Beza use as starting points for his theological systematization? The answer to this question is that he based his system on the Divine commands of election, that is, on the Divine decision to choose some people for salvation and others for damnation. Beza views everything else as consequences of these decisions. Thus, the doctrine of predestination received the status of a governing principle.

One important consequence of this principle can be pointed out: the doctrine of "limited reconciliation" or "particular atonement" (the term "reconciliation" is often used in reference to the benefits resulting from the death of Christ). Let's consider the following question. For whom did Christ die? The traditional answer to this question is that Christ died for everyone. However, although His death can redeem all, it has a real effect only on those whom it can have this effect on by the will of God.

This question was raised very sharply during the great predestinary controversy of the ninth century, during which the Benedictine monk Godescalcus of Orbais (also known as Gottschok) developed a doctrine of double predestination, similar to the later constructions of Calvin and his followers. With merciless logic, examining the consequences of his assertion that God has predestined eternal damnation for some people, Godeskalk pointed out that in this regard it is incorrect to say that Christ died for such people, for if this is so, then His death was in vain, for it did not have any effect. influence on their fate.

Hesitating over the consequences of his statements, Godeskalk expressed the idea that Christ died only for the elect. The scope of His atoning works is limited to those who are destined to benefit from His death. Most ninth-century authors viewed this claim with disbelief. However, he was destined to be reborn in late Calvinism.

Related to this new emphasis on predestination was an interest in the idea of ​​election. As we explored the characteristic ideas of the via moderna (pp. 99-102), we noted the idea of ​​a covenant between God and believers, similar to the covenant made between God and Israel in the Old Testament. This idea began to gain increasing importance in the rapidly growing Reformed Church. Reformed congregations saw themselves as the new Israel, the new people of God who were in a new covenant relationship with God.

The “Covenant of Grace” declared the duties of God towards His people and the duties of the people (religious, social and political) towards Him. It defined the framework within which society and individuals functioned. The form which this theology took in England, Puritanism, is of particular interest. The feeling of being “God’s chosen people” intensified as God’s new people entered the new “promised land” of America. Although this process is beyond the scope of this work, it is important to understand that the social, political, and religious views that characterized the settlers of New England were drawn from the European Reformation of the sixteenth century. The international Reformed social worldview is based on the concept of God's chosenness and the “covenant of grace.”

In contrast, later Lutheranism abandoned Luther's 1525 views on divine predestination and preferred to develop within the framework of free human response to God rather than sovereign divine election of specific individuals. For late sixteenth-century Lutheranism, "election" meant a human decision to love God, not a divine decision to choose certain people. Indeed, disagreement over the doctrine of predestination was one of the two major points of contention that occupied polemical writers during subsequent centuries (the other being the sacraments). Lutherans never had that sense of “God’s chosenness” and, accordingly, were more modest in their attempts to expand their sphere of influence. The remarkable success of "international Calvinism" reminds us of the power with which an idea can transform individuals and whole groups of people - the Reformed doctrine of election and predestination was undoubtedly the leading force in the great expansion of the Reformed Church in the seventeenth century.

The Doctrine of Grace and the Reformation

“The Reformation, when viewed internally, was but the final victory of the Augustinian doctrine of grace over the Augustinian doctrine of the Church.” This famous remark by Benjamin B. Warfield perfectly sums up the importance of the doctrine of grace to the development of the Reformation. The Reformers believed that they had freed the Augustinian doctrine of grace from the distortions and false interpretations of the medieval Church. For Luther, the Augustinian doctrine of grace, as expressed in the doctrine of justification by faith alone, was "articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae" ("the article on which the Church stands or falls"). If there were minor and not so minor differences between Augustine and the Reformers regarding the doctrine of grace, the latter explained them by more superior textual and philological methods, which, unfortunately, Augustine did not have at his disposal. For the Reformers, and especially for Luther, the doctrine of grace constituted the Christian Church - any compromise or deviation on this issue made by a church group led to the loss of that group's status as a Christian Church. The medieval Church lost its “Christian” status, which justified the reformers’ break with it, carried out in order to reaffirm the Gospel.

Augustine, however, developed an ecclesiology, or doctrine of the Church, which denied any such action. In the early fifth century, during the Donatist controversy, Augustine emphasized the unity of the Church, arguing heatedly against the temptation to form schismatic groups when the main line of the Church seemed erroneous. On this issue the reformers felt justified in disregarding Augustine's opinion, believing that his views on grace were much more important than his views on the Church. The Church, they argued, was a product of God's grace - and therefore the latter was of primary importance. Opponents of the Reformation did not agree with this, arguing that the Church itself was the guarantor of the Christian faith. Thus the ground was prepared for the controversy about the nature of the church, to which we will return in ch. 9. We now turn our attention to the second great theme of Reformation thought: the need for a return to Scripture.

For further reading

On the Doctrine of Predestination in General, cm.:

Timothy George, The Theology of the Reformers (Nashville, Tenn., 1988), pp. 73-79; 231-234.

Excellent overviews of Tsingvli's life and work, cm.:

G. R-Potter, Zwingli (Cambridge, 1976).

W. P. Stephans, The Theology of Huldrych Zwingli (Oxford, 1986).

Doctrinal development in later Reformed thought, cm.:

Richard A. Muller, Christ and the Decree: Christology and Predestination from Calvin to Perkins (Grand Rapids, Mich., 1988)

Excellent overviews of Calvin's life and work, cm.:

William J. Bouwsma, John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait (Oxford, 1989).

Alistair E. McGrath, A Life of John Calvin (Oxford, 1990).

T. H. L. Parker, John Calvin (London, 1976).

Richard Stauffer, "Calvin," in International Calvinism 1541-1715, ed. M. Prestwich (Oxford, 1985), pp. 15-38.

Francois Wendel, Calvin: The Origins and Development of his Religious Thought (New York, 1963).

Notes:

Id="note_06_001">

Id="note_06_002">

Id="note_06_003">

Id="note_06_004">

Id="note_06_005">

Id="note_06_006">

Id="note_06_007">

>

Chapter 7. Return to Scripture

Id="note_07_001">

1. See the master's collection of studies in Cambridge History of the Bible, eds P. R. Ackroyd et al. (3 vols: Cambridge, 1963-69)

Id="note_07_002">

2. See Alistair E. McGrath, The Intellectual Origins of the European Reformation (Oxford, 1987), pp. 140-51. Two major studies of this topic should be noted: Paul de Vooght, “Les sources de la doctrine chretienne d"apres las Theologiens du XIVsiecle et du debut du XV” (Paris, 1954); Hermann Schuessler, (Herman Schuessler) “Der Primaet der Heiligen Schrift als theologisches und kanonistisches Problem im Spaetmittelalter” (Wiesbaden, 1977).

Id="note_07_003">

3. Heiko A. Oberman (Heiko Oberman), “Quo vadis, Petre! Tradition from Irenaeus to Humani Generis" ("Who are you coming, Peter? Tradition from Irenaeus to Humani Generis"), in "The Dawn of the Reformation: Essays in Late Medieval and Early Reformation Thought" (Edinburgh, 1986). pp. 269-96.

Id="note_07_004">

4.CM. George H. Tavard, “Holy Writ or Holy Church? The Crisis of the Protestant Reformation (Holy Scripture or Holy Church? Crisis of the Protestant Reformation) (London, 1959)

Id="note_07_005">

5. See J. N. D. Kelly, Jerome: Life, Writings and Controversies (London, 1975) Strictly speaking, the term "Vulgate" describes Jerome's translation of the Old Testament (except the Psalter, taken from the Gallican Psalter); the Apocryphal Books (except the Books of the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, 1 and 2 Maccabees and Baruch, taken from the Old Latin Version) and the entire New Testament.

Id="note_07_006">

6. See Raphael Loewe, “The Medieval History of the Latin Vulgate,” in Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 2, pp. 102-54

Id="note_07_007">

7. See McGrath, “Intellectual origins,” pp. 124-5 and references therein.

Id="note_07_008">

8. Henry Hargreaves, “The Wycliffite Versions,” in Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 2, pp. 387-415.

Id="note_07_009">

9. See Basil Hall, “Biblical Scholarship: Editions and Commentaries,” in Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 3, pp. 38-93.

Id="note_07_010">

10. See Roland H. Bainton, Erasmus of Christendom (New York, 1969), pp. 168-71.

Id="note_07_011">

11. Roland H. Bainton, “The Bible in the Reformation” in Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 3, pp. 1 - 37; especially pp. 6-9

Id="note_07_012">

12. For further discussion of the problem of the New Testament canon, see Roger H. Beckwith, The Old Nestament Canon of the New Testament Church (London, 1985).

Id="note_07_013">

13. See Pierre Fraenkel, Testimonia Patrum: The Function of the Patristuic Argumant in the Theology of Philip Melanchton (Geneva, 1961); Alistair E. McGrath, "The Intellectual Origins of the European Reformation", pp. 175-90.

Id="note_07_014">

Id="note_07_015">

15. G. R. Potter, Zwingli (Cambridge, 1976), pp. 74-96.

Id="note_07_016">

16. See Heiko A. Oberman, Masters of the Reformation: The Emergence of a New Intellectual Climate in Europe (Cambridge, 1981), pp. 187-209.

>

Id="note_08_001">

1. This passage uses a number of biblical texts, most notably Matt. 2b: 26-8; OK. 22: 19-20; 1 Cor. 11: 24. For details, see: Basil Hall, “Hoc est corpus theit: The Centrality of the Real Presence for Luther,” in “Luther: Theologian for Catholics and Protestants,” ed. George Yule (Edinburgh, 1985), pp. 112-44.

Id="note_08_002">

2. For an analysis of the reasons underlying Luther's rejection of Aristotle on this issue, see Alistair McGrath, Luther's Theology of the Cross: Martin Luther's Theological Breakthrough. Martin Luther") (Oxford, 1985), pp. 136-41.

Id="note_08_003">

3. Other important texts used by Luther include 1 Cor. 10: 16-33; 11:26-34. See David C. Steinmetz, “Scripture and the Lord's Supper in Luther's Theology” in Luther in Context (Bloomington, Ind., 1986 ), pp. 72-84.

Id="note_08_004">

4. See W. P. Stephens, The Theology of Huldrych Zwingli (Oxford, 1986), pp. 18093.

Id="note_08_005">

5.CM. Timothy George, "The Presuppositions of Zwingli's Baptismal Theology", in "Prophet, Pastor, Protestant: The Work of Huldrych Zwingli after Five Hundred Years", eds E. J. Furcha and H Wayne Pipkin (Allison Park, PA, 1984), pp. 71-87, especially pp. 79-82.

Id="note_08_006">

6. On this issue and its political and institutional importance, see Robert C. Walton, “The Institutionalization of the Reformation at Zurich,” Zwingliana 13 (1972), pp. . 297-515.

Id="note_08_007">

7. Pope Clement VII made peace in Barcelona on June 29; The King of France reached an agreement with Charles V on August 3. The Marburg Dispute took place on October 1-5.

Id="note_08_008">

8. For an account of the Marburg Dispute, see G. R. Potter, Zwingli (Cambridge, 1976), pp. 316-42.

>

Id="note_09_001">

1. B. B. Warfield, “Calvin and Augustine” (Philadelphia, 1956), p. 322.

Id="note_09_002">

2. See Scott H. Hendrix, Luther and the Papacy: Stages in a Reformation Conflict (Philadelphia, 1981).

Id="note_09_003">

3. Also known as "Ratisbon". For details see: Peter Matheson, Cardinal Contarini at Regensburg (Oxford, 1972); Dermot Fenlon, Heresy and Obedience in Tredentine Italy: Cardinal Pole and the Counter Reformation (Cambridge, 1972).

Id="note_09_004">

4. For a full discussion, see F. H. Littel, Anabaptist View of the Church (Boston, 2nd edn, 1958).

Id="note_09_005">

5. See Geoffrey G. Willis, Saint Augustine and the Donatist Controversy (London, 1950); Gerald Bonner, St Augustine of Hippo: Life and controversies (Norwich, 2nd edn, 1986), pp. 237-311.

Id="note_09_006">

6. Earnst Troeltsch, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches (2 vols: London, 1931), vol. 1, p. 331, for variations on this analysis see Howard Becker, Systematic Sociology (Gary, Ind., 1950, pp. 624-42; Joachim Wach, Types of Religious Experience: Christian and Non-Christian (Chicago, 1951), pp. 190-6.

>

Chapter 10. Political thought of the Reformation

Id="note_10_001">

1. This is illustrated by the fate of Thomas Munzer: see Gordon Rupp, Patterns of Reformation (London, 1969), pp. 157-353. More generally, the development of radical reformation in the Netherlands should be pointed out: W. E. Keeney, Dutch Anabaptist Thought and Practice, 1539-1564 (Nieuwkoop, 1968).

Id="note_10_002">

2. See W. Ullmann, Medieval Papalism: Political Theories of the Medieval Canonists (London, 1949). M. J. Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty: The Papal Monarchy with Augustus Triumph us and the Publicists (Cambridge, 1963)

Id="note_10_003">

3. There is a considerable degree of ambiguity in Luther's use of the terms "kingdom" and "government": CM. W.D-J. Cargill Thompson (W. D. J. Cargill Thompson) “The Two Kingdoms” and the “Two Regimants”: Some Problems of Luther’s Zwei - Reiche - Lehre” (“Two Kingdoms” or “Two Reigns”: some problems of the doctrine Luther's Two Kingdoms), in Studies in the Reformation: Luther to Hooker (London, 1908), pp. 42-59.

Id="note_10_004">

4. For a complete analysis of this issue, see F. Edward Cranz, “An Essay on the development of Luther’s Thought on Justice, Law and Society.” society") (Cambridge, Mass., 1959)

Id="note_10_005">

5. See David C. Steinmetz, “Luther and the Two Kingdoms,” in Luther in Context (Bloomington, Ind., 1986), pp. 112-25.

Id="note_10_006">

6. See Karl Barth's famous letter (1939), in which he states that "the German people are suffering... because of Martin Luther's error in the relationship between law and gospel, temporal and spiritual order and government": cited in Helmut Thielicke, Theological Ethics (3 vols: Grand Rapids, 1979), vol. 1, p. 368.

Id="note_10_007">

7. See Steinmetz, Luther and the Two Kingdoms, p. 114.

Id="note_10_008">

8. See useful study by W. D. J. Cargill Thompson, “Luther and the Right of Resistance to the Emperor,” in Studies in the Reformation, pp. 3-41.

Id="note_10_009">

9. CM.: R. N. C. Hunt, “ZwingU's Theory of Church and State,” Church Quarterly Review 112 (1931), pp. 20 - 36 ; Robert C. Walton (Robert S. Walton), “Zwibgli's Theocracy” (“Zwingli’s Theocracy”) (Toronto, 1967); W. P. Stephens, The Theology of Huldiych ZwingU (Oxford, 1986), pp. 282 - 310.

Id="note_10_010">

10.CM. W. P. Stephens, The Theology of Huldiych Zwingi (Oxford, 1986), pp. 303, no. 87

Id="note_10_011">

11. W. P. Stephans, The Holy Spirit in the Theology of Martin Bucer (Cambridge, 1970), pp. 167 - 72. On Booker's political theology in general, see T. R. Togtapse (T. F. Torrance), Kingdom an Church: A Study in the Theology of the Reformation. ") (Edinburgh, 1956), pp. 73-89.

Id="note_10_012">

12. For a thorough study, see Harro Hoepfl, The Christian Polity of John Calvin (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 152-206. For more information, see Gillian Lewis, “Calvinism in Geneva in the Time of Calvin and Beza,” in International Calvinism 1541-1715, ed. Menna Prestwich (Oxford, 1985), pp. 39-70.

Id="note_10_013">

13. K. R. Davis, “Wo Discipline, no Church: An Anabaptist Contribution to the Reformed Tradition,” Sixteenth Century Journal 13 (1982) , pp. 45-9.

Id="note_10_014">

14. It should be mentioned that Calvin was also in the habit of dedicating his works to European monarchs, hoping to gain their support in the cause of the Reformation. Among those to whom Calvin dedicated his works were Edward VI and Elizabeth I of England and Christopher III of Denmark.

>

Chapter 11. The influence of reformation thought on history

Id="note_11_001">

1. Robert M. Kingdom (Robert M. Kingdom) “The Deacons of the Reformed Church in Calvin's Geneva” (“Deacons of the Reformed Church in Calvin’s Geneva”), in Melanges d’histoire du XVIe siecle (Geneva, 1970), pp. 81-9.

Id="note_11_002">

2. Franziska Conrad, “Reformation in - der baeuerlichen Gesellschaft: Zur Rezeption reformatorischer Theologie im Elsass” (Stuttgart, 1984), p. 14

Id="note_06_001">

1. W. P. Stephans, The Theology of Huldrych Zwingli (Oxford, 1986), pp. 86-106.

2. On this work, see Harry J. McSorley, Luther - Right by Wrong (Minneapolis, 1969).

3. Although Calvin's role in composing Nicholas Cope's All Saints' Day speech has been questioned, new manuscript evidence points to his participation. See Jean Rott, “Documents strasbourgeois concemant Calvin. Un manuscrit autographe: la harangue du recteur Nicolas Cop,” in “Regards contemporains sur Jean Calvin” (Paris, 1966), pp. 28-43.

4. See, for example, Naggo Hoepfl, The Christian Polity of John Calvin (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 219-26. Alistair E. McGrath, A Life of John Calvin (Oxford/Cambridge, Mass., 1990), pp. 69-78.

5. For details of this important change and an analysis of its consequences, see McGrath, Life of John Calvin, pp. 69-78.

6. On Calvinism in England and America during this period, see Patrick Collinson, “England and International Calvinism, 1558-1640,” in International Calvinism . 1541-1715". ed. Menna Prestwich (Oxford, 1985), pp. 197-223; W. A. ​​Speck and L-Billington, “Calvinism in Colonial North America,” in International Calvinism, ed. Prestwich, pp. 257-83.

7. B. B. Warfield, “Calvin and Augustine” (Philadelphia, 1956), p. 322.