Among the effects of original sin1 we must enumerate also the loss of the freedom of the will in spiritual matters. The term "free will" (liberum arbitrium) is used in a twofold meaning. In the first place it denotes the faculty to will (facultas volendi), by which man is distinguished from all irrational creatures. Free will in this sense is called also formal freedom, or freedom from coercion (libertas a coactione).
When we use the term in this sense, we say that man through the Fall has not lost his free will; for although corrupt man is so perverted that he cannot do otherwise than sin (non pot est non peccare), he nevertheless sins not against his will, but of his own free will. In other words, he is never coerced to sin, but commits sin of his own choice, John 8, 44. Hutter writes: "Sometimes the term will, or choice, is used to designate the faculty of the soul, indeed the very substance of the will itself, whose function is simply that of willing. Thus regarded, scarcely any one will deny free will to man." And Gerhard: "The question is not whether the essence of the will has survived the Fall; for this we emphatically maintain, namely, that man has not lost his will, but the soundness of it." Doctr. Theol., p. 260.2
However, the term "free will" has been used also in the sense of "spiritual power'' by which corrupt man can desire that which is spiritually good, prepare himself for divine grace, fulfil the divine Law out of true love for God, accept and believe the Gospel, and thus either convert himself entirely or at least cooperate in his conversion. To distinguish "free will" in this sense from the mere faculty of willing, dogmaticians have called it spiritual freedom (libertas spiritualis) or material freedom.
When the term "free will" is used in this sense, we, on the basis of Scripture, emphatically deny that man after the Fall has a "free will." 1 Cor. 2, 14: "The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned"; John 6, 44: "No man can come to Me except the Father which hath sent Me draw him"; Rom. 8, 7: "The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be"; Eph. 2, 1: "You hath He quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins."
If, then, the natural man does not receive the spiritual things, but regards them as foolishness; indeed, if he is dead in trespasses and sins and is enmity against God, then certainly he is without the power to will that which is spiritually good, to apply himself to divine grace, and to prepare himself for, or to cooperate in, his conversion. Gerhard writes: "Understanding the term liberty as describing the free power and faculty of choosing the good and rejecting the evil that was possessed by Adam, we maintain that Luther was perfectly correct in saying: 'Free will is a title without the thing itself, or a thing with nothing but a title.'"
Similarly the Formula of Concord says: "In spiritual and divine things, which pertain to the salvation of the soul, man is like a pillar of salt, like Lot's wife, yea, like a log and a stone, like a lifeless statue, which uses neither eyes nor mouth, neither sense nor heart. For man neither sees nor perceives the terrible and fierce wrath of God on account of sin and death, but ever continues in his security, even knowingly and willingly. . . . All teaching and preaching is lost upon him until he is enlightened, converted, and regenerated by the Holy Ghost." (Thor. Decl., II, 20. 21). And again: "Therefore the Scriptures deny to the intellect, heart, and will of the natural man all aptness, skill, capacity, and ability to think, to understand, to be able to do, to begin, to will, to undertake, to act, to work, or to concur in working, anything good and right in spiritual things as of himself", 2 Cor. 3, 5; Rom. 3, 12; John 8, 37; 1, 5; 1 Cor. 2, 14; Rom. 8, 'I: John 15, 5; Phil. 2, 13. (Thor. Decl., II, 12-14.)
But while our Confessions thus teach that man in spiritual matters has no free will, it admits on the basis of Scripture that the will of natural man is free in worldly affairs and even to some extent in the exercise of civil righteousness (iustitia civilis, carnal is, operum). The Apology of the Augsburg Confession affirms: "The human will has liberty in the choice of works and things which reason comprehends by itself. It can to a certain extent (aliquo modo) render civil righteousness, or the righteousness of works; it can speak of God, offer to God a certain service by an outward work, obey magistrates, parents; in the choice of an outward work it can restrain the hands from murder, from adultery, from theft. Since there is left in human nature reason and judgment concerning objects subjected to the senses, choice between these things, and the liberty and power to render civil righteousnes!', are also left." Art. XVIII, 70.
The qualification which is here made, namely, that man in the things enumerated has a free will only "to a certain extent" (aliqtto modo), is very important, since by nature he is so dead in trespasses and sins and captive in Satan's power, Eph. 2, 2; Col. 1, 13; 2 Tim. 2, 26; Acts 26, 18, that his civil righteousness leaves much to be desired. The Apology therefore rightly adds: "The power of concupiscence is such that men more frequently obey evil dispositions than sound judgment. And the devil, who is efficacious in the godless, as Paul says Eph. 2, 2, does not cease to incite this feeble nature to various offenses. These are the reasons why civil righteousness is rare among men, as we see that not even the philosophers themselves, who seem to have aspired after this righteousness, attained it." Art. XVIII, 71.
The Scriptural doctrine that man in spiritual matters has no free will at all, but is completely blind, dead, and inimical to God, has always been absolutely denied by synergists and Semi-Pelagians. The Formula of Concord describes the synergistic error as follows: "Man is not absolutely dead to good in spiritual things, but is badly wounded and half dead. Therefore, although the free will is too weak to make a beginning and to convert itself to God by its own powers and to be obedient to God's Law from the heart, nevertheless, when the Holy Ghost makes a beginning and calls us through the Gospel and offers us His grace, the forgiveness of sins, and eternal salvation, then the free will, from its own natural powers, can meet God and to a certain extent, although feebly, do something towards it, help, and cooperate thereto, can qualify itself for, and apply itself to, grace, and apprehend, accept it, and believe the Gospel, and can also cooperate by its own powers with the Holy Ghost in the continuation and maintenance of this work." (Thor. Decl., II, 77.)
In opposition to this error the Formula of Concord declares: "In spiritual and divine things the intellect, heart, and will of the unregenerate man are utterly unable by their own natural powers to understand, believe, accept, think, will, begin, effect, do, work, or concur in working, anything, but they are entirely dead to what is good, and corrupt, so that in man's nature since the Fall, before regeneration, there is not the least spark of spiritual power remaining nor present, by which of himself he can prepare himself for God's grace or accept the offered grace, nor be capable of it for and of himself, or apply or accommodate himself thereto, or by his own powers be able of himself, as of himself, to aid, do, work, or concur in working, anything towards his conversion, either wholly or half or in any, even the least or most inconsiderable, part; but he is the servant of sin, John 8, 34, and a captive of the devil, by whom he is moved, Eph. 2, 2; 2 Tim. 2, 26. Hence the natural free will according to its perverted disposition and nature is strong and active only with respect to what is displeasing and contrary to God." (Thor. Decl., II, 7.)
Among the arguments that have been used to oppose the Scripture-doctrine of man's total loss of free will in spiritual matters the following may be considered as the most important: -
All these and other objections to divine monergism in con version flow from the carnal heart, which is as proud as it is selfrighteous. Those who have advanced these arguments might be divided into three classes: -
a) Pelagians, "who taught that man by his own powers, without the grace of the Holy Ghost, can turn Himself to God, believe the Gospel, be obedient from the heart to God's Law, and thus merit the forgiveness of sins and eternal life." (Formula of Concord, Epit., II, 9 ff.)
b) Semi-Pelagians (Arminians), "who teach that man by his own powers can make a beginning of his conversion, but without the grace of God cannot complete it." (Ibid.)
c) Synergists, who teach "that, ... if the Holy Ghost by the preaching of the Word has made a beginning and therein offered His grace, then the will of man from its own natural powers can add something, though little and feebly, to this end, can help and cooperate, qualify, and prepare itself for grace, and embrace and accept it, and believe the Gospel." (Ibid.)
From the gross synergism of Melanchthon, who taught that man can cooperate in his conversion by his natural powers, we distinguish the subtle synergism of the later dogmaticians (Latermann), wich claims that man can cooperate in his conversion with spiritual powers bestowed on him by the Holy Ghost. Both types place the cause of conversion and salvation in man himself. But man cooperates towards his conversion neither by natural nor by spiritual powers; not by natural powers, since by nature he is an enemy of God; and not by spiritual powers bestowed upon him, since he is already converted as soon as he is in possession of spiritual powers.
Regarding this point the Formula of Concord teaches: "Through this means, namely, the preaching and hearing of His Word, God works and breaks our hearts and draws man, so that through the preaching of the Law he comes to know his sins and God's wrath and experiences in his heart true terrors, contrition, and sorrow, and through the preaching and consideration of the holy Gospel concerning the gracious forgiveness of sins in Christ a spark of faith is kindled in him, which accepts the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake and comforts itself with the promise of the Gospel; and thus the Holy Ghost (who works all this) is sent into the heart, Gal. 4, 6." (Thor. Decl., II, 54.)
the free will and put it in a separate chapter between the content from Pieper's vol. I and II. (The contents of Pieper's vol. I is found in chapters 1 to 10 of Mueller's Dogmatics, and the contents of Pieper's vol III are found in chapters 17 to 26, starting with the chapter on sanctification. More precisely, Mueller has placed the content of free will in Chapter 11.) ↩