9. Repeated Conversion.
teaches that true converts can fall from the state of conversion, or what is the same: believers can lose faith. Scripture teaches this in Word °° and example. 17°)
Cf. the section "Synonym of conversion".
Helmstedt wrongly referred to the Formula of Concord and Chemnitz for this procedure.
They believe ea quidem fide, quae ex semine verbi adeoque supernaturali ac divina virtute verbo divinitus coniuncta nascitur adeoque non humana, sed divina fides est. (by that faith, which is born from the seed of the word and thus supernatural and divinely united to the word by divine power, and therefore is not human but divine faith.] (Baier, II, 171.)
(concerning faith have made shipwreck]. David, Peter. Luther on Peter's case: St. L. IX, 1598. On the double use of the term vera fides: Baier, ed. Walther, Il, 171, nota a, This is to be held against the Calvinists in particular, who firmly maintain that even in the most serious cases of sin believers lose only the exercise of faith (exercitium fidei), not the faith itself.!°° The Lutheran Confessions rightly reject this Calvinist position as untrue and dangerous to the soul. 13°) — On the other hand, it must be recognized as a clear doctrine of Scripture that those who have fallen from faith can be converted again. Scripture teaches this too in word and example.!3°°
Talibus enormibus peccatis (like those of David, Peter and other saints) Deum valde offendunt, reatum mortis incurrunt. Spiritum Sanctum contristant, fidei exercitium interrumpunt, conscientiam gravissime vulnerant, sensum gratiae nonnunquam ad tempus amittunt: donec per seriam resipiscentiam in viam revertentibus paternus Dei vultus rursum affulgeat. Deus enim, qui dives est misericordia, ex immutabili electionis proposito Spiritum Sanctum etiam in tristibus lapsibus a suis non prorsus aufert, nec eousque eos prolabi sinit, ut gratia adoptionis ac iustificationis statu excidant. [Google] — Confession of Faith of the Presbyterians, chap. XVI: "They whom God hath accepted in His Beloved, effectually called and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace.
come, as perhaps there are some ready there, and at the time of the riot they came to my own eyes, who hold that all those who once had received the spirit of forgiveness of sins or had become faithful, if the same afterwards sinned, they nevertheless remained in faith, and such sin did them no harm, and thus cried out: Do what thou wilt, if thou believest, then it is all nothing, faith destroys all sin, etc. Say to this: If someone sins according to faith and spirit, then he has never had the spirit and faith right. Ihave had many such foolish men for myself, and I fear that there are still many such devils in them. Therefore it is necessary to know and to teach that when holy people repent and fight daily against the original sin they still have and feel, and fall into public sin, as David did in adultery, murder and blasphemy, then faith and the Spirit have been gone. For the Holy Spirit does not let sin reign and gain the upper hand, so that it may be accomplished, but controls and defends it, so that it does not have to do what it wants. But if it does what it wants, the Holy Spirit and faith are not involved; for it is said, as St. John says, "He who is born of God does not sin and cannot sin. And yet this is also the truth (as the same St. John writes): 'If we say that we have no sin, we lie, and God's truth is not in us.'" [Trigl. 491, Part III, Art. Ul, 42-44] Already in the Augustana, in the 12th Article, Of Repentance, it was said: They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. [Trigl. 49, XII, 7
namely the conversion of those godless people who belonged to God's people before their falling away, Ezek. 18:31; 33:11 — David, 2 Sam. 12:13; Ps. 51. The conversio reiterata must be held against the Novatians, as the Lutheran confession reminds us. '3° Of course, it must be admitted that there is a degree of hardening where conversion no longer occurs. This is the sin against the Holy Spirit. (Matt. 12:31) or the sin of death (1 Joh. 5:16). But the realization that this degree of hardening has occurred in a particular person will seldom be a general one, but will usually only be found in one or the other person in the church. This is the reason for the reluctance that can be found in the words of 1 John 5:16: "It is a sin to die; for this I say not that a man pray. In general we will have to limit ourselves to a warning against sin against the Holy Spirit, just as Christ Matt. 12 warns the Pharisees against this sin. The rule for the Church is that we do not deny the ustavosite to all those who are still in this life and do not refuse absolution to those who desire it.!°°8) This is also a necessary statement about the disputes that arose at the end of the 17th century about a "date of grace" (terminus gratiae peremtorius) set by God. '°° For church Manasse, 2 Chron. 33:11 ff. — Luke 15 Peter, Luke 22:61-62, 32. — Also Gal. 4:19 the 14Aw dive refers to the repeated conversion, namely to a renewed faith in the gospel. The Galatians had fallen to the law from the Gospel, Gal. 1:6 ff. Cf. Luther St. L. IX, 561 ff. "The Begetting into Christian existence" (Zéckler) happens through faith in the Gospel.
would not absolve such as had fallen after Baptism, though they returned to repentance" [Trigl. 49, XII, 9]. Cf. about the Novatians Adolf Harnack, RE.2 X, 652- 670. Gerhard (Loci, L. de poenitentia, § 14 sqq.) offers rich historical material and then the dogmatic evaluation of Novatianism by discussing the scriptural passages to which the Novatians referred (Hebr. 6:4 ff.). Rejection of Novatianism by the early church, Schmid-Hauck, Dogmengesch., p. 202 f.; for more detailed material on this see Gerhard, 1. c.
etc.
Bose (t 1700) writing: "Terminus peremtorius salutis humanae, that is, the time of grace set by God in His secret council, in which man, if he converts, can become salvationful; but after it has elapsed, no more time is given. Frankfurt, 1698. See literature and course of the dispute by Walch, Bibl. Theol Il, 783 sqq.; Religionsstreitigkeiten innerhalb der luth. Kirche I, 851 ff. Among the more recent descriptions in the encyclopedias, Meusel brings factual material under "Terminism". practice, it is enough to observe the words of the Formula of Concord (716, 56 [Trigl 1081, Sol. Dec., XI, 56]): "Thus God also knows without a doubt and has ordained for each time and hour of his profession, conversion" (the Latin text adds: and of his reconversion, quando lapsum rursus erigere velit [and when He will raise again one who has lapsed’’]) "but because these things have not been revealed to us, we are commanded to stop always with the word, but to command the time and hour to God. —- The Roman doctrine of repentance can be described as an extremely corrupt reversal of the scriptural doctrine of conversio reiterata. According to this doctrine there is no return to the grace of baptism for the fallen, but only a clinging to the "second plank" (secunda tabula), namely to the Roman penance, which embraces three human works: the contritio cordis, confessio oris, satisfactio operis. *! The fact that these three acts of penance are intended as human works which help to earn forgiveness is clearly shown by the fact that faith in the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake is expressly excluded from Roman penance and is subject to banishment. '!, "Through this"—says Chemnitz—"it becomes evident to the whole world what kind of church the Papist fellowship is. To the constant remembrance of the true Church of God it is known that the Council of Trent in repentance promised reconciliation with God and the forgiveness of sins without faith which arises from the Gospel and through which man believes that his sins are forgiven for Christ's sake". 3) To Bellarmin's objection that, according to Roman doctrine, human works of penance (contrition of the heart,
and IV]: Sunt quasi materia huius sacramenti [namely the penitence] ipsius poenitentis actus, nempe contritio, confessio et satisfactio. Qui, quatenus in poenitente ad integritatem sacramenti ad plenamque et perfectam peccatorum remissionem ex Dei institutione requiruntur, hac ratione poenitentiae partes dicuntur,. The Christian partes poenitentiae, namely the horror of conscience in the face of recognized sin and the faith in the forgiveness of sins for the sake of Christ, can 4, are cursed. Likewise in can. 2 are cursed those who do not want to call the Roman penance secundam post naufragium tabulam.
scilicet incussos conscientiae agnito peccato, et fidem conceptam ex evangelio vel absolutione, qua credit quis, sibi per Christum remissa peccata, anathema sit.
enumeration of sins, satisfaction imposed by the priest) received their proper value only through Christ's merit or through absolution, Gerhard replies that in this way things are subordinated to one another or connected with one another which Scripture opposes. Scripture attributes the forgiveness of sins to the grace of God and to faith in such a way that all human works are excluded, Rom. 11:6; 4:5 (LZ. de poenit., § 20.) The objections against the sole effectiveness of God in conversion. A whole series of objections have been raised within the Christian church as well against the doctrine of the sole effectiveness of God in conversion. The reasons used can be divided into two classes, alleged and real reasons. Alleged reasons are those that are brought forward after one has already decided against the sole effectiveness of the grace of God for other reasons. They are cited as reasons and happen as reasons because after the fall of man, as with other things, so with human logic, things are bad. After the Fall, man all too often thinks what is prescribed by his will, which has turned away from the truth. As is well known, the Apology expresses this state of affairs in the following way: "The inherent evil lust"—with which the whole original sinful perdition is designated—"is so powerful that people follow it more often than reason".'*!) "Real reasons" is what we call those that form the actual motive for the fight against the sole effectiveness of God in conversion. The alleged reasons against the sole effectiveness of God in conversion. The alleged reasons are set out in the following objections: First objection: Faith is demanded of man in Scripture, or Scripture uses imperative and conditional clauses in relation to the origin of faith, as Mark 1:16: "Believe (a1otevete) in the Gospel"; Acts 16:31: "Believe (iotevoov) on the Lord Jesus
malis affectibus saepius obtemperent homines quam recto iudicio. [Such is the power of concupiscence, that men often obey evil affections rather than right judgment.] Christ"; Rom. 10:9: If thou shalt believe in thine heart (eav miotEvoyic),... thou shalt be saved. From these imperative and conditional clauses it follows that conversion is not only due to the action of God's grace, but also to human participation, a sending of oneself to grace or right action against grace. '3!4) — This reason immediately collapses under its own weight, because it proves too much. The imperative and conditional sentences are, after all, to faith per se or to the whole of faith: "Believe in the Gospel", not to a contribution to faith: "Contribute to faith in the Gospel. Therefore, if the imperative, etc., were to prove something for man's ability to be active in the formation of faith, they would prove that faith is wholly a product of man or is wholly within man's ability. But this is not what those who conclude from the form of command that man is active in bringing about conversion do not want to do themselves. Luther therefore says something harshly against Erasmus: "It is a kind of dullness or drowsiness (stupor quidam vel lethargia quaedam) that one believes, through those words: "Convert", "If you convert" and the like confirm the power of free will." Luther exclaims: How is it that you theologians are so foolish (ineptiatis), as if you were two children, that as soon as you find a word in the form of a command, you conclude from it the ability of man to comply with it? '°!>) The auxiliary argument that is so insistently brought forward here stands on equally weak feet that the invitations to believe in the Gospel would be in vain, indeed would imply a mockery on the part of God, if man had no ability at all to comply with these invitations. According to Scripture, neither the legal
also Luthardt (Dogmatik, p. 284), the "Lutherische Kirchenzeitung" (26, No. 10: "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,’ admonishes the Apostle, Phil. 2:12. There can be no stronger expression of the fact that the salvation of man is not in every respect solely dependent on God; for literally translated it even says: "Achieve or bring about your salvation"), Keyser (Election and Conversion, 1914, p.
the Gospel. Why command them to do what they were utterly unable to do?... Why bid a man believe when he couldn't?"
imperatives (admonitiones legales) nor the evangelical imperatives (admonitiones evangelicae) are in vain or of no use, although man cannot obey either of them. Through the legal exhortations comes the knowledge of sin, 614 yap vOpLov Extyv@ots apaptiac, Rom. 3:20; through the evangelical exhortations faith is generated in the offered forgiveness of sins, 1) miottc && aoc, Rom. 10:17. As an analogy the old teachers state: the raising of Lazarus through Christ's exhortation: "Lazarus, come forth! (Joh. 11:43) as well as the healing of the lame through Peter's command: "Arise and walk" (Acts 3:6)! Yes, Scripture expressly forbids us to infer from the call to faith a human capacity to respond to the call. The same Christ who invites men: "Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden! (Matt. 11:28), teaches us: "No one can come to me unless the Father draws him" (Joh. 6:44). Second objection: * Without the acceptance of cooperation or concession on the part of man by a facultas se applicandi ad gratiam, by a "different" or "right behavior" against divine grace, etc., conversion becomes a coactio. This argument, too, which is used so generally and so persistently, cannot be said to have any reasonable meaning. There is no possibility at all of coercion in conversion, because conversion consists precisely in the fact that God, in and through conversion, makes what he wants out of what he does not want. Phil. 2:13: "It is God it is God which worketh in you to will (to béAeww)." Thus, the Formula of Concord teaches that "God, in conversion, makes willing by the drawing of the Holy Spirit out of unruly and unwilling people" (609, 88 [Zrigl. 915, Sol. Decl., I, 88]). In the synergistic disputes before the Formula of Concord, Lutherans used to say to the Philippists: God does not draw man to Himself by the neck or the hair, but by the heart and the will. 1316)
the colloquium at Herzberg in 1578, Andreae said in response to the accusation that the Formula of Concord teaches a forced conversion: " In conversion, the Holy Spirit does this, that a non-willing person becomes a willing person and an Third objection: God, however, gives the power to believe, but not the act of faith. This argument is presented in a variety of formulations. For example also like this: God only works the possibility of conversion, but not the conversion itself. That the possibility of conversion becomes reality stands with man himself, namely in his "self-determination" or "self- decision" for or against grace.!3! For this "limitation" of God's grace one has also referred to the Formula of Concord, because it speaks of an effect of the Holy Spirit by which man "can accept" the grace offered (potest oblatam gratiam accipere), 608, 83 [Trigl. 913, F. C., Sol. Decl., IL, 83]. 1318) _ But Scripture teaches clearly that God gives not only the power to faith, but also the act of faith, the motevevw. Phil. 1:29: "Itis given unto you for Christ's sake that ye... believe in him" (16 etc avtov aotEvetv), not merely that ye may believe in him. Likewise Eph. 1:19-20: "We believe (m1otebovtec)"— not merely: we can believe—"according to the working of his mighty power. And as far as the Formula of Concord is concerned, however, it speaks of an acceptance of the grace offered. But this ability to accept is not a preliminary stage of conversion, but conversion itself. The words of the Formula of Concord are: "Conversion (conversio enim hominis) is such a change by the action of the Holy Spirit in man's mind, will, and heart, that by such action of the Holy Spirit man enemy becomes an obedient person," and previously at the same Colloquium Chemnitz: "All this is different in the Formula of Concord, which shows that in conversion the Holy Spirit does this in the will, that he transforms a unwilling and reluctant will into a willing, assenting and obedient one". (Protocol or Acta of the Colloquii zu Herzberg; L. u. W. 1882, 444, 440) With Luther the expression returns that God does not convert man to himself as "the executioner beats a thief to the gallows", but in such a way that he "softens the heart" through the Gospel. (St. L. VIL 2287 ff.)
276, but also in his last dogmatic work, Die christl. Glaubenslehre, 1898, p. 442: "The determining influence (of God) does not take the place of self-determination; it rather extends only to the boundary of our self-determination; this itself is not taken away or spared from man, but it is made possible for him". Seeberg, RE.3 II, 544.
may accept the grace offered." According to the Formula of Concord, then, the conversion of a person has taken place when the person has been transformed inwardly to the extent that he can accept the grace offered. And this statement of the Formula of Concord is scriptural, because according to Scripture the condition of the natural or unconverted man is that he cannot accept the Gospel, but rejects it as folly (1 Cor. 2:14). If, therefore, a person is inwardly changed so that he can believe the Gospel, he is a new or converted person.!3!°) Even the later Lutheran teachers still held very strongly against Latermann and associates that the Holy Spirit not only works the ability to believe but also the act of faith. °° Fourth objection: If the Holy Spirit alone were to work faith, it would not be the person who believes, but the Holy Spirit in conversion. Thus even Kahnis, to whom in his time one ascribed special logical sharpness, justified his synergism with the statement: "Man, not the Holy Spirit, is the subject who believes. °7) But also of this objection one cannot say that it has any meaning. There is no reasonable connection of thoughts between the statements: The Holy Spirit is this causa efficiens of faith in man, therefore the Holy Spirit
sense is explained in detail in Zur Einigung der amerikanisch-lutherischen Kirche" 2 p. 86 ff. [Conversion and election: a plea for a united Lutheranism..., p. 119 ff.] The Scriptures (Isaiah 55:6; 5:4), the Formula of Concord (710, 29 [Trig/. 1073, Sol. Decl., XI, 29]) and the old Lutheran theologians (e.g. Luke Osiander in Isaiah 55:7) speak of a ‘possibility of or an opportunity for conversion, when people live under the sound of the gospel and thus the Holy Spirit is not only apparently effective for their conversion, but actually and seriously. The possibility of conversion in this sense is only another expression for the gratia universalis, seria et efficax and against Calvin (cf. Instit. I, 24, 8. 12). Synergism restricts the term "possibility" of conversion in the sense that God only makes conversion possible, not real. It ascribes to man a subjective ability to accept grace before his conversion.
side that we want? that we believe? Does he not grant that we can want? that we can be converted? that we can believe?
p. 38) "God will not force any man to accept Christ by faith; nor will God do man’s believing for him" the subject of faith. To give you an example: God alone in every human being is allowed to work and maintain the natural life. Acts 17:25, 28: "He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things"; " In Him we live and move and have our being". Nevertheless, no one outside the coterie of pantheists would think that it is not man himself but only God who lives in man.!°? Fifth objection: If the reason for non-conversion is in the human being, as it can be seen in Matt. 23:37 ("Ye would not") and is conceded by the "Lutheran orthodoxy", then it follows that also the conversion does not only depend on God's grace, but also on man himself, on his right behavior, his self-determination, the omission of wanton resistance etc. This argument is quite familiar to the fighters of sola gratia in old and new times. Luthardt, for example, thinks he has proven from Scripture that man can not only reject the Gospel but also accept it, when he quotes Matthew 23:37: "Ye would not".!°79) At this point, in the case of Kahnis, self-deception increases to the extent that he calls it "irrevocable logic", if one concludes from man's ability to spurn salvation that there is human participation in the grasping of salvation. 3 With regret, he reports of the theologians of the Formula of Concord: "However, the Lutheran tendency could not convince itself that whoever looks for the reason for rejecting the grace offered in man, includes an assent to the same in the appropriation of grace" (meaning a
tamen, ut Deus unice vires et potentiam poenitenti et credenti donet et in actum deducat, homo tamen nihilominus formaliter poeniteat et credat; that is: Man is the subject of repentance and faith, although God gives not only the powers but also the act of repentance and faith.
313: "There [Matt. 23:37] Christ himself says that his gracious will to bring the Jews to faith in Him and therefore to salvation was prevented and thwarted by their wanton resistance. From this follows with necessity..., that the conversion and salvation of the Jews did not depend in every respect solely on his gracious will.
human capacity to accept grace). The "orthodox" Lutherans, however, write non sequitur about this supposedly necessary conclusion. 87) And they were clearly aware of the reasons for the rejection of this conclusion. Firstly, they considered that the Holy Scriptures had the deciding vote on this question. Scripture, however, ascribes to man only the capacity for unwillingness, and explicitly denies him the capacity to will. °?% Secondly, they argued that the conclusion from unwillingness to the capacity to will is bad logic, because wanting and not wanting flow from different principles. The principle of not wanting is by nature in man according to Cor. 2:14, while the capacity to will is only worked by God in man: It is God who works in you 9éAévw [to will] according to his pleasure (Phil. 2:13). '32 Likewise, they reject the conclusion in the formulation when it is said: because man can prevent his conversion through malicious reluctance, the omission of malicious reluctance must also be in his power. "Lutheran Orthodoxy" emphasizes again and again that man is certainly quite adept at doing the willful reluctance and thereby preventing his conversion. But the omission or the cessation of wanton reluctance is not in man’s ability, but is only an effect of the Holy Spirit. °*8) Thirdly, the Lutherans declare it to be
et arbitrio hominis, etiam velle esse in eiusdem facultate. [It does not follow that if will is in man's power and discretion, will also be in his capacity.’]
irregeniti nolle venire, renuere obsequi Deo vocanti, Spiritui Sancto ad salutaria invitanti resistere, ergo pariter possunt velle venire, Deum vocantem sequi, Spiritus Sancti admonitionibus locum relinquere (give room) [Google].
in statu naturae lapsae proprium, hoc vero est restaurationis per gratiam. [The former is peculiar to disease and imperfection, and to those men in a state of fallen nature, but this is restoration by grace.
"always continues in his security, even knowingly and willingly (etiam sciens volensque, § 18: pro insita sua rebelli et contumaci natura Deo et voluntati eius hostiliter repugnat),... before he is enlightened, converted and reborn by the Holy Spirit". — Andraea at the colloquium in Herzberg: "Weakness is attributed to the born-again, but wickedness, even enmity, to the unborn. And this" (the malice and enmity) "is put to death by a factual and logical error to speak of a person in whom there is already a capacity and inclination for grace as if such a person were still unconverted. A person who wants grace is already decided and converted to grace,!*9) because the unconverted person never wants, but always behaves in a way that is hostile to the Gospel. One will have to admit that the representatives of the "Lutheran movement" have Scripture and logic on their side when they reject the conclusion from capacitas nolendi to capacitas volendi as quite improper. Sixth objection: * If man is not allowed to participate in conversion, conversion ceases to be a "moral" process. — The term "moral" is ambiguous. Moral can first of all mean: adapted to man as a moral being endowed with understanding and will. In this sense, conversion is to be called a moral process, because in conversion through the Word and the Holy Spirit, God acts on the mind and will of man, that is, has a different way of working in man than in unreasonable creatures or in a stone or block. This is also very carefully emphasized in the Formula of Concord.!*3° The term "moral" is then used in the sense that it denotes a human achievement or "moral act". 3!) Those who in this sense call conversion to God a "moral process" operate with a non-ens, the Spirit in conversion, and the weakness remains." (L. u. W. 1882, p. 444.) — Strasbourg Faculty (at Calov, Syst. X, 54): Neque illa non-repugnantia malitiosa est actus voluntatis et potestatis humanae, sed effectus vincentis eousque gratiae divinae et secundum magnitudinem et mensuram suam reprimentis carnis vitiosos motus et insultus. Semperque determinatio voluntatis nostrae in primo conversionis actu non potestati et cooperationi hominis, sed Spiritui Sancto per verbum, in voluntatem passive se habentem operanti ab orthodoxis adscripta fuit.
Therefore, according to the Formula of Concord, anyone who finds a spark of will, inclination, longing, etc., in relation to the grace of God in Christ may be convinced that he has already been converted and is a dear child of God. Formula of Concord. 591, 14 [Trigl. 885, Sol. Decl., IT, 14].
ibid., 89; 911, ibid., 81]
Luthardt, Dogmatik, p. 284: "Repentance and faith is demanded of man as his achievement". because Scripture says of man in relation to his position on the gospel: uwpia aVvT@ s0T1 Kat OV dvvatat yv@vat [They are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them (1 Cor. 2:14); ovéetc dvvatat Erb'éiv mpdc ps (Joh. 6:44); vexpdc totic mapamtmpaatv (Eph. 2:1, 5). And yet, precisely in the sense of human achievement or moral act, the synergists want to call conversion a moral or moral process. Without the inclusion of this "human factor", conversion would be considered "unethical", as being at odds with the "moral character" of man. But here, too, the reasonable sense is missing. As little as the creation of man, the bodily birth of man, the raising of man from bodily death are "unethical" processes, although human participation in these processes is not allowed, so little is the creation of faith in man, his spiritual birth from God and his awakening from spiritual death an "unethical" process, although here every human participation is excluded. If it has been objected that the spiritual process of the creation of faith should not be parallelized with those physical processes, it must be said that Scripture makes precisely this parallelization when it teaches us about the causa efficiens of conversion or rebirth, Eph. 1:19-20: "We believe according to the effect of his mighty power, which he worked in Christ, since he raised him from the dead"; Eph. 2:10: "We are his work (creature, moinua), created in Christ Jesus for good works"; 2 Cor.4:6: "God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, has put a bright light into our hearts"; Joh. 1:12-13: "Those who believe in His name" are "born of God". The same parallelism is therefore also found in the Formula of Concord: "For as little as a dead body can make itself alive to bodily life on earth, so little can man, who is spiritually dead through sin, raise himself up to spiritual life, as it is written: Since we were dead in sins, he has made us alive together with Christ" (524, 3 [Trigl. 787, Epit., II, 3]), and again (609, 87 [913, Sol. Decl., II, 87]): "The conversion of our corrupt will, which is nothing other than a raising of it from spiritual death, is one and only God's work, just as the raising from the dead in the bodily resurrection of the flesh is to be attributed to God alone. Seventh objection: Conversion should be thought of as a "free" process. The Helmstedters: Homo libere se convertit [Latermann and Calixt: The man turned freely]. '**) Luthardt: "Faith is free obedience. '*7*) The expression "free" is ambiguous. It is first of all used in contrast to compulsion. In this sense, however, conversion takes place freely, because conversion consists precisely in making nolentibus gratiam volentes gratiam out of nolentibus gratiam volentes gratiam. But the old and new fighters against the sole effectiveness of God in conversion mean "free" differently. When they say that faith is "free obedience", or that "man converts freely", they mean to describe a neutral state of man before conversion. The situation is thought of by them as follows: under the stimulating effect of God (Deo excitante) the human will is put into a state before conversion in which it can choose between conversion and non-conversion, reject or accept grace, decide against or for grace. As general as the acceptance of lines of such a neutral state before conversion is in old and new times, '**4 it is as contrary to Scripture and devoid of all reasonable sense. Old Lutheran theologians rightly say that this neutral state is a non-ens and cannot be found in any human being. '3*°) It is not found in man before conversion because, according to the testimony of Scripture, the natural man is not neutral but dismissive of the Gospel, uwpia yap avya iott Svvayar yvavar. '73° Nor is he to be found in man, either, if man is under the "preparatory grace", and grace is offered to him. For if a person, who by nature cannot accept, want or choose grace, is inwardly transformed to the point where he can accept, want or choose grace, he is already converted. — That there
velle se convertere et nolle se convertere [It is in man's power whether he wills to convert or not]. The Lutheran Standard of 19 August 19, 1882 says of the person who hears the Gospel and to whom grace is thereby offered: "He may accept and surrender if he will, or he may resist if he will.
sides) in nullo homine repertoire. [Such indifference (as to both sides) in no man's repertoire.]
oKkavdaAov [we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock], "EAAnou d¢ Lopiav. is no neutrality in the relationship between man and God and His kingdom is also explained by Christ in Matt. 12:30: "He who is not with Me is against Me" and with the other word Luke 9:50: "He that is not against us is for us", about which Luther remarks: "There is no middle road here, but we are necessarily either under the strong tyrant, the devil, in his prison, or under the Redeemer, Christ in heaven.... Therefore every man lives either with Christ against the devil or with the devil against Christ. (St. L. VU, 172) If there were a neutral state towards God, this state would also be sin and enmity against God, since God does not allow man to be neutral towards his will. Eighth objection: Man could provide the natural respectability, civil righteousness (probitas naturalis, iustitia civilis). — That natural righteousness is to some extent in the power of man, is of great value for the state or civil life, and is rewarded by God with bodily goods, is also amply attested to by the Lutheran Confessions on the basis of Scripture.!°3 But natural respectability is neither a preparation for conversion nor a part of conversion.!**8) And if someone wants to throw his natural honorableness before God into the scales, the case occurs which Christ describes in the words of Matt. 21:31: "The publicans and harlots may well enter the kingdom of heaven before you. An indispensable "preparation" for the emergence of faith in Christ is the thundering axe of the divine law, which not only throws into a heap the sinners who are revealed, but especially the honorable people. '**°) What is to be said of worldly respectability is, of course, also true of worldly education, culture, science, etc.. Also all these factors are and remain in the natural field, (hemisphaerium inferius) and do not form
ff.; 157, III, 9; 335, XVII, 70 ff.; 891, F. C., Sol. Decl., I, 26; 51, A. C., XVII, 1]
ék Tod Ivebpuatos mvedud éottv [that which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit’], Joh. 1:13: ot (scil, tvedpat0c) odK && aipatav ovdé Ek DEANATOSG GapPKOs ODdE Ek DEANPATOG AVvdpPdc (all-sided rejection of the natural origin of faith), GAN’ x Oeod EyewnOnoav [Which [believers on His name] were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.].
VII, 1090 ff.): "There a soul goes from the gallows to heaven, because meanwhile one spoils in the temple. a preparation for conversion nor part of it. Scripture explicitly states that the saving wisdom of God, that is, the Gospel of the crucified Christ, is beyond the horizons of the world's superiors (tav apyovt@v Tov aidvoc TovTOV, the aristocrats of the spirit and education). And if someone asserts his real or supposed education, his real or supposed knowledge against "the folly" of the Gospel, the judgment occurs, which Christ describes in Matthew 11:26 with the words: "I praise you, Father and Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes. Also in the case of the worldly wise (the cogoi katd odpka, Cor. 1:26), an indispensable preparation for conversion is the terrores conscientiae, under which the edifice of God's wisdom, also "the worldview of modern man", collapses of its own accord. Ludwig Hofacker says somewhere without dogmatic termini technici, but completely correctly and in writing: "The camels must all go through the eye of the needle.!34°) Ninth objection: The natural man has the ability to use the means of grace. At the colloquium in Herzberg, for example, the people of Anhalt raised the objection to the sole effectiveness of the Holy Spirit: "But in the article on Predestination, you say: ‘Man can hear the word of God and in many ways contemplate it'.!34 This fact is undisputed
516 f.): "It is an undeniable fact that the rapid spread of Christianity on the soil of the classical world can only be explained by the preparation of the classical world for Christianity, which again presupposes a connection of Christianity in the natural human being. Kahnis understands by the "connecting factor" a promotion of conversion through pagan morality and culture. (L. u. W. 1878, p. 262) ndrea at the colloquium in Herzberg: "When Aristotle hears and reads the word [of the Gospel] and considers it, it says 1 Cor. 2: 'The natural man hears nothing of the Spirit of God. (L. u. W. 1882, p. 445.)
and is also testified to very emphatically in the Confession of the Lutheran Church: "Man can hear and read this Word [of God] outwardly, even if he has not yet been converted to God and born again; for in these outward things, as said above, even after the fall, man has a free will to go to church, to listen to the sermon or not to listen. (601, 53 [Zrig/. 901, F. C., Sol. Decl., IL, 53]) But if man sees in his use of the means of grace an achievement on his part through which he gains a legal claim to divine grace, he makes the use of the means of grace an obstacle to his conversion. As seriously as the use of the means of grace is to be admonished, because God only converts in. 343) The old teachers correctly say: "The outward hearing of the Word of God does not have the nature of a merit, but of a means by which God ignites faith in our hearts. '* The Formula of Concord counts the use of the means of grace, which is in the power of the unconverted human being, among the "external things" (externis rebus) in which the human being, even after the fall, has a free will to some extent. The natural man can, for natural reasons '**>) "hear the Gospel and to some extent contemplate it, even speak of it as seen in the Pharisees and hypocrites". (594, 24 [Trigl. 891, F. C., Sol. Decl., I], 24]) Whoever hears or reads God's Word with a longing for the grace of God in Christ is already converted, as the Formula of Concord sets out for the necessary
F. C., Sol. Decl., I, 48-52; 903, ibid., 54-58; 911, ibid., 80; 915, ibid., 89]
preacher's planting and watering and the listener's running and willing, would be in vain, and no conversion would follow from it, unless the Holy Spirit's power and effect were added, which enlightens and converts the hearts through the preached and heard word, so that people believe such a word and give their consent to it.
rationem meriti, sed medii, per quod Deus fidem in cordibus nostris accendit. Meritum enim congrui, quod fingunt hic Pontificii, cum scilicet liomo facit, quod per naturam facere potest, quod tunc congruum sit, Deum eiusmodi homini dare gratiam, nos cum Scriptura ignoramus. [Google
facundiae vel illusionis gratia vel alias ob causas. [It can be done either because of the itch of novelty or to create a taste for convenience or illusion, or for other reasons. definition of the boundary between nature and grace. (691, 14 [Zrigl. 885, F. C., Sol. Decl., II, 14]) This matter has already been dealt with in more detail in the Doctrine of Free Will. [Vol. I] In the objections discussed so far, the synergism towards monergism was primarily on the offensive. It sought to show that misfortune would be many and various if conversion and salvation were to come about through God's grace alone. The imperative and conditional sentences would be devalued. A forced conversion would result. It would follow that in conversion not man but the Holy Spirit would believe. The "ethical" or "moral" character of conversion would be lost, and soon. But synergism also fights on the defensive. After having on the one hand disavowed the sola gratia with many reasons, it claims on the other hand also with several reasons that it leaves the sola gratia untouched, because it maintains, despite everything, that conversion does not come about by natural forces but by forces of grace. This assertion characterizes in particular the synergism of the 17th century (Latermann, Hornejiis) and the synergism of the more recent Lutherans (Thomasius, Luthardt, Dieckhoff, American Lutherans). This alone is also a self-deception. One talks about a conversion through forces of grace, but necessarily means natural forces 34°) This is clear from the following facts: