Monday, August 28, 2006

Is justification a mystery, and if so in what sense; or is it simply a forensic fact? If it is not a mystery, but a fact, what basis, if any at all, must it have, first, in the mystery of Divine Procession, and secondly, in the Incarnation of the Word?
Labels:

1 comment:

Thomas said...

Jason,

I think that’s exactly the Tridentine teaching on predestination. If we could have divine certainty of our election as individuals, where would be the need for hope? The relationship between hope and assurance is analogous to the relationship between faith and knowledge. A person doesn’t “know” the object of faith. Similarly, a person doesn’t have certainty of the object of hope. At the same time, a person is not ignorant of the object of faith nor does he despair of the object of hope.

It does no good to argue against this – as some Reformed might do – that the formal object of our hope is God’s goodness and fidelity rather than our individual election. And thus that the problem is solved in that the certainty of election comes indirectly from this hope in the Gospel.

The problem with this response is that divine truthfulness and immutability are not the objects of hope, but rather presupposed to faith, and in certain cases with certain men can be naturally known through rational demonstration.

In other words, my own personal election is the object of my hope..."hope" not faith. If my individual election were the object of faith, it would demand the assent of every believer, for whom the objects of faith, according to St. Augustine, are common.

Josef Pieper argues that the Reformation doctrine of certainty is very close to the vice of presumption.

4:13 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)