Free Will and Divine Grace in the Westminster Confession of Faith: A Theological Exploration
The question of free will has stood at the crossroads of theology and philosophy for centuries, inviting profound reflection on the nature of human choice, divine sovereignty, and moral responsibility. Chapter 9 of the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646)—titled “Of Free Will”—addresses this issue within a distinctly Reformed framework. While affirming that man possesses the natural capacity for choice, the Confession insists that this freedom is conditioned by his moral and spiritual state: created innocence, fallen corruption, regenerating grace, and final glorification. The Confession thus sketches a dynamic view of human will across redemptive history, situating it within the overarching sovereignty of God.
I. The Westminster Confession, Chapter 9: An Overview
Chapter 9 of the Westminster Confession opens with an affirmation that God has endowed man with a will that is “neither forced, nor by any absolute necessity of nature determined to good or evil.” In other words, human beings act voluntarily, according to their own inclinations, not under external compulsion. Yet, subsequent sections clarify that this freedom is not absolute but varies according to one’s spiritual condition:
-
In the state of innocence, man had the freedom and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God, yet mutably, so that he might fall.
-
In the state of sin, man has lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; as a natural man, he is “dead in sin” and cannot, of his own power, convert himself.
-
In the state of grace, God frees man’s will from bondage to sin, enabling him to will and to do that which is spiritually good—though not perfectly, for remnants of corruption remain.
-
In the state of glory, man’s will is made perfectly and immutably free to do good alone.
This progression mirrors the classic Augustinian and Reformed understanding of the human condition: creation, fall, redemption, and glorification. It provides a theological anthropology that balances divine sovereignty with a meaningful conception of human agency.
II. Non Posse Non Peccare vs. Posse Non Peccare
The Latin theological formulae non posse non peccare (“not able not to sin”) and posse non peccare (“able not to sin”) succinctly capture the contrasting states of fallen and unfallen humanity.
-
In the state of innocence before the fall, Adam and Eve were posse peccare (able to sin) and posse non peccare (able not to sin). Their wills were genuinely free but mutable.
-
After the fall, humanity became non posse non peccare—not able not to sin. The will, though still functioning in natural matters, is morally bound to sin in spiritual matters.
-
Through regeneration, the believer regains posse non peccare—the restored ability to resist sin by the grace of God.
-
In glory, the saints will attain non posse peccare—not able to sin, a state of perfected freedom.
This schema harmonizes with the Westminster view that man’s freedom is real but relative, dependent upon his moral condition. True freedom, paradoxically, is found not in autonomy but in holiness—when the will is fully aligned with the good.
III. Luther’s Bondage of the Will and Edwards’ Freedom of the Will
Two landmark works—Martin Luther’s De Servo Arbitrio (The Bondage of the Will, 1525) and Jonathan Edwards’ Freedom of the Will (1754)—represent distinct yet complementary Reformed treatments of this paradox.
Luther: The Will as Bound in Sin
Luther, responding to Erasmus, argued that the fallen human will is in “bondage” to sin and incapable of choosing God apart from grace. To him, the supposed “freedom” of the natural man is an illusion. The will follows the heart’s desires, and since the heart is corrupt, its choices are necessarily opposed to God. For Luther, only divine grace, working through the Word and Spirit, can liberate the will to love and obey God. Freedom, then, is not the ability to choose between good and evil, but the ability to act in accordance with one’s renewed nature.
Edwards: Freedom as Acting According to One’s Greatest Motive
Edwards, building on a more philosophical framework, defined freedom as the power to act according to one’s strongest motive or inclination. A person is free if he acts voluntarily, not if he can act contrary to his own nature or desires. Edwards thus reconciled divine sovereignty and human responsibility by distinguishing between natural ability (the capacity to act as one wills) and moral ability (the capacity to will the good). Fallen humanity retains natural ability but has lost moral ability. This mirrors Westminster’s statement that fallen man “cannot of his own free will convert himself.” For Edwards, as for Luther, grace is not a supplement to free will but its resurrection.
IV. The Fall and the Translation into Grace
The Westminster Confession carefully traces the contrast between man’s fall into sin and God’s translation of man into a state of grace. In the fall, human will becomes enslaved to corruption, leading inevitably to death. The “bondage of the will” is not mere limitation but moral captivity: the sinner freely chooses sin, yet cannot choose righteousness without divine intervention.
In regeneration, however, the Spirit renews the will, enabling a truly free response to God’s call. The Confession’s language—“when God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He freeth him from his natural bondage under sin”—echoes Pauline themes from Romans 6: “Being made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.” Grace does not abolish freedom but restores it. In the state of grace, believers experience a freedom that is both moral and spiritual: the liberty to do good willingly and joyfully, though imperfectly.
The culmination of this divine work occurs in glorification, where freedom and righteousness are made immutable. Here the tension between will and sin disappears altogether—freedom and holiness become one.
V. Conclusion: True Freedom as the Gift of Grace
The Westminster Confession’s doctrine of free will rejects both determinism and libertarian autonomy. It affirms a freedom that is always creaturely, conditioned by moral and spiritual state, and ultimately perfected only in union with God. The human will is never self-sufficient; it is either enslaved to sin or liberated by grace.
In this light, the Latin axiom servire Deo est regnare—“to serve God is to reign”—captures the Reformed paradox of freedom. The freest will is the one most perfectly conformed to divine goodness. Thus, the Confession offers a vision of liberty grounded not in independence from God but in communion with Him—the transition from non posse non peccare to non posse peccare is nothing less than the story of redemption itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment