Article XVIII Free Will
[67] The adversaries accept Article XVIII, “Free Will,” although they add some references having nothing to do with this case. They also add a speech that neither should the free will be granted too much, like the Pelagians, nor should all freedom be denied it, like the Manichaeans. [68] Very well, but what difference is there between the Pelagians and our adversaries, since both hold that people can love God and perform His commandments with respect to the substance of the acts and can merit grace and justification by works that reason performs by itself, without the Holy Spirit? [69] How many foolish things follow from these Pelagian opinions, which are taught with great authority in the schools! Augustine, following Paul, disapproves of these with great emphasis. We have repeated his opinion in the article “Justification.” [70] We do not deny freedom to the human will. The human will has freedom in the choice of works and things that reason understands by itself. To a certain extent reason can display public righteousness or the righteousness of works. It can speak of God, offer to God a certain service by an outward work, and obey public officials and parents. In choosing an outward work, it can hold back the hand from murder, adultery, and theft. Because human nature has been left with reason and judgment about objects subjected to the senses, choice between these things, the liberty and power to produce public righteousness are also left. Scripture calls this the righteousness of the flesh, which the carnal nature (that is, reason) produces by itself, without the Holy Spirit. [71] However, the power of lustful desire is such that people more often obey evil inclinations than sound judgment. The devil, who is powerful in the godless, does not cease to stir up this weak nature to various offenses, as Paul says in Ephesians 2:2. For these reasons even public righteousness is rare among people. Not even the philosophers, who seem to have hoped for this righteousness, achieved it. [72] But it is false to say whoever performs the works of the commandments without grace does not sin. The adversaries add further that such works also merit the forgiveness of sins and justification in merely an agreeable way (de congruo). For without the Holy Spirit, human hearts lack the fear of God. Without trust toward God, they do not believe that they are heard, forgiven, helped, and preserved by God. Therefore, they are godless. For “a diseased tree [cannot] bear good fruit” (Matthew 7:18). And “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” (Hebrews 11:6).
[73] Although we admit that free will has the freedom and power to perform the extreme works of the Law, we do not assign spiritual matters to free will. These are to truly fear God, believe God, be confident and hold that He cares for us, hears us, and forgives us. These are the true works of the First Table, which the heart cannot produce without the Holy Spirit, as Paul says, “The natural person [namely, a person using only natural strength] does not accept the things of the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:14). [74] People can determine this if they consider what their hearts believe about God’s will, whether they are truly confident God cares for and hears them. Even the saints find keeping this faith difficult (which is not possible in unbelievers). But, as we have said before, it begins when terrified hearts hear the Gospel and receive comfort.
[75] Their distinction is helpful. Civil righteousness is assigned to free will, and spiritual righteousness is assigned to the governing of the Holy Spirit in the reborn. In this way, outward discipline is kept, because all people should know that God requires this civil righteousness and that, to some extent, we can achieve it. And yet a distinction is shown between human and spiritual righ teousness, between philosophical teaching and the teaching of the Holy Spirit. It can be understood why the Holy Spirit is needed. [76] We did not invent this distinction; Scripture clearly teaches it. Augustine also presents it, and recently William of Paris has presented it very well. But those who dream that people can obey God’s Law without the Holy Spirit, and that the Holy Spirit is given so that obeying the Law may be considered meritorious, have wickedly hindered the distinction.