WJEC/Eduqas RS for A2/Yr2: Religion and Ethics (DRAFT)

WJEC / Eduqas Religious Studies for A Level Year 2 and A2 Religion and Ethics

In summary, the notion of divine providence as outlined above, combined with the doctrine of middle knowledge, provided Arminius with the underpinning basis of his theology of conditional predestination. Stranglin and McCall summarise it thus: ‘Working from the doctrine of middle knowledge, with its divine knowledge of all possible choices and actions of creatures prior to the divine decision, Arminius is thus able to insist upon a robust doctrine of divine providence. It is one in which the particulars of life are within the overall divine plan – but without divine determinism and its implications for God’s involvement with (or “authorship “ of) sin.’

Arminius’ summarises it as, ‘A thing does not happen because it has been foreknown or predicted, but it is foreknown or predicted because it is about to be’. This idea of middle knowledge was developed just before Arminius in the 16th century by Luis de Molina, a Spanish Jesuit priest. Like

■ MK is prior to any creative act of God (prevolitional) DRAFT

Arminius, Molina held that middle knowledge did not mean that predestination had to be rejected as God has full knowledge of future contingent events. Middle knowledge (MK) has certain characteristics: God knows all possible outcomes of any possible choices to be made.

Key quotes Arminius affirms foreknowledge without determinism. In his omniscience, God knows all that exists and he also knows all that will be. Middle knowledge means that God knows the result of any contingent event under any hypothetical set of circumstances without necessarily determining that outcome. (Skevington-Wood) Arminius wrestled with divine sovereignty and human freedom without sacrificing either on the altar of the other. (Stranglin and McCall) The decrees of election and reprobation are founded in God’s will alone, but salvation and condemnation in time are based on Christ’s work and human sin, respectively… Arminius brings Christ back as the foundation of election (not just salvation) and impenitent unbelief as

■ MK is independent of God’s will

■ MK is contingent

■ God has full awareness of the various possible outcomes of MK

■ MK informs God of what humans would do if a certain scenario beset them. This aspect of God’s providence is the key to understanding the compatibility between free will and predestination according to Arminius. In order to clarify his position on predestination and salvation, Arminius presented his Declaration of Sentiments , a written exposition of his theology, delivered before the states of Holland, at the Hague, on the 13 October, 1608. Arminius’ theological ideas, and in particular his ideas on free will and predestination, were never meant to spearhead his thinking. His notions were firmly set within the ‘bigger picture’, or overall decree, of God’s providence. As Stranglin and McCall attest: ‘God’s decree is one, yet manifold, dealing with all sorts of matters. The general decree about anything concerning the created order is called God’s providence; the special decree about election and salvation in particular is God’s predestination.’ This overall framework of providence holds that God does nothing without purpose, nor plan. Although God’s providence is eternal, this is a logical rather than temporal, and this means that it can be ‘enacted in time by various means leading to salvation or condemnation ’ according to Stranglin and McCall.

the cause of reprobation. (Stranglin and McCall)

118