Total Depravity?
Definition of Terms:
|
The doctrine of total depravity is a theological concept primarily associated with Calvinism, asserting that every part of human nature is corrupted by sin to such an extent that people cannot choose to follow God without divine intervention.
In John Calvin’s magnum opus, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, he presents a view of man that is very much like Luther’s but contrary to what we find in the pages of Sacred Scripture. Calvin used texts such as Genesis 6:5—“The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually”—and Romans 3:10ff—“None is righteous, no not one; no one understands, no one seeks for God. All have turned aside, together they have gone wrong; no one does good, not even one ”—to prove that man is utterly depraved through the fall of Adam and Eve.
Calvin’s conclusion from these texts and others was to say, “The will is so utterly vitiated and corrupted in every part as to produce nothing but evil” (Institutes, bk. II, ch. II, para. 26). According to John Calvin, even those who have been justified by Christ “cannot perform one work which, if judged on its own merits, is not deserving of condemnation” (Institutes, bk. III, ch. 9, para. 9).
When John Calvin says man is utterly dependent upon God for every single just thought in his mind (cf. Institutes, bk. II, ch. II, para. 27), Catholics will happily agree. And they would be correct: We do agree. However, appearances can be deceiving, because there is meaning beneath those words that Catholics cannot agree with.
With Calvin, there is no sense of grace aiding and empowering our wills as St. Augustine taught and the Catholic Church teaches. For Calvin, being “dependent upon God” means our free cooperation or free will has no part to play. God does not merely empower our wills; he operates them.
Calvin rejects and ridicules the Catholic notion of God merely permitting evil and working all things together for good. In his words:
Hence a distinction has been invented between doing and permitting, because to many it seemed altogether inexplicable how Satan and all the wicked are so under the hand and authority of God, that he directs their malice to whatever end he pleases” (Institutes, bk. I, ch. XVIII, para. 1).
Evildoers do not commit acts of depravity in spite of the command of God, but because of the command of God, according to Calvin (ibid., para. 4)!
Isaiah 45:7 and Amos 3:6 are used to teach that there is no evil that occurs that is not “impelled” by God’s positive command (ibid., para. 2).
1.Overemphasis on Sinful Nature: Catholics agree that humanity is affected by original sin, but they argue that the concept of total depravity overstates the extent of human corruption, implying that human nature is inherently evil. In contrast, Catholic theology maintains that, though wounded, human nature retains its goodness and capacity for grace.
2.Denial of Free Will: Total depravity suggests that humans are incapable of choosing good without God’s direct intervention. Catholicism upholds the existence of free will, teaching that while grace is necessary for salvation, human beings can cooperate with or resist God’s grace.
3.Imbalance Between Nature and Grace: The Catholic Church teaches that grace perfects nature, but does not destroy it. Total depravity, however, seems to imply that grace must completely override human nature, which Catholics see as an unnecessary rupture between nature and grace.
4.Contradicts the Doctrine of Human Cooperation with Grace: Catholicism holds that humans can cooperate with divine grace in the process of salvation. Total depravity implies that humans are passive recipients of grace, unable to collaborate with God’s will, a view that Catholics reject.
5.Inconsistent with the Sacramental View of Grace: Catholics believe that sacraments (such as Baptism and Eucharist) convey grace that strengthens and heals the human soul. The idea of total depravity seems incompatible with this sacramental theology, which assumes that human beings can respond to and participate in divine grace.
6.Undermines the Role of Virtue: Catholic teaching emphasizes the cultivation of virtues through good works, prayer, and cooperation with grace. Total depravity, in contrast, downplays the role of virtuous living and the potential for human moral improvement without first being regenerated by grace.
7.Dismisses the Innate Image of God in Humanity: Catholic theology teaches that all humans are created in the image and likeness of God, and while this image is tarnished by sin, it is not obliterated. Total depravity, on the other hand, seems to negate the presence of God’s image in fallen humanity, suggesting a more complete fall.
8.Implicates an Overly Pessimistic View of Human Relationships: Total depravity can lead to a cynical view of human relationships and societal institutions, as it implies that all human endeavors are tainted by sin. Catholics, however, hold that while sin has affected human relationships, the potential for love, justice, and goodness remains present.
9.Conflicts with Catholic Understanding of Justification: The Catholic Church teaches that justification involves a process of sanctification through which a person becomes truly holy. Total depravity, in its Calvinist form, typically involves an “imputed righteousness” where the sinner remains fundamentally depraved, and only Christ’s righteousness is counted on their behalf. This differs from the Catholic view of an actual internal transformation.
10.Undervalues the Role of Human Reason: Catholicism places significant value on human reason as a gift from God, capable of discerning truth and aiding in the pursuit of the good. Total depravity, however, often suggests that human reason is so corrupted by sin that it cannot effectively lead a person toward God, a position that Catholics view as too extreme.
These criticisms reflect broader differences between Catholicism and Reformed theology regarding human nature, grace, and salvation.
Critics of the doctrine of total depravity often turn to the Bible to argue against its key assertions. Here are several Biblical criticisms of total depravity, along with relevant verses and concepts that are seen as contradicting the doctrine:
1. Human Ability to Do Good
•Criticism: Total depravity teaches that humans are utterly incapable of doing good without divine intervention. However, several verses suggest that humans, even in their fallen state, can still perform good deeds.
•Key Verses:
•Matthew 7:11: “If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!” This passage implies that even sinful humans are capable of doing good things.
•Romans 2:14-15: “For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves.” Paul suggests here that non-believers can do moral good and follow their conscience, challenging the idea that humans are totally incapable of good.
2. Human Free Will
•Criticism: Total depravity implies that humans have no free will to choose God or respond to His grace without divine intervention. However, many passages in the Bible affirm human responsibility and the capacity to choose or reject God.
•Key Verses:
•Deuteronomy 30:19: “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live.” This verse presents a clear choice given to people, suggesting that they have the capacity to respond to God’s offer.
•Joshua 24:15: “Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve…” Joshua calls the Israelites to make a conscious decision to serve God, implying they have the ability to choose.
3. Imago Dei (Image of God)
•Criticism: The doctrine of total depravity implies that the image of God in humanity is either destroyed or completely corrupted. However, the Bible teaches that humans retain the image of God, even after the fall.
•Key Verses:
•Genesis 1:27: “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”
•James 3:9: “With it [the tongue] we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God.” This passage confirms that humans still bear the image of God, even after the fall.
4. Human Responsibility for Sin
•Criticism: Total depravity often suggests that people are so bound by sin that they cannot be held fully accountable for rejecting God without divine regeneration. However, the Bible consistently holds humans responsible for their sins and calls them to repentance.
•Key Verses:
•Ezekiel 18:30-31: “Repent, and turn from all your transgressions, so that iniquity will not be your ruin. Cast away from you all the transgressions which you have committed, and get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit.” This indicates that people have the ability to repent and turn to God of their own volition.
•Acts 17:30: “God… commands all people everywhere to repent.” This universal command suggests that humans have the capacity to respond to God’s call to repentance, contradicting the idea that only divine intervention can enable them to do so.
5. Children and the Innocent
•Criticism: Total depravity teaches that all humans are born in sin and are equally corrupted from birth. However, the Bible often speaks of children and the innocent in ways that suggest they are not fully depraved.
•Key Verses:
•Matthew 19:14: “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus’ reference to children as examples of the kingdom seems to contradict the idea that even children are totally depraved.
•Romans 5:13: “For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.” This suggests that there may be a period of innocence before an individual fully understands or can be held accountable for sin.
6. Seeking God
•Criticism: Total depravity asserts that no one can seek God on their own, as the will is completely corrupted by sin. However, various passages indicate that people do have the capacity to seek God, even before regeneration.
•Key Verses:
•Acts 17:27: “That they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us.” Paul affirms that people are capable of seeking after God.
•Jeremiah 29:13: “And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart.” This passage suggests that people can sincerely seek after God.
7. Moral Conscience
•Criticism: According to total depravity, the moral conscience of humans is entirely corrupted. However, the Bible suggests that humans possess a moral conscience that can still function in discerning good from evil.
•Key Verses:
•Romans 2:15: “They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.” This passage emphasizes that non-believers still possess a functioning conscience.
•Romans 7:22: “For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.” Paul speaks of an internal desire for God’s law, indicating that even those struggling with sin can recognize and delight in God’s truth.
8. Universal Call of Salvation
•Criticism: Total depravity suggests that God’s grace is only effective for the elect, as the rest are too depraved to respond. However, the Bible speaks of God’s universal desire for all people to be saved.
•Key Verses:
•1 Timothy 2:4: “[God] desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” This verse implies that salvation is universally offered, and that all have the potential to respond.
•John 12:32: “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.” Jesus expresses the intention to draw all people to Himself, which seems inconsistent with the idea that only the elect can respond to God’s call.
9. God’s Justice and Mercy
•Criticism: Total depravity, in conjunction with predestination, can raise concerns about God’s justice and fairness if only a select few are enabled to respond to the Gospel while others remain incapable due to their depraved state.
•Key Verses:
•2 Peter 3:9: “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise… but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” This verse emphasizes God’s desire for all to repent, suggesting that all have the potential to do so.
•Romans 2:6-7: “God ‘will repay each person according to what they have done.’ To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, He will give eternal life.” This implies that human actions and responses to God’s call matter, which seems at odds with total depravity’s focus on human inability.
10. Transformation through Christ
•Criticism: While total depravity focuses heavily on the inability of humans before salvation, critics point to the Bible’s emphasis on transformation and renewal through Christ, even in this life.
•Key Verses:
•2 Corinthians 5:17: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” This focuses on the renewal and transformation of believers, emphasizing that God’s grace enables a real change in human nature.
•Philippians 2:12-13: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.” This affirms that human effort in cooperation with God’s grace plays a role in the process of salvation.
These Biblical verses and concepts raise significant questions about the doctrine of total depravity, particularly regarding the extent of human freedom, moral capability, and God’s universal call to salvation.
The doctrine of total depravity, as articulated by John Calvin and later Reformed theologians, is often considered a distinct development within Reformation theology. However, the idea that human nature is deeply affected by sin has roots in earlier Christian thought, particularly in the Augustinian tradition. Yet, the specific notion of total depravity (that every aspect of human nature is completely corrupted and incapable of seeking God without divine grace) as understood in Calvinism, diverges in important ways from the teachings of the early Church Fathers.
1. Early Church Views on Sin and Free Will
The early Church Fathers generally acknowledged that sin had a profound effect on human nature, but they also affirmed the capacity of humans to choose good and cooperate with God’s grace. They did not espouse a view as extreme as Calvin’s total depravity.
Justin Martyr (100-165 AD)
Justin Martyr emphasizes the importance of free will in responding to God’s call, which contradicts the Calvinist view of total depravity.
•Quote: “We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it as true, that punishments, chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it were not so, and all things happened by fate, nothing would be left in our own power. For if it is destined that one man be good and another man be evil, neither is the one acceptable nor the other blameworthy.”
•Source: First Apology, Chapter 43.
Here, Justin refutes the idea that human action is so depraved that no one can choose good or evil apart from God’s intervention. He explicitly upholds the role of human will in determining one’s moral path, opposing the concept of total inability.
Irenaeus of Lyons (130-202 AD)
Irenaeus argues that humans retain freedom of will after the fall, suggesting that sin does not completely incapacitate human nature.
•Quote: “But man, being endowed with reason, and in this respect similar to God, having been made free in his will and with power over himself, is himself his own cause that sometimes he becomes wheat, and sometimes chaff.”
•Source: Against Heresies, Book 4, Chapter 37.
This view of Irenaeus asserts that human beings, even after the fall, have the freedom to choose their moral destiny, which conflicts with the idea that all human actions are corrupted by sin.
2. Augustine’s Doctrine of Original Sin
Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD) is often cited by Calvinists as an early proponent of doctrines that resemble total depravity, particularly in his conflict with the Pelagians, who denied original sin. Augustine strongly affirmed the necessity of grace for salvation, but even Augustine did not go as far as Calvin in his views on human incapacity.
•Quote: “For when God commands us to do what we cannot, He is admonishing us to know what we ought to seek from Him.”
•Source: On Grace and Free Will, Chapter 30.
Augustine believed that humans are deeply affected by original sin, but he also maintained that God’s grace is offered to everyone and that human will must cooperate with that grace. His views do not negate the possibility of human response to God’s call.
3. Pelagian Controversy
The Pelagian controversy of the 5th century is critical to understanding the development of doctrines about sin and grace. Pelagius (354-418 AD) emphasized the role of human free will in salvation, arguing that original sin did not corrupt human nature in a way that precluded moral perfection without divine grace. Augustine strongly opposed Pelagius, affirming the necessity of grace for overcoming sin, but Augustine still allowed for a degree of human cooperation with grace, which differs from the Calvinist interpretation of total depravity.
4. Church Fathers Affirming Human Cooperation with Grace
Clement of Alexandria (150-215 AD)
Clement argued that humans are not utterly depraved and have the ability to respond to God’s calling.
•Quote: “Neither is the will of God wanting to give salvation to men, nor is human nature incapable of receiving it. For neither does God compel, nor does He hinder. For salvation is the result of voluntary choice.”
•Source: Stromata, Book 2, Chapter 4.
Clement clearly rejects any notion that humanity is entirely incapable of seeking God or responding to His grace. His position that salvation is a result of voluntary human choice contradicts the Calvinist idea of total depravity, which holds that humans cannot choose God without prior divine regeneration.
John Chrysostom (347-407 AD)
John Chrysostom frequently affirmed the importance of free will and human cooperation with grace, offering a perspective that runs counter to total depravity.
•Quote: “All is not of grace, brethren, for if it were, all would be saved. But all are not saved. Whence is this? From ourselves, from our own negligence, from not wishing to be saved, not from any defect of grace.”
•Source: Homilies on Romans, Homily 18.
Chrysostom emphasizes that human will plays a decisive role in salvation. This contradicts the Calvinist view that grace is irresistibly given to the elect and that human will is completely incapacitated by sin.
5. Eastern Fathers and Synergism
The Eastern Church Fathers, particularly those from the Byzantine tradition, are more explicit in affirming synergism—the cooperation between divine grace and human free will in the process of salvation. This is a direct contradiction of total depravity, which teaches that no part of the human will can cooperate with grace until it is first regenerated.
Gregory of Nyssa (335-394 AD)
Gregory asserts the need for human cooperation with divine grace, rejecting any notion that human nature is totally depraved.
•Quote: “Being made in the image of God, man is given the ability to participate in the divine. But we are not compelled by nature to do so. Rather, the capacity for virtue is within us, but it is up to us to exercise it.”
•Source: On the Creation of Man, Chapter 30.
6. Criticism of Total Depravity from the Fathers
Several Church Fathers suggest that while sin affects human nature, it does not entirely destroy it or remove the capacity for good. The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions have maintained a view that sin wounds human nature but does not obliterate free will or moral ability. This theological position, often called synergism, allows for human cooperation with grace, a concept that directly opposes Calvin’s total depravity.
Conclusion: Church Fathers vs. Total Depravity
While early Christian theologians like Augustine discussed the effects of sin on human nature, they generally did not articulate a view as extreme as Calvin’s total depravity. The Church Fathers, including Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, John Chrysostom, Gregory of Nyssa, and others, consistently affirmed the cooperation of human free will with divine grace and the capacity of humans to do good. They rejected the idea that humans are so utterly depraved that they cannot respond to God without being regenerated first. Therefore, many of their writings provide a theological critique of total depravity, emphasizing a more nuanced understanding of sin, free will, and grace.
Here is a 10-point argument summarizing the critique of John Calvin’s doctrine of total depravity based on the biblical and theological points presented:
1.Misinterpretation of Genesis 6:5: While Calvin uses Genesis 6:5 to support the idea that man is utterly depraved, the context disproves this. Just four verses later, Noah is described as a “righteous man” who “found favor in the eyes of the Lord” (Genesis 6:8-9). This shows that man, with God’s grace, can indeed be righteous.
2.Romans 3 and Its Context: Calvin’s use of Romans 3:10ff to claim that no one is righteous is incomplete. The broader context of Romans, especially Romans 2:4 and 5:1-2, emphasizes God’s grace leading to repentance and justification, showing that through Christ, man can become truly just.
3.Psalm 14 Clarifies Paul’s Meaning: In Romans 3, Paul quotes Psalm 14, where the wicked are condemned. But immediately following, the Psalmist acknowledges that God is with “the generation of the righteous” (Psalm 14:3-5). This contradicts the notion of total depravity by recognizing the existence of the righteous alongside evildoers.
4.Human Beings Can Be Truly Just: St. Paul teaches that man is made truly just through God’s grace, as evidenced in Romans 8:2-4, where the law’s just requirement is fulfilled by those who walk according to the Spirit. The faithful are truly made just by grace, not totally depraved.
5.Natural Law in Romans 2:14-15: Calvin’s view of total depravity is contradicted by Romans 2:14-15, where Paul teaches that even those without the law can “do by nature what the law requires.” This suggests that human nature, though wounded by sin, is not totally depraved and can still act justly.
6.Righteous Works in Scripture: Calvin’s claim that even the justified cannot perform a single work worthy of God’s favor contradicts biblical examples such as Phineas, whose work was “reckoned to him as righteousness” (Psalm 106:30-31). Scripture shows that works of justice, performed by those who are just, are recognized by God.
7.Faith and Works Together: Scripture teaches that both faith and works contribute to justification. For example, James 2:24 says, “By works a man is justified and not by faith alone,” and Matthew 12:37 says, “By your words you will be justified.” These texts oppose the idea that all works are condemned.
8.God’s Grace Makes Works Truly Just: The Catholic view acknowledges that all good works are God’s gifts, yet through man’s cooperation with grace, these works are genuinely just and contribute to salvation (Revelation 3:4). Man is not merely a passive recipient but cooperates with grace.
9.Calvin’s Misconception of Grace and Free Will: Calvin’s view of grace excludes the role of free will, presenting man as entirely dependent on God in a way that eliminates human cooperation. In contrast, Catholic teaching, rooted in St. Augustine’s theology, holds that grace empowers human free will without erasing it.
10.God Does Not Cause Moral Evil: Calvin’s assertion that God “impels” evil actions, based on misinterpretations of Isaiah 45:7 and Amos 3:6, contradicts Scripture. James 1:13 clearly states that God cannot tempt anyone with evil, nor can He be the cause of moral evil, as God is entirely good.