Theology 8390-001,
Spring 2012
Predestination, Freedom, and Moral Effort
SAC 210,
Tuesdays 7:00 – 9:20 pm
Dr. Jesse Couenhoven
Office hours: Anytime! by
appointment. Or Mondays, 3 – 4 pm.
My email address:
jesse.couenhoven@gmail.com
jesse.couenhoven@villanova.edu is forwarded
to my gmail account, as is
jesse.couenhoven@aya.yale.edu. Feel free to
e-mail me at any time with questions or comments.
Office: SAC 473
To what degree can we each write our own life-stories? We
tend to think we control our lives—but at the same time, we are surrounded by
talk of genetic determinism and social determinants of behavior. Sometimes, we
think it is our fate to win a certain job or fall in love with a particular
person, but such achievements can also seem subject to luck. Are we less free
because our lives are out of our control in many ways? Should we want more
control (perhaps with the help of technology), or should we be grateful we are
not entirely in charge of our narratives?
Theologians have long pondered these and related questions
posed by the relationship between God’s agency and ours. What is the
relationship between divine grace and the effort we should put into being good?
How can we be free under the influence of divine grace? The doctrine of
predestination raises these questions in a radical way, by suggesting that the
saints’ ultimate destiny is not under their autonomous control. This might imply
that our own efforts are pointless; some consider predestination similar to
pagan ideas of being controlled by fate. Yet it remains an ecumenical doctrine,
affirmed by Catholics and Protestants alike. Should we affirm it as well?
Readings from recent authors will include discussions of
eschatology and divine election (Hans Urs von Balthasar, Karl Barth), the
mysterious relation between human and divine freedom (Matthew Levering, Reginald
Garrigou-Lagrange, Jacques Maritain), and “moral luck” (Bernard Williams).
Historical readings will consider the agreements and disagreements between
Calvin (The Bondage and Liberation of the
Will), Luther (The Bondage of the Will), Aquinas (selections from
his Summa Contra Gentiles and Summa Theologica), Anselm (On
Free Will), and Sophocles (Aias). Readings from Augustine (The
Predestination of the Saints,
Nature and Grace) will provide a focal point for our discussion.
The main assignment for the course will be a 20 page
research paper. I am uncertain whether you are destined to receive an “A”; God
may not be.
Course
Objectives
1. To become
familiar with influential theological understandings of predestination, and
related soteriological concepts, throughout the Christian tradition.
2. To
understand and be able to reflect critically and constructively on how the idea
of predestination relates to current issues in theology, ethics, and philosophy.
3. To write a
good essay that displays a critical understanding of the topics discussed in
class and in our readings.
Course Requirements
1. Keep up with assigned readings,
attend all class sessions, participate actively in discussions.
Repeated absences or lack of participation will result in a lowered
grade; consistent and thoughtful participation will improve your final grade.
Coming to class late is not acceptable, as it disrupts the class. If you must
miss a class, please email me as soon as possible to explain why. Participation
will count towards 15% of your grade, and if you are near a grade cut-off, will
influence my decision, for better or for worse.
2. Each week,
prepare a response (not to exceed one page or 300 words) to the reading for that
week. Prior to class, exchange your
response with a discussion partner (to be assigned).
The following week, your response should begin with or otherwise
incorporate a few sentences responding to your partner’s response from the
previous week. Thus, your responses
will over time constitute a written conversation as well as a record of your own
reflection on the reading. I will
collect responses twice during the semester, on February 29 and April 25.
Please email your responses to me a single .doc file, with the date on
which you sent each response to your partner clearly indicated at the top of
each response. A good approach is to
focus on a specific quote from the reading that captured your attention, but you
are also encouraged to make connections with other courses, your own reading,
theological matters more generally.
20% of final grade.
You may skip two weeks without penalty, but please notify
your partner that you have chosen to skip that week.
Responses will be graded as follows:
All (10) reflections completed on time and responsive to assignment = A-
(if at least some of your responses are insightful, A); One or two reflections
late or not fully responsive to assignment = B+; One reflection missing or three
or four reflections late = B; Two reflections missing or four or five
reflections late = B-; Three reflections missing or six or seven late = C; four
or more missing or more than seven late = F.
3. Once in the
semester, offer a presentation to initiate our discussion of the assigned
readings. Formulate three questions
arising out of the reading for the week.
Situate your questions with respect to a close reading of the text, your
own motivating concerns, and in relation to the unfolding of the course thus
far. Aim for an informal (i.e.,
spoken from notes, not read from a prepared text) presentation of about 10
minutes (I will cut you off if you go longer than 15). This will count for 10%
of your final grade.
4. 20 page
final paper. Papers may take a
variety of forms including a critical exposition of a theme in one or more
authors, a critical comparison of authors, or a constructive development of a
theme. They will be evaluated on how
well ideas and authors are understood and on how well the critical or
constructive task is carried out.
You should email me your topic by April 20. A rough draft—worth 15% of your
final grade—is due April 27. The final version will be due in the first week of
May, in lieu of a final, and counts towards 40% of your final grade.
Paper Grading
Rubric
An A is reserved for outstanding
work that clearly understands and helpfully interacts with the texts and
arguments of a broader conversation.
Papers earning such a grade
•
have an original, helpful thesis that develops new insights, directions,
or connections (thus making it worthwhile reading to some public);
•
make that thesis discipline the entire essay, especially the conclusion;
•
anticipate criticisms and, insofar as possible, account for alternative
positions;
•
use an effective rhetorical structure, including an accountable method of
argument and a clear flow of ideas;
•
are very well-written.
An A- or B+ indicates that you
have successfully and competently written an essay. You demonstrate accurate
understanding of texts and arguments and you have a clear thesis in a
well-written paper. To develop into an A-level essay, it may need a more
original thesis. Or you may have an excellent thesis that is not completely
realized in the subsequent argument. Or your reading of some of your
conversation partners may be slightly distorted at points.
A grade of B or B- indicates
acceptable completion of the assignment, with room for improvement in argument,
and/or in understanding of other texts. This may be a grade for a reasonable
essay that remains descriptive rather than critical, or that seems rushed in its
consideration. It may be the grade for an exciting idea that suffers from sloppy
writing and argumentation.
A grade of C indicates inadequate
completion of the assignment but good faith effort in approaching it. The paper
probably suffers from lack of a clear thesis and disorganized argument, and may
incorrectly understand other arguments. However, this may also be the grade for
a paper with a good thesis but confusing flow, undefended assumptions, or
inappropriate reading of other arguments.
Academic
Integrity
Students are expected to adhere to the most rigorous
standards of academic integrity. The Arts and Sciences academic integrity policy
will be followed scrupulously in this course. Students who plagiarize or
cheat on any assignment will receive either an F for the assignment or for the
course (depending on the seriousness of the violation), and a letter
will be filed with the student's dean and with the
Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Required Books
Sophocles (Aias)
Augustine (Selected
Writings on Grace and Pelagianism)
Anselm (Anselm of
Canterbury: The Major Works.)
Luther (Luther and
Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation, in the Library of Christian Classics)
Calvin (The Bondage
and Liberation of the Will)
Barth, Church
Dogmatics II/2;
http://www.amazon.com/Church-Dogmatics-Vol-Sections-32-33/dp/0567437019/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1326325651&sr=1-2
Von Balthasar, Dare
We Hope?
Many readings will be made available online during the
semester.
Course Schedule
Tuesday,
January 18: Introduction
O. Henry, “Mammon and the Archer”
Jan 24: Moral Luck, the Bible, and the problem of
Foreknowledge
Bernard Williams, “Moral Luck” pp. 35-56 (online);
Matthew Levering, “The Biblical Roots of the Doctrine” in
Predestination, pp. 13-35 (online)
William Hasker, “Divine Knowledge and Human Freedom” in Robert Kane (ed.),
The Oxford
Handbook of Free Will,
2011 (second edition), pp. 39-54 (online)
Jan 31: Conceptions of Fate
Sophocles, Aias,
pp. 27 – 77;
Bernard Williams, “Shame and Autonomy” (pp. 75-102 in
Shame and Necessity) (online)
Feb 7: Predestination
St. Augustine,
Predestination of the Saints, pp. 419-64;
Gift of Perseverance,
474-82; 490-523;
City of God,
V.9-10 (online)
Feb 14: Augustinian Freedom and Responsibility
Augustine, The Spirit
and the Letter, pp. 217-94
Optional Reading: Jesse Couenhoven, “Sickness, Sin, and
Augustine’s Compatibilism”
Feb 21: Forgiveness conference
Instead of attending class Tuesday evening, please attend
some portion of the conference on “Possibilities of Forgiveness” that will be
taking place Feb 20-1. For more information, see
http://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/artsci/humanities/forgivenessconference/schedule.html
Feb 28: Anselm’s alternative: a more moderate view?
Anselm, De
Concordia, 435-74; On Free Will,
175-92
Mar 6: No Class, Spring Break
Mar 13: Thomas Aquinas: Augustinian or Anselmian?
Aquinas, ST I Q80-3; I-II Q6, 8-16 (acts of will); ST I-II
Q109, 111-114.a3 (grace and merit) (online)
Eleonore Stump, “Aquinas’s Account of Freedom: Intellect
and Will” (online)
Supplemental readings: Aquinas,
On Evil Q III (pp.102-40), VI (pp.
234-47). ST III.18.4 (Christ’s free will). SCG I.88, II.23 (God’s free choice);
II.47-8, IV.92 (the heavenly saints)
Mar 20: Aquinas on Predestination
Aquinas, ST I
Q19, 22-23 (divine providence and predestination); III.24 (predestination of
Christ); SCG III.89-90, 93-5, 147-51, 155-163
Mar 27: No Class: Reading Week!
Apr 3: No free choice? Martin Luther
Luther, Selection on Predestination from his Commentary on
Genesis (online);
The Bondage of the
Will, Intro (pp. 101-5), Parts III-IV (pp. 169-188, 199-205; the summary
paragraph on 215, 229-263, 281-91, 293-301, 312-318), and Conclusion (332-5).
Apr 10: Double Predestination: Jean Calvin
Calvin, Institutes,
I.XV.7-I.XVI ; II.V.1-15 (on free choice and divine providence); III.XXI, XXIII
(on election and predestination) (online);
The Bondage and
Liberation of the Will, pp. 67-70, 128-179, 191-195, 203-217, 234-237
Supplemental readings: Inst II.I-IV (famous/infamous
passages on sin and the lack of free choice in fallen humanity); III.XIX
(Christian freedom); III.XXII, XXIV (election).
Apr 17: Election in Christ: Karl Barth
Barth, Selections from his
Church Dogmatics, II/2 selections from sections 32-3, pp. 3-34
(including the small print sections); 76-127 (NOT including the small print
sections); 145-188 (NOT including the small print sections).
Supplemental reading: CD II/2, pp. 306-325 (the election of
man).
Apr 24: Recent Catholic views
Matthew Levering,
Predestination, pp.177-201 (online)
Hans Urs von Balthasar, “Some Points of Eschatology” in
Explorations in Theology, vol 1.
(online)
Herbert McCabe, “Predestination” in
God Still Matters. (online)
May 1: Final Things: Eschatology, Hell, and Divine
Responsibility; Happy fault?
Hans Urs von Balthasar,
Dare We Hope? (selections)
N.T. Wright, “Purgatory, Paradise, Hell” in
Surprised by Hope, pp. 165-87.
(online)