Thread: Perseverance Pre-Calvin

I read this, then I read it again, then I read it again, and I'm not sure what he's saying. Help?

Here is a quote from Thomas Bradwardine's (14th century) The Cause of God Against the Pelagians, translated and reprinted in Oberman's Forerunners of the Reformation:

“Accordingly, Augustine proves that the gift of final perseverance cannot be lost and he suggests the following clarification for what we mean by its being lost. Because final perseverance actually means persevering until the end, it is possible for many to have it but, by definition, impossible for them to lose it. Let us beware, however, of saying that the gift of final perseverance can never be lost once it has been granted, that is, once on had the ability to persevere until the end. Let us rather say that it is lost in that moment when man rejects the gift so that he cannot reach the goal – just as we say that the man who does not persevere until the end has lost eternal life or the kingdom of God. It is not that he ever actually had it but he would have had it if he had been able to persevere.” (159)

He (Br.) seems to me to be explaining his read of Augustin (Augustin's "clarification") when he says "he suggests."

When Br. gets to "Let us beware," he may be resuming his own thought. That is, Br. may not be agreeing with what he might consider a taking of Augustin's thought too far. I would like to think that Augustin is saying that the gift of final perseverance is "discovered" in the finality. It was always present, but could not be known in advance.

Br., it seems to me, actually rejects a final perseverance granted before it is attained, that is he talks about it as real but potential only, and that one given the POWER to persevere finally nevertheless may not persevere finally by... well, by not persevering. By rejecting the gift. He says it can be lost once it has been granted, "once on[e] had the ability to persevere until the end."

IOW, he says at the end that he never "actually" had it, but that he would have if he had [under his own strength of purpose] "been able" to persevere. It sounds like perseverance may for Br. be "prevenient grace" (perhaps an anachronistic term). To me it just sounds like Br. wants to understand apostasy as a failure to use the grace of perseverance. That perseverance must be constantly watered by obedience, etc.

I'm not sure Augustin would consent, though we only have a snippet of his thought being mediated to us through Br. I think Augustin is saying final perseverance is recognized at the end, and it is part of the gift of salvation, and cannot be lost.

Is he saying "this is just how we ought to TALK about the subject"? That's probably too generous. I do think that Br. says he never actually had eternal life or the kingdom, but he focuses entirely on the term "final" with regard to perseverance. So that without that term, "perseverance" is a pursuit within the power of the grace provided. It isn't final actually until finalized.

I could be wrong, but it seems like he wants to make Augustin agree with him, that is to say less than he actually does say.

Make sense?

OK, that makes sense. That's about how I read it. I'd probably have to be more familiar with Br. thought as a whole to understand exactly why he is explaining the issue in those terms. I find it interesting that Br. is regarded as being the strict predestinarian of the 14th century.