The Bondage of the Will

This article is based on the translation made in 1823 by Edward Thomas Vaughan. The language has been modernized with the assistance of CoPilot AI, with further alterations and final approval by Thirdmill’s editorial staff.

Let’s talk about your statement—not just about free will, but about religious doctrine as a whole—where you say that if the absolute authority of Scripture and Church decrees didn’t stand in the way, you’d gladly join the Skeptics because you’re so frustrated by assertions.

That phrase—“absolute authority and Church decrees”—is slippery. You sound reverent toward Scripture and the Church, yet you imply you’d prefer to be free to embrace skepticism. What kind of Christian talks like that? If you’re referring to trivial doctrines, then sure, many people wish they had the freedom to question them. That’s nothing new.

In fact, most Christians already exercise that freedom when they reject rigid dogmatism. Unless, as your words suggest, you think Christians generally cling to worthless doctrines and foolishly argue over them. But if you’re talking about essential beliefs, then saying you wish you didn’t have to assert anything is deeply troubling. A true Christian would say, “Far from siding with the Skeptics, I strive to stand firm in God’s word, asserting what it teaches—and even in non-essential matters, I aim to be confident. What’s more miserable than uncertainty?”

Then you add, “I willingly submit my judgment to all of it, whether I understand it or not.” Really, Erasmus? Isn’t it enough to submit to Scripture? Must you also surrender to Church decrees? Are you saying the Church can command what Scripture doesn’t? If so, where’s the freedom to judge doctrine, as Paul instructs in 1 Corinthians 14:29: “Let the others judge”? You seem to oppose the idea of judging Church decrees, but Paul insists on it.

This new humility of yours—blindly submitting to human authority—strips us of the right to evaluate doctrine. Where does Scripture demand that? And what Christian would say, “I submit, even if I don’t understand”? You’re professing beliefs without grasping them. But Scripture curses those who don’t understand what they claim to believe. How can someone truly believe without understanding?

You seem to suggest that belief doesn’t require certainty. But if “apprehending” means fully grasping something, then partial understanding isn’t enough. You can’t claim to understand one part of God without understanding all of Him. We must first apprehend God before we can understand anything else in creation.

Ultimately, your words imply that belief doesn’t matter—as long as peace is maintained. When reputation, safety, or wealth are at risk, you seem to endorse the idea of echoing whatever others say: “They affirm, I affirm; they deny, I deny.” You reduce Christian doctrine to mere philosophical opinion, not worth defending because it only causes conflict. You present yourself as a peacemaker who wants to silence both sides, suggesting we’re fighting over nonsense. That’s the real message behind your words, Erasmus—and I suspect you know what I’m leaving unsaid.

Still, I’ll let those words slide for now, provided you don’t repeat them. But beware the Spirit of God, who sees through polished language and examines the heart. I’ve said this to discourage you from accusing us of being rigid or overly assertive. Your approach suggests you harbor the spirit of Lucian or some Epicurean who doesn’t believe in God and mocks those who do. Let us be assertive, passionate about truth, and unashamed of it. You can keep favoring your Skeptics and Academics—until Christ calls you to something greater.

The Holy Spirit is no Skeptic. He hasn’t written vague opinions on our hearts, but firm, life-rooted truths—truths more certain than anything we’ve experienced.

Now, to another point. You claim that some Christian doctrines are essential and others aren’t; some are hidden, others revealed. Are you just parroting others, or trying out rhetorical flair? You cite Paul’s words —“Oh, the depth of the riches of God’s wisdom” (Romans 11:33) — and Isaiah’s —“Who has known the mind of the Lord?” (Isaiah 40:13).

It’s easy to say these things when you’re writing for the general public, not directly to Luther. But I hope you still credit Luther with some understanding of Scripture. If not, I’ll make sure you do.

Let me offer a distinction: God and God’s written word are not the same—just as the Creator and His creation are distinct. Of course, many things are hidden in God. He says so Himself: “No one knows the day or hour” (Matthew 24:36), “It’s not for you to know the times” (Acts 1:7), “I know whom I have chosen” (John 13:18), and “The Lord knows those who are His” (2 Timothy 2:19).

But some philosophers—and you echo them here—claim that Scripture itself contains hidden doctrines. They’ve never proven this. Not once have they shown a single example to support their claim. Yet these ideas have discouraged people from reading Scripture and made it seem irrelevant—so that Satan’s own philosophical heresies could take root in the Church.