Real Calvinism - The Dictated Will

I have met quite a few people who call themselves Calvinists, or say that they have Calvinist-leanings. Many of these people believe that Scripture teaches both the free will of man and the sovereignty of God, though they usually are unable to reconcile the two teachings theologically. (The Lutheran Church MS presents a similar position in their statement regarding conversion.)

I am more and more convinced, however, that this is not the teaching of staunch, dedicated Calvinism. Calvinism, as taught by the more serious Calvinists, not only denies the freedom of the will, but denies it on the lowest of imaginable levels.

To fully prove that assertion would require a wide-ranging historical study beyond the scope of a single blog post. Yet, in support of this position I would like to provide a number of quotes from Arthur W. Pink's work "The Sovereignty of God". I selected this book for several reasons: first, that it was a readily available documentation of this kind of Calvinism, and second, because in the early twentieth century, Arthur W. Pink was known to be both an influential Bible Scholar and a staunch Calvinist. The excerpts are taken from the eighteenth printing (July 2000) - published by Baker Books.

Concerning the nature and the power of fallen man's will, the greatest confusion prevails today, and the most erroneous views are held, even by many of God's children. The popular idea now prevailing, and which is taught from the great majority of pulpits, is that man has a "free will", and that salvation comes to the sinner through his will co-operating with the Holy Spirit. (page 127)

Was there not a time (may the remembrance of it bow each of us into the dust) when you were unwilling to come to Christ? There was. Since then you have come to Him. Are you now prepared to give Him all the glory for that (Psa. 115.1)? Do you not acknowledge you came to Christ because the Holy Spirit brought you from unwillingness to willingness? You do. . . .Do you answer, Yet I remember well the time when the Great Issue was presented to me, and my consciousness testifies that my will acted and that I yielded to the claims of Christ upon me. Quite true. But before you "yielded", the Holy Spirit overcame the native enmity of your mind against God, and this "enmity" He does not overcome in all. . . .none are thus "willing" till He has put forth His all-mighty power and wrought a miracle of grace in the heart." (128-129)

But let us now inquire, What is the human Will? Is it a self-determining agent, or is it, in turn, determined by something else? Is it sovereign or servant? Is the will superior to every other faculty of our being so that it governs them, or is it moved by their impulses and subject to their pleasure? (129)

That which determines the will is that which causes it to choose. If the will is determined, then there must be a determiner. What is it that determines the will? We reply, the strongest motive power which is brought to bear upon it. What this motive power is, varies in different cases. With one it may be the logic of reason, with another the voice of conscience, with another the impulse of the emotions, with another the whisper of the Tempter, with another the power of the Holy Spirit; whichever of these presents the strongest motive power and exerts the greatest influence upon the individual himself, is that which impels the will to act. In other words, the action of the will is determined by the condition of mind (which in turn is influenced by the world, the flesh, and the Devil, as well as by God), which has the greatest degree of tendency to excite volition. . . .True, that in the end, the will made a choice, but the will itself was moved to make the choice. (131-132)

In defining the will we have said above, that "the will is the faculty of choice, the immediate cause of all action." We say the immediate cause, for the will is not the primary cause of any action, any more than the hand is. Just as the hand is controlled by the muscles and nerves of the arm, and the arm by the brain; so the will is the servant of the mind, and the mind, in turn, is affected by various influences and motives which are brought to bear upon it. (134)

The point which Pink hammers again and again is this: the will is always subservient to forces outside of itself. The will is, at best, a powerless middle-man between influence and action, always executing the latter in obedience to the former. What we perceive as our "choice" or "decision" is simply our will yielding to the loudest or most persuasive influence at the moment, whether that happens to be desire, reason, Satan, God, or whatever.

I once had a theology professor who, in defense of Calvinism, taught fundamentally the same thing. He argued that, although the will does control the actions of a man, it is the desires of a man that control his will. One of his favorite illustrations involved ice cream: a person is confronted with two choices - chocolate and vanilla. Which does he choose? Whichever flavor he prefers.

My goal in providing these quotes is not to argue for or against the position. That is better saved for another post. The point I am trying to make is that you should be aware of what Calvinism means to its most ardent defenders. And I would suggest (humbly) that if you do not believe this point, or any other core concept in serious Calvinism, that you stop calling yourself a Calvinist. Or, get to work at defining exactly what you believe is Calvinism, and then be prepared to give a defense from history as to why your version of Calvinism is closer (than your opponents' definition) to the ideas held by the people who originally started and formed the movement.