Hi, I'm Peter Adams, and you're listening to the History of Philosophy podcast brought to you with the support of the philosophy department at King's College London and the LMU in Munich, online at historyofphilosophy.net.

Today's episode take your choice, Erasmus vs. Luther on free will.

One of the best things about the place I live is the street market that pops up around the corner from my house every Friday.

And one of the best things about that market is a bakery stand, which sells the best apple cake I have ever had.

It's vital for the philosophical discussion that follows that you understand just how good this apple cake is, so let me describe it.

It has a sturdy biscuit-like base, topped with a thick layer of succulent cinnamon-infused apples. Finished with a sugar glaze whose consistency I can only compare to the first ice that forms on a freezing lake.

As long time listeners know, I yield to no one in my admiration of the elegantly seductive pastry that is the almond croissant.

But if you put a piece of this apple cake and an almond croissant in front of me, I would have difficulty choosing between them.

I would, by contrast, have little hesitation in affirming that I can indeed choose between them.

In the end, I would be able to select one treat or the other, or indeed both, feeling that I have confronted this momentous decision equipped with both an unconstrained power of agency and a nice fresh cup of coffee.

Medieval philosophers developed a whole theory of the will in order to explain this feeling of agency.

Though the scholastics disagreed about pretty much all the details, in particular, the question whether volition follows the lead of rational judgment or operates autonomously from reason, they broadly agreed that humans do have a power called the will, Walentus, and that we are morally responsible for how we use that will.

The idea of the will has a long history, which can be traced ultimately to non-Christian ancient philosophers, especially the Stoics.

But for the Medievals, the fundamental authority on the question was the 5th century theologian Augustin, who had written extensively about the will.

Someone ironically, Augustin also bequeathed to later Christians, a significant worry as to whether the human will is so free after all.

In his diatribes against another theologian called Pelagius, he argued forcefully that humans are in a state of sin and cannot escape from this state without God's freely given grace.

This makes it sound as if, in our current fallen state, the will isn't able to choose after all, or if it is, then not in the way that would really matter by making choices that would earn a salvation instead of damnation.

I might be able to choose apple cake over an almond croissant, but I'm not able to choose righteousness over wickedness because my defective nature guarantees that I will not be righteous.

As we've seen over the past couple of episodes, Luther was more than willing to accept this conclusion.

Towards the beginning of his career, he actually echoed the semi-pollegian view of scholastics like Gabriel Biel, who said that God has graciously promised to bestow grace on anyone who does their best.

As late as 1515, we find Luther saying, the Theologians rightly say that God infallibly gives grace to the person who does what they are able to do.

But deeper reflection on the teachings of Saint Paul and Augustin changed his mind.

...