The will is not an independent faculty equipoised between alternative choices. It always operates on the basis of bias, sundry influences, and hidden impulses. Choice is a matter of affection (evil or virtuous) and reason (flawed or reliable) and these two factors combine or converge in the determination of volition and the direction of the whole person.

The process of selection or preference as concerns moral or religious desire cannot be contrary to inherited nature and pre-determined taste. Infected desire or affection lacks sound taste. Degraded reason cannot be trusted as anywhere near infallible. Whimsical emotional states most common in human beings in the process of selection are always present, operational, and not a sound basis for wise choices and beneficial action. Man is free only to act according to his nature and the numerous limitations brought to bear upon it. We are free within certain boundaries, and on reflection there are more boundaries than we imagine.

The doctrine of philosophical necessity can be quite convincing, but it is speculative. The fact of the sinful and enslaved will is eminently Scriptural (see Martin Luther's most cherished theological effort The Bondage of the Will, and a later Lutheran scholar's classic work On Being a Theologian of the Cross, Gerhard O. Forde). "I will go as far as Martin Luther'', states Charles Spurgeon, "where he says, 'If any man ascribes anything of salvation, even the very least thing, to the free will of man, he knows nothing of grace, and he has not learned Jesus Christ rightly'"

Free agency is often posited, helpfully or otherwise, of human nature. We believe we have confined areas of choice where we are able to say that we are not selective or active by force. We consider that we have the power of resolve and assent, and yet reason has to weigh factors of possibility and proclivity. We are even subject to plausible or high-pressured persuasion that may affect inclination, but we still maintain that we are free.

But how much so? No free agent can escape the characteristics, conditions and confines of its nature. A Scotch Collie cannot choose to read the New York Times. Such an occupation is beyond its ken and desire. The sinner cannot choose the Saviour and his holiness which are way beyond his knowledge, awareness of need, or heart's yearning. The unregenerate harbors antipathy to God and the delights that grace will bring. Only new birth can reverse the spiritual calamity of our incurable opposition to God (Ezekiel 36: 25-27).

Our freedom creates responsibility, accountability, variability, but it is not absolute. In the end choice is governed by powers of reflection, reflex, or sheer recklessness. An indifference of will does not exist where there are no affective influences. There is no independent entity that is "the will". It is man in motion according to what and who he is and what it is that is that is driving him or drawing (or tempting) him.

As a shortcut we adopt Martin Luther's recognition of freedom in "things below" and of "things above". Under the first category we make free choices as to what breakfast will consist of and which item of clothing to wear for the day. Under the second category we make moral choices and these are determined by the kind of person we happen to be, vicious or virtuous, smart or dumb.

Holy Scripture approaches man as fallen, corrupt, and at enmity with God; in need of moral rescue and renovation, requiring reconciliation with his Creator. Articles nine and ten of the Anglican Confession explore the condition and conduct of man as a rebel against his God.

OF ORIGINAL or BIRTH SIN

How does man find himself in a state of evil and under its control?

*Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians do vainly talk;) but it is the fault and corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is ingendered of the offspring of Adam;

The father of our race fell from fellowship with God, became degraded and depraved in nature as a consequence of severance from the holy One, and passed the pollution of his person all the way down the line of his descendants through organic connection. We are all of one type with Adam. We inherit his fallen humanity in the way that we inherit so many traits from our more immediate predecessors. This trait, tendency, infection is ingrained within us. We are not sinners by emulation but from inoculation of a deadly virus into our fundamental being; we are born with a governing proneness to sin (the way infant and child addicts inherit the addiction of their drug abusing parents). We not only sin: we are sinful(l) - essentially, instinctively, entirely (extending to every faculty and to the abuse of the body as well), inevitably, habitually. There is in fact no age of innocence. Our thoughts and imaginations are evil, our desires and urges are evil, our designs and deeds partake of/in serious sin. We are, in truth, guilty rebels. We are infused with vileness as penalty for our violation of the divine will through the head of our race who represented us under the most congenial of circumstances and yet committed the first and fatal act of disobedience. The great offence according to Augustine. We would not have improved upon Adam's performance.

*Whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit; and therefore, in every person born into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation.

Our alienation from God as former Friend is total from where we have now taken ourselves in relation to him. We are so far gone there is no turning back as far as human nature is concerned. Our distance from him has killed desire for him. Where is our appetite for his companionship? It is not in us. We are his sworn enemies in league with Satan (Romans 8: 6-8, John 8:4 cf 34). Where is our longing for holiness? It does not exist until cultivated by God. (Where is man's free will in an unregenerate state?)

Righteousness has been forfeited in the fall. Being inclined to evil there is no initiative toward righteousness. No regret at its absence. No sense of its necessity. Such wickedness as is ours is repugnant to God. It stirs his disgust and awakens his holy anger and deserves his condemnation that causes our doom. Our offensiveness is audacious. Nothing from our side can repair the breach we have created or placate the ire of the One we have so irreverently wronged. Our predicament is horrific.

*This infection of our nature remains even in those who in Christ are reborn. Because of it the desire of the flesh is not submissive to the Law of God. True though it is there is no condemnation awaiting those who believe and are baptized, yet the Apostle asserts that all ungodly desires are in themselves sinful. [Re-statement of this section of the article according to Philip Edgcumbe Hughes for clarification].

The infection of sin is never entirely erased in this life. New birth (regeneration) necessitates a conflict within the believer between sin and the sanctified self. Two principles are at war within the one person. We are effectively taught of the plight and impotence of the sinner and the power of mercy. In this sometimes fierce inner fight (Romans 7) humility before God is fostered and gratitude toward his graciousness flowers. Our appreciation of a sovereign deliverance is mightily expanded. Belief brings us into new life in Christ and baptism testifies to (certifies, confirms) our death to sin in Jesus Christ and pardon for all our misdoings, the fruits of a fallen and fouled nature. "No condemnation" is joyful and fortifying news to the believer. The false notion of perfectionism has done great damage to countless sensitive and surprised souls who sometimes feel the arousal of the "old adam" within themselves. Owen, Romaine, Spurgeon and Ryle were great contenders against this cruel and deceitful error, and Wesley had to modify his doctrine of sin in order to maintain it.

Of Free-Will

Much of the understanding of free-will from a Christian point of view is already shaped by the conclusions reached in Article Nine. The nature of sinful man settles what may be affirmed about the sinful will of man. This is not merely a question of making a simple choice but of being remade to make a holy choice in contradiction of the evil disposition of fallen man. Man makes decisions and exercises options not through some independent, impartial faculty called "the will" but according to the inclination and bent of his whole inner being. Man is in fact a slave to Satan, sin, and the evil self. He is thrice bound by the power of evil and trapped in an antipathy to a holy God whom he desperately hates in his heart.

Man lives in freedom to be what he is and desire what he prefers. But he cannot run counter to his fallen nature and its preferences. He cannot nullify what his nature approves and constitutionally and constantly yearns for. He cannot reverse his inborn moral direction that dictates his decisions. He cannot cancel his hostility toward God. He cannot alter his immoral tastes and godless leanings. To shove of his shackles and wrench himself from the chains that bind him is not within his power of determination. Before God he is dead - very far gone with no thought of return. Lazarus is the image of the spiritually dead individual - locked in a tomb, lifeless and tightly bound with "grave-clothes (the chords of sin we are impotent to untie). Only the life-giving word of the Saviour can raise and liberate us (dash to John 11, digest John 6, defer to Romans 9).

*The condition of Man after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and good works, to faith, and calling upon God: wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us, (i.e. unless the grace of God is first given through Christ) that we may have a good will, and working within us, when we have that good will.

As sinners we simply do not have a good will until it is wrought within us or donated to us: For it is God who works in you both to will and to do for his good pleasure (Philippians 2:13). Does natural man ever consider the "good pleasure" of God, immersed as he is in the pursuit of his own pleasure? He is only able to please God as his priority through being born from above. Only then may he comply with Paul's exhortation, "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2: 12). Such a monergistic and miraculous work as the initiation of new life in the elect can only produce the awe of gratitude and reverent trembling in the hearts and demeanor of believers. They are struck by its import and magnificence. A sovereign and free salvation is precisely the capacity "to will and to do" God's good pleasure in humble submission

To be free to "choose God", "choose Jesus Christ" and "opt for salvation" is the fruit of grace not man's route to grace. These desires are exercised within a state of salvation. There they are awakened and recognized in human response - a response enabled by grace first given through Christ>. in order for a "freed will" to function. Preventing grace was a term used for prior grace (prevenient grace) that caused and moved our willing yielding to the saving mercy of the Lord Jesus. Such an event necessitated grace that caused and made certain our acquiescence to him.

The saving will of God woos us to concur with that will's intent and purpose for ourselves. When grace comes to us in that enthralling, melting moment of the conversion of the heart a concurrence of wills occurs. Divine love sets us at liberty from our hatred of God to an intense craving for him. Christ's working within us is the sweet romancing of a rebel to his side in warm and trusting embrace. Our once stubborn and adamantine attitude of revolt is changed, transformed, and we are inclined and bent in his direction by a radically renewed drive and direction toward him. This is omnipotent grace and effectual calling. This is Blaise Pascal's effectual grace that he received and enjoyed with his beloved Jansenists of Port Royal.

This is the grace of disposition recognized by Augustine, St. Bernard, and St. Thomas that grants us the ability to will what is good, which moves the will to close with Christ (a Puritan term). For these and so many other pre-reformational men in line with the Reformers, this is the agreed affirmation that excludes every appearance of Pelagiansim, Semi-Pelagianism, Arminianism and synergism: "Of ourselves we will, but it is of grace that we will what is good; grace excites free will, changes its affections, prevents the will, brings about concurrence of wills between God and the believer, and continues to accompany that good will in renewed man" (Bernard summarized: The Freedom of the Will). All is of grace from beginning, through life, to its happy completion on earth and translation to heaven. All is of grace.

Our Article agrees with all true Augustinians, and Calvinists are in that orthodox lineage, more so than many concede. Much disagreement is in the area of semantics and the need for clarity of definition. But that is another discussion.

Human free-will is fallen. it decides according to sinful human nature above which it cannot rise to the freedom of desiring God as he is, true faith in Christ, and authentic goodness (godliness). So man freely wills and prefers evil. In this sense his will is unfree until freed by grace.

We deal with the paradox of our native pollutedness. To sin we are free. To cease from sin we are unfree. We are willing to be the slaves of the devil, the evil he incites, and the self gratification that he inspires. Our fondness for our fallenness makes us helpless to forsake it.

Free-will in the customary sense understood by most Christians is a fallacy: Let others trust as they will in their own capacities and powers of free choice, which they seem to themselves to possess. For us let it be enough that we stand and are strong in God's power alone (John Calvin).

The Rev. Roger Salter is an ordained Church of England minister where he had parishes in the dioceses of Bristol and Portsmouth before coming to Birmingham, Alabama to serve as Rector of St. Matthew's Anglican Church.