Christ's freedom: Anselm vs Molina
Both Molinism and Anselmianism attempt to preserve libertarian freedom for created agents as well as robust divine sovereignty. The two issues intersect in addressing the puzzle of Christ's freedom: If God is necessarily good, how can God Incarnate be free? Anselm answers: while human agents ne...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
[2016]
|
| In: |
Religious studies
Year: 2016, Volume: 52, Issue: 4, Pages: 497-512 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Anselm, Canterbury, Erzbischof, Heiliger 1033-1109
/ Molina, Luis de 1535-1600
/ Jesus Christus
/ Free will
|
| IxTheo Classification: | CB Christian life; spirituality NBF Christology |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Publisher) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | Both Molinism and Anselmianism attempt to preserve libertarian freedom for created agents as well as robust divine sovereignty. The two issues intersect in addressing the puzzle of Christ's freedom: If God is necessarily good, how can God Incarnate be free? Anselm answers: while human agents need options for our choices to be up to us, Christ inevitably chooses rightly with perfect freedom. I defend Anselm's answer against a general criticism and then argue that Anselm's position is preferable to the Molinist solution which has recently been championed by Thomas P. Flint. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-901X |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Religious studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0034412516000093 |
