grace

Review: Heinz W. Cassirer, Grace and Law: St. Paul, Kant, and the Hebrew Prophets (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988).

Synopsis of the Book

This book is a meticulous study on the Scripture with the intention of shedding light to the postulation of Kant on the freedom of human will and ethical philosophy. Interestingly, Cassirer was a great Jewish philosopher in the tradition of Aristotle and Kant; he was raised by his father, Ernst, who himself a competent Kantian scholar, solely preoccupied with philosophical questions. Despite of their comprehensive scholarly knowledge, it was only in the early fifties that Heinz read the Scripture and was captured by Paul’s, as well as the Hebrew prophets’, understanding of human personality. Thus in this book, he speaks as a participant hunger for divine grace, not as mere observer of facts and philosophies.

The author’s struggle was that the long studied philosophy of Kant is in diametrically opposition to that of Paul’s explanation of the fundamental moral questions. The challenge was of great importance and weight that led to the birth of this book. This was after he withdrew himself from academic life in his fifties and immersed himself in the study of the Scripture, especially of the Pauline and prophetic corpus. Eventually, he was convinced of the Scriptural view of the human personality and began to appreciate his forefather’s faith and embraced Christianity.

A vital feature in his methodology here is his emphasis that in the mind of St. Paul, there is a spiral, dialectical patterns of thought. Heinz divided this ascending line of thought in the greater part of the epistles into thirty-none emotional and spiritual categories, rather than intellectual. This became the cornerstone of is understanding and personal translation of the Pauline corpus. And in his studies of the Hebrew prophets, he pays close attention to the personal relationship of God with the Jews.

Chapter 1: “But when the commandment came, sin sprang into life, and I died.”

This is the lengthy title for his first chapter by initially with his exposition on Romans 7:5-25. He concerned himself with Paul’s outcry on the nature of the process of disintegration and what he has to say to be delivered from such miserable state of anguish. Evidently, the anguish, in Heinz’s interpretation, the anguish is a pre-Christian past, and yet, this does not mean that there is no more personal struggle within the Christian conversion phase. His thesis goes: “that the process of inner decay of which St. Paul gives so poignant an account at a time when his soul was filled with a feeling of peace and liberation was not known to him at all when it was actually occurring, and that no consciousness existed in him of what later became for him an incontestable truth about himself.” 4).

Presenting his analysis includes a serious survey concerning the pre-Christian background of Paul expounding the texts Acts 22,26, Gal 1, and Phil 3. The paradoxical remorse of Paul is also studied (1 Cor 15; 1 Tim 1) where grace was preeminently at work, leaving an account that the general condition of mankind is pervaded with the pernicious character of sin. The author then compared his personal experiences before his conversion where he was sole preoccupied with the Kantian moral philosophy, relying too much on the moral freedom of humanity. He now agrees that as far as St Paul is concerned, Heinz is affirmative to the thesis he made where “only a miracle can bring into being a personal life of the depth he holds to be essential.” This miracle has occurred through Gods’ intervention in Christ whereby men are capable and can accomplish what he will emphasize later.

Presenting his translation biblical passages, specifically Romans 9:1-4; 10:1-3; Gal 2:11-21,1-10; Phil 3:2-16, Heinz notes that it must be kept in mind that no matter how severe may be Paul’s accusations against the law, his utterances are “invariably qualified by others, the tendency of which is the exact opposite, and which are intended to restore things to their proper balance.”(35) This means that the law is not after all a negative element in relation to human personality. Heinz is convinced that Paul’s’ contention that freedom is attainable and can be achieved by yielding to Christ’s guidance. This is the very essence of moral freedom. However, Kant’s postulation of the moral freedom is centered upon the striving of the agent. This is where Heinz contends for the similarities and differences between Paul’s ethic and that of Kant. Kant is almost as pessimistic as Paul about the natural level of human nature. Another major point Heinz cited: Paul “perpetually resorts to the language of command and injunction, and there are countless instances of imperatives making their appearance in the various appeals he addresses to his Christian brothers.”(48-9) Paul was not hesitant to mention lists of vices of which avoidance at all cost are to be made so that rewards of spiritual life would not be forfeited. Kantianism is convinced of man’s capacity by himself to make moral efforts of which Paul is only affirmative only in Christ, not on self.

Chapter 2: A Study in Kant’s Ethical Teaching

This chapter acknowledges the subtle difficulties in Kant’s moral postulations, but Heinz tried to compose this section understandable in his intention to its use for the laity. The author reiterated his legacy from his father who is a scholar in Kantian works. Here, Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason, Heinz confirmed that Kant’s ethical teaching, in the final resort, is “nothing more than common sense morality”(53) made unequivocally by means of philosophical analysis. The “unsophisticated” moral teachings of Kant were identified by Heinz. Differentiation in two principles, 1) concerning that of pleasure, self-love, private happiness, acting in obedience to one’s passions and inclinations; and it opposites 2) that of duty, virtue, having an equal concern for others as one has for himself. Kant is convinced that the very essence of human morality is to entirely submit to the second category of “ought”. His principle of personal happiness is opposed to the principle of morality; in that if actions are required to be in accordance with the requirements of duty, essentially, the agent’s will should be exclusively determined by the moral law, inclination and feelings. This means that the moral law should directly determine the will for the sake of the law. In sum, what a person does, “prompted by his feelings and inclinations, will at best enable him to act in a way which is not contrary to morality.”(58) Where morality is concerned, feelings and inclinations are to be left out.

One work of Kant considered here is Religion within the Bounds of Mere Reason. Though there were significant revisions of citing the principle of the positive evil found in man’s nature which counteract morality, Heinz is explicit in his analysis that still, Kant’s former is still intact in this revision. Kant’s belief in moral freedom is still as strong as ever and unaffected. The postulation that man has not only the duty but the strength, in his own capacity, to conquer evil within himself is still emphasized. If ever man fails to do so, he has to blame himself alone. Despite of the seemingly Stoic stance on morality, it goes on to show “a very special kind of rationalism which Kant advocates. In fact, it is wholly unlike anything else that has appeared in the history of philosophy.” (78) But Heinz firmly maintains that Kant was in error to assign to man that power of unlimited freedom. In regards to Kant’s moral philosophy, a striking feature was brought out by Heinz: “apart from his outstanding power of intellectual penetration, is that everything he says reflects the man, his temperament, and his personality.”(84) Heinz’ conclusion was that Kant failed to consider others as individuals. In fact, he insisted that, “So long as one remains within the Kantian orbit, one is committed to the view that giving the principle of divine grace admittance into the moral life of man must have the effect of degrading man and depriving him of his dignity.”(82) This is because the value of man consists exclusively in his “power of exercising rational choice.” Nonetheless, Heinz was sympathetic to the manifest godliness of Kant until his dying years in that even though his senses declined, his values of gratitude, considerateness, friendliness and his abstract reasoning remained intact.

Chapter 3: The Teaching of the Old Testament Prophets on Sin and Release from Sin

Initially, Heinz noted that the Old Testament prophets are less pessimistic than Paul as far as their exhortation and appeals are concern. There is an assumption thought that the prophetic literature perceives that man could turn from their wicked ways if they wanted to. But is here, Heinz noted that Kant’s idea that man can live righteous life on their own is foreign to the prophets. He noted that God is involved in the process of enabling humans to live life to the fullest. There is no such thing as absolute moral freedom in Kantian way. Again and again, the prophets draw attention “in language imbued with great passion and vehemence, to the circumstance that man men stubbornly refuse to lead the good life, and that their ways are wholly sinful and evil.”(90) There is indeed an all-embracing phenomenon of wickedness. But Heinz carefully maintained that there is no explicit claim on a theory of sin behind the prophetic utterances for the prophets are not theologians or theoreticians. Their words were not theories but insights unlike anything else; it advances towards it goals with touch of certainty. Prophetic utterances are not results of analysis and reflections on abstract terms. But their language is bound in their relationship with Yahweh as a chosen nation, not for mankind.

Some of the major things notes is that prophet are passionately convinced that knowledge of goodness has been communicated by God through the human soul. Those who were in the sate of wickedness are deprived of power for knowledge of God. And when man deserts goodness, it is equivalent to deserting God, vice versa. Another main claim must be considered: that the prophets were given special insight into the mind of God. With regards to the wickedness of man, the mood of the prophets is overwhelmingly one of hopelessness and despair. This is revealed in the study if prophetic utterances of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Hosea, and Micah. Heinz concluded that in the Old Testament prophets, the most penetrating analysis of man’s alienation from God is revealed. This is the reason why man gives himself up to a life of wickedness and depravity.

Chapter 4: A Renewed Inquiry into St. Paul’s Doctrine and Personality.

Here again, Heinz reiterated the major observations and realizations he made in the first chapter. He explored other expositions on special group of texts which presents the complex understanding of Paul on human personality. The Pauline corpus considered were selections from Phil 1,2,3,4; 1 Cor 2,3,8,9,14; 2 Cor 4,6,7,8,9,11,12,13; 1 Thess 2,3,4; 2 Thess 2,3; 1 Tim 6; 2 Tim 1,2,3,4; Titus 1,2,3; and Eph 4. A crucial thesis has been formulated out Heinz’s linguistic study and exposition on these texts: there is only one way of becoming human; that is by making complete surrender to Jesus Christ. In him, human beings are not deprived of personality by trusting themselves top Christ’s guidance. In fact, “having previously been in a situation in which a perpetual conflict raged within their souls, with result that their nature became more and more distorted, they now find themselves liberated and are enabled to think, act, and feel in a perfectly natural spontaneous manner.” (167) Becoming like Christ is freedom to devote one’s life for loving service to others. Heinz maintained that Paul “was the sort of man one would least expect to be ready to renounce self-will and to give up the control of his own life to another”(168) yet his act of turning to Christ really made him free; in that in his new mode of existence, he has the capacity to love his fellowman most sincerely and does not encounter the least hesitation to express his feelings without holding back anything. He has had a deep insight of himself as well as others. And it is undeniable that he manages to combine within himself gifts with proper balance (e.g. strong tendencies to mysticism and religious enthusiasm). As a final result, Heinz decisively disassociated himself with Kant for he is convinced that Kant’s moral ethics is diametrically opposed that of Paul. He embraced Christianity and Pauline concept of human personality and moral ethics.

Response: What I like here concerning Heinz Cassirer is that he spoke as a participant, not as mere theoretician and observer. His comprehensive knowledge of Kant turned a different course when he studied Pauline and Prophetic corpus.

Questions: What is the role of Grace and Law to Christian ethics? To what extent is human freedom applicable to Christian ethics?