Eclipsed Autonomy: Celestial Images and the Free Will Debate in Antonio Mira de Amescua’s Álvaro de Luna Plays
Antonio Mira de Amescua’s two-part Próspera fortuna and Adversa fortuna de don Álvaro de Luna chronicles the rise and fall of Spain’s most iconic privado, Álvaro de Luna. Suspected by medieval chroniclers of controlling Juan II with magic, Luna’s appearance on stage speaks to growing concerns in seventeenth-century Spain over the king’s ability to resist manipulation by powerful courtiers. Rather than using the plays as political commentary, however, Mira frames the institution of privanza within contemporary debates regarding free will, and, in doing so, offers a dramatic rendering of the nature of human autonomy and spiritual bondage.
Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification
Preface Acknowledgements 1. Prolegomena 2. The fountainhead: Augustine of Hippo 3. The development of the doctrine in the medieval period 4. The medieval schools of thought on justification 5. The transition from the medieval to the modern period 6. The development of the doctrine in the Reformation period 7. The Tridentine decree of justification 8. The legacy of the English Reformation 9. The modern period Appendix: a glossary of medieval soteriological terms Abbreviations Notes Bibliography Index.
Grace and Justification: Some Italian Views of the Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centuries
In 1544, one Francesco Colonna, making his testament in Venice, wrote: ‘I recommend to Almighty God my being and my soul, and when it is his pleasure to remove me from this life, I am content; knowing that in this life I can do no good thing, but rather that I shall always offend his majesty. If I have ever said a word or performed a deed that was pleasing to him, I know that I have always been impelled and moved by the Holy Spirit, when I have had any good thought, desire or wish, I have always recognised it to be from him and through his grace alone and whenever I have willed to conduct myself by my blind judgment, presumptive wisdom and diabolical spirit, I have always done the contrary and offended his divine majesty. I leave all, therefore, to God, the Supreme Father … and should he wish to take away all that he has given me, there would remain my sins alone, for these sins are mine and all other things are his; if I go with these sins before God, I am damned, if I wish to make satisfaction, I cannot. Indeed there is no saint who can take my sins for his and satisfy and placate the wrath of God, nor is there anyone who can do so save Jesus Christ. To him, therefore, I leave all my wretched thoughts, desires and acts and all my sins, past, present and future. I make a bundle of them and give them to Jesus Christ my Lord, with the certain faith and constant hope that he will, out of sublime charity, accept them for his.’