What do you see as major differences between a Lutheran vs. Reformed view of paradox in theology? I remember our discussion over Van Til's ideas on this. But I agree with you that they seem to be able to dodge a bullet where they shouldn't be. This would be relevant to the differences over the doctrine of election In my humble opinion.
James, I think the fundamental difference is that the "tension" of a paradox is something you embrace rather than solve. This creates problems when discussing the catholic faith because that faith has already provided "solutions" which makes it impossible to consistently carry through a paradoxical method without becoming heterodox. The traditional reformed and catholic view is that no man is required to believe something which is contrary to reason. The mysteries of the faith are above reason but not contrary to it. Seeming contradiction is not solved by simply deferring to God's infinite knowledge, but by the tools of reason serving in subjection to the Spirit and Word of God. By this means theology has progressed through the ages and developed categories by which to deal with apparent contradictions and resolve tensions. E.g., "three and one," "God and man in one," "sovereignty and responsibility," etc. These are apparent contradictions. They are resolved by acknowledging categories whereby members of a difficulty are distributed into their proper place. "Three" relates to subsistences while "one" relates to substance; "God" and "man" are natures while there is a "oneness" of person; God's will is distinguished between decretive and preceptive. We could go through all the loci of theology and it will be seen that the very structure of our system depends on the solutions which sanctified reason has provided for understanding the Word.
I think you are correct that the issue between Lutherans and Calvinists comes into clearest focus when discussing election, especially double predestination. This, and the operation of the sacraments are two areas where Calvinists are regularly charged with rationalism. Another area would be sanctification, where Lutherans embrace the outside/inside and sinner/saint ideas. Of course paradox could equally be used against the doctrine of sola fide, for one could maintain that justification is by faith alone and not by faith alone. This is the type of confusion that the acceptance of "tension" can create.
