nov2009 calvin.pdf

P R O T E S T A N T R E F O R M E DT H E O L O G I C A L

S E M I N A R Y

4949 Ivanrest AvenueWyoming, Michigan 49418-9142

ISSN 1070-8138

Volume 43 • November 2009 • Number 1

Editor’s Notes 1Calvin as Model for Reformed Ministers Today 3 Barrett L. Gritters Calvin the Preacher 23 Steven R. KeyCalvin on Justification: Considering the Judgment Day with Singular Delight 44 Angus StewartJohn Calvin’s Doctrine of Predestination 86 Chris ConnorsBook Reviews 105

in this issue:


PROTESTANT REFORMEDTHEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

Published twice annually by the faculty of the Protestant Re-formed Theological Seminary:

Ronald L. Cammenga, Editor ([email protected])Russell J. Dykstra, Book Review Editor ([email protected])Barrett L. Gritters ([email protected])

The Protestant Reformed Theological Journal is published by the Protestant Reformed Theological Seminary twice each year, in April and November, and mailed to subscribers free of charge. Those who wish to receive the Journal should write the editor, at the seminary address. Those who wish to reprint an article appearing in the Journal should secure the permission of the editor. Books for review should be sent to the book review editor, also at the address of the school.

Protestant Reformed Theological Seminary4949 Ivanrest AvenueWyoming, MI 49418

USA

105 McGowan, ARetrievin

111 Peterson, Rob Gracious116 Sweeney, Do

New Eng to Edwar122 Trueman, Car

Renaissa125 Wright, N.T. Vision130 Young, Edwa

Book Reviews

.T.B. The Divine Authenticity of Scripture: g an Evangelical Heritageert A. Election and Free Will: God’s

Choice and Our Responsibilityuglas A. and Allen C. Guelzo editors. The land Theology: From Jonathan Edwardsds Amasa Parkl R. John Owen: Reformed Catholic,

nce Man Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s

rd J. The God-Breathed Scripture

PROTESTANT REFORMEDTHEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

Published twice annually by the faculty of the Protestant Re-formed Theological Seminary:

Ronald L. Cammenga, Editor ([email protected])Russell J. Dykstra, Book Review Editor ([email protected])Barrett L. Gritters ([email protected])

The Protestant Reformed Theological Journal is published by the Protestant Reformed Theological Seminary twice each year, in April and November, and mailed to subscribers free of charge. Those who wish to receive the Journal should write the editor, at the seminary address. Those who wish to reprint an article appearing in the Journal should secure the permission of the editor. Books for review should be sent to the book review editor, also at the address of the school.

Protestant Reformed Theological Seminary4949 Ivanrest AvenueWyoming, MI 49418

USA

Book Reviews

105 McGowan, A.T.B. The Divine Authenticity of Scripture: Retrieving an Evangelical Heritage

111 Peterson, Robert A. Election and Free Will: God’s Gracious Choice and Our Responsibility116 Sweeney, Douglas A. and Allen C. Guelzo editors. The

New England Theology: From Jonathan Edwards to Edwards Amasa Park122 Trueman, Carl R. John Owen: Reformed Catholic,

Renaissance Man125 Wright, N.T. Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision130 Young, Edward J. The God-Breathed Scripture

YouhaveinhReformed Theolog2010issuewillbe500thanniversaryProtestantReformference.ThethemCalvinforReformThursday,Septem2009.ThevenueChurchofByronfacility.TurnoutwwasfilledtocapacStatesandanumb Theconferenthatweredeliveredisplaysfromvaranessaycontest.aquestionandanbothnewandusemuchmorethatmtheheartofthecocoveredmanydiffcontributiontoReandourfacultyw Four of the sPRTJ.Theremaissue.Writingoutheconferencespthepublicationomentationofquotnotpossibleinasspeechesthatmucthespeechesavaitoattendtheconf

Editor’s Notes
andthefirstoftwospecialissuesoftheProtestant ical Journal.Thisissueand,Godwilling,theAprildevotedtoJohnCalvin.IncommemorationoftheofthebirthofthegreatReformerfromGeneva,theedTheologicalSeminarysponsoredaCalvinCon-eoftheconferencewas:“After500Years:JohnedChurchesToday.”Theconferenceconvenedonber3,2009andconcludedonSaturday,September5,oftheconferencewastheFirstChristianReformedCenter,Michigan—aspaciousandveryserviceableasbetterthananticipated.Thesanctuary,attimes,ity,withover1,000peoplefromaroundtheUnitederofforeigncountries.ceincludedsomuchmorethanthesevenspeechesd.Therewasgood,sweetfellowship.TherewereiousProtestantReformedhighschools.TherewasTherewerefeaturedspecialnumbers.Therewasswersession.Therewerebooktablescontainingdtitles.Therewaslustyaudiencesinging.Andsoadeforafineconferenceandfondmemories.Butnferencewasthesevenspeeches.ThesespeecheserentaspectsofthecareerofCalvinandhisenduringformedchurches.Thespeecheswerewellreceivedasencouragedtopublishthem.even conference speeches appear in this issue ofiningthreespeecheswillappearintheApril2010tthetextofthespeecheshasundoubtedlyallowedeakerstoexpandtheirspeechesabit.Additionally,f the speechesprovides theopportunity fordocu-ationsandlistingofreferencesandsourcesinawaypeech.Allofthismakestheworkofpreparingthehmoreworthwhile,aswellasthebenefitofmakinglabletoawideraudiencethanthosewhowereableerence.

ProtestantReformedTheologicalJournal

Vol.43,No.12

OurplansfortheApril2010issuearetoputintoprinttheremainingthreeconferencespeeches.Inadditionwehopetoincludeanextendedbookreviewsection.OurintentionistodevotethisextendedbookreviewsectiontobooksbyandonJohnCalvin.ManypublishershavetakenadvantageoftheinterestinCalvinthathasbeensparkedbyhis500thanniversarycelebration. AgoodnumberofworthwhiletitlesbearingthenameofJohnCalvin,includingsomenewbiographies,aswellasanalysisofhistheology,havebeenreleased.Wehopetocallattentiontothebestofthesenewbooksinournextissue. Itakethisopportunitytoexpressthankstothoseofourreaderswhohavecontributedtooursupport.WecontinuetosendthePRTJ tooursubscribersfreeofcharge. Yourassistanceindefrayingthecostsofpublishingandmailingthejournalareappreciated. Mayourreadersfindthisissuebothinstructiveandedifying.AndmaythepublishedspeechesservethesamepurposeonthepagesofPRTJas theydidwhenspoken,namely, tomotivateReformedof-ficebearers and churchmembers to treasure the heritage thatGodhasgiventousthroughtheReformationingeneral,andthroughtheReformerJohnCalvininparticular.l

N

alevcaofasmwwofofchofantoteHsmofgiinGsocaw

CalvinasModelforReformedMinisters

Calvin as Modelfor Reformed Ministers Today

Prof. Barrett Gritters

ovember2009 3

ReadingthelifeandworkofJohnCalvinisintimidating.ItcansobeinvigoratingandmotivatingforaReformedpastor.FewwillerattainthestatureofsuchagiantservantofJesusChrist,butallnpraythatChristwillusethemasHeusedCalvin.IfReformedministerstodayintheir50-yearpastoratesdidhalf

whatCalvindidinhis27,preachedaquarterasoftenperweekCalvinpreached,workedwithatenthasmuchenergyasdidthisanofGod,reachedeventoCalvin’skneesintheologicalstature,eredevoted to thepeople’s carewith a fractionofhis devotion,erewillingtosufferforonlyoneyearwhatCalvinsufferedmosthisministry,andhadheartsofloveforGodaquarterofthesizethisman’sheart,theircongregationswouldbehealthy.Reformedurcheswouldbeprospering.UnderthegoodprovidenceandgraceGodtheywouldbeabletosurviveintheseevildays,andbegooddstrongwitnessesoftheLord.WhenaReformedministertodayreadsaboutCalvin’sdevotion

hisworkbecauseofCalvin’sdevotion tohisGod,hemightbemptedtorespondwithshame:“WhathaveIdonewithmygifts?owhaveIservedmyLordwithmytime?”Orwithsuchasenseofallnessthathedespairsofeveraccomplishinganythingthisgiantamanaccomplished.Buthemightresponddifferently.Understanding,first,thatGod

vesmenofCalvin’sstatureandstrength,capacityandcaliber,veryfrequently;and,second,thateachmanistoworkwiththegiftsthatodgavetohim;hemightinsteadbespurredontomorefaithfullaborthat,followingCalvin’s“patternofgoodworks”(Tit.2:7),hetoonbeablessingtothechurchinhiscornerofthekingdomasCalvinasinhis.Calvin,amodel?Onemodernpreacher’sjudgmentwasthat“He


Vol.43,No.14

causeduntoldmillionsofsoulstobedamned.”1DavidHunt’smorerecentsalvoagainstCalvinandCalvinismissimilar.2AndtheOxford Dictionary of the Christian Church contendshewasthe“vindictive”and“unopposeddictatorofGeneva.”3ApatternforReformedmin-isterstoday?Thisreformer,writer,theologian,scholar,amodelforReformedpastors? LiketheapostlePaulinPhilippians3:17(“asyehaveusforanensample”),CalvincanbeamodelforReformedministers.

First, John Calvin was personally upright. HisenemiesinGenevatestifiedotherwise.Someofhisdetrac-torsquipped:“BetterwithBeza inhell thanCalvin inheaven”?4 His contemporaries slandered himwith the kinds of accusationsthat todaywouldmake amanfile defamation lawsuits. One ofthefirstbiographiesofCalvin,byJeromeBolsec,wasavilepiecefilledwithaccusationsofambition,“filthylucre,”womanizing,evenhomosexuality. SuchevilaccusationsspurredCalvin’scolleagueTheodoreBezatowritethefirstbiographythatspoketruthaboutthismanofGod.

IhavebeenawitnessofhimforsixteenyearsandIthinkthatIamfully entitled to say that in thisman therewas exhibited to all anexampleofthelifeanddeathoftheChristian,suchasitwillnotbeeasytodepreciate,anditwillbedifficulttoimitate.5

Notwithoutfaults,Calvinwasuprightinsomanyways.Ifthereisanytruthtothecontentionthatthegreattemptationsforpastorsarethequartetofsloth, self, sex, and silver,thiswasnotlearnedfromobservingJohnCalvin.

1 Christian History,5,no.4(1986):3(quotedintheintroductorypagesofthespecialissueonCalvin;nocitationgiven).

2 What Love is This? Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God(2002,Sisters,Oregon,LoyalPublishing).

3 Ed.F.L.Cross(London:OxfordUniversityPress,1974),222,223.4 Christian History,ibid.5 Ibid.,4.

November2009 5

First,Calvinwas selfless. AlthoughGod thrust him into thelimelight,hedidnotseekpublicityandacclaim.Beforehedied,heleftclearinstructionsthathisgrave-sitenotbemarked,lestpeopleveneratehiminsteadofhisGod.LikelyhewouldhaveshudderedtothinkthatthedoctrinesofgraceandthetruesystemoftheChristianfaithwouldbenamedCalvinism.UnlikesomeofGod’sservants,hisegodidnotmatchhisabilities. Becausehewasconsciousofthedangerofprideandself-seeking,hetaught:“TheonlytruedignityofaChristianisindignity.”6“Amanwhoknowshimselfhaslittleself-esteem.”7 WhensomeoneaskedhimwhatwerethebasicpreceptsoftheChristianreligion,heillustratedbytellingthestoryofthegreatGreekoratorDemosthenes,who,whenaskedwhatwerethefirstprinciplesofeloquence,answered:“Pronunciation,pronunciation,pronunciation.”(Andwethoughttherealtorswereoriginalwiththeir“Location,location,location.”)Then,Calvinsaid,quotingAugustine, “If you askme about the precepts of theChristianreligion,Iwillanswerthatthefirst,thesecond,andthethirdarehumility.”8Heconfirmedtheseteachingsinhisdyingwords,“Godhadpityuponme.”9 Sexuallyhewasupright.Beforehemarriedhewashesitanttotakeawife.“IshallnotbelongtothosewhoareaccusedofattackingRome,liketheGreeksfoughtTroy,onlytobeabletotakeawife.”Whenfinallyhebeganlookingforawifehemadeitknowntohisfriendswhowerelookingforhim:“AlwayskeepinmindwhatIseektofindinher,forIamnoneofthoseinsaneloverswhoembracealsothevicesofthosewithwhomtheyareinlove,wheretheyaresmittenatfirstsightwithafinefigure.Thisonlyisthebeautythatalluresme:ifsheischaste,ifnottoofussyorfastidious,ifeco-nomical,ifpatient,ifthereishopethatshewillbeinterestedabout

6 PierreMarcel,“TheHumilityoftheProphet,”inJohn Calvin: Con-temporary Prophet: A Symposium, JacobT.Hoogstra,ed.(GrandRapids:Baker,1959),26.

7 Institutes, 3.3.16.8 Institutes, 2.2.1. 9 Marcel,“TheHumilityoftheProphet,”36.



Vol.43,No.16

myhealth.”Afterhiswifediedwhenhewasonly40,andhewasreflectingontheuniqueblessingshewastohim,hepledgedthathewouldfromthenon“leadasolitarylife.”Hedid,chastely,for14moreyears.10

Hewasanuprightfamilyman,devotedtohiswifeandchildren,a“one-woman-man”(ITim.3:2),notawomanizer.HecouldbearitwhenthepeopleofGenevaassaultedhim,butnotwhentheyassailedhisIdelette.Idelette,hewrotetohisfriendViretaftershedied,was“thebestcompanionofmylife.”11 As to silver, someofhisenemiesaccusedhimoffilthy lucre.Mostknewbetter.Hewasnotrich,norinterestedinriches.Calvinwas embarrassed at the recommendation of one prospectivewifebecauseshewasrichandhethoughtherrichesmightbeanoffensetothecongregation.12Fightingoffthehurtfulaccusationsoffilthylucre,Calvinsaid:“IfsomewillnotbepersuadedwhileIamalive,mydeathatalleventswillshowthatIhavenotbeenamoney-makingman.”13Whohasnotheardthepope’sjealouspraiseofCalvin:“Thestrengthofthathereticconsistedinthis, thatmoneyneverhadtheslightestcharmforhim.IfIhadsuchservants,mydominionwouldextendfromseatosea.”14 ButCalvinfelthurtbytheaccusationsofavarice.

Neitherthetableatwhichweeat,northebedonwhichwesleep,isourown….Where,then,dotheserumorscomefrom?Myacquaintances

10 WilliamJ.Petersen,“Idelette:JohnCalvin’sSearchfortheRightWife,”Christian History,5,no.4(1986):12.

11 InalettertoViretonApril7,1549,citedinPhilipSchaaf,History of the Christian Church, v.8(GrandRapids:Eerdmans,1979),419.

12 Ibid.,13.13 TheodoreBeza,Life of John Calvin (contained in JohnCalvin,

Tracts and Treatises on the Reformation of the Church [GrandRapids,MI:Eerdmans,1958],vol.1),cxxxiii.

14 QuotedinGarySanseri,“JohnCalvinontheLoveofMoney”(Ap-pendix5 inTheodoreBeza, The Life of John Calvin, Edinburgh:CalvinTranslationSociety,1844;reprint,Milwaukie,OR:BackHomeIndustries,1996),145.

November2009 7

wellknow…thatIdonotpossessafootofland….Ineverhadmoneysufficienttopurchaseanacre.15

Oneyearwhenheneededtomeettheexpensesofhisownsickness,heaskedthecounciltolendhimafewdollars.Whenhewasreadytorepaythecouncilandtheyrefusedrepayment,Calvinthreatenedneveragaintoenterthepulpitifhecouldnotrepay.Whenhiscol-leaguesneededaraiseandaskedCalvintobringtherequesttothecitycouncil,heproposedloweringhisownsalaryandsplittingtheamountevenlyamongthepastors.16 Andanyaccusationofslothwouldbereckless.Whatmantodaycouldgostrideforstridewiththismaninhistirelessdevotiontothework?Hesleptverylittleandprobablydidnotknowwhatavaca-tionwas.Aworkhorse,Calvinusuallypreachedtwentysermonspermonth,lecturedtoseminarians,composedcatechisms,wrotelettersinthethousands,authoredbooks,visitedsick,ledconsistorymeetings,metwith troubled refugees, established schools and advised theirfaculty,wrotechurchordersandcityordinances,counseleddeaconsandhospitaldirectors,andmore.Evenonhisdeathbed,hisalmostobsessivedrivetoworkmanifesteditself.Heaskedtoworkondicta-tion.Whenoneofhisfriendsurgedhimtorest,Calvinresponded,totheeffect:“What,wouldyouhavetheLordfindmeidlewhenHecomes?” ImmediatelyafterCalvindied,NicolasDesGallars,oneofthepastorsinGeneva’scompanyofpastors,wrote:

Whatlabors,whatlongwakinghours,whatworrieshebore;…withwhatfaithfulnessandintelligencehetookaninterestineveryone;withwhatkindnessandgoodwillhereceivedthosewhoturnedtohim;withwhatrapidityandopennessheansweredthosewhoquestionedhimonthemostseriousofquestions;withwhatwisdomhereceived,bothprivatelyandpublicly,thedifficultiesandproblemsbroughttohim;withwhatgentlenesshecomfortedtheafflicted…withwhatfirmnessheresistedtheenemy;withwhatzealhebroughtlowtheproudand

15 TheaB.VanHalsema,This Was John Calvin (GrandRapids:I.D.E.A.Ministries,1959),164.

16 VanHalsema,This Was John Calvin,166.



Vol.43,No.18

stubborn;withwhatgreatnessofsoulheenduredmisfortune;withwhatmoderationhebehavedinprosperity;withwhatskillandenthusiasm…heacquittedhimselfofallthedutiesofatrueandfaithfulservantofGod,wordsofminecouldneverexpress.17

Second, Calvin was a willing and patient sufferer. CalvintaughtothersthattheChristianlifeisalifeofsuffering—eachbears his own cross—andhe himself lived that life,withoutcomplaint. He enduredgreat physical pain and sorrowof heart, althoughthesearenotcross-bearing.Calvinsufferedsuchphysicalandemo-tionalhardshipsyoumightbeinclinedtocallhimthe“GenevanJob.”Headacheskepthimawakenights.Stomachcrampsforcedhimtoeatbutonceperday.Hehadasthma—apreacherwithasthma!Andtheknifingpainofkidneystonesontopofhemorrhoids.Firstonesmiles,thenhewinces,whenhehearsthatCalvin’sdoctorrecommendedthatherideahorsetojarloosethepainfulkidneystones,butthatCalvin’shemorrhoidsweretoopainfulforhimtositonthehorse.18Thepastorworkedthroughphysicalailmentsthatwouldhavemademoststrongmentodayapplyforearlyemeritation. Hisgriefofheartwasunparalleled.Hisveryfirstsonlivedonlytwoweeks.Threeyearslaterapreciouslittledaughterdiedatbirth.Twoyearsafterthat,anotherchildwasbornprematurely,anddied.WhenhisdearhelpmeetofonlynineyearscontractedTBatage40,helosther,too,andlivedawidowerfortherestofhisministry—almost15years. Justasheavywashis“cross-bearing.”Becausetheydespisedhisstandforthegospel,manyofthecommonpeopleinGenevatreatedhimpoorly.Theynamedtheirdogsafterhimandcomposedsongstomockhim.Theyabbreviatedhislastnamebyremovingthe“L”andthe“V”sothatitreadC-A-I-N.Onhisdeathbedspeechtohiscolleagues,CalvinremindedtheyoungpreachersthatwhenhefirstarrivedtopreachinGeneva: “Iwaswelcomedwithmockeryone

17 Opera Calvini XXXVI,15-16(citedinChristian History,5,no.4[1986]:10).

18 VanHalsema, This Was John Calvin,184.

November2009 9

evening in frontofmydoorby50or60rifleshots.Doyou thinkthatcoulddisturbapoor, timidstudentasIam….?”19 Therabbleshoutedathimwhilehewaspreaching;andwhenthepolicesilencedthem,theycontinuedtheirprovocationswithrudegesturesandcrudesounds.Becausechurchwassocloselyrelatedtostate,Calvinhadpoliticalenemieswhotriedmorethanoncetobanishhimfromthecity.HisloveforDavid’sPsalmsmaybeexplainedbyhisDavid-likeopposition—forChrist’ssake. Calvinenduredallthesetroubles,willingly.BeforeCalvinbe-cameGeneva’spastor,andwhenRev.Farelwasthunderingathimtostay,Calvinsaid:“IfIhadthechoice,Iwould ratherdoanythingthancomplywithyourwishesinthismatter.ButwhenIrememberthat I amnotmyown, Ioffermyheart asaburnt sacrifice to theLord.”20When,afterhehadbeenbanishedfromGeneva,theauthori-tieschangedtheirmindsandaskedhimtoreturn,hesaid,“I’drathergototheexecutioner,”andwrote,“Ipreferahundreddeathstothiscross.”21Hisfriendandneighboringpastor,PeterViret,encouragedhimtotakethecallbecause,amongotherthings,Geneva’smountainairwouldbegoodforhishealth.Calvinresponded,“Ireadthatpas-sageofyourlettercertainlynotwithoutasmile,whereyoushowsomuchconcernaboutmyhealth….Itwouldhavebeenfarpreferabletoperishonceforallthantobetormentedinthatplaceoftorture.”22 ButCalvinwentanyway,becausehedidnotpastorwherehewouldbemostcomfortable,butwherehewouldbemostuseful. Doingthis,CalvinwasindeedpracticingwhathepreachedandbecomingapatternofgoodworksforReformedministers:

19 CitedinDavidW.Hall,“JohnCalvin:ALifeWorthKnowing,”inA Heart Promptly Offered: The Revolutionary Leadership of John Calvin, (CumberlandHouse,2006),accessed5October2009,availablefromhttp://www.calvin500.org/Bio3.html.

20 RichardStauffer,The Humanness of John Calvin, trans.GeorgeShriver(AbingdonPress,1971;reprint,Birmingham:SolidGroundChristianBooks,2008),96.

21 Ibid.,76.22 VanHalsema,128.



Vol.43,No.110

Eachmustbearhisowncross.ForwhomevertheLordhasadoptedanddeemedworthyofhis fellowshipought toprepare themselvesforahard,toilsome,andunquietlife,crammedwithverymanyandvariouskindsofevil.ItistheheavenlyFather’swillthustoexercisethem….BeginningwithChrist,hisfirstborn,hefollowsthisplanwithallhischildren….Whyshouldweexemptourselves,therefore,fromtheconditiontowhichChristourHeadhadtosuffer?23

ButCalvinknewthecrosseswerenotwithoutpurpose:

TheapostleteachesthatGodhasdestinedallhischildrentotheendthattheybeconformedtoChrist.Hence…agreatcomfortcomestous:weshareChrist’ssufferingsinorderthat,ashehaspassedfromthelabyrinthofallevilsintoheavenlyglory,wemayinlikemannerbeledthroughvarioustribulationstothesameglory….Bycommunionwithhimtheverysufferingsthemselvesnotonlybecomeblessedtousbutalsohelpmuchinpromotingoursalvation.24

WhentheywereevictedbytheangrycrowdinGeneva,1538,CalvinwroteFarel:“Ifwehadbeenservingman,wehadbeenbadlyrewarded!However,weservetheOnewhoneverwithholdsfromhisservantsthatwhichhehaspromisedthem.Beyondmeasure,theLordcaresforushisservants.”25

Calvinwouldhaveputitsomethinglikethis:Bythesesufferings,Godtrainsoureyes(ministers,too)onhomeandmakesourheartspantforthecomingdayofChrist.

Third, Calvin was a wise and sympathetic pastor. Todescribe(orthinkof)Calvinasascholar,theologian,churchreformer,disciplinarian(in thegoodsense), liturgist,catechist,or-ganizerofschools,hospitalandorphanagebuilder,oranythingelse,withoutdescribinghimfirstofallasapastorofthechurchinGeneva,wouldbelikewritingthebiographyofmydearwifeanddescribing

23 Institutes, 3.1.8.24 Ibid.25 InDaleCooper,“ASortofPerpetualCross,”The Banner, August

2009,37(noreferenceiscitedbyCooper).

November2009 11

herfirstofallasamarvelouscook,excellentseamstress,counselorofyoungerwomen,andtirelesshomemaker,withoutgivingherthegreatesthonor—callingheradevotedwife,mother,andgrandmother.Likewise,Calvinwasalltheseotherthings;buttodojusticeandbeaccuratewemustdescribehimas“ThePastorofGeneva.” Althoughoriginallyreluctanttobeapastor,farpreferringthelifeofasecludedscholar,onceGodimpresseduponhimthecalltoservethechurchpastorally,Calvinbecameadeterminedpastor.Hewasnolongerofthemindthatsomepastorshavetoday,happyandeveneagertoleavetheirflockforayear’sstudyonascholar’sgrant. Hewasasympatheticpastor,withaheart that longedfor thepeople’sgood.Calvinyearnedtodeliverthepeoplefromsuffering.Hesufferedwiththem. Iwassostruck,inallmystudiesforthisconference,bythedeepsympathyofthismanofGodthatItookenoughnotestomakeanentirearticleonthatsubjectalone.SoImustbeselectiveandgivethebestsamplingthatIcan. Geneva’spoor,orphans,widows,sick—allfoundanadvocateinPastorCalvin.MostofthosewhohaveonlycursoryknowledgeofCalvinwouldneverdescribehimasanactivistforthedestitute.Butunderhisinfluencetheofficeofdeaconwasrestoredinthechurch,withtwobranches—oneforthepoor,theotherforthesickandelderly.HewassoinfluentialinhismercyforthepoorthatsomeCalvinscholarscontendthathismercyministryhadasmuchinfluenceinEuropeansocietyashistheologydidinthechurch.Hewassodeterminedtomakeknownhisloveforthepoorthathewrote,exaggeratingifonlysoslightly:

Dowewanttoshowthatthereisreformationamongus?Wemustbegin at this point, that is, theremust bepastorswhobearpurelythedoctrineofsalvation,andthendeaconswhohavethecareofthepoor.26

Andmoreemphatically,butwithnohyperbole:

26 InDavidW.Hall,“TenWaysModernCultureisDifferentBecauseofJohnCalvin,”Banner of Sovereign Grace Truth, July/August2009,159.



Vol.43,No.112

IfwewanttobeconsideredChristiansandwantittobebelievedthatthereissomechurchamongus,thisorganizationmustbedemonstratedandmaintained.27

Heriskedhislifeforthesufferingunderhiscare.Heministeredfacetofacetothosefromwhomhecouldhavecontractedtheplague.Fromhisownsmall storeofpersonalpossessionshegave tohelporphans.NothingcouldstophimfromthisGod-givencare:Iamprepared“topawnmyheadandfeet,thatit(money)willbefoundforthcominghere.”28Whenhewrotehiswill,heallocatedmuchofwhatlittlehehadfortheBoy’sSchoolandthepoor. Calvin’sChristianpastoralcompassionalsoledhimtoministertothosewhowerepersecutedfortheirfaith. ThetimeoftheReformationwasatimeofgreatpersecution.Byletter,Calvinadvisedmanythattheiroptionswereeithertoendurethesuffering,evendeath,orflee. Manyfled.TheywenttoGeneva,wheretheyknewtheywouldbecaredfor.SomanyrefugeescametoGenevathatsomeofthelocalsbecameresentfuloftheirburgeoninginfluence. Calvinwroteletterstoprisonerswhocouldnotflee—touchinglettersthatmakeonecrytoread.OnemustreadthestoryofthefiveyoungmensentencedtodeathinaRomanCatholiccrack-downonthereformationinLyons,France.Calvinpersonallytriedtogaintheirrelease;wroteletterstotheyoungmenthemselves;wrotealetterofencouragementtoalocalpastorwhohadvisitedthem;andthenwrotethemosttouchingletterwhentheyoungmenknew,aftermanyap-peals,therewasnohopefortheirlivesbeingspared.

SinceitpleasesGodtoemployyoutothedeathinmaintaininghisquarrel,hewillstrengthenyourhandsinthefight,andwillnotsuf-ferasingledropofyourbloodtobespentinvain.Andthoughthefruitmaynotallatonceappear,yetintimeitshallspringupmoreabundantlythanwecanexpress.Butashehasvouchsafedyouthisprivilege,thatyourbondshavebeenrenowned,andthatthenoiseof

27 Ibid.28 Stauffer,83-85.

November2009 13

themhasbeeneverywherespreadabroad,itmustneedbe,inspiteofSatan,thatyourdeathshouldresoundfarmorepowerfully,sothatthenameofourLordbemagnifiedthereby.29

AndwiththatencouragementfromCalvintheywenttothestaketobeburned,likelysingingPsalm68,afavoriteoftheReformers.Re-flectonthewordingofthis1539(!)versificationofthePsalm,whichReformedbelieversstillsingtoday:

LetGodbepraisedwithreverencedeep;HedailycomesourlivestosteepInbountiesfreelygiven.Godcaresforus,ourGodisHe;WhowouldnotfearHismajestyInearthaswellasheaven?OurGodupholdsusinthestrife;TousHegrantseternallife,Andsavesfromdesolation.Hehearstheneedywhentheycry,Hesavestheirsoulswhendeathdrawsnigh,ThisGodisoursalvation.30

Then read, ifyouwill, the formprayer“ForAll theNeedsofChristendom”andbeawareofthegreatinfluenceofCalvinonthatbeautifulprayerdesignedforaReformedworshipservice.31 Calvinpersonally cared for somany individualswhowere inneed,forbelieverswhowouldneverbeabletorepayhis“favors.”

29 InW.RobertGodfrey,John Calvin: Pilgrim and Pastor (Wheaton:CrosswayBooks,2009),161. (The story,with thequotations, aregivenwithoutcitationofsource).

30 The Psalter, rev.ed.,producedbyspecialarrangementfortheProt-estantReformedChurches(GrandRapids:Wm.B.Eerdmans,1995),#420,stanza5.The1539versificationwasbyMatthaeusGreiter;theEnglishistheversionofRev.B.Essenburg,1931.

31 TheprayermaybefoundinThe Psalter, rev.ed.,producedbyspe-cialarrangementforReformationHeritageBooks(GrandRapids:Wm.B.Eerdmans,1995),Liturgysection,170-171.



Vol.43,No.114

Hewroteletterstowomenwhosehusbandshadbeenunfaithful,toparentswhosechildrenhaddied(“IfoundmyselfsodistractedandconfusedinspiritthatforseveraldaysIcoulddonothingbutcry”32),toahusbandwhohadlosthiswife(assuringhimthathewouldbereunitedwithher inheaven33). HeaskedViret tofind lodgingforanoldwoman,tookpersonalresponsibilityforthecareoforphans,evensethimselftoplaying“matchmaker”forayoungmemberofhiscongregation,apracticeofquestionablewisdomforpastorstoday! Calvincaredforthelovely.Healsoministeredtotheunlovely.He pastored Servetus, the impenitent hereticMichael Servetus.TwentyyearsbeforeServetuswasfinallyburnedatthestake,CalvinriskedhisownlifebytravelingtoParistomeetandteachServetus,who,althoughheexpressedwillingnesstomeet,didnotshowup.AtServetus’strial,whereCalvinwasthe“chiefwitnessfortheprosecu-tion,”Servetusthrewviciousdenunciationsathim.Calvinstillvisitedhiminjailandpleadedwithhimtorepent.Servetuslaughedathim.WhenServetusfinallywassentencedtodeath,Calvinpetitionedtheauthoritiestograntthemorehumanedeathofbeheadingratherthanburning,althoughtherequestwasdenied.Andthoughtherearedif-ferentversionsoftheeventsofthedayofexecution(somehistorianshavingFarelaccompanyinghimtothestake),itisnotunlikelythatCalvinaccompaniedthecondemnedServetus,pleadingwithhimtoconfessJesusas“God,theeternalSon,”ratherthanmerely,“sonoftheeternalGod.” Reformedpastorsgrowintheirappreciationforthepastoralheartofthisgianttheologian. It isonethingtobeapastor,butquiteanother tobewiseandbalanced.Calvinservedwithararewisdom. Thosewhohavereadanyofhiscommentariesarefamiliarwithhismagnanimousapproachwhentheproperexegesisisquestionable:“Youmayholdyourinterpretation;hereiswhyIholdmine.” Herefusedtosupportradicals(the“200percenters”)inthecity,

32 InStauffer,88.33 Selected Works, vol.6,1551,ed.H.BeveridgeandJ.Bonnet(Grand

Rapids:1983),236,inGodfrey,148.

November2009 15

resistingattimesevenhisowncolleaguesinordertokeepbalance.Whenhegavecounseltoachurchtornbystrife,hespokefirsttothepeople:“someofyouareimpelledbyazealnottemperedbymoderation”;and:bepatientwithyourless-than-satisfactorypastor.Second,hecounseledtheconsistory:“Itwillbeyourdutytobring[thepeople]toreasonwithallmeeknessandhumanity…(and)youknowtherulewhichtheHolySpiritlaysdown…thateachshouldyieldandgiveuphisright.”34 Perhapssurprisingly,butcertainlyinstructiveforpastorstoday,hewaswillingtointerprettheevilsinthecongregationasGod’sjudgmentuponthem.Then,inaprivateresponsetooneofthemagistratesinthevicinity,headmittedthatthesituationwasprobablyworsethanheletontothechurch,thatthepastorwasprobablylargelytoblame,andthatitwasnotonlythe“perverseandpeevish”butalsothe“honestandsimple”whodespisedthepastor.Calvin’swisdomevenanticipatedArticle11:“Sometimes,for thegoodof thecongregation,ministersmustgoeveniftheyareinnocent.”35 Hispastoralwisdomandprudencewarnedagainstjudgingaman’seternaldestiny,amanwhopersecutedtheReformed:“Topronouncethatheisdamned…istogotoofar,unlessonehadsomecertainandinfalliblemarkofhisreprobation.”36Hecalledthepeopletoseekthesalvationevenoftheirenemies;hecautionedthe“hyper-Calvinists”ofhisday.(“Wecannotyet,”hesaid,“distinguishtheelectfromthereprobate.”37) And in his deathbed speech to the city’s leaders,Calvin gavecounselthateveryyoungministeroughttoframeinhisstudy.They

34 Godfrey,163.35 Godfrey,165.ThechurchorderofmanyReformedchurchestoday

islargelythechurchorderofDordt,whichspeaksof“dismissingthemin-isterfromservice.”Thearticleisusedtoseparateapastorandcongregationwhentheirrelationshipbecomessostrainedthatconsistoryandclassisjudgeseparationtobetheonlyremedy.

36 Selected Works, vol.7,1551ed.H.BeveridgeandJ.Bonnet(GrandRapids:1983),354,inGodfrey,150.

37 Commentary on John, vol.2,172.



Vol.43,No.116

ought“nottoinnovate—weoftenaskfornovelties—…becauseallchangeishazardous,andsometimesharmful.”38

Fourth, Calvin was a teacher of the church’s children. As faithfulministers today know,Calvin recognized that thechurchwouldnotlastanothergenerationifthechildrendidnotreceivecatecheticalinstruction,plusthoroughparentalChristianeducation.Hesawtheurgentneednotonlyfortraininginthefaith,butforseculareducationfromgoodteachers. Soheinstitutedcatechism.39AfterhewasbanishedfromGeneva,hewouldnotreturnexceptunderfourconditions,oneofwhichwascatechism.Alreadyinhisfirstpastorate,Geneva’s“EcclesiasticalAr-ticles”includedademandforcatechism.Afterhisreturn,therequire-mentswereevenmorethorough.Heandtheconsistorydemandedthatparentssendtheirchildren,beginningalreadyatage7,andthattheybedisciplinediftheyrefused.Theyrequiredthechildrentomemorizeanswers,singtheScripturetocommitittomemory,andattendclassesuntiltheymadeconfessionoftheirfaith.Andofficebearerswhowerequalifiedfortheworkmustteach. Withapastor’sheart,healsodrewupordinancesforChristianschools.40Calvinunderstoodthatthechurchhadresponsibilitytopro-motetheChristianeducationofthechildren.SoGenevaestablishednotonlytheAcademytotrainpreachers,magistrates,lawyers,etc.,butalsoaschoolforthechildren,beginningalsoatage7. Childrenlearnedtheology,butalsotheartsandsciences,because“CalvinwasconvincedthattheReformationcouldgrowandincrease

38 CitedinDavidW.Hall,“JohnCalvin:ALifeWorthKnowing,”inA Heart Promptly Offered: The Revolutionary Leadership of John Calvin (CumberlandHouse,2006),accessed5October2009,availablefrom http://www.calvin500.org/Bio3.html.NoreferenceisgivenbyHall.

39 InanupcomingJournal articleIplantopublishmyrecentstudyofCalvin’sandGeneva’scatecheticalinstructionofthechurch’scovenantyouth.

40 TheinformationinthissectioncomesprimarilyfromJ.ChrisCoetzee,“CalvinandtheSchool,”inJohn Calvin: Contemporary Prophet: A Sym-posium, JacobT.Hoogstra,ed.(GrandRapids:Baker,1959),197-225.

November2009 17

onlythroughastudyoftheartsandsciencesaswellasthatoftheol-ogy.”Theyhad“grammaticaldrills,memorization,reciting,review-ing….”Theschoolmusthaveacapableheadmaster,anditmustbewell-fundedsothatallthepoorcouldattend.Justaswithcatechism,parentsweretobepunishediftheyrefusedorneglectedtosendtheirchildrentotheschool. Veryclearly,Calvinsawthat,althoughtheeducationofthechildrenwasthedutyoftheparents,bothchurchandstatehadpartinit. Passionatelyinterestedinthewelfareofthelambs!

Fifth, Calvin was a zealous missionary. IfCalvinwerealivetoday,onecanhardlyimaginethathewouldnothavebeenamemberofthedenomination’smissioncommittee,onthelocalchurch’sevangelismcommittee,orbebeggingtheeldersnottoforbidhimonthegroundthat“Thereisothermoreimportantworktobedone.” Calvindidnottakeacalltoamissionfield,becomeordainedasamissionary,ortraveltotheendsoftheearth.Nevertheless,hemaybedescribedasamissionary.Hewasasinvolvedasanymancouldbeintheworldwidespreadofthegospel. Whatmany scholars ofmissions say aboutCalvin is untrue.Onemissionhistorianwrote:“WemissintheReformersnotonlymissionaction,buteventheideaofmissions…becausefundamentaltheologicalviewshinderedthemfromgivingtheiractivityandeventheirthoughtsamissionarydirection.”41EvenAlisterMcGrath,popu-larwriteronChristianhistoryanddoctrine,arguedthatProtestant-ismhadlittleinterestinmissionsandthat“neitherJohnCalvinnorMartinLutherhadanyparticularinteresttoreachbeyondthebordersofChristendom.”42 Ofcourse,McGrathdoesnotconsiderRomanCatholicismtobetheripefieldformissionsthatitwas.Howmanythousandsandmillionsweredyingspirituallyinthatfold? From1555to1562,Geneva’sconsistoryminutes(the“RegisteroftheCompanyofPastors”)showthatGenevasentout88mission-

41 D.McKay,“TheMissionaryZealofCalvin,”Lux Mundi, December2008,83.

42 CitedinMcKay,83.



Vol.43,No.118

aries,mostlytoFrance,Calvin’shomeland.Likelythenumberwasfarhigher,sincetorecordthenamesofthemissionarieswouldbetorisktheirlives.Somesourcesshowasmanyasover100,injustoneyear,weresentout.“…Anarmyofmissionaries(weresent)toItaly,Germany,Scotland,England,andespeciallytoFrance.”43 Theyoung,newlytrainedministerswentoutunderthecoverofnightandhid inatticsand infalseroomsbehindchimneys. Theygatheredinbarns,openfields,orsecludedcaves.Asaresult,smallchurcheswereorganized.AndwithCalvin’sgoodcounselbyletter,signedoftenwithapseudonym,thechurchesmultiplied!Byhisef-forts,therewereover1,000underground“churchplants”44inFranceby1560.LiketheIsraelitesinEgypt,“themoretheywereafflicted,themoretheymultipliedandgrew.”In20years,thenumberofRe-formedchurchesinFranceincreasedby800,from1,200to2,000! Itwasdangerousforthesemissionaries.Manywerearrestedandsentencedtodeath.TheAcademyofGeneva(Calvin’s“seminary”)becameknownas“Calvin’sschoolofdeath”becausesomanygradu-ateswentouttomartyrdominFrance. AndcriticssayCalvindidnotpromoteorengageinmissions?TheycallattentiononlytotheabortedefforttoevangelizeBrazilasevidencethatCalvinandhisReformedfriendswerenotmissionar-ies? Contrarytotheclaimsofhiscritics,Calvin’sdoctrinesofpredes-tinationandthesovereigntyofGodinsalvationdidnothinderhimfrombeingazealousproponentofmissions.Infact,thesedoctrineswere thegrounds forhismissionefforts. Inhis Institutes,CalvinquotesAugustinewithapprovalthat,becausethenumberoftheelectisunknowntous,ourattitudeinmissionsmustbedeterminedbythedesirethatallmaybesaved.“Forasweknownotwhobelongstothenumberofthepredestinatedorwhodoesnotbelong,weoughttobesomindedastowishthatallmenbesaved.”SofarAugustine.

43 Christian History,5,no.4(1986):23.44 ThisisthelanguagetheReformersused.Aneglise planteemight

benomorethananunorganizedgroup,meetingforprayerandBiblestudy;thegoal,ultimately,wasaneglise dressee,anorganizedchurchwithitsownofficebearers(cf.D.McKay,85).

November2009 19

ThenCalvincomments:“Soshallitcomeaboutthatwetrytomakeeveryonewemeetasharerinourpeace.”45Predestination,thereasonCalvindidnotengageinmissions?Wrong,onbothaccounts. Calvin’smotivesformissionsareawarningtotheReformedpastortodaywhomaybetemptedtomisapplythedoctrineofpredestination.Apersonal desire,wellingupwithin thosewhohave experiencedGod’sgrace,thatalsoothersshouldhavethisgreatblessing,drivesamantomissions.

Bythesewords[Is.2:3]hefirstdeclaresthatthegodlywillbefilledwithsuchanardentdesiretospreadthedoctrinesofreligion,that every one not satisfied [carnally satisfied,BG]with his owncallingandhispersonalknowledgewilldesiretodrawothersalongwithhim.Andindeednothingcouldbemoreinconsistentwiththenatureoffaiththanthatdeadnesswhichwouldleadamantodisregardhisbrethren,andtokeepthelightofknowledge(ofGod)chokedupwithinhisownbreast.Thegreatertheeminenceaboveotherswhichanymanhasreceivedfromhiscalling,somuchthemorediligentlyoughthetolabortoenlightenothers.46

Meditate,foralittlewhile,ontheimplicationsofthat.

Sixth, Calvin was a preacher. An exegetical, doctrinal, polemical, passionate, and practicalpreacher.47 Calvinwasnothingifnotapreacher.CalvinispreeminentlyamodelforReformedpastorstodayinsofarasCalvinwasapreacher.Heknewwhatfedtheflock,keptthewolvesatbay,ministeredtothelambs,gavemuscletothebonesofthewarriors…andskilltotheirhands.HepreachedwiththeunshakableconvictionthatthemouthoftheministerwasthemouthofGod,asBullingerputit,“ThepreachingoftheWordofGodisthewordofGod,”andthat

45 Institutes,3.23.14.46 Commentary on Isaiah,citedinMcKay,89.47 ForfullertreatmentofCalvinaspreacher,seeStevenKey’sarticle

inthisissue.



Vol.43,No.120

“Whereverthegospelispreached,itisasifGodhimselfcameintothemidstofus.”48 So,besidespreachingmanytimesperweek,hetrainedpreachers,andwarnedthem:“MaythesoulssodearlypurchasedbythebloodofourLordnotperishbyourcarelessness.”49ThispastorwantedtobesurethenewpastorscouldtrainmorepreachersuntiltheLordre-turned.Heknewthat“itpleasesGodbythefoolishnessofpreachingtosavethemthatbelieve”(ICor.1:21). Hewas exegetical:“Letthosewhodesiretoteachotherswell,appointthemselvesthesebounds,thattheyutternothingbutoutofthepurefountainoftheword.”50 Hispreachingwasdoctrinal. TheScripturesareprofitablefordoctrine!“AnassemblyinwhichthepreachingofheavenlydoctrineisnothearddoesnotdeservetobereckonedaChurch.”51 Hewasnothesitanttobepolemical: “Thepastoroughttohavetwovoices;one, forgathering the sheep, andanother forwardingoff…wolves.”52 Calvinmodeledpassion: “ItappearstomethatthereisverylittlepreachingofalivelykindintheKingdom,butthatthegreaterpartdeliveritbywayofreadingfromawrittendiscourse.”CommentingonPaul’ssecondlettertotheCorinthians,andPaul’s“jealousy”forthechurch,Calvinrebukedthepreachersofhisandourday:“Awaywithindolenceandcoldnessin[preaching],foronethatiscoldwillneverbequalifiedforthisoffice.”53Passiononthepulpitwasoneofthereasonsthat,althoughhedidnotrequirethisofothers,Calvin

48 CitedinCalvin’s Wisdom:An Anthology Arranged Alphabetically,GrahamMiller(Edinburgh:BannerofTruthTrust,1992),225.

49 Jean-DanielBenoit,“PastoralCareoftheProphet,”inJohn Calvin: Contemporary Prophet: A Symposium, JacobT.Hoogstra,ed.(GrandRapids:Baker,1959),53.

50 CitedinCalvin’s Wisdom, 254.51 Ibid.,254.52 Ibid.,253.53 Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians,

vol.2(GrandRapids:Eerdmans,1959),340.

November2009 21

preachedwithoutnotes.Hewantedtospeaktotheheartsofthepeople,andfromhisheart. Andhowpractical hissermonswere!NoonewhohasreadthesermonsofCalvinwilldenythatthepreachingofCalvinwasalsoeminentlypractical,addressedandappliedconcretelytothepractice ofChristianity.Evenhisdoctrinaltreatise,theInstitutes,attimeshadmoreapplicationthanexplanation.54ThatwasthemindandheartofthisMinisterofGeneva.

Seventh, John Calvin loved God. CalvinwaseverythingthathewasbecausehewasdevotedinlovetohisGod. Consider theother topicsofourconferencepapers. WhywasCalvinareformer?WhyanexpositorandpreacherofHolyScripture?Whyadefenderofchurchdiscipline?Ateacherofjustification,pre-destination,thecovenant?ThenconsidertheareasIhavementioned.Whypersonallyupright,awillingsufferer,awiseandsympatheticpastor,ateacherofcovenantchildren,azealousmissionaryandfaith-fulpreacher? BecausehewasamanfullydevotedinlovetotheGodandFatherofourLordJesusChrist.Nothingelseexplainshim.Nothingelsewoulddrivehimtosuchlengths.Aman’sloveforGodwillenablehimtodoeverything. EverythinghedidmanifestedhisloveforGod.Readhissermons,butdonotfailtoreadtheprayersthatcomeaftereverysermon,andhearthedevotiontotheOnewhosavedhiseyesfromtears,hisfeetfromfalling,whohadsethimfree.Hearhimcryoutformercy,pleadwithGodtousethewordtobless theflock,glorifyHim. SeehisdedicationtotheexpositionofthePsalms,because,ofallthings,thechildofGodiscalledtoworshipandprayer. Cor Meum Tibi, Offero Domine, Prompte et Sincere. IfIeverhadtheprivilegetowriteabiographyofJohnCalvinandsayinitwhatmostimpressedmeaboutthisman,Iwouldsay

54 Cf.Calvin’s treatmentof thedoctrineofprovidence,both inhisInstitutes andhisCalvin’s Calvinism.



Vol.43,No.122

whateveryministerofChristwouldwantsaidabouthimselfafterhisdeath:HelovedGod.HigherpraisethanthatIcannotgivetoaman.HelovedGod. Nearingdeath,Calvinsaid(andeverybelieverwithevenahintofatenderheartchokestoreadit):

InthenameofGod,I,JohnCalvin,servantoftheWordofGodinthechurchofGeneva…thankGodthatHehasshownnotonlymercytowardme,Hispoorcreature,and…hassufferedmeinallsinsandweaknesses,butwhatismuchmore,thatHehasmademeapartakerofHisgracetoserveHimthroughmywork….IconfesstoliveanddieinthisfaithwhichHehasgivenme,inasmuchasIhavenootherhopeorrefugethanHispredestinationuponwhichmyentiresalva-tionisgrounded.IembracethegracewhichHehasofferedmeinourLordJesusChristandacceptthemeritsofHissufferinganddying,thatthroughthemallmysinsareburied;andIhumblybegHimtowashmeandcleansemewiththebloodofourgreatRedeemer…sothatI,whenIshallappearbeforeHisface,maybearHislikeness. Moreover,IdeclarethatIendeavoredtoteachHisWordundefiledandtoexpoundHolyScripturefaithfully,accordingtothemeasureofgracewhichHehasgivenme.

AfterCalvindied,hisoldfriendFarelsaid:“Oh,howhappilyhehasrunanoblerace.Letusrunlikehim,accordingtothemeasureofgracegivenus.” l

November2009 23

Calvin the PreacherSteven R. Key

ConsideringthattheinspiredapostlePaulwascompelledtospeakof“thefoolishnessofpreaching,”menoftheworldwouldcertainlyfinditastoundingthatsomanyshouldbegatheredtogethertoconsiderJohnCalvinasapreacher.Calvin’scontributionsweremany.EventheworldrecognizestheimpressionheleftuponmanyaspectsoflifenotonlyinGeneva,butinEuropeandfromtherespreadingtoNorthAmerica.ButtheonethingthatCalvinhimselfwouldberememberedfor—Ihavenodoubt—isthathestoodbeforeGodafaithfulpreacherofthegospel. WhilethefocusofthisconferenceisonJohnCalvin,wemustbecarefulnottoattributetoCalvinmorethanwhatisproper.JohnCalvinwasnotthe“fatherofpreaching.”HewasnotthefatherofpreachingeveninthecontextofthegreatReformationofthesixteenthcentury.Hewas a second-generation reformer following the pathmarkedoutbyMartinLuther,UlrichZwingli,andotherreformerswhohadbroughttothechurcharenewedemphasisuponexpositorypreachingandwhohadwitnessedthepowerfuldivineeffectsofthatpreaching.Calvin’scontributiontopreachingismostsignificantparticularlyinthetheologyuponwhichhispreachingwasfoundedandthebrillianceofhisexegeticalgifts,thegiftsofBibleinterpretation. InthecourseofthisspeechonCalvinthepreacher,Iintendtocallyourattention,firstofall,toJohnCalvin’spreaching.Secondly,Iwouldhaveyounoticethetheologicalfoundationandfocusofthatpreachingand,therefore,whyhispreachingwassopowerful.Finally—tomakeitapplicabletomorethanjusttheseminarystudentsandmycolleaguesintheministry—IwilldirectyourattentiontowhatCalvinhadtosayabouttheattitudeanddutyofthecongregationinregardtopreaching.

Calvin’s Preaching WhatwasCalvin’spreachinglike?

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.124

Let’sgobacktoCalvin’sGeneva.ThefirstdayofeachnewweekinGenevabeganwithasermonatdaybreak:sixa.m.fromEastertothefirstofOctober,andsevena.m.inthewintermonths.1Anotherservicewasheldatninea.m.andathirdserviceatthreeintheafter-noon.Duringtheweek,preachingserviceswereheldonMonday,Wednesday,andFridaymornings,untilinOctober1549theCouncilorderedthesermonsincreasedfromeveryotherdaytoonceeveryday.2JohnCalvinhimselfpreachedeveryday,everyotherweek,aswellastwiceonSundays,foratotaloftensermonseverytwoweeks.3 Givenallhisotherresponsibilities,sucharigorouspreachingschedulewouldnotseemtoleavemuchtimeforcarefulpreparation.Yetthestrengthofhispreachingbeganinhisstudy. Preparationforthefaithfulpreacherrequiresardentself-discipline,a commitment to rigorous study, andcareful preparation. Calvin’sunderstandingof thatwas expressedbyhim thisway in a sermononDeuteronomy6:13-16asheexplained theexhortation,“YeshallnottempttheLordyourGod.”Hesaid,“...ifIshouldclimbupintothepulpitwithouthavingdeignedto lookatabookandfrivolouslyimagine‘Ahwell!WhenIgetthereGodwillgivemeenoughtotalkabout,’andIdonotcondescendtoread,ortothinkaboutwhatIoughttodeclare,andIcomeherewithoutcarefullyponderinghowImustapplytheHolyScripturetotheedificationofthepeople—well,thenIshouldbeacock-surecharlatanandGodwouldputmetoconfusioninmyaudaciousness.”4SoCalvinappliedhisbrilliantmindtothestudyofGod’sword,workingwiththeoriginallanguages,drawingonhisextensiveknowledgeoftheScriptures,andoftentakingintoaccountwhatothersalsohadwrittenconcerningthepassagehewasstudying.

1 T.H.L.Parker,The Oracles of God: An Introduction to the Preaching of John Calvin,LondonandRedhill,England:LutterworthPress,1947,p.33.

2 T.H.L.Parker,Calvin’s Preaching, Louisville,Kentucky:Westminster/JohnKnoxPress,1992,p.59.

3 Parker,Oracles,p.39.4 JohnCalvin,Sermons on Deuteronomy, Facsimile of 1583 Edition,

Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1987,p.292.(ThetranslationistakenfromParker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.81.)

November2009 25

Calvincametothepulpitwithoutmanuscriptornotes.Weknowverylittle,therefore,abouttheearlyyearsofhispreaching,andhavelittlebasisonwhichtomakeanyevaluationofhisdevelopmentasapreacher.ItisonlyafterhisreturntoGenevain1541thatamoredefinitepictureofhispreaching is formed,althoughanothereightyearsofhiscareerpasswithlimitedinformation.Wemaybethankfulthatbeginningin1549asocietyofFrenchimmigrantsinthechurchsawtotherecordingandcatalogingofthesermonsbyaprofessionalstenographer.5 Weconsider,therefore,theCalvinwhohadseveralyearsofpulpitexperiencebythistime.ThesermonsavailabletoustodayintheEnglishlanguagearesermonspreachedduringthisfinal15-yearperiodofCalvin’sministry,from1549to1564. Calvin’s approach in preachingwas to preach systematicallythroughentirebooksoftheBible.Histext,dependingonthenatureofthebookfromwhichhewaspreaching,wouldconsistoftwoorthreeverses,oranentiresectionofthechapter.Hewouldnotlethispersonalfeelingsshapewhattextshemightselect,norcouldheeverbeaccusedoftreatingonlysubjectshedeemedimportant.Thecon-gregationinGenevaknewfromweektoweekanddaytodaywhatsectionofScripturetheywouldhearexpoundedwhentheywenttothehouseofGod. By these continuous expositions of Scripture, “difficult andcontroversialsubjectswereunavoidable.Hardsayingscouldnotbeskipped.Difficultdoctrinescouldnotbeoverlooked.Thefullcoun-selofGodcouldbeheard.”6SocommittedwasCalvintothiskindofseriespreachingthatonhisreturntoGenevainSeptember1541,afterhavingbeenbannedfromthecitythreeyearsearlier,hedidnotclimbthepulpitagainwithaspecialsermonfortheoccasion,buthe

5 La compagnie des étrangers(theCompanyofStrangers)hiredDenisRaguenierforhalfapastor’ssalary.Raguenierwouldtakedownthesermoninshorthandandafterwarddictatehisshorthandtoateamofsecretarieswhowroteoutthetextinfull.JohnCalvindirectedthattheprofitsofanysermonssoldbegiventothefundtosupportFrenchrefugees.(Cf.Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,pp.65ff.;Selderhuis,John Calvin, A Pilgrim’s Life,p.131.)

6 StevenJ.Lawson,The Expository Genius of John Calvin, Orlando,FL:ReformationTrustPublishing,2007,p.32.

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.126

openedtheScripturesandbegantopreachexactlywhereheleftoffthreeyearsbefore.Calvinwouldinterrupttheseseriesonlyforcertainoccasions,generallyrelatedtothechurchcalendar,atwhichtimeshewouldpreachfromappropriatetextsfortheoccasion.7 BecausehewasoftheconvictionthatScripturewasaunityandthat thewholeBible belonged to the people ofGod, he balancedpreachingfromtheOldTestamentwithpreachingfromtheNew.HedidsorecognizingthatallScriptureisamazinglyrelevanttoGod’speopleineverymomentofhistory.HeunderstoodthattheurgencywithwhichPetersenthisfirstepistletothechurchscatteredthroughoutthevariousregionsofAsiaMinorpresseduponthecongregationinGenevawiththesameweight.ThePsalms,whichsooftenexpressthedeepspiritualthoughtsandexperiencesofthosewhowrotethemundertheinspirationoftheHolySpirit,alsoexpressourownthoughtsandexperiences.All God’swordspeakstotheneedsofGod’speople. ThiscommitmenttoseriespreachingtellsussomethingelseaboutCalvin’sperspectiveofpreachinganditsrelationshiptothehealthofthechurch.HeunderstoodthatthespiritualgrowthofGod’speopleisnotsomethingsudden.Wedonotgrowfromchildhoodtoadult-hoodovernight.Wemustbefaithfullyfedandnourished,growingslowlybutsurelyoveralongperiodoftime.Thepreachermusthavealongviewofthechurch’sspiritualgrowth.TheblessedfruitsofpreachingthatareseeninthesalvationandspiritualgrowthofGod’speoplearefruitsslowindeveloping.Buteventhoughslow,thosefruitsarealsosure—whenaministerfaithfullyandconsistentlypro-claimsGod’sWordinthemidstofthecongregation.Forthatreason,forhoweverlongittook,sometimesayearormore,CalvinwouldsteepthecongregationinthegospelsetforthinaparticularbookorsectionofScripture. BritishscholarT.H.L.Parker,whohaswrittentwobooksonCal-vin’spreaching,presentsalistofCalvin’ssermonsfromvariousbooksoftheBible.8JusttogiveyouanexampleoftheextensivenatureofCalvin’ssermonseries,hepreached123sermonsfromGenesis,200fromDeuteronomy,159fromJob,342or343fromIsaiah,and189

7 Parker,Oracles,p.70.8 Parker,Oracles,p.163;Calvin’s Preaching,pp.150-171.

November2009 27

fromtheBookofActs.AshorterseriesfromJohnCalvinwouldbea43-sermonseriesfromGalatians,a28-sermonseriesfromtheprophecyofMicah,or25fromthebookofLamentations.Althoughtherearenorecordsofhissermonspriorto1549,fromthatyeartotheendofhislifein1564Calvinpreached2,040sermons.Comparethattotheroughly1,500sermonsaProtestantReformedministerwouldpreachoverasimilar15-yearperiod!Consideringthat,duringmuchofthattime,hepreachedtensermonseverytwoweeks,notafewministerstodaymightthink,“Nowonderhediedyoung!” ButCalvinunderstoodthetremendouscallingandprivilegeGodhadgivenhimtopreachthegospel. Tothatpreachinghewouldgivehimself, inhealthaswellas insickness—and theoccasionswereoftenwhenhepreachedinillhealthandinpain,letaloneinthefaceofmuchopposition.Hisinfirmitiesalsoapparentlyaffectedhissermondelivery.Hisdeliveryissaidtohavebeenratherslowanddeliberate,partlybecauseofhischronicafflictionwithasthma.9 FromthereadingofScripturetotheamenofhisclosingprayer,thepeopleofGodwouldgiveCalvintheirattentionforanhour. Hewouldnottaxthemlonger. Norwouldheoverburdenthemwithexcessivesermoncontentinthathour.Hissermonswereabletobetakendownwordforwordbythosewhorecordedthem.InreadingCalvin’ssermonorallyatthepaceatwhichIwouldnormallypreach,IfoundthatwhatCalvinpreachedinanhourtakesmeapproximately35minutes. A convincing case has beenmade forCalvin havingused theHebrewandGreektextnotmerelyinhispreparationforpreaching,butinexpoundingthetextfromthepulpit.10ThoughhewouldnotmentionHebreworGreekwords from thepulpit, careful toavoiddrawingattentiontohisownknowledge,aswellasbeingcarefultospeakon the level of the commonperson’s understanding,Calvin

9 Parker,Oracles,p.40.10 ThisistheassertionnotonlyofT.H.L.Parker,butalsoofHughes

OliphantOld,The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church, vol. 4: The Age of the Reformation:“ThetextonwhichCalvinpreachesistheGreektext,andthetranslationheoffershiscongregationisoftenafreetranslation,aswefindhere”(pp.99-100).

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.128

translatedhistextdirectlyfromtheoriginallanguage.Parkerputsitthisway:

Hehad,then,aHebrewOldTestamentorGreekNewTestamentbeforehimandpreachedwithoutanynotes(orsoweassumefromthefactthathehadnonoteswhenhelectured).Thiswasnotfromanynotionthatextemporaneouspreachingwassuperiortoawrittensermonornotes,butnodoubtbecauseheknewhecouldtrusthismemory.11

ThestrengthofCalvin’spreachingisnottobefoundinhisser-monoutlines.Hedidnotfollowastatedoutlinewithathemeandrecognizabledivisions taken fromthe logical structureof the text.Heexpoundedthetextsentencebysentence,phrasebyphrase,andoccasionallyevenwordbyword.Thatisnottosaythathissermonswere bare commentaries. There is clearly a differencewhenyoucomparehissermonstohiscommentaries.Whilebothinvolvecarefulinterpretationofthepassage,Calvin’ssermonscarriedmuchgreateremphasisonthepracticalapplicationoftheteachingsofthetext,show-ingaconcerntoapplythemeaningofthetexttothecongregationandtoexhortthemtosubmittothewordofGod.Theweaknessofthis

11 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.81.TheaccuracyofParker’sassumptioncouldbecalledintoquestionbywhatCalvinwrotetotheProtectorSomerset,October22,1548inCalvin’sSelected Works,vol.5,p.202-203:“WhatIhavethussuggestedastothemannerofinstruction,isonlythatthepeoplebesotaughtastobetouchedtothequick,andthattheymayfeelthatwhattheApostlesaysistrue(Hebrews4),that‘thewordofGodisatwo-edgedsword,piercingeventhroughthethoughtsandaffectionstotheverymarrowofthebones.’Ispeakthus,Monseigneur,becauseitappearstomethatthereisverylittlepreachingofalivelykindinthekingdom,butthatthegreaterpartdeliveritbywayofreadingfromawrittendiscourse.Iseeverywellthenecessitywhichconstrainsyoutothat;forinthefirstplaceyouhavenot,asIbelieve,suchwell-approvedandcompetentpastorsasyoudesire.Wherefore,youneedforthwithtosupplythiswant.”Irealize,however,thatthisquotecouldreferasmuchtothosewhowereneglectingfaithfulsermonpreparationandsimplyreadingwrittensermonsfromotherpreachers,astothosewhoweretakingmanuscriptstothepulpitandgivingalifelessreadingfromtheirmanuscripts.

November2009 29

formofCalvin’ssermonmakingwasthatthethreadofamaintheme,letalonealogicalstructure,wasnotalwaysevidentinhissermons.Thatsaid,Calvinwasnotsointerestedinstyleasinsubstance,andwascontenttoletthecontentsofthetextbeartheweightofcarryingthemindsofthecongregation.Andsoitdid. Parker,inwhatIconsiderabrilliantdescriptionofCalvin’spreach-ing,putitthisway:“Thesermonsarelikerivers,movingstronglyinonedirection,alivewitheddiesandcross-currents,nowthunderingincataracts,nowacalmmirrorofthebanksandthesky;butneverstill,neverstagnant.”12

HughesOliphantOldpointsout thatJohnCalvindidhavesomeimportantgiftsforspeaking,nottheleastofwhichwashisbrilliantmemoryandtheabilitytofocusattentiononthetextwithsuchinten-sitythathedrewhishearersintothetextwithhim.13Healsohadanoutstandinggraspoflanguage,theabilitytousewordswithgreatestprecision. In thoughtandexpressionCalvinwascharacterizedbyclarity.Butitwasn’tgiftsoforatorythatmadehispreachingexem-plary.Itwasthecontent—thesolidexegesisandtheconstantconcernfortheapplicationofthetexttotheheartsandlivesofGod’speople,himselfincluded. BelievingthattheHolySpiritinspiredHolyScripturewordforword,Calvingavecarefulattentiontothegrammaticalconstructofthetext.ThereispurposeinthegrammaticalformofthewordsusedbytheHolySpirit.Inaddition,Calvingavediligentandfaithfulat-tentiontothehistoricalcontextofeverypassage,recognizingthattheweightofeachpassageisfoundedonaparticularhistoricalsettingandcircumstance.Yeteachhistoricalsettingboreanapplicationtothechurchthroughouttheages.“CalvindrewoutoftheScripturesaspectsofChristianteachingwhichtheChurchhadnotheardforcenturies.”14 Hepreachedwiththegoalofleadingthecongregationintothepower-

12 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.132.13 HughesOliphantOld,The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures

in the Worship of the Christian Church, vol. 4: The Age of the Reformation,GrandRapids,MIandCambridge,England:EerdmansPublishingCo.,2002,pp.128-132.

14 Ibid.,p.130.

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.130

fulrealitiesoftheapplicationofGod’sHolyWord.CalvinunderstoodthatbytheworkoftheHolySpirit,“ThelivesofthosewhobelievedtheWordofGodwouldbetransformedbythatWord....TobelievetheWordwastolivebytheWord.”15ThethoughtsandaffectionsoftheheartsofGod’speople,whenshapedbythepowerofthewordpreached,wouldbearfruittothegloryofGod.OfthatCalvinwassure. VariousmenhavespokenofCalvin’sstyleofpreachingasfamil-iar.16Bythattheyspeakofpreachingthatcouldbeunderstoodbythecommonperson.ItwasatermusedbyCalvinhimselfquitefrequently.PreachingonEphesians5:15-18,hepointedoutthat“GodhasstoopedinsuchawaythatallofusfromthegreatesttotheleastmaybetaughtinfamiliarfashionbyhisWord.”17InasermononITimothy1:3,hesaid,“WealwaystrytomakeScripturefamiliar.”18BythatexpressionCalvinhadreferencenotonlytothepersonalnatureofhispreaching.Thatwaspartofit.Hesoughttomakethegospelmessage personal, sothatthecongregationknewthatGodwasspeakingtothem.ButCalvinalsohadinmindthelanguageheused,languagethatcouldbeunderstoodbythecommonpeople.Ofpreaching,Calvinsaid,“...letthemnotbedazzledbymen,butletthemshowthattheWordthattheycarry,thatiscommittedtothem,isliketheroyalscepterofGod,underwhichallcreaturesbowtheirheadsandbendtheirknees.”19 In this context of holding forth his efforts tomakeScripturefamiliar,hecensuredpreacherswho“babbleinrefinedlanguage.”20 Pointedlyheaddressedthismatterwhenhewrote:“...goodandfaithfulministersofGod...mustnotmakeaparadeofrhetoric,onlytogainesteemforthemselves.”21Hespokeofthisasabiblicalstandard,al-

15 Ibid.16 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.139.17 JohnCalvin,Sermons on The Epistle to the Ephesians,Edinburgh,

TheBannerofTruthTrust,1973,p.542.18 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.139.19 LeroyNixon,John Calvin, Expository Preacher,GrandRapids:Wm.

B.EerdmansPublishingCompany,1950,p.58.20 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.139.21 John Calvin, Selected Works, vol. 5, p. 203.

November2009 31

ludingtoICorinthians2:4,wherePaulwrote,“Andmyspeechandmypreachingwasnotwithenticingwordsofman’swisdom,butindemonstrationoftheSpiritandofpower.” Calvin’spulpitspeech,therefore,differentfromhisotherwritings,wasquitesimple. Hismasteryoflanguageandvocabulary,quiteevidentinhistheologicalwritings,wasadaptedinpreachingtotheignoranceofthosetowhomhepreached.Hislanguage,whilecareful,wasnotsopolished;butitwasfulloflife.TheodoreBeza,Calvin’scontemporaryandsuccessoratGeneva,saidofhim,“Everywordweighedapound.”22

Whilehislanguagewaskeptquitesimple,hedidnothesitatetousethetheologicaltermsofScripture.IfpeopletodayhavedifficultywiththelanguageofCalvin’ssermons,perhapsitismoreindicativeofageneralignoranceoftheBiblethanofafailureonCalvin’spart.Calvindidnot,normaywe,avoidthelanguageofScripture.Butheattemptedtomakeeventheweightiertermsunderstandable.Heusedillustrationsandfiguresthatwouldbeeasilyunderstood.HereisanexamplethatParkerrefersto:“Whenwomenwhoputonmake-upcomeoutintothesunandgethot,themake-upcomesoffandoneseesthewrinkles—soitiswithhypocrites.”23 The preaching of JohnCalvinwas alsomarked by intensity.Sometimes,infact,theearnestnesswithwhichhepreachedcametoexpressioninanger,whichinturndrewthecomplaintsofsome.In1548,duringatimeofratherintensecontroversyinGeneva,Calvinwas censured by theCityCouncil for a sermon inwhich, itwascharged,“Today,withgreatwrath,hepreachedthatthemagistratespermitseveral insolences.” Hewas thenordered toappearbeforetheCouncil“toexplainwhyhepreachedthus.”24ButifCalvinwereaskedtoexplaintheintensitywithwhichhepreached,hisanswerwasthis:“HowthencanweseeamortalandfeeblecreatureraisehimselfagainstthemajestyofGod,totramplealltruedoctrineunderhisfeet,andbearitpatiently?Weshouldcertainlyshowbythatthattherewas

22 Nixon, pp. 31, 34 (which quote comes fromBroadus,History of Preaching,p.120).

23 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.148.24 Parker,Oracles,p.38.

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.132

nozealforGodinus.”25Whenhesawtheneed,Calvincouldspeakinawaythatwouldshockmostpeopletoday.Butsuchatoneinhispreachingwasrare.Rather,asParkernoted, “thetenorofhispreach-ingisanurgentandhigh-mindedseriousness.”26 Hisapproachinhispulpitministrywasnotonlyevidenttothosewhosatunderhispreaching,itwasalsoclearlyexpressedbyhimanumberoftimesasparticulartextsgavehimopportunity. InasermononDeuteronomy5:23-27,Calvinpointedoutthat“nomanshalleverbeagoodministerofGod’sword,unlesshebeascholarfirst.”27ButbelongingtothatscholarshipisalsothewisdomofbeingableproperlytoapplythewordofGodtoHispeople.Itisnotenough,inexpoundingtheword,“todiscourseuponitasifitweremerehistory....TheofficeofagoodandfaithfulshepherdisnotbarelytoexpoundtheScripture,buthemustuseearnestnessandsharpness,togiveforceandvirtuetotheWordofGod.”28 SoinsistentwasCalvinuponapplyingthewordofGodtothecongregation,eveninthewayofwarningsandrebukes,admonitionsandcallstorepentance,thatinasermononIITimothy2:14-15,afterpointingoutthefollyofaphysiciansimplytellingasickmanwhatthemanwants tohearandtreatinghimaccordingly,heasks,Doeshenotthenbecomehispatient’sbutcher?“...weforsaketheserviceofGodbythismeans.AndthereforethatwedonotoffendourMaster,whomwemustserve,letusnotbeashamed,thatistosay,letusnotbegrieved,ifweseewearenotesteemed,andmenfawnnotuponus,butcastusoff....”29 Suchistheresponsibilityoftheministeroftheword.Calvinreal-izedthat“themajorityofteachers,indesiringtoyieldtothecorrupt

25 Ibid.,p.76.26 Ibid.27 JohnCalvin,Sermons on Deuteronomy,p.258.28 RonaldS.Wallace,Calvin’s Doctrine of the Word and Sacrament,

Edinburgh:OliverandBoyd,1953,p.120.29 JohnCalvin,Sermons on the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, Facsimile

of 1579 Edition,Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1983,p.802.

November2009 33

wishesoftheworld,adulteratethewordofGod.”Buthewouldnotbeoneofthem.30 InasermononJob33:1-7,inwhichCalvinhadmuchtosaynotonlyaboutpreaching,butabouthearingthepreaching,hespokeasifaddressingministers:

...whenGodgrantsusthegracetospeakinHisname,itbehoovesustoyieldalltheauthoritytoHisWord,andtoadvancetheestimationofthatWord.Butifwearesoturnedasidebylookinguntocreatures,thatwespeaknotfreelyasweoughttodo,isitnotadishonoringofGod?Ifamanissentfromanearthlyprince,andsuffersothermentoscornhim,andheplaysthegoofanddaresnotbringthemessagethatiscommittedtohim:itissucharecklesswastefulnessasisnottobepardoned.Behold,GodreceivesustoHisservice,evenuswhoarebutdustbeforeHim,evenuswhoarealtogetherunprofitable.HeputsusinhonorablecommissiontobearabroadHisWord;andHewillhaveitcarriedabroadwithauthorityandreverence.31

OfhimselfCalvinsaidinanotherplace,

WhenIexpoundHolyScripture,Imustalwaysmakethismyrule:ThatthosewhohearmemayreceiveprofitfromtheteachingIputforwardandbeedifieduntosalvation.IfIhavenotthataffection,ifIdonotprocuretheedificationofthosewhohearme,Iamasacrilege,profaningGod’sWord.... Teachingonitsownisnotsufficient,forwearecoldandindifferenttoGod’struth.Weneedtobepierced.Thepreacherhastousevehemence,sothatwemayknowthatthisisnotagame.32

Andthepeoplemustnotsay,“Ho!thatistoohardtobeborne.Yououghtnottogoonlikethat.”Thosewhocannotbeartobereprovedhadbetterlookforanotherschool-masterthanGod.Therearemanywhowillnotstandit:“What!isthisthewaytoteach?Ho!wewantto

30 Wallace,p.121.31 JohnCalvin,Sermons on Job, Facsimile of 1574 Edition,Edinburgh:

TheBannerofTruthTrust,1993,p.574.(Modernizationofthelanguageismine.sk.)

32 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,pp.11-12.

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.134

bewonbysweetness.”“Youdo?ThengoandteachGodhislessons!”Theseareoursensitivefolkwhocannotbearasinglereprooftobeof-feredtothem.Andwhy?“Ho!wewanttobetaughtinanotherstyle.”“Wellthen,gotothedevil’sschool!hewillflatteryouenough—anddestroyyou.”ButbelievershumblethemselvesandarewillingtobetreatedseverelysothattheymayprofitinGod’sschool.33

AsisevidentespeciallyfromthosesermonsrecordedduringtheyearsofintensecontroversyinGeneva,Calvinwasattimesverysharpintheapplicationofhissermons—whenthetextgaveopportunityforsuchapplication.ButasParkerpointsout,eveninthestormyyears,suchoutburstswerenotvery frequent;much lessduring themoresettledyearsofhisministryinGeneva.34 ReferencestocurrenteventsinCalvin’ssermonsarerare.Muchmorefrequentarepolemicsagainstthefalseteachingsprevalentinhisday. Butwhetherpolemicsor theoccasionalsharprebukesofthosewhowerelicentious,theserecedebeneaththegospeltenorofhispreaching. InexpoundingHolyScriptureCalvinpreached thegospel,goodnewsaimedtobuildupbelieversinthetrueknowledgeofGodinJesusChristourLord.Thatbeingsaid,JohnCalvinmaderichapplicationinhispreachingtothelivesofGod’speopleinthecongregationinGeneva.HestrovealwaystoshowtherelevanceofScripturetothepresenttime.Hedidsoprimarilybecauseheunder-stoodthathumannatureisthesameineveryage,andthereforethestrugglesthatwefacetodayarethestrugglesfacedbyGod’speopleduringthetimeswhenthevariousbooksoftheBiblewerewritten. Calvincouldpreachthewayhedid,withsuchpointedapplication,becauseheunderstoodsowelltheappallingsinfulnessofourhumannature.CalvindescribesthisdepravityinhissermononGenesis3:4-6:

...thereisnoplace,searchaswemay,wherewearenottemptedbyanumberofwickeddesires.Somewillbetemptedbyadulterywhenlookingatawoman.Whatisthesourceofthiswantongaze?Others

33 Ibid.,p.14.34 Ibid.,p.118.

November2009 35

willnotbeabletolookatsomethingbeautiful,atmeadows,orlands,orfields,orpossessions,withoutimmediatelybeingtemptedtosay,“Iwishthatweremine,”or“Whydoesthatnotbelongtome?”Thatishowoureyesoffendus,somebysensuallust,othersbygreed.Inshort, all ourgazes are infected andwecannot lookhereor therewithoutsinning.Thesameistrueforourears.WhateverwehearwilldrawustowardevilandenticeusandprovidesomeopportunitytooffendGod.Thatishowalloursensesareperverted. Letusnowconsiderhowthathappens.Doestheevillieintheeyesandtheears? Notatall! Itssourceismoreremote. Thatisbecausetheheartisinfectedandcorruptedsothatalloursensesareonlymessengersofwhatishiddeninsideuntilitmanifestsitself.Inthisway,becausewearetooliabletobedeceivedandalluredbytheworld’sandSatan’senticementstoeveryiniquity,letusknowthatthathappensbecauseoursoulsarepervertedandsouncleanthattheynecessarilyandclearlyshowtheirfruitsandeffectsineverythingandeverywhere.35

CalvinneverwithheldwhathesawaspertinentandnecessaryapplicationsofGod’sword.Buttheonemaninthecongregationtowhichall hissermonsweredirectedwashimself.Rarelydidhespeakto thecongregationwith thesecondpersonpronoun,you. Almostalwaysdidhesayweorus,includinghimselfinthecongregationtowhomthepreachingwasdirected. Moreover,Calvin showed inhis sermonsbyhiscontinualuseofthepronounwethatheplacedhimselfundertheauthorityofthewordofGodasmuchashedidthecongregation.SostronglydidCalvinconsiderthenecessityoftheministerleadingbyexampleinhissubmissiontothewordofGod,thathedeclaredwithpassion,“Itwerebetterforhimtobreakhisneckgoingupintothepulpit,ifhedoesnottakepainstobethefirsttofollowGod.”36

The Theological Foundation of Calvin’s Preaching ThefoundationofCalvin’spreachingwasitsdecidedlyGod-

35 JohnCalvin,Sermons on Genesis, Chapters 1:1 - 11:4,Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,2009,pp.240-241.

36 Parker,Oracles,p.60.

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.136

centeredfocus.Inmanycirclestoday,preachingisdefinedbysto-rytellingandentertainment.Inourday,thechargegiventomanypreachersgoessomethinglikethis:“Whenyoucangetpeopletoattendchurch,keepthemcomfortable;keepthementertained;keepthem interested;anddon’tkeep them long.” Tocompare suchaconceptionofpreachingtothatofJohnCalvinwillmarkthesharp-estantithesis.TheGod-centeredfocusofCalvin’spreachingisfarfromtheman-centeredfocusofentertainmentandhumanpleasure.Thetranslator’sprefacetotherecentlypublishedSermons on Gen-esispointsoutthatinthe49sermonsofthatbookthefear of God ismentioned226timesinoneformoranother,withsinmentionedsome229times.37DominantthoughtsthoseareinCalvin!Theyarenotmattersforentertainment. ThepreachingofJohnCalvinwasthepreachingofamanwholivedintheconsciousnessofthemajesticholinessofGod,whospeakstousinthepreachingofthegospel.Thatistosay,theimportanceJohnCalvingavepreachingwasdeterminedbyhistheologyofpreaching.CalvinrecognizedfromScripturethattheSpiritofGodsoworksinthepreachingofthegospelthatChrist,asitwere,standsinthemidstofHis people speaking to them. Ronald S.Wallace, inCalvin’s Doctrine of the Word and Sacrament,summarizesCalvin’sviewthisway:“ThroughthepreachingoftheWordbyHisministers,ChristthereforegivesHissacramentalpresenceinthemidstofHisChurch,impartstomenthegracewhichtheWordpromises,andestablishesHisKingdomovertheheartsofHishearers.ThepreachingoftheWordbyaministeristhegraciousformbehindwhichGodincomingneartomenveilsthatinHimselfwhichmancannotbeartobeholddirectly.”38 Thatisthecase,ofcourse,onlyinsofarasthepreacherproclaimstheholyandauthoritativewordofGod.Thatmakesthecallingofthepreacheraweightycallingindeed!ThepreachermustfaithfullyexpoundGod’sword!Thatbeingestablished,however,thepowerofpreaching isnot tobeascribed to theminister,nor to theworditself. Nomatter that the sermonbeamost faithfulexpositionof

37 JohnCalvin,Sermons on Genesis,p.x.38 Wallace,p.84.

November2009 37

HolyScriptureproclaimedmosteloquently,preachingitselfremainspowerless—exceptbythesovereignandfreeworkoftheHolySpirit,bywhosepoweralonethepreachingismadeeffective. Nowonder,then,thatJohnCalvincouldpreachwithsuchbold-ness!Nowondersuchfervencymarkedhispreaching!Hespokenothisown,butGod’sword.Hecamenotinhisownpower,butwiththepoweroftheHolySpirit.HecamewiththeconfidenceofPaul’sconfessioninIICorinthians10:4-5:“Fortheweaponsofourwarfarearenotcarnal,butmightythroughGodtothepullingdownofstrongholds;Castingdownimaginations,andeveryhighthingthatexaltethitselfagainsttheknowledgeofGod,andbringingintocaptivityeverythoughttotheobedienceofChrist.” Calvinenteredthepulpitthereforewithsingularfocus:toproclaimGod’swordinallitsauthority.HewasamessengerwithamessagefromtheKingofkings.Asamessenger,hehimselfstoodundertheauthorityofthatword.TheveryfactthathisministrywastoexpoundGod’swordfilledhimwithaprofoundreverenceforthetaskbeforehim.39Thatcametoexpressioninhispreaching.Thereisnothingwishy-washyaboutCalvin’ssermons.Hedoesn’tdarestandbeforethecongregationwithhisownopinions,saying,“Ithink;Ithink.”Hedidn’tstandbeforethemasabeggar,pleadingwiththemtohearhim.Heproclaimed,“ThussaiththeLord!”Hedidsowiththefullauthor-ityoftheofficeheboreandparticularlyofthewordhepreached. InconsiderationofHebrews4:12,Calvinsaid,“IfanyonethinksthatwhentheWordofGodispreachedtheairisbeingbeatenwithanemptysound,heisquitewrong.Itisalivingrealityandfullofhiddenenergywhichleavesnopartofmanuntouched.”40Thisistruenotbecauseofanypowerinthepreacherhimself,butbecausethesameSpiritofGodwhogavethemessageassuresthatthemessageaccomplishesthepurposewhereuntoGodsentit.CalvinexplainedinasermononIITimothy1:1-2:“...GodworksbyHiswordpreacheduntous,thatitisnotabarevoicethatsoundsonlyintheair,andsovanishesaway: butGodputs to it thevirtueofHisHolySpirit....Nodoubt,ifwecometothetemple,weshallnotonlyhearamortal

39 Old,p.132.40 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.30

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.138

manspeak,butweshallfeelthatGodspeakstooursouls,thatHeisMaster,andthatbyHissecretpower.Hetouchesusinsuchaway,thatthevoiceofmanentersintous,andprofitsusinsuchawaythatwearerestoredandnourished.”41 PreachingisthemeansbywhichGodtakesusintoHisownfellow-ship.ThusCalvin’sviewofpreachingfitshiscovenantaltheologyofworship,amatteremphasizedbyDr.Old.42 WorshipistheexpressionofthecovenantrelationshipbetweenGodandHispeople.“Itisinworshipthatthecovenantisestablished,maintained,nourished,andrenewed.InworshipweexperienceGodasourGodandourselvesasHispeople....InthereadingandpreachingoftheScriptures...wearenourishedinthecovenantrelationship.”43 BecauseGodreceivesintoHiscovenantfellowshiponlythosewhoareinChristJesus,preachinghasatwofoldeffect.Iteithersoftensorhardenstheheart.Theheareriseithersavedbythatpreaching,orbroughtundercondemnation.“TheGospelisneverpreachedinvain,buthasinvariablyaneffect,eitherforlifeordeath.”44“SincetheWordisthesceptreofChrist’sKingdom‘itcannotberejectedwithouttreatingHimwithopencontempt....NocrimeismoreoffensivetoGodthancontemptofHisWord.’”45“WhenwedonottakeHisWordseriously, it isasignthatweattributenomoreimportancetoGodthantoabarkingdog.”46ForthatreasonCalvinalsocarefullyandrepeatedlycalledthecongregation’sattentiontotheircallingbeforethatwordpreached.

The Congregation and the Preaching WhatdidCalvinhavetosayabouttheattitudeanddutyofthecongregationinregardtopreaching?

41 Calvin,Sermons on Timothy,p.665.(Modernizationofthelanguageismine.sk.)

42 Old,p.133.43 Old,pp.133-134.44 Wallace,p.93.45 Wallace,p.94.46 JeanCalvin,Sermons on Jeremiah,Lewiston/Queenston/Lampeter:

TheEdwinMellenPress,1990,p.201.

November2009 39

Foronething,God’speopleseekthatpreaching,desireit,andattendtoitateveryopportunity.“Calvin,inoneofhissermons,ap-pealstothosewhothinktheministertoolongifhepreachesforhalfanhour,andareyetwillingtosoaktheirearsnightanddayin‘fables,lies,andthingsofnoprofit,’toconsiderhownecessaryandgloriousathingitistolistentothewordthatproclaimsthelengthandbreadthandheightanddepthoftheloveofChrist.”47 InasermononJob29:18-25,hespokeofthefact thatnooneneedstobetaughttocovetthethingsnecessaryforthebody.Everymandesirestoeatanddrink.Whatistobesaid,then,aboutthosewhodespisefoodfortheirsouls?“Butweseesomanywretches,”Calvinsaid,“astheypassnottohearanything:andweseeothersthatcannotbesatisfiedwithdespisingthedoctrine,buttheyalsohateitandutterlyabsentthemselvesfromit,asmuchastheycan.Anddosuchfolkdeservetobecountedmen?”Hisansweris:No,theyareworsethanbeasts.48 God’speopleknowthattheycannotlivewithoutthewordoftheirSavior.Thustheyapproachthatwordwithattentiveness.Calvindidnotalwaysobservethatinthecongregation.HeaddressedalsothatweaknessinthesermontowhichIjustreferred.Hesaid,

...inthegospelwehaveinfinitetreasuresofwisdomandknowledge.GodshowsHimselffamiliarlyuntous;Hewillhaveustobefilled,even thoroughlyfilledwith all perfectionofHis doctrine; andHegivesussoclearandcertainunderstandingascanbepossible.Andyet,forallthis,whereisthereverencethatJobspeaksof?whereisthedesire?whereistheamiableobedience?Naytothecontrary,weseescornfulness,asIhavetouchedalready.Again,whenthedoc-trineispreached,howmanyaretherethatgiveattentiveearuntoit?...thereareveryfewfolkinwhichthereverenceistobefoundthatisspokenofhere.Andasforconformingthemselvesfullyuntoit,thatisaveryrarevirtue.49

LetGod’speoplehearwithattentivenessthewordoftheirAl-

47 Wallace,p.119.48 Calvin,Job,p.504.(Modernizationofthelanguageismine.sk.)49 Ibid.,p.505.(Modernizationofthelanguageismine.sk.)

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.140

mightyKing.Indeed,“allthepioustrulyfeelhowmuchthisfamiliarsortofteachingisneeded.”50 Secondly,theircallingbeginswithproperpreparation.Inorderforonetobeintheproperphysicalcondition,itisimportantthatheobservecarefullytheSaturdaynightcurfewandgetthenecessarysleeptocomebeforethepreachingwithclearmindandfullatten-tion.

Calvinfrequentlyadvisedthepeoplenottoeattoomuchbreakfastbeforecomingtothesermon.Butmostofthedifficultieswithrespecttothephysicalconditionofthecongregationcameattheafternoonsermon.“Thosethreedrunkardsbackthere,”saidCalvinupononeoccasion,“mightjustaswellhavestayedinthetavern,forallthegoodtheyaregettingfromlisteningtotheWordofGod.”SundayafternoondinnerswerealsoafrequentcauseofindifferencetotheWord.“HowcananymanprofitfromtheWordwhenhisbellyissofullofwineandmeatthatittakesallofhiseffortjusttostayawake?”51

Thirdly,thecongregationhasacallingtoreceivethatpreachingwithhumble submission to theauthorityofGod’sword, carefullydiscerningtheapplicationofGod’struthtotheirownlives.

WhenwecometohearthesermonortakeuptheBible,wemustnothavethefoolisharroganceofthinkingthatweshalleasilyunderstandeverythingwehearorread.Butwemustcomewithreverence;wemustwaitentirelyuponGod,knowingthatweneedtobetaughtbyHisHolySpirit,andthatwithoutHimwecannotunderstandanythingthatisshownusinHisWord.52

InasermononIITimothy3:16-17,Calvinsaid,“...God’sWorddeservessuchreverencethateachpersonshallrangehimselfbeneathitandlistentoitpeaceablyandwithoutcontradicting.”Hegoeson.“Tosumitup,St.Paulherepronouncesthatmenmustnottakeout

50 JohnCalvin,Institutes of the Christian Religion,Philadelphia:TheWestminsterPress,1960,vol.2,IV.1.5,p.1018.

51 Nixon,pp.65-66.52 Wallace,p.103.

November2009 41

partsandbitsthattheyapproveofandwhatmeetstheirfancyinHolyScripture.Withoutexceptiontheyshouldconcludethat,sinceGodhas spoken inhisLawand inhisProphets, theymustkeep to thewhole.”53 Yet,eventhoughtheauthorityofthewordofGodisabsolute,thepreachingdoesnotdemandablind,unreasoningobedience.God’speoplearealwaystoputtothetestthesermonstheyhear.Thecrite-rionbywhichtheyjudgethosesermonsisnottheirownopinionofwhatthosesermonsoughttoincludeornot.ButtheyaretobelikethebelieversinBerea,ofwhomtheapostlewroteinActs17:11that“theyreceivedthewordwithallreadinessofmind,andsearchedthescripturesdaily,whetherthosethingswereso.”ThecongregationhasasuretestimonythatwhattheyhearinthepreachingisthewordofGodwhenitisfoundinharmonywithScriptureitself.Whensuchisthecase,thepreacherhimself“maybetheleastimportantofmen,aman‘contemptibleastotheflesh,’yetifheispreachingpuredoctrine,hiswordsmustbereceivedwithreverenceandobedience.”54Forheisanambassador,speakinginGod’snameanddeclaringGod’swill. Uponsuchpreachingthesalvationandsafetyofthechurchde-pend.CalvinwrotetotheProtectorSomersetonOctober22,1548:“For there is somedanger thatyoumayseenogreatprofit fromall thereformationwhichyoushallhavebroughtabout,howeversoundandgodlyitmayhavebeen,unlessthispowerfulinstrumentofpreachingbedevelopedmoreandmore.Itisnotsaidwithoutameaning,thatJesusChristshaltsmitetheearthwiththerodofhismouth,andwiththebreathofhislipsshallheslaythewicked(Isaiah11:4).”55

JohnCalvinstoodbeforethedauntingtaskofseeingtoitthattheReformationwasnotmerelyamovementagainsttheRomanCatholicChurchandhererrors,stilllessapoliticalorsocialmovement.TheReformationstoodforthegloryofGodandthecauseofHisgospel.SowithhisunderstandingofthewordofGodandthepowerofpreach-ing,CalvinwascompelledtoseethatthechildrenoftheReformation

53 Parker,Calvin’s Preaching,p.9.54 Parker,Oracles,p.62.55 Calvin,Selected Works,vol.5,p.204.

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.142

understoodtheirfoundationinthetruthofGod’sword,andalsosawwhatitmeanstoliveasReformedChristians. Howgreatistheneedforsuchpreachinginourday!MaytheHolySpiritprosperusinthis! l

Bibliography:

Beveridge,HenryandBonnet,Jules(eds.).Selected Works of John Calvin, Tracts and Letters, vol.5.Albany,OR:AgesSoftware.

Calvin,Jean.Sermons on Jeremiah.Lewiston/Queenston/Lampeter:TheEdwinMellenPress,1990.

Calvin,John.Sermons on Deuteronomy, Facsimile of 1583 Edition. Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1987.

Calvin,John.Sermons on Genesis, Chapters 1 - 11.Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,2009.

Calvin,John.Sermons on Job, Facsimile of 1574 Edition.Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1993.

Calvin,John.Sermons on 2 Samuel, Chapters 1 - 13.Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1992.

Calvin,John.Sermons on the Beatitudes.Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,2006.

Calvin,John.Sermons on the Epistle to the Ephesians.Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1973.

Calvin,John.Sermons on the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, Facsimile of 1579 Edition.Edinburgh:TheBannerofTruthTrust,1983.

Dargan,EdwinCharles.A History of Preaching,vol.1.NewYork:A.C.Armstrong&Son,1905.

Lawson,StevenJ.The Expository Genius of John Calvin. Orlando,FL:ReformationTrustPublishing,2007.

Nixon,Leroy.John Calvin, Expository Preacher.GrandRapids:Wm.B.EerdmansPublishingCompany,1950.

Old,HughesOliphant.The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church, vol.4,The Age of Refor-mation.GrandRapids,MIandCambridge,England:EerdmansPublishingCo.,2002.

November2009 43

Parker,T.H.L. Calvin’s Preaching. Louisville:Westminster/JohnKnoxPress,1992.

Parker,T.H.L.The Oracles of God: An Introduction to the Preach-ing of John Calvin.LondonandRedhill,England:LutterworthPress,1947.

Selderhuis,HermanJ.John Calvin, A Pilgrim’s Life.DownersGrove,IL:IVPAcademic,2009.

Wallace,RonaldS.Calvin’s Doctrine of the Word and Sacrament. Edinburgh:OliverandBoyd,1953.

CalvinthePreacher


Vol.43,No.144

Calvin on Justification: Considering the Judgment Day

with Singular DelightRev. Angus Stewart

Approach and Orientation RightfromtheveryfirsttimethatIreadJohnCalvin’sInstitutes of the Christian Religion,Iwasdeeplystruckbyespeciallyonethinginhistreatmentofjustification:hisrepeatedandforcefulcalltoconsiderourselvesbeforetheheavenlyjudgmentseatofAlmightyGod. Allare,orshouldbe,awareofthetheologicalissues.Doesjustifi-cationmean“makerighteous”or“reckonrighteous”?Isjustificationtheinfusionofrighteousnessortheimputationofrighteousness?Isjustificationbyfaithandworksorbyfaithalone?AsCalvinputsit,thesethingsarenot“frivolouswordbattles,”but this isa“seriousmatter,”forwedonotstandbeforea“humancourt”butbeforethe“heavenlytribunal.”1 Thisputsintoproperperspectiveourcontroversyoverjustifica-tionwithRome,withecumenically-mindedProtestantswhowouldbringusbacktoRome,withtheNewPerspectiveonPaul,withtheFederalVision,andwiththosewhoclaimthatCalvin’sdoctrineofjustificationisnotthatofMartinLuther.2

1 JohnCalvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion,ed.JohnT.McNeill,trans. FordLewisBattles, 2 vols. (Philadelphia:TheWestminsterPress,1960),3.12.1,pp.754,755.

2 Thesefive groups are, of course, notmutually exclusive.Worksadvocating thesehereticalviewsare toomany to listhere,but itmaybeworthmentioningatleastoneinfluentialandrecentbookthatseekstodriveawedgebetweenCalvinandLutheronjustification:PeterA.Lillback,The Binding of God: Calvin’s Role in the Development of Covenant Theology (GrandRapids:Baker,2001).

November2009 45

Listen toCalvin’s sharpwarnings against playing intellectualgameswithjustification!

Intheshadycloistersoftheschoolsanyonecaneasilyandread-ilyprattleaboutthevalueofworksinjustifyingmen.Butwhenwe come before the presence of Godwemust put away suchamusements!3 …theseleisuredrabbis…disputethesemattersundertheshadeineasychairs.ButwhenthatsupremeJudgesitsinhisjudgmentseatsuchwindyopinionswillhavetovanish.Itisthisthatwehadtoseek:whatconfidencewecanbringtohisjudgmentseatinourdefense,notwhatwecantalkaboutintheschoolsandcorners.4

Whataneloquentandpowerfulappeal, callingus to focusonGod’smajesticjustice!Wemustnot,anddonot,merely“talk”or“prattle”aboutjustificationinthisarticle.

Tothisquestion,Iinsist,wemustapplyourmindifwewouldprofit-ablyinquireconcerningtruerighteousness[i.e.,justification]:Howshallwe[i.e.,Calvin,you,andI]replytotheHeavenlyJudgewhenhecallsustoaccount?LetusenvisageforourselvesthatJudge,notasourmindsnaturallyimaginehim,butasheisdepictedforusinScripture:bywhosebrightnessthestarsaredarkened[Job3:9];bywhosestrengththemountainsaremelted;bywhosewraththeearthisshaken[cf.Job9:5-6];whosewisdomcatchesthewiseintheircraftiness[Job5:13];besidewhosepurityallthingsaredefiled[cf.Job25:5];whose righteousnessnoteven theangelscanbear [cf.Job4:18];whomakesnottheguiltymaninnocent[cf.Job9:20];whose vengeancewhen once kindled penetrates to the depths ofhell[Deut.32:22;cf.Job26:6].Letusbeholdhim,Isay,sittinginjudgmenttoexaminethedeedsofmen:Whowillstandconfidentbeforehisthrone?“Who...candwellwiththedevouringfire?”askstheprophet.“Who...candwellwitheverlastingburnings?Hewhowalksrighteouslyandspeaksthetruth”[Is.33:14-15p.],etc.Butletsuchaone,whoeverheis,comeforward. Nay, thatresponsecausesnoonetocomeforward.For,onthecontrary,aterriblevoice

3 Calvin,Institutes, 3.12.1,p.754. 4 Calvin, Institutes,3.14.15,p.782.

CalvinonJustification


Vol.43,No.146

resounds:“Ifthou,OLord,shouldstmarkiniquities,Lord,whoshallstand?”[Ps.130:3;129:3,Vg.].5

Thisalonegivesustherightapproachandorientationtothetruthofjustification.Allofus,ofourselves,standnakedandexposedbeforetheholyGod.“Notonesparkofgood”isfoundinus“fromthetopof[our]headtothesolesofourfeet,”writesCalvin,echoingIsaiah1:6.6HowcanwepossiblystandinGod’ssight?YouandI? Theanswer, theonlyanswer, is justificationby faithalone, inChristalone,bygracealone,tothegloryofGodalone,accordingtoScripturealone.ThisistheBible’steaching;thisisCalvin’sdoctrine;thisistheunitedtestimonyoftheReformationandallofitscreeds,and this is theonly truegospel that savesusmiserableoffenders.Thisisthegospelwebelieve,confess,andsufferforaschildrenoftheReformation,asCalvinists,andasfollowersofourLordJesusChrist.Wewitnesstothetruthofjustificationfortheedificationandreformationofthechurchandfortheconversionofunbelievers. FurthertounderscorethesignificanceofjustificationforCalvin,weshallconsiderstatementsfromfourofhismostinfluentialwritings,arrangedhereinchronologicalorder.

Reply to Sadoleto InStrasburginSeptember1539,Calvin’sreplytotheRomanCatholicCardinalJacopoSadoleto,BishopofCarpentras,waspub-lished.Calvin,alongwithWilliamFarelandElieCourault(anold,blindpreacher),hadbeenexpelled fromGeneva theyearbefore.This left something of a religious vacuum inGeneva.CardinalSadoleto,upontheurgingofhisco-religionists,soughttoexploit

5 Calvin, Institutes,3.12.1,p.755.Atthestartofhismagnumopus,theFrenchReformer states that eachmanmust “raise [his] thoughts toGod”inheavenandHisjudgment,inordertogaina“clearknowledgeofhimself”andsobe“convincedof[his]ownunrighteousness,foulness,folly,andimpurity.”Otherwise,astotallydepravedsinners,“beingquitecontentwithourownrighteousness,wisdom,andvirtue,weflatterourselvesmostsweetly,andfancyourselvesallbutdemigods”(1.1.2,pp.37-38).

6 Calvin,Institutes, 3.14.1,p.769.

November2009 47

thisbywritingtheGenevansacunningletterinordertowinthembacktoRome. Calvin’sresponseincludesthefollowingverysignificantlines:

You[i.e.,CardinalSadoleto],inthefirstplace,touchuponjustifica-tionbyfaith,thefirstandkeenestsubjectofcontroversybetweenus.Isthisaknottyanduselessquestion?Wherevertheknowledgeofitistakenaway,thegloryofChristisextinguished,religionabolished,theChurchdestroyed,andthehopeofsalvationutterlyoverthrown.Thatdoctrine,then,thoughofthehighestmoment,wemaintainthatyou[i.e.,SadoletoandtheRomanCatholics]havenefariouslyeffacedfromthememoryofmen.7

Noticeseveralthingsfromthisquotation.JustificationwasthefirstdoctrinethatSadoletoattacked;likewise,itwasthefirstdoctrinethatCalvindefended.NowondertheGenevanReformercallsit“thefirstandkeenestsubjectofcontroversybetweenus.”Insteadofitbeingmerely“aknottyanduselessquestion,”Calvindeclaresthatitis“ofthehighestmoment,”forwithoutit,fourthingsnecessarilyfollow:Christ’sgloryisextinguished,religionisabolished,thechurchisdestroyed,andthehopeofsalvationisutterlyoverthrown.This,chargestheReformer,ispreciselywhattheRomanchurchhasdoneby“nefariouslyeffac[ing][thetruthofjustification]fromthememoryofmen.”8 Ratherthan“enteruponafulldiscussion”ofjustification,CalvinpointstheRomancardinalto“theCatechismwhichImyselfdrewupfortheGenevese,whenIheldtheofficeofPastoramongthem.”ThismanualforinstructionforthechildrenoftheGenevanchurch,Calvinavers,“wouldsilenceyou.”9

7 JohnCalvinandJacopoSadoleto,A Reformation Debate: Sadoleto’s Letter to the Genevans and Calvin’s Reply,ed.JohnC.Olin(GrandRapids:Baker,1976),p.66.

8 Elsewhere,CalvintracesRome’soppositiontoitsdiabolicalsource(cf.Eph.6:12):“Satanhaslabouredatnothingmoreassiduouslythantoextinguish,ortosmother,thegratuitousjustificationoffaith”(Commentary on Genesis 15:6).

9 Calvin,A Reformation Debate,p.66.WewillconsidersomeoftherichteachingoftheGenevancatechismattheendofthisarticle.



Vol.43,No.148

Inhisnextparagraph,however,ReformedapologistCalvindoes“brieflyexplain…howwespeakonthissubject.”

[1]First,webidamanbeginbyexamininghimself,andthisnotinasuperficialandperfunctorymanner,buttocitehisconsciencebeforethetribunalofGod,andwhensufficientlyconvincedofhisiniquity,toreflectonthestrictnessofthesentencepronounceduponallsinners.Thuscon-foundedandamazedathismisery,heisprostratedandhumbledbeforeGod;and,castingawayallself-confidence,groansasifgivenuptofinalperdition.[2]ThenweshowthattheonlyhavenofsafetyisinthemercyofGod,asmanifestedinChrist,inwhomeverypartofoursalvationiscomplete.Asallmankindare,inthesightofGod,lostsinners,weholdthatChrististheironlyrighteousness,since,byHisobedience,Hehaswipedoffourtransgressions;byHissacrifice,appeasedthedivineanger;byHisblood,washedawayoursins;byHiscross,borneourcurse;andbyHisdeath,madesatisfactionforus.WemaintainthatinthiswaymanisreconciledinChristtoGodtheFather,bynomeritofhisown,bynovalueofworks,butbygratuitousmercy.WhenweembraceChristbyfaith,andcome,asitwere,intocommunionwithHim,thisweterm,afterthemannerofScripture,therighteousness of faith.10

WhatapowerfulandmovingpresentationofjustificationinChristalone,bygracealone,andthroughfaithalone[2]!WealsonotethatitbeginswithwhatissomethingofahallmarkofCalvin’streatmentofjustification:thecalltoexamineone’s“consciencebeforethetribunalofGod”[1].

Commentary on Romans ThenextyearinStrasburginMarch1540,Calvinpublishedhisfirstbiblicalcommentary,significantlyonthatkeybookoftheRef-ormation,Romans. On the veryfirst pageof “TheArgument” (an introduction tothebook),Calvinstates,“Themainsubjectofthewholeepistle[ofRomansis]justificationbyfaith.”11InCalvin’sfineoverviewofthe

10 Calvin,A Reformation Debate,pp.66-67.11 JohnCalvin,Commentary on Romans,p.xxix.AllcitationsofCal-

vin’scommentariesarefromthe22-volumeBakeredition(repr.1993).

November2009 49

sixteenchaptersofRomans,justificationisprominent.12Moreover,Calvindeclares,“Whenanyonegainsaknowledgeofthisepistle[andremember,hehasjustaffirmedthatjustificationbyfaithisits‘mainsubject’],hehasanentranceopenedtohimtoall themosthiddentreasuresofScripture.”13 Inotherwords,withagraspofRomans,includingitskeysubjectofjustification,the“mosthiddentreasures”ofthewholeofScripturelieopen.Therefore,withoutagraspofRomansandjustification,theBibleisaclosedbook.Thiscertainlyunderscoresthesignificanceofthisbiblicalbookandthisfundamentaldoctrine! Movingfrom“TheArgument”tothecommentaryproper,Calvinidentifies“justif[ication]byfaiththroughthemercyofGodalone”as “the principal point or themain hinge of the first part of thisEpistle.”14 ThisishowtheFrenchReformersummarizesRomans1:1-3:8:“NowtheApostlehadsummonedallmankinduniversally[i.e.,JewsandGentiles]beforethetribunalofGod, thathemight includeallunderthesamecondemnation.”15

AftermanyOldTestamentquotationsprovingman’s“unrighteous-ness”(Rom.3:10-18),16CalvincommentsonPaul’spurpose:

That every mouth may be stopped, &c.;thatis,thateveryevasionmaybecutoff,andeveryoccasionforexcuse.Itisametaphortakenfromcourtsoflaw,wheretheaccused,ifhehasanythingtopleadasalawfuldefence,demandsleavetospeak,thathemightclearhimselffromthethingslaidtohischarge;butifheisconvictedbyhisownconscience,heissilent,andwithoutsayingawordwaitsforhiscondemnation,beingevenalreadybyhisownsilencecondemned.17

12 Calvin,Commentary on Romans,pp.xxix-xxxvii.13 Calvin,Commentary on Romans,p.xxix.Calvinmakesaverysimilar

remarkinhis“EpistleDedicatory”tohisGermanfriendSimonGrynaeus(p.xxiv).

14 Calvin,Commentary on Romans (1:17). By“thefirst part of thisEpistle,”CalvinseemstobethinkingofRomans1-5(cf.pp.xxix-xxx).

15 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(3:9).16 Calvin,Commentary on Romans (3:10).17 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(3:19).



Vol.43,No.150

ThispavesthewayforPaul’sgreatstatementonjustificationinRomans3:21-28.Calvinprovidesasummary,usingthefourAristo-telian“causes”:

Thereis,perhaps,nopassageinthewholeScripturewhichillustratesinamorestrikingmannertheefficacyofhis[i.e.,Christ’s]righteousness;foritshowsthatGod’smercyistheefficientcause,thatChristwithhisbloodisthemeritoriouscause,thattheformalortheinstrumentalcauseisfaithintheword,andthatmoreover,thefinalcauseisthegloryofthedivinejusticeandgoodness.18

Afterdevelopingthesubjectofrighteousnessbyfaithinhisex-positionofapostolicteachinginRomans4,19CalvinnotesthatPaul“beginstoillustrate”justificationbyits“effects”(Rom.5:1-11);indeed“thewholeofthischapter[i.e.,Romans5]istakenupwithamplifi-cations,whicharenolesscalculatedtoexplainthantoconfirm”thisfundamentalChristiantruth. “PeacewithGod”or“tranquillityofconscience”isimpossiblewithoutjustification,foritis“thepeculiarfruitoftherighteousnessoffaith.”20Other“effects”and“amplifications,”which“explain”and“confirm”justification,include“access”toGod,“finalperseverance,”andthebeatificvision(“whenweshallseeGodfacetoface[and]shallbelikehim”),21aswellas“glorying”intribulationsandgrowingin“patience,”“hope,”and“love.”22

18 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(3:24);cf.Institutes3.14.17,pp.783-784;3.14.21,p.787.Sometimes,Calvingivesonlythreeofthe“causes,”omittingthe“finalcause”(Commentary on Romans3:22).

19 InhisexpositionofRomans4,CalvinnotesthatChristianbaptism,whichis“asigninstituted”inthe“place”ofcircumcision,“hadtheofficeofsealing,andasitwereofratifying,therighteousnessoffaith.”Indeed,justificationandsanctificationare“thegeneralbenefitsof[both]sacraments”as“sacredsymbols,”“instruments”and“testimonies”which“confirm”“theelect”inthis“twofoldgrace”(Commentary on Romans4:11).

20 Calvincontinues,“NoonecanstandboldlybeforeGod,buthewhoreliesonagratuitousreconciliation”(Commentary on Romans5:1).

21 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(5:2).22 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(5:3,4,5).Also,forCalvin,“life

November2009 51

CalvinsummarizesPaul’sargumentforGod’scertainpreserva-tionofallHisreconciledpeopleinRomans5:6-11:“Theimportofthewholeis—sinceChristhasattainedrighteousnessforsinnersbyhisdeath,muchmoreshallheprotectthem,beingnowjustified,fromdestruction.”23 The second half ofRomans 5—verses 12-21, on the parallelbetweenAdam’ssinandChrist’srighteousness—containsmore“am-plifications”explainingandconfirmingjustification:

He[i.e.,Paul]nowbeginstoenlargeonthesamedoctrine,bycom-paringwith itwhat isof anoppositecharacter. For sinceChristcametoredeemusfromthecalamityintowhichAdamhadfallen,andhadprecipitatedallhisposteritywithhim,wecannotseewithsomuchclearnesswhatwehaveinChrist,asbyhavingwhatwehavelostinAdamsetbeforeus,thoughallthingsonbothsidesarenotsimilar.24

In his commentary onRomans 6-7,which chapters dealwithsanctification, theFrenchReformer is at pains to stress that “theywhoimaginethatgratuitousrighteousnessisgivenusbyhim,apartfromnewnessoflife,shamefullyrendChristasunder”“forthesetwothings[i.e.,justificationandsanctification]areconnectedtogetherbyanindissolubleknot.”25“Thestateofthecaseisreallythis,—thatthefaithfulareneverreconciledtoGodwithoutthegiftofregeneration[i.e.,sanctification];nay,weareforthisendjustified,—thatwemayafterwardsserveGodinholinessoflife.”26

proceeds from justification” (Commentary on Romans 5:18) andChrist’s“cloth[ing]uswithhisownrighteousness”isthe“necessary”legalgroundfortheholyGodto“love”us(Commentary on Romans 4:3).InhisInstitutes, CalvinstatesthattheLord’speople“havetheirsinsburiedandarejustifiedbeforeGodbecause,ashehatessin,hecanloveonlythosewhomhehasjustified”(3.11.11,p.740).Justificationisthewayinwhichweare“receivedintofriendship”and“fellowship”withGod(3.14.6,p.773).

23 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(5:8,9).24 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(5:12).25 Calvin,Commentary on Romans (6:1,4).26 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(6:2).



Vol.43,No.152

Itwill suffice simply tomention a fewother passages in theremainder ofCalvin’s commentary onRomans that highlight thesignificanceofjustification. InhisexpositionofRomans8,Calvinaffirms,“Thefirstandthechiefconsolationofthegodlyinadversities,istobefullypersuadedofthepaternalkindnessofGod.”Wehavethisconfidencebecause“Godjustifies”usand“Christisouradvocate.”Thus“thefaithfulareveryfarfrombeinginvolvedinthedangerofcondemnation,sinceChristbyexpiatingtheirsinshasanticipatedthejudgmentofGod,andbyhisintercessionnotonlyabolishesdeath,butalsocoversoursinsinoblivion,sothattheycomenottoanaccount.”27Calvincontinues:

Ithencefollows,thatwhenanyoneseekstocondemnus,henotonlyseekstorendervoidthedeathofChrist,butalsocontendswiththatunequalledpowerwithwhichtheFatherhashonouredhim,andwhowiththatpowerconferredonhimsupremeauthority.Thissogreatanassurance,whichdarestotriumphoverthedevil,death,sin,andthegatesofhell,oughttolodgedeepintheheartsofallthegodly;forourfaithisnothing,exceptwefeelassuredthatChristisours,andthattheFatherisinhimpropitioustous.28

DespisingChristandjustificationinHimalonewasthegroundsuponwhichIsrael,God’sancientcovenantpeople,was“deservedlyrejected.”29ThissupportsLuther’scontentionthatjustificationis“thearticleofastandingorafallingchurch”(articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae).Itisthisserious! WhenIsraelsought“tobejustifiedby...works,”it“shamefullymutilatedthelawofGod.”This“falseinterpret[ation]”and“wickedabuseofthelawwasjustlyreprehendedintheJews”who“rejected[the]soul[oftheMosaiclaw]andseizedonthedeadbodyofthelet-ter.”Thisisthecase,aversCalvin,

becausethelawhadbeengivenforthisend,—toleadusasbythehandtoanotherrighteousness:nay,whateverthelawteaches,whateverit

27 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(8:33).28 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(8:34).29 Calvin,Commentary on Romans (9:32).

November2009 53

commands,whateveritpromises,hasalwaysareferencetoChristasitsmainobject;andhenceallitspartsoughttobeappliedtohim.Butthiscannotbedone,exceptwe,beingstrippedofallrighteous-ness,andconfoundedwiththeknowledgeofoursin,seekgratuitousrighteousnessfromhimalone.30

Calvin’s remarks at the great turning point in this epistle—chapters1-11beingdoctrinalandchapters12-16beingdoctrinal—aresignificant.AttheverystartofhiscommentsbeforethoseonRomans12:1,hewrites,

AfterhavinghandledthosethingsnecessaryfortheerectionofthekingdomofGod,—thatrighteousnessistobesoughtfromGodalone,thatsalvationistocometousalonefromhismercy,thatallblessingsarelaidupanddailyofferedtousinChristonly[Rom.1-11],—Paulnowpasseson,accordingtothebestorder,toshowhowthelifeistobeformed[Rom.12:16].31

Noticethatjustificationcomesfirstofthethreethingslistedas“necessaryfortheerectionofthekingdomofGod”andcoveredinRomans1:11. Furthermore, theother twofurtherexplainorflowfromthis(imputed)righteousness! Later,Calvinunderscoresthefactthatrighteousnessisvitalinthekingdomofheaven(andnotonlyessentialinunderstandingIsrael’srejectionandtherightinterpretationoftheMosaiclaw):

[Theapostlehas]nodoubtincludedinfewwordsasummaryofwhat[thekingdomofGod]is;namely,thatwe,beingwellassured[ofourjustification], havepeacewithGod, andpossess real joyof heartthroughtheHolySpiritdwellinginus....Heindeedwhoisbecomepartakeroftruerighteousness,enjoysagreatandaninvaluablegood,evenacalmjoyofconscience;andhewhohaspeacewithGod,whatcanhedesiremore?32

30 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(10:4).31 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(12).32 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(14:17).



Vol.43,No.154

The Necessity of Reforming the Church In1543,Calvin’sThe Necessity of Reforming the Churchwaspublished,aworkaddressed toEmperorCharlesV inviewof theapproachingDietofSpires. InthishistoricReformationmanifesto,Calvindeclares,“Thereisnopointwhichismorekeenlycontested,nonewhichouradversar-iesaremoreinveterateintheiropposition,thanthatofjustification:namely,astowhetherweobtainitbyfaithorbyworks.”33 TheReformationdoctrineofjustification,Calvinavers,“istheclearanduniformdoctrineofScripture, ‘witnessed,’ asPaul says,‘bythelawandtheprophets[i.e.,theOldTestament]’(Rom.3:21);andsoexplainedbythegospel[i.e.,theNewTestament]....”34Thus,althoughthebookofRomanscontainsthemostdetailedandsystematictreatmentofjustification,itistaughtconsistentlyandperspicuouslyinbothtestamentsandinthewritingsofMoses,theprophets,andtheapostles. TheGenevanReformermakesthestrikingremark:“whenwetellamantoseekrighteousnessandlifeoutofhimself(i.e.,inChristonly,becausehehasnothinginhimselfbutsinanddeath),acontroversyimmediatelyariseswithreferencetothefreedomandpowersofthewill.”35 Doyou seewhatCalvin is saying? Theorthodoxdoctrineofjustificationnotonlyclasheswithjustificationbyfaithandworks;itopposesfreewillaswell!ThisisnecessarilysobecausejustificationisinChristalone(andnotman)andbygracealone(andnotworks)andbyfaithalone(andnottheallegedfreewillofthesinner). Inthetwosentencesimmediatelyfollowingthelastcitation,ourReformerproveshiscaseagainstman’sso-calledfreewill:

For,ifmanhasanyabilityofhisowntoserveGod,hedoesnotob-tainsalvationentirelybythegraceofChrist,butinpartbestowsitonhimself.Ontheotherhand,ifthewholeofsalvationisattributedto

33 Calvin,The Necessity of Reforming the Church,trans.HenryBever-idge(Dallas,TX:ProtestantHeritagePress,1995),p.26.

34 Calvin,The Necessity of Reforming the Church,p.60.35 Calvin,The Necessity of Reforming the Church, p.57.

November2009 55

thegraceofChrist,manhasnothingleft,hasnovirtueofhisownbywhichhecanassisthimselftoprocuresalvation.36

Calvin’steachingmeans,intoday’sterminology,thatnotonlydowehavealife-and-deathdoctrinalbattleregardingjustificationwithRome,butalsowithArminianism.Thisisthecasebecause,forArmin-ians,justificationbyfaithmeansjustificationbyman’s free will,sinceforArminiansfaithispracticallysynonymouswithman’sfreewill.37

Institutes of the Christian Religion Moving fromCalvin’s reply toCardinal Sadoleto (1539), hiscommentaryonRomans(1540),andhisThe Necessity of Reforming the Church(1543),wecometohismagnumopus,the Institutes of the Christian Religion,thefinal,1559edition.Hereweshallconsiderfourwaysthatthisworkunderscorestheimportanceofjustification. First,thesignificanceofjustificationforCalvinismostobviouslyseeninthelargenumberofchaptersdevotedtothissubjectinBook3oftheInstitutes.Thoughentitled“TheWayinWhichWeReceivetheGraceofChrist:WhatBenefitsCometoUsfromIt,andWhatEffectsFollow,”itissufficientforourpurposesherethatweconsideritasdealingwithsoteriology,thedoctrineofsalvation. Book3containstwenty-fivechapters.Chapters1-5areonfaith

36 Calvin,The Necessity of Reforming the Church,p.57.37 Thereisamassivedifferencebetweenfaithandfreewill;thetwoare

antithetical.TheapostlePaulnotonlyteachessalvationbyfaithaloneandnotworks(Eph.2:8-9);healsoaffirmsthat“it[i.e.,salvation]isnotofhimthatwilleth[i.e.,man’ssupposedfreewill],norofhimthatrunneth[i.e.,man’sstrenuousexertions],butofGod thatshewethmercy”(Rom.9:16).ThustheCanonsofDordtdeclare,“FaithisthereforetobeconsideredasthegiftofGod,notonaccountofitsbeingofferedbyGodtoman,tobeacceptedorrejectedathispleasure;butbecauseitisinrealityconferred,breathed,andinfusedintohim;orevenbecauseGodbestowsthepowerorabilitytobelieve,andthenexpectsthatmanshouldbytheexerciseofhisownfreewill,consenttothetermsofthatsalvation,andactuallybelieveinChrist;butbecausehewhoworksinmanbothtowillandtodo,andindeedallthingsinall,producesboththewilltobelieve,andtheactofbelievingalso”(III/IV:14).



Vol.43,No.156

andsalvation,chapters6-10ontheChristianlife,andchapters11-18onjustification.Christianlibertyisconsideredinchapter19,andprayerinchapter20.Thenthesourceofoursalvationistracedtoeternalelec-tion(withitsnecessaryconcomitant,reprobation)inchapters21-24.Finally,Calvinturnstoglorificationinachapterentitled,intheBattlesedition,“TheFinalResurrection,”whichtreatsthegoalor“crowningact”ofoursalvation(chapter25).38Thus,eightofthetwenty-fivechaptersofBook3,almostathird,aredevotedtojustification.Itismorethanthisifoneincludeschapter19onChristianfreedom,whichCalvinreckonsis“especiallyanappendageofjustification.”39 Second, the importanceof justification inCalvin’s Institutes isevidentfromhisapologeticplacementofit.IntheInstitutes,Calvintreats justificationafter sanctification,whereas sanctificationcomesafterjustificationintheordo salutis ororderofsalvation.WhydoestheReformerdothis?Calvinstatesthat“whenthistopic[i.e.,ournewlifeinChrist]isrightlyunderstooditwillbetterappearhowmanisjustifiedbyfaithalone,andsimplepardon;neverthelessactualholinessoflife,sotospeak,isnotseparatedfromfreeimputationofrighteousness.”40 Moreover,Calvin inverts themorenatural order (justification thensanctification)becausejustificationissocrucialtohimthathewantsto“forestallRomanistobjections,”aseditorJohnT.McNeillputsit.41In

38 FrançoisWendel,Calvin: The Origins and Development of His Religious Thought, trans.PhilipMairet(NewYork:Wm.Collins,1965),p.284.

39 Calvin, Institutes,3.19.1,p.833.E.g.,DavidJ.Engelsma’s treat-mentoftheReformer’sdoctrineofjustificationcontainsCalvin’schapteronChristianfreedom(The Reformed Faith of John Calvin[Jenison,MI:RFPA,2009],pp.222-246).

40 Calvin,Institutes,3.3.1,p.593;cf.3.11.1,pp.725-726.41 Calvin,Institutes,p.593,n.2.However,Engelsmawrites,“Isug-

gestanother,moresubstantialreasonforCalvin’streatmentofsanctificationbeforejustification.Calvinrecognizesthatintheworkofsalvationthereisasenseinwhichsanctification,ornewnessoflife,doesprecedejustifica-tion.Regenerationinthenarrowsense,ornewnessoflifethatcomesaboutbyunionwithChrist,makesusnewcreaturesinChrist,andthusholy.Andthisdoesprecedetheactivityoffaithandconsciousjustificationbyfaith.Toputitverysimply:weareunitedtoChristandinprinciplemadenew

November2009 57

sodoing,Calvinproclaimsloudlythatjustificationbyfaithalonedoesnotdenyormitigatethepowerof,orthecallto,holiness. Third,theimageryattheverystartofhistreatmentofjusti-ficationhighlightsitsworthtoCalvin.Therearetwometaphorsused by theReformer inBook 3, chapter 11, section 1 of theInstitutes. Hecallsjustificationa“hinge”anda“foundation.”Justification is“themainhinge,onwhichreligion turns”or is“supported”or“sustained,”asRichardGaffinmoreaccuratelyrendersit.42Losethehinge,andthedoorofreligionfalls.Jus-tificationisalso“thefoundation”onwhichyou“establishyoursalvation”and“buildpietytowardGod.”43Withoutthisfounda-tion,thehouseofsalvationisbuiltonsandandallpietycollapsestotheground.44 Inthenextsectionofthischapter,CalvinteachesthatjustificationisalegaldeclarationbytheMostHigh,theheavenlyjudge.Being“reckonedrighteousinGod’sjudgment,”thejustifiedmanorwoman“standsfirmbeforeGod’sjudgmentseat.”45Justificationisreceivedbyfaithalonewithoutanyworksanditconsistsintwothings:negatively,theremissionorforgivenessofsinsand,positively,theimputationofChrist’srighteousness—Hisobediencereckonedtoouraccount.46

creaturesinChristbeforeconsciouslybelievinginChristandthusenjoyingrighteousness”(The Reformed Faith of John Calvin,p.226).

42 Calvin,Institutes,3.11.1,p.726;RichardB.Gaffin,Jr.,“JustificationandUnionwithChrist(3.11-18),”inDavidW.HallandPeterA.Lillback(eds.), A Theological Guide to Calvin's Institutes(Phillipsburg,NJ:P&R,2008),p.257.

43 Calvin,Institutes,3.11.1,p.726.Later,Calvincallsjustificationbyfaith“thisutterlyincomparablegood”(3.11.10,p.737)and“thesumofallpiety”(3.15.7,p.794).Elsewhere,heextolsitas“theprincipalblessingoftheeverlastingcovenant”(Commentary on the Psalms143:2).

44 Calvinalsousesthe“foundation”imageinasermononLuke1:5-10,inwhichhedescribesjustificationas“theprincipleofthewholedoctrineofsalvationandofthefoundationofallreligion”(quotedinWendel,Calvin: The Origins and Development of His Religious Thought,p.256).

45Calvin,Institutes,3.11.2,p.726.46 Calvin,Institutes,3.11.2,pp.726-727.



Vol.43,No.158

Calvinprovesthisbylookingatseveralbiblicaltextsinthenexttwosections.47 Thisscripturalexplanationofjustificationmustbegivenattheverystart,Calvinmaintains,lest“westumbleattheverythreshold”andsonevergetintothehouse.48ThatispreciselywhattheChurchofRome,theNewPerspectiveonPaul,andtheFederalVisionhavedone:theystumbleontheverythresholdwiththeirhereticaldefini-tionsofjustificationandsodonotenterthehouseholdoffaithandtheFather’smansions.Toreturntooneofthetwoimagesusedearlier,theyarenotbuildingonthetrue“foundation”atall—andsotheyarebuildingsomeotherhouse—andtheirpiety,thoughtheymayvauntittotheskies,isbuiltonsand. Alongwiththelength,position,andimageryofCalvin’streatmentofjustification,thereisafourthwayinwhichitssignificancecomesthroughintheInstitutes:hisdetailedelaborationanddefenseofit.Book3,chapter11definesandexplainsjustificationbyfaithalone.Chapter12recognizesthatwordsandargumentsarenotenoughtoconvinceusoffreejustification;wemustreckonwithGod’sheavenlyjudgmentseat—apeculiaremphasisofCalvin’s.Chapter13treatstwothingstobenotedinfreejustification:Jehovah’sgloryandourpeaceofconscience.ThustheReformeddoctrineofjustificationpreservesGod’shonorandensuresourcomfort,therebymanifestingitself,incontrasttojustificationbyfaithandworks,asthetruegospel.Chapter14evaluatestheworksofidolaters,hypocrites,nominalChristians,andtheregenerate.Inchapter15,Calvinassailsthedoctrineofman’smeritoriousworks,foritdestroysboththepraiseofGodandouras-suranceofsalvation.Chapters16,17,and18refuteRome’sattackonjustificationbasedonitswrongviewsofgoodworks(ch.16),thepromisesofthelawandofthegospel(ch.17),andtheideaofreward(ch.18). EveninthisnecessarilycursorysummaryofhisinstructiononjustificationinBook3,chapters11-18,weseesomething,atleast,ofCalvinasatheologicalcraftsmandefining,declaring,anddefendingthegospeltruthofjustification.Remember,too,thatCalvinwasnever

47 Calvin,Institutes,3.11.3-4,pp.727-728.48 Calvin,Institutes, 3.11.2,p.726.

November2009 59

contentwithhisarrangementoftheInstitutes (including,presumably,hisarrangementofjustification)untilthisfinaleditionof1559.

Driving Us Out of Ourselves Havingconsidered thesignificanceof justification inwhatarearguablyCalvin’s greatest polemical letter, biblical commentary,Reformationmanifesto,andtheologicaltreatise,wearenowinaposi-tiontoask:WhatisCalvindoinginallhiswritingsonjustificationinhisInstitutes,commentaries,sermons,andothertheologicalworks?Theanswercanbereducedtoonesentence:He is driving us out of ourselves (and our supposed righteousness) so that we seek all of our justification in Jesus Christ crucified alone.49Howdoeshedothis? TheFrenchReformerpresentsfallenmanasheis:atotallyde-pravedsinner.Allofunbelievingman’sworksareonlyevil,even—andCalvinisparticularlysharpandclearonthisatthispoint—theapparently gooddeeds of the “virtuous heathen.”50 This is so, asethicistCalvin explains, because the “motive” or “end”or “goal”ofsuchworksisonlyeverselfishnessandneverthegloryofGod.51 Throughouthiswritings,Calvinhastenstoaddthateventhegooddeedsoftruebelieversareimperfectandneedforgiveness.Whatevergoodisinus,itiswroughtinusbytheSpiritofChristalone. Calvinalsoexaltsthelaw.Heexplainsthatitisspiritualandin-ward,thatitincludesourheartandnotmerelyexternals,thatitcoversourthoughtsandwordsaswellaswhatwedo,andthatitrequiresone-hundred-percentobedienceandneveranythingless.CalvinusesthelawwiththesamepurposeasPaulinRomans3:19:“thatevery

49 ThisishowtheReformerdescribesPaul’smethodinRomans1-3:“Havingwhollydeprivedallmankindoftheirconfidenceintheirownvirtueandof theirboastof righteousness,and laid themprostrateby thesever-ityofGod’sjudgment,hereturnstowhathehadbeforelaiddownashissubject—thatwearejustifiedbyfaith;andheexplainswhatfaithis,andhowtherighteousnessofChristisbyitattainedbyus”(Calvin,Commentary on Romans,p.xxxi).

50 Calvin,Institutes, 3.14.3-4,pp.770-771.51 Calvin,Institutes, 3.14.3,p.770.Likewise,theHeidelbergCatechism

statesthatgoodworksmustbe“tohis[i.e.,God’s]glory”(A.91).



Vol.43,No.160

mouthmaybestopped,andalltheworldmaybecomeguiltybeforeGod.”Inthisway,thelawis“ourschoolmastertobringusuntoChrist,thatwemightbejustifiedbyfaith”(Gal.3:24).52 TheGenevanReformerforcefullyappealstoJames2:10:“Forwhosoevershallkeepthewholelaw,andyetoffendinonepoint,heisguiltyofall.”53 IntheverylastsectionofCalvin’streatmentofjustificationintheInstitutes,hammeringthefinalnailinunbelievingman’scoffin,theReformerreturnstothistext:

TheseSophistsofoursstumblebecausetheydonotpayattentiontoJames’statement,“Whoeversinsinonepointisalreadymadeguiltyofall,forhewhoforbadekillingalsoforbadestealing”[James2:10-11p.],etc.Accordingly,itoughtnottoseemabsurdwhenwesaythatdeathisthejustpunishmentforeachseveralsin,foreachonedeservesGod’sjustwrathandvengeance.54

Asifthisisnotenough,Calvinevenappealsto“arighteousnesshigherthantheobservanceofthelaw”:

Indeed,IadmitthatinTheBookofJobmentionismadeofarighteous-nesshigherthantheobservanceofthelaw,anditisworth-whiletomaintainthisdistinction.Forevenifsomeonesatisfiedthelaw,noteventhencouldhestandthetestofthatrighteousnesswhichsurpassesallunderstanding.Therefore,eventhoughJobhasagoodconscience,heisstrickendumbwithastonishment,forheseesthatnoteventheholinessofangelscanpleaseGodifheshouldweightheirworksinhisheavenlyscales.55

52 CalvincomplainsaboutthefollyofRome’ssixteenth-centurycouncil:“ButsopreposterousaretheFathersofTrent,thatwhileitistheofficeofMosestoleadusbythehandtoChrist(Gal.3:24),theyleadusawayfromthegraceofChristtoMoses”(“ActsoftheCouncilofTrentwiththeAntidote,”inJohnCalvin,Tracts and Treatises[GrandRapids:Baker,1958],vol.3,p.120).

53 Calvin,Institutes,3.14.10,p.777.54 Calvin,Institutes,3.18.10,p.833.55 Calvin,Institutes, 3.12.1,pp.755-756.AsDerekW.H.Thomasob-

serves,“[This]raisestheissueofdoublejustice—thatthereexistsastandardofjustice(righteousness)overandabovethatwhichisrevealedinthelaw.”

November2009 61

Calvinremindsusforcibly,timeandtimeagain,ofGod’sterriblecurseduetousforbreakingHisstatutes:“Cursediseveryonethatcontinuethnotinallthingswhicharewritteninthebookofthelawtodothem”(Gal.3:10;Deut.27:26).56 Herearetwostrikingquotations,bothfromCalvin’ssermons,firstonthetenthcommandment(Deut.5:21),and,second,on“righteous”Noah(Gen.7:1-5),inwhichtheFrenchReformerremindsusofGod’scurseuponourdisobedience:

WhenSaintPaulwantstoprovethatmen,assinners,arecursedandthatnotaoneofthemisjust,whatargumentdoesheuse?Hecitesthis passage fromMoses: “Cursed are theywhodonot fulfil thecontentsoftheLaw.”57 …weareemptyofeverygoodthing…wearealreadycondemnedand totally lostbeforeGod, as the sentencehasalreadybeenpro-nounced:“Cursedistheonewhodoesnotfulfilallthethingswhicharewritteninthelaw”(cf.Gal.3:10).Whofulfilsthem?Whoevenbeginsto?58

Merit and Works of Supererogation Fromallthis,itisreadilyunderstoodwhytheReformerofGe-nevaresolutelyrefusesanyplaceforhumanmeritorso-calledworksofsupererogation(i.e.,worksbeyondthelaw)inman’sjustification.

Calvinnotonlyspeaksof“doublejustice”inhisInstitutes;italso“receivesfairlyextensivetreatmentinCalvin’ssermonsonJob”(“TheMediatoroftheCovenant[2.12-15],”inHallandLillback[eds.],A Theological Guide to Calvin’s Institutes,p.208).LaterintheInstitutes,Calvinaffirms,“Christalone,whosurpasses all perfection of the law, mustbesetforthasrighteous”(3.19.2,p.835).

56 E.g.,Calvin,The Necessity of Reforming,p.60;Institutes, 3.12.1,p.756.OurHeidelbergCatechismquotesGalatians3:10inQ.&A.10.

57 JohnCalvin,John Calvin’s Sermons on the Ten Commandments,ed.andtrans.BenjaminWirtFarley(GrandRapids:Baker,1980),p.229.

58 JohnCalvin, Sermons on Genesis: Chapters 1-11, trans.RobRoyMcGregor(Edinburgh:Banner,2009),p.618.Notice,especially,thetwohaunting,rhetoricalquestionswithwhichthecitationends: “Whofulfilsthem[i.e.,God’slaws]?Whoevenbeginsto?”



Vol.43,No.162

Heattacks thenotion thatmanmay“merit”withGod,callingita“proud”and“offensive”word,whichhasdone“greatdamage…totheworld.”59Thenotionthatgoodworksmayproceedfromman’sfleshis“vicious.”60Itiseven“execrableblasphemy”:

[Rome’s]ideaofmeritingreconciliationwithGodbysatisfactions,andbuyingoffthepenaltiesduetohis[i.e.,God’s]justice,isexecrableblasphemy,inasmuchasitdestroysthedoctrinewhichIsaiahdeliv-ersconcerningChrist—that“thechastisementofourpeacewasuponhim”(Isa.53:5).61

Calvinquestionsthespiritualsanityofthosewho“supposethattheycanprocureeternallifebythemeritoftheirworks.”Hereckons,theyare“laboringunderakindofdelirium.”62 TheFrenchReformerrightlyseesthatworksofsupererogationareimpossiblebecauseGodisentitledtoallthatweareandhaveanddo.Thedivinelawencompassesalloflife,sowecannevergobeyondit.Andifwedid,GodwouldaskwithIsaiahofold,“‘Whohasrequiredthisofyourhands?’[Is.1:12,cf.Vg.].”63Calvinaskshow“worksofsupererogation…squarewiththe[scriptural]injunction”:“whenyeshallhavedoneallthosethingswhicharecommandedyou,say,Weareunprofitableservants:wehavedonethatwhichwasourdutytodo”(Luke17:10).64

“Without Works” Calvin refutes the “ingenious subterfuge”ofRome that twistsScripturesthatspeakofjustification“withouttheworksofthelaw”toreferonlytotheceremoniallawandnotthemorallaw.Hequotes

59 Calvin,Institutes, 3.15.2,p.789.60 JohnCalvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”inJohnCalvin,

Treatises on the Sacraments: Catechism of the Church of Geneva, Forms of Prayer, and Confessions of Faith,trans.HenryBeveridge(Scotland:ChristianHeritage,2002),p.54.

61 Calvin,The Necessity of Reforming the Church,p.63.62 Calvin,The Necessity of Reforming the Church,p.101.63 Calvin,Institutes, 3.14.15,p.782.64 Calvin,Institutes, 3.14.14,p.781.

November2009 63

varioustexts(fromRomansandGalatians),oneafteranother,andridi-culesthosewhosaythattheseoraclesspeakonlyof“ceremonies”:

Dotheythinkthattheapostlewasravingwhenhebroughtforwardthesepassagestoprovehisopinion?“Themanwhodoesthesethingswillliveinthem”[Gal.3:12],and,“Cursedbeeveryonewhodoesnotfulfillall thingswrittenin thebookof thelaw”[Gal.3:10p.]. Unlesstheyhavegonemadtheywillnotsaythatlifewaspromisedtokeepersofceremoniesorthecurseannouncedonlytothosewhotransgresstheceremonies.Ifthesepassagesaretobeunderstoodofthemorallaw,thereisnodoubtthatmoralworksarealsoexcludedfromthepowerofjustifying.TheseargumentswhichPauluseslooktothesameend:“Sincethroughthelawcomesknowledgeofsin”[Rom.3:20],thereforenotrighteousness.Because“thelawworkswrath”[Rom.4:15],hencenotrighteousness.Becausethelawdoesnotmakeconsciencecertain, it cannot confer righteousnesseither. Becausefaithisimputedasrighteousness,righteousnessisthereforenottherewardofworksbutisgivenunearned[Rom.4:4-5].Becausewearejustifiedbyfaith,ourboastingiscutoff[Rom.3:27p.].“Ifalawhadbeengiventhatcouldmakealive,thenrighteousnesswouldindeedbebythelaw.ButGodconsignedallthingstosinthatthepromisemightbegiventothosewhobelieve”[Gal.3:21-22p.].Letthemnowbabble,iftheydare,thatthesestatementsapplytoceremonies,nottomorals.Evenschoolboyswouldhootatsuchimpudence.Thereforeletusholdascertainthatwhentheabilitytojustifyisdeniedtothelaw,thesewordsrefertothewholelaw.65

TheexegesisoftheFederalVisionmenisslightlydifferentbutjustasfoolish.WhentheBiblesaysthatwearejustifiedwithoutworks(e.g.,Rom.3:28;4:5-6;Gal.2:16),theyclaimitreferstoworksthataredone out of a desire to merit.Calvinwould“hoot”atthemtooanddeclaretheirviews“utterlysilly.”66 Moreover,ifallthishasnotstoppedthemouthsofallrenderingthemguiltybeforeGod,CalvindragsusbeforethejudgmentseatofGod.Take

65 Calvin, Institutes, 3.11.19,p.749.Elsewhere,Calvinstatesthatitis“quiteabsurd”to“confine”“theworksofthelaw”to“ceremonies”(Com-mentary on Romans 3:28).

66 Calvin,Institutes, 3.11.19,p.749.



Vol.43,No.164

timeearnestlytoconsideryourselfandyourworksinthelightofthatheavenlytribunal!Institutes,3.12,headedintheBattlesedition,“WeMustLiftUpOurMindstoGod’sJudgmentSeatthatWeMayBeFirmlyConvincedofHisFreeJustification,”isthechapterinCalvin’smagnumopusthatespeciallycallsustothisholyconsideration,butthisisathemetowhichCalvinreturnsfrequentlyinhispreachingandwriting.

Sermon on Micah 6:1-5 OneofCalvin’ssermons,thatonMicah6:1-5,willhavetosuf-ficeasasampleofhisdirectandpowerfulpreachingofthedivine“lawsuit”totheGenevancongregation.67

He[i.e.,God]declareshisintentiontoenterintoalawsuitagainstus.Indeed,heactsasbothjudgeandcriminalprosecutor.Yet,wesleepon!Wethinknothingofit!ButGodwillmakeusfeelthefullscopeofhisindictmentagainstus.68

OnecanhearprosecutingattorneyCalvinputhislegaltrainingtogoodeffectasheinsistsupon“tworeasonswhy…wecannotwinourcase”:

First,wedonothaveitwithinourabilitytotriumphagainstsopowerfulanadversaryasGod.Andsecond,becausethereisnothingwecancitethatwouldjustifyourselves.Intruth,mankindpretendtobelievethatthereismuchintheirfavor,butintheend,itallcrumbles.ForGodneedspeakonlyawordtorepudiateitall.“Intruth,”Godsays,“intheeyesofmenyouappearasgrandandnoble,butwhenyoucomebeforemypresence,Ichargeyouwithbeingatraitorandwithbeingguiltyofdisloyalty....”69

Calvinpresseshomehispointbyappealingtothecasesoftwogodlymen,JobandDavid:

67 TheHebrewwordrîb,referringtoalegaldisputeorlawsuitorcaseatlaw,isusedthreetimesinMicah6:1-3.

68 JohnCalvin,Sermons on the Book of Micah,trans.anded.BenjaminWirtFarley(Phillipsburg,NJ:P&R,2003),p.313.

69 Calvin,Sermons on the Book of Micah,pp.314-315.

November2009 65


Inorder tocomprehendthisbetter, letusconsiderwhatJobsaid,following thenumerousprotestationsofhis innocenceandpurityofconscience.“Nevertheless,”hesays,“whenIcomebeforemyjudge,Iwillbewithoutexcuse.AndIwillbemorethanguilty.EvenifIcouldcitejustoneinstancethatmightjustifyme,Godwouldbeabletolistathousandthatwouldcondemnme”[Job9:3].ThatisJob,whoacknowledgedthathewasaseyestotheblind,asfeettothelame,asafathertoorphans,asahaventoanimals;thathishandwasneverclosedtothepoor;thatheneverwrongedasinglesoul;andthatheneverrebelledagainstGod[seeJob29:12-17].Heacknowledgedallthat,yetwhenitcametohimself,heknewthatweareallsinners,fulloffilthandcorruption.ForincomparisontoGod,weourselvesknowthatweareworthyofathousanddeaths!Conse-quently,myonlyrecourseistoconfessmysinsandtoacknowledgethetruthaboutmyself.Thatishowhespeaks.EvenDavid,thoughGodfoundhimtobeamanafterhisownheart,says:“OLord,enternotintojudgment.”Andwithwhom?“Withyourservant”[Psalm143:2].HecalledhimselfGod’sservant,yetheknewhimselftobeguiltyineveryway. Thuswehavetwosaints,assoundastheangelsofparadise;nev-ertheless,theyknewthatifGodhadenteredintojudgmentwiththem,theywouldhavebeendamned.Whatdoesthissayaboutus?70

TothoselyingprostrateindustandashesbeforethedreadmajestyoftheHolyOneofIsrael,Calvinbringsthecomfortofthegospeloffreejustification.HeheraldstherighteousnessofChristalone;HeproclaimsthemeritsandloveofOnewhoistheincarnateSonofGod.Hesufferedonthecrossforoursins!Hislife,Hisatoningdeath,Hisburial,Hisvictoriousresurrection,Hisascension,andHisheavenlyintercession—thatisallwewilleverneed.Thisisheldoutto,andconferredupon,allwhobelievethefaithfulpromise.PastorCalvinencouragesusthatitisallofgrace,rootedineternalelection,forallwhoreceiveitbyfaithalone. “WehavebeenredeemedfromGod’sjudgment,”writesCalvin,throughChrist’s“descentintohell,”the“beginning”ofwhichoccurredintheGardenofGethsemane:“whatharshanddreadfultormentshe

70 Calvin,Sermons on the Book of Micah,p.315.


Vol.43,No.166

suffered,whenheknewthathestoodaccusedbeforeGod’sjudgmentseatfor our sake.”71Centrally,thearticleoftheApostles’CreedspeaksofthehellishagoniesChristenduredatthecross,accordingtoCalvin:“thatinvisibleandincomprehensiblejudgmentwhichheunderwentinthesightofGod...sufferinginhissoultheterribletormentsofacondemnedandforsakenman.”72ThisMessiahisouronly—andall-sufficient—hope!

James 2 Thereareespeciallytwotexts,bothinthesixteenthcenturyandinthetwenty-first,thatRomanistsuseagainstjustificationbyfaithalone.Thenumberonepassagetowhichtheyappealis,asonewouldexpect,James2,forverses14-26mightappearatfirsttodenytheBible’s(andespeciallyPaul’s)doctrineofjustificationbyfaithalone.73 CalvintreatsJames2inhis1540commentaryonRomans3:28.Hereferstothe“context,”or“thedriftoftheargumentpursuedbyJames”:

Forthequestionwithhimisnot,howmenobtainrighteousnessbeforeGod[aswithPaul],buthowtheyprovetoothersthattheyarejustified;forhisobjectwastoconfutehypocrites,whovainlyboastedthattheyhadfaith[James2:18].74

71 Calvin,Institutes,2.16.12,p.519.72 Calvin,Institutes,2.16.10,p.516;cf.HeidelbergCatechism,Q&A

44.73 Asignificant,recentRomanCatholicattackonjustificationthatleans

heavilyonflawedexegesisofJames2isRobertA.Sungenis,Not by Faith Alone: The Biblical Evidence for the Catholic Doctrine of Justification(SantaBarbara,CA:QueenshipPublishing,1997),esp.pp.117-175.

74 Calvin,Commentary on Romans3:28.Calvin’sRomanscommentary(1540)revealshowimportanthesawthisissueoftheapparentdiscrepancybetweenPaulandJames,forherefershisreaderstoamoredetailedtreatmentofitinhisInstitutes(Commentary on Romans 3:28).Healsoremarks,“[I]intendtoexplain[James2]morefully,whenIcome,iftheLordwillpermit,toexpoundthatEpistle”(Commentary on Romans4:3).Goddidsowill,forelevenyearslaterCalvinpublishedhiscommentaryonJames(1551).

November2009 67


Overadecadelater,inhiscommentaryonJames2,ourReformergivesafulltreatmentoftheseverses.AgainCalvin—fineexegetethatheis—especiallyconsidersthecontext:“thegeneraldriftofthewholepassage.”JamesandCalvinteachthatgoodworks“makeknown”orprovide“theproof”or“themanifestationof[imputed]righteousness”“andthatbefore men,aswemaygatherfromtheprecedingwords,‘Shewtomethyfaith’[James2:18).”75 In his Institutes (1559),Calvinmakes at least three points onJames2.76First,thosewhointerpretJamesasteachingjustificationbyfaithandworks“dragPaulintoconflictwithJames,”which,ofcourse,giventheunityofScripture,exposestheirexegesisaswrong.77 Second,CalvinpointsoutthatJamesisdealingwithhypocrites,thosewhoonlyclaimedtohavefaithbutdidnotinreality(andthisshowedbytheirfailure to liveholilyanddogoodworks).78 Third,Calvinexposesthe“doublefallacy”ofhisopponentswhowronglyreckonthatJamesusesthewords“faith”and“justify”inthesamesenseasPaul.79 In1560,theyearafterthepublicationofthefinaleditionoftheInstitutes,Calvin’sfour,recently-deliveredsermonsonjustificationonGenesis15:4-7wereprintedinFrenchalongwithanotherfourteensermonsbytheGenevanReformer.80 TheseGenesis15sermons,claimsRichardMuller,“presentwhat,withlittlehyperbole,canbecalledCalvin’sfinaltestamenttotheReformedteachingsofjusti-ficationbygracealonethroughfaithandof therightrelationshipbetweenfaithandtheobedienceofChristians.”81 Calvindevotes

75 Calvin,Commentary on James(2:21).76 Calvin,Institutes,3.17.11-12,pp.814-817.77 Calvin,Institutes,3.17.11,p.814.78 CalvindescribesthoseJamesisexhortingasfalsebrethrenwhohave

“abandonedthemselvestoawhollylicentiouslife,”yettheyliveina“stupidassurance,”forthey“boastofthefalsenameoffaith”thoughtheypossessonly“theemptyimageofit”(Institutes,3.17.11,p.814).

79 Calvin,Institutes,3.17.11-12,pp.815-817.80 RichardA.Muller,“Foreword”toJohnCalvin,Sermons on Melchizedek

and Abraham(WillowStreet,PA:OldPaths,2000),p.xv.81 Muller,“Foreword,”p.ix.


Vol.43,No.168

overathirdofthelastofthesefoursermonstoprovingthatJames2harmonizeswithGenesis15:6andjustificationbyfaithalone.82 Calvin’streatmentofthissubjectinthisfourthsermonaddsnoth-ingnewtohisearlierwritings.ButhedoesuseastrikinganalogywhenarguingthatJames2speaksof“faith”improperly,onlyrefer-ringtothe(false)claimofungodlyhypocritestobetruebelievers:“thefrivolousvauntingwhichwasinthemouthofthosescoffersthatwouldbetakenforgoodChristians.”83Calvinsaysthisissimilartohisusingtheword“church”withrespecttoRomanCatholicism:

ButwhenwespeakofthePapists,weneveryielduntothemintruththattheyhaveanychurchwhichistobeobeyed:ForindeedtheyhavenothingbutsomeruinsofaChurch,andacertaincanvassingandtossingofserviceoftheirowndevising,and(astheythought)toserveGodwithal.84

ItishighlyrevealingthatinourdaynotonlyRomebutalsotheadvocatesoftheFederalVisionappealtoJames2,whichtheymis-readandtwist.ThesepurportedProtestantchurchmencorrupt,andsodeny,thetruthofjustification,“thearticleofastandingorafallingchurch,”thusraisingthequestionifweshouldrefertotheirchurchesas“churches”inthepropersense!85

Romans 2:13 ImmediatelyaftertreatingJames2intheInstitutes,Calvin,whobelievesincoveringallthebases,turnstoRomans2:13:“FornotthehearersofthelawarejustbeforeGod,butthedoersofthelawshallbe

82 Calvin,Sermons on Melchizedek and Abraham,pp.179-188.83 Calvin,Sermons on Melchizedek and Abraham,p.183.84 Calvin,Sermons on Melchizedek and Abraham,p.182.Insteadof

Romebeing“thespouseofourSaviorJesusChrist,”Calvindeclares,“surelyitisaveryharlot”that“begotnothingbutbastards”(p.183).

85 ForacoupleofrecentProtestanttreatmentsofJames2’steachingonjustification,seeJamesR.White,The God Who Justifies(USA:BethanyHouse,2001),pp.329-354;BrianM.Schwertley,Auburn Avenue Theology: A Biblical Analysis (USA: AmericanPresbyterianPressandCovenantalReformationPress,2005),pp.78-97.

November2009 69


justified.”Calvinexplains,positively,themeaningofthetext:thereisnoonewhocankeepthelawandthereforenoonecanbejustifiedthisway.86AnymantaughtintheslightestbytheSpiritknowsthisandcastshimselfbeforeAlmightyGodinrepentance. InhiscommentaryonRomans2:13,heissharpinhiscriticismoftheheretics:

Theywhopervertthispassageforthepurposeofbuildingupjustifica-tionbyworksdeservemostfullytobelaughedat,evenbychildren.Itisthereforeimproperandbeyondwhatisneedful,tointroduceherealongdiscussiononthesubject,withtheviewofexposingsofutileasophistry....87

Thisistheproperway,Calvin’sownway,todealwiththemenoftheFederalVisionandtheadvocatesoftheNewPerspectiveonPaul.Peopleshouldnotendorse,orenthuseabout,theirbooks;Christiansoughtnotstandupaftertheirspeechestogivethemanovation;theyshouldlaughatthem.Iftheybroughtanyoftheirchildrentosuchlectures,thechildrenshouldlaughatthemtoo.SosaidCalvin,whodidnotevenbothertoexpose“sofutileasophistry”;hereckoneditwasalmostbeneathhim. GuyPrentissWaters’ evaluation is correct: “All expressionsofChristianityareonthepathtooneoftwodestinations,RomeorGeneva.WhattheNPP[i.e.,NewPerspectiveonPaul]offersusisdecidedlynot‘Genevan.’”88NoristheFederalVision.“Ifweex-aminetheirargumentscarefully,weseethatwhattheyarereally and increasinglysayingisthatLutherandCalvinweremistaken,andthat[theRomanCatholicCouncilof]Trentwasright.”89 Besidesthesetwomaintexts,James2andRomans2:13,CalvindealswithmanyothersinhisInstitutes. Onehastoscratchone’shead

86 Cf.Calvin,Institutes, 3.17.13,pp.817-818.87 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(2:13).88 GuyPrentissWaters,Justification and the New Perspectives on Paul

(Phillipsburg,NJ:P&R,2004),p.211.89 Waters,Justification and the New Perspectives on Paul,p.212;italics

Waters’.


Vol.43,No.170

atpoints,marvelingattheforcedinterpretationsthatRomefoisteduponmanypassagesofHolyScripture:“That’singenious!Howtheytwistthesebiblicaltextstooverthrowjustification!”Calvin,patienttheologianthatheis,pursuestheRomanCatholicsophistsintoeveryhidingholeandrefutesalltheirevasions.Thisleavesthemtotallywithoutexcuseandmakesthetruthofjustificationstandclearandfirmforallwhohaveeyestoseeandearstohear.

Perversion of Orthodox Phrases Thereisanotherployoffalseteachersinthesixteenthandtwenty-firstcenturies(and,indeed,ineveryage):usingorthodoxphrasesbutpervertingthemtoanothermeaning.CardinalJacopoSadoleto,BishopofCarpentras,inhislettertotheGenevansspokeofsalvationby“faithalone.”Thesearehiswords:“Moreover,weobtainthisblessingofcompleteandperpetualsalvationby faith aloneinGodandinJesusChrist.”90 “Faithalone,”saystheRomancardinal!Butheadds,“wemustalsobringamindfullofpietytowardsAlmightyGod,”beforespeak-ingofpreparingourselvesanddoinggoodworks,andconcludingthatfaithincludes“hopeanddesireofobeyingGod,togetherwithlove.”91 Thatissome“faithalone!”“Faithalone”—andthenheaddshalfadozenthingstoit! JamesHenleyThornwell, a nineteenth-centurySouthernPres-byteriantheologian,stateditwellinthisepigram:“Tobejustifiedbygraces[plural]isnottobejustifiedbygrace[singular].”92CalvindidnotevendeemSadoleto’sperverseredefinitionof“faithalone”asdeservingananswer.TheFederalVisionmenalsoprattleabout“faithalone,”butthen,likethecraftycardinal,theyinclude“covenantfaithfulness”and“theobedienceoffaith”in“faithalone.” Sadoletoalsousesthephrase“Christalone”:“we,beingaidedinChrist alone,withalldivineandhumancounsels,helps,andvirtuesmightpresentoursoulstoGodinsafety.”93TheBishopofCarpentras

90 Calvin,Reformation Debate,p.35.91 Calvin,Reformation Debate,pp.35-36.92 JamesHenleyThornwell,The Collected Writings of James Henley

Thornwell (Edinburgh:Banner,1974),vol.3,p.353.93 Calvin,Reformation Debate,p.34.

November2009 71


usesthewords“Christalone,”butevenwithinthatverysentencehepervertsitintoourworks,because,through“alldivineandhuman”aids,wehaveadecisiveroleinsavingourselves.

Osiander, the Lutheran AllknowthatRomeisCalvin’smainenemyconcerningjustifica-tion,soitissurprisingthatthefirstopponenthementionsinhistreat-mentofjustificationinInstitutes,3.11-18isaLutherancalledAndreasOsiander.94AfterdealingwithOsiandertheGenevanReformerturnstheswordoftheSpiritagainstRome. CalvindoesnotcriticizeOsianderbecauseheisaLutheran.ThismightbewhatyouwouldexpectiftheFederalVisionmenwererightandthatCalvinandLuther,andthereforeLuther’sfollowers,differedonjustification.Instead,CalvinrebukesOsianderbecauseOsianderwasnot faithful to thebiblicaldoctrineof justification,whichwasjointlyheldby theLutherans and theReformed.Osiander’smanyheresiesincludedthenotionthatthedivineessenceistransfusedintous and that this infusionand the imputationofChrist’s righteous-nesscombineinourjustification.95 CalvinrightlycallsOsiander’s“speculation”a“strangemonster”anda“wilddream”“borderingonManichaeism.”96

Catechism of the Church of Geneva Finally,weshallbuilduponthetruthofjustificationbyfaithalonebysettingforthsixaspectsofCalvin’steachingonthisdoctrinethatareperhapslesswellknownandunderstood,butwhichare,nevertheless,importantforafullconfessionof,andgreatercomfortin,thisgloriousgospeljewel.HereweshalltakeourleadfromCalvin’sCatechismoftheChurchofGeneva(1545),whichhewroteforchildrenasaformofinstructioninthedoctrineofChrist.

94 Calvin,Institutes, 3.11.5-12,pp.729-743.95 Againstallconfusionofimputedandinfusedrighteousness,Calvin

rightlymaintains,“itisfalsetosaythatanypartofrighteousness(justifica-tion)consistsinquality,orinthehabitwhichresidesinus”(“ActsoftheCouncilofTrentwiththeAntidote,”p.117).

96 Calvin,Institutes, 3.11.5,pp.729,730.


Vol.43,No.172

WhatdoesCalvin’sGenevanCatechismsayaboutjustification?WhatdidCalvinwantthechildrenofthechurchtoknowaboutit?WhatgreattruthsofthegospelofjustificationdidhereckonChrist’slambs(andnotonlyHissheep)shouldandmustgrasp inorder tomatureasprosperingandprofitablemembersofthecongregation?

1. Justification and Sanctification Calvinisespeciallyclearthatjustificationandsanctificationaredistinctbutinseparablyjoined.

Master.Butcanthis[imputed]righteousnessbeseparatedfromgoodworks,sothathewhohasitmaybevoidofthem?Scholar. Thatcannotbe. ForwhenbyfaithwereceiveChristasheisofferedtous,henotonlypromisesusdeliverancefromdeathandreconciliationwithGod[i.e., justification],butalsothegiftoftheHolySpirit,bywhichweareregeneratedtonewnessoflife[i.e.,sanctification];thesethingsmustnecessarilybeconjoinedsoasnottodivideChristfromhimself.97

JustificationandsanctificationareinChrist—bothofthem,to-gether,inseparably—justasjustificationandsanctificationarethetwodistinct,cardinalblessingsofthenewcovenantinChrist,asCalvinteachesrepeatedlyinhisvariouswritings.98 InhiscommentaryonHebrews8:8-12,whichScripturepassageisaquotationofJeremiah31:31-34,Calvindeclares,“Therearetwomainpartsinthiscovenant;thefirstregardsthegratuitousremissionofsins[i.e.,justification];andtheother,theinwardrenovationoftheheart[i.e.,sanctification].”99 PreachingonGalatians2:17-18,Calvinrefersto“thetwoprincipalgracesofourLordJesusChrist”:

97 Calvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”p.55.98 Cf.AngusStewart,“JohnCalvin’sIntegratedCovenantTheology(3):

TheBlessingsoftheCovenant,”Protestant Reformed Theological Journal,vol.42,no.1(November2008),pp.3-16,esp.pp.6-14.Alonger,moredevelopedversionof this articlemaybe foundon-line (www.cprf.co.uk/articles/calvinscovenanttheology3.htm).

99 Calvin,Commentary on Hebrews (8:10).

November2009 73


Theoneistheforgivenessofoursins,wherebyweareassuredofoursalvation,andhaveourconsciencesquieted[i.e.,justification].…Thesecondis,thatwhereaswebeforwardofourownnature…whenwehaveoncetastedtheinestimableloveofourGod,andperceivedwhatourLordJesusChristis:thenwebesotouchedbyhis[H]oly[S]pirit,thatwecondemntheevil,anddesiretodrawnearuntoGod,andtoframeourselvestohisholywill[i.e.,sanctification].100

Thisbeingthecase,thereisnoroomforlooselivingorantino-mianisminCalvin’steachingonjustification.Thosewhoaretrulyjustifiedbyfaithalonewill,andmust,livenewandgodlylivesandsodogoodworks.Covenantchildren—andadults—needtoknowandpracticethis.

2. Justification and Assurance Calvinemphaticallyteachesthatjustificationincludesassuranceofsalvation.CalvinwantedtheGenevancatechumenstoknowthis,asthisdialoguebetweentheMaster(M)andtheScholar(S)shows:

M.Whatadvantageaccruestousfromthisforgiveness[whichis,ofcourse,includedinjustification]?S.Weareaccepted,justasifwewererighteousandinnocent,andatthesametimeourconsciencesareconfirmedinafullrelianceonhispaternalfavour,assuringusofsalvation.101

Thisisnecessarilythecasebecausejustificationisitselfadeclara-tionofGodtousinourconsciousnessthatwearerighteousand,hence,recipientsofJehovah’sfatherlycareandsalvation.Thusjustificationitselfcarrieswithitthetruthofassurance. Calvin’sdefinitionoffaith,whichheputsintothemouthsofthelambsinGeneva,alsoincludesassurance.InanswertotheMaster’srequestfora“truedefinitionoffaith,”thechildreplies,“Itmaybedefined[as]asureandsteadfastknowledgeofthepaternalgoodwillof

100 JohnCalvin,Sermons on Galatians (Audubon,NJ: OldPaths,1995),pp.277-278.

101 Calvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”p.79.


Vol.43,No.174

Godtowardus,ashedeclaresinthegospelthatforthesakeofChristhewillbeourFatherandSaviour.”102

AssuranceisalsoincludedinthedefinitionoffaithgiveninCal-vin’sInstitutes:

NowweshallpossessarightdefinitionoffaithifwecallitafirmandcertainknowledgeofGod’sbenevolencetowardus,foundeduponthetruthofthefreelygivenpromiseinChrist,bothrevealedtoourmindsandsealeduponourheartsthroughtheHolySpirit.103

ThatassuranceisoftheessenceoffaithisapointCalvinmakesrepeatedly inhisvariousworks. For instance, inThe Necessity of Reforming the Church, immediatelyafter speakingof justification,CalvincastigatesRomeforitsgrievousheresyinthisregard:

Lastly,therewasanothermostpestilentialerror,whichnotonlyoccu-piedthemindsofmen,butwasregardedasoneoftheprincipalarticlesoffaith,ofwhichitwasimpioustodoubt:thatis,thatbelieversoughttobeperpetuallyinsuspenseanduncertaintyastotheirinterestinthedivinefavor.Bythissuggestionofthedevil,thepoweroffaithwascompletelyextinguished,thebenefitsofChrist’spurchasedestroyed,andthesalvationofmenoverthrown.For,asPauldeclares,thatfaithonlyisChristianfaithwhichinspiresourheartswithconfidence,andemboldensustoappearinthepresenceofGod(Rom.5:2).Onnootherviewcouldhisdoctrineinanotherplacebemaintained:thatis,

102 Calvin,“Catechismof theChurchofGeneva,”p.53. Likewise,Calvinstatesthatfaith“asureknowledgeofGod’smercy,whichisreceivedfromthegospel,andbringspeaceofconsciencewithregardtoGod,andresttothemind”(Commentary on Romans4:14).

103 Calvin,Institutes,3.2.7,p.551.ForafinetreatmentofCalvinonassuranceinhisInstitutes,seeEngelsma,The Reformed Faith of John Cal-vin,pp.194-199.TheHeidelbergCatechismfaithfullyreflectsthebiblicalteachingoftheFrenchReformer:“Whatistruefaith?Truefaithisnotonlyacertainknowledge,wherebyIholdfortruthallthatGodhasrevealedtousinHisword,butalsoanassuredconfidence,whichtheHolyGhostworksbythegospel,inmyheart;thatnotonlytoothers,buttomealso,remissionofsin,everlastingrighteousnessandsalvation,arefreelygivenbyGod,merelyofgrace,onlyforthesakeofChrist’smerits”(Q&A.21).

November2009 75


that“wehavereceivedtheSpiritofadoption,wherebywecry,Abba,Father”(Rom.8:15).104

ThustheGenevanReformernotonlyseesjustificationandsanc-tification as inseparably joined;PastorCalvin also rightly teachesthatjustificationincludesassuranceofsalvation.Theyoungestcat-echumensinCalvin’sGenevawereleftinnodoubtconcerningthis.YetmanyReformed theologianseven inourdayhavenotgot thisstraight.105

3. Justification and Continual Forgiveness Justificationincludesthecontinualforgivenessofsins.ItisnotonlyreceivedonceandforallattheverystartoftheChristianlife,asmanyinfundamentalistandevangelicalcirclesbelieveandteach.Calvinteaches,inthefifthpetitionoftheLord’sPrayer(“forgiveusourdebts,asweforgiveourdebtors”),thatwewhoarealreadybelieverscontinuallyaskGodtoremitoursins:

M.Whatdoesthefifthpetitioncontain?S.ThattheLordwouldpardonoursins….WhenChristgavethisformofprayer,hedesigneditforthewholeChurch.106

Calvinexplainsthat,becauseofhiscontinualimperfectionandsin,thebelieverrequires“continualforgiveness”:

Forsincenoperfectioncancometoussolongasweareclothedinthisflesh,andthelawmoreoverannouncesdeathandjudgmenttoallwhodonotmaintainperfectrighteousnessinworks,itwillalwayshavegroundsforaccusingandcondemningusunless,onthecontrary,God’smercycountersit,andbycontinualforgivenessofsinsrepeat-edlyacquitsus.107

104 Calvin,The Necessity of Reforming the Church,p.27.105 Formoreonassurance,seethison-lineAssuranceResourcespage

(www.cprf.co.uk/assuranceresources.htm).106 Calvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”p.79.107 Calvin,Institutes, 3.14.10,p.777.


Vol.43,No.176

Inthequotationbelow,weseetheGenevanReformerprovehispointfromScripturebyappealingtothehistoryofDavidandAbraham,notingthatstatementsoftheirjustification(Psalm32:1andGenesis15:6,respectively)aregivenlongaftertheyfirstbelievedandwerejustifiedintheirconsciousnessesforthefirsttime[1].Calvinalsoappealstothetestimonyoftheconscienceofthe(continuallysinning)believerastotheneedforcontinualforgiveness[2].

[1]Norcanthisindeedbeconfinedtothecommencementofjustifi-cation,astheydream;forthisdefinition—“Blessedaretheywhoseiniquitiesareforgiven”—wasapplicabletoDavid,afterhehadlongexercisedhimselfintheserviceofGod;andAbraham,thirtyyearsafterhiscall,thougharemarkableexampleofholiness,hadyetnoworksforwhichhecouldglorybeforeGod,andhencehisfaithinthepromisewasimputedtohimforrighteousness;andwhenPaulteachesusthatGod justifiesmenbynot imputing theirsins,hequotesapassage,whichisdailyrepeatedintheChurch.[2]Stillmoretheconscience,bywhichwearedisturbedonthescoreofworks,performsitsoffice,notforonedayonly,butcontinuestodosothroughlife.108

RemembertoothatCalvinrightlyseesman’sconscienceasGod’switnesstous,alreadyinthislife,ofHisrighteousverdictuponoursins.

...whenmenhaveanawarenessofdivinejudgmentadjoinedtothemasawitnesswhichdoesnotletthemhidetheirsinsbutarraignsthemasguiltybefore the judgmentseat—thisawareness iscalled“con-science”...thisfeeling,whichdrawsmentoGod’sjudgment,islikeakeeperassignedtoman,thatwatchesandobservesallhissecretssothatnothingmayremainburiedindarkness.Hencethatancientproverb:conscienceisathousandwitnesses.109

NowonderCalvinaffirmsinhisInstitutes,

…wemusthavethisblessedness[ofjustification]notjustoncebut

108 Calvin,Commentary on Romans (3:21).109 Calvin,Institutes,4.10.3,pp.1181,1182.

November2009 77


mustholdtoitthroughoutlife…theembassyoffreereconciliationispublished[i.e.,preached]notjustforonedayoranotherbutisattestedasperpetualinthechurch.110

Justificationisnotincreased,foritisalways100%complete,basedontheperfectrighteousnessofJesusChristimputedtous.Butwewhoarejustarealsosinners(toborrowLuther’sphraseology),andsowecontinuallyneedtoheartheassuringdeclarationofpardoninourconsciousness,especiallythroughthepreachingoftheWord.111 ThisisReformedandbiblicalChristianityforyoungandold.

4. Justification and Our Good Works CalvininstructsusthatGodjustifiesthegoodworksofallthosetowhomHeimputesChrist’srighteousness.

M.Whencethenorhowcanitbethatthey[i.e.,thebeliever’sgoodworks]pleaseGod?S.Itisfaithalonewhichprocuresfavourforthem,aswerestwithas-suredconfidenceonthis—thatGodwillsnottotrythembyhisstrictrule,butcoveringtheirdefectsandimpuritiesasburiedinthepurityofChrist,heregardstheminthesamelightasiftheywereabsolutelyperfect.112

Thisiswhatisreferredtoas“doublejustification”:God’sjusti-

110Calvin,Institutes, 3.14.11,pp.778-779.Forotherreferencestothebeliever’s receivingcontinual forgivenessofsins,see,e.g.,Calvin,Com-mentary on Genesis(15:6);Commentary on Romans(4:6-8);“ActsoftheCouncilofTrentwiththeAntidote,”pp.114,122-123.

111Cf.CornelisP.Venema:“Calvinconceivesofjustificationasade-finitivejudgmentaccomplishedonce-for-allinChrist.Yetfaithcontinuallyappealstoandappropriatesthisjudgmentthroughoutthewholecourseoflife,sinceatnopointisthebelieverwithouttheneedforGod’sforgivenessandChrist’srighteousness”(Accepted and Renewed in Christ: The “Two-fold Grace of God” and the Interpretation of Calvin’s Theology[Göttingen:VandenHoeck&Ruprecht,2007],p.108,n.78).

112Calvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”p.55.


Vol.43,No.178

ficationofboththebeliever’spersonandhisworks.113Theformeristreatedinthefirstparagraphandthelatterinthesecond,inthisfullerexplanationintheInstitutes:

Butwedefinejustificationasfollows:thesinner,receivedintocom-munionwithChrist,isreconciledtoGodbyhisgrace,while,cleansedbyChrist’sblood,heobtainsforgivenessofsins,andclothedwithChrist’srighteousnessasifitwerehisown,hestandsconfidentbeforetheheavenlyjudgmentseat. Afterforgivenessofsinsissetforth,thegoodworksthatnowfol-lowareappraisedotherwisethanontheirownmerit.Foreverythingimperfect inthemiscoveredbyChrist’sperfection,everyblemishor spot is cleansed awaybyhis purity in order not to be broughtinquestionatthedivinejudgment.Therefore,aftertheguiltofalltransgressionsthathindermanfrombringingforthanythingpleasingtoGodhasbeenblottedout,andafterthefaultofimperfection,whichhabituallydefilesevengoodworks,isburied,thegoodworksdonebybelieversareaccountedrighteous,or,whatisthesamething,arereckonedasrighteousness[Rom.4:22].114

Asinthepreviousquotation,hereCalvinalsomakesclearthat“double justification” is through unionwithChrist and by faithalone:

Aworkbeginstobeacceptableonlywhenitisundertakenwithpardon.Nowwhencedoesthispardonarise,savethatGodcontemplatesus

113Calvinistsnotonlybelieveindoublepredestination(unconditionalelectionandreprobation);wealsobelieveindoublejustification.ForCalvinondoublepredestination,seeespecially,JohnCalvin,Calvin’s Calvinism, trans.HenryCole(Jenison,MI:RFPA,2009)andInstitutes3.21-24.Themostdetailedcreedalstatementofdoublepredestinationis,ofcourse,HeadIoftheCanonsofDordt.

114 Calvin, Institutes, 3.17.8,pp.811-812.Hereagainwenotice theReformer’sreferencestojustification(bothofusandourworks)intermsofconfidence“beforetheheavenlyjudgmentseat”and“thedivinejudgment”—andthistooinCalvin’s“singlefullestdefinition[ofjustification],atleastwithin the Institutes” (Gaffin, “Justification andUnionwithChrist,” p.260).

November2009 79


andourallinChrist?Therefore,asweourselves,whenwehavebeenengraftedintoChrist,arerighteousinGod’ssightbecauseouriniqui-tiesarecoveredbyChrist’ssinlessness,soourworksarerighteousandarethusregardedbecausewhateverfaultisotherwiseinthemisburiedinChrist’spurity,andisnotchargedtoouraccount.Accordingly,wecandeservedlysaythatbyfaithalonenotonlyweourselvesbutourworksaswellarejustified.115

TheGenevanReformerisclearthatthejustificationofthebe-liever’sworksare“subordinate”and“notcontrary”tothejustificationofhisperson:

IsaythatitisowingtofreeimputationthatweareconsideredrighteousbeforeGod;Isaythatfromthisalsoanotherbenefitproceeds,viz.,thatourworkshavethenameofrighteousness,thoughtheyarefarfromhavingtherealityofrighteousness.Inshort,Iaffirm,thatnotbyourownmeritbutbyfaithalone,arebothourpersonsandworksjustified;andthatthejustificationofworksdependsonthejustificationoftheperson,astheeffectonthecause.116

CalvinaffirmsthatGod“notonlylovesthefaithful,butalsotheirworks,”before adding, “Wemust againobserve, that since somefaultalwaysadherestoourworks,itisnotpossiblethattheycanbeapproved,exceptasamatterofindulgence.”117 HeinrichQuistorppresentsCalvin’steachinginthisregard:

[The]goodworks...ofbelievers...arenotgoodinthemselvesbuttheybecomesothroughjustificationbygraceflowingfromfaithinChrist,

115 Calvin,Institutes, 3.17.10,p.813.;cf.Commentary on Romans(4:6-8).

116Calvin,“ActsoftheCouncilofTrentwiththeAntidote,”p.128.Elsewhere, therighteousnessof thebeliever’sgoodworks isalsosaid tobe“subordinate”tohisjustificationbyfaithalone(Commentary on Psalms 106:31).SometimesCalvindescribesthejustificationofourworksasan“effect”that“proceedsfrom”thejustificationofourpersons(Commentary on Romans4:6-8).

117 Calvin,Commentary on Genesis 7:1;cf.Commentary on Genesis 15:6;Commentary on Psalms(106:31);Commentary on Hebrews(6:10).


Vol.43,No.180

andthishasitseternalgroundintheelectionofGod.Justificationandtherecompenseofworksdonotthereforeinthelastresortcontradicteachother....ItisinfactapurerewardofgracewhichHegivesusinthejudgmentofChrist.ThusGodcrownsinHischildrentheworkwhichHebeganinthem.118

RonaldWallacesummarizesCalvin’sviewofourfatherlyGodasHejustifiesHischildren’sworks:

Goddoesnotexamineourworksaccordingtothe“severeruleoftheLaw.”Hisattitudetoourworksisratherlikethatofthefatherwhoispleasedtowatchandacceptwhathislittlechildtriestodoeventhoughitbeofnopracticalvalue.119

WhatacomfortingtruthforthechildreninGenevaandallthechildrenofGodofwhateveragethroughouttheworld!120

5. Justification and the Church Calvin teaches that the gift of imputed righteousness—whichis inseparably joined to sanctification and includes assurance, thecontinualforgivenessofsins,andthejustificationofourworks—isreceivedandenjoyedonlyinatruechurch.ThisishowtheCatechism

118HeinrichQuistorp,Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things,trans.HaroldKnight(Richmond,VA:JohnKnoxPress,1955),p.149.BelgicConfes-sion,Art.24states,“WedonotdenythatGodrewardsourgoodworks,butitisthroughHisgracethatHecrownsHisgifts.”Likewise,theHeidelbergCatechismdeclares,“Thereward[forgoodworks]comesnotoutofmerit,butofgrace”(A.63).

119 RonaldS.Wallace,Calvin’s Doctrine of the Christian Life(EdinburghandLondon:OliverandBoyd,1959),p.302.Inproofofhistwostatements,Wallaceappeals,respectively,toCalvin’scommentaryonRomans6:14andsermononJob10:16-17.

120However,CornelisVenemaobserves,“Itisunfortunatethatinterpret-ersofCalvin’sdoctrineofthe‘twofoldgraceofGod’[injustificationandsanctification]havegiveninsufficientattentiontohisparticulardoctrineofdoublejustification,orthebeliever’s‘twofoldacceptance’byGod[i.e.,bothofhimandhisworks]”(Accepted and Renewed in Christ,p.163).

November2009 81


oftheChurchofGenevarelatestwoarticlesoftheApostles’Creed:“Ibelieveanholy,catholicchurch”and“theforgivenessofsins”:

M.WhydoyousubjoinforgivenessofsinstotheChurch?S.BecausenomanobtainsitwithoutbeingpreviouslyunitedtothepeopleofGod,maintainingunitywiththebodyofChristperseveringlytotheend,andtherebyattestingthatheisatruememberoftheChurch.121

Themaster’snextquestiondrawsforthanemphaticconfirmation:

M.InthiswayyouconcludethatoutoftheChurchisnaughtbutruinanddamnation?S.Certainly.ThosewhomakeadeparturefromthebodyofChrist,andrenditsunitybyfaction,arecutofffromallhopeofsalvationduringthetimetheyremaininschism,beithowevershort.122

InhisIsaiahcommentary,theFrenchReformeralsounitesjus-tificationandlivingchurchmembership,andreferstothesametwoarticlesoftheApostles’Creed:

Itisalsoworthyofobservation,thatnonebutthecitizensoftheChurchenjoythisprivilege;for,apartfromthebodyofChristandthefellow-shipofthegodly,therecanbenohopeofreconciliationwithGod.Hence,intheCreedweprofesstobelievein“TheCatholicChurchandtheforgivenessofsins;”forGoddoesnotincludeamongtheobjectsofhisloveanybutthosewhomhereckonsamongthemembersofhisonly-begottenSon,and,inlikemanner,doesnotextendtoanywhodonotbelongtohisbodythefreeimputationofrighteousness[i.e.,justification].Henceitfollows,thatstrangerswhoseparatethemselvesfromtheChurchhavenothingleftforthembuttorotamidsttheircurse.Hence,also,adeparturefromtheChurchisanopenrenouncementofeternalsalvation.123

121 Calvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”p.52.122 Calvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”p.52.123 Calvin,Commentary on Isaiah(33:24).RonaldS.Wallacestates,

“TorefusethegraciousministryoftheChurch[accordingtoCalvin]istorefusetocometotheonesuresourceofthegraceofChrist”(Calvin’s Doctrine of the Word and Sacrament[GrandRapids:Eerdmans,1957],p.234).


Vol.43,No.182

All this fits perfectlywithCalvin’s teaching throughout hiswritingsonthenecessityofjoining,orlaboringtoestablish,atruechurch,124aswellaswitharticles28and29ofourBelgicConfession,writtenchieflybyGuidoDeBrès.BoththeConfessionanditsauthorwereinfluencedandapprovedbyCalvin.125

TheGenevanReformer’sviewisnot justificationbyfaithand works!Norisitevenamitigationofjustificationbyfaithalone!Calvinisteachingthatthechurchistheonlysphereinwhichtheblessingofjustificationbyfaithaloneisenjoyed.Thisisanothergoodreasonwhyyoungandoldsaintsmust“joinandunitethemselves”withatruechurch,“submittingthemselvestothedoctrineanddisciplinethereof;bowingtheirnecksundertheyokeofJesusChrist.”126

6. Justification and the Judgment Day JustificationforJohnCalvinbrings“singulardelight”inconsider-ingthejudgmentday.

M.DoesitgiveanydelighttoourconsciencethatChristonedaywillbejudgeoftheworld?S.Indeed,singulardelight.Forweknowassuredlythathewillcomeonlyforoursalvation.M.Weshouldnotthentrembleatthisjudgment,soastoletitfilluswithdismay?S.No, indeed;sinceweshallonlystandat the tribunalofa judgewhoisalsoouradvocate,andwhohastakenusunderhisfaithandprotection.127

WhatinsightfulquestionsandperceptiveanswerstheGenevancatechismcontains!Onlythetruegospelcanenableustocontemplatethecomingjudgmentdaywithoutourrunningawayindreadorour

124 Cf., esp., JohnCalvin,Come Out From Among Them: ‘Anti-Nicodemite’ Writings of John Calvin, trans.SethSkolnitsky (Dallas,TX:ProtestantHeritagePress,2001).

125 NicolaasH.Gootjes,The Belgic Confession: Its History and Sources(GrandRapids:Baker,2007),pp.59-70.

126 BelgicConfession,Art.28.127 Calvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”pp.49-50.

November2009 83


tremblinginterrororourbeingfilledwithdismay.128Onlyjustifica-tionbyfaithalone—theassurancethattherighteousnessofChristisreckonedtoouraccountbyGod’sgracewithoutworks—cangiveusconfidence,nay“singulardelight,”bothnowandatthelastday,withregardtoGod’sjudgment.129 Anydoctrineofjustificationthatcannotdothisis, therefore,afalse doctrine of justification, and not the doctrine of justificationtaughtintheBible,norattheReformation,norbyCalvin.ThisisthecondemnationofRomanism,falseecumenism,theNewPerspectiveonPaul,andtheFederalVision(amongstothers). JohnCalvin—goodpastorandtheologianthathewas—preachedthegoodnewsofjustificationtothecatechumensinGeneva.Weandourseedneedtohearandbelieveitcontinuallytoo:“Littlechildren,donotbedistraughtasyoucontemplatethegreatjudgmentday.Donotthinkofitinabjectterror.Consideritwithsingulardelightbecauseyou are justified, you are righteouswith the righteousnessofGodHimselfwroughtinourLordJesusChrist,whofacedthejudgmentforyoutwothousandyearsagoonthecross.” Underasectionentitled,“TheJudgeisthe—Redeemer!”intheBattles editionof the Institutes,Calvin rejoices in this “wonderfulconsolation,”whichis“nomeanassurance”:

Hencearisesawonderfulconsolation:thatweperceivejudgmenttobeinthehandsofhimwhohasalreadydestinedustosharewithhimthehonorofjudging[cf.Matt.19:28]!Farindeedishefrommountinghisjudgmentseattocondemnus!HowcouldourmostmercifulRulerdestroyhispeople?HowcouldtheHeadscatterhisownmembers?Howcould our advocate condemnhis clients? For if the apostle

128 Onlyjustificationbyfaithalonefrees“theconscienceoffear,ter-ror,anddread,”inapproachingGod,statesBelgicConfession,Art.23,for,“verily,ifweshouldappearbeforeGod,relyingonourselvesoronanyothercreature,thougheversolittle,weshould,alas!beconsumed.”

129 Cf.Quistorp:“ForthereformersthedoctrineoftheendisprimarilyaGospel,ateachingaboutthejoyfulDayofJudgment(Luther)oraboutthedayofoursalvationandblessedresurrection(Calvin).Forthemtooitisofcourseadayofjudgment,butofthejudgmentofJesusChristandHisgrace”(Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things,p.12).


Vol.43,No.184

daresexclaimthatwithChristintercedingforusthereisnoonewhocancomeforthtocondemnus[Rom.8:34,33],itismuchmoretrue,then,thatChristasIntercessorwillnotcondemnthosewhomhehasreceivedintohischargeandprotection.Nomeanassurance,this—thatweshallbebroughtbeforenootherjudgmentseatthanthatofourRedeemer,towhomwemustlookforoursalvation!Moreover,hewhonowpromiseseternalblessednessthroughthegospelwillthenfulfillhispromiseinjudgment.Therefore,bygivingalljudgmenttotheSon[John5:22],theFatherhashonoredhimtotheendthathemaycarefortheconsciencesofhispeople,whotrembleindreadofjudgment.130

CornelisVenemapresentsCalvin’steaching:

ThroughfellowshipwithChrist,believersenjoythroughfaithanan-ticipationofthefinalverdictoffreeacceptanceandfavorwithGod.JustificationinCalvin’sconceptionis,therefore,athoroughlyescha-tologicalbenefit.ByvirtueofChrist’satoningdeathandresurrection,believerswhoareunitedtohimenjoythegospelpronouncementoffreeacceptancewithGod,whichisnolessthanthepresentdeclarationofwhatwillbepubliclyconfirmedatthelastjudgment.131

AlltruebelievershavebeenjustifiedatCalvary;alltruebelieversreceivethisacquittalintheirconsciousnessesastheyexercisefaithinChristcrucifiedandrisen;alltruebelieverswillbeopenlydeclaredrighteouswithChrist’srighteousnessatthegreatassize. However,itisasthechildofGodearnestlyfollowsChristasalivelychurchmember,continuallyseekingandexperiencingforgive-

130 Calvin,Institutes, 2.16.18,p.526.Elsewhereinhismagnumopus,theFrenchReformerstates that“wefearlesslypresentourselvestoGod”(4.10.3,p.1182),forwehave“untroubledexpectationofjudgment”(2.16.19,p. 528), since, “being reconciled toGod throughChrist’s blamelessness,we...haveinheaveninsteadofaJudgeagraciousFather”(3.11.1,p.725).Calvinevenspeaksofourgoing“toGod’stribunal”and“tomeetChrist”“confidently,”“cheerfully,”and“joyfully” (Commentary on I John 4:17).

131 CornelisP.Venema,“Calvin’sDoctrineoftheLastThings:TheResurrectionoftheBodyandtheLifeEverlasting(3.25etal.),”inHallandLillback(eds.),A Theological Guide to Calvin’s Institutes,pp.461-462.

November2009 85


nessforhiswretcheddepravityandmanifoldsins,thatheisenabledmore and moretoconsiderthejudgmentdaywithsingulardelight.Afterall,eachdayheisassuredoftheverdictoftheheavenlytribunalthatJehovahmercifullyjustifieshimandhisworks.132Inthisway,thegreatwhitethronelosesitsterrorforusandisunderstoodasathroneofgrace. ThisishowCalvinputsitinhisRomanscommentary:

...asourfaithmakesprogress,andasitadvancesinknowledge,sotherighteousnessofGodincreasesinusatthesametime[i.e.,progressivesanctification],andthepossessionofitisinamannerconfirmed[i.e.,increasedconfidenceinourjustification].Whenatfirstwetastethegospel,weindeedseeGod’ssmilingcountenanceturnedtowardsus,butatadistance:themoretheknowledgeoftruereligiongrowsinus,bycomingasitwerenearer,webeholdGod’sfavourmoreclearlyandmorefamiliarly.133

Christthejudgeis“ouradvocate”;weare“underhisfaithandprotection”;Heiscomingnotforourcondemnationbut“onlyforoursalvation”—toour“singulardelight!”134 l

132 Cf.Engelsma: “Calvindoesnot [only]mean that thisheavenlytribunaliswherewearegoingtostandsome dayatthemomentofourdeath,andalsoonthelast day,whenallofusstandonthejudgmentseatofChrist,buthemeansthatthisiswherewestandevery dayinthematterofjustifica-tion”(The Reformed Faith of John Calvin,p.228;italicsEngelsma’s).

133 Calvin,Commentary on Romans(1:17).134 Calvin,“CatechismoftheChurchofGeneva,”p.50.WhatCalvin

speaksofintermsof“singulardelight,”theHeidelbergCatechismtreatsas“comfort”:“Whatcomfortisittotheethat‘Christshallcomeagaintojudgethequickandthedead’?Thatinallmysorrowsandpersecutions,withupliftedheadIlookfortheverysameperson,whobeforeofferedHimselfformysake,tothetribunalofGod,andhasremovedallcursefromme,tocomeasjudgefromheaven:whoshallcastallHisandmyenemiesintoeverlastingcondemnation,butshalltranslatemewithallHischosenonestoHimself,intoheavenlyjoysandglory”(Q&A.52).


Vol.43,No.186

John Calvin’s Doctrine of Predestination

Rev. Chris ConnorsIntroduction “IfIwishedtowriteaconfessionofmyfaith;Icoulddosowithallfullnessandsatisfactiontomyselfoutofhiswritings.”ThatiswhatCalvinsaidofAugustine;andIsayitofCalvin.Isupposethatmeansthispaperhasahugebias.IamaCalvinistbyconviction—forIbelievethedoctrinesofgracearethegospel.Thatmaynotbethemostscholarlyapproach—butIamunrepentant!Indeed,myhopeisthatthisspeechmightinsomesmallwayspurusalltokneelalong-sidetheapostlePaul,Augustine,Luther,andCalvintomagnifythesovereignmercyofalmightyGod. AllowCalvintointroduceustohisdoctrineofpredestination:

Letusholdfastthisglorioustruth—thatthemindofGod,inoursal-vation,wassuchasnottoforgetHimself,buttosetHisowngloryinthefirstandhighestplace;andthatHemadethewholeworldfortheveryendthatitmightbeastupendoustheatrewhereontomanifestHisownglory.NotthatHewasnotcontentinHimself,notthatHehadanyneedtoborrowadditionfromanyothersources;butitwasHisgoodpleasuresohighlytohonourHiscreatures,astoimpressonthemthebrightmarksofHisgreatglory.1

ThatisCalvin’svision!WhenIreadthosewordsinmyearlytwenties,IfeltthatIhadmetamanwhocouldshowmewhatitreallymeanttoglorifyGod!CalvinseesGOD!HeseesGodGREATand

1 JohnCalvin,Calvin’s Calvinism(GrandRapids:RFPA),p.86.Allquotesaretakenfromanundated,firsteditionofRFPA.Seealsointhisrespect,Calvin’sintroductiontotheSecretProvidenceofGod:“NorwillanyoneprofitablycontemplatetheProvidenceofGodinthegovernmentoftheworld,asitissetbeforeusintheScripturesandseenbyfaith,buthewho,feelingthathehastodosowithhisMakerandwiththeCreatorofallthings,first"bowsthehead"withtheaweandreverenceandwiththathumilitywhichbecomesonestandingbeforesuchstupendousMajesty!”

November2009 87

CalvinonPredestination

liftedupingloryunapproachablewithsuchtranscendentdominionandpowerandauthority—thatittakesyourbreathaway! Adore with astonishment the secret counsel of God, through which, those which seemed good to him are elected, and the other rejected!2 ThatencapsulatesCalvin,thebeliever/theologian’sapproachtopredestination.HebeheldthegloryofGodrevealedintheword.HeprostratedhismindandheartbeforetheGodoftheword.AndbecauseheheardGodspeakingsoclearlyofHiseternalpredestination,Calvinbelievedit,taughtit,andpreachedit!Calvin,yousee,practiced Sola Scriptura! Thatreformingprincipledemandedpredestination;anditdeliveredusfrombondagetoRome’ssemi-Pelagianism!Predestination,yousee,isboththefountainofgraceandthedeathknelltohumanmerit;predestinationiswhatgivesustheothergreatsolas oftheReforma-tion:grace alone,inChrist alone,throughfaith alone,to God’s glory alone. GRACE ALONE!ThatisthetriumphantcryoftheReforma-tion. Calvintookustoitssource—the eternal predestination of God. Hedrovehispegintothatmightytruthandanchoredusinthefree grace of God. Calvin’s doctrine of predestination stands at the very heart oftheReformedconfessions.3 Thedoctrinesofgrace, orfivepoints

2 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation (NewJersey:OldPathsPublications,1996),p.31.And…“LetthosewhocometoChristrememberthattheyare‘vessels’ofgrace,notofmerit”(Calvin’s Calvinism,p.84).

3 TheWestminsterConfession,chapter3,reads:

I.Godfromalleternitydidbythemostwiseandholycounselofhisownwill,freelyandunchangeablyordainwhatsoevercomestopass;yetsoastherebyneitherisGodtheauthorofsin;norisviolenceof-feredtothewillofthecreatures,noristhelibertyorcontingencyofsecondcausestakenaway,butratherestablished.II.AlthoughGodknowswhatsoevermayorcancometopass,uponallsupposedconditions;yethathhenotdecreedanythingbecauseheforesawitasfuture,asthatwhichwouldcometopass,uponsuchconditions.III.BythedecreeofGod,for themanifestationofhisglory,some


Vol.43,No.188

ofCalvinism,4haverightlybecomethecommon-placesforbiblicalChristianity.

men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, andothersforeordainedtoeverlastingdeath.IV.Theseangelsandmen,thuspredestinatedandforeordained,areparticularlyandunchangeablydesigned;andtheirnumberissocertainanddefinitethatitcannotbeeitherincreasedordiminished.V.Thoseofmankind that are predestinatedunto life,God, beforethe foundationof theworldwas laid, according tohis eternal andimmutablepurpose,andthesecretcounselandgoodpleasureofhiswill, hath chosen inChrist, unto everlastingglory, out of his freegraceandlovealone,withoutanyforesightoffaithorgoodworks,orperseveranceineitherofthem,oranyotherthinginthecreature,asconditions,orcausesmovinghimthereunto;andalltothepraiseofhisgloriousgrace.VI.AsGodhathappointedtheelectuntoglory,sohathhe,bytheeternalandmostfreepurposeofhiswill,foreordainedallthemeansthereunto.Whereforetheywhoareelected,beingfalleninAdam,areredeemedbyChrist;areeffectuallycalleduntofaithinChristbyhisSpiritworkingindueseason;arejustified,adopted,sanctified,andkeptbyhispowerthroughfaithuntosalvation.NeitherareanyotherredeemedbyChrist,effectuallycalled,justified,adopted,sanctified,andsaved,buttheelectonly.VII.TherestofmankindGodwaspleased,accordingtotheunsearch-ablecounselofhisownwill,wherebyheextendethorwithholdethmercyashepleaseth,forthegloryofhissovereignpoweroverhiscreatures,topassby,andtoordainthemtodishonorandwrathfortheirsin,tothepraiseofhisgloriousjustice.VIII.Thedoctrine of this highmystery of predestination is to behandledwith specialprudenceandcare, thatmenattending to thewillofGodrevealedinhisWord,andyieldingobediencethereunto,may,fromthecertaintyoftheireffectualvocation,beassuredoftheireternalelection.Soshallthisdoctrineaffordmatterofpraise,rever-ence,andadmirationofGod;andofhumility,diligence,andabundantconsolationtoallthatsincerelyobeythegospel.

4 Totaldepravity,Unconditionalelection,Limitedatonement,Irresist-iblegrace,Perseveranceofthesaints.

November2009 89


LetustakealookatwhatCalvinhimselftaughtconcerningpre-destination,andthendrawoutsomethingofthechallengeheholdsforthechurchesstilltoday.

I. Calvin’s Doctrine Outlined First off, let us glance at Calvin’s big picture.Calvinlocatespredestination in theeternal covenantbetweenGodasFather, andGodtheSonappointedtotheofficeofMediator. HewritesintheInstitutes:

TheelectaresaidtohavebeentheFather’sbeforehegavethemtohisonlybegottenSon.…theFather’sgiftisthebeginningofourreceptionintothesuretyandprotectionofChrist….[T]hewholeworlddoesnotbelongtoitsCreatorexceptthatgracerescuesfromGod’scurseandwrathandeternaldeathalimitednumberwhowouldotherwiseperish.Buttheworlditselfislefttoitsowndestruction,towhichithasbeendestined.…

“Thuswemustbelieve,”writesCalvin, that“whenhe[Christ]declaresthatheknowswhomhehaschosen,hedenotesinthehu-mangenusaparticularspecies,distinguishednotbythequalityofitsvirtues,butbyheavenlydecree.”5

ThatisthepatternofCalvin’sthought,apatternfromwhichheneverdeviates.

1. Calvin’sdefinitionofPredestination. Inthe Institutes, hewrites:

WecallpredestinationGod’seternaldecree,bywhichhedeterminedwithinhimselfwhathewilledtobecomeofeachman.Forallarenotcreatedinequalcondition:rather,eternallifeisforeordainedforsome,eternaldamnationforothers.Therefore,asanymanhasbeencreatedtooneortheotheroftheseends,wespeakofhimaspredestinedtolifeortodeath.6

5 JohnCalvin,The Institutes of the Christian Religion(London:SCM.Press,Ltd,1960),Book3,chapter22,section7.

6 Calvin,Institutes, 3.21.5.


Vol.43,No.190

Inhis“TreatiseonEternalPredestination”(1552)overagainstacertainAlbertusPighius,who,inCalvin’swords,“attempted…toestablishthefree-willofman,andtosubvertthesecretcounselofGodbywhichhechoosessometosalvationandappointsotherstoeternaldestruction,”hewrites:

Now,ifwearenotreallyashamedofthegospel,wemustofneces-sityacknowledgewhatisthereinopenlydeclared:thatGodbyHiseternalgoodwill(forwhichtherewasnoothercausethanHisownpurpose),appointedthosewhomHepleaseduntosalvation,rejectingalltherest;andthatthosewhomHeblessedwiththisfreeadoptiontobeHissonsHeilluminesbyHisHolySpirit,thattheymayreceivethelifewhichisofferedtotheminChrist;whileothers,continuingoftheirownwillinunbelief,areleftdestituteofthelightoffaith,intotaldarkness.7

Todenypredestinationwas,inCalvin’sjudgment,to“beashamedofthegospel.”Infact,withoutpredestinationthereisnogospel:“Letustakeawayelection,”hesays,“andwhatshallthereremain?Aswehavedeclared,weremainaltogetherlostandaccursed.”8Mercyisouronlyplea. Calvinpreachedthesametruthinasimplerwaytohisflock,ascanbeseeninhisSermons on Election and Reprobation.PreachingontheGenesisaccountofGod’sdealingswithelectJacobandreprobateEsau,hesaid:

Itbehooved[wasneedfulandfitting,cjc]thatHe[God]choseaccord-ingtoHisliberty,suchasHethoughtgood,andthattherestshouldremainintheircursedstate….Itbehoovethnot[itisnotneedfulorfitting]thatweenterintoanydeeperdisputationofthismatter,unlessitbetoadorewithastonishmentthesecretcounselofGod,throughwhich,thosewhichseemedgoodtohimareelected,andtheotherrejected.9

7 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.31.8 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation, p.39.9 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation,p.31.

November2009 91


2. Calvin taught and preached double Predestination. Calvinneverusesthisterminology.Calvinwouldhavethoughtitaredundancytospeakofdouble predestination!10Yousee,Calvinproceedsonthebasisthatpredestinationisonedecree,whichneces-sarilyhastwoaspects.Calvintaughtthattherecannotbeonewithouttheother;andhecouldnotbecleareraboutthat:“…many,”hesays,“asiftheywishedtoavertareproachfromGod,acceptelectioninsuchtermsastodenythatanyoneiscondemned.Buttheydothisveryignorantlyandchildishly,sinceelectionitselfcouldnotstandexceptassetoveragainstreprobation.”11 “WhenPighiusholdsthatGod’selectionofgracehasnoreferenceto,orconnectionwith,Hishatredof thereprobate, Imaintain thatreferenceandconnectiontobeatruth.InasmuchasthejustseverityofGodanswers,inequalandcommoncause,tothatfreelovewithwhichHeembracesHiselect.”12

3. Calvin held election and reprobation as equally absolute and unconditional.13 ModernmoderateCalvinism,embarrassedbyabsolutesovereigntyandfearinglestthewholetruthbetoooffensivetothoseofuniversalistpersuasion,isstrangelysilentregardingreprobation,orelseitleavestheimpressionthatreprobationisbaseduponforeseensin.Calvinhadnotimeforsuchfinagling:“Thattheywerefittedtodestructionbytheir own wickedness,” hewrote,“isanideasosillythatitneedsnonotice.”14 Overagainstthat,Calvintaughtthat:“Itmustbeconfessedbyallthat…[the]differencemadebetweentheelectandthereprobate…proceeds

10 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism, p.45.“Thereis,mostcertainlyandevi-dently,aninseparableconnectionbetweentheelectandthereprobate.Sothattheelection,ofwhichtheapostlespeaks,cannotconsistunlessweconfessthatGodseparatedfromallotherscertainpersonswhomitpleasedHimthustoseparate.Now,thisactofGodisexpressedbythetermpredestinating.”

11 Calvin,Institutes,3.23.1.12 Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism,p.75.13 Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism,p.75.“…according to His sovereign

and absolute will”–thatisCalvin’smaxim.14 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.76.


Vol.43,No.192

fromthealonesecretwillandpurposeofGod.”15 Certainly,CalvintaughtthatGod“caststheblamefor…perdition uponthosewhooftheirownwillbringituponthemselves.”AndhecautionedagainstrepresentingthereprobateassodestituteofthecommonoperationsoftheSpiritinGod’sdealingswiththeirresistingconsciences,thatthefaultfortheirsinscouldbecastuponGod.16And,atthesametime,heinsistedthat“itisutterlyinconsistenttotransferthe preparationfordestructiontoanythingbutGod’ssecretplan.”17 TotheobjectionthatsuchanexerciseofsovereigntymakesGodatyrant,Calvin,withnohintofbackwardstep,replies:“WithAugustineIsay:theLordhascreatedthosewhomheunquestionablyforeknewwouldgotodestruction.ThishashappenedbecauseHehassowilledit.ButwhyHesowilleditisnotforourreasontoenquire,forwecan-notcomprehendit.”18ForCalvin,God’swillis“somuchthehighestruleofrighteousnessthatwhateverhewills,bytheveryfactthathewillsit,mustbeconsideredrighteous.”19Indeed,reprobationitself“hasitsownequity,unknownindeed,tous,butverysure.”20

15 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism, p.77.16 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism, p.176.17 Calvin, Institutes,3.23.1.Seealso,insections1and7,“Thosewhom

Godpassesover,hecondemns,andthishedoesfornootherreasonthanthathewillstoexcludethemfromtheinheritancewhichhepredestinesforhisownchildren.…AsScripture,then,clearlyshows,wesaythatGodonceestablishedbyhiseternalandunchangeableplanthosewhomhelongbeforedeterminedonceforalltoreceivesalvation,andthosewhom,ontheotherhand,hewoulddevotetodestruction.Weassertthat,withrespecttotheelect,thisplanwasfoundeduponhisfreelygivenmercy,withoutregardtohumanworth:butbyhisjustandirreprehensiblebutincomprehensiblejudgmenthehasbarredthedooroflifetothosewhomhehasgivenovertodamnation.”

18 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.32.19 Calvin,Institutes, 3.23.2.20 Calvin,Institutes,3.23.9.Andheinsists,atthesametime,thatit

isperverseforsinnerstosuppressthecauseoftheircondemnation,whichisnothingotherthantheirownsin,inordertocasttheblameuponGod.Calvin’spointisthatnosinnershalleverarriveinhell,exceptitbeinthathewalkedallthewaythereinhisownsin.

November2009 93


4. Calvin’s understanding of foreknowledge. His opponents, like the universalists of our day, “barked andyapped”aboutGodchoosingandrejectingonthebasisofforeseenfaithandfree-will.InCalvin’sjudgment,“suchkindofmenhavenodropofthefearofGod.”21TopresentGodaslimitedandreactivewas,toCalvin,aformofblasphemy.22“Theopponents,”saysCalvin,“imaginethat[God]foreknowsfromanidlewatchtower,whathedoesnothimselfcarryout.”But,“GodisnotawatcherbuttheAuthorofoursalvation…theAuthorofoursalvationdoesnotgooutsidehimself.”23 “Godforeseesfutureeventsonlybyreasonofthefactthathedecreedthattheytakeplace.”24“TheelectofGodwereforeknownwhen,andbecause,theywerefreelychosen.”25CalvinhadahigherviewofGod.HesawtheGodofScripturetobeinfinite,eternal,omnipotent,self-sufficient,sovereign.Thushisextendeddefinitionofforeknowledgeasitis inGod:

Whenweattributeforeknowledge toGod,wemean thatall thingsalwayswere,andperpetuallyremain,underhiseyes,sothattohisknowledgethereisnothingfutureorpast,butallthingsarepresent.Andtheyarepresentinsuchawaythathenotonlyconceivesthemthrough ideas,aswehavebeforeus those thingswhichourmindsremember,buthetrulylooksuponthemanddiscernsthemasthingsplacedbeforehim.Andthisforeknowledgeisextendedthroughouttheuniversetoeverycreature.26

5. That leads us to Calvin’s doctrine of Election. Hewrites,

Scripture clearly shows,we say, thatGodonce establishedbyhiseternalandunchangeableplanthosewhomhelongbeforedeterminedonce for all to receive salvation…this planwas foundeduponhis

21 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation, p.38.22 Calvin,Institutes, 3.21.5.23 Calvin,Institutes,3.22.6.24 Calvin,Institutes,3.23.6.25 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.48.26 Calvin,Institutes,3.22.1.


Vol.43,No.194

freelygivenmercy,withoutregardtohumanworth….Nowamongtheelectweregardthecallasatestimonyofelection.Thenweholdjustificationanothersignofitsmanifestation,untiltheycomeintothegloryinwhichthefulfillmentofthatelectionlies.27

Calvinemphasizedthreethingsaboutthiselection: A. Election is…in Christ. CalvinseesGodasturningHiseyesuponChrist,arrayedinHisthreefoldoffice,28asthecompletebasisofsalvationfortheelect.

…sinceamongalltheoffspringofAdam,theHeavenlyFatherfoundnothingworthyofhiselection,heturnedhiseyesuponhisAnointed,tochoosefromthatbodyasmembersthosewhomhewastotakeintothefellowshipoflife.Letthisreasoning,then,prevailamongbeliev-ers:wewereadoptedinChristintotheeternalinheritancebecauseinourselveswewerenotcapableofsuchgreatexcellence.”29

Fourpointsofemphasisappear.First,GodhasmadeChristtobethe“fountainoflife,theanchorofsalvation,andtheheiroftheKingdomofheaven.”30Second,electionincorporatesparticularsin-nersinto Christforsalvation.Third,“Godhadnoregardtowhatwewereormightbe,butourelectionisfoundedinJesusChrist.”31Andfourth,GodopensHisfatherlymercyandkindlyhearttoHiselectinChrist.32 Election,then,istheeternalaspectofunionwithChrist.Theelectareplacedin Himeternallyinorderthattheymightbeunited to Him

27 Calvin,Institutes,3.21.7.28 Calvin,Institutes,2.15.1-6.29 Calvin,Institutes, 3.22.1.30 Calvin,Institutes, 3.24.5.31 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation, p.55.32 A further point of emphasis inCalvin is adoption. Election and

adoptionarealmostsynonymousinhismind.Electionistheeternaladop-tionofchildrenbytheFather,whoopensHishearttotheminandthroughChrist. ThisisthewayCalvinviewstherelationshipofthe“covenant.”Thecovenantrelationisfilial–andtherelationshipitaffordsisfilialloveandcommunion.

November2009 95


intime,bygracealone,throughfaithalone,inChristalone.33OutofthistruthCalvindrawsthesweetdoctrineofChristasthemirrorinwhombelieversmustfindtheassuranceoftheirownelection.“IfweseekGod’sfatherlymercyandkindlyheart,weshouldturnoureyestoChrist…forwehaveasufficientlycleartestimonythatwehavebeeninscribedinthebookoflifeifweareincommunionwithChrist.”34 B. Election is, therefore, completely unconditional. ItwouldnotbepossibletooveremphasizejusthowcompletelyCal-vinrepudiatedconditionalelection.ThisiswhatCalvinpreached:

Paulwouldfrustratewhatsoevermenmightbringofthemselves,andshowthatnothinghasdominionherein,buttheonlymercyofGOD!…So then, letusnotpretend thatwecaneitherwillor run:but itbehooveththatGodfindusaslost,andthatherecoverusfromthatbottomlesspit,andthatheseparateusfromthemwithwhomwewerelost,andtowhomwewerealike.35

That“grace…isultimatelyrenderedeffectualbythewillofman,”hewrites,isa“ fiction.”36Hiswordsalmostleapoffthepageashedemolishesfreewill:“Nofree-willofmancanresistHimthatwillstosave.Wherefore,wearetorestassuredthatnohuman wills canresist the will of God,whodoesaccordingtoHiswillall thingsinheavenandinearth,andwhohasalreadydonebyHiswillthethingsthatshallbedone.”37Whatunfoldsintime(providence)is,forCalvin,nothinglessthanGodbringingtopassHiseternalcounsel.Therefore,“tomakefaiththecause ofelection,”hewrites,“isaltogetherabsurd,andutterlyatvariancewiththeword.”38

33 Calvin,Institutes, 3.1.1.Thus,whenCalvinexplainshowtheelectreceivethegraceofChrist,hebeginswiththeworkof“theHolySpiritasthebondthatunitesustoChrist.”

34 Calvin,Institutes,3.24.5.35 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation,p.42.36 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.46.37 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.149.38 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.45.


Vol.43,No.196

C. Election is the singular fountain of grace. AccordingtoCalvin,reprobationaddsnothing;butelectionac-tivelybestowsChristandcompletesalvationinHim.“…allbenefitsthatGodbestowsfor thespiritual life…flowfromthisonesource:namely,thatGodhaschosenwhomhehaswilled,andbeforetheirbirthhaslaidupforthemindividuallythegracethathewilledtograntthem.”39 FollowingthedivinelogicofRomans8:29-30,Calvintracesgracefromunconditionalelectionlikeastreamfromitsfountain-head.Attimeshefollowsitdowntousfrometernalpredestination,throughef-fectualcalling,tojustification;andshowsusthatitmustissue,withoutfail,inglorification!40Atothertimesheteachesustotracegracebackupstreamfromfaith,toeffectualcalling,andfromcallingtoChrist,inwhomisouradoptionbytheFather.Thisishowheputit:“Godcallsandjustifies,inHisowntime,thosewhomHepredestinatedtotheseblessingsbeforethefoundationoftheworld.”41Effectualcallingisatestimonyandsignthatmanifestselection,42and“faithisthespecialgiftofGod,andbythatgiftelectionismanifestedto,andratifiedin,thesoulthatreceivesit.”43Furthermore,anyglimmerofholinessinthesaintsisreferred“totheelectionofGod,aswatersaretracedtotheiroriginating source.”44 Salvation is, therefore, theworkingofGod’spurestgrace—frombeginningtoend! ThissayssomethingaboutCalvin’sunderstandingofgrace. Grace,inCalvin’smind,always“delivers”God’schildrenintoChrist’shandsandpossession.45MuchadohasbeenmadeofCalvin’smentionofa“common”orgeneralkindnessofGodmanifestinHisprovidentialdealingswithallHiscreation.ButIwanttopointoutthatwheneverCalvin’scontexthasanythingtodo,even remotely,withsalvationorthegospel,Calvinhadgracehooked intopredestination.

39 Calvin,Institutes 3.22.2.40 Calvin,Institutes,3.21.7.41 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.112.42 Calvin,Institutes,3.21.7.43 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism, p.97.44 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism, p.154.45 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.51.

November2009 97


ForCalvin,whenitcametosalvation,theideaof grace flowingtothosewhomGodhaspassedbyandleftoutsideChristasobjectsofHisrighteoushatred—wasafalsehoodtobedemolished.46 Calvin sees a predestinating God—the omnipotent volitional being—who is eternally putting forth His favor to Christ and those particular sin-ners He has chosen to eternal life in Him.HeseesgraceasGod’spurposeful,personal,irresistible,savingfavor.47“Restassured,”headvisesus,

NohumanwillcanresistthewillofGod,soastopreventhimfromdoingwhathewills,seeingthatHedoeswhathewillwiththewillsthemselvesofallmankind.48

AnditalsosayssomethingaboutCalvin’sviewofwhatGod’spurpose,ordesire,iswiththepreachingofthegospel. Calvin refutes Pighius’ idea thatGod sends the gospel to bepreachedtoallmenbecauseHedesiresthesalvationofallmen.Calvin,holdingtothetruthofpredestination,bringsittobearonthetenaciouserrorofuniversalism.Whathewritesappliestoanyandeveryhintofuniversalism.“Thegreatquestion,”hesays,“lieshere:didtheLordbyHiseternalcounselordainsalvationforallmen?”49 Obviously

46Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.75.“WhenPighiusholdsthatGod’selectionofgracehasnoreferenceto,orconnectionwith,Hishatredofthereprobate,Imaintainthatreferenceandconnectiontobeatruth.InasmuchasthejustseverityofGodanswers,inequalandcommoncause,tothatfreelovewithwhichHeembracesHiselect.”

47Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism, p.150.How?“DoesHebindtheirbodies,Iprayyouwithchains?”asksCalvin,“Oh,no!Heworkswithin;Hetakesholdoftheirheartswithin;Hemovestheirheartswithin;anddrawsthembythose,now,newwillsoftheirownwhichHehasHimselfwroughtinthem.”

48Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,pp.149-150. 49Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,93-94.Pighiusobjects:Specialandpar-

ticularelectionisfalse,“becauseChrist,theredeemerofthewholeworld,commandedthegospeltobepreachedtoallmen,promiscuously,generally,andwithoutdistinction.Butthegospelisanembassyofpeace,bywhichtheworldisreconciledtoGod,asPaulteaches.And,accordingtothesameholywitness,itispreachedthatthosewhohearitmightbesaved.”And,“Itisquite


Vol.43,No.198

not—predestinationprovesotherwise.Thereforeheconcludes:“themercyofGodisofferedequallytothosewhobelieveandtothosewhobelievenot,sothatthosewhoarenotdivinelytaughtwithinareonlyrenderedinexcusable,notsaved.”And:“Thatthey[thereprobate,cjc]maycometotheirend,he[God]sometimesdeprivesthemofthecapacitytohearhisword;atothertimeshe,rather,blindsandstunsthembythepreachingofit.”50 Thisishowheputitwhenhepreachedaboutpreaching: “WhenGodgenerally sets salvation before us in JesusChristhisonlySon[thatis,intheoutwardcallthattouchestheearofall],it is tomakethereprobatesomuchthemoreinexcusablefor theirunthankfulness,inasmuchastheyhavedespisedsogreatabenefit:inthemeantimetheelectaretouched,andGodnotonlyspeakstothemoutwardlybutalsoinwardly.”51

CalvindidnotbelievethatthegospelissenttoallbecauseGoddesiresthesalvationofall!Hewithstoodthatidea.CalvinbelievedthatGoddesiresthesalvationofalltheelect,andbecausetheyarescatteredamongthereprobate,HecausesHisgospeltobeheardbyallmen.Calvinbelievedthattheoutwardcallisthemeansbywhich

manifestthatallmen,withoutdifferenceordistinction,areoutwardly called orinvitedtorepentanceandfaith.ItisequallyevidentthatthesameMediatorissetforthbeforeall,asHewhoalonecanreconcilethemtotheFather.Butitisasfullywellknownthatnoneofthesecanbeunderstoodorperceivedbutbyfaith,infulfillmentoftheapostlePaul’sdeclarationthat‘thegospelisthepowerofGoduntosalvationtoeveryonethatbelieveth’;thenwhatcanitbetoothersbutthe‘savourofdeathuntodeath’?asthesameapostleelsewherepowerfullyexpresseshimself”(Calvin’s Calvinism,p.95).

50 Calvin,Institutes,3.24.12.51 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation, p.63.SeealsoIn-

stitutes, 3.24.12.“AsGodbytheeffectualworkingofhiscalltotheelectperfectsthesalvationtowhichbyhiseternalplanhehasdestinedthem,sohehashisjudgmentsagainstthereprobate,bywhichheexecuteshisplanforthem.Whatofthose,then,whomhecreatedfordishonourinlifeanddestructionindeath,tobecometheinstrumentsofhiswrathandexamplesofhisseverity?Thattheymaycometotheirend,hesometimesdeprivesthemofthecapacitytohearhisword;atothertimeshe,rather,blindsandstunsthembythepreachingofit.”

November2009 99


GodsavesHiselectbygrace,andbringsthereprobatetotheirap-pointedendinthewayoftheirownwickedunbelief.52God’sdesiresarenever unfulfilled.53

II. Calvin’s Challenge to the Church Iwantnowtocallattentiontosomeofthemorepractical,andchallenging,aspectsofCalvin’sdoctrineofpredestination.

1. Calvin’s challenge to commitment to predestination as a truth we receive from God through His word. Calvindidnotjustteachadoctrinalsystem—heexperiencedthereformingpowerofsola scriptura. Consequently,hemodelswhathappenswhenamindwellversedinScriptureandenlightenedbytheSpiritsubmits itselfunderGodspeakingintheword;andhechal-lengesustodothesame—inamostpracticalway.ThisiswhatmadeCalvinsuchacatalystforthorough-goingreform.54Andthisiswhatittakestostandfastinthetruthofpredestination,againstthetide,inourday.So,let’stakeabrieflookatCalvin’steachingwithrespecttothefaithfulnessthatGodrequired. ThiswasCalvin’srule—fully as far, but no further. FaithmustfollowChristfully as far, but not one step beyond.Perhapsthebestwaytoshowhowcompletelyhesubmittedtothatrule,andhowfirmlyherequiredotherstodothesame,istoreadapassagefromoneofhissermons:

LetusknowthatourLordJesusChristteachesus,thatwecannotdoamisstoharkenandopenourears,toinquireandsearchafterwhatit

52 Calvin,Institutes, 3.24.12.53 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism,p.179.Weread:“Godalwayswills

thesamething;andthisistheverypraiseofHisimmutability.WhateverHedecrees,therefore,Heeffects;andthisisinDivineconsistencywithHisOmnipotence.AndthewillofGod,beingthusinseparablyunitedwithHispower,constitutesanexaltedharmonyofHisattributesworthyofthatdivineprovidence,bywhichallthingsinheavenandeartharegoverned.”

54 OnSunday,August16th2009,anABCradioprogramwasdedicatedtoadiscussionofJohnCalvin’slifeandinfluence.Itwasstated,andagreedbythepanel,that“withoutJohnCalvin,theworldweliveinwouldbeaverydifferentplace.”


Vol.43,No.1100

haspleasedhimweshouldknow:butletustakeheedthatwegonotbeyondit:forthereisnoragesogreatandoutrageous,aswhenwewillknowmorethanGodshowsus.…Letusthereforekeepthismean:thatistosay,tohearkentothatwhichGodpropoundsuntous:andassoonasheshallonceshuthismouth,letushaveallourunderstandingslockedupandcaptive,andletusnotendeavourtoknowmorethanheshallhavepronouncedtous.…Andwhenweshallbe…[troubled]tormented,letushaverecourseuntoGod:thatistosay,letushearkentothatwhichisshownusintheholyScripture,letuspraythatGodwillopenourearsandoureyes,totheendwemayunderstandhiswill.Andfurther,wehavethis;itbehoovesusaltogethertoresttherein,andtobequiet. For there is no cause of disputing any farther, when God has once pronounced his sentence.55

Calvin’schallengeis to faith! Faithmustgo as far as, but no further. ThatisaconstantrefraininCalvin.HerepeatsitsooftenthatyougettheimpressionCalvindidn’texpectanyonetoagreewithwhat he taught about predestinationunless this way of relating to the wordwasfixedintheheart.Andespeciallywhenhemusttouchupona“perplexing”pointhesetshishearersinsidethisprinciplebyreiteratingitbefore,during,andafterwhathehastosay! Now,thatprincipleisofcourseatwo-edgedsword—itcutsbothways,revealingeitherfaithorunbelief.Itholdsusbetweenarockandahardplace!Tothosewhodenypredestinationbecauseitraises“ques-tionsconcerningthejudgmentsofGodwhichareincomprehensible,andwhichareofsohighandprofoundmatter,thattheHolySpirithastoteachthem,”Calvinsays,“insteadofcurioussearching,wemustadorethem!”56“Letusnotbeashamedtobeignorantofsomethinginthismatterwhereinthereisacertainlearnedignorance”required.“WeceasetospeakwellwhenweceasetospeakwithGod.”57So,not one step beyond! Andatthesametime,Calvinjudgedittobefalsehumility,dishonouringtoGod,anddetrimentaltoGod’schildrentodrawbackfrompredestinationasifitisareefuponwhichwemight

55 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation, p.30.Seealsopp.28,29,31,36,37,52,53,54;andintheInstitutes,3.21.3.

56 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation,p.52.57 Calvin,Institutes,3.23.5.

November2009 101


beshipwrecked.Andhechidesthe“tearymoderation”ofthe“insipidcautiousones”58whowanttohidewhatGodteachesmentobelieve.HebelievedtheymadethemselveswiserthanGod,forimplyingthattheSpirithadletslipsomethingbymistakethatwasinjurioustoHischurch.Tosuchlike,Calvinsays—fully as far as He leads! TheinsipidcautiousonesofourdaymaynottakerefugeinCal-vin’scallingreprobation“thedreadful”decree.McNeillhasitrightwhenhe explains that “Calvin is awestruckbut unrelenting in hisdeclarationthatGodistheauthorofreprobation.”59Byallmeans,letusbeawestruck,butletusnotbedumbstruck.TheheirsofCalvinwillsurelybeinterestedintheunrelentingbitalso!Calvin’sdoctrineofpredestinationincludes,indeeddemands,justsuchsubjectiontoGodspeakingintheword.ForCalvin,denialand/orsuppressionofpredestinationwasadisplayofunbelief!

2. Calvin therefore holds a challenge to the churches to teach and preach predestination. Calvin’sconvictionwasthat,“Thedoctrineofelectionoughttobepreachedconstantlyandthoroughly.”Andwhenitcomestothosewho“carp,rail,barkorscoffatit,”Calvinchallengesustorememberthat,“iftheirshamefulnessdetersus,weshallhavetokeepsecretthechiefdoctrineof thefaith,almostnoneofwhich theyor their likeleaveuntouchedbyblasphemy.”60Predestinationisnotanaddendumtothegospel—norisitsomethingthatistobehiddenfromtheworldincaseitcausesoffence!Predestinationis,inCalvin’sjudgment,thechief doctrine. Andhischallengetothechurchesisthis:If opposition to predestination can drive you into an embarrassed silence—there is nothing you will ultimately stand on. Anditistellingtoseewhatheassociatesthiswith.WhatifsomeoneopposesthedoctrineoftheTrinity,heasks?Orwhatifsomeoneguffawsatyourbeliefthatonlyalittlemorethan5000yearshavepassedsincecreation?No!insistsCalvin,“God’struthissopowerful,bothinthisrespectandineveryother, that it hasnothing to fear from the evil-speakingofwicked

58 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism. p.150.59 McNeill,Institutes, 3.23.7,note17.60 Calvin,Institutes, 3.21.4.


Vol.43,No.1102

men.”61Forthechurchtosuppressandhidepredestination,becauseofwhatmenmightthinkorsay,isunbelief! ThatisCalvin! IfwewouldstandwithCalvin,wewillneedtosay:“Letthosederideuswhowill,ifGodbutgiveHisnodofassentfromheaventoour stupidity(asmenthink),andifangelsdobutapplaudit.”62

3. Finally, Calvin challenges us to embrace predestination as gospel truth—and to preach and teach it for the good of God’s elect, and the glory of God’s name. Calvinfirmlybelievedthatwithoutthetruthofpredestinationweare“blindtothethreegreatbenefitsofsalvation,namely,God’sfreegrace,God’sglory,andsincerehumility.”63Predestinationgroundsthegospelingrace,andhumblesusallundertherealitythat“thereisnothingbuthismercyalone.”64Anditopensbeforeustheonlysurehopeofsalvation,namely,thatthereismercywithGod.Furthermore,outofelectioninChristflowsallcomforttobelievers—andtheymaynotberobbedoftheinheritanceGodhasgiven.Itholdsusatthefootofthecross! Andbecausethatisso,Calvinhasacaution.Heinsists,withAugustine,that,“those things which are truly said can at the same time be fittingly said.”65 Whatdidhemeanby“fittinglysaid”?Thatisasubjectworthyofapaperinitsownright.ButthewayheputhisInstitutes together,andwhathewritestherein,showusclearlyenoughwhathemeant.Hebothmodelsandteacheswhathemeans. In the Instituteshemodelswhathemeanswhenhe leaveshisformaltreatmentofpredestinationuntilBookThree.WhenwemightexpecthimtodealwithpredestinationunderTheology,heleavesituntiltowardstheendofhistreatmentofthewayofsalvation.Cal-vinfirstleadsusthroughfaithasagiftofGod,throughregenerationandeffectualcalling, intounion with Christ. Then,onlywhenhe

61 Calvin,Institutes,3.21.4.62 Calvin,Calvin’s Calvinism, p.84.63 Calvin,Institutes, 3.21.1.64 Calvin,Sermons on Election and Reprobation,p.41-42.65 Calvin,Institutes, 3.23.14.

November2009 103


hasshownusthatinChristwe aremadepartakersofthebenefitsofsalvation,Calvinintroducesustopredestination! IfindinCalvinthreeprimaryreasonsforthisorder.First,hebelievedthatthenatural placeforpredestinationtoarise,asPaulshowsinRomans9,isinanswertothatcrucialquestion:Why,whenthegospel ispreached toall,doonlysomebelieve? Second,hebelievedfirmlyandpassionatelythatpredestinationmustneverbepreachedinsuchawaythatitsendssinnerstoGod’ssecretcounseltodiscover theirelection. Forpreaching todo that, saysCalvin,wouldbeto,“castmenintothedepthsofabottomlesswhirlpoolto be swallowed up; then he tangles himself in innumerable andinextricablesnares;thenheburieshimselfinanabyssofsightlessdarkness.”66Ifwewouldteachmenhowtosailtheshipoffaithsoastoavoidthisrock,“againstwhichnooneiseverdashedwithoutdestruction,”andtodososafely,calmly,andpleasantly,then“letthistherefore,bethewayofourinquiry:tobeginwithGod’scall,andtoendwithGod’scall.”67HereferstotheeffectualcallthatunitesthesoultoChristbyfaith.Andthatishisthird reason:electionmustberevealed to and ratifiedinthesoulbyfaith!Itisonlytobeliev-ers,indweltbytheSpiritofHisSon,thatGodgivesthatpowertobecometheSonsofGod,andtocryAbba,Father.Therefore,ifwewouldpreachpredestinationasCalvinwouldhaveitpreached,thenonethingmustbemadesoperfectlyclearthatthereisnotsomuchasahintofitsoppositeleftinthemindsofourhearers.KnowledgeofGod’selectinglovecanbehadinnootherwaythanbyfaithinJesusChrist.Preachingmustcallsinnersto“Christasthemirrorwhereinwemust,andwithoutself-deceptionmay,contemplateourownelection.”68Thus,predestinationdemandsthatsinnersbecalledtofaithinChristalone.Thatiswhatpreachingisfor.ItistounitetheelecttoChristbyfaith,buildthemupinChristbyfaith,andbringthemsafelyhometoChristthroughfaith! Predestination is, therefore, the great encouragement to preach the gospel.

66 Calvin,Institutes,3.24.4.67 Calvin,Institutes,3.24.4.68 Calvin,Institutes, 3.24.5.


Vol.43,No.1104

Calvin saw that predestination grounds the gospelmessage inGod’ssovereignmercy,anddirectssinnerstoChristalone.AndthisissofarfrommilitatingagainstthepreachingofChristtoallmen,thatitbeggarsbeliefthatthechargeisevermade! PredestinationletsthegospelofGodlooseasthepowerofGodtoallthosethatdobelieve.ItsendsthegospeltocalleverysinnertobelieveinChristastheSaviorofunworthysinnersofeverysort.Ithasadivinepromisethatisgroundedineternalelectiontoencourageandenrichwhosoeverbelieves!Anditsendsitforthwithconfidence—absolute andunshakable confidence—for it places thepreacher inthemidstofafallenworld,likeEzekielcalledtodeclarethewordofGodinthevalleyofdrybones.Cantheseboneslive?Theirresist-iblegraceofunconditionalelectionisabletomakethemlive!GODcandoit—andHewill,forallHiselect!GODwillcallHiselecttolifethroughthegospel.Thatistheencouragementtopreach!Thatisthebasisofmissions!Thatistheencouragementforustowitnessandsharethegospelwithourneighbours,toteachandnurtureourchildren—tobringthewordaseldersinadmonitionanddiscipline!ChristwillmakeHissheeptohearHisvoice! Thatisthegoodnews!GodisstillGod! ThanksbeuntoGod,whoalwayscausesustotriumphinChrist,andmakesmanifestthesavourofHisknowledgebyusineveryplace.Forwearethesavourofdeathuntodeath,andtotheotherthesavouroflifeuntolife.Andwhoissufficientforthesethings?Forwearenotasmany,whichcorruptthewordofGod:butasofsincerity,butasofGod,inthesightofGodspeakweinChrist(IICor.2:14-17).

l

November2009 105

BookReviews

Book Reviews

The Divine Authenticity of Scripture: Retrieving an Evangelical Heritage., byA.T.B.McGowan.DownersGrove,IL:InterVarsityPress,2008.240pages.Paper.[ReviewedbyHermanHanko.]

that thewayScripture func-tionsinthechurchoughttoberevisited,first,byanalyzingtherelationshipbetweenScripture,confessional statement andtradition, and second, by areassessmentofhowScriptureistobepreached(9).

Bysettlingthesquabblebe-tween “inerrantists” and “infal-libilists”theauthorhopestouniteevangelicalism on this crucialissue. The author has imposingcredentials. He is principal ofHighlandTheologicalCollege inDingwall,Scotland,adjunctpro-fessor of theology atReformedTheologicalSeminary,andvisitingprofessoroftheologyatWestmin-sterTheologicalSeminary. Onewouldthinkthatonewouldgetaclear,forthrightandsturdydefenseofthetruthofanerror-freeScrip-ture,butsuchisnotthecase. Weshouldtakeacloserlookattheauthor’sposition. Dr.McGowan clearly andemphaticallydoesnotwant any

Thisisaverypuzzlingbook.Theauthorprofessestoholdtotheerrorless character of Scripture,and yet he argues vehementlyagainstthedoctrineofinerrancy.Hesetsinerrancy,whichthebooksharply condemns, over againstinfallibility, when bothwordsmeanthesamethingaccordingtomyunabridgeddictionary.Hear-guesstronglyagainstthepositionofWarfieldandHodge,whoheldtoinerrancy,butrecommendsthepositionofJamesOrr.Ifindthebookstrangeandunclear.Butletmebemorespecific. Thepurposeofthebookissetdowninthe“Introduction.”

The purpose of this book isto contribute to discussionsaboutthenatureandfunctionof Scripture in evangelicalChristianity.Ishallarguethat,informulatingourdoctrineofScripture,weneed to reviewbothourvocabulary andourtheology, in order to clarifypreciselywhatwemeanwhenwespeakaboutScriptureastheWordofGod.Ishallalsoargue


Vol.43,No.1106

part of the positionof those hecallsinerrantists.Herefersespe-cially to thepositionon inspira-tiondevelopedanddefendedbyBenjaminWarfield andCharlesHodgeandfollowedbymanyinevangelical circles.He stronglyurges that their terminologyandwhathe considers theirpositionbe abandoned. He divides theinerrantists into three camps.Thefirsthecalls“fundamentalistinerrantistswhorejectalltextualcriticism, are largely academic,sometimestendtowardsdictationtheoriesandusuallyarguethattheKingJamesVersionoftheBibleis the only legitimate version.”Peoplebelongingtothesecondarecalled“TextusReceptusinerran-tistswhoofferadetailed textualargumentinfavouroftheviewthatthe autographa [theoriginalMSSof theBible,HH]areaccuratelyrepresentedby(andonlyby)theso-calledTextusReceptus.”Thethird camp are called “Chicagoinerrantists,beingthosewhocanaffirmtheChicagoStatementonBiblical Inerrancy as explainedabove”(apositionthattheauthorsays comes close to that of theinfallibilists)(103).Thefirsttwoarerejectedoutofhand;thelastisnot,thoughitismildlyreproved. The arguments against the

inerrantistarethese.Thefirstargu-mentisnotentirelyclear,but theauthor seems toarguenegativelythat inerrantistsfindit impossibletoexplaindiscrepanciesbetweendifferentpartsofScripturedealingwith the samesubject. Here theauthor seems to indicate thatwemust allow for certain errors inScripturethatdonotaffectthepur-poseofScriptureandareincidentaltoScripture’steachings(106). The second argument is noclearer. The argument is againvagueandforthatreasonnotofmuchvalue.Becauseinerrantistsbelievethattheautographawerewithouterror,howisittobeex-plainedthatGoddidnotpreservethesedocuments? (107-112). Agreatdealoftimeisspentonthisobjectiontotheinerrantistposi-tion, but the argument seems tometocometonothing.Errorlessautographa arethenecessaryre-sultofaGod-breathedScriptureandareessentialforthefaithofthechurch thatconfesses,alongwiththeWestminsterConfession,thattheScripturesarepreserved“by [God’s] singular care andprovidence[andare]keptpureinallages”(108). The third argument is verymuch like thefirst. Inerrantistsfind it difficult and unconvinc-

November2009 107

BookReviews

ingtoexplaindiscrepanciesandcontradictions. The objectionis summed up in thesewords:“Afterall, ifGod isable tousethe errant copies (manuscripts,translations,editions)thatwedohave,inordertodohiswork,whyinvestsomuchtheologicalcapitalin hypothetical originalswe donothave?”(113).Notehowthisargumentclearlyallowsforerrorsin the autographa. Thefourthargumentisthattoinsistonaninerrantautographaistomakeanunwarrantedassump-tionaboutGod—thatis,thatthenatureandcharacterofGod re-quirethatGod’sworkbewithouterror.Butthisisnotnecessarilytrue,saysMcGowan.Hewrites:“In other words, I agreewiththe inerrantists thatGod could havebroughtintobeinginerrantautographictexts,hadhechosentodoso,butI reject theirargu-mentthathemusthaveactedinthisway”(113,114).Butwhy?WhyrejectwhatGodcouldhavedonethatwasinkeepingwithHisnature:thatis,becauseHeisholyandwithoutanyimperfection,theScripturesHewrotebytheHolySpiritarealsoholyandwithoutimperfection. There isnogoodreasonfordenyingthis. But there are other reasons

why the author rejectswhat hecalls the inerrantist position.McGowan considers the iner-rantistpositionasrationalistic—although once again I cannotunderstandwhy this should bethecase.And,asamatteroffact,itisnotthecase,andthechargeissimplyfalse. Butwheneverythingelse issaidanddone, theauthor’smainobjection against the inerrantistpositionisthechargethatitdoesnotdojusticetothehumansideofScriptureandundermineshumanagency.Thisisrepeatedagainandagain(158,161).Theproblem,thebookclaims,withtheinerrantistsisthattheirviewleadstoamechani-calviewofinspiration,aviewthat,when Iwas inhigh school,wascalled thedictationor typewritertheoryof inspiration. Thisviewdestroysthehumanagent.OnlytheinfallibilistviewcandojusticetoScriptureandpreservethehumanelement in inspiration. And thisviewiswhatiscalledtheorganicviewofinspiration. Thisorganicview,which,ac-cordingtoMcGowan,maintainshuman authorship, retains thehumanity of the authors alongwith theirweaknesses (147). Italonegives proper credit to themenwhowrote the Scriptures,


Vol.43,No.1108

confrontedwithwaybackinmycollegedays.ButthebelieverofScriptureresponds:Aplagueonbothyourhouses.Thisdilemmawithwhichtheauthorconfrontsusisnotonlyanoldploy,butisverywrong. What is the biblical posi-tion? Firstofall,weoughttoquitplaying with words. To useinerrancy and infallibility ascontrary views is playingwithwords and confusing the issue.Bothwordsmeanthesamething.Inerrant means, according tomyunabridgeddictionary,“freefrom error.” Infalliblemeans,accordingtothesamedictionary,“Exempt from liability to error,absolutely trustworthyor sure.”Tomake the lattermean“liabletoerror”isunconscionable. Secondly,wemust indeedholdtoanorganicviewofinspi-ration.Butanorganicviewmustnotbeinterpretedtomean“opento error.” The organic viewofScripturemeans: 1)ThatGodconceivedof the entireBible inHiseternalcounselasthewrittenrecordoftherevelationofHimselfinJesusChristastheGodofoursalvation. 2)God sovereignlydetermined that because revela-tionisinhistory,thosewhomHe

anditalsoallowsforerrorsthatbelongtoallhumans(158,161). Andso,theauthoropines,itiswrongtospeakofverbalinspira-tion,becauseittoosuggestsame-chanicalviewofinspiration(184).AconceptionoforganicinspirationthatallowsroomforerrorsissetoveragainstamechanicalviewofScripture,andthesetwopositionsaretheonlyalternativestheauthorwillpermit. The key statement in thewholedebate,accordingtotheau-thor,theonewemuststeadfastlymaintain,isthattheScripturesareasGodintendedthemtobe.Thisisrepeatedseveraltimes.Butnoone,sofarasIknow,woulddis-agreewiththatveryobvioustruth.Byittheauthorisassumingwhathastobeproved:DidGodintendtogivemenaBiblewithmistakesinit?OrdidGodintendtogiveHischurchabookthatHeHim-selfwrotewithouterror,thoughitbethroughhumaninstruments? The author claims to beadvancing new ideas and newapproaches toScripture’s inspi-ration,buttosetthesetwoviewsoveragainsteachother(theiner-rantistposition,whichisaccusedof beingmechanistic, and theinfallibilist, which allows forerrors)isanoldploythatIwas

November2009 109

BookReviews

wouldusetowritethatrecordweremenofHischoosing.3)ThatGodsovereignlydetermined the timeinhistorythattheywereborn,thecircumstancesoftheirlifeinallitsdetails,theirgiftsandallthatgoestomakeuptheirpersonalities,theplacetheyoccupiedinthehistoryof redemption, andwhatpartofScripture theywouldwrite. 4)God inspired thesemen in theirwritingsbyHisHolySpirit.5)Theresult of theirwritingswas thatScriptureisGod-breathed(IITim.3:16) and that this Scripture iswrittenby“holymenofGod”whowere“movedbytheHolySpirit”(IIPet. 1:21). 6)ThesewrittenScriptures are themselves “prof-itable for doctrine, for reproof,for correction, for instruction inrighteousness:That theman ofGodmaybeperfect, thoroughlyfurnisheduntoallgoodworks”(IITim.3:16,17). OneoughttonoticethattheScriptures themselvesmake noexplicitmentionofahumanfac-tor or human agency. IITimo-thy 3:16 speaks only of divineagency, for the Scriptures are“God-breathed.” II Peter 1:21speaksofthemenGodused,butsaysofthemthattheywere“holymenofGod,” that is,menwhoin theirwritingwere preserved

fromerror.Itsaysthatthesemenweremovedby theHolySpirit,thewordusedbeingthesameaswouldbeused for shipsmovedbythewindoverthewater. Thewholeconceptofahu-managent isnoteverexplicitlymentionedinScriptureandcan-not be deduced from the twoclassicalproof texts for inspira-tion: IITimothy 3:16, 17, andIIPeter1:21.Itisadeduction.ItisadeductionfromthefactthateachbookoftheBiblebearstheunmistakable imprint of its hu-man instrument—the imprintofhispersonality,hisstyleofwrit-ing,hispurposeinbeingchosenas an instrument for revelation.MoseswritesasMoses,AmosasAmos,andPeterasPeter. Thisis obvious and has never beendenied in all the history of thechurch. But thequestion is theway inwhichGod used them.And a correct conception of anorganic inspirationwill explainGod’s absolute sovereignty intheworkofsalvationandintheinspirationofScripture,apartofthisgloriousworkofsalvation. Of the result of their beingmovedwithouttheirwills,thetextsays that theirwritingswerenot“ofanyprivateinterpretation”;thatis,theirwritingsneverexpressed


Vol.43,No.1110

their ownopinions about thingsor their own ideas. Thesewrit-ingsdidnotcomebythewillofman:averystrongstatementthatabsolutelyexcludesallpossibilityoferrorandthatmakesScripturemoretrustworthythaneyewitnessaccounts(IIPet.1:19). Itiswell,ratherthantamper-ingwithScripture’s infallibility,thatwetakeheedtoScriptureasalightthatshinesinadarkplace(thisworldofsinanderror)untilthe day dawn, and the day starariseinourhearts—whenChristtakesustoheavenandwehavenoneedforScripturebecauseweshallseeHimfacetoface(IIPet.1:19). I have used the analogy(of inspiration and salvation)elsewhere;itisaproperone,forScripture is a part of the salva-tionoftheelectandthemeanstobringsalvationinChristtothem.Hence, the inspiration ofScrip-tureisamiracleassurelyasoursalvationisamiracle.McGowanmustnothurlatusthechargeofrationalism;heistherationalist,forhedeniesthemiracle.Webe-lievetheScripturesareconnectedwithoursalvation,andbotharemiraculousworks of almightyGod.Justasthereisnoelementof

humancooperationandnosmid-geonofahumancontributioninGod’swork of saving us, so istherenoelementofhumaninven-tion,cooperation,orcontributioninthewritingofScripture. But just asGod savesus asrational andmoral creatures sothat,althoughHeworksinusbothtowillandtodoofHisgoodplea-sure(Phil2:13),andjustasthosegoodworksthatHeworksinusareourworksandevenrewarded,soScriptureisnotbythewillofman,butitremainsthewritingsofPaulandMosesandIsaiahand…. To deny Scripture’s ownteaching on inspiration is todenythatsalvation,whichcomesthroughScripture,istheworkofGod. Bezawas speaking of thechurchwhen he addressed thebloodthirstyDukeofGuise,buthis remark can just aswell beapplied to Scripture. “Sire, itbelongs, in truth, to the churchofGod, in thenameofwhich Iaddressyou,tosuffer blows,notto strike them. But at the sametime let it be your pleasure toremember that the church is ananvilwhichhaswornoutmanyahammer.”n

November2009 111

BookReviews

Election and Free Will: God’s Gracious Choice and Our Responsibility,byRobertA.Peterson.Presbyterian&ReformedPublishing,2007.208pages.Paper.(PartoftheSeries,“ExplanationsinBiblicalTheology.”)[ReviewedbyHermanHanko.]

inhistheology,andtooreadytocondemnotherswhodonotholdfirmly towhat he considers thetruth of sovereign election andreprobation.Butitisnotamatterofbeingpicky.Abriefcompari-sonwithLuther’steachingonthesubjectinThe Bondage of the Will andCalvin’streatiseonThe Eter-nal Predestination of God, not to mentiontheemphaticstatementsofDordtandWestminster,clearlydemonstrates the inadequacyofthistreatmentofthesubject. The dissatisfaction startsearly in the bookwhen the au-thorbemoansthefact that thereis antagonismbetweenCalvin-istsandArminiansandholdsupthe friendship betweenGeorgeWhitefield and JohnWesley asbeinganexampleworthemulat-ing.Butifpastdefendersofthetruthwould have followed hisadvice,LutherwouldhavebeenfriendswithErasmus—andtherewouldhavebeennoreformationinGermany;CalvinwouldhaveenjoyedthefriendshipofPighiusandBolsec,andthebattleforthetruthwouldhavebeenlost;Dordtwould have shaken handswith

OnewhoseloveisReformedtheology picks up a bookwiththisorasimilartitlewithacertaineagerness.Thebookisonadoc-trinethatisclosetohisheartandoneofsuchinteresttothechurchandtobelieversthat ithasbeena subject of discussion, debate,anddisagreementforover1,500years—that is,since the timeofthe great bishop ofHippo,Au-gustine.Theauthor,professorofsystematictheologyinCovenantTheological Seminary, workswithin the tradition of Presby-teriandevelopment of the truth,whichreacheditscrowninggloryattheWestminsterAssembly. From a certain viewpointthe book defends the doctrineof sovereign election and holdsfirmlytoman’saccountabilityforhissin.Itevenmakesbriefmen-tion of reprobation and speaksof reprobation as sovereign (indistinction from theArminianpositionofconditionalpredesti-nation)(139-142). Andyetonesoonfindshimselfdissatisfiedandtroubledbythebook.Itiseasytosay,ofcourse,thatonewhoistroubledbythebookistoopicky


Vol.43,No.1112

theArminiansandwished themGodspeedrather thancondemn-ing their theology as Pelagian-ism resurrected from hell; andWestminster would have soldouttheshoptotheAmyraldiansrepresentedattheAssembly. Thedissatisfactionincreaseswhenone comes across the au-thor’s altogether inaccurate de-scription of hyper-Calvinism, adescription that basically putsconsistently Reformedmen inthe hyper-Calvinist camp. Hedescribeshyper-Calvinism’smaintenets to be: “First,God lovesthe elect, but not the non-elect.Second, there is no such thingas a universal gospel call, butonlyaneffectivecalltotheelect.Third,strictlyspeaking,unbeliefisnotasinbecausethenonelectcannot possibly exercise savingfaith. Fourth,anythingshortofthisdegreeofCalvinismissub-Christian”(31). Fromthiscontriveddescrip-tionofhyper-Calvinism,itisclearthathewantstoputallthosewhodenya loveofGod forallmenandwhorepudiatetheideaofagracious andwell-meant gospeloffer in the campof the hyper-Calvinists.NoReformedmanisintimidatedbythis,forthechargeis old and has been answered

timeswithoutnumber. Althoughwhat the authorsaysaboutdivineelectionistruetakenalone,heomits importantandnecessaryaspectsofthedoc-trine.HefailstodefineelectionasadecreeofGod’scounsel(thereisnomentionof the counselofGodinthewholebooksofarasIcouldsee),andhethereforehasnoroomforthedecreeofelectionaseternal,unchangeable,andinnowaybasedonhumanresponsesorworks. Idonotmeantosaythattheauthordoesnotcondemnconditionalelection;hedoes,butthefullimpactofitislostwhenit isdiscussedapartfromGod’scounsel. Election“inChrist,”whilere-ferredtofromtimetotime,isnotgivenitsfullsignificance.Thatis,ChristandtheelectgiventoHimarenotdescribedintermsoftheorganism thatGod chooses andsaves,andbecauseofwhichtheelect stand in everlasting unionwithChristtheirHead. Electionasthefountainandcause of all salvation (whichtheCanonsemphaticallyassert)is barelymentioned. And thisserious omission demonstratestheimportanceofunderstandingand explaining election as “inChrist.”

November2009 113

BookReviews

Asamatteroffact,theauthorhasaverypeculiardefinitionofthe phrase “chosen inChrist,”a definition that seems to comeperilously close to denying theeternityofelection.Hewrites:

God’s choice of us ‘in himbefore the foundationof theworld’(v.4;seealsov.11[ofEphesians 1,HH] speaks ofourunionwithChristbeforecreation. But thesewordscannotspeakofactualunionwith Christ, for before ourcreation byGodwedid notexist. Instead, Paul speaksofGod’s plan to unite us toChrist.Therefore,themean-ingofthewords‘hechoseusinhimbeforethefoundationoftheworld’isthatGodnotonlychosetosavehispeople,butalsoplannedthemeansbywhichtheyshouldexperiencethatsalvation;hepurposedtounite them spiritually to hisSon(106).

The error lies in treating thedecree of election outside thecounselofGod. Reprobation,while brieflymentioned and described in abiblicallycorrectway,isnotde-finedintermsofbeingapartofthesamedecreeandelection—astheCanonsofDordtsay(Canons

1/6). The pertinent part of thisarticlereads:

That some receive the giftoffaithfromGodandothersdo not receive it proceedsfromGod’seternaldecree…,according to which decree[note the singular]He gra-ciously softens the hearts oftheelect…whileHeleavesthenon-electinHisjustjudgmentto theirownwickednessandobduracy.

TofollowthistruthoftheCanonswouldrequirethattheauthordealwith the relationship betweenelectionandreprobationandtheneedforboth.Thebookisweakatthiscrucialpoint.Theauthorobserves thatJohnWesley’sha-tred of predestinationwas basi-cally his hatred of reprobation.Thisisstilltruetoday. Whentheauthorturnstothesubjectofman’sresponsibility,heisequallyweakandnotalwaysallthatclear. Perhaps I can mention inpassingthat thechapteronFreeWill opens rather strangely andinappropriatelywitha referencetoaprofessionalbaseballplayerwho,wearetold,isanevangeli-calChristian.Apartfromtheno-tion that amanwho repeatedly


Vol.43,No.1114

Theentireparagraphinwhichthefreedomofchoiceisdefined,andthatisakeyparagraphinthediscussion,reads:

It is fruitful to consider hu-man freedom in light of theunfolding biblical story. AtcreationGodgaveAdamandEve freedom of choice andtrue freedom. Freedom ofchoiceis theabilitytomakespontaneous choices accord-ingtotheinclinationsof thewill.Thisisanunlosablepartof our humanness. By con-trasttruefreedomislosable,andinfactwaslostinthefall.Truefreedomisrelational;itis the ability to know, love,serve, and enjoyGod as heintended(132).

It is especially in the areaof freedom of choice that theauthor,when he should be ab-solutely clear, becomes veryfuzzy. He speaks a great dealofhumanagencyanditsimpor-tance; he speaks of the relationbetweendivine sovereignty andhumanresponsibilityas“doubleagency”; he feels compelled totake hyper-Calvinism to taskonce again. NoReformedmanisoffendedbyavendettaagainsthyper-Calvinism,buttheunderly-ing assumption inhisdefinition

desecratestheSabbathcanbean“evangelicalChristian,”itseemsincongruous to begin such animportantchapterwiththissub-ject. Itmaybethat therelationbetweenadiscussionoffreewillandaprofessionalbaseballplayerisinthestatement:“Hegavehisheart to JesusChrist and askedhimtobecomeLordofhislife”(125).Ifthisinterpretationistrue,theauthorofthisbooksurelytipshishandinrevealingwhathecon-siderstobetherelationbetweenfaithinChristandthedecreeofelection. The terminology Petersenuses is different fromwhat hasbeen used in the history of thechurch.HecallsthefreedomwehavetokeepGod’slaw“thefree-domofourrelationtoGod.”Hedistinguishes between that free-domandwhathe calls freedomof choice. While the author isnotalwaysclearonwhatthistermmeans,heprobablyreferstothefreedomamanhasasarationalandmoral creature. His defini-tion is not helpful: “Freedomof choice is the ability tomakespontaneous choices accordingto the inclination of thewill”(132). Petersen does stronglyinsiston theabsoluteslaveryofthedepravedsinner(129).

November2009 115

BookReviews

ofhyper-Calvinismseems tobethat thosewho consistently de-fendabsolutesovereigntyintheworkofsalvationarealsohyper-Calvinists.Thisiswrong. Theelementsthataremissinginthewholetreatmentoffreewillarethese.Godaloneisabsolutelyfree,forHeistheCreatorofallmen. Adam’s freedom inPara-dise,while indeedafreedomofmoralchoice,wascircumscribedbyGod’s absolute sovereignty.Adamwasacreature,dependentonGodforhisveryexistenceandabletoliveonlywithinthescopeofhisowncreatureliness. Adam’sfallwasnotoutsidethecounselofGod.Tomaintainthat itwas is to put two inde-pendentpowers in theuniverse:Godandsin.ThereissomethingGnostic or evenManichaean inthatdualism. Allman’sso-calledfreedomofchoiceafter thefallwasalsocircumscribed byGod’s sover-eignty. The freedomof the re-deemedchildofGodispossibleonlybecauseChristfulfilledthelaw forHis elect, because theSpiritwritesthelawontheheartsofGod’speopleandbecauseGodworksinHispeople“bothtowill and todoofhisgoodpleasure”(Phil.2:13).

Thefreedomoftheredeemedisagreater freedomthanAdampossessed, forAdam’s freedommade a fall possible,while ourfreedommeansthattofallfromChristisimpossible. Human accountability iswritten on every page ofHolyWrit. While not in any wayclaimingtounderstandfullythemysteriouswaysofGod,wemayconfidentlysayatleastthatmanremains responsible for his sinbecausehesinswillingly.God’ssovereignty remains intact, andman’saccountabilitybringshimto hell, unless he is redeemedin the bloodof the cross. Goddoes not, though in amysteri-ousway, violate thewill of thesinner—eventhoughHeremainssovereignalsooversin.Itdoesnot troubleme, nor do I seek afullsolution to theproblem,forallGod’sworksofwhichIamawitness every day aneware farbeyondmyunderstanding.Ican-notevenunderstandhowabladeofgrassgrowsorhowGodformsababyinthewombofitsmother(Ps.139).God’swaysarebeyondfindingout—always. The author iswell advisedtohavedonehisresearchbeforetakingpeninhand.AreadingofAugustine’sThe Freedom of the


Vol.43,No.1116

Will, aswell as ofAugustine’sEnchiridion andwritingsagainstthePelagians,wouldhavebeenhelpful. HementionsLuther’smagnificentbookThe Bondage of the Will, buthe shouldhaveusedit.Calvinwroteabookonthesamesubject,andtoreaditisofgreatbenefitinadiscussionof the question the author ad-dresses.DordtandWestminster

hadmuchtosayonthesubject,and the question, addressed inthe light of their confessionalstatements,would have alteredsignificantlythecontentsofthebook.Inotherwords,abookonsuchatheologicalsubjectwrit-tenoutsidethemainstreamofthechurch’sthinkingandconfessionisabookboundtobeamiss.

n

The New England Theology: From Jonathan Edwards to Edwards Amasa Park,ed.DouglasA.SweeneyandAllenC.Guelzo.GrandRapids:BakerAcademic,2006.320pages.$29.99.Softcover.[ReviewedbyDouglasJ.Kuiper.]

This book is a “collectionof theNewEnglandTheology’sprimary texts” (24)—selectionsfromthewritingsofthetwoJona-thanEdwards (thewell knownpreacher,andhissonbythesamename), JosephBellamy,SamuelHopkins,SarahOsborn,NathanStrong, Nathanael Emmons,StephenWest, John Smalley,Asa Burton,TimothyDwight,NathanielW.Taylor,JamesHar-risFairchilds,CharlesG.Finney,EdwardsAmasaPark,andHarrietBeecherStowe. The thesis thatthe book demonstrates is thatthesewriterswerecommittedtotheNewEnglandTheology.

Eachselectionisintroducedbysomeeditorialcommentsofapageortwo,givinganoverviewoftheroletheauthorplayedinthemovement and explainingwhattheselectioncontributed.

“New England Theology” Claimedbytheeditorstobe“America’sfirstindigenoustheo-logicalmovement” (24), “NewEnglandTheology”referstotheteachings of JonathanEdwards(died 1758) as developed byothermenover two succeedinggenerations.This“NewEnglandTheology”wasareactionbothtoCalvinisticorthodoxyontheone

November2009 117

BookReviews

hand, and to theEnlightenmentontheother. Central to this theology isEdwards’viewofthefreedomofthewill,andtherelatedmatteroftherolethesinnerhimselfplaysin his own conversion. In partone, the editorsdevelop thisbyquotingselectionsfromEdwards’worksA Divine and Supernatural Light,Religious Affections, hisbiographyofDavidBrainerd,andhisFreedom of the Will. Part two traces the devel-opment of this thought into amovementthroughtheworkandwritingsofvariouspeople,chief-ly Edwards’ twomost famousstudents, Joseph Bellamy andSamuelHopkins.Thismovementwas founded on the principlesthatrevivalswerelegitimateanddesirable;thatfullchurchmem-bershipshouldbelimitedtothosewho gave evidence of true re-newal;thateverysinnerisableofhimselftorepentandisrequiredtoliveaholylifethat“amountedalmost tomoral perfectionism”(70);andthatChrist’satonementwassufficientforallmen,andtheonlyreasonnotallweresavedistheirown failure tobelieveandrepent. The Edwardsean view ofatonementissetforthatgreater

length in part three. Edwardssubscribed to the governmentaltheory: in the death ofChrist,GodshowedHimselftohatesin,andabletodestroysinners. Hedidthis,nottoexpiateHiswrathand provide atonement, but togiveman every reason to turnfromsinintruerepentance. Part four, entitled“Edward-seanEthics,” purposes to dem-onstratethatthepreachersoftheNew England Theology werepracticalandrelevanttothetimes:they encouragedmissionwork,anddenouncedslavery. Partfivedealswiththemove-ment’sdivisionintotwofactionsinthefirsthalfofthe1800sovertheissueofsin’sorigin—referringnownottoitshistoricalorigininAdam, but to the question, “Inwhatpartofmandohisownpar-ticularsinsoriginate?”NathanaelEmmonsspokeofsinasarising,notinthenature,butinthefunc-tionsofman’swill.AsaBurtoncame closer to locating sin’sorigininman’snature,whenhefounditinman’sheart,whichhedistinguishedfromman’swill. Part six focuses on furtherdevelopments in this school ofthought also in the early 1800swiththefoundingofthedivinityschool atYale, inNewHaven,


Vol.43,No.1118

Connecticut. NathanielTaylorgave newmeaning to the term“originalsin”byemphasizingthatAdam’sguiltisnotimputedtothehumanrace.Inhiswork“Concio Ad Clerum”(“ChargetotheCler-gy”),heexplainedwhathemeanswhen teaching thatmankind isentirelydepravedbynature:“Idonotmeanthattheirnatureisitself sinful, . . .butImeanthat theirnatureistheoccasion,orreasonoftheirsinning”(201;emphasishis). Taylor also revised thedoctrineof regeneration, claim-ingthatduringregenerationmanbecomesconsciousof the truth;andheendeavoredtomergetheideasofGod’ssovereigntyinsal-vationandthefreedomofman’swillbyteachingthat“GodalwayseffectswhatGodintendstoeffectinus…bywinningoverourwills”(214). ThatCharlesG.Finneywaspartofthismovement,inspiteofhiscriticismsofEdwards,istheargumentofpart7.Theeditorsassert that Finney’s criticismswere not really responding toEdwardsassuch,buttoEdwardsas portrayed byNathanielTay-lor. Finney’s own teachings,later classified as the “OberlinTheology,”reliedheavilyontheNewEnglandTheology.Finney

himself appealed toEdwards inteaching that sin lay not in thenature,butinthewill,sothatthesinnerwasable tochoose tobesaved. Themovement endedwithEdwardsAmasaPark(died1900),andhis theologyof the intellect(reason)andofthefeelings(Chris-tianpiety), treated inpart eight.Thattheseweretwodistinctthe-ologies,eachvalidinthemselves,andyetoverlapping,servedashispresupposition to explainwhyGodcannotlienorrepent(ISam.15:29) andyet did repent (Gen.6:6). Parkalsowrote“thefirst-ever, comprehensivehistory”ofthismovementinhisessay“NewEnglandTheology”(256). The concluding part of thebook notes how the novelistHarrietBeecherStowe,bornandraisedaccordingtotheteachingsofthismovementbutnevercom-pletely happywith them, inte-gratedthetenetsofthemovementin her novels, at times creatingsomeof herfictional charactersasministers either in sympathywith,ornotinsympathywith,themovement. Thebookendswithaselectbibliography, notmeant to beexhaustive,whichcoversalmost40pages.

November2009 119

BookReviews

“Consistent Calvinism” The book gives ample tes-timony to the fact that themenof theNewEnglandTheologymovementconsideredthemselvesconsistent Calvinists. Whilepointing outways inwhich themovement departed from tra-ditionalCalvinism, the editorsexpresstheirownopinionthattheNewEnglandTheologyisaformof“evangelicalCalvinism”(21). Theeditorsnote that, in themindsofBellamyandHopkins,JonathanEdwards’dismissalfromNorthampton“onlyunderscoredthe degree of New England’sapostasy from trueCalvinism”(15). They “saw themselves asrestorersofpureCalvinism”(71).Denyingthatsinoriginatesinthenature,NathanaelEmmonswas“justaseagernottoloseagriponCalvinismintheprocess”(173).NathanielTaylorandhiscohorts“formedakinder,gentlerevangel-icalCalvinism”(188).Explain-ingEphesians2:3(“andwerebynaturethechildrenofwrath”)soastodenythatsinarisesinman’snature,Taylor appealed toCal-vinandtheWestminsterdivines(197).EvenFinney’scriticismsof Edwards supposedly “wereinfluenced not by a repudiationof Calvinism…” (220) but by

NathanielTaylor’s portrayal ofit.FairchildspeaksoftheOberlinTheologyasbeing“NewSchoolCalvinism”(222).InhisessayonNewEnglandTheology,EdwardsAmasaParkwrote: “NewEng-landTheologyisCalvinisminanimprovedform….ThesubstanceofourtheologyisCalvinistic….ItisnotmereCalvinism,butitisconsistentCalvinism”(260).Infact,accordingtoPark,

theNewEnglandtheologiansnotonlystood in the lineofEdwards but also developedEdwards’sthoughtin“asys-tem theminutiae ofwhich”even “Calvin andAugustinewould have defended” hadthey “livedwhen the lawsofinterpretationandthephi-losophyofcommonsensehadbeenas clear andprominentas they have been duringandsincethetimeoftheEd-wardses”(256).

AntiCalvinism My own assessment, basedontheevidencepresentedinthisbook, is much different fromtheNewEnglandTheologiansthemselves.TheywerenotCal-vinists.TheywerenotmodifiedCalvinists.TheirteachingswerenotmerelyunCalvinistic. They


Vol.43,No.1120

wereAntiCalvinists—portrayingtobetheverythingofwhichtheywere the very opposite. Theywere inherent liberals. Eventhosewhodonotwant toplaceEdwardshimselfinthiscategorymust honestly admit that histeachingonfreewillcontradictstheCalvinisticdoctrinesoftotaldepravityandirresistiblegrace. Thisassessmentisnotminealone. One familiar with thehistoryoftheperiodknowsthatmanypreachersandtheologians,thoseofPrincetonamongthem,were alarmed atwhat theNewEnglandtheologianswereteach-ing. B.B.Warfield, speakinghighlyofEdwardshimself,wrotethatit“wasEdwards’misfortunethathegavehisnametoaparty”thatwas“inmanyrespecttheex-actantipodesofEdwards”(20). The antiCalvinism of thismovementbecomesclear,whenonecomparesitsteachingstothedoctrines of Calvinism, popu-larlysummedupbytheacronym“TULIP.” The New Englandtheologians’ view of freewillcontradicts total depravity andirresistible grace. The govern-mental view of Christ’s deathcontradicts limited atonement.RedefiningthenatureandscopeofChrist’satonementnecessarily

requiresonetothinkofelectionintermsotherthanunconditional. The editors are candid thatEdwards’ownstudentsdepartedfromCalvinism. Bellamy andHopkins

had difficulty squaring theirideaswiththeofficialCalvin-istorthodoxyNewEnglandershad inherited fromGeneva,theSynodofDordt,theWest-minsterConfession,andeventheirownCambridgePlatformof1648.Inregardtothefivecardinal “points” ofCalvin-istorthodoxy,Hopkins’sandBellamy’s preaching neededcarefulexplainingtoconnectwith fourof them,while thenotionofanaturalabilityinallsinnersseemedtocutdirectlyacrossthefifth,thelimitationof the efficacyof the atone-mentonlytotheelect(71).

Inaddition to theseobviouspoints,wehavedrawnattentionto the way in which theNewEngland theologians redefinedoriginalsinandthenre-explainedthewayinwhichsinisamatterofthenature.ThatAdam’sguiltisnotimputedtous(130)andthatnot Christ’s righteousness butonlythebenefitsofthatrighteous-nessareimputedtous(129)wereothererrorstaughtsorigorously

November2009 121

that these theologians broughttheirteachings

into conflictwithwhat hadbeen a central belief ofCal-vinist orthodoxy since thesixteenthcenturyand,forthatmatter, theProtestantRefor-mationitself:theunderstand-ingthattherighteousnessthatsavesasinnercomesnotfromthesinnerbutfromatransfer(or imputation)of themeritsofChristtotherepentantbe-liever(109).

HowelsecanCharlesFinneybeviewedasEdwardsean,exceptthat thismovement, beginningwithEdwardshimself,wasprin-cipallyArminian?

The Book’s Value The book’s value is three-fold. First,itpresentsthewritingsand teachings of thesemen asbeing part of amovement, anddemonstratingthatthemovementoriginatedinEdwards,thoughhe

did not intend to start amove-ment. Second, it clearly demon-strateswhatthementhemselvesdenied, andwhat supporters ofEdwardswouldnotwanttohear:EdwardswasnotaCalvinist,andthemovementthathestartedwasnotCalvinistic,inthetruesenseof the term. Edwards himselfwasprincipallyArminian,andasthemovement gainedmomen-tum,thatbecamemoreandmoreclear. Third,thebookdemonstratestheantiCalvinismofthesetheo-logians from their ownoriginalwritings, so thatwearenot leftto conjecture. The book is notprimarily a scholarly work inwhichtwomenendeavortoshowsomethingaboutEdwardsandhisfollowers,andsupporttheirviewswithcopiousreferencestootherscholarsandtooriginalsources;itpresentsthesourcesthemselves,sothatthereadercaneasilydis-cernthetruthofthematter.n

BookReviews


Vol.43,No.1122

John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man, byCarlR.Trueman.Burlington,VT:AshgatePublishingCo,2007.132pages.$29.99.Softcover.[ReviewedbyDouglasJ.Kuiper.]

This themeTrueman intro-ducesinhisfirstchapter,thetitleofwhichisthesameasthetitleofthebook.Thechapterbeginswith a biographical survey ofOwen’slife,notingtheworksthathepublished,hissermonsbeforeParliamentaftertheexecutionofKingCharles,andhismovefromaPresbyteriantoanIndependentviewof churchgovernment; in-deed,OwenwasoneofthosewhorevisedtheWestminsterConfes-sionwiththeSavoyDeclarationof1658. Acknowledging thatOwenwas a Puritan, Trueman givesreasonswhyheratherpreferstospeak ofOwen as an orthodoxReformed theologian: “this isatoncebothmoreeasilydefinedand less limiting than the cat-egory of Puritanism” (6). HegivesafullerexplanationofwhathemeanswhensayingthatOwenis a “Catholic” and a “Renais-sance”man. Thenat lengthhegivesthebackgroundforOwen’spolemicsagainstRome,Armini-anism,andSocinianism,statingthat“at theheartofhisdisputewiththesegroupsishisattitudeto the priesthood of Christ”

Thisbookispartofaseriesentitled “Great Theologians,”whichAshgate is publishing.Other theologians treated inthis series includeAthanasius,Aquinas,Barth, andAnselmofCanterbury. Thesubjectof thispresentworkisJohnOwen,who“was without doubt the mostsignificant theological intellectinEnglandinthethirdquarteroftheseventeenthcentury”(1).CarlTrueman,author,isprofessorofhistorical theology and churchhistoryatWestminsterSeminaryinPhiladelphia. ThemainthemeofthebookisthatthetheologyofJohnOwen(1616-1683)was fundamentallyReformed,but at the same timebased on and continuing thetheologyoftheearlychurch,par-ticularlyAugustine(toconveyallthisthetitleusesthephrase“Re-formedCatholic”),andalsoinflu-encedbyhisextensivelearning,andinparticularhisknowledgeoftheClassics(so“Renaissance”).Thiscombinationmadehimasol-idtheologian;andespeciallyhislearningmadehimaformidableopponenttoRomanCatholicism,Arminianism,andSocinianism.

November2009 123

(17).Inconcludingthischapter,Truemanarguesthattheneglectof scholars over the centuriestostudyOwen“hasmoretodowithwriting the history, ratherthan the intrinsic mediocrityof his thought” (32)—meaningthatOwenhimselfisworthyofmuchmorestudy,butthat,beingaPuritan,andexcludedfromtheChurchofEngland in1662,hewas on the “losing” side, andhistorians prefer towrite aboutwinners. Inchapter2Truemaninves-tigatesOwen’sdoctrineofGod.Owen’sdoctrineofGodwasor-thodox.Whilehedidnotdevelopthedoctrineinanynotableway,hecertainlydefendeditpolemi-cally. Particularly, this chapterfocuses onOwen’s defense ofGod’s simplicity, immensityand omnipresence, and justice(regarding this latter attribute,Owen’sviewsunderwentchangeanddevelopmentduringhislife);Owen’steachingsontheTrinity,thedeityofChrist,andthedeityof theHolySpirit; andOwen’sviewofGod’sforeknowledgere-gardingcreationandhistory,overagainsttheideaofmiddleknowl-edge,whichwas taught in hisday.Thischapterendsbyquot-ingthefirstsevenquestionsfrom

a satirical catechism thatOwenwroteinresponsetotheSocinianJohnBiddle’sviewofGod’sat-tributes,whichquoteunderscoresOwen’suseofwit—bitinghumor,attimes—inhiswritings.Forthereader’sbenefit,Iquotethissec-tioninfull(p.66):

Qu. 1:WhatisGod?Ans.Godisaspirit,thathatha bodily shape, eyes, ears,hands,feet,liketous.Qu. 2:WhereisthisGod?Ans. In a certain place inheaven,uponathrone,whereamanmayseefromhisrighthandtohisleft.Qu. 3:Dothheevermoveoutofthatplace?Ans.Icannottellwhathedothordinarily, but he hath for-merlycomedownsometimesupontheearth.Qu. 4:What doth he do inthereinthatplace?Ans.Amongotherthings,heconjecturesatwhatmenwilldoherebelow.Qu. 5: Doth he, then, notknowwhatwedo?Ans.Hedothknowwhatwehave done, but notwhatwewilldo.Qu. 6:Whatframeisheuponhis knowledge and conjec-ture?Ans.Sometimesheisafraid,

BookReviews


Vol.43,No.1124

sometimes grieved, some-times joyful, and sometimestroubled.Qu. 7:Whatpeaceandcom-fortcanIhaveincommittingmyselftohisprovidence,ifheknowsnotwhatwillbefallmetomorrow?Ans.Whatisthattome?Seeyoutothat.

Inchapter3Owen’sdoctrineofthecovenants(plural,referringtohisviewofacovenantofworkswithAdam before the fall, thecovenantofgracewiththeelectafter the fall, and the covenantofredemptionbetweenGodandChrist)andhisChristologyareonthe foreground. AsOwen livedin the second century after theReformationbegan,theReformeddoctrineofthecovenanthadbe-gun to be developed inOwen’sday,butstoodinneedoffurtherdevelopment and discussion.Owentaughtthatthecovenantofworkswas unilaterally imposeduponAdam,butalsothatbyper-fect obedienceAdam“was ableto achieve a supernatural end”(74). ThatthecovenantofgraceistheoutworkingofGod’sdecreeofpredestination,anditsrealiza-tion the sovereignworkofGodHimself,Owenrightlytaught.In

speakingoftheworkofChristintime,especiallyinChrist’sdeath,OwenhighlightedthepriesthoodofChrist. He also insisted thatthis death was expiatory andatoning,inasmuchasChristboreGod’s wrath and punishmentfor our sins; and he taught thatChrist’satonementwaslimited. OwendidjusticetotheplaceoftheHolySpiritintheTrinity,andtheworkoftheHolySpiritinsalvation.Infact,hedevelopedtheReformed viewof the cov-enantofredemptionbyspeakingof the roleof theHolySpirit inthiscovenantbetweentheFatherandSon. Owen’sviewof justificationgetsspecialtreatmentinchapter4.AfterdescribingthedevelopmentofthatdoctrineinProtestantthoughtprior toOwen,Trueman treatsOwen’steachingthatbothChrist’sactiverighteousnessandHispas-siverighteousnessare imputedtobelievers (prior theologians hadarguedthatonlyHispassiverigh-teousnesswas imputed);Owen’steachingofeternaljustification;andOwen’sviewrelatingsanctificationtojustification,inwhichOwenof-feredgoodevidencethatJamesandPauldonotcontradicteachotherintheirtreatmentofjustificationandfaith.

November2009 125

Thoughrelativelyshort,thisbookdoesnotreadquickly.Partlythis is due to the typesetting—smallerfont,andrelativelycloseline spacing. Andpartly this isduetotheauthor’sstyle—attimesponderous; to followhim takessomeeffort. Thereaderwilllearnasmuchabout other Reformedmen asaboutOwenhimself.Asoneex-ample,inthechapteronOwen’sviewof the covenant,Truemanrepeatedlydevotesseveralpagestotheviewsofothers,especiallyFrancis Turretin and PatrickGillespie. The positive benefitofthisisthatOwenissetinhishistorical context. At the same

time,Ifounditnecessarytokeepremindingmyself what pointaboutOwenwasbeingdeveloped;itseemedthattheextendedtreat-mentof theviewsofothermeninterruptedtheflowofthought. ThebookgivesthereaderagoodoverviewofOwen’stheol-ogyandpolemicalworks,anditexplainswellthecontextinwhichOwenwrote.ParticularlyIappre-ciatedthesectiontreatingOwen’sviewofthecovenant,foritfallstotheologianstodaytocontinuetodeveloponthefoundationrightlylaidbyourReformedpredeces-sors, and to revisewhere theystrayed. n

Justification: God’s Plan & Paul’s Vision, by N.T.Wright.DownersGrove,IL:InterVarsityPress,2009.279pages.Cloth($25.00). [ReviewedbyDavidJ.Engelsma.]

Themain value of this lat-est book by the prolificN.T.Wright is its demonstration ofthe radical rejection of the six-teenth centuryReformation ofthechurch,particularlyorthodox,creedallyReformedChristianity,bytheNewPerspectiveonPaul(hereafter,NPP).Indeed,despiteWright’s disarmingly deceptive,gentlemanlymanner,thebookis

anothersalvointheNPP’sattackon the gospel, recovered by theReformation. Wright is forthright: “Thestraylambs[WrightandhisNPPcohorts—DJE]arenotreturningtotheReformationfold….Itistimetomoveon”(29).

Justification AttheheartofWright’snew

BookReviews


Vol.43,No.1126

perspective on Paul, especiallyinRomans andGalatians, is adoctrineofjustificationthatisnotthe forgiveness of sins by theimputationofChrist’srighteous-ness.TheReformation’sdoctrineof imputed righteousness, thatis, that Christ’s righteousnessis“credited to [the]account”ofothers,“simplymuddlesup”thebiblicalteaching(213).Justifica-tioninPaul,accordingtoWright,isGod’sverdictthatsomeonebe-longstothecovenantcommunity,orchurch. The faith bywhich one isjustified, in Paul’s theology, issimilarly“re-viewed”bytheNPP.Faith does not function as themeans,orinstrument,ofimputa-tion(sincejustificationisnotim-putation).Rather,faithismerelythe“badge”(Wright’sterm)thatidentifiesoneasbelongingtothecovenantcommunity. Justificationbyfaith,inNPPtheologyasdeliveredbyWright,meansthat“Goddeclaresaper-sontobe‘righteous’on the basis offaith”(212;emphasisadded).Presentjustification(indistinctionfrom the justification that reallymatters, the future justificationof the final judgment) is basedonthehumanworkofbelieving.OneshouldtakenoteofWright’s

significant quotation marksaround theword “righteous” inthe last quotation. “Righteous”inWright’stheologyofjustifica-tion does notmean “righteous”atall,but“intheright,”whichissomethingaltogetherdifferent. As present justification isbased on the human work ofbelieving, the justification thatawaitsbelieversinthefinaljudg-mentwill be based on all theirgoodworks. Wright explainsRomans2:13 (“thedoersof thelawshallbejustified”),whichisproving tobe thecrucial text inthecontroversyoverjustification,asteachingwhatcanandwillac-tuallytakeplace:doersofthelawwill be justified by their doing.This isWright’s explanation ofthetext,despitePaul’sinsistenceintherestofRomans2andinRo-mans3thatthereisnodoerofthelawanddespitePaul’sdeclarationinRomans2:20that“bythedeedsofthelawthereshallnofleshbejustifiedinhissight”(183,260). WrightacknowledgesthatthedeathofChristisalsopartofthebasisofjustification(alongwiththe humanworks of faith andobedience).ItisremarkablethatWright never explainshow and why the deathofChrist settledGod’sscorewiththesinsofoth-

November2009 127

ers,sothatGodcandeclaresin-ners“intheright”(asWrightputsit).Somehoworother,Christwas“faithful”toGod’splanforIsraelinawaythatmakesitpossibleforGodtojustify(intheNPPsense)others. But about one thingWrightisclear,emphatic,andrepetitive:TheReformation’sdoctrineofthecrossassubstitutionarysatisfac-tiontothejusticeofGodfortheguiltofsinnersiswrong.“[Christdidnot] ‘fulfill…the law’ in thesenseofobeyingitperfectlyandthus building up a ‘treasury ofmerit’which can thenbe ‘reck-oned’tohispeople”(135).Theteachingof thegreat “exchange(‘Wewere under the curse; hetookit;wegofree’)”is“simplis-tic” (136). “The ‘obedience’ofChristisnotdesignedtoamassatreasuryofmeritwhichcanthenbe‘reckoned’tothebeliever,asin someReformed schemes ofthought”(228).

Synthesis of Heresies ThetheologyofN.T.Wrightis a brilliant, fresh synthesis oftheworks-righteousnessdoctrineoftheJudaizers,whobewitchedtheGalatians (now the dogmaoftheRomanCatholicChurch);of the liberal abhorrence of the

righteousnessofGod(expressedin the demand of the death ofHis Son as punishment for sinand ina strictly legalpardonoftheguiltofsin);andofArminianuniversalism(Christdiedtomakesalvationpossible for all, in theloveofGodforallmankind),withan ecumenical purpose (WrightpromoteshistheologyasbringingallprofessingChristians,RomanCatholics aswell asProtestantsofallvarieties,tothesameLord’sTable),forthebenefitspecificallyofevangelicals. MakinganawarenessoftheNPP,particularlyN.T.Wright’sversion,imperativeforReformedministersandprofessorsoftheol-ogy is the fact that themen ofthefederal[covenant]visionareheavily influenced by theNPP,particularly by N. T.Wright.Evenwheresupposedlyconserva-tive theologians donot espousethedistinctivetenetsofthefederal[covenant]vision,thereisopen-ness to theNPP. NotafewareenamoredofN.T.Wright.

Exegesis Wright’s persuasiveness isdueinlargeparttohisexegeticalskills.Byfarthebiggerpartofthebookisseeminglycarefulexege-sisofGalatiansandRomans,with

BookReviews


Vol.43,No.1128

exegesisofimportantpassagesinPhilippians,IandIICorinthians,andEphesiansthrowninforgoodmeasure. The incautious readerwill find himself carried alongwiththesmoothexegeticalflowtotheconclusionthatPaulteachesajusticeofGoddevoidofrigh-teousness, a faith that does not,aboveallthings,receivebydivinereckoningGod’s righteousnessworkedoutinthedeathofChrist,andajustificationthatisnottheforgivenessofsins. But then the believer, lay-man as readily as theologian,remembers Paul. Paul teachesthatinjustification“Godimputethrighteousness”(Rom.4:6),whichis not the verdict that someonesomehowis“intheright,”butthereckoning,legally,tosomeone’saccountperfectobediencetothewillofGodasrevealedinHislaw,sothatthissomeonenowhasthelegalstandingofinnocencebeforethetribunalofGod,thatis,ofhav-ingfulfilledeverydemandofthelawofGod. Paul teaches that this righ-teousness,whichisimputedintheactofjustification,isGod’sownrighteousness(whichsurelycan-notbeGod’sbeing“intheright”)workedoutforguiltysinnersastheirrighteousnessinthebloody

deathoftheeternalSonofGodinhumanflesh(Rom.3:24-26). Paulteachesthattheimputa-tionofthisrighteousnessconsistsmainlyoftheforgivenessofsins(Rom.4:6,7). PaulteachesthatfaithistheGod-givenmeans bywhich theguilty sinner receives the righ-teousnessofGodinJesusChristbyimputation(Rom.3:28). AndPaulteachesthattheben-efitofjustificationisthepersonalassurance of a relationship offriendshipwithGod(Rom.5:1). PaulalsoteachesthatanyonewhopreachesanothergospelthanthisonepervertsthegospelandiscursedofGod(Gal.1:7-9). Wright’simpressiveexegeti-calskillisobviouslynotthespiri-tualgiftthatenablesonetoknowthe things of God—the mostimportantandgloriousthingsofGod—inScripture. MartinLuther didhave thisspiritualgift.TheAnglicanprel-ate is bold to criticizeLuther’sgrandcommentaryonGalatians:“Luther’s…deeplyflawed com-mentary on Galatians” (112).CompareWright’s commentaryonGalatians2:16withLuther’s.Galatians2:16reads:“Knowingthatamanisnotjustifiedbytheworksofthelaw,butbythefaith

November2009 129

of JesusChrist, evenwe havebelievedinJesusChrist,thatwemightbejustifiedbythefaithofChrist,andnotbytheworksofthelaw:forbytheworksofthelawshallnofleshbejustified.” Wrightexplainsthetextthisway:

“To be justified” here doesnotmean“tobegrantedfreeforgiveness of your sins,”“tocomeintoarightrelationwithGod”orsomeothernear-synonymof“tobe reckoned‘intheright’beforeGod,”butrather, and very specifically,“tobereckonedbyGodtobeatruememberofhisfamily,andhencewiththerighttosharetablefellowship”(116).

AndLuther:

Here it is to be noted thatthese three things are joinedtogether:faith,Christ,andac-ceptanceorimputation.FaithtakesholdofChrist andhasHimpresent, enclosingHimastheringenclosesthegem.AndwhoeverisfoundhavingthisfaithintheChristwhoisgraspedintheheart,himGodaccounts as righteous. Thisisthemeansandthemeritbywhichweobtaintheforgive-ness of sins and righteous-

ness….Thisdoctrinebringsfirm consolation to troubledconsciencesamidgenuineter-rors(MartinLuther,Luther’s Works, vol. 26,Lectures on Galatians 1535,SaintLouis:Concordia,1963,132,133).

Covenant Wrightwrote Justification in response to JohnPiper’s de-fense of the orthodox doctrineof justification againstWright.Wright’s refutation of Piper isdevastating.Howeverwronghisdoctrine,Wrightisrighttoimbedjustificationandthecrossinthecovenantofgrace,asPauldoesinRomansandGalatians,especiallyGalatians3.AsadispensationalBaptist,PiperhasnoeyeforthecovenantandtheunityofGod’ssavingwork in history. WrightexposesthisfatalflawinhisBap-tistadversary.

Paul’sdoctrineofjustificationis therefore aboutwhatwemay call the covenant—thecovenant God made withAbraham,thecovenantwhosepurposewasfromthebegin-ningthesavingcallofaworld-wide family throughwhomGod’ssavingpurposesfortheworldweretoberealized.ForPiper,andmanylikehim,theveryideaofacovenantofthis

BookReviews


Vol.43,No.1130

kindremainsstrangelyforeignandalien(12). Recognize its [the one covenantofgraceestablishedwithAbraham—DJE] exis-tence for Paul…and for anyconstruction of his theologywhichwants to claim that itis faithful to his intention. Forwheneveryouignoreit…youarecuttingoffthebranchon which Paul’s argumentis resting. To highlight thiselement, which Reformedtheologyoughttowelcomeinitshistoricstressonthesingleplan ofGod (as opposed tohavingGodchangehismindinmidstream[asistheteach-ingofdispensationalBaptists

suchasJohnPiper—DJE]),istoinsistonthewholenessofhistrainofthought(94).

Ignorance of the covenantmakesitimpossibletodojusticetothebiblicaldoctrineofjustifi-cation. Bythesametoken,suchistheintimaterelationofcovenantandjustificationthattheerrantviewofthecovenantasconditionalgracetoallwhoarebaptizednecessarilyimpliesjustificationbyfaithandworks.AndthisistheheresynowflourishinginReformedchurchesasthefederal[covenant]vision. WiththehelpoftheNPPofN.T.Wright.n

The God-Breathed Scripture,byEdwardJ.Young.WillowGrove,PA:TheCommitteefortheHistorianoftheOrthodoxPresbyterianChurch,2007.112pages.$5.00.Softcover.[ReviewedbyDouglasJ.Kuiper.]

ThefourchaptersthatcomprisethisbookarethewrittenversionoffourlecturesthatEdwardJ.Young(1907-1968)gavein1966atGraceTheologicalSeminaryandCollege,andwhichwerepublished in theFall 1966volumeof theGrace Journal.Spokensomenineyearsafter thepublicationofYoung’swell known bookThy Word is

Truth,theselectures“clearlyreflectthebasiccontentsofthatbook”(7),accordingtoRichardB.Gaffin,Jr,whowrotetheforeword.Indeed,inthisbookYoung’shighviewofScriptureisevident. InthebookYoungarguesthattheBibleisself-authenticating.InGaffin’swords,“Young…isinsis-tent…thatScripture’sself-witness

November2009 131

mustbefoundationalandcontrol-linginformulatingthedoctrineofScripture”(9). Inchapterone,entitled“Scrip-ture:God-BreathedandProfitable,”Young argues that the views ofhigher criticismproceedon“thefundamentalassumption…thatthemindofman,withouttheassistanceofdivinerevelation,canmakepro-nouncementsastowhethercertainpartsoftheBiblearefromGodornot”(14),andthattheconclusiontowhichsuchthinkingleadsis“thattheteachingoftheBibleconcern-ing itself is inerrorandmustbecorrected”(14). Working through the ex-egeticalquestionsthatIITimothy3:16 raises, focusing onGreekwords translated “and,” “all,”“God-breathed,”and“profitable,”Youngconcludesthatinthisverse“Paulisdeclaringthedivineori-ginofScripture”(22). Thenhedraws thepracticalconclusion that, viewing all ofScriptureasprofitable,weshouldstudyallofScripturewithaviewto such profit. Interesting ex-amplesheusestodrivehomehispointincludethecanonicityofthebookofEstherandthe“Shibbo-leth”incidentofJudges12:5ff. Chapter 2 is entitled “WhatisGod-BreathedScripture?”By

thisquestionYoungmeanstoaskwhetheronlytheautographaareGod-breathed and profitable, orwhether these terms apply alsotoallavailableandcurrentcop-ies,versions,andtranslationsofScripture. Answering this question,Youngisbothathisbestandhisworst. Heisathisbestinmakingacareful distinction between theautographaandthecurrentcopiesandtranslationsofScripture.HenotesthatIITimothy3:16,refer-ring to the origin of Scripture,indicatesthattheautographawereinspired,andnot thecopiesandtranslationsofScripture.Yethemaintains thatany faithfulcopyand translation of Scripture isprofitable for us. Appealing tothe doctrine of verbal inspira-tion,Youngmakesagoodpointregarding the necessity of hav-ingcompetent translatorsof theScriptures (referringnotonly tothosemenwho translatewith aviewtopublication,buttoallmin-isters and students of Scripturewhotranslate).Raisingtheissueofdifficultiesandinconsistenciesfound inScripture,Younggivesgoodcautionthatwenotsupposethesedifficultieswerepartoftheautographathemselves.

BookReviews


Vol.43,No.1132

ButheisathisworstintakingGenesis5asthegreatexampleofa difficult passage ofScripture,and trying to explain how it isprofitable.Muchofwhathesaysisnodoubttrue:“whatthewriterwishestoconveyisthatevendur-ingthelineofpromisedeathex-erciseditsuniversal,almostunre-strained,reign”(50).But,clearlyconvincedthattheearthisolderthan the4004B.C. age that thechronologyofGenesis5suggests,hearguesthatinthischapterwehaveaschematicarrangementofthelineofthepromise,andthatthepurposeofthechapterisnottoteachchronology. WhileYoung’sinstructioninthe chapter is solid, his specificinstance of how to dealwith adifficult passage contradicts thevery instructionhegave, in thathe expressly allows himself tobe influenced by science in hisunderstandingofScripture:“Butnatural revelation can often beof aid in enabling us rightly tounderstandtheScripture”(46). In his third lecture,YoungarguesthattheBibleisabsolutelynecessary for the faith and lifeof thechildofGod,andopposesthe idea that one canbe agoodChristian even apart from theBible.Specifically,henotesAlan

Richardson’sattempttoholdtotheChristian faith, at the same timedenying that theGospelaccountsgiveareliablerecordofthefactofChrist’sresurrection.Inresponsetothis,YoungdefendstheScripturesasGod’sWord, therefore reliableandnecessaryfordoctrineandlife,ascribingpraisetothetrueauthorof theScriptures: “InHis greatmercytowardusGodhasnotleftuswho live today todependongarbledtradition...buthasgiventousHiswrittenWord,inorderthatwemayhaveatrueanddependableaccountofthosegreateventsuponwhichHischurchisfounded”(72).Therefore,“TheBibleisthesourcefromwhencewe learnwhatourdoctrineistobeandalsowhatourlifeistobe”(77). Hisfinallecture,“AModernViewof theBible,”exposes theerroneousviewofScriptureun-derlyingtheConfessionof1967,adopted that same year by theUnitedPresbyterianChurchintheUSA.HedemonstratesthatthisconfessiondeniesScripturetobeGod’sword and revelation, andthereforedeniesScriptureasthenormforChristianfaithandlife. Young concludes by callingthechurchestodefendtheScrip-tures from their current attack,andtopreachthemfaithfully.

November2009 133

BookReviews

Beingrathershortandhavingmedium-sizetype,thisbookcanbereadquickly.Someofit,thelastchapterinparticular,appearsonlyremotelyrelevant to today.

Yet its defense of the biblicaldoctrine of Scripture, and itsstandagainstthemodernviewofScripture,makeitrelevanttoday,andworthwhilereading.n

EVANGELISM COMMITTEE

of the

South Holland

Protestant Reformed ChurchPO Box 478, South Holland, Illinois 60473

Phone: (708) 333-1314 Fax: (708) 333-4017“and ye shall be witnesses unto me… unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Acts 1:8b

FREE BOOKLET

The Gift of Assurance

By Prof. David Engelsma

Prof. Engelsma has just completed this new booklet on the precious truth of assurance. Having the knowledge that one is elect and an heir of salvation through Christ Jesus is a gift to the believer from the Holy Spirit. We need to get this message out especially to those people that languish in Puritan doubt. The Evangelism Committee of the South Holland PRC encourages you to get copies of this new booklet to read and distribute to your family and friends outside of our denomination where the serious error of “works righteousness” is being preached, accepted and becoming more widespread.

REQUEST YOUR FREE COPY TODAY!Write, phone, fax, or email:

The Evangelism Committee of the South Holland Protestant Reformed Church

P.O. Box 478South Holland, IL 60473

Phone: (708) 333-1314, Fax (708) 333-4017Email: [email protected]

www.SouthHollandPRC.org

Contributors for this issue are:

Chris Connors, pastor in theEvangelical PresbyterianChurchofAustralia.

David J. Engelsma, professor emeritus ofDogmaticsandOldTestamentStudiesintheProtestantReformedSeminary,Wyoming,Michigan.

Herman Hanko, professoremeritusintheProtestantRe-formedSeminary,Wyoming,Michigan.

Barrett L. Gritters, professorofPracticalTheologyandNewTestament Studies in the ProtestantReformedSeminary,Wyoming,Michigan.

Steven R. Key, pastoroftheProtestantReformedChurchinHull,Iowa.

Douglas J. Kuiper, pastor of the ProtestantReformedChurchinRandolph,Wisconsin.

Angus Stewart, pastor of theCovenant ProtestantRe-formedChurchinNorthernIreland.

Editor’s Notes 1Calvin as Model for Reformed Ministers Today 3 Barrett L. Gritters Calvin the Preacher 23 Steven R. KeyCalvin on Justification: Considering the Judgment Day with Singular Delight 44 Angus StewartJohn Calvin’s Doctrine of Predestination 86 Chris ConnorsBook Reviews 105

in this issue:


P R O T E S T A N T R E F O R M E DT H E O L O G I C A L

S E M I N A R Y

4949 Ivanrest AvenueWyoming, Michigan 49418-9142

ISSN 1070-8138


Documents

nov2009 calvin.pdf