introduction to Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion

[rmwilliamsll]

Next week i'm going to have the only topical class. I'd like to tie book III up by looking across the chapters at the issue of assurance of faith.

http://www.girs.com/library/theology/dm_assure.html
http://www.hornes.org/theologia/content/rich_lusk/calvin_on_baptism_penance_absolution.htm

i don't expect to finish the lesson before friday. it promises to be rather intensive.

-- links list
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/assurance.html
http://www.e-grace.net/assure.html

good but read online:
http://www.mbrem.com/confessions/wcf18.htm
http://www.the-highway.com/articleDec98.html
http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/reformationink/srbeza.htm
http://www.girs.com/library/theology/syllabus/subsoter10.html

i've read these and using them to help collect the pieces of Institutes together:
assurance of faith, beeke joel
'Assurance of Faith: Calvin, English Puritanism, and the Dutch Second Reformation (American University Studies, Series Vii, Theology and Religion, Vo)'

calvin and english calvinism to 1649, kendall
'Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649 (Oxford theological monographs)'

The Quest for Full Assurance: Legacy of Calvin & His Successors
Joel R. Beeke

my idea is to look at least this one time at a topical study rather than a systematic chapter at a time structure.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

This is the last section- 3 lessons on book IV.

I would like to use Calvin's concern for French evangelism as an organizing principle to get into Book IV, what did Calvin teach that gave particular strength to the Reformed churches so that they could organize in the face of governmental opposition? So next week will be lesson 14, how to define the church? what are the marks of a true church? and what are the means of grace and how does this relate back to the contents of Book 3-faith? Following week will be on Servetus, the big question is the relationship of the church and the state, tied back into the definition of the church, and asking the fundamental question of whether this action was consistent with the theology or rather a confusion. I will use the sections of book IV on church discipline to try to understand what it is that Calvin wished to accomplish with this prosecution of Servetus. The last lesson, 15, will be to tie the ends of the study together. Going back to the preface to Francis I and looking at the last chapter-on civil government i want to ask a very pointed question. Was Calvin being disingenuious when he claimed to be a good subject of the king when the Reformed beheaded Charles King of England in Jan 30th, 1649. The associated issue is if Reformed theology leads naturally to republican forms of government that challenged and finally won over the long held divine right of Kings to rule.

working on lesson 14 at:
http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/lesson14_essay.html
this week.

BOOK IV. THE EXTERNAL MEANS OR AIDS BY WHICH GOD INVITES US INTO THE SOCIETY OF CHRIST AND HOLDS US THEREIN.
Introduction:



Calvin has a big problem and a little problem, with regards to the nature of the church. As we make the transition from Book 3 we are at the point that God has saved an individual, by name, out of the world, and made him a little brother to Jesus by uniting him to the Mediator. Now the church is spoken of in terms of the bride of Christ and the body of Christ. Both these metaphors concentrate our attention on the unity of the Church and the necessity of the individual soul being bound to her. Calvin, as we will see, takes these strongly imaged metaphors out of Scripture and believes that unity with Christ implies, no requires, unity with the visible Church. This is the big problem……

This is because he has broken off fellowship with the Roman Catholic Church therefore he leaves himself open to the charge of being a schismatic. This is complicated and intensified by his high view of the necessity of fellowship with the church. There are two major directions potentially to take when separating from the RCC (for that matter from any organization of significance), the first is Calvin and Luther’s reformist, restorationist[1], direction where you challenge the contents, the doctrine, the teachings of the RCC, but do not subject the need for the institution to attack. The second is to challenge not just the contents of the organization but the necessity of it altogether, this is the Anabaptist route, and is perhaps easier than Calvin’s way as you are not open to the second left wing challenge of ½-way, ½–hearted reformation. The second (smaller) problem is how to build a church that can go back into France and survive the persecution of the secular state in alliance with the RCC, essentially an organizational task, one for which Calvin’s genius is rightly credited.

Calvin begins Book IV with the distinction of the invisible and visible church. Anchoring the invisible church in the mystery and wisdom of God and putting inquiries into it beyond the scope of justified questioning.[2] This puts discussion of the Scriptural admonitions like the purity and perfection of the bride of Christ outside of the visible Church as being about the invisible Church as God sees her. They (the discussions) can comfortable reside there (about the invisible church), for what we can see-the visible is to be mirrored from the invisible however partially and imperfectly[3]. This versus the tendency of perfectionists, as Calvin refers to a subset of the Anabaptists, who do not make this distinction and would seek the invisible church in this world and make it identical with their organizational visible bodies. To Calvin this is not just impossible but puts an unbearable burden on the gatekeepers of the church to decide who ought to be admitted and who ought to be excluded from the fellowship of a particular group of the saints. The admission to the church not being a human process to the perfectionists but an almost angelic one to decide who is close enough to perfection to be admitted to the community, rather than a simple acknowledgeable that the person confesses Jesus is Lord before man.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

research notes



Westminster Confession of Faith 23

WCF 23:I. God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, hath ordained civil magistrates, to be, under him, over the people, for his own glory, and the public good: and, to this end, hath armed them with the power of the sword, for the defense and encouragement of them that are good, and for the punishment of evildoers.
from: http://www.girs.com/library/theology/syllabus/nom5.html
excellent

http://www.pbministries.org/Baptists/J. B. Jeter/baptist_principles_reset/bpr_p2_08.htm
http://www.covenanter.org/GGillespie/miscellaneousquestions/ggilles13.html

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/ashes.htm
http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/calvin.htm

http://www.geocities.com/calvinismheresy/calvinismmain.html
http://www.thirdmill.org/qach_answer_main.asp/section/qa/subnav/ch/file/99812.qna
http://www.gospeltruth.net/heresy/heresy_chap5.htm

THE RIGHT TO HERESY
OR, HOW JOHN CALVIN KILLED A CONSCIENCE
Castellio Against Calvin
by
Stefan Zweig
at: http://www.gospeltruth.net/heresy/heresy_intro.htm

THE
EXECUTION OF SERVETUS
FOR BLASPHEMY, HERESY,
& OBSTINATE ANABAPTISM,
DEFENDED
By John Knox
at: http://www.covenanter.org/Antitoleration/knoxdefended.html

John E. Longhurst
LUTHER'S GHOST IN SPAIN
(1517-1546)
at: http://www.ku.edu/carrie/texts/carrie_books/longhurst/index.html

http://www.banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_detail.php?457


from: http://www.thirdmill.org/files/english/html/ch/CH.Arnold.RMT.8.HTML

# CALVIN AND THE BURNING OF SERVETUS


1. The one event in Calvin's life that has cast a shadow over his fair name, and which has exposed him to the charge of intolerance and persecution is the burning of the heretic Servetus. Calvin's enemies have played this event to the hilt. Facts have often been withheld or misconstrued so as to put Calvin in a bad light. That the burning of Servetus was a mistake is admitted by all. History knows only one spotless being — Jesus Christ, the savior of sinners. All others have marks of infirmity in their lives.

2. Servetus was a Spaniard who opposed Christianity, both in its Roman Catholic and Protestant forms. He denied the Trinity and was the most audacious and even blasphemous heretic of the sixteenth century. He opposed the teaching of justification by faith and infant baptism. Servetus was a very strange person, and to understand him we have to look into his background. He had a split personality, and perhaps some of this can be traced to the fact he was castrated at the age of five. He was religious and superstitious, but not Christian. He followed astrology like a religion and consulted the stars rather than the Bible for guidance. He was a proud, vain and arrogant man.

3. Servetus had fled to Geneva from Vienna, France. Before he came to Geneva, he corresponded with Calvin, and Calvin did all he could to help this man see the truth of Christianity, but with no success. Servetus regarded Calvin as the pope of orthodox Protestantism whom he was determined to convert or overthrow. When Servetus first came to Geneva, he tried to align himself with the liberal city council that was somewhat opposed to Calvin. Calvin apparently sensed this danger and was in no mood to permit Servetus to propagate his errors in Geneva. Hence he considered it his duty to make so dangerous a man harmless, and determined to bring him either to recantation or to deserved punishment. Servetus actions were in one sense sedition — because in a theocracy there is a mixture of state and church, his attempt to overthrow the church was an attempt to overthrow the government of Geneva. Servetus was promptly arrested and brought to trial.
Calvin and other pastors in Geneva spent days with Servetus, trying to help him to see the error of his way, but Servetus was as hard as stone. He was convinced that the liberal council would throw Calvin out and let him out of jail.

4. The trial of Servetus was left to the civil court, which charged him with fundamental heresy, falsehood and blasphemy. The city council at this point was not favorable to Calvin. The libertines hoped to use the Servetus situation as a means of getting Calvin expelled from Geneva. The court's decision was:

“Inasmuch as you, Michael Servetus of Villanueva in the Spanish kingdom of Aragon, have been accused of terrible blasphemies against the holy Trinity, against the Son of God and other principles of the Christian faith, whereas you have called the Trinity a devil and a monster with three heads, whereas you went about to destroy poor souls by your horrifying mockery of the honor and majesty of God, too wicked to be mentioned, whereas refusing to be taught in any way, you called Christian atheists and magicians, whereas, whereas, whereas . . .

“We, the mayor and judges of this city, having been called to the duty of preserving the church of God from schism and seduction, and to free Christians of such pestilence, decree that you, Michael Servetus, be led to the place of Champel and be bound to a stake and with your book be burned to ashes, a warning to all who blaspheme God.”

The verdict was “guilty,” and the sentence punishment by fire. Calvin, agreeing that Servetus should be put to death, opposed the state’s method of execution and pleaded for the sword to be substituted for the fire. The council refused Calvin's request. The final responsibility for the burning rested with the city council, not Calvin.
Had Servetus been executed in any other way than by fire, his death would have passed almost unnoticed.

5. Calvin considered Servetus the greatest enemy of the Reformation and honestly believed it to be the right and duty of the state to punish those who offended the church. This act was based on the Old Testament principle of death for heretics (Lev. 24:16). Calvin also felt himself providentially called to purify the church of all corruptions, and to his dying day he neither changed his views nor regretted his conduct toward Servetus.

6. We should not be too hard on Calvin in the matter of Servetus, for the spirit of the day among all, except the Anabaptists, whether Catholic or Protestant, was to put heretics to death. The treatment of heretics was an error of the age, and we dare not judge Calvin by our twentieth century standards. We must remember that Servetus was given a fair court trial, which lasted over two months, and that he was sentenced by the full session of the civil council in accordance with the laws which were then recognized throughout Christendom.

It should be noted that only Servetus was put to death in Geneva and no one else. No Catholic or Anabaptist was ever executed in Geneva for the sake of his religious conviction.

7. Calvin's course in regard to Servetus was fully approved by all the leading Re-formers of the time. Melanchthon, Bucer, Bullinger, Farel and Besa all felt that Calvin and Geneva dealt fairly with Servetus. The city council sought the advice of the other cities in Switzerland as to the fate of Servetus and received the following answers:

From Zwingli's city: “No severity is too great to punish such an offense. Our preachers are in total agreement with what Calvin thinks of his doctrine.

From Schaffhausen: “Stop the evil, other-wise his blasphemies, like a crawfish, will eat away the members of Christ!”

From Basel: “Do what lies in your power to convince him of his error. If he persists in his folly, then use the power which is entrusted to you by God to prevent him by force from any further injury to the Church of Christ.”

Even Melanchthon stated to Calvin in a letter, “I have read your book in which you clearly refuted the horrid blasphemies of Servetus . . . To you the Church owes gratitude at the present moment, and will owe it to the latest posterity. I perfectly assent to your opinion. I affirm also that your magistrates did right in punishing, after regular trial, this blasphemous man.”

Public opinion has undergone a great change in regard to this event, and the execution of Servetus which was fully approved by the best men in the sixteenth century is entirely out of harmony with twentieth century ideas.

8. When Servetus was informed of the decision of the council, he was stunned at first, and then began to rant and rave like a mad man. Again, Calvin went to Servetus, hoping to lead him to Christ, and said to him:

“Believe me, never did I have the intention to prosecute you because of some offense against me. Do you remember,” he spoke now with a tender voice and not in a tone of reproach, “how, in danger of death, I wanted to meet you in Paris sixteen years ago in order to win you to our Lord? And afterwards when you were a fugitive was I not concerned to show you the right way in letters until you began to hate me because you were offended by my firmness? But let's not talk about me, nor of the past! Are you thinking of asking forgiveness of the everlasting God whom you have blasphemed on so many occasions? Are you thinking of being reconciled to the Son of God?”

Servetus became quite serious and humble as he faced the certainty of death. He asked Calvin to forgive him, and perhaps he asked Christ for forgiveness also. It is recorded that he spent the last twenty-four hours of his life repeating over and over again, “Jesus, Son of the eternal God, have mercy upon me!”

9. In Geneva at this very hour, on the place where Servetus was burned, is an inscription placed there by later followers of Calvin which says:

“As reverent and grateful
sons of Calvin,
our great Reformer,
repudiating his mistake, which was the mistake
of his age,
and according to the true principles of the
Reformation and the Gospel
holding fast to the freedom of conscience,
we erect
this monument of reconciliation
on XXVII October MCMIII”






the lesson will be in 3 pieces:
the first is institutes on church discipline
the second on the history of related ideas--
constantinian synthesis, augustine's 2 swords, use of old testament theocratic metaphors
the third is relationship of state and church

the questions asked are:
was calvin justified in executing servetus for heresy?
should we attempt to enact heresy laws?
what we have learned about the issues historically: is religious tolerance principled or merely pragmatic?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

i finished the first draft on Servetus




it is at:
http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwilli...on15_essay.html
it begins---->

Justification:

If you were to analyze the anti-Calvin sites and essays on the net, most of them would make reference to the execution of Michael Servetus and how this event makes Calvin's lifetime work in theology at least suspect, if not totally invalidate. There seem to be two great champions of this viewpoint: secularists who would remake Servetus into a proto-scientist fighting the forces of religion and other darkness and fundamentalist Baptists (see Servetus cover-up comic below) who see their roots in the Anabaptist movement and find in the event a way to cast a cloud over Calvin and thereby dismiss his theology. In both cases, ignorance of the real issues seems to predominate and I hope this lesson will help Reformed Christians understand the fundamental and important issues at stake.
What are the issues?

The first is the necessity of discipline in the church, how it is used and for what purposes.
The second is the relationship of the church to the magistrate.[ii]
This issue has an historical component in the doctrine of the two swords by Augustine and the Constantinian synthesis.
The third is the continuities and discontinuities between the Old and New Testament as interpreted by Calvin and covenant theology and the effects of this exegesis on infant baptism and the Lord’s Supper.
The last I will discuss is the underlying theme of Christendom or Corpus Christianum[iii] and how boundaries are drawn and under what kind of forces these ideas mutate over time. The relationship of Islam to this boundary is of primary importance and is not generally recognized.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

The completed essay on the rebellion under lesser magistrates is at:
http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwilli...on16_essay.html

i have to get to the xerox place to copy it for tomorrow's class but i will continue to integrate information gained from you'all's postings into the webpage.

thanks for your help, this is the last essay i need to write for the class, next week is questions only and tie up loose ends.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

the temporarily completed work exists at:
http://surveyofcalvinsinstitutes.50megs.com/
http://www.dakotacom.net/~rmwillia/lesson_plan.html

i'm going back to my hermeneutics of the defense of slavery studies for a few months.
but i expect to add to and most of all include my book reading in the notes.
thanks for everyone's help, i hope it proves as useful to you as it was to me to work on it.....

---

 

[kingston123]

Great post..

 

[kql314]

Hello there- You seem to be an expert on Calvin, which is great. My question- I've heard that at one point in Geneva Calvin essentially set up and was the head of a de facto "theocracy" per se. And that no one in the city limits could refute his teachings. Is that correct?
Thanks,

Ken

 

[JM]

Why and How to Read Calvin’s Institutes – Justin Taylor

Calvin’s Institutes: A Comparison Between the 1536 and 1559 Editions

 

[JM]

On 'Which Translation?'

from Amazon.com

John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion is a classic. And the two most frequently suggested English translations seem to be the older Henry Beveridge translation and the newer John McNeill and Ford Lewis Battles translation. But it's hard for a layperson like me to know which English translation is "best." So for what it's worth, if anything, I thought the following quotations from Christian scholars might be helpful to some people:

1. Here's what Reformed Christian scholar and theological philosopher Paul Helm (who himself has studied and contributed several works on John Calvin) says:

"Incidentally, if you have the need of a translation of the Institutes, then the reissue of the Beveridge translation (newly published by Hendrickson) may be just the thing. It has new indexes, and has been 'gently edited', which means, I hope, only the removal of typos and other detritus. (I have not yet had the chance to check). Beveridge is superior to Battles in sticking closer to the original Latin, and having less intrusive editorial paraphernalia."

2. Here's another Calvin scholar, Richard A. Muller, on the two translations (from the preface of The Unaccommodated Calvin):

"I have also consulted the older translations of the Institutes, namely those of Norton, Allen and Beveridge, in view of both the accuracy of those translation and the relationship in which they stand to the older or 'precritical' text tradition of Calvin's original. Both in its apparatus and in its editorial approach to the text, the McNeill-Battles translation suffers from the mentality of the text-critic who hides the original ambience of the text even as he attempts to reveal all its secrets to the modern reader."

3. The following is from J.I. Packer in the foreword to A Theological Guide to Calvin's Institutes:

"No English translation fully matches Calvin's Latin; that of the Elizabethan, Thomas Norton, perhaps gets closest; Beveridge gives us Calvin's feistiness but not always his precision; Battles gives us the precision but not always the punchiness, and fleetness of foot; Allen is smooth and clear, but low-key."

4. Finally, the following is from David Calhoun:

"Let me just say a few words about English translations. The first was Thomas Norton back in the sixteenth century. Calvin was very fortunate with his first English translator. Norton did an exceptionally good job. Very soon after the completion of the Institutes in 1559, which was written in Latin, it was translated by Calvin into French and then quite soon into English. John Allen was the second translator. John Allen and Henry Beveridge were both nineteenth-century translators. The Beveridge translation is still in print. It was until fairly recently anyway. Those are not bad but not very good either. Ford Lewis Battles' 1960 translation is the one that we are using. Even though it has been criticized some, it is by far the most superior translation that we have at present."[end quote]

from Amazon.com

Unfortunately this translation of Calvin's 'Institutes' is often overlooked due to the more popular translation from Battles. However, this is an excellent translation of Calvin's most famous work and given its age (first published in 1845), it is surprisingly modern - due in part to this very edition which has been 'tweaked' into a more modern verbiage.

This 'tweaking' in no way has diminished, however, the wonderful job Beverage did in translating this work. From what I have been told by several Latin scholars and theologians, and having studied Latin myself, Calvin's Latin is not a walk in the park. That being the case, once you read this translation, you can see why Beverage did such a great job.

The one feature I like best about this translation is the fact that it is well footnoted for the researcher and reader. Therefore, this translation is well documented for further research into Calvin's thought. This also helps to clear up difficulties of translation (remember Calvin's Latin is very tough). At certain points in Calvin's work, his thought via a solid translation gets confusing for scholars, this edition has footnotes detailing these difficulties, and that makes for a better read.

Now, about Calvin's 'Institutes' This work is Calvin's Opus and gives the reader the best information regarding Calvin's thoughts on the Church and Church Government, Calvin's hermeneutic, Calvin's theology of God, Calvin's epistemology, Calvin's Soteriology, the benefits of the grace of Christ, his views on the Papacy (of his day), the Roman Catholic Church, the current state of Christendom, and much more. The interesting thing about this work (the Institutes), it is not Calvin's definitive work on the theology of predestination. Calvin actually wrote several other works which deal only with that subject and present a far better assessment of his theology behind predestination (see Calvin's treatise titled "Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God," and Calvin's response to Pighius titled "The Bondage and Liberation of the Will.")

But, for the best overview of Calvin's thought on the Church and theology, the Institutes is the work to read. Beverage's translation is a great work. It is introduced by the reformed theologian John Murray, it has a general index in the back of the work, and reads very much in modern verbiage. I highly recommend this edition. [end quote]

from Amazon.com

The recent reissue of Beveridge's 19th century translation of Calvin's Institutes is a very nice complement to the more comprehensive scholarly edition by McNeil (translated by Battles). If you are trying to decide between the Battles and the Beveridge translation here are a few things to consider.

1. The Battles has extensive editing, which includes a thorough cross-referencing of the pertinent quotations that Calvin refers to, as well as the pertinent Biblical texts and intertextual references. McNeil is a quality editor, but as with any editing, the view of the editor is never without a measure of bias. If you are looking to get a fresh interpretation of Calvin, you try reading the Beveridge first, or skip over the footnotes in the Battles.

2. The Beveridge provides alternative readings based upon the French edition of the Institutes. I've found this aspect to be quite interesting. Calvin's style in French tends to be a bit more expansive and colorful than his Latin.

3. The Beveridge has the benefit of being a one-volume hardback, as opposed to the two-volume hardback of the Battles. The one-volume has a bit more heft to carry around, but you always have the complete work with you if you are out and about.

4. The subject headings are different in the two editions. The Beveridge provides a full sentence overview outline at the beginning of each chapter division, whereas the Battles provides subheadings for each minor section. There are pros and cons to each approach, of course.

Whatever edition you decide to get, you will not be disappointed. Calvin's Institutes is a masterpiece of Western literature, and one of the most important works of the Christian Church of all time.[end quote]