Is Calvin of relevance and how may we understand him?

[Amittai]

We have many luminaries who have contributed: saints, preachers, reformers, theologians of varying kinds of usefulness, etc. One often mentioned in most circles is Calvin. He seems much remembered for having been a secular ruler in a district around Geneva for a period.

Personally I try to use several secondary sources to give me mental pointers for my strategy before wading into primary reading matter. I've got Carl F H Henry on the Holy Spirit by Jesse M Payne (2021).

In a passage about Calvin (not Henry), Payne says he is drawing on Chung and on Lopes and de Conceicao, to state in summary that Calvin had written much on for example:

- systematising "bibilical data on the Spirit * "
- integrating "pneumatology into other theological loci"
- "examined the relationship between word [ Payne's lower case ] and Spirit * "
- "presented the entirety of Christian ethics in the light of the Holy Spirit".

[ * Payne's not specifying which Spirit in these two instances ]

Elsewhere in the book, in direct reference to Carl Henry, who is supposed to have drawn on Calvin, is a mention of Russell Moore and other currently very famous people as associates of Henry.

In view of what kind of flavour of beliefs I got from direct quotes from such personalities (who themselves mention Calvin's name) that I've come across, I am surprised to come across the above listed items in Payne's book.

There is so much talk generally about:

- sola this and sola that and sola the other, but I want to believe in the whole meaning of the news of Jesus and Another Comforter with nowt taken owt (Rev 21) and to know how we and those around us shall have providential perseverance.

- TULIP which was merely a highly convolutedly derived slogan and apparently only refers (whether accurately or not) to a portion of a portion of what some say "ought" to be the proper beliefs of "Calvinists".

(Bearing in mind Paul asked us not to consider ourselves Paulists or Apolloists - referring to his friend Apollo.)

Some claimed devotees of Calvin, themselves, portray him as a cynical putter-down or sophist (as if we would approve).

I also note Calvin is reported by A Thiselton (in a 1998 essay) as disagreeing with Melanchthon (a collaborator of Luther) about the hermeneutic circle and accommodations in revelation.

Is Calvin worth the average member of the public delving into?

What if anything should or could we expect to gain from Calvin?

Are there some potted versions (straight summaries) which are more balanced than others?

Especially, web pages or free (without registering) PDFs?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

We have many luminaries who have contributed: saints, preachers, reformers, theologians of varying kinds of usefulness, etc. One often mentioned in most circles is Calvin. He seems much remembered for having been a secular ruler in a district around Geneva for a period.

Personally I try to use several secondary sources to give me mental pointers for my strategy before wading into primary reading matter. I've got Carl F H Henry on the Holy Spirit by Jesse M Payne (2021).

In a passage about Calvin (not Henry), Payne says he is drawing on Chung and on Lopes and de Conceicao, to state in summary that Calvin had written much on for example:

- systematising "bibilical data on the Spirit * "
- integrating "pneumatology into other theological loci"
- "examined the relationship between word [ Payne's lower case ] and Spirit * "
- "presented the entirety of Christian ethics in the light of the Holy Spirit".

[ * Payne's not specifying which Spirit in these two instances ]

Elsewhere in the book, in direct reference to Carl Henry, who is supposed to have drawn on Calvin, is a mention of Russell Moore and other currently very famous people as associates of Henry.

In view of what kind of flavour of beliefs I got from direct quotes from such personalities (who themselves mention Calvin's name) that I've come across, I am surprised to come across the above listed items in Payne's book.

There is so much talk generally about:

- sola this and sola that and sola the other, but I want to believe in the whole meaning of the news of Jesus and Another Comforter with nowt taken owt (Rev 21) and to know how we and those around us shall have providential perseverance.

- TULIP which was merely a highly convolutedly derived slogan and apparently only refers (whether accurately or not) to a portion of a portion of what some say "ought" to be the proper beliefs of "Calvinists".

(Bearing in mind Paul asked us not to consider ourselves Paulists or Apolloists - referring to his friend Apollo.)

Some claimed devotees of Calvin, themselves, portray him as a cynical putter-down or sophist (as if we would approve).

I also note Calvin is reported by A Thiselton (in a 1998 essay) as disagreeing with Melanchthon (a collaborator of Luther) about the hermeneutic circle and accommodations in revelation.

Is Calvin worth the average member of the public delving into?

What if anything should or could we expect to gain from Calvin?

Are there some potted versions (straight summaries) which are more balanced than others?

Especially, web pages or free (without registering) PDFs?

He is relevant if one believes in his interpretation of God's Character.
Blessings

 

[Amittai]

Thank you

He is relevant if one believes in his interpretation of God's Character.

is there an unbiased yet balanced and moderately pithy way in to explaining this?
Everything I've tried so far - including lengthy ones - is subtly slapdash.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Thank you

is there an unbiased yet balanced and moderately pithy way in to explaining this?
Everything I've tried so far - including lengthy ones - is subtly slapdash.

Fair enough. Maybe read his writings rather than the writings of others. Blessings

 

[Hazelelponi]

Perhaps start with realizing that what is coined "Calvinism" is just reformed theology. I believe the term Calvinist began as an insult to those holding to reformed theology as opposed to Roman Catholic etc. The term simply stuck.

The acronym T.U.L.I.P. and what it stands for isn't a comprehensive understanding of reformed theology, but it is easy way to remember some of the basic points that show contrast between traditional RC theological positions and reformed positions.

But as far as Calvin and what he taught, it's likely there are differences of theological positions here and there since "Calvinists" aren't followers of John Calvin, although they do respect him as a reformed teacher, but in the end, he is only one of many.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Thank you

is there an unbiased yet balanced and moderately pithy way in to explaining this?
Everything I've tried so far - including lengthy ones - is subtly slapdash.

John Calvin is an important theologian in the Reformed Protestant tradition, and is one of the fathers of the Reformed Tradition (others include the Scottish Reformer John Knox, and the Swiss Reformer Ulrich Zwingli).

Outside of the Reformed Tradition proper, Calvin may be more peripheral in importance, depending on the particular relationship with Calvinist theology one has.

As a Lutheran, Calvin is of little importance except in the way in which Lutheran and Reformed theological traditions have had a complicated relationship over the last five centuries. There have been many frequent attempts over the centuries to effectively shoe-horn Calvin and Calvinism into the Lutheran churches, which has consistently been met with strong resistance going all the way back to the Protestant Reformation itself. One of the worst examples of this was when in the 19th century the Kingdom of Prussia forced the Lutheran and Reformed churches into a single "Evangelical Church" ("Evangelical" simply means "Protestant" in this context). This actually resulted in thousands of Lutherans leaving Prussia and immigrating to other places, such as Canada, the US, and Australia. So, as you can imagine, lots of Lutherans (especially Lutherans who still carry the memory the forced Prussion union of Protestant churches in the 1800's) are strongly committed to our distinctive, historic, and confessional Lutheran identity.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Amittai]

Thank you VC, the detail about Prussia (which had a profound effect on my own family too) explains why self proclaimed followers of the man, or of "reform", have sometimes (like some other movements) turned out prone to seeing themselves as political shock troops.

So Augsburg is the rival to Heidelberg / Dort / Westminster then? Was Calvin involved in Heidelberg?

Web pages about Calvin seem to carry the comment that Calvin didn't write about the whole of what Christian faith is, only some of it, in which case we ought to borrow lots from outside his tradition, is that a fair viewpoint?

 

[Amittai]

holding to reformed theology as opposed to Roman Catholic

They seem to be similar rather than different (apart from a few overt details). But thank you!

 

[fhansen]

We have many luminaries who have contributed: saints, preachers, reformers, theologians of varying kinds of usefulness, etc. One often mentioned in most circles is Calvin. He seems much remembered for having been a secular ruler in a district around Geneva for a period.

Personally I try to use several secondary sources to give me mental pointers for my strategy before wading into primary reading matter. I've got Carl F H Henry on the Holy Spirit by Jesse M Payne (2021).

In a passage about Calvin (not Henry), Payne says he is drawing on Chung and on Lopes and de Conceicao, to state in summary that Calvin had written much on for example:

- systematising "bibilical data on the Spirit * "
- integrating "pneumatology into other theological loci"
- "examined the relationship between word [ Payne's lower case ] and Spirit * "
- "presented the entirety of Christian ethics in the light of the Holy Spirit".

[ * Payne's not specifying which Spirit in these two instances ]

Elsewhere in the book, in direct reference to Carl Henry, who is supposed to have drawn on Calvin, is a mention of Russell Moore and other currently very famous people as associates of Henry.

In view of what kind of flavour of beliefs I got from direct quotes from such personalities (who themselves mention Calvin's name) that I've come across, I am surprised to come across the above listed items in Payne's book.

There is so much talk generally about:

- sola this and sola that and sola the other, but I want to believe in the whole meaning of the news of Jesus and Another Comforter with nowt taken owt (Rev 21) and to know how we and those around us shall have providential perseverance.

- TULIP which was merely a highly convolutedly derived slogan and apparently only refers (whether accurately or not) to a portion of a portion of what some say "ought" to be the proper beliefs of "Calvinists".

(Bearing in mind Paul asked us not to consider ourselves Paulists or Apolloists - referring to his friend Apollo.)

Some claimed devotees of Calvin, themselves, portray him as a cynical putter-down or sophist (as if we would approve).

I also note Calvin is reported by A Thiselton (in a 1998 essay) as disagreeing with Melanchthon (a collaborator of Luther) about the hermeneutic circle and accommodations in revelation.

Is Calvin worth the average member of the public delving into?

What if anything should or could we expect to gain from Calvin?

Are there some potted versions (straight summaries) which are more balanced than others?

Especially, web pages or free (without registering) PDFs?

In my admittedly limited understanding Calvin’s main and distinctive focus was on emphasizing the sovereignty of God and the absolute necessity of grace. The Church had already solidly laid down this foundational teaching 1000 years before but Calvin, IMO, took it a step further, myopically fixating on God’s role while effectively eliminating any role at all for man’s free response, both in his initial acceptance of God’s overtures to him (in opening the door when God knocks), as well as his role in cooperating with God and His grace throughout the rest of his life.

The basis of Calvin’s emphasis was good. He strayed from truth mainly in over-emphasizing parts of it as I view the matter. This led to an imbalance, so to speak, in his teachings.

 

[Lukaris]

John Calvin is an important theologian in the Reformed Protestant tradition, and is one of the fathers of the Reformed Tradition (others include the Scottish Reformer John Knox, and the Swiss Reformer Ulrich Zwingli).

Outside of the Reformed Tradition proper, Calvin may be more peripheral in importance, depending on the particular relationship with Calvinist theology one has.

As a Lutheran, Calvin is of little importance except in the way in which Lutheran and Reformed theological traditions have had a complicated relationship over the last five centuries. There have been many frequent attempts over the centuries to effectively shoe-horn Calvin and Calvinism into the Lutheran churches, which has consistently been met with strong resistance going all the way back to the Protestant Reformation itself. One of the worst examples of this was when in the 19th century the Kingdom of Prussia forced the Lutheran and Reformed churches into a single "Evangelical Church" ("Evangelical" simply means "Protestant" in this context). This actually resulted in thousands of Lutherans leaving Prussia and immigrating to other places, such as Canada, the US, and Australia. So, as you can imagine, lots of Lutherans (especially Lutherans who still carry the memory the forced Prussion union of Protestant churches in the 1800's) are strongly committed to our distinctive, historic, and confessional Lutheran identity.

-CryptoLutheran

Not to derail this thread, is this why there are 3 Lutheran Synods in America?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Not to derail this thread, is this why there are 3 Lutheran Synods in America?

Partly. Many of the German Lutheran immigrants would eventually form the LCMS under C.F. Walther. The ELCA is the result of several splits and mergers of several earlier Synods, with a fairly strong Scandinavian Lutheran tradition. I'm less familiar about the origins of the WELS.

The origins of the "big three" Lutheran denominations in the US are partly to do with different immigrant communities, and the values those communities brought with them.

-CryptoLutheran