|
|
Institutes of the Christian Religion
John Calvin
lesson 3: The Structure of Institutes
scheduled 23 May 2004
Our Motivation:
Explore
the structure of Institutes as a guide to understanding it better
before we read, the idea is a simple map to show where we are
going.
Logical Structure--what is it? How does it differ from
literary (OTOH) or philosophic structure(OTO)?
What
is Calvin trying to achieve, does the purpose change through the
different editions? (obviously, it does since i asked the question
*grin*)
How Institutes was written-->
the
constant revisions, the relationship of Calvin's commentaries,
sermons, and tracts to Institutes. The effect of Calvin as
Pastor-Teacher (the silver thread) on the concerns of the Institutes.
The issues that Calvin is primarily replying to, what drives his
efforts. Set the stage for an analysis of particular themes.
Given
how Institutes was written, what are the major themes? That is given
our limited time, where should we start reading and why?
Source
of jpeg:
One piece of answering this question lies in a discussion of last week's reading.
Review of last week's readings:
Outline
of the dedicatory letter to Francis I.
(first, how hard did people find it? i can try to abridge or even
annotate Institutes in the readings, would this help?)
from amazon, the
table of contents from:
Prefaces and Prologues to Famous Books
(Harvard Classics, Part 39)
by Charles
W. Eliot (Editor)
1909. Contents: William
Caxton: Title, Prologue and Epilogues to the Recuyell of the
Histories of Troy; Epilogue to Dictes; Prologue to Golden Legend,
Caton, Aesop; Proem to Chaucer's Canterbury Tales; Prologue to
Malory's King Arthur and Virgil's Eneydos. John Calvin: Dedication of
the Institutes of the Christian Religion. Nicolaus Copernicus:
Dedication of the Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies. John Knox:
Preface to the History of the Reformation in Scotland. Edmund
Spenser: prefatory Letter to Sir Walter Raleigh on the Faerie Queene.
Sir Walter Raleigh: Preface to the History of the World. Francis
Bacon: Prooemium, Epistle Dedicatory, Preface, and Plan of the
Instauratio Magna.
I.
Prefactory Address to King Francis I of France
....A. 1-
Circumstances in which the book was first written
........1.My
purpose was solely to transmit certain rudiments by which those who
are touched with any zeal for religion might be shaped to true
godliness. And I undertook this labor especially for our French
countrymen.
........2.It is as if this doctrine looked to
no other end than to wrest the scepters from the hands of kings, to
cast down all courts and judgments, to subvert all orders and civil
governments, to disrupt the peace and quiet of the people, to abolish
all laws, to scatter all lordships and possessions--in short, to turn
everything upside down!
....B. 2-Plea for the persecuted
evangelicals
.........1.Rather, I embrace the common cause of
all believers, that of Christ himself--a cause completely torn and
trampled in your realm today, lying, as it were, utterly forlorn,
more through the tyranny of certain Pharisees than with your
approval.
.........2.For ungodly men have so far prevailed that
Christ's truth, even if it is not driven away scattered and
destroyed, still lies hidden, buried and inglorious.
.........3.But
our doctrine must tower unvanquished above all the glory and above
all the might of the world, for it is not of us, but of the living
God and his Christ whom the Father has appointed
King....
.........4.Now look at our adversaries (I speak of the
order of priests, at whose nod and will the others are hostile toward
us), and consider with me for a moment what zeal motivates them. They
readily allow themselves and others to ignore, neglect, and despise
the true religion, which has been handed down in the Scriptures, and
which ought to have had a recognized place among all men. They think
it of no concern what belief anyone holds or does not hold regarding
God and Christ, if only he submit his mind with implicit faith (as
they call it) to the judgment of the church.
....C. 3-Charges
of Antagonists refuted: newness, uncertainty; the value of
miracles
..........1. But however they may jest about its
uncertainty, if they had to seal their doctrine in their own blood,
and at the expense of their own life, one could see how much it would
mean to them. Quite the opposite is our assurance, which fears
neither the terrors of death nor even God's judgment seat.
....D.
4-Misleading Claim that the Church Fathers oppose the Reformation
teaching
....E. 5-The appeal the "custom" against
the Truth
..........1 what is seen being done by the many soon
obtains the force of custom; while the affairs of men have scarcely
ever been so well regulated that the better things pleased the
majority. Therefore, the private vices of the many have often caused
public error, or rather a general agreement on vices, which these
good men now want to make law.
....F. 6. Errors about the
nature of the Church
.........1. Our controversy turns on these
hinges: first, they contend that the form of the church is always
apparent and observable. Secondly, they set this form in the see of
the Roman Church and its hierarchy.
.........2. let us leave to
him the fact that he sometimes removes from men's sight the external
signs by which the church is known. That is, I confess, a dreadful
visitation of God upon the earth. But if men's impiety deserves it,
why do we strive to oppose God's just vengeance? In such a way the
Lord of old punished men's ingratitude.
.....G. 7. Tumults
alleged to result from Reformation Preaching
..........1
Lastly, they do not act with sufficient candor when they invidiously
recount how many disturbances, tumults, and contentions the preaching
of our doctrine has drawn along with it, and what fruits it now
produces among many.
..........2. And first, indeed, he [Satan]
stirred up men to action that thereby he might violently oppress the
dawning truth. And when this profited him nothing, he turned to
stratagems: he aroused disagreements and dogmatic contentions through
his catabaptists and other monstrous rascals in order to obscure and
at last extinguish the truth.
.......H. 8- Let the King Beware
of acting on false charges: the innocent await divine vindication
discussion
of Calvin's conversion autobiographical notes from Psalms commentary.
(if you didn't see it in the packet of readings, 2 double sided xeroxes
from Battle's Institutes 1536 edition
see also:
http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/calcom/calcom-General.html
feel free to read these pages instead of the Book 4, chapters 22-29 if
you are uninterested in the subject material of civil government, we
will return to these issues at the end of the class)
Essay:
extended
illustration:
A. Example of misdirection. Put the book on
someone's desk. Ask them to turn to book 3 chapter 22. Tell them this
is the high point of the whole book. The chapter that summarizes
Calvin's life's work—double predestination.
Examine
consequences, this is what many of the books about Calvin and the
institutes do.
B.
Put the institutes on someone else's desk, tell they this has only
historical significance to a few professors and their unfortunate
students who must read and sustain examinations on it. It has no
significance to your life, its a nice story by a dry, overly
intellectual, old dead white European man.
This seems to summarize
another approach to institutes.
Would you find the time and energy
to read Institutes if you believed this?
C.
Go to other person. Offer them this book that summarizes 30 years of
Bible study by a uniquely gifted man called by God to pastor a church
and teach in a school during one of the most tumultuous times in
European history. He intended it to be an introduction for young
seminary students into the lifelong study of the Scriptures and
offers a systematic way to relate what is otherwise distributed
throughout the Bible.
Which person is more likely to read and get
something out of Institutes?
D. This is the interpretive triangle. The corners are: logical order has one or two ideas of primacy, historical order has Calvin outdated-often they pulldate the Scriptures as well, the 3rd corner is---my grandfather was just as smart, and just as lead by the Holy Spirit as i am--history as prologue.
The corners are
historical
theology, systematic theology, and Biblical theology. Imagine a ball
suspended in the center and drawn to each corner with a different
strength. This internal tug-of-war between: history, Bible,
philosophy. Take a minute to explain the corners and how they relate.
See how speculative theology doesn't fit into either Calvin's
Institutes nor into the triangle. Even better yet to to imagine at
diamond, with the upper vertex pastoral theology, for that was Calvin's
great motivation. What was edifying for the people he preached to. And
with the lower vertex- speculative theology, for that is exactly what
Calvin did not want to do, speculate on the nature of God.
Now i would like nothing better than to offer you a concise outline of Institutes. Say controlling theme is Apostles Creed, 4 parts corresponding to the four books, then take each book and break it down into 10 major points and those into subpoints. What we would end up with is an analysis of Calvin's systematic theology. If we wanted to explore the imago dei all we had to do was look up in an index and poof 1 chapter on the imago dei and around it would be related chapters, leading us into a complete study of the Reformed doctrine. The problem is that i can't do this. Nor do i think anyone can, nor is there a few themes that structure Calvin's thought like predestination or even the sovereignity of God. My idea of the metal threads is a way to remember and relate the lessons together, not a systematic way to see Institutes. Why is this?
Primarily because Calvin is a Biblical theologian with a lawyer's logical mind. And Institutes reflects this Biblical structure, for it doesn't approach the faith as a systematic theology does, categories and organization based on first principles. For instance, look at the difference between preaching through the books of the Bible and a pastor getting up Monday morning and figuring out the most important current event that week from the newspaper, then doing research on what the Bible speaks about that issue, then structuring the sermon around this. OTOH Calvin preaches through the Scriptures as does our Pastor, a system that holds up not just the Words of Scripture but the very structure as important and authoritative. Thus tackling each issue as it appears in Scripture rather than what you think is important for the moment. This contrast of pastoral theological techniques is likewise something deeply ingrained in Calvin's Institutes.
So i can't offer you an outline of Institutes systematic theology, but i can offer you a lifeline to allow you to feel more comfortable reading it without drowning. First, like a novel, read it from front to back. Second, take notes, highlight, read out loud, struggle and work at it. Third, look at it as an introduction to Biblical theology as seen by Calvin as he reacts to the burning issues of the day and struggles to relate his sermons and commentaries to what he sees as an introduction for young pastor-teachers. So i propose following the pattern of the books for the rest of the class, three Sunday mornings for each of the 4 books. But when we come to each book, recognize that we can not read the entire book, nor is just reading the first 45 pages (3 weeks, 15 pages per week) satisfactory, but rather concentrating our efforts three related points that strike the modern reader as being particularly important. Realizing that we are not trying to summarize Calvin, but rather look at the pieces that history has challenged most strongly since he wrote the book.
see: Outline of Method and Arrangement by Olevian from the first class notes.
This is going to form the framework for the rest of the class:
Book One-The knowledge of God as Creator 1st-what can we know about God from the Creation (chp 3,5)2nd-what is the effect of sin on this understanding 3rd-this knowledge is through the Scriptures- accommodation
Book Two- 1st: Christ the Mediator. 2nd: subject of original sin 3rd: the offices of Prophet, Priest, and King
Book Three- 1st: particularism-does not unite all men to Christ 2nd:assurance of salvation 3rd:predestination
Book Fourth: 1st: Servetus 2nd:means of grace 3rd:outside the church there is no salvation
These choices are driven by today's burning questions: are the heathen saved? The nature of Christ. Predestination, schism or denominationalism
The forces that modified the structure, Calvin's commentaries and sermons.
The charts from Battle' outline on how the chapters changed.
The chronology from Oberman on Calvin's literary output by month and year.
Geneva as a pastoral laboratory, where Calvin's battle with the Council's feeds back into his sermons(primarily), and his calling as a pastor and a teacher drive him to Scripture for the answers to these political dilemmas.
Reading
from Calvin, the purpose is to show how Institutes is 'bracketed' by
the dedicatory letter to Francis I and these paragraphs on civil
government, which expand and explain the dedicatory epistle that we
read last week. Between the two i think this shows Calvin's very strong
desire to build the church as an institution capable of winning the
'hearts and minds' battle in France with the absolutist king and state.
As we know, the
(Obedience,
with reverence, due even unjust rulers, 22-29)
22. Deference
The first duty of subjects towards their rulers, is to entertain the most honorable views of their office, recognizing it as a delegated jurisdiction from God, and on that account receiving and reverencing them as the ministers and ambassadors of God. For you will find some who show themselves very obedient to magistrates, and would be unwilling that there should be no magistrates to obey, because they know this is expedient for the public good, and yet the opinion which those persons have of magistrates is that they are a kind of necessary evils. But Peter requires something more of us when he says, "Honor the king," (1 Pet. 2: 17;) and Solomon, when he says, "My son, fear thou the Lord and the king," (Prov. 24: 21.) For, under the term honor, the former includes a sincere and candid esteem, and the latter, by joining the king with God, shows that he is invested with a kind of sacred veneration and dignity. We have also the remarkable injunction of Paul, "Be subject not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake," (Rom. 13: 5.) By this he means, that subjects, in submitting to princes and governors, are not to be influenced merely by fear, (just as those submit to an armed enemy who see vengeance ready to be executed if they resist,) but because the obedience which they yield is rendered to God himself, inasmuch as their power is from God.
I speak not of the men as if the mask of dignity could cloak folly, or cowardice, or cruelty, or wicked and flagitous manners, and thus acquire for vice the praise of virtue; but I say that the station itself is deserving of honor and reverence, and that those who rule should, in respect of their office, be held by us in esteem and veneration.
23.Obedience
From this, a second consequence is, that we must with ready minds prove our obedience to them, whether in complying with edicts, or in paying tribute, or in undertaking public offices and burdens which relate to the common defense, or in executing any other orders. "Let every soul", says Paul, "be subject unto the higher powers." "Whosoever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God," (Rom. 13: 1, 2.) Writing to Titus, he says, "Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work," (Tit. 3: 1.) Peter also says, "Submit yourselves to every human creature," (or rather, as I understand it, "ordinance of man,") "for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them that do well," (1 Pet. 2: 13.) Moreover, to testify that they do not feign subjection, but are sincerely and cordially subject, Paul adds, that they are to commend the safety and prosperity of those under whom they live to God. "I exhort, therefore," says he, "that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority: that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty," (1 Tim. 2: 1, 2.)
Let no man here deceive himself, since we cannot resist the magistrate without resisting God. For, although an unarmed magistrate may seem to be despised with impunity, yet God is armed, and will signally avenge this contempt.
Under this obedience, I comprehend the restraint which private men ought to impose on themselves in public, not interfering with public business, or rashly encroaching on the province of the magistrate, or attempting any thing at all of a public nature. If it is proper that any thing in a public ordinance should be corrected, let them not act tumultuously, or put their hands to a work where they ought to feel that their hands are tied, but let them leave it to the cognizance of the magistrate, whose hand alone here is free. My meaning is, let them not dare to do it without being ordered. For when the command of the magistrate is given, they too are invested with public authority. For as, according to the common saying, the eyes and ears of the prince are his counsellors, so one may not improperly say that those who, by his command, have the charge of managing affairs, are his hands.
24. Obedience is also due the unjust magistrate
But as we have hitherto described the magistrate who truly is what he is called, viz., the father of his country, and (as the Poet speaks) the pastor of the people, the guardian of peace, the president of justice, the vindicator of innocence, he is justly to be deemed a madman who disapproves of such authority.
And since in almost all ages we see that some princes, careless about all their duties on which they ought to have been intent, live, without solicitude, in luxurious sloth, others, bent on their own interests venally prostitute all rights, privileges, judgments, and enactments; others pillage poor people of their money, and afterwards squander it in insane largesses; others act as mere robbers, pillaging houses, violating matrons and slaying the innocent; many cannot be persuaded to recognize such persons for princes, whose command, as far as lawful, they are bound to obey.
For while in this unworthy conduct, and among atrocities so alien, not only from the duty of the magistrate, but also of the man, they behold no appearance of the image of God, which ought to be conspicuous in the magistrates while they see not a vestige of that minister of God, who was appointed to be a praise to the good and a terror to the bad, they cannot recognize the ruler whose dignity and authority Scripture recommends to us. And, undoubtedly, the natural feeling of the human mind has always been not less to assail tyrants with hatred and execrations than to look up to just kings with love and veneration.
25. The wicked ruler a judgment of God
But it we have respect to the word of God, it will lead us farther, and make us subject not only to the authority of those princes who honestly and faithfully perform their duty toward us, but all princes, by whatever means they have so become, although there is nothing they less perform than the duty of princes. For though the Lord declares that ruler to maintain our safety is the highest gift of his beneficence, and prescribes to rulers themselves their proper sphere, he at the same time declares, that of whatever description they may be, they derive their power from none but him. Those, indeed, who rule for the public good, are true examples and specimens of big beneficence, while those who domineer unjustly and tyrannically are raised up by him to punish the people for their iniquity. Still all alike possess that sacred majesty with which he has invested lawful power.
I will not proceed further without subjoining some distinct passages to this effect. We need not labor to prove that an impious king is a mark of the Lord's anger, since I presume no one will deny it, and that this is not less true of a king than of a robber who plunders your goods, an adulterer who defiles your bed, and an assassin who aims at your life, since all such calamities are classed by Scripture among the curses of God.
But let us insist at greater length in proving what does not so easily fall in with the views of men, that even an individual of the worst character, one most unworthy of all honor, if invested with public authority, receives that illustrious divine power which the Lord has by his word devolved on the ministers of his justice and judgment, and that, accordingly, in so far as public obedience is concerned, he is to be held in the same honor and reverence as the best of kings.
26.
Obedience to bad kings required in Scripture
And, first, I would have the reader carefully to attend to that Divine Providence which, not without cause, is so often set before us in Scripture, and that special act of distributing kingdoms, and setting up as kings whomsoever he pleases. In Daniel it is said, "He changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings," (Dan. 2: 21, 37.) Again, "That the living may know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will," (Dan. 4: 17, 20.) Similar sentiments occur throughout Scripture, but they abound particularly in the prophetical books. What kind of king Nebuchadnezzar, he who stormed Jerusalem, was, is well known. He was an active invader and devastator of other countries. Yet the Lord declares in Ezekiel that he had given him the land of Egypt as his hire for the devastation which he had committed. Daniel also said to him, "Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven has given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven has he given into thine hand, and has made thee ruler over them all," (Dan. 2: 37, 38.) Again, he says to his son Belshazzar, "The most high God gave Nebuchadnezzar thy father a kingdom, and majesty, and glory, and honour: and for the majesty that he gave him, all people, nations, and languages, trembled and feared before him," (Dan. 5: 18, 19.) When we hear that the king was appointed by God, let us, at the same time, call to mind those heavenly edicts as to honouring and fearing the king, and we shall have no doubt that we are to view the most iniquitous tyrant as occupying the place with which the Lord has honoured him. When Samuel declared to the people of Israel what they would suffer from their kings, he said, "This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectioneries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your olive yards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your men-servants, and your maid-servants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants," (1 Sam. 8: 11-17.) Certainly these things could not be done legally by kings, whom the law trained most admirably to all kinds of restraint; but it was called justice in regard to the people, because they were bound to obey, and could not lawfully resist: as if Samuel had said, To such a degree will kings indulge in tyranny, which it will not be for you to restrain. The only thing remaining for you will be to receive their commands, and be obedient to their words.
27. The case of Nebuchadnezzar in Jeremiah ch. 27
But the most remarkable and memorable passage is in Jeremiah. Though it is rather long, I am not indisposed to quote it, because it most clearly settles this whole question. "I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power, and by my outstretched arm, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me. And now have I given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon my servant; and the beasts of the field have I given him also to serve him. And all nations shall serve him, and his son, and his son's son, until the very time of his land come: and then many nations and great kings shall serve themselves of him. And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the Lord, with the sword, and with famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand," (Jer. 27: 5-8.) Therefore "bring your necks under the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him and his people, and live," (v. 12.) We see how great obedience the Lord was pleased to demand for this dire and ferocious tyrant, for no other reason than just that he held the kingdom. In other words, the divine decree had placed him on the throne of the kingdom, and admitted him to regal majesty, which could not be lawfully violated. If we constantly keep before our eyes and minds the fact, that even the most iniquitous kings are appointed by the same decree which establishes all regal authority, we will never entertain the seditious thought, that a king is to be treated according to his deserts, and that we are not bound to act the part of good subjects to him who does not in his turn act the part of a king to us.
28. General testimonies of Scripture on the sanctity of the royal person
It is vain to object, that that command was specially given to the Israelites. For we must attend to the ground on which the Lord places it - "I have given the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar; therefore serve him and live."(Jer. 27). Let us doubt not that on whomsoever the kingdom has been conferred, him we are bound to serve. Whenever God raises any one to royal honour, he declares it to be his pleasure that he should reign. To this effect we have general declarations in Scripture. Solomon says - "For the transgression of a land, many are the princes thereof," (Prov. 28: 2.) Job says "He looseth the bond of kings, and girdeth their loins with a girdle," (Job 12: 18.) This being confessed, nothing remains for us but to serve and live.
There is in Jeremiah another command in which the Lord thus orders his people - "Seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for it: for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace," (Jer. 29: 7.) Here the Israelites, plundered of all their property, torn from their homes, driven into exile, thrown into miserable bondage, are ordered to pray for the prosperity of the victor, not as we are elsewhere ordered to pray for our persecutors, but that his kingdom may be preserved in safety and tranquillity, that they too may live prosperously under him. Thus David, when already king elect by the ordination of God, and anointed with his holy oil, though ceaselessly and unjustly assailed by Saul, holds the life of one who was seeking his life to be sacred, because the Lord had invested him with royal honour. "The Lord forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the Lord's anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him seeing he is the anointed of the Lord." "Mine eye spared thee; and I said, I will not put forth mine hand against my lord; for he is the Lord's anointed," (1 Sam. 24: 6, 11.) Again, - "Who can stretch forth his hand against the Lord's anointed, and be guiltless?" "As the Lord liveth, the Lord shall smite him, or his day shall come to die, or he shall descend into battle, and perish. The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth mine hand against the Lord's anointed," (1 Sam. 26: 9-11.)
29. It is not the part of subjects but of God to vindicate the right
This feeling of reverence, and even of piety, we owe to the utmost to all our rulers, be their characters what they may. This I repeat the softener, that we may learn not to consider the individuals themselves, but hold it to be enough that by the will of the Lord they sustain a character on which he has impressed and engraven inviolable majesty.
But rulers, you will say, owe mutual duties to those under them. This I have already confessed. But if from this you conclude that obedience is to be returned to none but just governors, you reason absurdly. Husbands are bound by mutual duties to their wives, and parents to their children. Should husbands and parents neglect their duty; should the latter be harsh and severe to the children whom they are enjoined not to provoke to anger (Eph. 6:4), and by their severity harass them beyond measure; should the former treat with the greatest contumely the wives whom they are enjoined to love (Eph. 5:25) and to spare as the weaker vessels (I Peter 3:7); would children be less bound in duty to their parents, and wives to their husbands? They are made subject to the froward and undutiful.
Nay, since the duty of all is not to look behind them, that is, not to inquire into the duties of one another but to submit each to his own duty, this ought especially to be exemplified in the case of those who are placed under the power of others. Wherefore, if we are cruelly tormented by a savage, if we are rapaciously pillaged by an avaricious or luxurious, if we are neglected by a sluggish, if, in short, we are persecuted for righteousness' sake by an impious and sacrilegious prince, let us first call up the remembrance of our faults, which doubtless the Lord is chastising by such scourges. In this way humility will curb our impatience. And let us reflect that it belongs not to us to cure these evils, that all that remains for us is to implore the help of the Lord, in whose hands are the hearts of kings, and inclinations of kingdoms (Prov. 21:1). "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods." (Ps. 82:1). Before his face shall fall and be crushed all kings and judges of the earth, who have not kissed his anointed, who have enacted unjust laws to oppress the poor in judgement, and do violence to the cause of the humble, to make widows a prey, and plunder the fatherless (Isa. 10:1-2).
(Constitutional
magistrates, however, ought to check the tyranny of kings; obedience
to God comes first, 30-31)
30. When God intervenes, it is
sometimes by unwitting agents
Herein is the goodness, power, and providence of God wondrously displayed. At one time he raises up manifest avengers from among his own servants and gives them his command to punish accursed tyranny and deliver his people from calamity when they are unjustly oppressed; at another time he employs, for this purpose, the fury of men who have other thoughts and other aims. Thus he rescued his people Israel from the tyranny of Pharaoh by Moses; from the violence of Chusa, king of Syria, by Othniel; and from other bondage by other kings or judges. Thus he tamed the pride of Tyre by the Egyptians; the insolence of the Egyptians by the Assyrians; the ferocity of the Assyrians by the Chaldeans; the confidence of Babylon by the Medes and Persians, - Cyrus having previously subdued the Medes, while the ingratitude of the kings of Judah and Israel, and their impious contumacy after all his kindness, he subdued and punished, - at one time by the Assyrians, at another by the Babylonians. All these things however were not done in the same way.
The former class of deliverers being brought forward by the lawful call of God to perform such deeds, when they took up arms against kings, did not at all violate that majesty with which kings are invested by divine appointment, but armed from heaven, they, by a greater power, curbed a less, just as kings may lawfully punish their own satraps. The latter class, though they were directed by the hand of God, as seemed to him good, and did his work without knowing it, had nought but evil in their thoughts.
31. Constitutional defenders of the people's freedom
But whatever may be thought of the acts of the men themselves, the Lord by their means equally executed his own work, when he broke the bloody sceptres of insolent kings, and overthrew their intolerable dominations. Let princes hear and be afraid; but let us at the same time guard most carefully against spurning or violating the venerable and majestic authority of rulers, an authority which God has sanctioned by the surest edicts, although those invested with it should be most unworthy of it, and, as far as in them lies, pollute it by their iniquity. Although the Lord takes vengeance on unbridled domination, let us not therefore suppose that that vengeance is committed to us, to whom no command has been given but to obey and suffer.
I speak only of private men. For when popular magistrates have been appointed to curb the tyranny of kings, (as the Ephori, who were opposed to kings among the Spartans, or Tribunes of the people to consuls among the Romans, or Demarchs to the senate among the Athenians; and, perhaps, there is something similar to this in the power exercised in each kingdom by the three orders, when they hold their primary diets.) So far am I from forbidding these officially to check the undue license of kings, that if they connive at kings when they tyrannise and insult over the humbler of the people, I affirm that their dissimulation is not free from nefarious perfidy, because they fraudulently betray the liberty of the people, while knowing that, by the ordinance of God, they are its appointed guardians.
32. Obedience to man must not become disobedience to God
But in that obedience which we hold to be due to the commands of rulers, we must always make the exception, nay, must be particularly careful that it is not incompatible with obedience to Him to whose will the wishes of all kings should be subject, to whose decrees their commands must yield, to whose majesty their sceptres must bow. And, indeed, how preposterous were it, in pleasing men, to incur the offence of Him for whose sake you obey men! The Lord, therefore, is King of kings. When he opens his sacred mouth, he alone is to be heard, instead of all and above all. We are subject to the men who rule over us, but subject only in the Lord. If they command any thing against Him, let us not pay the least regard to it, nor be moved by all the dignity which they possess as magistrates - a dignity to which, no injury is done when it is subordinated to the special and truly supreme power of God. On this ground Daniel denies that he had sinned in any respect against the king when he refused to obey his impious decree, (Dan. 6: 22,) because the king had exceeded his limits, and not only been injurious to men, but, by raising his horn against God, had virtually abrogated his own power. On the other hand, the Israelites are condemned for having too readily obeyed the impious edict of the king. For, when Jeroboam made the golden calf, they forsook the temple of God, and, in submissiveness to him, revolted to new superstitions, (1 Kings 12: 28.) With the same facility posterity had bowed before the decrees of their kings. For this they are severely upbraided by the Prophet, (Hosea 5: 11.) So far is the praise of modesty from being due to that pretence by which flattering courtiers cloak themselves, and deceive the simple, when they deny the lawfulness of declining any thing imposed by their kings, as if the Lord had resigned his own rights to mortals by appointing them to rule over their fellows or as if earthly power were diminished when it is subjected to its author, before whom even the principalities of heaven tremble as suppliants. I know the imminent peril to which subjects expose themselves by this firmness, kings being most indignant when they are condemned. As Solomon says, "The wrath of a king is as messengers of death," (Prov. 16: 14.) But since Peter, one of heaven's heralds, has published the edict, "We ought to obey God rather than men," (Acts 5: 29,) let us console ourselves with the thought, that we are rendering the obedience which the Lord requires when we endure anything rather than turn aside from piety. And that our courage may not fail, Paul stimulates us by the additional considerations (1 Cor. 7: 23,) that we were redeemed by Christ at the great price which our redemption cost him, in order that we might not yield a slavish obedience to the depraved wishes of men, far less do homage to their impiety.
End of the Institutes.
G O D B E P R A I S E D .
from:
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/lifelong-learning/distrib/reforml9.htm#1.2
Part
I: The Origins of the Institutes
1. How the Institutes Evolved
The
Institutes of the Christian Religion, as they are now universally
called in English, were first published in Latin in 1536 under the
title Institutio Christianae Religionis [6.1.2, Reardon, pp. 154-57].
Calvin was just twenty-seven and the Reformation of Martin Luther was
not yet fully established. The word institutio would remind the
humanist readers of the legal code of the Emperor Justinian [6.1.2,
McGrath, p. 136]. The Institutes were written in and for the
sixteenth-century.
The
first edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion was the
Latin version published in Basle in 1536, it went to a second edition
in 1539 (printed in Strasbourg) with quite substantial amounts of new
material. Indeed the second edition was three times a voluminous as
the first edition and ‘it is no longer a primer; it is well on the
way to being a definitive statement on the nature of the Christian
faith’ [6.1.2, McGrath, p. 137]. The third edition evolved more
slowly through 1543-50 (printed in Geneva) and contained revisions
across the substance of the work and new material on monasticism but
it was less well organised (some regard the 1543/1550 publications as
one edition, others [for example, 6.1.2, Wendel, p. 117] as two
editions). The final version of the Institutes was published in 1559
in Geneva and has obviously become the definitive edition of the
Institutes [6.1.2, Greengrass, p. 172, has a very useful summary
table of the evolution of the editions and also see, 6.1.2, McGrath,
p. 141].
The notion
that the Institutes was originally meant as a primer with
catechetical intent can be seen from the Preface, the apologetic
letter to Francis I: ‘My purpose was solely to transmit certain
rudiments by which those who are touched with any zeal for religion
might be shaped in true godliness’. You must decide for yourself
whether this claim is correct and that the apologetic tone of the
Preface of the Institutes is carried though into criticism and
polemic. The 1536 edition certainly contained polemic in that the
fifth chapter, of its six chapters, was "The Five False
Sacraments".
The
1536 edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion is about 220
pages in a modern edition and the 1559 edition about 1500 pages. It
is likely therefore that some changes in content and purpose must
have occurred between these dates. The 1536 edition is made up of six
chapters, the 1559 edition 4 Books and 80 chapters. Each Book title
and each chapter heading in the 1559 edition are quite explicit and
precisely described. As the editions evolved they became more like
the topoi of Aristotle (loci in Latin and used, for example, by
Cicero), that is, a discussion of ‘important topics’ (topos
literally means "place" or "position").
The
fourfold structure of topics the Institutes is clear in each edition
and may represent a rough framework of the exegesis of the Apostles
Creed:
I believe in the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth ...
I believe in Jesus Christ his only Son Our Lord ...
I believe in the Holy Spirit ...
I believe in the holy catholic Church ...
As Wendel has claimed
[6.1.2, pp. 122-44] the Institutes are made up, or influenced by, a
number of sources: (a) the Bible - both in Hebrew and Greek [6.1.2,
Ganoczy, 1996, p. 236], (b) the Church Fathers, (c) Roman law, (d)
nominalist thought and (e) the thought of Martin Luther [6.1.2,
Ganoczy, 1966, pp. 133-81, for a full exposition of the sources]. The
Institutes of the Christian Religion became a programmatic statement
of Christian theology as understood by Calvin [6.1.2, Wendel, pp.
111-49]. It was not the first such work of the emergent Protestant
sects. In 1521, Philipp Melanchthon published the Loci Communes
("Commonplaces") which was an exposition of Luther’s
thinking [6.1.2, McGrath, pp. 139f.], Huldrych Zwingli wrote in 1525
the Commentarius de vera et falsa religione and Guilluame Farel, in
1534, his Sommaire which was a brief exposition of the key aspects of
being a Christian [6.1.2, Parker, p. 34]. In 1529, in Avignon,
Francis Lambert wrote Somme Chrestienne a short work which Calvin
deliberately used as a "source" and basis for his
Institutes.
The political
circumstances of the origins of the Institutes is a key item in our
interpretation of the work. We saw in the last session that Guillaume
Cop, rector of the University of Paris, was implicated by the
authorities over a sermon, based on the daily lectionary reading,
Matthew 5.1-12, and both were forced to flee Paris and they went
together to Basel in February 1535. The Institutes were written soon
after this traumatic event and the Preface of the Institutes reflects
an apologetic intent as well as an attempt by Calvin to persuade
Francis I that his faith was not dangerous or seditious. The 1536
Preface, an open letter to Francis I, the famed Epistola
Nuncupatoria, remained unchanged throughout all of the editions of
the Institutes.
Francis I
was implacably opposed to the evangelicals in France and sent
instruction to the French parliament:
Dear faithful friends ... we are very troubled and displeased at what has taken place ... where at the principal university of Christendom that accursed heretical Lutherans sect swarms. Its further spread we wish with our might and power to prevent. And to that end we wish and understand that such a grievous punishment should be meted out that it would be a correction to the accursed heretics and an example to all others [in A.-L. Herminjard, Correspondence des Réformateurs (Geneva, 1870), vol. 3, pp. 114f.].
Given this serious situation, it is unsurprising that an apologetic motive is evident in the Institutes of the Christian Religion but it also indicates something of its genesis.
(see:
_Analysis of the Institutes of the Christian Religion of John Calvin_
by Ford Lewis Battles)
pg. 23-4 "How should one
undertake to read the Institutes? I have a bad habit of reading new
books (new to me, that is) by scrutinizing the index examing the
conclusions, savoring the organization, perhaps sampling a few test
passages and then asking myself, Is it worth further reading? I would
not recommend this approach to reading the Institutes. First, you
must want to read the book; you must set out from the beginning;
third you must persist, however long it takes you, until you reach
the last page. Do not become a Calvinist of the first five chapters
or of the first book. I can generally tell, when people speak of
Calvin, whether they know him only be hearsay, have read a few pages,
or have sampled him anthologically. They have no clue to the
wonderful interconnectedness of Calvin's thought. They ask questions
which a fuller reading of the Institutes could have answered.
Fourth, do not lament that a question seems to go unanswered, or a loose end seems not to be tied; it will be answered; it will be tied. Be patient. If, after you have read the whole book for the first time, you remain in serious disagreement with Calvin--well, so be it! But what coherent alternative will you have to offer?
Fifth, as you read, think not only of Calvin's time (perhaps reviewed by way of T.H.L.Parker's Portrait of Calvin or W.Monter's Calvin's Geneva) but also of your own. Is Calvin somehow speaking too to the late 20thC? So speculating, readers of the Institutes have sometimes made surprisingly helpful discoveries.
Last,
do not hesitate to place this Analysis beside you as you read. For
some of you who prefer to grasp the structure of the book as a whole
before you plunge into it, the Analysis can be a help, for it
faithfully sets forth the tripartite book, chapter, and section
organization of the work.
...
These words would be incomplete
if Calvin's own call to Scripture were not re-sounded. He wrote the
Institutes to draw Christians to the Scriptures; he wrote his
commentaries to elucidate not so much the larger elements of the faith
as the details of the text itself. He proclaimed the Scriptures from
the pulpit. The reader of the Institutes will find his own
understanding and conviction quickened by continuing his study
beyond the Institutes to the Scriptures that are its source and to
the Commentaries and Sermons which further expound the biblical faith
of John Calvin.
references for further study:
http://www.antithesis.com/features/sola_scriptura_01.html
The term "biblicism" is usually derogatory. It is commonly applied to (1) someone who has no appreciation for the importance of extrabiblical truth in theology, who denies the value of general or natural revelation, (2) those suspected of believing that Scripture is a "textbook" of science, or philosophy, politics, ethics, economics, aesthetics, church government, etc., (3) those who have no respect for confessions, creeds, and past theologians, who insist on ignoring these and going back to the Bible to build up their doctrinal formulations from scratch, (4) those who employ a "proof texting" method, rather than trying to see Scripture texts in their historical, cultural, logical, and literary contexts.
I wish to disavow biblicism in these senses. Nevertheless, I also want to indicate how difficult it is to draw the line between these biblicisms and an authentic Reformation doctrine of sola Scriptura. Consider, first, (1): Sofa Scriptura is the doctrine that Scripture, and only Scripture, has the final word on everything, all our doctrine, and all our life. Thus it has the final word even on our interpretation of Scripture, even in our theological method.
An article too long to ask people to read, but adds greatly to the
historical-Biblical-systematic theologies triangle example while
defending Sola Scriptura. J.Frame is the professor who taught the
normative-situational-existential triangle first at WTS-CA now at
RTS-Orlando, i think he is the best prof i've ever had, and i suspect
he is one of the most creative and important reformed theologians of
our time.
-----
http://www.ncl.ac.uk/lifelong-learning/distrib/reforml8.htm
http://www.superior.net/~covenant/reformation.htm
------
http://www.bible.org/docs/history/calvin/institut/ci000007.htm
Method
and Arrangement, or Subject of the Whole Work[From an Epitome of the
Institutions, by Gaspar Olevian.]
-------
http://www.apuritansmind.com/Reformation/McMahonShortSummaryInstitutes.htm
A
Condensed Summary of Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion by
C. Matthew McMahon
his longer outline, perhaps the best online one is at: McMahon
Longer Overview
doesn't compete with Battles _Analysis of The Institutes of the
Christian Religion_ but is a good place to start
reading before you tackle each piece of Calvin.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
one of the best summaries of this
online i've seen is at:
http://mb-soft.com/believe/text/calvinis.htm
where the author writes:
"The formal principle and source of
Calvin's theological system is
embodied in the Latin phrase sola
Scriptura (Scripture only). In a
strict sense Calvin was primarily a
biblical theologian. Trained in
the techniques of
historicogrammatical exegesis through his humanistic
and legal studies, he went to the
Scriptures to see what they clearly
said. He rejected the medieval
fourfold interpretation which allowed
allegorizing, spiritualizing, and
moralizing, insisting that the
literal meaning of the words was to
be taken in their historical
context. On this basis he sought to
develop a theology that would set
forth in a systematic form the
teaching of Scripture. He was, however,
no rationalist, for he constantly
stressed the fact that while the
Bible reveals God and his purposes to
us, yet there is always the
mystery of the divine Being and
counsel which no human thought can
penetrate. Deut. 29:29 was a verse to
which he referred many times.
The stress which he laid upon the
Scriptures was the result of his
belief that they were the Word of God
and therefore were the final
authority for Christian belief and
action. He did not believe in a
doctrine of dictation, although he
did on occasion refer to the
writers as God's amanuenses, but held
that the Holy Spirit in
different and often mysterious ways
revealed God's will and work and
guided the writers in their recording
of them. Thus, the Bible is
authoritative in all matters with
which it deals, but it does not deal
with everything, such as astronomy.
The individual comes to recognize
the Bible as the Word of God not
primarily because of logical,
historical, or other arguments but by
the enlightenment of the Holy
Spirit's "internal testimony."
the second is to early on justify the
study of Calvin as a man shaped
by God but not as a "saint" in the RC
sense, of someone whose writings
have any more grace or inspiration
than does any other human writing.
so i guess the problem is to draw two
lines.
the big one between the Scripture and
human writings.
the minor one putting the creeds and
writings like Calvin's into a
group of writings that are worthwhile
for our edification because they
present Scripture in persuasive way
to us. thus essentially Calvin
becomes valuable as he accurately
absorbs Scripture and retransmits it
in his words to us. It is hard to
justify spending time with Calvin in
the face of opposition which would
say something like "use the time
you are spending struggling with
Calvin to read Romans".
a sermon with the illustration of
the importance of the index of Institutes as a way to see the way
Calvin thought at: http://www.nassauchurch.org/worship/sermons/20030601.htm
where he writes:
But there is one certain way that
you can tell if a Presbyterian pastor studied John Calvin with Ed
Dowey. Go into the study and find a copy of Calvin’s Institutes. For
students of Ed Dowey, the penciled notes and margin marks begin not
with the first sentence of the Institutes, but in the Table of
Contents. Dr. Dowey suggested that it is the Table of Contents that
reflects the structure of Calvin’s thought and argument. It is the
order of the topics addressed that reflects Calvin’s theological
commitment whereby the human being can only come to a full knowledge of
self after wrestling with a knowledge of God, where the themes of faith
and justification and election are only broached after a discussion of
Christ as Redeemer. So there in Table of Contents you will find notes
that reflect Dr. Dowey’s comments on chapter titles and penned brackets
that reveal his thoughts on groupings of chapters and specific page
numbers that direct the student to paragraphs on justification,
election, double predestination, the church, and the sacraments. I bet
we spent an entire class just on the Table of Contents.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
version 2.0
dated 21 May 2004