Showing posts with label John Calvin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Calvin. Show all posts

Saturday, 8 August 2015

Tozer on Geneva

AW TOZER
AW TOZER ON THE FAITH OF OUR FATHERS, THE STRONG PRESSURE OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS AND IDEALS AND JOHN CALVIN'S GENEVA:

"Were the faith of our fathers exercising a major influence in society there would be a revolution in moral values among all Christians and a change in the outlook of multitudes who, while not themselves Christians, would nevertheless feel the strong pressure of Christian ethics around them. So it was in Italy under Savonarola, in Geneva under Calvin, in Germany in the time of Luther, in the England of the Wesleys and on a smaller scale in many places where revivals have broken out in cities and communities over the past century."  (The Price of Neglect. p. 99-100) 

Monday, 23 June 2014

Did God author sin?

DID JOHN CALVIN TEACH THAT GOD IS THE AUTHOR OF EVIL?
  (This page is a work in progress, but with sufficient material to post immediately. There is quite a bit of material but is well worth the effort to read it all. It strikes the Scriptural balance between the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of the sinner for his actions.)


THE STORY SUMMARISED FROM THE FULL QUOTES GIVEN BELOW:  

The clear answer to the above question is "No - he did not." As seen in the quotes given below, he outrightly denied it to be the case: "I deny that God is the author of evil" (Comment/Acts 2:23) Calvin identified two "absurdities" in his comments on James 1:13 including the idea that God is the author of sin, which he called an"vain evasion." Calvin further claimed that "every evil proceeds from no other fountain other than the wicked lusts of man" and that it is Satan who allures men to sin. (ibid) The whole of Calvin's comment on James 1:13 is rich in clear quotes on this matter, which cannot be misunderstood in any way, concluding with the words: "
But God does not desire what is evil: he is not, therefore, the author of doing evil in us."


We reproduce, in full, Calvin's section from the Institutes (2:4:2) where he takes on the scenario from Job and shows how the three separate players (God, Satan and the Chaldeans) all had a totally different impute into the trouble afflicted upon Job and shows how that only God could walk away without any blame and why i.e. His purpose and manner differed greatly from that of Satan and the Chaldeans.  Calvin's comments on Isaiah 10:7 further enlarge upon these things. Here he points out that the wicked are obliged to take their orders from the revealed law of God and cannot complain if God uses their self produced wickedness for His own holy ends. In his comments on Genesis 8:22, Calvin points out that no man is compelled to sin by outside force, but  always does not voluntarily by his own wicked lusts.  On several occasions, Calvin pointed out that man is the author of his own damnation - and so could claim: "Accordingly, we should contemplate the evident cause of condemnation in the corrupt nature of humanity—which is closer to us—rather than seek a hidden and utterly incomprehensible cause in God’s predestination." (Institutes 3:23:8)

We also reproduced in full Calvin's comments on Judas Iscariot and how the wicked (not the innocent or the neutral) are sometimes bridled by God and used to accomplish his holy will. Again, Calvin carefully explains how Judas can be and is guilty. We follow this up with a partial quote from Calvin on Matthew 27:3 relating to how Judas refused the gospel offer made to him by God and so increased his wickedness.

Calvin also deals with how God hardening/blinding the reprobate does not indict God's character. It is seen to be judicial - a response to light refused. God does not begin the hardening. (Comments/Isaiah 6:10)



DID JOHN CALVIN TEACH THAT GOD IS THE AUTHOR OF EVIL?


If Calvin did so teach, then he is a false teacher and blasphemer who should be exposed and shunned by all right thinking Christians. If John Calvin did not so teach, then such a heinous charge should never be laid against his name.


it is a fact that some - even professing the name of Christ - have been very quick to lay this charge against Calvin. That some of them are merely parroting others is no excuse. If I repeat a slander, then I am as guilty (in a court of law) as the one who first begat the vicious rumour. It is expected that I should check my facts first, ascertain the truthfulness of any report and then repeat only what is verifiable and true. The rest ought to be buried in the shameful oblivion where it belongs. Calvin is not the hardest man to research.  His commentaries and other writings are readily available on the Internet and greatly aided by the Google search engine.

First of all, Calvin did make some statements which, if left to stand alone and void either of context or other qualifying or explanatory statements look bad. However, any one  seizing them without checking is either a knave (and so morally incapable of discussing the matter at hand) or a fool (and therefore intellectually incapable of the  same.)

For example, in his "Institutes of the Christian Religion" Calvin discussed how Providence extends to all matters, both wicked and good. He used the illustration of a poor man in a forest who unwisely wandered from his companions and was found murdered in a thieves den. Calvin concludes: "
His death was not only foreseen by God’s eye, but also determined by his decree." (Institutes 1:16:9) Again, Calvin writes of the reprobate: "They have been given over to this depravity because they have been raised up by the just but inscrutable judgment of God to show forth his glory in their condemnation." (Institutes 3:24:12)

(Other statements will be added as time permits.)

The best way to interpret Calvin's view on these things is to read his great explanation in 2:4:2 which deals with (to quote Calvin) the calamity inflicted by the Chaldeans upon the holy man, Job."  My edition of the Institutes (McNeill) puts a heading over this paragraph as:
"God, Satan and Man active in the same event." Let us see what Calvin says. We have put the paragraph concerned in the left hand side in BLACK with my comments in red in the right hand side.


Far different is the manner of God’s action in such matters. To make this clearer to us, we may take as an example the calamity inflicted by the Chaldeans upon the holy man Job, when they killed his shepherds and in enmity ravaged his flock Notice right away how Calvin puts a clear and strongly worded distinction between the manner in which God is involved in this matter and the others. It is "far different."
Now their wicked act is perfectly obvious; nor does Satan do nothing in that work, for the history states that the whole thing stems from him [Job 1:12]. Here Calvin identifies the wickedness of the Chaldeans and the activity of Satan, clearly saying that the whole matter stemmed from him quoting Job 1:12 where Satan was given all that Job had in his own power (marg: hand)
But Job himself recognizes the Lord’s work in it, saying that He has taken away what had been seized through the Chaldeans [Job 1:21]. It is not merely Calvin's view that God had His part to play, but he quotes Job's own words that God not only gave but God also took away what had been unlawfully seized by the Chaldeans.
How may we attribute this same work to God, to Satan, and to man as author, without either excusing Satan as associated with God, or making God the author of evil? Here is the crux of the matter. Calvin sees it as totally undesirable that Satan should either be excused or God made (and note the words) "the author of evil." 
Easily, if we consider first the end, and then the manner, of acting. The use of the word easily is significant. As Calvin explains, the difference that indicts Satan but exonerates God lies in the purpose of the act and the way in which it is carried out.  
The Lord’s purpose is to exercise the patience of His servant by calamity; Satan endeavors to drive him to desperation; the Chaldeans strive to acquire gain from another’s property contrary to law and right. So great is the diversity of purpose that already strongly marks the deed. God's purpose is holy. He wants the holy man of God to be even holier by the event. Satan was driven by murderous spite seeking Job's apostasy and destruction while the Chaldeans were driven by greed. There is no overlap (says Calvin) but "so great" diversity which "already strongly marks the deed." 
There is no less difference in the manner. The Lord permits Satan to afflict His servant; He hands the Chaldeans over to be impelled by Satan, having chosen them as His ministers for this task. Satan with his poison darts arouses the wicked minds of the Chaldeans to execute that evil deed. Having sorted out the purpose, Calvin tackles the manner, confident that there is no overlap: "no less difference." Calvin himself uses the word permit which is usually used to denote the allowing of something that is sinful. Calvin never quibbled with the use of the word although he usually denied that it was 'mere permission,' as if God had no purpose at all in the matter.
They dash madly into injustice, and they render all their members guilty and befoul them by the crime. Satan is properly said, therefore, to act in the reprobate over whom he exercises his reign, that is, the reign of wickedness.  Calvin here indicts the Chaldeans with the guilt of mad haste, injustice, and being under the reign of Satan. The Chaldeans are the agents: They dash - they render their members etc., Satan is indicted as having a reign of wickedness. 
God is also said to act in His own manner, in that Satan
himself, since he is the instrument of God’s wrath, bends himself hither and thither at His beck and command to execute His just judgments.
Calvin lays no indictment against God but states that God uses the instrumentality of Satan (who is at His beck and command) to execute what Calvin carefully calls  God's "just judgements." 
I pass over here the universal activity of God whereby all creatures, as they are sustained, thus derive the energy to do anything at all. I am speaking only of that special action which appears in every particular deed. Calvin here carefully  closes up a certain potential loophole in his argument, lest we misunderstand what he is getting at.  He is not speaking in generalities but of particular deeds i.e. in this case the particular incident of the Chaldeans being led of Satan to murder Job's children and pillage his goods.
Therefore we see no inconsistency in assigning the same deed to God, Satan, and man; but the distinction in purpose and manner causes God’s righteousness to shine forth blameless there, while the wickedness of Satan and of man betrays itself by its own disgrace. Calvin here sums up his position. The deed might be the same (i.e. the killing of Job's children etc.,) but there were two entirely different principles and manner of working in the same act.  God's righteous principles shone forth blameless (hence Job could use: "Blessed be the name of the Lord" even in the same breath as "...the LORD took away...") while, at the same time, the disgraceful wickedness of Satan and men betrayed itself. 

This is surely a defining paragraph from Calvin's own pen? It ought to qualify every statement that Calvin made on this subject, even when he does not go at such length into any explanation.

Let us take on another scenario i.e. the part which Judas Iscariot played in the betrayal of Jesus Christ. In his comments on Matthew 26:24-25  "The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said.) Calvin again does not pull any punches. As above, we have Calvin's full quote in the
left hand side in BLACK with my comments in red in the right hand side.



Matthew 26:24. The Son of man indeed goeth. Here Christ meets an offense, which might otherwise have greatly shaken pious minds. For what could be more unreasonable than that the Son of God should be infamously betrayed by a disciple, and abandoned to the rage of enemies, in order to be dragged to an ignominious death? But Christ declares that all this takes place only by the will of God; and he proves this decree by the testimony of Scripture, because God formerly revealed, by the mouth of his Prophet, what he had determined. We now perceive what is intended by the words of Christ. It was, that the disciples, knowing that what was done was regulated by the providence of God, might not imagine that his life or death was determined by chance. But the usefulness of this doctrine extends much farther; for never are we fully confirmed in the result of the death of Christ, till we are convinced that he was not accidentally dragged by men to the cross, but that the sacrifice had been appointed by an eternal decree of God for expiating the sins of the world. For whence do we obtain reconciliation, but because Christ has appeased the Father by his obedience?

Calvin takes the clearly devotional end of things. He concerns himself first of all with the Cross of Christ, rather than the controversial matter re: Judas. He sees the great  shaking of pious minds in how the Son of God could end up on a Cross unless it had been decreed by God, rather than left to chance. The argument liesthat unless God had decreed it, then it could not obtain the required reconciliation.
Wherefore let us always place before our minds the providence of God, which Judas himself, and all wicked men—though it is contrary to their wish, and though they have another end in view—are compelled to obey. Let us always hold this to be a fixed principle, that Christ suffered, because it pleased God to have such an expiation.

Calvin comes now to the matter that concerns us in this particular study. Wicked Judas (indeed all wicked men) are "compelled" to obey God, even though it is contrary to their wish i.e. they had no pious wish to obey God, having "another end in view" which (as we know) for Judas was treachery and greed. If Calvin had left it there, without the following explanation, then we might have room to murmur, but it is not for us to snatch sentences here and there as if we were some prosecuting lawyer, determined to get a result, no matter what.  At this point, even though Calvin has introduced the controversial subject, it is only to reaffirm his first main and very encouraging thought i.e. Christ suffered because it pleased God to have such an expiation.

And yet Christ does not affirm that Judas was freed from blame, on the ground that he did nothing but what God had appointed. For though God, by his righteous judgment, appointed for the price of our redemption the death of his Son, yet nevertheless, Judas, in betraying Christ, brought upon himself righteous condemnation, because he was full of treachery and avarice. In short, God’s determination that the world should be redeemed, does not at all interfere with Judas being a wicked traitor.

Hence we perceive, that though men can do nothing but what God has appointed, still this does not free them from condemnation, when they are led by a wicked desire to sin. For though God directs them, by an unseen bridle, to an end which is unknown to them, nothing is farther from their intention than to obey his decrees.
Calvin moves to close any loopholes that he should be thought to affirm that  Judas was then free from any blame or God to be indicted for sin. He affirms that the judgment of God is righteous in appointing redemption's price to be through the Cross and also in the way that He dealt with Judas. Calvin points out that Judas was no innocent - but was full of treachery and avarice. The key phrase here which answers the overall question of this page is this: "In short, God’s determination that the world should be redeemed, does not at all interfere with Judas being a wicked traitor."  Yes, admits Calvin, they are under the bridle of God to accomplish His holy ends, but (as I have written elsewhere) they are not innocent people who are unfortunate enough in the wrong place at the wrong time. This is not a stitch up. This is a guilty wretch being taken further than he wanted to go. See Calvin's comments below on Matthew 27:3 for the sequel to this story.

Those two principles, no doubt, appear to human reason to be inconsistent with each other, that God regulates the affairs of men by his Providence in such a manner, that nothing is done but by his will and command, and yet he damns the reprobate, by whom he has carried into execution what he intended. But we see how Christ, in this passage, reconciles both, by pronouncing a curse on Judas, though what he contrived against God had been appointed by God; not that Judas’s act of betraying ought strictly to be called the work of God, but because God turned the treachery of Judas so as to accomplish His own purpose.

Calvin is not blind to the apparent inconsistencies which arise, but he insists that God is free from any blame. He does so by playing up the sin of Judas. Judas is the reprobate. His act is that of betrayal, which although appointed by God, cannot strictly be called the work of God. All God has done (according to Calvin) is to turn the treachery (already born in Judas' heart) to accomplish His own righteous purpose.

I am aware of the manner in which some commentators endeavor to avoid this rock. They acknowledge that what had been written was accomplished through the agency of Judas, because God testified by predictions what He fore-knew. By way of softening the doctrine, which appears to them to be somewhat harsh, they substitute the foreknowledge of God in place of the decree, as if God merely beheld from a distance future events, and did not arrange them according to his pleasure. But very differently does the Spirit settle this question; for not only does he assign as the reason why Christ was delivered up, that it was so written, but also that it was so determined.


For where Matthew and Mark quote Scripture, Luke leads us direct to the heavenly decree, saying, according to what was determined; as also in the Acts of the Apostles, he shows that Christ was delivered not only by the foreknowledge, but likewise by the fixed purpose of God, (Acts 2:25) and a little afterwards, that Herod and Pilate, with other wicked men, did those things which had been fore-ordained by the hand and purpose of God, (Acts 4:27, 28.) Hence it is evident that it is but an ignorant subterfuge which is employed by those who betake themselves to bare foreknowledge.

Calvin is also aware of a softer option here which bases the whole matter on what God - as a mere spectator - could forsee rather than decree. However, Calvin keeps to the various Scripture references which he quotes that use the word determine and rightly rejects the lesser option an ignorant subterfuge.

It had been good for that man. By this expression we are taught what a dreadful vengeance awaits the wicked, for whom it would have been better that they had never been born. And yet this life, though transitory, and full of innumerable distresses, is an invaluable gift of God. Again, we also infer from it, how detestable is their wickedness, which not only extinguishes the precious gifts of God, and turns them to their destruction, but makes it to have been better for them that they had never tasted the goodness of God. But this phrase is worthy of observation, it would have been good for that man if he had never been born; for though the condition of Judas was wretched, yet to have created him was good in God, who, appointing the reprobate to the day of destruction, illustrates also in this way his own glory, as Solomon tells us: The Lord hath made all things for himself; yea, even the wicked for the day of evil, (Proverbs 16:4.) The secret government of God, which provides even the schemes and works of men, is thus vindicated, as I lately noticed, from all blame and suspicion.

Notice how Calvin keeps referring to Judas (and others of his ilk) i.e. "the wicked" - "their wickedness" - "the reprobate"
This is how God dealt with him. Thus if appointed to the day of destruction, it is as a reprobate (and thus judicial) and if made for the day of evil (as in Psalm 16:4) - it is as one who is wicked. Again, never the innocent bystander. Calvin homes in on the nature of their wickedness and shows it to be detestable. This is because they take  the good gifts of God and [i] extinguish them and [ii] turn them to their destruction. Calvin claims that have clearly tasted the goodness of God, but their sin makes it such that it would have been better had they not.  Judas was wretched in what he did, yet he had been created good in God (cp. Gen 1:1/Eccles 7:29). Calvin concludes this important paragraph by showing that God is vindicated from all blame and suspicion.

25. And Judas who betrayed him. Though we often see persons trembling, who are conscious of doing wrong, yet along with dread and secret torments there is mingled such stupidity, that they boldly make a fiat denial; but in the end they gain nothing by their impudence but to expose their hidden wickedness. Thus Judas, while he is restrained by an evil conscience, cannot remain silent; so dreadfully is he tormented, and, at the same time, overwhelmed with fear and anxiety, by that internal executioner. Christ, by indirectly glancing, in his reply, at the foolish rashness of Judas, entreats him to consider the crime which he wished to conceal; but his mind, already seized with diabolical rage, could not admit such a sentiment. Let us learn from this example, that the wicked, by bold apologies, do nothing more than draw down upon themselves a more sudden judgment.
Even the Scripture (from which Calvin always took his lead) now identifies Judas as the one "who betrayed him" because we should never separate Judas from his sins in speaking of his role in the death of Christ. Calvin focuses here also on the internal struggles of Judas with his tormented conscience which he calls his "internal executioner." Thus, Judas condemned himself. In this verse, as Calvin points out, Christ indirectly entreats Judas to consider the foolish rashness of the crime that he was secretly planning. But Judas, seized by a devilish rage, could not bring himself to admit to such a thing (even though planning it in his heart) and so brought himself, as a enboldened wicked person, a more sudden judgment. 

In this last sentence, Calvin shows that the matter applied more than merely to Judas, applying it to all the wicked, because God did not deal with Judas in any particular novel fashion. 


The sequel to the Judas incident. When we preach the gospel, we preach it to elect and reprobate alike. While it might be said that we do not know who is elect and reprobate (Who would've thought that the Repentant Thief hanging naked on a Cross would have been numbered among the elect?) - yet God does. And God, who knows, still wants us to preach this glorious gospel to everyone without exception or distinction. Where did Judas stand in regards to this? The verse below i.e. Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, (Matthew 27:3) shows us very clearly. We have Calvin's quote (relevant part pertaining to this particular thought)  in the left hand side in BLACK with my comments in red in the right hand side.




If Judas had listened to the warning of Christ, there would still have been place for repentance; but since he despised so gracious an offer of salvation, he is given up to the dominion of Satan, that he may throw him into despair. But if the Papists were right in what they teach in their schools about repentance, we could find no defect in that of Judas, to which their definition of repentance fully applies; for we perceive in it contrition of heart, and confession of the mouth, and satisfaction of deed, as they talk. Hence we infer, that they take nothing more than the bark; for they leave out what was the chief point, the conversion of the man to God, when the sinner, broken down by shame and fear, denies himself so as to render obedience to righteousness. (Matthew 27:3)

Let us therefore learn, that when we see wicked persons, with whom we have any thing in common, filled with alarm, those are so many excitements to repentance, and that they who neglect such excitements aggravate their criminality. (Matthew 27:4)
Here  Calvin states the Evangelical obvious:  Judas was warned by Christ but refused to listen.  Had he done so, then there was still room for repentance, because none who seek repentance fail to find it. As a consequence ("since") of despising "so gracious an offer of salvation" - Judas was therefore judicially given up to Satan's grip and from there into despair.  After he points out the failure of the RC's to define true repentance, Calvin returns to the failure of Judas to have been broken down by shame and fear and consequently "denied himself" (signficiant words) so as to render [Evangelical] obedience to righteousness.  Even these words, moved from the deeply theological mysteries of the decrees to the more practical matter of the gospel, show that Judas can blame none but himself.

Calvin's comments on v4 show again that God excites the wicked to repentance and that neglect of these must not only be blamed on the wicked themselves, but actually aggravates their criminality. 

Calvin made other statements, all of which are entirely consistent with what is recorded above:


1) MAN ALWAYS SINS WILLINGLY AND EAGERLY - NOT BY ANY FORCED COMPULSION FROM WITHOUT:

The chief point of this distinction, then, must be that man, as he was corrupted by the Fall, sinned willingly, not unwillingly or by compulsion;
by the most eager inclination of his heart, not by forced compulsion; by the prompting of his own lust, not by compulsion from without. (Institutes 2:3:5)

We must, therefore, acquiesce in the judgment of God, which pronounces man to be so enslaved by sin that he can bring forth nothing sound and sincere. yet, at the same time, we must remember, that no blame is to be cast upon God for that which has its origin in the defection of the first man, whereby the order of creation was subverted. And further, it must be noted, that men are not exempted from guilt and condemnation, by the pretext of bondage: because although all rush to evil, yet they are not impelled by any extrinsic force, but by the direct inclination of their own hearts; and lastly, they sin not otherwise than voluntarily. (Comments on Genesis 8:22)


13. Let no man, when he is tempted. Here, no doubt, he speaks of another kind of temptation. It is abundantly evident that the external temptations, hitherto mentioned, are sent to us by God. In this way God tempted Abraham, (Genesis 22:1,) and daily tempts us, that is, he tries us as to what are we by laying before us an occasion by which our hearts are made known. But to draw out what is hid in our hearts is a far different thing from inwardly alluring our hearts by wicked lusts. He then treats here of inward temptations which are nothing else than the  inordinate desires which entice to sin. He justly denies that God is the author of these, because they flow from the corruption of our nature. This warning is very necessary, for nothing is more common among men than to transfer to another the blame of the evils they commit; and they then especially seem to free themselves, when they ascribe it to God himself. This kind of evasion we constantly imitate, delivered down to us as it is from the first man. For this reason James calls us to confess our own guilt, and not to implicate God, as though he compelled us to sin. But the whole doctrine of scripture seems to be inconsistent with this passage; for it teaches us that men are blinded by God, are given up to a reprobate mind, and delivered over to filthy and shameful lusts. To this I answer, that probably James was induced to deny that we are tempted by God by this reason, because the ungodly, in order to form an excuse, armed themselves with testimonies of Scripture. But there are two things to be noticed here: when Scripture ascribes blindness or hardness of heart to God, it does not assign to him the beginning of this blindness, nor does itmake him the author of sin, so as to ascribe to him the blame: and on these two things only does James dwell. Scripture asserts that the reprobate are delivered up to depraved lusts; but is it because the Lord depraves or corrupts their hearts? By no means; for their hearts are subjected to depraved lusts, because they are already corrupt and vicious. But since God blinds or hardens, is he not the author or minister of evil? Nay, but in this manner he punishes sins, and renders a just reward to the ungodly, who have refused to be ruled by his Spirit. (Romans 1:6.) It hence follows that the origin of sin is not in God, and no blame can be imputed to him as though he took pleasure in evils. (Genesis 6:6.) The meaning is, that man in vain evades, who attempts to cast the blame of his vices on God, because every evil proceeds from no other fountain than from the wicked lust of man. And the fact really is, that we are not otherwise led astray, except that every one has his own inclination as his leader and impeller. But that God tempts no one, he proves by this, because he is not tempted with evils. For it is the devil who allures us to sin, and for this reason, because he wholly burns with the mad lust of sinning. But God does not desire what is evil: he is not, therefore, the author of doing evil in us. (Commentary on James 1:13)

(Other statements will be added as time permits.)

2)
ALTHOUGH GOD DECREES TO USE THE ACTIONS OF THE UNGODLY TO FURTHER HIS OWN ENDS, YET MAN MUST BE GUIDED BY THE REVEALED WILL OF GOD AND HAS NO EXCUSE FOR HIS CRIMES:

He says that he has given a loose rein to the fierceness of enemies, that they may indulge without control in every kind of violence and injustice. Now, this must not be understood as if the Assyrians had a command from God by which they could excuse themselves. There are two ways in which God commands; by his secret decree, of which men are not conscious; and by his law, in which he demands from us voluntary obedience. This must be carefully observed, that we may reply to fanatics, who argue in an irreligious manner about the decree of God, when they wish to excuse their own wickedness and that of others. It is of importance, I say, to make a judicious distinction between these two ways of commanding. When the Lord reveals his will in the law, I must not ascend to his secret decree, which he intended should not be known to me, but must yield implicit obedience. Now, if any one allege that he obeys God, when he complies with his sinful passions, he is guilty of falsehood, by vainly attempting to involve God in the guilt of his crimes, to which he knows that he is led by the failings of his own heart; for on this point no other witness or judge is needed but a man’s own conscience. God does indeed make use of the agency of a wicked man, but the man has no such intention. It is therefore accidental, so far as relates to men, that he acts by the wicked and reprobate; for they neither know that they serve God, nor wish to do so. Accordingly if they seize on this pretext, it is easy to prove that, when they yield obedience to their own sinful passion, they are at the greatest possible distance from obeying God. They have the will of God declared in his law, so that it is in vain for them to seek it anywhere else. So far as they are concerned, they do not perform the work of God, but the work of the devil; for they serve their own lusts. (Ephesians 2:2.) Nothing certainly was farther from the intention of the Assyrians than to give their services to God, but they were hurried along by their lust and ambition and covetousness. Yet the Lord directed their exertions and plans to an object which was totally different, and which was unknown to themselves. (Comments on Isaiah 10:7)

(Other statements will be added as time permits.)

3) CALVIN WROTE THAT IT WAS AN ABSURDITY TO TEACH THAT GOD WAS THE AUTHOR OF EVIL OR THAT MEN DO NOT SIN WHEN THEIR WICKEDNESS IS USED OF GOD, SEEING THAT THEY DO NOT OBEY HIS REVEALED LAW:

Because Peter seemeth to grant that the wicked did obey God, hereupon followeth two absurdities; the one, either that God is the author of evil, or that men do not sin, what wickedness soever they commit. I answer, concerning the second, that the wicked do nothing less than obey God, howsoever they do execute that which God hath determined with himself. For obedience springeth from a voluntary affection; and we know that the wicked have a far other purpose. Again, no man obeyeth God save he which knoweth his will. Therefore, obedience dependeth upon the knowledge of God’s will. Furthermore, God hath revealed unto us his will in the law; wherefore, those men do obey God, who do that alone which is agreeable to the law of God; and, again, which submit themselves willingly to his government. We see no such thing in all the wicked, whom God doth drive hither and thither, they themselves being ignorant. No man, therefore, will say that they are excusable under this color, because they obey God; forasmuch as both the will of God must be sought in his law, and they, so much as in them lieth, do God. As touching the other point, I deny that God is the author of evil; because there is a certain nothing of a wicked affection in this word. For the wicked deed is esteemed according to the end whereat a man aimeth. When men commit theft or murder, they offend for this cause, because they are thieves or murderers; and in theft and murder there is a wicked purpose. God, who useth their wickedness, is to be placed in the higher degree. For he hath respect unto a far other thing, because he will chastise the one, and exercise the patience of the other; and so he doth never decline from his nature, that is, from perfect righteousness. So that, whereas Christ was delivered by the hands of wicked men, whereas he was crucified, it came to pass by the appointment and ordinance of God. But treason, which is of itself wicked, and murder, which hath in it so great wickedness, must not be thought to be the works of God. (Comment on Acts 2:23)

(Other statements will be added as time permits.)

3a) CALVIN TAUGHT THAT THIS IS HOW WE MUST INTERPRET THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD:

Notwithstanding herein is contained a singular doctrine, that God doth so govern and guide all things by his secret counsel, that, he doth bring to pass those things which he hath determined, even by the wicked. Not that they are ready willingly to do him such service, but because he turneth their counsels and attempts backward; so that on the one side appeareth great equity and most great righteousness; on the other appeareth nought but wickedness and iniquity. Which matter we have handled more at large in the second chapter. [My note: See above quote from Acts 2:23] Let us learn here, by the way, that we must so consider the providence of God, that we know that it is the chief and only guider of all things which are done in the world, that the devil and all the wicked are kept back with God’s bridle, lest they should do us any harm; that when they rage fastest, yet are they not at liberty to do what they list, but have the bridle given them, yet so far forth as is expedient to exercise us. (Comments: Acts 4:24-31)

(Other statements will be added as time permits.)

4) MAN'S HARDENING IS TO ATTRIBUTED EXCLUSIVELY TO THEIR OWN DEPRAVITY:

It is not the duty of the Prophets, therefore, to blind the eyes, but rather to open them. Again, it is called perfect wisdom, (psalm 19:9) how then does it stupify men and take away their reason? Those hearts which formerly were of brass or iron ought to be softened by it; how then is it possible that it can harden them, as I have already observed? Such blinding and hardening influence does not arise out of the nature of the word, but is accidental, and must be ascribed exclusively to the depravity of man. As dim-sighted people cannot blame the sun for dazzling their eyes with its brightness; and those whose hearing is weak cannot complain of a clear and loud voice which the defect of their ears hinders them from hearing; and, lastly, a man of weak intellect cannot find fault with the difficulty of a subject which he is unable to understand; so ungodly men have no right to blame the word for making them worse after having heard it. The whole blame lies on themselves in altogether refusing it admission; and we need not wonder if that which ought to have led them to salvation become the cause of their destruction. It is right that the treachery and unbelief of men should be punished by meeting death where they might have received life, darkness where they might have had light; and, in short, evils as numerous as the blessings of salvation which they might have obtained. This ought to be carefully observed; for nothing is more customary with men than to abuse the gifts of God, and then not only to maintain that they are innocent, but even to be proud of appearing in borrowed feathers. But they are doubly wicked when they not only do not apply to their proper use, but wickedly corrupt and profane, those gifts which God had bestowed on them. (Comment on Isaiah 6:10)

(Other statements will be added as time permits.)

5) MAN'S DAMNATION IS ALWAYS ATTRIBUTED TO THE GUILT OF HIS SIN AND NOTHING ELSE:

You shall find throughout all my books, how I have taught, that we must not seek our perdition anywhere else than in ourselves and in our perverse will. (An answer to a libel against Predestination - adjoined to Sermons on Election & Predestination - p312)

 
"The fact that the reprobate do not obey God’s Word when it is made known to them will be justly charged against the malice and depravity of their hearts, provided it be added at the same time that they have been given over to this depravity because they have been raised up by the just but inscrutable judgment of God to show forth his glory in their condemnation. Similarly, when it is narrated of Eli’s sons that they did not heed his wholesome admonitions, “for it was the will of the Lord to slay them” [1 Samuel 2:25], it is not denied that their stubbornness arose out of their own wickedness; but at the same time it is noted why they were left in their stubbornness, even though the Lord could have softened their hearts—because his immutable decree had once for all destined them to destruction."
(Institutes 3:24:12)
 
Please note: In his decree, God deals with the reprobate as guilty sinners - not as neutral creatures who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Those who argue that Calvin taught that God raised up men with no other purpose than to damn them miss the mark. Hence Calvin wrote:

Accordingly, we should contemplate the evident cause of condemnation in the corrupt nature of humanity—which is closer to us—rather than seek a hidden and utterly incomprehensible cause in God’s predestination. (Institutes 3:23:8)

(Other statements will be added as time permits.)

* CALVINIST INDEX
* PROTESTANT INDEX
* CH SPURGEON INDEX
* EVANGELISM INDEX
* HERE AND THERE INDEX
* YOUTUBE VIDEO INDEX
* 3 MINUTE AUDIOBOO INDEX
 


Sunday, 11 May 2014

baxter


Click on Picture to Enlarge

“We must also note the universal word, whosoever. For God admitteth all men unto himself without exception, and by this means doth he invite them to salvation, as Paul gathereth in the tenth chapter to the Romans, and as the prophet had set it down before, “Thou, Lord, which hearest the prayer, unto thee shall all flesh come,” (Psalm 65:2.) Therefore, forasmuch as no man is excluded from calling upon God, the gate of salvation is set open unto all men; neither is there any other thing which keepeth us back from entering in, save only our own unbelief.” 
(John Calvin: Acts 2:21)



INDEXES:

* CALVINIST INDEX
* PROTESTANT INDEX
* CH SPURGEON INDEX
* EVANGELISM INDEX
* HERE AND THERE INDEX

* YOUTUBE VIDEO INDEX
* 3 MINUTE AUDIOBOO INDEX

Wednesday, 16 April 2014

Calvin's Evangelism

  JOHN CALVIN THE SOULWINNER


"John Calvin…is looked upon now, of course, a theologian only, but he was really one of the greatest of gospel preachers. When Calvin opened the Book and took a text, you might be sure that he was about to preach "Through grace are ye saved, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God." CH Spurgeon (14:216)


The following are quotes from J.H. Merle D’Aubigne's "History Of The Reformation In The Time Of Calvin" I am reproducing those parts which distinctly speak of his evangelistic efforts as opposed to those which speak of him engaging in controversy or theology, although I recognise that in reality there would have been an overlap. 


CALVIN ALLOWED HIS COVETED STUDY TIME TO BE INTERRUPTED IN ORDER TO TEACH PEOPLE THE WAY OF SALVATION:

His admirers returned to him. Several citizens of Orleans opened their houses to him, saying: ‘Come and teach openly the salvation of man.’ Calvin shrank back. ‘Let no one disturb my repose,’ he said; ‘leave me in peace.’ His repose, that is to say his studies, were his only thought. But these souls, thirsting for truth, did not yield so easily. ‘A repose of darkness!’ replied the most ardent; ‘an ignoble peace; Come and preach!’ Calvin remembered the saying of St. Chrysostom: ‘Though a thousand persons should call you, think of your own weakness, and obey only under constraint.’ ‘Well, then, we constrain you,’ answered his friends. ‘O God! what desirest thou of me?’ Calvin would exclaim at such moments. ‘Why dost thou pursue me? Why dost thou turn and disturb me, and never leave me at rest? Why, despite my disposition, dost thou lead me to the light and bring me into play?’ Calvin gave way, however, and understood that it was his duty to publish the Gospel. He went to the houses of his friends. A few men, women, and young people gathered round him, and he began to explain the Scriptures. It was quite a new order of teaching: there were none of those distinctions and deductions of scholastic science, at that time so familiar to the preachers. The language of the young man possessed all admirable simplicity, a piercing vitality, and a holy majesty which captivated the heart. ‘He teaches the truth,’ said his hearers as they withdrew, ‘not in affected language, but with such depth, solidity, and weight, that every one who hears him is struck with admiration.’ These are the words of a contemporary of Calvin, who lived on the spot, and in the very circle in which the Reformer then moved. ‘While at Orleans,’ adds this friend, Theodore Beza, ‘Calvin, chosen from that time to be an instrument of election in the Lord’s work, wonderfully advanced the kingdom of God in many families.’

It was at Orleans, therefore, that Calvin began his evangelist work and manifested himself to the world as a Christian. Calvin’s activity in this city is a proof that he was then converted to the Gospel, and that he had been so for some time; for his was Not one of those expansive natures which immediately display externally what is within them. This first ministry of the reformer negatives the hypotheses which place Calvin’s conversion at Orleans, or at Bourges, somewhat later, or, even later still, during his second residence at Paris.
  Thus the young doctor, growing in knowledge and acting in love, refuted the objections of the gainsayers, and led to Christ the humble souls who thirsted for salvation. (Vol 2: p35-37)

CALVIN BEGAN TO SPEND MORE TIME AND EFFORT IN PERSONAL SOULWINNING:

Nor was this the only call he received at Bourges. Wolmar had spoken of him, and several famines invited him to their houses to edify them. This took the young man by surprise, as it had done at Orleans; he remained silent, lost in the multitude of his thoughts. ‘I am quite amazed,’ he said, ‘at seeing those who have a desire for pure doctrine gather round me to learn, although I have only just began to learn myself!’ He resolved, however, to continue at Bourges the evangelical work which he had timidly commenced on the banks of the Loire; and he brought more time and more decision to the task.

Calvin accordingly entered into relations with students and townspeople, nobles and lawyers, priests and professors. The family of the Colladons held at that time a considerable station in Berry. Two brothers, Leo and Germain, and two sisters, Mary and Anne, were the first to embrace the Gospel in Berry. Leo and Germain were advocates, and one of their cousins, styled Germain II. in the genealogies, now eighteen years old, afterwards became Calvin’s intimate friend at Geneva. These ties of friendship had probably begun at Bourges. (Vol 2: p43)

CALVIN HAD AN EFFECTIVE STRATEGY IN HIS WIDENING SPHERE OF EVANGELISM:

The evangelist soon extended his Christian activity beyond the walls of the city. Many natives of Berry, who had heard him at Bourges, had been charmed with his addresses. ‘Come and preach’ these beautiful words to us,’ they said. Calvin gradually laid aside his natural timidity, and being cheerful and fond of walking, he visited the castles and villages. He introduced himself affectionately into all the houses at which he stopped. ‘A graceful salutation,’ he said in after years, ‘serves as an introduction to converse with people.' He delivered several sermons in these hamlets and country-seats. (Vol 2: p43-44)

CALVIN'S STYLE OF EVANGELISM WAS EVERY THING THAT IT SHOULD BE:

On the banks of the Arnon, ten leagues from Bourges, there stands a little town ‘named Lignieres, at that time the seat of a considerable lordship. Every year certain monks came to preach in the parish church, and were bountifully received at the chateau, where they complained of their wretchedness in the most pitiable tone. This offended the lord of Lignieres, who was not of a superstitious character. ‘If I am not mistaken,’ he said, ‘it is with a view to their own gain that these monks pretend to be such drudges.’ Disgusted with their hypocrisy, M. de Lignieres begged Calvin to come and preach in their stead. The law-student spoke to an immense crowd with such clearness, freedom, depth and vitality, that every one was moved. ‘Upon my word,’ said the lord to his wife, ‘Master John Calvin seems to me to preach better than the monks, and he goes heartily to work too.’ (Vol 2: p44)

CALVIN'S EVANGELISTIC ZEAL REACHED EVEN TO THE CHILDREN:

In this way Calvin labored in the town, in the villages, and in the chateaux, conversing tenderly with the children, preaching to adults, and training heroes and martyrs. (Vol 2: p44)

CALVIN'S EVANGELISTIC ZEAL IN HIS HOMETOWN PAID DIVIDENDS:

The same persons who presided over these several changes encouraged Calvin to preach. When a young man who has gone through his studies for the ministry, of the Word returns to his native place, every one is anxious to hear him. Curiosity was still more keenly aroused in Calvin’s case, for his reputation had preceded him, and some little charge of heresy, put forward from time to time, served but to increase the general eagerness. The effects of Calvin’s preaching were various. Many persons rejoiced to hear, at last, a living word beneath that roof which had reechoed with so much vain and useless babbling. Of this number were, no doubt, certain notable men who were seen pressing round the preacher … All were afterwards accused of having embraced the new doctrine, and were condemned by the Parliament of Paris to be drawn on hurdles and burnt in the great square of Noyon; but they had already quitted the kingdom. The words of the young speaker did not merely communicate fresh knowledge they worked a transformation of the heart and life. (Vol 2: p62-63)

BUSY HERE AND THERE, CALVIN WAS FAITHFUL IF NOT ALWAYS SUCCESSFUL

He soon returned to Paris, which opened a wider field of labor to him. On the 15th of January, 1530, he wrote Daniel a letter which he dated from the Acropolis, as if Paris were to him the citadel of Catholicism or the Parthenon of France. He was always trying to save some lost sheep, and such a desire filled his mind on the 15th of January. On that day he expected two friends to dinner. One of them, Robert Daniel, brother to the advocate of Orleans, an enthusiastic ‘young man, was burning with desire to see the world. Calvin, who had already done all in his power to win him over, flattered himself that he would succeed that day; But the giddy young fellow, suspecting perhaps what awaited him, did not come. Calvin sent a messenger to Robert’s lodging. ‘He has decamped,’ said the landlord; ‘he has left for Italy.’ At Meaux Calvin had desired to win over a great personage; at Palls he had hoped to win over a young adventurer’ in both cases he failed. ‘Alas!’ he said, ‘I am but a dry and useless log!’ And once more he sought fresh strength in Christ. (Vol 2: p70)

CALVIN EVANGELISED IN THE MOST HUMBLE OF PLACES:

But the hour had not yet come when Calvin was to proclaim these great truths with the authority of a reformer. A modest and devout man, he was now performing a more humble work in the remotest streets and loneliest houses of the capital. One would have taken him for the most insignificant of men, and yet he was already a conqueror. The light of Scripture, with which his mind was saturated, was one day to shine like the lightning from east to west; and no man since St. Paul was to hold the Gospel torch so high and with so firm a hand. When that student, so thin, pale, and obscure, in appearance so mean, in manner so timid, passed down the street of St. Jacques or of the Sorbonne; when he crept silently past the houses, and slipped unobserved into one of them, bearing with him the Word of life, there was not even an old woman that noticed him.

CALVIN WAS ALWAYS BUSY. THE GOSPEL MADE PROGRESS DAILY:

Mere preaching did not satisfy Calvin: he entered into communication with all who desired a purer religion, made them frequent visits, and conversed seriously with them. He avoided no one, and cultivated the friendship of those whom he had formerly known. He advanced step by step, but he was always busy, and the doctrine of the Gospel made some progress every day. All persons rendered the strongest testimony to his piety. The friends of the Word of God gathered round him, and among them were many burgesses and common people, but there were nobles and college professors also. (Vol 2: p137)

Calvin had not quitted Paris. He was at one moment on the boulevards with the merchant De la Forge, at another in the university quarter with Cop; in the dwellings of the poor, and the mansions of the nobles, ‘increasing greatly the work of the Lord,’ says Beza, ‘not only by teaching truth, but also by opposing the heretics.' (Vol 2: p189)

CALVIN AIMED HIGH IN HIS EVANGELISM AS WELL AS LOW:

These Christians were full of hope, and even Calvin entertained the bold idea of winning the king, the university, and indeed France herself, over to the Gospel. (Vol 2: p137)

CALVIN PENNED THE GOSPEL SERMON WHICH ANOTHER PREACHED AT THE UNIVERSITY TO THE MONKS ETC.,

During the month of October Cop was much occupied with a task that had fallen to him. It was the custom of the university for the rector to deliver an inaugural address in Latin on All Saints’ Day in one of the churches of Paris. Calvin thought that it was his duty to take advantage of this opportunity to proclaim the Gospel boldly in the face of France. The rector replied that he was a physician, and that it was difficult for him to speak like a divine: ‘If, however, you will write the address,’ he said, ‘I will promise to deliver it.’ … They agreed to explain the essence or the Gospel before the university, giving it the academic name of Christian Philosophy …. Nobody suspected that it Calvin who was about to set the university, and indeed all France, in commotion. The hour having come, all the dignitaries, professors, and students fixed their eager eyes upon Cop as he rose to speak. He pronounced the opening address ‘in a very different fashion,’ says Theodore Beza, ‘from what was usual.’ There was a simplicity and life in his delivery which contrasted strongly with the dryness and exaggeration of the old doctors. The discourse is of importance in the history of the Reformation…
 
University professors, priests, monks, and students — all listened with astonishment to such unusual language. Here and there in the congregation signs of approbation might be observed, but far more numerous signs of anger. Two Franciscans, in particular, were so excited that they could scarcely keep their seats; and when the assembly broke up they were heard expressing their indignation in loud terms: ‘Grace… God’s pardon… the Holy Ghost… there is abundance of all that in the rector’s discourse; but of penance, indulgences, and meritorious works… not a word!’ It was pointed out to them that the rector, according to custom, had ended his exordium with the salutation which the angel had addressed to Mary; but that, in the opinion of the monks, was a mere form. The words being in Scripture, how could the rector refuse to pronounce them? Had he not besides begun by saying that Christ is the only true intercessor, verus et unus opud Patrem intercessor?… What is left then to Mary, except that she is the mother of the Savior? The Sorbonne was filled with anger and alarm... To select the day of the festival of All Saints, in order to proclaim that there is only one intercessor! (Vol 2: p189-192)

OF THE CHIEF WOMEN…NOT A FEW (ACTS 17:4)

Calvin, as it will be remembered, had studied and evangelised at Orleans, and his teaching had left deep traces, particularly among the students and with certain ladies of quality. The wife of the city provost seems to have been one of the souls converted by the ministry of the young reformer. The narrative he has devoted to her, the full details into which he enters, show the interest he took in her conversion. This woman, who occupied a distinguished rank in the city, had found peace for her soul in faith in Christ; she had believed in the promises of the Word which Calvin had explained; she had felt keenly the nothingness of Roman pomps and superstitions; the grace of God was sufficient for her; and caring little for outward adorning, she strove after that which is not corruptible, the ornament of the women who trusted in God. (Vol 2: p250)


CALVIN SENT FORTH SOME THIRTY OR FORTY MISSIONARIES EACH YEAR FROM GENEVA:

That man whose hand was one day boldly to raise the standard of the Gospel in the world, whose teaching was to enlighten many nations, and whose eloquence was to stir all France; that man who was yearly to send forth from Geneva some thirty or forty missionaries, and whose letters strengthened all the Churches; that man, still young, pursued by the lieutenant-criminal and his sergeants, had been forced to steal out of his chamber into the street and disguise himself in strange garments. Vol 3: p28)

CALVIN TEACHING TWO BRETHREN GREEK FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT LEADS THEM TO CHRIST:

About this time their circle was increased: John Du Tillet, afterwards bishop of Meaux, arrived at Angouleme. He too became attached with his whole heart to Calvin: the latter, wishing to make himself useful to the two brothers, offered to teach them Greek, and while teaching them to read the New Testament, he led them to seek Christ. (Vol 3: p35)

CALVIN SUPPLIED EVANGELISTIC SERMONS TO BE READ OUT IN THE PARISH CHURCHES IN THE VILLAGES:

Calvin’s sphere widened gradually: he wrote to those to whom he could not speak; and ere long his friends asked why they should keep for themselves alone the bread of life on which they fed?… One of them giving utterance to this thought to the young doctor, added: ‘But you can only reach the people in the churches.’ It was scarcely possible that Calvin, a fugitive from Paris, could visit the churches of the Angoumois as an evangelical missionary. ‘Compose some short Christian exhortations for us,’ said his friends to him, ‘and we will give them to well-disposed parish priests to read to their congregations.’ He did so, and humble clerks read these evangelical appeals from their pulpits, as well as they could. Thus Calvin preached through the mouths of priests to poor villagers, as he had addressed the imposing Sorbonne by the mouth of the rector. (Vol 3: p38)

CALVIN - A LIFE LONG EVANGELIST:

Calvin, by labouring thirty years for Geneva and France, laboured for the whole Christian world, He made the first experiment at Poitiers, and (if we may use the word) began that glorious evangelising campaign, which he was to direct until the close of his life. Not content with evangelising the city, the young and zealous doctor visited the castles, abbeys, and villages of the neighbourhood. (Vol 3: p71)

CALVIN PREACHES THE GOSPEL TO THE ROMAN CATHOLIC MONKS IN THE ABBEY:

The abbot announced to his monks that a Picard, brought up in the university of Paris and the holder of a benefice at Noyon, would preach in the abbey-church. Accordingly Calvin went into the pulpit and declared that whosoever had a firm and lively faith in the grace of Christ was saved. Some of his hearers were startled at a doctrine which made the Romish priesthood of no use. ‘What a perverse doctrine!’ they said; ‘why does the abbot allow this Picard to preach it in his church?’ (Vol 3:72)

BURDENED FOR HIS NATIVE FRANCE, CALVIN SENDS OUT MISSIONARIES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD:

When Calvin saw this movement of life going on around him, he thought of France. Would she remain behind Germany and Switzerland? No. France will awakE. She is already waking; ere long she will receive the Gospel in its holy purity, and will increase in morality, in light, and in liberty: such were his hopes. But for their realisation, men were needed who, being regenerate themselves, should be fellow-workers with God in this new creation. Calvin asked himself whether some of the converts of Poitiers were not called to this work? One day being at the usual meeting, he said: ‘Is there any one here willing to go and give light to those whom the Pope has blinded?’ Jean Vernou, Philip Veron, and Albert Babinot stood forward. Calvin had not forgotten the Angoumois where he possessed beloved friends; thither and into the adjacent provinces he will first send his missionaries and commence the evangelisation of France: ‘You, Babinot, will go into Guyenne and Languedoc,’ he said; ‘Philip Veron, you will go into Saintonge and Angoumois; and you, Jean Vernou, will stay at Poitiers and the neighbourhood.’ Calvin and the other brethren did not think that these missionaries required regular theological studies; had they not received the necessary gifts from God, ‘neither more nor less than if He had given them with His own hand?’ But they had need to be recommended to the almighty grace of God. They therefore prayed together, and Calvin Called upon the Lord to accept the services of these pious men. He told them to go and proclaim the Gospel, not in the name of any man, but in the name of the Lord, and because God commanded it. A collection provided for the expenses of this mission, and the evangelists departed. (Vol 3:72-73)

[Historical note: Calvin’s three missionaries, Babinot, Veron, and Vernou, were soon famous throughout the west of France, and the wrath of the clergy of all ranks, and even of laymen of note, knew no bounds...When Calvin was subsequently settled at Geneva, Babinot, Veron, and Vernou paid him a visit. They were delighted to find the Christian professor surrounded with respect, and were never tired of listening to him from whose lips they had heard at Poitiers the first words of life. They did not, however, stay with him. Babinot and Veron returned to the west of France to continue to propagate the Gospel there, which they did until their death. As for Vernou, he was seized while crossing the mountains of Savoy, and was burnt alive at Chambery, confessing Jesus Christ his Saviour. (Vol 3:76-77)]

LIKE ANDREW OF OLD, CALVIN FIRST WON HIS OWN FAMILY TO CHRIST:

He had found in his father’s house two brothers and a sister, Anthony, Charles, and Mary: these were the first persons he invited to Christ, in affectionate and pious conversations. He then turned to some members of the episcopal clergy and other inhabitants of Noyon. He put his hand (to use his own expression) on those who were running elsewhere, ‘to stop them short.’ Anthony and Mary were the first to answer to him. Charles resisted longer; he received however at that time a seed in his heart which germinated afterwards. (Vol 3:79)

EVEN IN THE SAD INCIDENT CONCERNING SERVETUS, CALVIN HAD FIRST CHERISHED THE DESIRE THAT HE MIGHT WIN HIM TO CHRIST:

Calvin resolved to accept Servetus’s invitation. These two young men, born in the same year, gifted each of them with marvelous genius, unshakeable in their convictions, are about to enter the lists. What blows they will deal each other! What a struggle! Which will come off conqueror? If Luther, Zwingle, and Bucer are so animated, what will Calvin be? He was the one who showed the most moderate sentiments with regard to Servetus. Alas! why did he not continue so to the last? ‘ I will do all in my power to cure Servetus,’ he said. ‘If I show myself in public, I know that I expose my life; but I will spare no pains to bring him to such sentiments, that all pious men may be able to take him affectionately by the hand.’ (Vol 3:95)

CALVIN ASSISTED IN TRANSLATING THE BIBLE:

In his retirement on the Wartburg, Luther had translated the New Testament. Calvin engaged in a similar task at Basle. On March 27th, 1534, a translation was published by Pierre de Wingle at Neuchatel: it was a small folio, printed in double columns, and was from the pen of Lefevre of Etaples, but had undergone a revision with regard to certain expressions which still retained a Romish colouring. It would appear that this edition was suppressed, either because it had been made without resorting to the original texts, or because Wingle himself was dissatisfied with it. He was soon to publish a more perfect version, in which Calvin assisted while at Basle. (Vol 3: p154-155)

Pierre Robert of Noyon, called Olivetan, had finished the work the Church had entrusted to him. On the 4th of June, 1535, appeared the first French Bible of the Reformation. ‘Possessing a keen and penetrating mind,’ said one of its readers who was thoroughly capable of appreciating the work, ‘the translator is not deficient in learning; he has spared neither labour, research, nor care, and has ably discharged the duties of a translator of the Bible.’ ‘I have done the best I could,’ said the translator himself, on presenting the book to his brethren; ‘I have laboured and searched as deeply as I possibly could into the living mine of pure truth; but I do not pretend to have entirely exhausted it.’… It has been calculated that the new translator had corrected the biblical text of the Sorbonne doctor in twenty-three thousand five hundred places, and in more than sixty thousand, if account be taken of all the minutiae of style. Calvin’s share has reference particularly to the later editions of this Bible. (Vol 5: p232)

CALVIN LED SOME HIGH RANKING WOMEN TO CHRIST BY HIS WISE AND FAITHFUL CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM:

It was not the men of learning, however, whom the young theologian had come to see: it was the duchess herself. That princess, who had already received in France a few rays of evangelical light, did not yet possess a sufficient knowledge of Christian truth: she felt this, and was determined to seek above all things peace with God. She therefore had frequent interviews with Calvin. Holy Scripture was the subject of their conversation; the reformer explained to Renee one passage by another, and the light of heaven beaming from all these passages of Holy Writ, carried brightness and warmth into the princess’s heart. The young doctor spoke with simplicity and modesty, but at the same time with affection and decision. ‘If I address you, madam,’ he said, ‘it is not from rashness or presumption, but pure and true affection to make you prevail in the Lord. When I consider the pre-eminence in which He has placed you, I think that, as a person of princely rank, you can advance the kingdom of Jesus Christ.’ But even this consideration was not necessary to arouse the zeal of the evangelist of Noyon. The princess’s noble character and her love for the Gospel touched him deeply. ‘I observe in you,’ he added, ‘such fear of God, and such a real desire to obey Him, that I should consider myself a castaway if I neglected the opportunity of being useful to you.’ Calvin was the most profound and most earnest commentator of Holy Scripture; and Renee embraced with her whole heart the truths that he proclaimed, so that the reformer was able to say to her some time later: ‘It has pleased God, madam, to enlighten you with the truth of His holy Gospel. Let us now confess that if God has withdrawn us from the depths of darkness, it is in order that we should follow the light straightforwardly, turning neither to this side nor to that.’ The duchess profited by this advice. (Vol 5: p.342)

Soon after his arrival at the court of Ferrara, Calvin had remarked a lady of great intelligence and learning, who was one of its principal ornaments. This as Anne de Parthenay, first lady of honour to the duchess, and wife of Antoine de Pons, count of Marennes, first gentleman to the duke. The countess of Marennes was a great musician, and often sang in the duchess’s apartments, where she was admired for the beauty of her voice. But Anne busied herself with more serious labours. Not satisfied with studying the Latin authors, she had a taste for Greek, and ‘intrepidly’ translated the poets and prose writers. That eminent woman did more: she read books of divinity, and even took a particular pleasure in ‘discussing almost every day with the theologians the matters of which they treated.’ She therefore talked with Calvin on these subjects, and before long the pure and living faith of the reformer gave a new direction to her soul. Hitherto she had been somewhat of a ‘blue-stocking,’ but now she ‘ceased to have any confidence in herself,’ and sought in the holy books and in her Savior the means of quenching the thirst for knowledge and the divine life which tormented her. From that hour she became a new creature and a ‘good Huguenot.’ She even won over her husband to the convictions that were dear to herself, and, so long as the countess lived, the latter showed himself a great lover of virtue and of truth. (Vol 5: p.345)

CALVIN'S ZEALOUS EFFORTS TO TURN A ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST TO THE TRUE PATH:

It was not only among his compatriots at Ferrara that Calvin was a fisher of men. The traditions of certain families of the peninsula place several eminent Italians there. Calvin had been a faithful and active workman in his Master’s vineyard, yet he did not always meet with friendly and docile hearers, even in Ferrara. Among the persons forming the duchess’s court, he had noticed a cringing person with insinuating manners, whose look and expression displeased him greatly. That man, by name Master Francois, chaplain to Renee was one of those double-hearted people who wish to satisfy God and their own cupidity. Calvin had heard that the life of that priest was far from saintly. Calvin tried, therefore, to convince Francois that the celebration of what he called ‘the sacrifice at the altar’ was contrary to Holy Scripture. Whenever the chaplain went astray the reformer admonished him. ‘I have often tried to bring him into the true path,’ he said. The priest would then appear sorrowful, and ashamed of his weakness, and Calvin, pressing him still more closely, would succeed in ‘making him confess his iniquity.’ But human respect still prevailed in Francois, and if any one about the court happened to be present at his conversations with the reformer, he would make excuses for himself before them. (Vol 5: p349-350)

CALVIN'S DEBATES WITH ROMAN CATHOLIC THEOLOGIANS LEAD TO A ROMAN CATHOLIC MONK GETTING SAVED:

A monk of the order of Cordeliers, the Franciscan Jean Tandy, who had been present at the disputation from its opening, listened with eager interest to Calvin’s speech, and felt that its truth reached him. His heart was affected, his understanding was satisfied. He embraced by faith the sacrifice of the Saviour; and, according to the expression of the Evangelist, he ate of his flesh and drank his blood. For a while he sat silent, awaiting the objections which might be offered. But when he saw that those who had taken part in discussion till that hour had their lips closed, he took courage, rose and said, the assembly listening to him attentively — ‘Holy Scripture teaches that there is no remission for the sin against the Holy Ghost. Now this sin is that of men who, through unbelief, willing to contend against the clearest truth, choose rather to exalt themselves against God and his Word than to humble themselves and obey him. As I desire now not to resist the truth, but to receive it and confess it openly, I acknowledge before you all that I have long been mistaken. While I thought that I was living in a state of perfection, as they had given me to understand, I have been, on the contrary, only the servant of men, submitting myself to their traditions and commandments. Nothing is good but that which God commands. I have heard the truth. I see that I must hold fast to Jesus alone, must stand to his Word, and must have no other head, leader, or Saviour, but him who by his sacrifice has made us acceptable to the Father. I will henceforth live and die according to his Gospel. I ask forgiveness of God for all that I have done and said against his honour. I ask pardon of you and of all the people, so far as by my preaching or by my life I taught you amiss, or have given you a bad example. And since, by following the rule of the Cordeliers and assuming this garb of dissimulation, I have been led out of the right way; at this moment in which I renounce all superstition, I abandon also this garb full of all hypocrisy and trumpery.’ As he uttered these words, Jean Tandy cast off his monastic dress, and then added — ‘Let no one be offended, but let each examine himself and confess that if the state in which he has lived be contrary to the will of God, he ought not to persevere in it, nor to re-enter after quitting it. I will live as a Christian, and not as a Cordelier; according to the Gospel of Jesus, and not according to the rule of the monks; in true and living faith in Christ, and united with all true Christians. To this God calls us all, to the intent that, instead of being divided into so many rules, we may be all one in Jesus Christ.’ This frank, noble, and affecting conversion gave great joy to those who loved the Gospel, and Farel, as their spokesman, said, ‘How great God is! how good and how wise! How he smites and heals, how he casts down to hell and brings up again to heaven, we see with our own eyes. What superstition is there equal to that of the Cordeliers, in which the enemy has with so much skill coloured his work that, even the elect are deceived! Let us rejoice, therefore, that the poor sheep which was straying on the mountains and in the deserts, in the midst of wolves and wild beasts, now, by the grace of the Lord, abandoning the barren deserts, the vexatious thorns of human traditions, is entering into his fold, and finds now his pasture in God’s holy Word.’ (Vol 6: p.213-214)

CALVIN PREACHED EVERY DAY FOR MOST OF THE YEAR AND OFTEN TWICE A DAY, SOMETIMES TO CATHOLIC PRIESTS, EXPOUNDING THE SCRIPTURES:

It is indispensable, however, to give in this place some account of Calvin’s preaching. He was, with Luther, the most important actor at the epoch of the Reformation; and there is no character in history more misunderstood than he is. It is a duty to come to the aid of one who is assailed—were it even the weakest that offers his aid to the strongest. Besides, it is no task of special pleading that we undertake. We shall confine ourselves to laying before the reader the documentary evidence in the trial. Two or three thousand of Calvin’s sermons are extant, he could not spend weeks on the composition of a homily. During great part of the year he preached every day, sometimes twice a day. He did not write his sermons, but delivered them extempore. A shorthand writer took down his discourses during their delivery. These sermons opened the treasures of the Scriptures, and spread them abroad amongst men; and they were full of useful applications. Calvin usually selected some book of the Bible, and preached a series of sermons on the divine words contained in it. These were published in large infolios. One volume appeared which contained a hundred and fifty-nine sermons on Job; another which consisted of two hundred sermons on Deuteronomy; in a third were given a hundred on the Epistles to Timothy and Titus. There are volumes of sermons on the Epistles to the Ephesians, the Corinthians, the Galatians, etc…Calvin used to preach in the cathedral church of St. Peter, which was more particularly adapted for preaching. A great multitude thronged the place to hear him. Among his hearers he had the old Genevese, but also a continually increasing number of evangelical Christians, who took refuge at Geneva on account of persecution, and who belonged, for the most part, to the most highly cultivated of their nation. Among them were also some Catholic priests and laymen, who had come to Geneva with the intention of professing there the reformed doctrines, and to these men it was very necessary to teach the doctrine of salvation. (Vol 7: p.90)

CALVIN RECOGNISED THAT MANY WERE INTERESTED IN THE GOSPEL JUST TO ESCAPE FROM ROME - HE SUCCESSFULLY ENLIGHTEN MANY TO THE TRUTHS OF A GREATER LIBERTY AGAIN i.e. FROM SIN:

But at the time when Calvin appeared in the city of the first Huguenots, morality was far from being irreproachable; religion, scarcely disengaged from the forms and errors of Rome, was with the majority neither personal nor evangelical, deep-seated, pure, vital, or active; and civilization itself was hardly at a higher level there than it had reached in other countries. The heroes of independence had need themselves of being enlightened by the light of the Gospel, and of being transformed by its fire. Their first education was defective, and it was necessary to begin it again. Their intercourse with all that surrounded them exerted an influence over them which needed to be counterbalanced. The great advantage of the Reformation having been, in their view, their deliverance from the pretensions of priests and of princes, it was needful that they should learn to recognize in the Gospel the tidings of a higher order, of a spiritual enfranchisement, which would deliver them from sin and would give them the liberty of the children of God. They had availed themselves of the reformation as a political instrument; they must now learn to have recourse to it as a religious, moral, and divine instrument, capable of making them citizens of another and more glorious city. Many did this. (Vol 7:101-102)

 
* CALVINIST INDEX
* PROTESTANT INDEX
* CH SPURGEON INDEX
* EVANGELISM INDEX
* HERE AND THERE INDEX
* YOUTUBE VIDEO INDEX
* 3 MINUTE AUDIOBOO INDEX