Editorial

What does the great reformer John Calvin have to say about the critical issues facing the Reformed churches around the world today? The 50 Calvin scholars who gathered in Geneva in April 2007 to ponder this question went well beyond the tired clichs of Calvin as father of capitalism, the author of double pre-destination and the champion of moral austerity; instead they offered fresh insights for the Reformed family worldwide to consider as we approach the 500th anniversary of his birth in 2009. The scholars writing here remind us that Calvin continues to offer significant thinking concerning the glory of God, the place of Christ in our lives, the work of the Spirit, the importance of scripture, the role of God in the world, the gift of creation, the churchs call in the face of principalities and powers, and the unity of the church. We are thankful to the sponsors of the Geneva consultation: the John Knox International Reformed Center, the Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches, the Faculty of Theology of the University of Geneva and the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC). We offer special thanks to the John Knox Center for hosting the event and to the Swiss churches for their support. This should be but the beginning of such a Calvin inquiry. As the theologians said in their joint statement following the consultation, We call therefore on theologians and intellectuals of other academic disciplines, as well as the whole people of God, to re-visit the heritage of the great reformer. May there be many more consultations, perhaps with more voices from women, the South and the margins, as we collectively ponder what Calvin has to say to the Reformed family of churches today. It will be good to be reminded of where we have been as Reformed churches, and perhaps also catch a glimpse of the future.

John P Asling .

229

230

Foreward What is the significance of Calvins legacy?

Report of an International Consultation

In two years time, John Calvins birth in 1509 will be commemorated. In Geneva and all over the world the celebration of this anniversary will provide an opportunity to reflect on his legacy and to discover his relevance for the pressing issues of today. To start this process of reflection, 50 theologians from different continents and countries met from 15 to 19 April 2007 in Geneva at the invitation of the John Knox International Reformed Center, the Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches, the World Alliance of Reformed Churches and the Theological Faculty of the University Geneva. The following issues were addressed. Who was Calvin and what is the significance of his legacy for today? These perennial questions arise with special urgency as the anniversary of Calvins birth in 2009 approaches. Calvin is a continuing source of inspiration and for the Reformed churches, who are therefore looking forward to the celebration with a sense of deep gratitude and as an opportunity for their own commitment and renewal. They would like to share the true legacy of

Calvin with Christians of other traditions and with society. At the same time they are aware that the image of Calvin is controversial and today often presented in a negative perspective. Like no other Reformer of the 16th century he has become the victim of clichs. Four stereotypes invariably return when his name is referred to in public: his grim concept of double predestination: God elects some for salvation and destines others to damnation; the moral austerity which he imposed on the people of Geneva; his participation in the execution of Michael Servetus; his role in the historical development of modernity, in particular modern capitalism. For some he is one of the fathers of modernity, for others he laid the ground for a prosperity-oriented spirituality. Though these perceptions of Calvin are widely accepted and taken for granted by many, they represent a reduction and, in
231

fact, a distortion of the historical reality. What is more, they lead to an attitude of prejudice which obstructs access to the true significance of the reformer. The consultation came to the conclusion that a fresh effort of interpretation should be undertaken. An appeal, therefore, goes out to theologians and intellectuals of other academic disciplines, as well as the whole people of God, to revisit the heritage of the great reformer. This heritage contains insights and perspectives which remain relevant for today. A closer study of Calvins writings, not only of the Institutes but also his shorter treatises, sermons and commentaries will reveal unexpected riches. Calvin belongs to the second generation of the Reformation movement. Through his teaching and his life, he decisively contributed to the consolidation of the Reformation. The range and coherence of his thinking have made possible the building up of Reformed churches. At the Reformation jubilee in 2017, his name must therefore be recognized for without Calvin the Reformation would have taken a different course. The effort to go beyond the widespread stereotypes must, in our view, be guided by the following three principles: The point of departure of any valid interpretation must be the fundamental impetus of Calvins life. What was ultimately the driving force of his theology and life? Particular and problematic aspects of his teaching, such as, for instance, his doctrine
232

of predestination, must be seen and interpreted in the framework of his primary intentions in understanding God, creation, human salvation and the fulfilment of all things. Often Calvin is held responsible positively or negativelyfor historical developments of later centuries. In the eyes of some, he opened the door to the modern world, in particular capitalism; in the eyes of others, he bears the responsibility for the narrow biblicist moralism which characterizes certain Protestant churches. To get an authentic image of Calvin, it is necessary to be guided by his own intentions and utterances. Calvin lived in a very particular situation attacked by enemies and also contested in his own city of Geneva. He had to defend his perception of the gospel in troubled times. Calvin was not simply a theological writer but was drawnagainst his personal inclination and willinto the struggles of his time. It is essential to interpret Calvin in this context. Much new research has been done in recent times on particular aspects of his life, making a more serene understanding possible. Calvin was no saint, and any attempt to draw an idealized picture of him is bound to fail. We recognize that his response to conflicts in Geneva could be harsh and that his role in the execution of Servetus was, indeed, more than dubious. Even against the yardstick of his own convictions, he failed

in decisive moments. His use of language against theological adversaries renders the reading of certain of his writings difficult. As we reflect on the relevance of his heritage, we realize that certain aspects of his teaching are no longer pertinent and cannot be maintained. But, in our view, Calvin remains an outstanding witness of the Christian message and deserves to be carefully listened to today. Here is a selection of eight areas which, in our view, are of particular interest today and may provide fresh access to Calvins legacy: 1. Calvins commitment to proclaiming the glory of God. Calvin believes that God, the sovereign and gracious Creator of all, desires to be in intimate relationship. 2. Calvins determination to place Jesus Christ at the forefront of all our thinking and living. In honouring the name of Christ who became flesh of our flesh, the glory and grace of God are attested in our midst. If we separate ourselves even by one single inch from Christ, salvation fades where Christs name does not sound, everything becomes stale (Institutes II.16.1). The Church depends entirely on the presence of the living Jesus Christ through the power of Gods Spirit. Thus it becomes the communion of the lovers of Christ (amateurs du Christ, preface to Olivetans Bible translation). It cannot rely on tradition or on the strength of existing structures. Calvins critique of the church of his times was based on this firm

conviction. 3. Calvins emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit in creation and salvation. The action of God is universal and allencompassing. For Calvin, it expresses the divine rule over all creatures, human and nonhuman. Nothing is beyond the wisdom and parental care of God. The Spirit is a lifegiving force, sustaining all things in being. That same Holy Spirit unites us with Christ, inspiring us in our understanding of Gods word, illuminating and sanctifying us in faith, and gathering us into the communion of the church. Calvin always speaks about the church, with its ministry of word and sacrament, as the community of believers within which faith is born, nourished, and strengthened through the action of the Holy Spirit. As members of his body we live in hope for the renewal of our lives and of the whole world. 4. Calvins engagement with scripture. For Calvin, the Bible is at the heart of the churchs life, ever to be read and studied by each one of Gods people. It is to be taught within the Church, which he describes often as the mother and school of our faith. Our weakness does not allow us to be dismissed from her school until we have been pupils all our lives (Institutes, IV.1.4). Calvins careful attention to the content and unity of the Old Testament and the New Testament, the centrality of the Bibles witness to Jesus Christ, the need to wrestle over the meaning of the text with the help of the historical and scientific knowledge of
233

his day, and the power of the word of God to speak afresh to each generation remain exemplary. His exposition of Christian doctrine is never undertaken apart from his interpretation of scripture, which in turn always takes place in the context of the daily work of preaching, pastoral care and civic outreach. 5. Calvins determination that Gods will be brought to bear on all areas of life. Calvins concern was that the glory of God be celebrated and witnessed to at all levels of life, that all of creation sing Gods praises in concrete and vibrant ways, and that the beauty of Gods will be manifest in our patterns of life both grand and small. Calvin holds that the moral law in scripture both convicts us of our sin against Gods will and serves as a guide for glorifying God in every aspect of our daily lives. The law, the form of Gods purpose for the faithful, offers a space for human flourishing that is as welcoming and inclusive as it is binding and formative. It gives boundaries and order to our creaturely existence so we might delight in the good gifts of God and respond with joyful gratitude. 6. Calvins insistence on Gods gift of creation. Gods will for creations flourishing is the constant measure of human society and humanitys engagement with the created world in all its mystery and depth. Central features of this vision are a fundamental affirmation of human equality and the celebration of difference between and
234

among human persons. It includes an awareness of the profound interrelatedness of all aspects of creation, the call for human beings to embody just relations, and an enduring commitment to the affirmation of human dignity. At the heart of this vision lies a compassionate commitment to love, justice, responsible care and hospitality towards widows, orphans, and strangers: those who are defenceless, displaced, hungry, lonely, silenced, betrayed, powerless, sick, broken in body and spirit, and all those who suffer in our globalizing and polarizing world. Where God is known, there also humanity is cared for (in Ieremiam, cap. 22,16). Calvin claims that we see Christ in all persons and are uplifted and judged by his presence in them, ever proclaiming in our words and actions the integrity of creation as the theatre of Gods glory. 7. Calvins realization that the church

is called to discern, in ongoing ways, its relation to the principalities and powers of the world. In our present global context, this includes both various forms of state and nation and the ever shifting reality of the global market. This includes the churchs confession of its involvement in creations brokenness and human suffering as well as its desire to prophetically preach and embody Gods good will towards the world. Calvin acknowledges, as well, that Gods glory can be proclaimed and embodied outside the church and that the Christian community is called to engage her global

neighbours with both humility and bold vision. The church realizes that the form and content of this engagement will vary from place to place and time to time, in ways as manifold and rich as the faithful, lived realities of Gods creation itself. Nevertheless, it cannot but obediently and gratefully respond to Gods word in the present, and as such, be a constructive witness to Christ. 8. Calvins commitment to the unity of the church. Calvins passionate and consistent commitment to the unity of the body of Christ was lived out within the reality of an already fragmented church. In the midst of division, he acknowledged the one Lord of the one church, stressing repeatedly that Christs body is one, that there is no justification for a divided church, and that schisms within churches are a scandal. Our current situation is also one of separated churches and threatened splits within churches. In particular, Reformed churches continue to be characterized by internal division as well as by ecumenical commitment. Calvins thinking about the nature of Christian community, his willingness to mediate controversial matters such as the Lords Supper, and his tireless efforts to build bridges at every level of church life, stand as a contemporary challenge. Calvin challenges churches to understand the causes of continuing separation and, in accordance with scripture, to strive toward visible unity by engaging in concrete

ecumenical efforts, all for the sake of the gospels credibility in the world, and the fidelity of the churchs life and mission.

Participants:
Prof. Dr. Philip Benedict, University of Geneva; Switzerland Bishop Dr. Gustv Blcskei, Reformed Church in Hungary Rev. Thierry Bourgeois, Eglise Evanglique Libre de Genve, Switzerland Prof. Dr. Coenraad Burger, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa Prof. Dr. Eberhard Busch, University of Gttingen, Germany Prof. Dr. Emidio Campi, University of Zurich, Switzerland Rev. Prof. Leopoldo Cervantes Ortiz, Iglesia Nacional Presbiteriana, Mexico Rev. Dr. Meehyun Chung, mission 21, Switzerland Rev. Jean Arnold de Clermont, Fdration protestante de France Dr. Wulfert de Greef, Protestant Church in the Netherlands Prof. Dr. James de Jong, Calvin College and Calvin Theological Seminary, USA Prof. Dr. Franois Dermange, University of Geneva, Switzerland Dr. Edouard Dommen, Switzerland Prof. Dr. EvaMaria Faber, Theologische Hochschule Chur, Switzerland

235

Prof. Dr. David Fergusson, University of Edinburgh, Scotland Rev. Serge Fornerod, Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches Prof. Dr. Martin Friedrich, Community of Protestant Churches in Europe (Leuenberg Church Fellowship) Dr. Pawel Gajewski, Chiesa evangelica Valdese, Italy Rev. Prof. Eduardo Galasso Faria, Seminario teolgico de So Paulo, Brazil Rev. Philipp Genequand, Eglise protestante de Genve, Switzerland Rev. Mag. Thomas Hennefeld, Evangelische Kirche H.B. in sterreich, Austria Rev. Dr. Martin Hirzel, Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches Prof. Dr. Serene Jones, Yale Divinity School, USA Prof. Dr. Tams Juhsz, University of Cluj Napoca, Romania Rev. Dr. Clifton Kirkpatrick, World Alliance of Ref. Churches

Ms. Charlotte Kuffer, Eglise protestante de Genve, Switzerland Dr. Johannes Langhoff, Evangelische Kirche H.B. in sterreich, Austria Rev. Dr. JaeCheon Lee, Presbyterian Church in the Republic of Korea Prof. Christian Link, University of Bochum, Germany Rev. Dr. Gottfried Locher, Institute of Ecumenical Studies, University of Fribourg, Switzerland Rev. Dr. Odair Pedroso Mateus, World Alliance of Reformed Churches Dr. h.c. Gerrit Noltensmeier, Reformierter Bund Deutschland, Germany Dr. Peter Opitz, Universitt Zrich, Institut fr Schweizerische Reformationsgeschichte, Switzerland Rev. Prof. Seong-Won Park, Young Nam Theological College and Seminary, Korea Rev. Solveig Perret Almelid, Confrence des glises protestantes romandes, Switzerland Rev. Dr. Lazarus Purwanto, Reformed Ecumenical Council

236

Who was and who is Calvin? Interpretations of recent times

Eberhard Busch

In reflecting on the eve of the 500th birthday of the great reformer John Calvin, Eberhard Busch laments the lack of research taking place at this time on fundamental questions such as what Calvin perceived as the main differences between the reformers and the Roman Catholic Church of his time. Busch wants to see all Calvins texts published anew and those which have never been published to see the light of day so that they will be made more available to everyone. Scholars need to become infected with Calvin so that they truly understand what this fallible messenger of God has to say to Christians today.

1. Interpretations in former times

A look back at the interpretations of Calvin about a hundred years ago reveals a broad diversity of views that for decades defined the way the reformer was viewed. According to Albrecht Ritschl, Calvin confused and combined the Lutheran differentiation between the church as the agent of grace and the state as the agent of law and order. Thus, Calvin was able to say something that is unthinkable to German Lutherans, namely, that every person is equal in relation to the law and that the overthrow of tyrants by the people is legitimate.1 As recently as 1940, Dietrich Bonhoeffer repeated this view in his Ethics.2 In contrast to this view, the cultural historian from Basel Jacob Burckhardt

stated, The tyranny of one single human has never been promoted further than it was by Calvin, who not only made his private convictions into a general law and who oppressed or banished all other convictions, but also constantly insulted everybody regarding the most innocent matters of taste.3 The poet Stefan Zweig in 1937 used this characterization of Calvin to accuse Adolf Hitler of being a demonic human.4 Even Karl Barth wrote that when one knows the details of the much admired way of living in Geneva at the time of Calvin, words like tyranny and pharisaism come nearly automatically to mind. None of us . . . would like to have lived in that holy city [Geneva].5 The widespread thesis of Max Weber that Calvin was one of the fathers of capitalism
237

was first repudiated by Ernst Troeltsch, followed by Andr Biler. 6 According to Troeltsch, Calvins ideas led to the emergence within the Reformed tradition of religious socialism at the beginning of the 20th century, something which was very different from conservative, antidemocratic Lutheranism. 7 In contrast to Troeltsch, Charles Hodge at Princeton Theological Seminary stated that because of his view that the church as church had nothing to do with secular affairs, Calvin followed the Lutheran two-kingdom doctrine. This is true, Hodge goes on to say, even if politicians should not silence representatives of the church who give witness to the truth and to the law of God.8 Similarly, the Dutchman Abraham Kuyper stated that, on the one hand, Calvinism distinguished sharply between state and church including in the realm of culture, but on the other hand, both state and church are directly subjected to the government of God.9 What is true of most of these interpretations is that they speak more generally about so-called Calvinism than about Calvin himself, or, as Stanford Reid put it in 1991: that they often speak about Calvin without taking great pains to have a look what he really said.10

to listen more carefully to what Calvin really said, first and foremost within the context of the Reformation, in France and in Geneva. This has resulted in a growing understanding that the Reformation of the church is not to be measured solely by the figure of Martin Luther, as one sometimes hears, especially in Germany. It has thus become clearer that the formulation of the doctrine of justification is not the only decisive difference between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. Calvin certainly taught justification by grace alone, but at the same time insisted, more than did the Lutheranism of his day, that justification and sanctification belonged inseparably together. In doing so, he was expounding 1 Corinthians 1:30: He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption. He demonstrated how pure was his exposition of the doctrine of justification in 1547 in what was actually the first differentiated commentary offered by a Protestant on the doctrine of justification proposed by the Council of Trent, which was itself a substantive statement. Although the decrees of the council were not published at the time, Calvin was well informed not only about the council text, but also about the discussions conducted by the fathers on that council. His comment did not appear in German translation until the study edition of Calvin was published in 1999. As Anthony Lane has shown, Calvin participated in the run-up to the Council of

2. The centre of his theology

It is probably true that every age influences the results of its research by how its questions are formulated. But one must also say, with Reid, that scholars in recent years and decades have made great efforts
238

Trent, especially in the discussions in Regensburg between Protestant and Roman Catholic theologians, which dealt primarily with the doctrine of justification.11 Calvin scholars continue today to discuss the extent to which Calvins interpretation might make possible some common understanding between both confessions with regard to the Pauline statement in Gal 2:6 that faith justifies without works and in Gal 5:6 that faith works through love. In any case, Calvin stands in his doctrine of justification on the ground of the Protestant Reformation. Nevertheless, for him the decisive difference with Rome was elsewhere. Bernard Cottret writes in his biography of Calvin that the so-called Affair of the Placards at the end of 1534 in Paris was for Calvin the turning point. These placards, which were posted at various places, directed strong criticism against the Roman Catholic Mass based upon the epistle to the Hebrews: Christ is the only mediator and the only priest; by his unique sacrifice he makes illusory the priestly dignity of human church officials which was so central to Roman Catholic thinking. 12 This fundamental difference was etched on Calvins mind at a procession through Paris at which King Francis I followed the monstrance, while at the same time along the streets heretics were sacrificed, that is, burned to death because they opposed this doctrine of sacrifice.13 When defining his liturgy, Calvin, in contrast to Zwingli, did not opt for the late medieval preaching service, nor did he grant secondary

importance to the worship liturgy. Rather, as Christian Grosse has recently shown, he infused new life into the liturgy of divine worship, following the model of the ancient church.14 At the centre of divine worship, the Holy Spirit communicates to us in the Lords Supper, the reconciliation with God accomplished by Christ, and in gratitude for this we testify in the same event that we are his community. Calvin, allegedly the almighty sovereign in Geneva, was, however, not able to persuade the city government to follow his profound conviction that the Lords Supper belonged to every divine worship service, accompanied by public prayers (the Psalter) and the interpretation of the holy scripture (not as various pericopes selected from the Bible, but as lectio continua, the exposition of whole books of the Bible).15 The amount of discussion devoted to the proper understanding of the eucharist in the first edition of the Institutio Christianae Religionis of 1536 shows that this, in Calvins view, was the most important point of controversy with the Roman Catholic church at that time. In the immensely enlarged last edition of the Institutio of 1559, the critique is expanded to a dispute about the understanding of the church, to which more than one third of the entire work is devoted. One might say that this is the theme of the second generation of reformers. Even if we agree with Wilhelm Neuser that the composition and structure of the four parts in the1559 edition are confusing in detail16, it is, I think, very clear that Calvin in the first three parts wants to speak about
239

God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and that in the very long fourth part he deals with the church, that is, with the external means by which God invites us into fellowship with Gods self and with one another. And in this part of his book, Calvin deals extensively with the Roman Catholic doctrine of the church. It is exciting that he works with the same fundamental material used by the other side, but he interprets this same fundamental material in a very different way, both formally and substantively. He attacks here the substance of the Roman Catholic doctrine about the church, the doctrine upon which the system of papal organization is based.17 I do not see in the Lutheranism of that time any substantive contribution to this debate. For Calvin, this was a substantive issue. According to the view shared by both Roman Catholics and the Calvinists, Christ, as the mediator between God and humanity, holds a three-fold office, that is: as prophet, as king and as priest. But, unlike the Roman Catholic side, Calvin stresses that Christ is alive, and therefore, that he has neither relinquished these three offices to ecclesial institutions, nor is he ever able to do so. His relationship to the church is like that of the head to the body, and there are no substitute heads. Only he governs the church, and the church is a community of brothers and sisters, connected to him and with one another in mutual exchange, as expressed in the Catechism of Geneva of 1545.18 Every member participates in the
240

head, but only as a member of Christs body. All Christians participate directly by faith in Christ, without the mediation of human priests, as declared in the Second Helvetic Confession of 1566. 19 In this way, all Christians participate in the three-fold office of Christ by faith20, and they show this by actively confessing, as Zwingli says in his 1530 statement of faith.21 The human leaders of the ecclesial communion too are members of Christs body, not heads of the church. This is made apparent by the fact that the three offices under their leadership are distributed to different persons who lead the church collectively. This interpretation gives new significance to the three offices exercised by the government of the church which differs with the Roman Catholic churchs view: the pastors embody the prophetic teaching of Christ. They are not at all priests, and this is perhaps the deepest point of divergence with the Roman Catholic church. The elders embody the kingly office of Christ; they have the task of leading the communion and ensuring the care of souls (cura animarum), but they are not the sovereigns of the church. Lastly, the service of the deacons to the poor corresponds to the priestly office, which Christ fulfilled once and for all on the cross. But todays Calvin research scarcely addresses the question of what the Geneva reformer perceived as the main difference with the Roman Catholic church of his time. I believe that his view in this regard is still important today when we see even Reformed pastors trying to act as priests,

and the dilemma in which Lutherans find themselves because their concept of justification is no longer supposed to separate them from the Roman Catholic Church. I am not saying that the doctrine on the church was the centre of Calvins theology. The centre of his theology can be summed up by a phrase taken from his commentary on Jeremiah: Ubi cognoscitur Deus, etiam colitur humanitas, this means Where God is taken seriously, humanity is cared for as well.22 This sentence clearly underscores Calvins concern, which contrasts with the tendency in Lutheran theology to forget the differentiation between Gods divinity and our humanity because of the both divine and human nature of the one Christ, instead of holding this differentiation in honour.

which were published in the 19th and early 20th centuries, in the original language or in translations: biblical commentaries, letters, and polemical documents. The most important and voluminous publication is the Calvini Opera, begun in 1877, comprising 59 volumes and edited in the original language. Later there appeared the smaller edition, the Calvini Opera Selecta, edited by Peter Barth and Wilhelm Niesel, 19291936. However, some earlier editions contain gaps, while others have scientific deficiencies, such as the edition of biblical commentaries in Latin by August Tholuck (mid-19th century). New editions are now appearing that try, on the one hand, to provide scientifically responsible texts, and on the other hand, to fill gaps. An invaluable overview of the new editions is provided by Michael Bihary in his Bibliographia Calviniana. Calvins Werke und ihre bersetzungen, Prague, 2000. One such gap was filled in 1961 with the launching of a collection entitled Supplementa Calviniana. Sermons indits. This collection includes 600 previously unprinted sermons. But in point of fact, Calvin delivered more than 2400 sermons.23 This edition alone will comprise 15 volumes or more. Each of those sermons consists of nearly 10 well-filled pages written in 16th century French. This edition demonstrates how Calvin dealt with the interpretation of the holy scripture in the time of early Christianity, in the medieval church and in the Jewish exposition.24 As far as his biblical commentaries in their original language are
241

3. Editions
But to all appearances there is little work nowadays in Calvin research on these fundamental questions. The research that is being carried out is focused on discovering Calvin anew, but it is proceeding in small steps. The first great, or rather, huge task in this regard is to publish all of Calvins texts anew, and in some instances, for the first time, and to make them accessible to everyone. There are, in fact, important texts of Calvin which have not been printed since the 16th century or since the Leiden edition in the 17th century, or which have never been printed at all. In addition to Calvins Institutio, which is available in diverse editions, there are many other Calvin texts

concerned, we still must rely on the 100 year-old Calvini Opera. However, a bold new edition has been initiated. The basic texts are the last edition of each work printed during Calvins lifetime, or the last version examined by Calvin himself: Ioannis Calvini Opera Omnia, published by the Librairie Droz in Geneva, edited by eight prestigious Calvin researchers, enriched by helpful literary references and footnotes. To date, eight volumes of this edition have been published. It also contains English Calvin researcher Thomas C. H. Parkers edition of Calvins commentary on Romans. It is the commentary, which Calvin produced with elaborate care in Strasbourg in 1539 and which he revised in 1551 in Geneva: it was his first biblical commentary. In view of the difficulty many people today have understanding 16th century French, but especially classical Latin, which Calvin wrote so brilliantly, his texts in their original languages are inaccessible to many people, including eminent scholars. As a result, these texts are limited to a small circle of experts. It would be necessary to be as familiar with those languages as Calvin was, in order to understand his style rich in detail and his refined theological argumentation. But this means that whoever wants to let Calvin speak today will have to translate him, as Christian Link remarks in the preface to the CalvinStudienausgabe, which he and several other scholars have been editing since 1994. In this edition, various, representative pieces

of Calvins theology, some of which have not been translated until now, appear in two languages: in their original language and in a German translation. Six volumes have been published, including two volumes of the Romans commentary. In Italy a new edition was launched in 2004 with the publication by Claudiana in Torino of Calvino, Opere scelte, Volume I: Dispute con Roma. It seems that in the future such translations will be more and more necessary because of the demise of the knowledge of the classical languages. It appears that the English translations are surging ahead of the German ones.

4. New Interpretations
Apart from the great task of publishing the texts resulting from new scientific research on Calvin, a plethora of individual studies have been produced as well. Peter de Klerk has listed all new publications since 1971 in the Calvin bibliography published in the Calvin Theological Journal. It is striking that in many recent works, half of the text consists of footnotes that often refer to a large number of other single investigations which are unfortunately often not available to the reader. Furthermore, there is no lack of studies with such specific theses that they cannot be substantiated except by appealing to hypotheses. Three scholars have presented a work which they claim, due to a lack of documents, cannot be more than merely an experiment that does not answer many questions.25 There

242

are also many works exploring with great effort what is already known. As is the case in other sciences, Calvin research, beyond the aforementioned language problem, is faced with the issue of increasingly specialized topics being dealt with in ever smaller groups of experts, while the number of those ignorant in these matters is growing even in theologically educated circles. I have no solution to these problems, only a question that the experts have to answer themselves: Who is served by their hard work? In my opinion this can only be relevantly answered when in their zeal to understand Calvin, they let themselves be infected by him so that they understand with Calvin, that is, understand with this fallible messenger what God has placed before him and before us. Calvinus Praeceptor ecclesiae is the title of proceedings published from the last international Calvin symposium. But was he really recognized and taken seriously as teacher of the church? To expect the newer research to deal only with these critical questions would be unfair. Indeed, one has to respectfully recognize that the multiple research efforts, taking many directions and many approaches, shed distinctive new light on many hidden corners of Calvin and his world,. bringing this world closer to us. We see Calvin in his relationship with Martin Bucer 26 and Bernhard von Clairvaux27, Melanchthon28, a Lasco 29 and his colleagues in G e n e v a 30 , with

Augustine 31 , Pighius 32, King Sigismund August of Poland 33 , a n d s o o n . We furthermore see him as a young man 34, in his relationship with women 35, children and young people 36, with Baptists 37, or with Greek philosophy 38. But of course, he is presented to us especially as a theologian and as someone occupied with theological topics such as hermeneutics 39, a n t h r o p o l o g y 40 , t h e d o c t r i n e o f predestination 41 , t h e m e d i a t i o n o f salvation 42 , eschatology 43 , doctrina 44 , prayer45 and so on. We do not have to complete the long list of contributions here. Of course, all these studies do not completely agree with each other and by far, not all of them refer to each other. Nonetheless we can put them together like pieces of a puzzle and thus get a fairly comprehensive idea of the Geneva reformator and his work. More illuminating with regard to knowledge about Calvin and his theology than the long list of Calvin literature is the recent availability of many sermons and biblical commentaries. In short: while formerly Calvin was seen in the light of his Institutio and in the context of his polemical writings, today researchers begin to read him chiefly in his sermons and biblical interpretations. We are narrowing in on the exegete rather than on the teacher of dogmatics. Indeed, not the Institutio, but the interpretations of the Bible were the subject of his theological lectures which were taken

243

down by official note-takers and later published. To him, theological instruction meant exposition of the holy scripture. But sermon meant the same thing to him. He presents both as doctrina, which, according to Victor dAssonville, means communication commissioned by God, as opposed to dogma, which is human teaching.46 Sermon and lecture are not the same, but for Calvin they do not differ in principle. The lectures are short preparations for the sermons, which express the same thing, but in a more detailed and, more illustrated fashion, more directed towards listeners. Both sermon and lecture belong together according to Calvins doctrine of the exercise of the prophetic office in the church. And it is precisely these texts that have been sought out recently with greater interest in order to understand Calvins theology. Because of this, his teaching presents itself in a perhaps not fully different form but yet in a new light, in an able interaction, on the one hand, of observations that focus precisely upon the text in question and on the other hand, of statements that speak concretely to particular listeners or readers. Max Engammare, for instance, is preoccupied with Calvins interpretation of Genesis.47 According to him, the figure of Abraham is exemplary and comforting for the reformer in Geneva. He shows that Calvin saw himself his entire life as a refugee, and as such he addressed himself to other

people, that is to the oppressed in France who were awaiting the establishment of the lordship of Christ in their country; to those who had to flee their homelands because of persecution and some of whom came to Geneva; and to those who had to learn the challenges of faith through these brothers and sisters in the faith. Wilhelmus H.Th. Moehn, in the context of his edition of Calvins sermons on Acts 1-7, referred especially to Abraham as the father of the church of God.48 Moehn, while working through Calvins exposition of Acts 7, had in view, as he dealt with the figure of Abraham there, Calvins exposition of Genesis which he was doing at the same time. According to Calvin, Abraham is the model for the way in which true faith and obedient discipleship belong inseparably together. And together with Abraham, Calvin also had in view the compelling contemporary problem of Nicodemitism, that is, the attitude of those who believe evangelically but who, in contradiction with that faith, live external lives adapted to a majority with another orientation. Based upon the fact that Abraham lived among pagans in Canaan, he envisioned the task of the native Genevans to be to depart, not from the city or their neighbours, but from themselves. At the same time, referring to Abrahams concern for his progeny, Calvin emphasized that neighbourly love must expand to embrace subsequent generations. I see these kinds of works as a promising indication of all that will come to light when

244

the sermons and exegeses of Calvin are made more fully accessible.

granting loans and usury. But in all this, he promoted practising social solidarity. Valeri profiles Calvins intentions by naming what he argued against: Dissolution of the bonds of communication isolates individuals from others in the body social, resulting in the misuse of neighbour as an object for gain.52 And Jane Dempsey Douglass writes: According to Calvin, restored humanity is not individual but social. All men and women are created equal and are created for one another, and when we violate this, it is the sign of sin and draws Gods anger.53 Certainly, Calvin is interested in individual responsibility, but at the same time he is interested in social solidarity. He apparently sees these as corresponding to the mutuality of the body of Christ, which he also sees in the mutuality in which the members of the political council and those of the church council (the elders) do their work of public responsibility. These aforementioned researchers showed that there were two concerns in particular on which Calvin insisted with the people of Geneva, in the discharge of his prophetic duty. Or, to put it more clearly: he recognized that there were two forms of poverty and misery that disturbed community life in the city then and seriously challenged personal responsibility and social solidarity. The first form concerned the relationship of the local people to the foreigners who within a short period of time came seeking refuge in Geneva. Until then it was the rule that each city was individually

5. The ethics of Calvin

An illuminating expansion, but also correction, of the image we have of the reformer of Geneva lies in the question raised by Robert Kingdon; it subsequently stimulated a number of North American scholars especially, to conduct interesting studies. The question was: What actually was new and different in Calvins Geneva in comparison with the medieval period that preceded it? 49 The question applies in particular to the social and economic problems in the Geneva of the time. According to Kingdon, there was minimal social support for the poor in the city already in the Middle Ages. What was new in the 16th century was that the social work was carried out more professionally and by laymen. But what was Calvins contribution to it? In Mark Valeris opinion, for Calvin, the economy and the ethics of public welfare must be in harmony. 50 By confronting the competitive thinking with the idea of togetherness and solidarity, he stood against the economic trend of his time.51 He especially fought against usury; and since usury raises its head again and again by hiding behind different labels, his struggle turned against the misuse of language in favour of trustworthiness. But he did not fight against it in blind radicalism, but as a theologian who has the common sense to know the difference between

245

responsible for the needy in its midst. But now suddenly masses of French refugees who were expelled from their country came to Geneva. In a few years, the population of Geneva doubled, which made the question of their livelihood particularly urgent. Therefore it became above all a very practical matter whether or not the stranger is really a neighbour. Perhaps at least part of the resentment within the old established families of Geneva towards Calvin was based on his answering this practical question clearly in the affirmative, that he deliberately remained, for most of his time in Geneva, a foreigner himself, to show the significance of the problem. As Valeri points out, that anger grew even greater when, after some time, around 1555, the leadership of the city fell into the hands of the foreigners.54 These strangers were mostly refugees from France, but slowly the doors opened to those from Italy and England as well. Kingdon also mentions that a Turk and a Jew were helped.55 In a sermon about Deuteronomy, Calvin speaks of his encounter with a stranger and says: although they could not speak a word to each other, our Lord shows us today that we will be brothers, because Christ is the peace of the whole world and of all its inhabitants. Therefore, we must live together in a family of brothers and sisters, which Christ has founded with his blood. And with each enmity [which we encounter], he gives us the opportunity to withstand this enmity.56 The other misery that Calvin pointed

out to the people of Geneva as teacher and preacher and which put their community to a test, was the disparity between rich and poor. To be sure, in the Middle Ages, the good work of giving to the poor was well established. The fact that the poor remained no less impoverished was not a problem with regard to the possibility of doing good works. Poverty could even become an ideal for saints. Calvin, however, considered the poverty of the real poor people to be an unbearable scandal. Nicholas Woltersdorff summarized Calvins thoughts about poverty in its terrible form with the sentence: The social injustice and the tears of the social victims wound also God. According to him, the creation of human beings in the image of God also means that God sees Gods self in our fellow beings who are tortured victims of inhumanity. But, as Wolterstorff confirms, it is precisely upon this vulnerable love of God that Calvins fight for justice is founded.57 Therefore the duty of the rich does not end with charitable giving, instead, as Valeri quotes Calvin: I cannot separate myself from those who became needy, to whom God has knit me. 58 In the name of solidarity, conversely, one can recognize the luxury enjoyed by the rich in the metropolises as scandalous. This luxury is an expression of egoism, as shown by Valeri in Calvins commentary on the first letter to the Corinthians.59 When Calvins doctrine of the sanctification in the Institutio receives its profile from self-denial, we understand in

246

the light of these findings that self-denial is neither a worthy virtue in itself nor a renunciation of the joy of life (although this was not very visible in Calvins face because of his illnesses!). Instead, self-denial in Calvins understanding represents a helpful counter-initiative against the egoism of the rich. It means that the rich share their possessions with the poor, and this with the hope and the aim that a society built on solidarity is formed, a society based on mutual giving and taking. Recent studies have shown that rich refugees from France also were included in this sharing with the poor people. All this aimed at achieving social solidarity, in which poverty is no longer the fate of the majority of people as the consequence of the rule of wrongful competition. The emphasis on this confirms what Ernst Troeltsch had already said, that Calvins support of a balance between society and individual in social policy ran in the opposite direction of Adam Smiths classical theory of capitalism. 60 And he added: while Calvins concern was understood in Lutheranism as an attack on the holy fundament of the God-given order, the tradition survives to the present day in the area of the Reformed church in the form of social democratic pastors.61 This has been stated as well more recently by R. C. Gamble and Stephen Reid: Calvinism in Geneva was more an attack on wealth than a defence of the accumulation of capital.62 Wolterstorff quotes a sermon by Calvin about Gal 6:9-11, in which he draws together both sides, the poor and the strangers, and

says: We cannot but behold our own face as it were in a glass in the person that is poor and despised ... though he were the furthest stranger in the world. Let a Moor or a Barbarian come among us, and yet inasmuch as he is a human, he brings with him a looking glass wherein we may see that he is our brother and neighbour.63 I think that this spiritual insight is the source of Calvins interest in social and economic affairs. Therefore he wrote in his interpretation of 2 Cor 8:13 et seq, to which Andr Biler had already referred: God wants that there be proportion and equality among us, that is, each man is to provide for the needy according to the extent of his means so that no one has too much and no one has too little.64 God wants, declares Calvin here. He declares this as a preacher of the word of God. He declares this in a Christian church, which should understand itself as an assembly of human beings in community and personal responsibility under their one head, Christ. From this point of view, Calvin sees the sphere of the state as an institution with the purpose of allowing an existence of common welfare and freedom, not common welfare at the expense of freedom, and not freedom at the expense of common welfare. But, he says it as an interpreter of the Bible in his sermons and biblical commentaries, and he says it not with the desire to misuse the Bible according to his private taste, but rather, to take the Bible seriously as the word certified by God for the present time. He says it in the name of God, whom he sees not as a
247

tyrant, but as the highest who takes care of the lowest, as God has shown Gods self in Christ. I have already quoted what Wolterstorff says about Calvins insight that the tears of the social victims victimize also God. Now I would like to refer also to the work from Randall Zachman entitled Crying to God on the Brink of Despair. He speaks about Calvins interpretation of Psalm 22: My God, why you have forsaken me? And the reformer of Geneva explains it with the words that

we may be certainnot looking to ourselves, but looking to Godthat God is merciful to us even when God appears to be against us. And Calvin writes in reference to the lamentation in Psalm 77 on whether God has forgotten to be merciful: The goodness of God is inseparably connected with his essence as to render it impossible for him not to be merciful.65 This is fortunately a message which we hear much more clearly in recent interpretations of John Calvins work.

Notes
Albrecht Ritschl, Geschichte des Pietismus, Vol . I (Bonn: Marcus, 1880) 6180. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethik (Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1958) 43 [Neville Horton Smith, trans. Ethics (London: SCM Press, 1955)]. 3 According to Werner Kaegi, Jacob Burckhardt : eine Biographie. Bd. 5, Das neuere Europa und das Erlebnis der Gegenwart (Basel; Stuttgart: Schwabe, 1973) 90. 4 Stefan Zweig, Castellio gegen Calvin oder ein Gewissen gegen die Gewalt (Wien: Reichner,1936). 5 Keiner von uns . . wrde in dieser heiligen Stadt gelebt haben wollen. Karl Barth, Die Theologie Calvins 1922 (Zrich: Theologischer Verlag, 1993 ), 163 [trans. Geoffrey Bromily, The Theology of John Calvin (Grand Rapids MI: W.B Eerdmans) 1995)]. 6 Ernst Troeltsch, Gesammelte Schriften Vol. 1- Die Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen und Gruppen, (Tbingen: JCB Mohr, 1912), 713. On Biler, cf. Note 63. 7 Op. cit. 721. 8 Charles Hodge, Discussions in Church Polity (New York: Charles Scribners, 1898), 104106. 9 Abraham Kuyper, Calvinism: Six Stone-Lecture (Grand Rapids MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1931). 10 W. Stanford Reid, John Calvin - Early Critic of Capitalism (II), in Richard C. Gamble, Articles on Calvin and Calvinism, Vol 11 (Garland: New York/London, 1992) 169. 11 Herman Selderhuis, ed. Calvinus Praeceptor Ecclesiae. Papers of the International Congress on Calvin Research, Princeton, August 20-24, 2002 (Geneva: Droz, 2004) 233264. 12 Bernard Cottret, Calvin : Biographie (Paris: J.-C. Latts, 1995) [in English: Calvin: a Biography (Grand Rapids MI: W.B. Eerdmans/Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000)] 109. 13 Op. cit., 114. 14 Eberhard Busch et al., eds. Calvin-Studienausgabe, Vol. 2 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1997) 137-225. 15 Christian Grosse, Dogma und Doctrina bei Calvin, in: Calvinus Praeceptor (note 11), 189 et seq.
2 1

248

16 Wilhem H. Neuser, Einige Bemerkungen zum Stand der Calvinforschung, in: Calvinus Praeceptor (note 11), 189. 17 Cf. Timothy George ed. John Calvin and the Church: a Prism of Reform (Louisville KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1990) and Stefan Scheld, Media Salutis: zur Heilsvermittlung bei Calvin (Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, 1989), Verffentlichungen des Instituts fr Europische Geschichte Mainz, Vol. 125. 18 John Calvin, Catechism of Geneva, Questions 34-45. 19 Heinrich Bullinger, Das zweite Helvetische Bekenntnis [The Second Helvetic Confession of Faith] (Zrich: Zwingli Verlag, 1966) ch. 5. 20 Heidelberg Catechism, Q. 31. 21 Enst Friedrich Karl Mller, Die Bekenntnisschriften der reformierten Kirche [Reformed Confessions of the 16th Century] (Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1903) 85, 11f. 22 Calvini Opera 38, 388. 23 Hanns Rckert, ed. Supplementa Calviniana. Sermons indits: Vol. I, Predigten ber das 2. Buch Samuelis (Neukirchen: K. Moers, 1936-1961) p. XIII. 24 Op. cit., XXXII. 25 Calvinus Praeceptor (Note 11) 142. 26 Marijn de Kroon, Martin Bucer und Johannes Calvin. Reformatorische Perspektiven. Einleitung und Texte, trans. Hartmut Rudolph (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1991). 27 Anthony N.S. Lane, Calvin and Bernard of Clairvaux (Princeton: Princeton Theological Seminary, 1996) (Studies in Reformed Theology and History, New Series No. 1). 28 Barbara Pitkin, Redefining Repentance: Calvin and Melanchthon, in Calvinus Praeceptor (Note 11) 275-285. 29 Wim Janse, Calvin, a Lasco und Beza. Eine gemeinsame Abendmahlserklrung (Mai 1556)?. Bericht eines Forschungsseminars mit offenem Ausgang, in Calvinus Praeceptor., 209-231. 30 Elsie McKee, Calvin and his Collegues as Pastors: Some insights into the Collegial Ministry of Word and Sacraments, in ibid. 9-42 and Erik.A. de Boer, Calvin and Collegues. Propositions and Disputations in the Context of the Congrgations in Geneva, in ibid. 331-342. 31 Jan Marius J. Lange van Ravenswaay, Augustinus totus noster. Das Augustinverstndnis bei Johannes Calvin, (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1990) (Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte No. 45). 32 Harald Rimbach, Gnade und Erkenntnis in Calvins Prdestinationslehre. Calvin im Vergleich mit Pighius, Beza und Melanchthon, (Frankfurt et al.: Lang, 1996) (Kontexte. Neue Beitr. zur Hist. u. Syst. Theologie, No. 19). 33 Mihly Mrkus, Calvin und Polen. Gedankenfragmente in Verbindung mit einer Empfehlung, in Calvinus Praeceptor (note 11), 323-330. 34 Jung-Uck Hwang, Der junge Calvin und seine Psychopannychia (Frankfurt et al.: Lang, 1990) (Europ. Hochschulschriften, Reihe 23, No. 407). 35 Jane Dempsey Douglass, Women, Freedom, and Calvin (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1985). 36 Jeffrey R. Watt, Childhood and Youth in the Geneva Consistory Minutes, in: Calvinus Praeceptor (note 11) 43-64. 37 Willem Balke, Calvin und die Tufer. Evangelium oder religiser Humanismus, trans. Heinrich Quistorp, (Minden: Selbstverl. Quistorp, 1985). 38 Irena Backus, Calvins Knowledge of Greek Language and Philosophy, Calvinus Praeceptor

249

(note 11). 343-350. 39 Alexandre Ganoczy and Stefan Scheld, Die Hermeneutik Calvins. Geistesgeschichtliche Voraussetzungen und Grundzge (Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1983); Peter Opitz, Calvins theologische Hermeneutik (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1994). 40 Mary Potter Engel, John Calvins Perspectival Anthropology (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988) (American Acad. of Religion. Academy series 52); Christian Link, Die Finalitt des Menschen. Zur Perspektive der Anthropologie Calvins, Calvinus Praeceptor (note 11) 159178. 41 Cf. note 31. 42 Stefan Scheld, Media salutis (note 11). 43 Raimund Llsdorff, Die Zukunft Jesu Christi. Calvins Eschatologie und ihre katholische Sicht (Paderborn: Bonifatius, 1996) (Konfessionskundliche und Kontroverstheologische Studien, Bd. LXIII, J.A. Mhler-Inst.). 44 Victor E. dAssonville Jr., Dogma und Doctrina bei Calvin in einer begrifflichen Wechselwirkung: Ein Seminarbericht, Calvinus praeceptor (note 11) 189-208. 45 Jae Sung Kim, Prayer in Calvins Soteriology, in op. cit., 265-274. 46 Cf. note 44. 47 Max Engammare, Dune forme lautre : Commentaires et sermons de Calvin zur la Gense, in Calvinus praeceptor (note 11) pp. 107-137. 48 Wilhelmus Moehn, Abraham Pre de lglise der Dieu . A Comparison of Calvins Commentary and sermons on Acts 7:1-6, in Calvinus Praeceptor (note 11) 287-301. 49 Robert Kingdon, Calvinism and Social Welfare, Calvin Theological Journal (1982): 212230. 50 Mark. Valeri, Religion, Discipline, and the Economy in Calvins Geneva, Sixteenth Century Journal 28/1 (1997):123-142. 51 Op. cit., 139. 52 Op. cit., 138. 53 Jane Dempsey Douglass, Calvins Relation to Social and Economic Change, in: Church and Society, March / April 1984, p. 127. 54 Valeri, op. cit. (note 50) 128. 55 Kingdon, op. cit. (note 49) 228. 56 Calvin, Sermo Deutr. 125, CO 28: 16 et seq.; Valeri, op. cit. (note 50) 139. 57 Nicholas Wolterstorff, The Wounds of God: Calvins theology of social injustice, The Reformed Journal, Juni 1987: 14-22. 58 Valeri, op. cit. (note 50) 138. 59 Calvin, Argument zum Kommentar zum ersten Brief von Paulus an die Korinther (1546/ 1556), Edinburgh 1960, 6ff., 12ff., CO 49; cf. Valeri, 137. 60 Troeltsch, op. cit. (note 6), 676. 717. 61 Op. cit. 721. 62 Stanford Reid, John Calvin. Early Critic of Capitalism (1), The Reformed Theological Review, 77-79, and Richard C. Gamble, op. cit. (note 10) 161-163 . 63 Wolterstorff (note 57), 138 et seq., CO 51: 105. 64 CO 50, 100f.; Andr. Biler, The social Humanity of Calvin, Paul T. Fuhrmann, trans. (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1964) 33; the full quotation in the Foreword by W.A. Vissert Hooft, op. cit. 8. 65 Randall C. Zachman, Crying to God on the brink of despair: The assurance of faith revisted, in Calvinus Praeceptor, 351-358, here: 355 et seq.

250

Calvin between humanism and discipleship

Christian Link (translated by D. Dichele)
Christian Link argues that John Calvin stood between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, a figure who was inspired by both movements yet was able to move beyond them both, particularly in his understanding of science and economics. While he followed closely the new developments of his time like no other reformer, Calvin held that they were to remain in radical subordination to the will of God and not be accepted as entities with their own independent interests. Not the least of Calvins achievements was his awareness of the responsibility of humanity for caring for the miracle of Gods creation.

The question whether we can turn directly to Calvin with our modern-day problems and whether he can provide us with the complete answers to issues confronting us todaythe establishment and organization of a just form of government, the enforcement of human rights and the management of the earths ever diminishing resourcesmay be debatable. Raising this question and undertaking serious reflection along the lines indicated by Calvin is a worthwhile task. No other Reformation theologian took on the challenges of the new era with comparable critical awareness. And as a Renaissance scholar, Calvin knew what he was speaking about. Of all places, it was in the very chapter of his great work the Institutes of the Christian Religion in which he set forth the doctrine

of the unfree will as the iron ration of the new Protestant faith that Calvin spoke great praise of the secular sciences: Therefore, in reading profane authors, the admirable light of truth displayed in them [shines upon us] ... In despising the gifts, we insult the Giver. How, then, can we deny that truth must have beamed on those ancient lawgivers who arranged civil order and discipline with so much equity? Shall we say that the philosophers, in their exquisite researches and skilful description of nature, were blind? Shall we say that those who, by the cultivation of the medical art, expended their industry in our behalf were only raving? Nay, we cannot read the writings of the ancients on these subjects without the highest admiration without tracing it [all this] to the hand of God.(Inst II,2,15).

251

The Renaissance represented the rebirth of classical rationalism, the discovery of the human capacity to use technical inventions as a means of channelling the forces of the earth to transform the natural environment into a developed urban culture. This is connected with an emphatic interest in political and social orders as well as the spirit of modern worldliness. Calvin took part in all of this, and did not enter into a conflict with humanismin contrast to Luther. Instead, he allowed Luther to confront him with the problem that the Reformation, inasmuch as it sought to maintain a sustainably perceptible voice in the new era, would undoubtedly come to face the question of how to shape the world. This is what accounts for his modernity. How could the newly established insight, which Calvin advocated with particular rigour, that God is the Lord and no other (Is 45:5), that all of thisjurisprudence, science, medicinecomes from God, how could this coincide with the newly awakened self-awareness of the era, with its will to autonomy? Calvin devoted a large, and certainly not the least significant part of his theological uvre to this ethical question, the Reformations question of destiny (Barth). If there is one single basic and underlying theme to Calvins theology, an axissimilar to justification in Wittenberg around which all his ideas and concepts revolve, it was the broadly developed theme of sanctification. Christian lifeas one could describe this new accentuationdoes not

reach its goal simply through the adaptation of a new concept of justice, but only through a trial of this justice in the context of social conflict. By decisively turning to face the problems of the world, Karl Barth reasoned that Calvin and not Luther made the Reformation capable of dealing with the world and history Calvin was the creator of a new Christian sociology that was so shaped as to be able to interact fruitfully with the different social principles of the new age inaugurated by the Renaissance, and to play a decisive role in their birth and development.1 The best understanding of Calvin the ethicist is given in the first lines of his Geneva Catechism. There he provides an unambiguous, direct answer to the question of the chief end (prcipuus finis) of human life, this being a knowledge of God: Because God created us and placed us in this world to be glorified in us, it is right to devote ones life to Gods glory.2 All there is to say about the meaning and goal, the very mission of human existence, can be derived from the moment in which God placed us in this world, Gods creation. God wishes to portray Gods self in us as in a picture (Inst I,15,3). Calvins anthropology and, therefore, his ethics are unique in their focus on Gods place for us, Gods creatures, which thus results in an unmistakable conflict with the epochal consciousness of the Renaissance: In this ethical system, there is not even an inkling of the modern idea of the deliverance of creation into human hands.

252

Even the concept, so strongly emphasized by Luther, of human cooperation (cooperatio) is completely abandoned in this context; human action becomes nearly exclusively an instrumental action to serve providence. The world remains the free gift of God (CO 23,29), even in reference to the dominium terr (Gen 1:28), and does not, under human rule, cease to be Gods foot and hand. (ibid. 11) Each independent claim of possession is limited by Pauls constraint of having as if one had not (Inst III,10,4). This conflict is already written into the plan of creation itself, and is, according to Calvins defining explanation, the theatre of Gods glory (CO 8,294), the scene of Gods manifestation in the world, and not merely as a stage, but as the space in which this drama between God and humanity unfolds. Without an awareness of ones own role in this play, one cannot comprehend what it is actually about. With this development, Calvin departs from the natural philosophy and world view of the Renaissance. J. Bohatec spoke even of a reversal of the creatorcreation relationship.3 Although he adopts the Platonic Academy of Florences conception of nature and its concept of organisms (M. Ficino), as well as its terminology (symmetry, proportion) and applies the metaphor of the human being as a microcosm,4 Calvin does not speak of the metaphor of the world as a coin minted by God, the value of which is determined by the human spirit. This constitutes the greatest thinkable opposition to his

theocentric viewpoint. The manifestation of Gods glory, as inherent in the acts of creation, points in another direction, moving past the immanent establishment, purposefulness and order of the cosmos, onward towards the final goal, the glorification of God by his creation. As Calvin sees it, creation does not only have an eschatological edge (G. von Rad), but also an eschatological aim, and can only be understood properly on the basis of this aim. The nature of Gods creatures only becomes visible in their state of expecting liberation in the last days; Paul placed them at our side as companions in our own hope (III,25,2). The principle thus also holds in respect to humankind that the leading feature in the renovation of the divine image must also have held the highest place in its creation. (I,15,4). The renewal that we are approaching unlocks for us the very beginning. Only the vision of the final goal opens our earthly existence to the purpose for which it was created. This existence does not reside in itself; it is limited from the outside and can only achieve its individual purpose from outside. For this reason, the existential question, To what purpose (quorsum, quel propos) are humans created? (CO 23,39), that is, why, according to Gods will, do we dwell upon this earth, accompanies all reflections concerning the imago Dei. And, the answer in the Job sermons and elsewhere is that our lives are by no means to be lived only here below, but that there is also an

253

eternal life in heaven to which we are called by God (CO 33,509). Without heaven, the earth can not be a home for us; without the invisible kingdom, the visible world also falls to pieces. This point of view, which, in my opinion, forms the dominant strand of Calvins ethics, took on a dimension of withdrawal from the world in his famous piece Meditatio futur vit. There, he linked the early church theme of spiritual wandering (peregrinatio) to the humanistic legacy of Plato and Cicero5 and formulated the radical demands of self-denial (Inst III,7) and the bearing of the cross (tolerantia crucis, ibid. III,8): Let believers, then, in forming an estimate of this mortal life, and perceiving that in itself it is nothing but misery, make it their aim to exert themselves with greater alacrity, and less hindrance, in aspiring to the future and eternal life. When we contrast the two, the former may not only be securely neglected, but, in comparison of the latter, be disdained and contemned. If heaven is our country, what can the earth be but a place of exile? If departure from the world is entrance into life, what is the world but a sepulchre, and what is residence in it but immersion in death? (Inst III,9,4; OS IV,174.2-9)

that now is.7 Those who focus on the life beyond, thereby approaching the final future, see themselves as called upon and able to realize the gifts given to them by God. This is a second, complementary strand of Calvins ethics. The hope for the future life is not an escape from this world; one must speak of this hope so that we can learn to use the present life and its aids (Inst III,10). Calvin remains the earths advocate. He defends Gods creation against an inhuman philosophy, that allows us to make use of only in the most extreme need, as a lawful fruit of the divine beneficence (ibid. III,10,3). This is the place where we are called upon to act responsibly:

What advantage is it to fly in the air, and to leave the earth, where God has given proof of his benevolence towards the human race? I answer, since the eternal inheritance of man is in heaven, it is truly right that we should tend thither; yet must we fix our foot on earth long enough to enable us to consider the abode which God requires man to use for a time. (Gen 2,8; CO 23,37) In this vein, Calvin can unhesitatingly recognize the efforts of science, not only because of its obvious usefulness, but also because it leads us deeper into the mystery of divine wisdom. This wisdom finds its full theological expression in divine providence, which is not merely restricted to the wellconceived order of the works of creation, but extends to ethics and social institutions in particular. As God has reserved for himself

For a long time, statements of this kind were misunderstood as pure Platonism,6 but Ernst Troeltsch correctly characterized them as the deepest thoughts and meaning of all Christian asceticism, that the life beyond is the very inspiration of the life

254

the right to rule the world, his will should represent for us the only guideline for justice (Inst I,17,2). Modern critics who feel compelled to speak here of a complete theological appropriation8, fall far short of the mark. The eternal plan, which is of such great importance to Calvin, does not limit human freedom and responsibility (ibid. 17,4). It is, on the contrary, a signal of Gods will to stand by creation unconditionallyespecially when it threatens to distance itself from God the most. Karl Barth expressed this concisely: With the eternal decree of God behind them, the law of the will of God above them, and future life ahead of them, Reformed Christians stood with both feet on the earth. 9 The conflict described here between openness for the new developments of his time and a withdrawal from the world with deference to the life beyond, has played a great role in forming the image of Calvin to this day. This vacillates between the extremes of dark opposition to life and intolerance on the one hand, and enlightened progressive thought and liberal embracement of the world on the other. Specifically, the thesis supported in the works of Max Weber and Ernst Troeltsch, casting Calvin as the father of modernity, has had a considerable impact on 20th-century research. And yet, if these propositions are at all accurate, this cannot mean that one should resolve this paradox in any one absolute way or another. In all likelihood, it

is more appropriate to say that Calvin sought to apply Reformation insight as a crisis to the horizontal problem of the Middle Ages and our own time, that is, to the increasingly virulent problem of forming the world.10 Both sides could then be brought together in a very modern-sounding division of labour: How can the new cultural and scientific changes, which he followed with open interest, be met with biblical tenets and in such a way as to maintain the order of creation and to preserve that which is humane? This is, in any event, the main question posed by Calvins ethics. The surest way to reach this goal, of which we must one day give account, is an aspiration to celestial immortality. With a view to the vita futuraa hitherto rarely heeded methodical approachCalvin develops the rules that are to guide us in our attitude towards earthly goods (Inst III,10,4-5). The keys to this are moderation (moderatio) and boundaries (finis, terminus, meta). He explains that God has assigned us different modes of life, in which the meaning and task of our earthly calling (vocatio) are fulfilled in such a manner that folly and rashness (temeritas) do not throw all things in heaven and on earth into confusion, and so that no one may presume to overstep his proper limits (finis) (ibid. 10,6; OS IV,181.1-4). In the precise language of the doctrine of providence, Calvin stated: For he who has fixed the boundaries of our life, has at the same time entrusted us with the care of it [and] provided us with the means

255

of preserving it (Inst I,17,4; OS III,207.9-11). In Calvins exhortations, this basic concept of his ethical argumentation is reflected in the relentlessly repeated admonition that we need to pull the reins (Latin frenum; French bride) in order not to go beyond the laws set for us through creation (and natural law). But how do we become aware of these reins? We can do this by inquiring into our purpose along the lines of the meditatio futur vit, namely to descend into ourselves, and consider how it is that the Lord there manifests his wisdom, power, and energy (Inst I,5,10; OS III,54,2f.25-28). This is indeed an unmodern reminder, but one worth pondering in a time in which nature (and especially our technology and economy) no longer impose any limits on us. In a necessary second step, the picture developed here reappears in an influential account of the history of ideas that referred to Calvin as the inaugurator or even the father of modernity. In the question of the roots of democracy or in the field of economics (to which we will limit our scope), Andr Biler, one of the greatest scholars of recent Genevan history, is of the opinion that Calvin was the first theologian of his era to recognize, with great clarity, the providential role that transportation, economy, and thus all those involved in trade play in society and for the continuation of the human race 12. At the same time, he is one of the most adamant critics of the well-known Weber thesis that modern
11

capitalism derives from the spirit of Calvinist ethics13. In his decisive argument, Biler states that the Calvinism of the English Puritans, which was analysed by Weber, cannot be seen to correspond with the doctrines of the Genevan reformer. The recent work of Max Geiger, Hans Esser, and Ronald S.Wallace leaves little to be said on this matter14. For the sake of historical justice, however, one should add that Troeltsch put it much more cautiously. In his view, Calvin is neither the discoverer nor the inspiration behind modern economic forms, but he understood that they are reconcilable with Christian thought, and practised them in accordance with the prevailing conditions in the Geneva of his time15. Troeltsch was particularly observant in understanding that, since Adam Smith, classical economic theory has constructed the fundaments of the economy from an angle virtually opposite to that of Calvin. One current researcher concurs that Calvin, an advocate of social ethics, would never have approved of the idea of a competitive society16.

Economy
What did Calvin in fact want in the sphere of economics? Which doors did he open in this respect? One can best understand the strains of his argumentation when one remembers that Gods providence also enters into the economic realmnow in the particular form of a blessingsince all goods that we come in contact with are

256

deposita Dei, goods placed at our disposal in a form of administrative trust. Psalm 127 states, in Calvins words, that the order of society, both political and domestic, is maintained solely by the blessing of God, and not by the policy, diligence, or wisdom of men. (CO 32,320) For this reason (as explained above) Calvin replaces Luthers clearly defined view of human cooperation with the view that God uses Gods creatures as legitimate instruments of divine providence (Inst I,17,9). This excludes all independence and autonomy of creaturely cooperation17, which by no means renders human action superfluous. Humans must orient themselves, howeverCalvin speaks of a recta dispensatiotowards a standard based in love, and what this entails, is, tellingly enough, expressed most clearly in Calvins chapter on self-denial: How difficult is it to perform the duty of seeking the advantage (utilitas) of our neighbour! ... Let this, then, be our method: in regard to everything which God has bestowed upon us, and by which we can aid our neighbour, we are his stewards (conomi), and are bound to give account of our stewardship ... In this way, we never shall unite the study of our neighbours advantage with a regard to our own, but make the latter subordinate to the former. (III,7,5) Troeltsch even spoke of a programme of Christian socialism.18 This characterization, though clearly overstated, is nonetheless correct (and at the same time demonstrates that Calvin

could never have defined a person as a homo conomicus) in that the principle of egalitarianism (qualitas), and the ensuing demand for compensation, is replaced by two other economic principles, founded in natural law: justice (rectitudo) and equity (quitas): Calvin answers the question as to with which goal and purpose we conduct trade if we wish to lead a well-ordered life that meets with Gods approval with the statement: We must adhere to two things, righteousness and equity (droiture et equit) in regard to our neighbours And in order to serve God in proper piety, we must relate all of this to him. The aim of this righteousness is thus that no one goes off on their own to seek his own profit, but that we share as we are indeed connected with one body, and the equity, that we do not unto others that which we do not wish others to do unto us. (CO 33,66) While Calvin explicitly stresses the natural law-based character of these demands (equit naturelle; regula illa iuris ipsius naturalis; CO 10/1,248.264), he expects that they are engraved on our hearts by God (cf. CO 31,148) and thus only reproduce that upon which, according to Mt 22:40 all the law and the prophets depend. Equity as a standard for action also forms the point of contact between applied natural law and the commandment of love in the form of the Golden Rule. Each person must enjoy their own rights, and individuals should approach each other in a brotherly,

257

humane, and loyal manner. This does not serve as a verdict on the ambitious Genevan merchant class, which was a necessary and useful element in the life of the state. In this respect Calvin opened a door wide that had hitherto been closed theologically. At the same time, however, his rules on the immanent desire for profit set clear limits, thus demonstrating how far he distanced himself from the currents of his time.

entrepreneurs. (CO 28,120f.) This does not constitute a blank cheque for unrestrained speculationon the contrary! Calvin drew a clear line against the likely danger of usury, in order to protect the social balance. In a frequently cited letter to Claude de Sachin, Calvin detailed his instructions for legitimate interest in that we do not only take into account the personal use of matters at hand, but that we also take into account what is useful to the general public. It is entirely clear that the interest a merchant pays is a payment to all (une pension publique). One must thus also make certain that the contract does more good than harm to the general welfare of society. (CO 10/ 1,249) His opinions form the primary basis for the legislative work of the Geneva Council, which limited interest to a maximum of five per cent. It is quite clear that a free monetary economy, as is the case in capitalism, is not compatible with these principles. Karl Holl felt therefore compelled to turn Webers well-established view around: There has not been a church that has attempted to live out the word of the Lord in the Sermon on the Mount as seriously as the Calvinist church through the middle of the 17th century, and thus none either that has fought capitalism as strongly 21! A. Biler summed up: Calvin distinguished himself (here as well) from the Protestant ethics of his contemporaries and successors. Interest was for him neither an overriding economic issue nor a relevant moral act,

Interest (tribute)
These characterizations are further borne out by Calvins view of the right to collect interest, a subject of debate since time immemorial. Calvins rejection of the scholastic view of the sterility of money19, which provided the basis for the medieval prohibition of interest, constituted a modern if not absolutely novel viewpoint. This cannot simply be reduced to a reaction to a situation that had changed in the course of an expanding economy 20 . The differentiation between consumptive and productive interest is a trail-blazing concept, including in the realm of economic theory, which takes the new developments into account. It makes a difference whether people pawn the very shirts off their backs, or if they invest money in the construction of a factory. While the basic principle prevails that in lending, one should not make use of ones neighbours distress, capital is nevertheless needed for the business transactions that constitute the existential basis for merchants and

258

but instead a problem that places individuals before God in their personal actions and with their full responsibility22.

What Calvin seeks to say that divides him most deeply from the worldview of the Renaissance was that webiblically speaking, since the fall of Adamwe are no longer able to fulfil our commission concerning creation, that we rebel against Gods order, and God punishes us and nature for it:

Creation
This responsibilityin a broader context also includes how we deal with the earth, which is placed in our trust. We have received the earth from God for our use (CO 28,222); we are virtually created under the condition that we subjugate it. (on Gen 1,26; CO 23,28) While this mission is limited to the mandate of agriculture and does not confer upon us an independence that would compete with God, Calvin, on the basis of this text, came nevertheless to the far-reaching and quite modern conclusion: if nature is subordinate to humankind, its fate is, come what may, dependent on peoples action and inaction. And we see how constantly the condition of the world itself varies with respect to men (on Gen 3:17; CO 23,73). The inclemency of the air, frost, thunders, unseasonable rains, drought, hail, and whatever is disorderly in the world, are the fruits of sin (on Gen 3:19; CO 23,75). Sentences such as these were of course not yet written with ecology in mind, even if we cannot help but read them literally today:

What a dreadful curse we have deserved, since all created things in themselves blameless, both on earth and in the visible heaven, undergo punishment for our sins; for it has not happened through their own fault, that they are liable to corruption. Thus the condemnation of mankind is imprinted on the heavens, and on the earth, and on all creatures (on Rom 8:21; CO 49,153).

The modern ecological drama is thus set before us as divine pedagogy. In chastising the faithful, God does not consider what they deserve; but what will be useful to them in the future. Gods punishments serve as medicine for future time (CO 23,76). They impress upon us the current responsibility we have for the balance of nature and for a society prone to hunger and illness. The key anthropological concepts of integritas and rectitudo remind us of the proper Godgiven order and point once again to the cosmic horizon within which humankind finds its home. There is a spiritual solidarity (Biler) that connects people with the universe: if the earth is pulled down together with

We throw heaven and earth into confusion by our sins. For were we in right order as to our obedience to God, doubtless all the elements would be conformable, and we should thus observe in the world an angelic harmony (on Jer 5:25; CO 37,635).

259

human defection and rebellion, it regains its dignity as the site of Gods glory once we return to Gods ways, which were lost with Adam. For which of us would venture to claim for himself a single grain of wheat, if he were not taught by the word of God that he is the heir of the world? (1 Tim 4:5; CO 52,297). This is where a new manner of thinking must begin, starting with the understanding that the liberal arts and all the sciences by which wisdom is acquired, are gifts of God. They are confined, however, within their own limits; for (in an argument characteristic of Calvin) into Gods heavenly kingdom they cannot penetrate. It is the wisdom of the world which assumes to itself authority, and does not allow itself to be regulated by the word of God. (1 Cor 3:18f; CO 49,359f.). Calvin explicitly refers to the biblical provisions for the sabbatical year to protect the earth from extreme and violent exploitation. (Ex 23:10; CO 24,585f. and Dt 5:12; CO 24,580). He adds in a sermon on Dt 20:19f.: If we practise this, i.e. not damaging (trees), then we do this in the awareness that the Lord made the earth into our nourishing mother; and when she opens herself up to feed us, it as if God extends his hand to us, revealing the signs of his goodness. (CO 27,63923). This does not, however, exclude that we, by nature, have an adequate portion of insight and reason, enabling us within the boundaries of this life to take charge of the exigencies of the political and social order (Inst II,2,13), as this is most certainly a matter of maintaining humanity and its humaneness.
260

Humanity
As much as Calvin approaches the Christian humanism of the Reformation era in the aspects of the Institutes (II,2,12-16) discussed above, he is still worlds away from the harmonic development of human existence, individualistic self-reliance and the esthetic glorification of the self, ideals which go back to classical thought. Instead, he views the meaning of humanity, without which there is no acceptable justice before God (CO 28,182), in the context of our situation as strangers and sojourners upon earth. This, of course, also includes the external conditions that people are able to live in a reliable society that makes rightful commerce possible, and that Christian worship be well ordered (Inst VI, [1536]; OS I 259f.), but this in no way reaches the core of the matter. The heart of our human existence is, as expressed in the programmatic introduction to the Institutes, nothing else than subsistence in God alone (Inst I,1,1), with no autonomy, and without the ability to speak and defend interests independently and outside the reality of God. A greater contrast with the established opinions of our days is unthinkable. That our humanity subsists in God, and that God is reflected in humans, indeed means that humanity cannot be measured according to an idea or principle that we ourselves postulate or derive from the standard of a particular culture or civilization. The measure of this rather a priori form of humanity is the righteousness and loyalty of God. Whereas we cannot do otherwise

than form humans according to our own ideas, moulding them in the image of our society and marking them with the stamp of our civilization and our standards, God sets aside for people as free human beings a place; they justify and defend their rights against the force and intolerance of societal roles and expectations that continually threaten these rights. They thus exist in Gods image, an image that is neither a natural predisposition nor a substance that we could find in the recesses and depths of our own beings. This is a bonum adventitium (Gen 2:7; CO 23,35), something that we can only receive from without, i.e. a relationship that must be realized and lived out. We are the custodians of his precious image, Calvin said in a sermon on 1 Tim 3:14 (CO 53,311), not its lords and owners. The topic of humanity which pervades the modern discussion of human rights can be traced back to a second strain of natural law. Calvin was indeed cognizant of natural basic human rightsfreedom of the individual conscience, the entitlement to mutual love and mercy, the equality of all before the law, and (to some extent) the right of participation in church and political decision processes. Gods law, in particular the second table of the Decalogue, which seeks to protect our humanity from attack, is, in a way, written and stamped on every heart (Inst II,8,1; IV,20,16). Via this bridge, the interpretation of the creation in Gods image can take on classical, and specifically, Stoic thought, and later Calvinists were not in fact on the wrong path when they

interpreted Calvin according to natural law24. Among Reformed Christians, this was achieved with particular success, as exemplified by Hugo Grotius. If nature and reason are Gods creations, then, according to Grotius argumentation, the Christian faith is not only revealed truth, but is also binding as rational and natural truth25. This provided the basis for the concept of equal dignity for all people to enter into European legal thought. Calvin did not (yet) explicitly venture down this path. Instead, he connected doctrinal statements with instructions for action in such a consistent, theologically convincing way that faith and conduct of life cannot, in the end, be separated. The central term of his theology is sanctification, which calls for the realization of what we believe, i.e. the practical functioning of Christian existence and true service to God. He thus asks: How do we carry out before God the mandate to rule over the earth responsibly, in the future and for the future as God determined for creation? (on Gen1,26; CO 23,27) In doing so, we must constantly ask ourselves whether we are fulfilling our role as beings created in Gods image, the reflection of Gods glory. This is a matter of providing an adequate echo to his virtues and his works, by which he draws near, becomes familiar, and in a manner communicates himself to us. (Inst I,5,9) Calvin impressively described what this means for human interaction in a large treatise on the vita Christiana. Scripture teaches that we are not to look
261

to what men in themselves deserve, but to attend to the image of God, which exists in all, and to which we owe all honour and love. Therefore, whoever be the man that is presented to you as needing your assistance, you have no ground for declining to give it to him. Say he is a stranger. The Lord has given him a mark which ought to be familiar to you: for which reason he forbids you to despise your own flesh. Say he is mean and of no consideration. The Lord points him out as one whom he has distinguished by the lustre of his own image Say that you are bound to him by no ties of duty. The Lord has substituted him as it were into his own place, that in him you may recognize the many great obligations under which the Lord has laid you to himself. In this way only we attain to what is not to say difficult but altogether against nature, to love those that hate us, remembering to look to the image of God in them, an image which should by its beauty and dignity allure us to love and embrace them. (Inst III,7,6). The study undertaken by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches on the Theological Basis of Human Rights (1976) further extended this journey, in its essence, in identifying the realization of the image of God in relations between men and women, individuals and society, and human beings and their ecological context. The study saw in this the seed of equal dignity for men and women and for the right to life of future generations.

What does all this mean for the image of Calvin in the context of two different eras? The Reformation in Wittenberg marked the religious end of the Middle Ages, while the Renaissance marked that end in nonreligious, humanistic ways 26 . The Reformation in Geneva stood between these two great movements, inspired by both, but in the end leaving both behind. The Geneva Reformation was, despite its reverence for the Church Fathers, at no instant regressive in an historical sense. It was, however, most certainly not modern in a sense that would credit it with the penning of the economical and political theories of modern times. In the words of Eberhard Busch, Calvin opened doors, through which he himself did not yet go entirely through, but which stood open for him to be passed through one time.27 He attentively followed and recognized the new developments of his time, particularly in the areas of economy and science, but radically subordinated them to Gods will, and worked against any independence of their interests and goals. He determinedly strove towards the goal of the coming of Gods promised world. In the light of providence, looking back at the first beginnings from the end, Calvin beheld the miracle of creation, sharpening his awareness for the responsibility that we bear for its temporary earthly form. This was not his smallest achievement in an era that was coming close to losing its sense of limit to what can be achieved.

262

Notes
Karl Barth, The Theology of John Calvin, transl. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1995) 90. 2 Catechismus Ecclesi Geneviensis (1545), CO 6,10; Opera Selecta II, 75. 3 J. Bohatec, Bud und Calvin, Studien zur Gedankenwelt des franzsischen Frhhumanismus (Graz: Hermann Bohlaus, 1950) 266. 4 Sermons on the Book of Job, CO 33, 481. 5 Plato, Phaedo 64A. 80E; Cicero, Tusculan Disputations I,34,75; 49,118. 6 Martin Schulze, Meditatio futur vit. Ihr Begriff und ihre herrschende Stellung im System Calvins (Leipzig: Dieterich, 1901). 7 Ernst Troeltsch, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches, transl. Olive Wyon (London: Allen & Unwin, 1931); original: Die Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen und Gruppen (Tbingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1923) 797. 8 Ernst Saxer, Vorsehung und Verheissung Gottes (Zrich: Theologischer Verlag, 1980) 41. 9 K. Barth, The Theology . . . 88. 10 Ibid. 204. 11 Cf. H. Vahle, Calvinismus und Demokratie im Spiegel der Forschung, Archiv fr Reformationsgeschichte (ARG) 66 (1975):182-212. 12 Andr Biler, La Pense Economique et Sociale de Calvin (Geneva: Georg, 1961) 452. 13 Ibid. 477-492. 512ff. 14 Max Geiger, Calvin, Calvinismus, Kapitalismus, in: ibid., ed. Gottesreich und Menschenreich. FS E. Sthelin (Basel-Stuttgart: Helbing & Lichtenhahn, 1969), 231-286; Hans H. Esser, Calvins Sozialethik und der Kapitalismus, Hervormde Teologiese Studies 48 (1992):783800; Ronald S. Wallace, Calvin, Geneva and the Reformation (Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 1988). 15 E. Troeltsch, The Social Teaching 706, 718. 16 Albrecht Thiel, In der Schule Gottes. Die Ethik Calvins im Spiegel seiner Predigten ber das Deuteronomium (Neukirchen: Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1999) 265f. 17 Magdalene L. Frettlh, Theologie des Segens. Biblische und dogmatische Wahrnehmungen (Gtersloh: Gutersloher Verl., 2005) 162. 18 E. Troeltsch, The Social Teaching 723. 19 Cf. the famous dictum ascribed to Aristotle: nummus nummum non parit [money does not beget money]. 20 Cf. Sermons on Deuteronomy, esp. on Dt. 23, 18-20. 21 Karl Holl, Die Kulturbedeutung der Reformation (1911), in Ibid., Gesammelte Aufstze zur Kirchengeschichte I, (Tbingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1948) 468-543, here 506. 22 A. Biler, La Pense. 476. 23 On this topic in general cf. A. Biler, La Pense 431-442. 24 Dietrich Ritschl, Der Beitrag des Calvinismus fr die Entwicklung des Menschenrechtsgedankens in Europa und Nordamerika, in: ibid. : Konzepte : kumene, Medizin, Ethik : gesammelte Aufstze (Mnchen: Kaiser, 1986) 301-315) here 310. 25 Heinz E. Tdt, Theologie und Vlkerrecht, in: Georg Picht/ Constanze Eisenbart, Frieden und Vlkerrecht (Stuttgart: E. Klett, 1973) 13-169, here 66. 26 Cf. Jrgen Moltmann, Das Kommen Gottes. Christliche Eschatologie (Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlagshaus, 1995) 210. 27 Eberhard Busch, Gotteserkenntnis und Menschlichkeit. Einsichten in die Theologie Johannes Calvins (Zrich: Theol. Verl., 2005) 142.
263
1

Response to Christian Link

Serene Jones

I encounter the legacy of Calvin on a daily basis, in three very different institutional and intellectual environments in North America, a place where these three Calvins exist side by side. First, living in the United States, my dayto-day life is profoundly affected by the policies of an administration that boldly justifies its policies with reference to the Calvinist tradition. While it is true that the Bush administration and the conservative evangelicals that support his policies do not often have Calvin conferences (they dont really do much theology or history, in fact), they nonetheless standin very large numbersin a pietistic tradition of Calvinism that has tethered its future to what I consider to be a virulent version of empire. The strongest political, military force at work in the world today is Calvinist, in name, if not also in substance. In this respect, I live in the belly of the Calvinist beast. Second, I teach in a secular university which began as a Calvinist seminary and can arguably claim (as it does in its historical literature) that it has followed its founding Reformed principles to their logical end by becoming, in its present form, a devoutly

humanist intellectual community, one that is devoted to highest learning, is radically secular, is Calvinist to the core and, in its secularity, can be at times quite hostile towards or indifferent to religionin many ways, a counter-portrait to the first version of empire. Third, living inside that belly and immersed in secularity, I find Calvin also continues to be for many others as he does for me the source of creative and faithful resistance. I am an ordained minister in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and the United Church of Christ communities, two of the most prophetically progressive churches in North America today. In these communities, I read Calvin in a manner that is Marxist-socialist, feminist, post-colonial, queer, anti-racist, etc. In fact, my own academic interest in Calvin is fueled by the hope that we might find in him a version of Gramscis organic intellectual, albeit in ecclesial garb. Cynthia Rigby and I participated in the writing of Feminist and Womanist Essays in Reformed Dogmatics1, a volume in which Calvin is a central figure. It is not insignificant that one of the most important works in feminist

264

theology published in the last several years in North America was written by a collective of Calvinists. These three environments might be entitled: Calvin as the Beast of Empire, Calvin as the Grandfather of Postmodernist Secular Humanism, Calvin as the Trumpeter of Flourishing Liberationism. In this threefold weave of influence, we begin to catch a glimpse of why celebrating the legacy of this figure is crucial to our global future. Within this complex legacy stands the logic of empire, the logic of resistance, the logic of faith, and the logic of the seculara combination as deeply global as it is full of both threat and promise. Reflecting on the above and the context of Professor Links paper, my first comment concerns our collective approach and the task of this gathering. Why and how do we celebrate the legacy of John Calvin in the church today? It is a strong presupposition that expanding and re-discovering Calvin should be grounded in historical investigation. There appears to be an obvious intellectual good that comes from this and it is a position I embrace whole-heartedly. It is pragmatically useful, I believe, for churches that claim the Calvinist heritage to know something of the traditions and histories that form them. But still, there is an additional question we may need to ask: Why does it matter theologically to the churches that Calvin is retrieved and celebrated? It may make us a more historically aware church but does it make

us a better, more faithful church? In other words, what might be the theologicalnot just the historiographical or pragmatic rationale for this celebration? Added to this is another question: Might there be something particularly Reformed about the way we approach the task of reclaiming Calvins legacy? Might Calvin teach us something about how to read his work? What if we look at his use of the Fathers, for instance, for hermeneutical guidance? Here, we find a Calvin who might approach himself irreverently, creatively, high-mindedly, and low-browedly, a Calvin guided in his reading of historical figures by the constant sense that no matter how esteemed their legacy may be, their truth is measured by the yardstick of the gospel and not vice versa. My second comment turns directly to Professor Links paper where he asks if Calvin is the father of modernism. I appreciate and agree with his assessment of the shortcomings of the Weberian thesis and the more intuitive wisdom of Troelstles analysis of Calvins place in the history of Western culture. But I am curious as to why this question matters. Suppose he is the father of modernity, what does that then suggest to us? Does that mean his legacy is responsible for the ravages of the environment and the exploitive excesses of capitalism? Or does it mean, conversely, that we have him to thank for the Wests deep appreciation for human rights, the affirmation of the dignity of human persons

265

and the values of liberal democracy? It seems to me that modernism is marked by both horrors and blessings. Given this, I am not clear about the upshot of the query about Calvins relation to it, particularly with respect to why that matters to us, theologically, in present day churches. Further, if Calvin is not the father of modernism, then what? Does that mean he has nothing to add to contemporary political conversations about the future of the modern state or of market capitalism? Or does it mean, conversely, that his theology will be somehow able to avoid the harms of enlightenment imperialism because of its pre-enlightenment orientation? Does his non-modernism make him uniquely modern or postmodern and as such, somehow more pertinent to our present global political life? Therefore, I call into question the usefulness of the periodization that Professor Links paper presupposes. I was drawn to Calvin, initially, because I saw similarities between his pre-modern and my postmodern sensibilities. I found that the relation between the modern and the theological true and virtuous seemed at best ambiguous and at worst, too overdetermined to discern. My third comment is related. Professor Link refers to humanism throughout the paper, but I found myself wondering which humanism and again, whose experience of Calvin? I gather that the principle humanism

for Link is, historically speaking, that of the Erasmian variety, a humanism that in the present translates into the humanism of the modern secular German university. There is another trajectory, however, worth exploring here. It is, in historical terms, the humanism that Calvin encountered in his early legal studies, his time in southern France, his involvement in Italian humanism, and his roots in the rhetorical tradition. In its contemporary form, this would not have developed into the German humanism Link speaks of, but, in the Italian context, a modernism like that of the philosopher of religion Agamben (our Italian colleagues know this material much better than I) who argues that the logical end of the Reformed tradition is, in fact, its own undoing, a radical humanism freed from the constraints of transcendence, an earthy, presentist, world-affirming, God-free humanism. In this tradition, Calvins God himself stands as the last icon that a truly faithful church is called to topple. My fourth comment turns to the substance of Professor Links argument about Calvins theological call for humanity to shape the world and his view of sanctification. I fully agree with him on this point. It is clearly a central axis of his thought. Link develops this idea by pointing to the world shaping dimensions of sanctification. My own interests supplement this by focusing on its personshaping dimension. The question here is not how do we shape the world in grand

266

political terms (and hence, corporate social ethics) but rather how does faith craft particular kinds of selves who shape the world? It strikes me that Calvins theology was very good at doing this, of crafting a theological identity into which an emergent generation of the faithful could step. He scripted a template for Christian personhood. In between the lines of his texts, he authored space for a new agent to evolve into, an agent who then became the ethical actor that Professor Link describes. He articulated and formed habits of heart and imagination, dispositions of spirit, which in turn changed the face of Europe. When we adopt this perspective on sanctification, we are allowed to think about Calvins political and ethical influence in ways that reach beyond his direct statements about social issues such as churchstate relations, the environment, or capitalisms accrual of interest. This view does not turn us towards the individual and hence away from the collective but rather, it directs our attention towards the political as it lives in the living tissue of doctrines and the faithful selves they author. According to this understanding of sanctification, politics is everywhere and that faith is present and grace moves through flesh. It seems to me that identifying some of these deeply personal, poetic, imaginative dimensions of Calvins person craft might be a very exciting way to proceed with our work here. My fifth comment builds on this person-

shaping approach to sanctification. Given the present state of global life, what dimensions of this self-craft are important to highlight? Professor Link focuses on one very important element of that identity perhaps the most important momentthe futuring play of mind. We are not our own but belong to God. We receive our identity from beyond. We are extrinsically rendered. Let me build on this by focusing on a different dimension of global capitalism than that which is lifted up by Professor Link. In the consumer culture of the United States, it is evermore clear that the way in which the market insures the steady production of willing, vigorous consumers is through its colonization of the selfs desires. Through its aggressive advertising strategies, the market trains us to want certain things. It determines what we consider beautiful, how it is that we want the beautiful, and how we go about getting it and possessing or acquiring the objects of our desire. I find it interesting that Calvin understood this dynamic in its earliest forms and in doing so, gives us tools for articulating the theological basis for a different economy of desirea different anatomy of the heart and its passions. At the core of this is his insistence that first and foremost, the God we worship is beautifulglorious, in fact. And we are called to adore this God. This adoring is enacted in the form of a desire for God that is non-acquisitive, non-competitive, and non-consumptiveas is Gods desire for us. It is also not passive wanting but engaged

267

yearning, and in this regard, it is as erotic as it is just. Its pleasure is in the desiring itself, not its consummation. Further, Calvin knew what it meant to write theology in a language beautiful enough to actually construct this mode of desiring, albeit with the enlivening assistance of the Spirit and the guiding truth of scripture. This raises, I believe, challenges for the Reformed church as it moves into the world of this global market in the 21st century. How might we write poetic theology and in doing so participate in making more revolutionarily erotic, desiring selves capable of contesting the logic of the market head on? In other words, what (and how) does Calvin call the church to desire? How does Gods beauty more powerfully enter not just our doctrines but our language and practices as it moves to create space for human flourishing that resists the dehumanizing logic of market capitalism? My next comment adds to this perspective on sanctifying selves: Calvins God is not only glorious; this God is a relational God who gives us a social form to live intoGod as law-giver. And that law isbeautiful. Globally we are seeing the convergence of movements committed to forms of life that are sustainable and justan emerging world culture whose logic challenges the damaging forms of life that nations and markets invest in. In this conversation, which is certain to grow in the years ahead, how might Calvins brilliant understanding
268

of the lawas beautiful, as both natural and constructed, as both confining and free, as a space as much as a set of rules as a positive aid to human flourishing how might this vision of law be lifted up and celebrated? For his birthday, these inquiries and ideas might be compelling themes to focus on. Or possibly all of them could be distilled into one overarching theme: the beauty of law. How might we reinvigorate a theological assessment of it? Law as a positive space, a place of bounded openness, a reality revealed to us in the Torah because, under the conditions of sin, we can no longer see it in the glory of God as it shines in nature. But once seen in the law of Israel, the law appears to us in the natural order and is, according to the logic of nature, engraved upon our very hearts as well. What rich imagery for us to ponder! If we were to follow this path, it might provide an opening to conversations with Islam where law stands as a pillar of the faithful life. It might also give us new purchase on questions related to church state issues, particularly in light of the destabilization of the nation state, and the reconfiguring of boundaries around the emergent political economic units carved out by the neo-liberal economic programmes of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), etc. How might Calvins view of the Laws territorial constraints shed light on these discussions? Similarly, how might this complex view of Law help us reflect on the emergence of global megacities, such Sao Paolo, Mexico City, and

Beijing, where the boundaries around religious identity are shifting in profound and enduring ways. How might it also help us respond to the issue of immigration and refugees both of which concern, theologically, the subject matter of boundaries? One final comment, when we look at this person-shaping dimension of sanctification, how does it shift our assessment of Calvins legacy with respect

to those dimension of the self that cannot be reduced to confessed belief or cognitive commitment but involves dimensions of who we are that are unknown and unsaid. Is there a Calvinist unconscious? Is there a Calvinist set of patterned, embodied practices that push us to see community in a new way? Are there identity traits that the worldwide Reformed community shares? In the end, who does Calvin call us to become?

Note
1

Serene Jones and Amy Platinga Pauw, eds. Feminist and Womanist Essays in Reformed Dogmatics (Louisville KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006).

269

Calvins view of the Bible as the word

Herman J. Selderhuis

It is to John Calvins commentaries on the Psalms that Herman J. Selderhuis turns in order to discover how the great reformer views the Bible. Calvin was a man of the book who maintained that through the word of God found in the Bible, God is truly present in the world, he writes. However the scholar adds that Calvin does not so bind God to the Bible that an identification of God with the Bible could be mistakenly made. Calvins commentaries on the Psalms also reveal a great deal about the man himself, including his pain, doubt and loneliness.

1. Introduction
John Calvin was the man of one book. I know it may appear absurd to start with this thesis, since all of the newer research refutes it. Calvin is not the man of one book, so why should I say the opposite? Because by that one book I do not mean his Institutes, but the Bible. It is one of the fruits of this newer research that much more is known about Calvins hermeneutics and his theology since the study of his commentaries has completed the picture of his doctrine, and a lot more is expected, as there are numerous works of Calvin on the Bible that have still to be examined1. Yet, we know that Calvin is a constant and a consistent theologian, so we will not learn really new things that we do not already know from his Institutes. In addition, there is a continuity throughout his commentaries,

even if the latter are like Dutch windmills: each has something special although they all look alike. Because of this, I will focus on Calvins commentary on the Book of Psalms, in which he says so much about himself, but also so much about his view of scripture and its relevance for all times2.

2. Calvin and the Psalms

To better understand this commentary as well as Calvins dealing with the Bible in general, it is important to notice the time at which it was written. In a letter to Bullinger dated 27 March 1557, Beza remarks that Calvin is often forced to endure injustice and that he finds consolation in his work commenting on the Psalms 3. Having endured many things, Calvin finds events in the Psalms comparable to his own experience. As a result, Calvins

270

interpretation sometimes reflects his own experience more than the historical facts4. The notion of identification is strengthened by the fact that Calvin also experienced the world in which he lived as completely chaotic. It is a world in which everything turns around and nothing is sure5, in short, a world where confusion rules6. This chaos particularly affects Christians, who live like sheep among wolves7 and wander about on this earth8. Not a day passes that we do not experience pain and trouble, says Calvin9. It is small wonder, therefore, that his own experience has so moulded his exposition, as he himself admits: Moreover, if my readers derive any fruit and advantage from the labour which I have bestowed in writing this commentary, I would have them to understand that the small measure of experience which I have had in the conflicts with which the Lord has exercised me has in no ordinary degree assisted me, not only in applying to present use whatever instruction could be gathered from these divine compositions, but also in comprehending more easily the design of the writer in each of the Psalms.10

the meaning as efficiently as possible11. It is a matter of communication, not only between expositor and text, but also between the expositor and the reader of the exposition. This humanistic textual exposition has the consequence that it also reveals much about the expositor. Hence, the profit the reader draws from Calvins commentary is mainly due to Calvins own experience. Because Calvin knows that his audience in Genevafor a large part refugeesand the readers in France face the same sorts of troubles, he continually speaks in terms of we and us. Through this rhetorical style he establishes a relation with his readers12. When the text describes various kinds of troubles, Calvin will use his own experience as a starting point. Therefore, when he speaks about us and we,13 it should be understood as me and I, that means me and I from the sentence I do not like to speak about myself14. He who reads I in many of the places where we is written, expands his knowledge about Calvin the man15. Calvins comment on the Bible being spectacles that people need in order to notice Gods hand in creation is well known16. Similarly it should be kept in mind that Calvin, while commenting on the Psalms, is himself wearing the spectacles of his own experience. In Calvins case it is sunglasses: even bright things acquire a dark shade. Calvin attributes a large number of Psalms to David, even though not all of these Psalms have the inscription by David. He favours this interpretation of authorship
271

Humanistic exposition of texts implies a subjective involvement of the expositor. The expositor is more than someone who simply passes on the meaning of the text. Therefore, he is not the trait dunion between the text and the reader of its exposition, but by involving himself in the context of the text, he attempts to pass on

and setting because the situation described in the Psalms often fit David best. He even applies this to a Psalm where, for instance, Asaph is cited as the author17. Yet, Calvin can also question Davidic authorship using the same argument18. Calvin reads the Psalms from his conviction that in Geneva he encounters the same kind of trouble caused by the same sort of people as those against whom David had fought19. He recognizes himself in the pains that David experienced and, thus, it is no wonderand essential for understanding Calvinthat he writes: My readers, too, if I mistake not, will observe that in unfolding the internal affections of both David and others I discourse upon them as matters with which I have familiar experience.20

novae) his opponents bring, although there is no mention of this in the text. The same applies to the remark that Davids appetite for power was the cause of conflict with Saul. This accusation is absent from the text, but is a charge that was issued against Calvin22. What Calvin passes on to the readers of his commentary is so coloured by his own experience that a certain one-sidedness is apparent. As has been said, Calvin summarizes mainly negative feelings like pain, doubt and loneliness. His personal experience, including his poor health, evidently contributed to this exposition. As for this commentarys exposition of the religious life and its expression in the Calvinistic tradition, it owes part of its character more to Calvins experience than to Gods revelation.

With more detail than is permitted by the biblical text, Calvin considers the scorn that David had to suffer from those who simply wanted to vilify his good name. David vehemently resisted these peoplenot because of his name, but because of the well-being of the church21. The reader of the commentary will thus understand why Calvin took up a position in Geneva similar to that of David and why Calvin had to condone this position. This identification also leads Calvin to an interpretation of Davids circumstances from his own situation. The enmity that David experienced according to Psalm 2 is also evident, says Calvin, in the novelties (res
272

3. The word
For Calvin, the word is equivalent to Gods promises 23 and, therefore, the emphasis is more on the preached word than on the written word in the Bible. God comes to us in the word, and only then may we expect anything from God24. Since it is in the word that God comes to us with the promise of well-being and salvation, we also have the hope of Gods salvation in no other way than by looking to the word25. God has revealed Gods goodness in the word, and so we must also seek certainty of this goodness towards us in the word26. Likewise, he who trusts in the word of God never has to doubt Gods help 27 . In contrast, the one who

derives no encouragement from the word will in fact be dead28. In the word one can find comfort from all sorrows29, and the word is the best weapon by which we can stand firm against our enemies. It is the doctrine of piety which is a treasury of eternal salvation.30 The word is actually a little piece of heaven on earth. Calvin says that although it lives on earth, making its way to our ears and living in our hearts, it still retains its celestial nature, since it comes down to us in such a way that it is not subject to earthly changes.31 The word is therefore the only constant factor in this world, as it is not tied to any boundary or limit.32 The word actually frees us, Calvin says, from the confinement of this world. 33 In light of this worlds turbulence, the word is the only fixed point. Calvin goes so far as to suggest that the words immutability is the most important foundation to our faith. Without this we could not be offered a certain hope of eternal salvation as God gives us in Gods word . Without reference to the Bible, statements about faith are insipid in content and impotent in their ability to elicit the praise of God. This is why, Calvin summarizes, true piety is found exclusively in the foundation of Gods revealed word35. The word is more effective and better suited for our instruction than any revelation to our sight could be36. We need the word, Calvin says, in order that we might recognize the countless signs of Gods favour. The word, for example, makes it clear that those things
34

which are going well in our lives are blessings from God37. Calvin opposes the charge that the word of scripture is too obscure as it is claimed by Rome38. Thereby he turns the taunt of Romethat amongst the Reformed every uneducated layperson reads the Bibleinto a sign of Gods blessing39. Calvin interpreted the Reformation as the result of the power of Gods word. The fact that in such a short time so many people could be brought under the dominion of Christ was solely due to the voice of the gospel, and that in spite of the opposition of the whole world. 40 Yet the word does not work mechanically. Here again though Calvin guards against necessarily connecting God with something external. God can bring it about that, although Gods word is present, one does not know what to do with it. In such times, all scripture seems to be turned upside down and no matter how much one may long for that word, it is of no avail41. Although Calvin attributes the

authorship of the Bible to the Holy Spirit inasmuch as it is the Holy Spirit who moved Davids tongue,42 there are several finer points which need to be observed about Calvins doctrine of scripture. First, this does not mean that Calvin ignores the human authorshe has no problem for example in saying that David wrote things down at times with a special intention43. Secondly, Calvin states that the author of Hebrews quotes Psalm 8 (in chapter 2) because the concepts of lowering and adorning occur there. Apparently he is more concerned with the

273

terms themselves than with their meaning. Furthermore, when Calvin turns to Psalm 88:6 and the line which says that God no longer thinks of those who are in the grave, he indicates that the human author here has let himself go, being so overwhelmed by his cares that he did not express himself as thoughtfully as he ought to have done44. Calvin even states that the light of faith has been momentarily dimmed, although it afterwards reappears. Later in his interpretation of the same psalm Calvin says once again that the author is going too far45. These remarks confirm that Calvin had a very organic view of the inspiration of the scriptures46. Calvin is convinced that David knows about the future calling of the gentiles,47 which is why he can say that all gentiles will kneel before God. Because David understands that to Jewish ears it would sound like an offensive novelty that gentiles would worship together with the children of Abraham, David chooses to tone the message down by observing that the gentiles have also been created by God. On the basis of this reminder it is more natural to believe that the gentiles will in the end also worship God together with the Jews. Calvin again shows here his conviction that the Bible writers arrange in their own way that which the Spirit has inspiredDavids poetry being just one case of this practice. Calvin makes a striking comparison in order to indicate that our thoughts must always be tested against the touchstone of

Gods authoritative word. He likens those who do not do this to those who derive their knowledge only from commentaries and do not have the book itself in front of them.48 Looking at the papacy, one can see what happens if tradition is made to rule over the word, and so Calvin accordingly rejects the idea that whatever is old must also be good49. In fact, he calls it foolish to act as if that which the ancestors said and did amounts to a kind of law that we must imitate. If this were so, sins would continue to be passed on, so that, in many instances he thinks it would be much better that their example not be followed at all50.

4. Word and spirit

For Calvin there is a close connection between the operation of the word of God and the Spirit of God. The word is presented to all people alike, but one only comes to a conviction of its truth when ones mind is also illumined by the Holy Spirit51. By this Calvin does not mean to say that the word only has power when the Spirit accompanies it, but that the power of the word is only experienced by those who are indwelt by the Spirit. And yet the knowledge of Gods word precedes the experiential knowledge of grace. There is no experience without the word52. For if God wants to show Gods self to us as the ever-present God (as people usually put it), he must first be sought in the word.53 The scriptural word therefore does lead to experience. Calvin is not trying to underestimate the experience of faith. Faith

274

comes from the word and rests upon the word, but it nonetheless derives much support from experience. Word and faith do not rest on experience, but the experientia does confirm the word and faith.54 So also must God by the Spirit inwardly seal the assurance given by the word. The Spirit illumines our minds in such a way that we see the truth of Gods salvation in the word as in a mirror.55 This also applies to those who preach the word. No one can minister the word of God adequately if they have not first experienced the word firsthand. The doctrine of the gospel is not transferable by the lips if God has not first revealed it to the heart. 56 The connection between the word and the Spirit enables us through Gods word to also speak and witness on our own. The Holy Spirit connects the word of God that gives hope, with our word in order to confess the hope.57 We do not, however, receive the Spirit of God so that we may then proceed to despise the external word and to be carried away by all sorts of spiritual experiences.58 Calvin thus rejects the notion of the fanatici, who reckon that one can be spiritual only when one rejects the external word59 and that a true believer does not need the word any more.60 Submission to the word of God, however, prevents us from following our own flights of fancy.61 The external doctrine must be coupled with the grace of the Spirit.62 Or, as Calvin also says, the work of the preachers must be made effectual, if it does not want to be useless. The word falls upon our ears in vain unless
63

the Spirit of God effectively pierces our hearts.64 When God sets Gods word before us, God simultaneously teaches us inwardly. It is not sufficient that the word only sound in our ears; God at the same time must also illuminate our mind by the Spirit of knowledge.65

5. Hermeneutics
Calvin is careful that he does not prematurely look for Christological meaning in the Old Testament.66 In fact, he warns against violating the text by directly relating it to Christ lest the Jews have proper grounds for their charge that it is our aim by means of sophistry to connect things with Christ that do not directly relate to him.67 Thus Calvin rejects a Christological exegesis of such passages as Psalm 87:4. The interpretation that the psalmist speaks here about Christthrough whom those people who used to be strangers and enemies towards one another now want to be reckoned as residents of Jerusalemis dismissed by Calvin as untenable, albeit clever.68 The meaning is simply that people are willing to give up their own nationality to be added into the citizenship of Jerusalem. Similarly, in his exposition of Psalm 88:6, Calvin discards the Christological interpretation of Saint Augustine as astute, but not in correspondence with the authors intention. 69 Nevertheless he asserts that the texts of the Old Testament by themselves emphatically refer to Christ. The
275

hermeneutical key that Calvin uses for the Christological interpretation of the text is this: that which did not come to fulfilment in the time of the Old Testament, must indeed refer to Christ.70 If an utterance does not fit with the historical situation, then it is a prophecy of Christ.71 This key then opens a door to an interpretation by Calvin that is hardly distinct from the Christocentric exegesis of Luther. When in Psalm 72:10 David foretells that all kings of the world will bow before Solomon, it is clear from the course of Solomons history that this refers to Christ. The prophecy of Psalm 2:8Ask of me and I will give peoples to be your inheritancecannot refer to David, and therefore it also applies to Christ.72 The way in which Calvin performs such exegesis is illustrated well by these texts. When David speaks of his son Solomon, his mention of all kings indicates that the Spirit is lifting David above his own situation and is making him speak of the spiritual monarchy of Christ. Furthermore, from this it follows that we have not received the hope of eternal life by mere chance since in this text it is clear that God already had us in mind in the Old Testament. We can even deduce from this text that in the church there is room for monarchs. Calvin interprets the text this way in order to give support and comfort from this passage to his readers and his audience when a literal reading of the text does not explicitly do so. Other passages in Calvins Psalms commentary reveal the same pattern of

biblical interpretation. When the author of Psalm 47 calls God the King over all the earth, it is indeed clear from the context of these words that here the reign of Christ is meant.73 When in Psalm 89 there is talk of an eternal throne, it can only refer to Christ.74 This also applies in Psalm 96:9 when the entire world is called upon to worship God despite the fact that in the Old Testament only Israel can.75 On Psalm 110 Calvin observes that even if Christ himself had not said in Matthew 22:42-44 that this Psalm is about him the Psalm would still not allow any other interpretation. The Psalm is shouting out, as it were, that this is the only possible interpretation.76 Calvin is of the opinion that in a discussion with Jews it could be proven by clear arguments that this song of praise is about nobody if not the mediator. In interpreting all of the scriptures, one must take into account the fact that God adapts himself to people through his speech. In Calvins thought, therefore, the concept of accommodation plays a rather significant role.77 David does not speak about creation in scientific terminology, but in his speech he adapts himself to the ordinary people.78 When the scriptures address such matters as physics, one should keep in mind that God describes things in such a way that they may be understood by ordinary people.79 When the Bible speaks of the sun and the moon as the two great lights, this also is an adaptation of God to the readers. There are, of course, planets that are greater

276

than the moonCalvin mentions Saturn as an example, but the moon is more noticeable since it is nearer to the observer on earth. Nor was it the intention of the Holy Spirit to teach astronomy.80 The Spirit wanted to communicate in such a way that even the simplest could understand. The Holy Spirit would rather prattle like a little child, Calvin says, than speak in such a complicated way that ordinary people are excluded. 81 David realizes that ordinary people would not understand if he were to go and speak of the mysteries of astronomy, and therefore he speaks of the universe in everyday terms.82 Had he been speaking to scientists he would have used other words, but as it is, he adapts himself to simple and uneducated people.83 Just how far God will go in his accommodation, Calvin notes, is evident in Psalm 78:65 when he compares himself to a drunken man waking up from his inebriation. This, however, is no adaptation to the peoples simplicity, but to their obtuseness.84 Calvin explains that the Spirit has to choose between two extremes. When God expresses Gods self too simply in accommodating to our level, Gods way of speaking is looked down upon. Should God speak on a higher level, though, people use this as an excuse for their ignorance, saying they cannot understand it. The Holy Spirit combats these two possibilities however by speaking in such a way that everyone can understand it, provided that people are willing to learn.
85

6. The relationship between Old Testament and New Testament

Calvin emphasizes the unity of the Old and the New Testaments so that between the times before and after the incarnation of Christ the difference is more a matter of degree than substance.86 The unity of the covenant receives so much emphasis that history, including the salvation history of Jesus, threatens to evaporate. The coming of Christ means that the times have been renewed.87 According to Calvin the period which has lasted since the coming of Christ may be designated as the renewal of the church.88 The coming of Christ is therefore not the beginning of the church but the beginning of a new era in the church.89 Calvin finds difference as well as similarity in the two testaments by means of the anagogue.90 He does not use this word in the sense of the medieval four-fold interpretation of scriptures which gives the meaning of a text for the future, but rather as a comparative application of the text.91 When Psalm 81 says that God has freed Gods people from the burden of carrying stones in Egypt, after Christ, this Psalm means that God has freed us from the burden of the tyranny of Satan. For indicating the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament, Calvin uses various concepts and classifications such as shadow and reality; childhood and adulthood; and less versus more. Shadow / reality92With the coming of Christ a new era has commenced, and that

277

also has the consequence that what is said in the Old Testament of Jerusalem is now connected with the spiritual Jerusalem which is spread over the whole world.93 The outward glory of Jerusalem has now been replaced by the spiritual wealth of the church. Just as Jerusalem was encircled with walls and towers under the shadowy time of the law, now the church has been adorned with spiritual gifts since the coming of Christ. 94 The kingdom of David and his successors is a shadow which points to the reality of the kingdom of Christ.95 By using the temporary kingdom as a type, Calvin writes, a far better rule is describeda kingdom which does indeed give full joy and complete bliss to the church.96 Elsewhere he suggests that the kingdom of Christ begins with the kingdom of David since Davids reign lays the foundation for that of Christ. 97 The two kingdoms and their respective kings thus relate to each other as shadow and reality. There are even many similar experiences in the paths walked by each king, including for each, Calvin notes, a hidden beginning and later an open rejection.98 Another correlation between shadow and reality is seen in the temple, which is the image in the Old Testament administration which keeps our focus on the priesthood of Christ, and the palace then means his monarchy.99 The return from exile is, according to Calvin, related to the kingdom of Christ as a prophecy of that kingdom. 100 The land was given to the

people to hold in their possession until the coming of Christ, since it is a foreshadow and an image of the heavenly native land.101 Meanwhile Calvin does not consider it a disaster that no reunification of the Jews into a single land of their own ever took place because they have found a much more fortunate reunification. In the body of Christ, he continues, they are reunited with one another as well as with the gentiles who believe. They are no longer in one physical land, but instead they constitute one church that is spread over the whole world and yet is one through the spiritual bond of faith.102 The dynamic of shadow and reality in scripture indicates not only difference but similarity. When the shadows of the law disappear, Calvin says, spiritual truth remains for us.103 Spiritual truth was thus also there under the law, and it entails that God must be praised in those circumstances as well. If this were not also the purpose of the outward ceremonies of the Old Testament, they would have been a useless display. The essence and purpose of shadow and reality are therefore the same, but they do differ according to the way in which each operates. Canaan is a pledge of the heavenly inheritance. 104 However, God shows favour by bestowing earthly blessings105, after Christ as well as before. In this regard, Calvin can not be charged with spiritualizing salvation. Childhood / adulthood Another way of describing the difference between the two testaments is the analogy of differing ages.

278

In the Old Testament the church finds herself in her childhood, but upon the coming of Christ her adulthood has commenced.106 The sacrifices of the Old Testament are therefore childrens lessons for beginners107 which God had assigned in order to prepare the people in this epoch for something elsenamely, the sacrifice of Christ. Earthly blessings also function as early lessons intended to teach us to seek that which is higher.108 According to Calvin, such musical instruments also belong with the first years of learning.109 After Christ, however, the church does not need these teaching tools any more. The functioning of the law, as well, belongs to the childhood years. When compared with the situation in the New Testament, the church under the old covenant found herself under the authority of the law as a pedagogue,110 the slave that used to watch over the children and that accompanied them to and from school.111 All of these remarks reflect Calvins understanding of the movement from the Old Testament to the New Testament as a change from childhood to adulthood. Less / more Calvin also describes the difference between the two dispensations with the categories of less and more. In Christ God is revealed even more clearly, for instance, as our shepherd.112 Calvin explains that the evidences of Gods love towards useven when it comes to living here on earthare clearer after Christ than during the time of the Old Testament. In the old dispensation, the knowledge of God was also more limited with the result that

people were less able to see God in exaltation.113 Furthermore, the promise of God now is no longer limited to merely one people. The distinction between a particular ethnic group of people and the rest is gone, so that the message of the gospel by which God reconciles himself with the world now comes to all people.114 In the covenant God reveals Gods self as Father first to Israel and subsequently more clearly (clarior) through the gospel that has given us the Spirit of adoption more abundantly (uberior).115 The time of the Old Testament, in comparison with the New Testament, is somewhat less civilized,116 and in revelation, God adapts Gods self to the needs of each period. The biblical writer, for example, makes use of the customs of the writers time when threatening a divine curse that the remembrance of the sinner would be effaced. One would expect, says Calvin, that it would be more applicable as a curse for someones name to be erased from heaven. However, spiritual punishments had in this time not been as clearly revealed, since the fullness of time wherein the complete revelation took place, had not yet come.117 The same type of accommodation is also evident in the blessings. When a man is wished a fertile wife as a sign of Gods blessing, the criticism could be made that this shows a rather earthly preoccupation. One needs to keep in mind, however, that he is speaking with those who are still under the law.118
279

Whereas in the Old Testament the presence of God is to be sought particularly in the tabernacle and the temple, we now have at our disposal a much more confident way of coming to God,119 since that which had formerly been only foreshadowed in the images of the law, is now revealed to us in Christ. (By the images of the law Calvin means, for instance, such figures as the ark.) Whereas God says in the Old Testament that God lives in Zion, now it is known with more clarity that God is present wherever Christian believers worship purely in accordance with the word.120 The way in which Calvin verbalizes this difference creates the impression that before the coming of Christ the people had to go to God while after Christ, the case is that God comes to the people. The difference also carries various applications by which present believers can be exhorted given the time in which they live. If David, though living under the shadowy cult of the law121 and far away from the temple, could remain standing by means of prayer, how much more should the same be true for us, for whom the blood of Christ has opened a way, and to whom God presents such a friendly invitation to fellowship. New Testament believers ought to have more trust in God and more assurance of Gods aid. If the temple was a sign of Gods presence to Israel that gave a reason for trusting in God, how much more ought the church today reflect such trust now that Christ has come to bind us even

closer to God.122 The same applies to the worship of God. If David praised God in his own day for having saved him from death, how much more ought we, who by the grace of Christ have been snatched from an even deeper abyss of death.123 In the biblical accounts, Davids life was prolonged just a little while, but we have been brought from hell to heaven.124 God required obedience from Israel as a sign of its gratitude for such deliverance. Calvin notes that such grateful obedience applies to us believers in Christ much more.125

7. Conclusion
For Calvin the vital aspect to Gods revelation in the word is that through the word, God really is present in this world. Nevertheless Calvin does not so bind God to the revealed word that an identification of God with the Bible could be mistakenly made. By denoting the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament as less versus more, the question arises as to the value of Christs coming. When Calvin says that Christ has come to bind us even closer to his Father,126 the question might be raised as to whether Calvins theology does not perhaps make the meaning of the incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ something merely relative, given how much carries over for Calvin from the old system into the new. Calvins commentary on the Psalms offers a good overview of how he sees the Bible and deals with scripture in general. It is striking

280

that there is so much Calvin in his exegesis, but in this regard, every honest preacher

will say that Calvin is a colleague in the field.

Notes
It is impossible to give a complete overview but the following works are good introductions and supply the reader with extensive bibliographical information for further research on Calvins work on the Bible: Erik A. De Boer, John Calvin on the Visions of Ezekiel, Historical and Hermeneutical Studies, in John Calvins sermons indits, especially on Ezek.36-48 (Leiden: Brill, 2004); Alexandre Ganoczy and Stefan Scheld, Die Hermeneutik Calvins (Wiesbaden: F. Steiner, 1983); Donald McKim, ed., Calvin and the Bible (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press ,2006) Thomas H.L. Parker, Calvins Old Testament Commentaries, 2nd edition (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993). 2 See also: Herman J. Selderhuis, Calvins Theology of the Psalms (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007). 3 Calvin qui est trs injustement accabl comme tu le sais, se console en crivant des commentaires sur les Pseaumes (Correspondance de Thodore de Bze, t. 2, Genve: Droz, 1996, 58). 4 For examples, cf. William Naphy, Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation 84-120. 5 ... in rota volvatur mundus ..., Ps. 18:8 (CO 31, 216); ... hac caduca vita ..., Ps 23:6 (CO 31, 242). 6 ... confusa perturbatio ..., Ps. 25:13 (CO 31, 258). 7 ... in medio luporum ..., Ps. 34:8 (CO 31, 338). 8 Calvin speaks about vagari, Ps. 37:9 (CO 31, 371). 9 Conditio nostra, fateor, tot miseriis in hoc mundo implicita est, tantaque varietate agitatur, ut nullus fere dies sine molestia et dolore praetereat, deinde inter tot dubios eventus fieri non potest quin assidue anxii simus ac trepidi, Ps. 30:6 (CO 31, 294-295). 10 CO 31, 19. 11 Millet, Calvin, 523. 12 Regarding Calvins use of the rhetoric, cf.: Serene Jones, Calvin and the Rhetoric of Piety, Louisville 1995. 13 Concerning the way Calvin used the word us, cf. also: Millet, Calvin, 532-537; Moehn, Wilhelmus H. Th. , God Calls us to his Service. The Relation between God and his Audience in Calvins Sermons on Acts , Geneva 2001. 14 This approach does not mean a correction, though it offers a significant addition to the data of Bsser. He restricted himself to the I-statements.
281
1

15 Millet refers to passages in other works of Calvin where the latter speaks about us but primarily thinks of me. (Millet, Calvin, 532-537, has named this section fittingly: Du nous ou je .) Calvin speaks about us to mention him-self not explicitly but to include himself unambiguously. Mlhaupt believes that the same applies to the sermons on the Psalms: Wenn irgendwo in seiner Predigt die Herztne seines Christentums vernehmbar sind, dann ist dies in seinen Psalmpredigten zu erwarten, Mlhaupt, Psalmpredigten, XXVIII. 16 Inst. I.6.1. 17 Ps. 73: intro (CO 31, 673). 18 Ps. 44:1 (CO 31, 436). 19 See inter alia: Ps. 26:1 (CO 31, 264); Ps. 31:12 (CO 31, 307). 20 Praefatio (CO 31, 33). 21 Haec ratio est cur tam sollicite et vehementer contendat David in asserenda causae suae iustitia, Ps. 18:21 (CO 31, 181). 22 Ps. 7:4 (CO 31, 80). 23 Ps. 119:49 (CO 32, 235). On the relationship between word and promise, see Wilhelm H. Neuser, Theologie des Wortes: Schrift, Verheissung und Evangelium bei Calvin in Calvinus Theologus: Die Referate des Europischen Kongresses fr Calvinforschung, ed. W.H. Neuser (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1976), pp. 17-37. 24 Ps. 119:65 (CO 32, 243). 25 Ps. 119:81 (CO 32, 250). 26 Ps. 119:149 (CO 32, 282). 27 Ps. 119:85 (CO 32, 252). 28 nisi animum recipiat ex Dei verbo, se fore exanimem, Ps. 119:49 (CO 32, 235). 29 Ps. 119:76 (CO 32, 247). 30 pietatis doctrina, quae aeternae salutis thesaurus est, Ps. 147:19 (CO 32, 431). 31 Ps. 119:92 (CO 32, 255). 32 Ps. 119:96 (CO 32, 256). 33 Restat ut hanc amplitudinem concipiant animi nostri: quod fiet ubi se in angustias mundi huius coniicere desierint, Ps. 119:96 (CO 32, 256). 34 Ps. 119:152 (CO 32, 283). 35 Ps. 29:9 (CO 31, 290). 36 sed quia sensus melius excitat sonorae vocis praedicatio, vel certius saltem ac maiore cum profectu docet, quam simplex conspectus cui nulla coniuncta est admonitio, Ps. 19:1 (CO 31, 195). 37 Ps. 60:8 (CO 31, 577). 38 Ps. 119:105 (CO 32, 260). 39 Rideant vero papistae, ut faciunt, quod scripturam promiscue ab omnibus legi volumus, Ps. 119:130 (CO 32, 273). 40 Ps. 110:3 (CO 32, 163). 41 Ps. 77:8 (CO 31, 714). 42 spiritus sanctus, qui Davidis linguam direxit, Ps. 8:1 (CO 31, 88). 43 Ps. 29:1 (CO 31, 287). 44 Ps. 88:6 (CO 31, 807). 45 excusari tamen non potest excessus, Ps. 88:11 (CO 31, 809). 46 For an overview of the discussion about Calvins doctrine of inspiration, see Stefan Scheld, Media Salutis: Zur Heilsvermittlung bei Calvin (Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1989), pp. 6065. 47 Nec vero Davidem latebat futura gentium vocatio, Ps. 86:9 (CO 31, 794).

282

Ps. 119:11 (CO 32, 219). et vetustas semper aliquam reverentiam sibi vendicat, Ps. 95:9 (CO 31, 34). 50 Ps. 78:8 (CO 31, 725). 51 Ps. 119:64 (CO 32, 242). 52 An analysis of Calvins Commentary on the Psalms which gives special attention to the relationship between word and experience is found in W. Balke, The Word of God and Experientia according to Calvin, in Calvinus Ecclesiae Doctor, ed. Wilhelm H. Neuser (Kampen: Kok, 1980) 19-31. 53 Ps. 27:9 (CO 31, 676). 54 non vulgaris tamen verbi et fidei confirmatio est ipsa experientia, Ps. 43:3 (CO 31, 435). 55 Ps. 119:152 (CO 32, 283). 56 Ps. 91:1 (CO 32, 2). 57 verbo spei adiungit verbum confessionis, Ps. 119:41 (CO 32, 233). 58 Ps. 119:17 (CO 32, 222). 59 Ps. 119:17 (CO 32, 222). 60 Ps. 119:171 (CO 32, 293). 61 Ps. 119:171 (CO 32, 292). 62 sed externam doctrinam cum spiritus gratia coniunxisse, Ps. 119:133 (CO 32, 275). 63 inutilis est doctorum opera donec efficax reddatur, Ps. 119:171 (CO 32, 292). 64 Ps. 119:133 (CO 32, 275). 65 Ps. 119:171 (CO 32, 292). 66 On Calvins interpretation of the Old Testament, see Wulfert de Greef, Calvijn en het Oude Testament (Groningen: T. Bolland, 1984) and David L. Puckett, John Calvins Exegesis of the Old Testament (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995). According to Richard Muller, it may be assumed that Calvins warning must be seen as a reaction to the wellknown commentary on the Psalms by Faber Stapulensis where Christ is taken to be the sole reference of the text, and David disappears entirely as a focus of meaning. See Richard A. Muller, The Hermeneutic of Promise and Fulfillment in Calvins Exegesis of the Old Testament Prophecies of the Kingdom, in The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, ed. David C. Steinmetz (Durham: Duke University Press, 1990) 77. 67 Ps. 72:1 (CO 31, 664). 68 Quod offerunt Christiani, quamquam propter argutiam primo intuitu plausibile est, nihil tamen habet solidi, Ps. 87:4 (CO 31, 802). 69 Ps. 88:6 (CO 31, 807). 70 Ps. 72:10 (CO 31, 669). See also Calvins introduction to Psalm 97 (CO 32, 42). De Greef calls Calvins principle a little whiff of rationalism in his exegesis (een rationalistisch trekje in zijn exegese) in his Oude Testament, 91. 71 Ps. 149:7 (CO 32, 439). 72 Ps. 2:8 (CO 31, 47). 73 Ps. 47:2 (CO 31, 467). 74 Ps. 89:31 (CO 31, 822). 75 Unde colligimus Psalmum hunc ad regnum Christi referri: quia donec patefactus fuit mundo, non alibi quam in Iudaea invocari potuit eius nomen, Ps. 96: introduction (CO 32, 361). 76 Psalmus ipse clamat se non aliam expositionem admittere, Ps. 110: introduction (CO 32, 159). 77 See David F. Wright, Calvins Accommodating God, in Calvinus Sincerioris Religionis
49

48

283

Vindex: Calvin as Protector of the Purer Religion, Sixteenth Century Essays & Studies, ed. Wilhelm H. Neuser and Brian G. Armstrong, Vol. XXXVI (Kirksville MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1997), pp. 3-19. 78 non disputat philosophicae Davidsed populariter loquens, ad rudium captum se accommodat, Ps. 24:2 (CO 31, 244). 79 ut se accommodent ad rudissimi cuiusque captum, Ps. 148:3 (CO 32, 433). 80 Ps. 136:7 (CO 32, 365). 81 maluit spiritus sanctus quodammodo balbutire, quam discendi viam praecludere plebiis et indoctis, Ps. 136:7 (CO 32, 365). 82 Ps. 19:4 (CO 31, 198). 83 sed rudissimis quibusque se accommodans, Ps. 19:4 (CO 31, 198). 84 quia accommodatur ad populi stuporem, Ps. 78:65 (CO 31, 742). 85 si modo placidam docilitatem et serium proficiendi studium afferant, Ps. 78:3 (CO 31, 722). 86 On the relationship of Old and New Testament see De Greef, Oude Testament, pp. 93154; and Hans Heinrich Wolf, Die Einheit des Bundes: Das Verhltnis von Altem und Neuem Testament bei Calvin (Neukirchen: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Erziehungsvereins, 1958). 87 Nunc, postquam adventu suo saeculum renovavit, Ps. 48:8 (CO 31, 477). 88 Ps. 48:11 (CO 31, 480). 89 Ps. 96:7 (CO 32, 39). 90 Nunc ab illis ad nos anagoge tenenda est, Ps. 81:7 (CO 31, 761). 91 See Parker, Commentaries, pp. 72-74. According to Parker anagogue in Calvins thought functions as a transference or application of a Biblical person or event to some theological truth, p. 72. 92 Parker gives an analysis of this pair of concepts as it is used in the Institutes and Calvins commentariesParker, Commentaries, pp. 56-62. See also de Greef, Oude Testament, pp. 136-141. 93 Ps. 48:8 (CO 31, 477). 94 Ps. 48:11 (CO 31, 480). 95 Ps. 21:4 (CO 31, 214). 96 Ps. 20:1 (CO 31, 207). 97 Ps. 118:25 (CO 32, 210). 98 Arcana fuit David electioEadem regni Christi fuerunt exordia, Ps. 118:25 (CO 32, 210). 99 Ps. 112:4 (CO 32, 305). 100 quia restitutio in patriam, cum regno Christi annexa erat, Ps. 85: introduction (CO 31, 785). 101 coelestis patriae fuisse symbolum, Ps. 69:35 (CO 31, 653). 102 Ps. 106:47 (CO 32, 134-135). 103 Ps. 66:15 (CO 31, 615). 104 Ps. 106:24 (CO 32, 126). 105 Ps. 128:3 (CO 32, 328). 106 Quod si tam austera fuerunt pueritia rudimenta, nisi hodie, postquam in virilem aetatem Christi advenu adolevit ecclesia. Ps. 129:2 (CO 32, 331). 107 pueritia rudimenta, Ps. 40:8 (CO 31, 413). 108 quia talibus rudimentis altius tunc deduci oportuit, Ps. 147:2 (CO 32, 430). 109 ad tempus paedagogiae, Ps. 149:2 (CO 32, 438).
284

instar paedagogi veterem populum serviliter prae nobis regeret, Ps. 26:8 (CO 31, 268). 111 On the law as teacher, see Parker, Commentaries, pp. 63-69. 112 nobis luculentius quam olim patribus sub lege pastorem exhibuit, Ps. 23:4 (CO 31, 240). 113 Sicuti enim prius obscurior erat eius notitia, sic minus conspicua fuit exaltatio, Ps. 97:9 (CO 32, 46). 114 Ps. 81:12 (CO 31, 765). 115 Ps. 67:3 (CO 31, 618). 116 pro temporis ruditate, Ps. 105:4 (CO 32, 99). 117 quia nondum advenerat maturum plenae revelationis tempus, Ps. 109:13 (CO 32, 152). 118 Ps. 128:3 (CO 32, 328). 119 Ps. 3:5 (CO 31, 55). Unlike the English (Parker Society) translation a much easier way and the German (Weber) translation einen freieren Zugang, I prefer confident (Dutch: vertrouewelijk) as a translation of familiaris. Confident better captures that it has to do with the quality of the way. Moreover, Calvin frequently uses the word familiariter when addressing the confidence which believers ought to have in approach their heavenly Father. 120 Ps. 9:12 (CO 31, 102). 121 Ps. 61:1 (CO 31, 581). 122 Ps. 48:9 (CO 31, 478). 123 ex altiore mortis abysso, Ps. 86:12 (CO 31, 796). 124 Ps. 86:12 (CO 31, 796). 125 multo sanctior est nostra obligatio quam veteris populi, Ps. 81:7 (CO 31, 761). 126 Ps. 48:9 (CO 31, 478).

110

285

Response to Prof. Herman J. Selderhuis

Park Seong-Won

I appreciate the contribution Professor Herman Selderhuis has made on Calvins view of the Bible as the word of God. My response will be from the perspective of preachers and congregations in Korea who are sharing the message from the Bible every Sunday. I agree with Professor Selderhuis statement that Calvin was the man of one book, namely the Bible. It is true that Calvin wrote a lot of books, but the Bible was the central source for all that he wanted to say in these numerous writings. For him, the Bible was not merely a religious book, but the word of God, or even more, the actual voice and will of God. Professor Selderhuis focus on the Psalms as a window through which he contemplates Calvins approach to the Bible was very helpful towards understanding Calvin by revealing how he used his personal experience in interpreting scripture. This is summed up in the following sentence: Humanistic exposition of texts implies a subjective involvement of the expositor. In a sense, Calvin had already applied the new so called readers approach to the interpretation of texts which has recently

emerged, as opposed to the authors or textual approach of the past. He also highlighted Calvins understanding of the word as Gods promises, the relationship between the word and the Spirit, the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament. All these were helpful. However, let me take this first point Calvins view of the Bible as a means of celebrating more relevantlyas an entry point for raising a couple of questions. But before turning to these questions, I would like to highlight one of the unique contributions by Calvin and other reformers, and that is to have made the Bible the common reference point for the majority of Christians around the world, or at least Protestants, regardless of their confession, social and cultural background or political orientation. Without the Bible as a common reference point, it would have been hard for the global church to engage in dialogue about Christian faith, both with regard to points of convergence and divergence. In the case of Korea, this is extremely true. The first characteristic of the Korean

286

Church might be its uncompromising loyalty to the scripture. The Bible has been placed in the centre of the lives of Korean Christians. Missionaries were eager to teach the Bible and many Koreans became Christians by participating in Bible conferences. In the early Korean church, Sunday worship was celebrated at 2 oclock in the afternoon; mornings were fully devoted to Bible study. The Bible study tradition remains strong even today. Korean congregations hold numerous Bible courses and small Bible study groups. In some congregations, pastors train elders or deacons to become Bible study leaders. All Sunday school students take Bible courses according to the curriculum designed by the educational department of the General Assembly of the churches. Every summer, Sunday schools conduct special conferences in which students can participate in intensive Bible study courses. In the Korean Presbyterian church, the Bible has supreme authority both in theology and in church polity. No matter how polemical they may be, theological arguments are accepted if their biblical reference is clear. No matter how understandable they may be, theological thoughts are called into question, or at least rendered controversial, if their biblical reference is not clear. Sometimes, the Korean churchs biblical perspective is too tough, legal and literal. However, as far as the authority of the Bible is concerned, it

still keeps its powerful authority in Presbyterian churches in Korea. The Bible has made a great contribution to Korean society. The Korean language, despised by Confucian intellectuals, was glorified by the Korean translation of the Bible. Many illiterate people learned to read and to write by studying the Bible. Many women who had no opportunity to go to school encountered the joy of learning through the Bible. Liberation, emancipation, enlightenment and spiritual nourishment are the precious gifts granted by the Bible. In this respect, the vision of Calvin concerning the supreme authority of the Bible in Christian life and the principle of intelligibility of the Reformation have largely been achieved in the life of Korean Reformed Christians. However, the authority of the Bible often became a source of Church division. The current rift in the church is largely related to different interpretations of scripture. The supreme authority of the Bible shaped Korean Presbyterianism to be highly stubborn and exclusive. Now let us turn to some questions: First, did Calvin promote biblicalism as a dogmatic ideology, as many Reformed churches have done since Reformation? Exclusive fundamental biblicalism has been one of the main sources of the division of Reformed churches. Or did Calvin take the Bible as a text to prove his passionate vision of reformation of the church? If this is true,

287

his approach to the Bible was a proof text approach. He confirmed his argument based on the absolute authority of the Bible. However, as I listen to Professor Seldernhuis, I understand Calvin had a tendency to interpret the Bible from a contextual point of view. Professor Selderhuis said that Calvin used his own experience as a starting point. This may include both his personal experience and the social context in which his personal experience was made. Maybe for Calvin, the social, political and economic situation of 16th century Geneva was the main context in which he interpreted the Bible. So can we say that Calvin was a contextual theologian, or a contextual interpreter of the word? This needs to be one of the barometers by which the legacy of Calvin is measured. Second, does Calvins interpretation of the Bible concern only personal faith and piety and eccelesiology? Or does his interpretation of the word go further? We know that Calvin wanted Geneva to be transformed into a city which was governed by the will of God. Are we to understand that Calvins view of the Bible was not determined only by considerations of personal piety, faith and eccelesiology, but by a concern which reaches all spheres of life, including the political, social, economic and cultural? If this is true, the view of many Korean Presbyterians of the Bible needs to be corrected. Third, in Professor Selderhuis

description of Calvins understanding of the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament using a shadow/reality, childhood/adulthood, less/more framework, one has the impression that Calvin has taken the Old Testament as a preparatory process for final achievement in the New Testament. Has this view of Calvins influenced significantly the understanding by biblical theologians of the two testaments relationship in terms of promise/ achievement or prophecy/fulfillment. We, in Korea, had a different framework. For instance, when we were colonized by the Japanese imperial power, we interpreted the Exodus as our story. We saw the Japanese emperor in the story of the Egyptian Pharaoh; in the story of Red Sea, we saw the sea between Japan and Korea; in the story of the Hebrew slaves, we saw the Korean people who were enslaved by the Japanese colonial power; and in Moses we saw the power of the liberating church. We believed that this God who liberated the Hebrew slaves from the Egyptian bondage would liberate us from the Japanese colonial rule. I take this as a dynamic interpretation framework rather than a promise/ achievement or prophecy/fulfillment framework. Did Calvin not take the main ethos of the Bibles message as a spiritual source, both historically and politically, to shape society? Is this not true particularly with regard to his work on the so-called solidarity economy in the Geneva of his

288

time? The final question is for todays context. In the light of Calvins theology, what would Calvin, say about neoliberal economic globalization as well as neoliberalism itself, the global empire today led by the United

States and the new ecumenical context affecting the relationship between other living faiths? I think this is the key question today to be clarified for celebrating more relevantly Calvins legacy in this time of history.

289

Calvins understanding of the church

Emidio Campi

While first cautioning that 21st century readers of John Calvin ought not put their own words into his 16th century mouth (though they should feel free to disagree with him if need be), Emidio Campi plumbs the depths of the great Reformers thinking on the church and its significance for the ecumenical movement of today. He reminds us that Calvin, who stressed the sinfulness of schism, saw the church as mother and as school, hence, the means used by God to approach humanity and make Gods self accessible. The writer warns that the church that takes Calvin seriously should not withdraw into private spirituality, but should be yeast for change in the world.

at

When I received the invitation to speak this consultation on Calvins

which tries to tie together various stages of development in my own life. Before turning to the 16th century, let us first briefly address two methodological questions. It is always a risky affair to resort to authorities of the past for advice on things about which they may have had better knowledge then we do. There are questions we must raise for ourselves and answer by ourselves, to which the voices of other generations are irrelevant. Nobody would dream of quoting Zwingli in favour of, or against, nuclear warfare. No neurobiologist would rely on Melanchthons Liber de Anima for the study of the nervous system. On the other hand, certain questionsand these are the most profoundtouch all human experience and involve us in a dialogue in which perhaps Paul, Augustine, Aquinas,

understanding of the Church and its relevance for the ecumenical movement1, I was a little surprised. To be sure, being Waldensian by birth and conviction, Calvinism has had the greatest theological influence on my life and thought. It is true that by profession I am a Reformation historian, and, having spent 10 years of my life as secretary of the World Student Christian Federation, I have developed a vivid interest in the ecumenical movement. But over the past decade I have turned my attention partly to the field of the Italian Reformation, with special reference to Peter Marty Vermigli, and partly to Heinrich Bullinger and the Zurich Reformation. Your invitation led me to engage in a reflection
290

Luther and countless other eminent Christian theologians may freshly intervene. Calvins teaching on the church and its significance for the ecumenical movement is a case in point. It is true that all the founders of Protestantism wrestled with this very issue. In the first period of the Reformation, Luther, Zwingli, Oecolampadius, and Melanchthon came along with their vigorous challenges to sacramental practice and papal authority, and they laid the foundations of Protestant ecclesiology by asserting the inextricable link between church, word and sacraments. Subsequently, Bucer, Bullinger, a Lasco, Knox, Vermigli, Zanchi and Beza modified the formulations of the previous generation through a series of refined distinctions2 or even added discipline to the notae ecclesiae. Others like Schwenckfeld and Hubmeier came to the conclusion that holiness of life belonged among the marks of the true church. It is no disparagement of his predecessors and contemporaries to assert that Calvin has produced the most comprehensive and influential reflection on the church. It is therefore worth taking a long look at his ecclesiology. However, we owe him, as to other past thinkers, not to put our own questions and preoccupations in his mouth, thus making him a mere sounding board for our own ideas. If we really seek a genuine dialogue, it seems quite reasonable that we should find out first of all what he says and allow him to intervene, even if disconcertingly, in our debates. On the other hand, of course, if we are not

content with what he says, it is perfectly possible to disagree with him. My next remarks address the use of the sources. Many have attempted to trace Calvins conception of the church. Earlier studies3 have tended to focus mostly on Calvins doctrinal thought in the Ecclesiastical Ordinances and the final edition of the Institutes. In recent years we have become increasingly aware that if we want to know the range of his thought on this topic, we must consult nearly his entire work, considering also the controversial writings, the catechisms 4, the biblical commentaries and the sermons5, as well as the correspondence.6 Furthermore, efforts to clarify the practice of the ministry of word and sacraments in Calvins Geneva7 as well as new sociological inquiries in popular religious life have given colour to the picture of this part of the reformers work.8 These sources are exceptionally fruitful, but must here be excluded. The purpose of the present paper is to examine the relevance of Calvins ecclesiology for the ecumenical movement, and this will best be served if we rely chiefly upon the locus classicus of his teaching about the church, namely Book IV of the 1559 edition of the Institutes, which extends through twenty chapters, if one includes, as one surely must, the question of the civil government. With these two cautions in mind, and without losing sight of our specific purpose, I suggest that we now approach a few of the central themes of Calvins ecclesiology under
291

three headings: 1) The church as mother and school; 2) The marks of the church in word and sacraments; 3) The church and the godly magistrate.

of communion with it: Just as we must believe, therefore, that the former church, invisible to us, is visible to the eyes of God alone, so we are commanded to revere and keep communion with the latter, the visible church. 11 Although by definition it is imperfect and contains numerous hypocrites, Calvin insistently stresses the sinfulness of schism: For the Lord esteems the communion of his church so highly that he counts as a traitor and apostate from Christianity anyone who arrogantly leaves any Christian society, provided it cherishes the true ministry of word and sacraments.12 It is noteworthy that the very first images Calvin uses for his discussion of the visible church are those of mother and school, which he frequently combines. 13 A few telling sentences must here be quoted, which have many parallels in the commentaries on the pastoral epistles14 and in the sermon 30 on Galatians (1557/58).15 I shall start, then, with the Church, into whose bosom God is pleased to gather his children, not only that they may be nourished by her help and ministry so long as they are infants and children, but also that they may be guided by her motherly care until they mature and at last reach to the goal of faith. For what God has joined together, it is not lawful to put asunder [Mark 10: 9], so that, for those to whom he is Father the Church may also be Mother.
16

1. The church as mother and school

In the thought of the reformers, Lutheran and Reformed alike, there is a vivid awareness of the double aspect of the church as the invisible or holy and spiritual society of the truly faithful and the visible or earthly and imperfect organization of professed Christians. Already in the First Zurich Disputation (1523), Zwingli set the church of the pontiffs in contrast with the true church, the spotless bride of Jesus Christ governed and refreshed by the spirit of God.9 Bullinger in his Decades (15491551) clearly distinguished between the inward and invisible church which we profess in the creed and the visible and outward church which is outwardly known by men for a church, by hearing Gods word and partaking of his sacraments, and by public confession of their faith.10 In common with the other reformers Calvin never relaxed the tension between visible and invisible church, but beset by a resurgent Catholicism and a proliferating Anabaptism, he laid more emphasis upon the church as an external institution recognizable as true by certain distinguishing marks. He held the two poles together, frequently in the same sentence, but turned his attention more and more to the visible church and affirmed the necessity
292

But because it is now our intention to discuss the visible Church, let us learn even from the simple title mother, how

useful, indeed how necessary, it is that we should know her. For there is no other way to enter into life unless this mother conceive us in her womb, give us birth, nourish us at her breast, and lastly, unless she keep us under her care and guidance until, putting off mortal flesh, we become like angels [Mt 22: 30]. Our weakness does not allow us to be dismissed from her school until we have been pupils all our lives. Furthermore, away from her bosom one cannot hope for any forgiveness of sins or any salvation, as Isaiah [37:32] and Joel [2:32] testify. Ezekiel agrees with them when he declares that those whom God rejects from heavenly life will not be enrolled among Gods people [Ezekiel 13:9]. On the other hand, those who turn to the cultivation of true godliness are said to inscribe their names among the citizens of Jerusalem [Isaiah 56:5; Psalm 87:6] By these words Gods fatherly favour and the especial witness of spiritual life are limited to his flock, so that it is always disastrous to leave the church. 17

believers and Gods school fulfils a unique and indispensable function in the work of salvation. More specifically, Calvin says that before the fall God intended that nature should be a school in which we might learn piety,22 but now the fallen state of humanity requires a kind of remedial education. The instructor, or alternatively, the classroom, is no longer nature, but rather the maternal church. While his emphasis does not lie upon the church as an extension of the incarnation,23 Calvin nonetheless ascribes to the church a significant role in the economy of redemption. While the incarnation of Christ forms the primary and unique medium through which God accommodates Gods self to us24, the church is a subordinate means God also uses to approach us and make Gods self accessible to us. And while Calvin leaves God the freedom to communicate Gods grace in ways other than through the church,25 the church ordinarily serves as the society within which faith is born, nourished and strengthened. The specific manner in which this occurs is through the ministry of word and sacraments, as the following paragraphs and even more the sermon on Gal. 4: 26-31 clearly indicate. There is no need to retrace here Calvins clear and distinctive doctrine of the four orders or offices of ministry. What is at stake is not the existence of the four offices, but their status. While the tone is fairly restrained, the picture that emerges from these sentences is significantly different

Let me point out in passing that the usage of these ancient metaphors is not peculiar to Calvin.18 Luther uses similar language in his Large Catechism: Outside the Christian Church, that is, where the Gospel is not, there is no forgiveness, and hence no holiness...The church is the mother that begets and bears every Christian through the word of God. 19 Bullinger has also a careful discussion of the church as mother in his Decades20 and he frequently applies the image of the school to the church in his commentaries.21 Both insist that the church as mother of the

293

from traditional Catholic teaching about the offices in the church. The latter had tied the authority of the office-bearer to the office itself. A bishop or a priest has certain powers granted by God which are inherent to his office, regardless of whether he uses those powers judiciously or abuses them blatantly. The church Calvin envisions is one in which God reserves all authority26, though God chooses to exercise this authority through the churchs ministers. Just as God is heard in Christ and in his gospel, so Christ himself communicates with us through his ministers. Calvin assigns such a high function to the ministry of the church that in his commentary on Gal 4:26 he can say: certainly he who refuses to be a son of the Church in vain desires to have God as his Father; for it is only through the instrumentality of the Church that we are born of God, [1 John 3:9] and brought up through the various stages of childhood and youth, till we arrive at manhood. This designation, the mother of us all, reflects the highest credit and the highest honor on the Church.27

churches are in a state of cognitive dissonance about it, affirming the centrality of community life, yet retaining an individualistic understanding of faith. Why then do Reformed Christians, strong as they are on individuality in Christ, often appear weak when it comes to the corporate awareness that should flow from recognizing the church as central in the plan of God? To be sure, the gospel message individualizes, and faith is always an individual, personal matter, and within the Christian community, each persons individuality is deepened and enhanced. At the same time, however, through the ministry of the word and the sacraments, the self-sufficient individualism should be snuffed out step by step, and through the communitys life, the glory of God should increasingly become the focus of each believers longings and prayers. Secondly, there is a whole realm of possibility for beautiful imagery and even poetry in these metaphors of the church as mother and school, provided that we do not interpret them in the sense of mater et magistra, that is as a magisterium vested in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, as in the Professio fidei Tridentina of 1564 28, but rather return to Calvins emphasis on the faithful teaching of the word of God. Yes, language in the church has been too masculine. We have ignored the truth that the church is the bride of Christ, and the mother of all believers. By eliminating the mother from the doctrine of the new birth, we have forced women to try to find some

This brief synopsis of Calvins conception of the church as mother of believers invites two short remarks. First, contrary to some subsequent developments in Protestantism, there is according to Calvin a genuine centrality of the church and a primacy of the corporate dimension of faith in the purpose of Gods gracious condescension towards us. It is a case, I believe, that urgently needs to be made, because many Reformed
294

new place for feminine language. Even worse, by denying the necessity of the visible church in the soteriology, we have ignored the motherand now she is dying, being excluded from our understanding as Gods instrument through which souls are revivified and sanctified. Yes, God alone is our father, but it is the church who is our mother, by whom we are nurtured through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This image has largely been lost in Reformed theology over the last 350 years. The only exception I know of is Jan Amos Comenius and his most touching work The Bequest of the Dying Mother (1650).29 Yet, the indications are suggestive. At the very least, recovery of the mother/school imagery would reflect a return to a biblical way of thinking about the church in her relationship with Christ, and would hopefully recapture one of the most fruitful images for understanding the role of the church in salvation.30

not only purely preached but also heard. For example, Bullinger, the other father of the Reformed tradition, affirms in the first sermon of the Decades: there are two special and principal marks, the sincere preaching of the word of God, and the lawful partaking of the sacraments of Christ.32 Calvins addition emphasizes the importance of people actually hearing what was preached and applying this to their lives, both collectively and individually. Of course, this is not a formal definition, but rather a way of discerning where a church is. There may be a lot of other aspects attached to the notion of church that are incidental to the fulfilment of its essential purpose, says Calvin, but as long as there is faithful preaching and hearing of the word of God and right administration of the sacraments, there is the church. According to Calvin, preaching must ordinarily be accompanied by the administration of the sacraments which, as appendices of the gospel, serve to confirm and to sustain us in the faith. 33 Speaking of this relationship between preaching and sacraments, Calvin notes that communion belongs to the fullness of worship:

2. The marks of the church: word and sacraments

How is the visible church to be recognized? It is well known that Calvin slightly modified the Augsburg Confession to give us the classical Reformed statement on the church: Wherever we see the word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to Christs institution, there, it is not to be doubted, a church of God exists. 31 Noteworthy in this formula is the explicitness of language: the word of God is

it was not instituted to be received once a year, and that perfunctorily, (as is now commonly the custom;) but that all Christians might have it in frequent use, and frequently call to mind the sufferings of Christ, thereby sustaining and confirming their faith: stirring themselves up to sing the praises of God,

295

and proclaim his goodness; cherishing and testifying towards each other that mutual charity, the bond of which they see in the unity of the body of Christ.34

imperfections of life ought not to be made a pretext for abandoning the church. In a strong passage he argues that to condemn wickedness in the church is one thing; to judge that no church exists on account of its

The awareness of the infirmity of our faith should lead us to experience the power of the aids and helps that God has provided for us in the church, especially in the preaching and the sacraments, so that our faith might be confirmed and strengthened thereby. This argument can lead him to the emphatic statement:

lack of perfect purity of life is quite another. It is vain to expect the church on earth to be completely purified. Perfection of life is not itself a characteristic note of the church. The marks of the true church are the word of God and the sacraments.36 There are several aspects of this lucid description of the marks of the church that are worth commenting on, but one in

Let us therefore carefully keep these marks imprinted upon our minds and esteem them in accordance with the Lords will. For there is nothing that Satan plots more than to remove and do away with one or both of these. Sometimes he tries by effacing and destroying these marks to remove the true and genuine distinction of the church. Sometimes he tries by heaping contempt upon them to drag us away from the church in open rebellion.35

particular must be singled out, namely the relation between preaching and the sacraments. The ecumenical exchanges of the past century have heightened awareness of the ecclesiastical reality that lies at the heart of these sentences and at same time of that singular phenomenon of logocentrism which so often undergirds present-day Reformed ecclesiology. Starting from these well-known passages of the Institutes Martha L. Moore-Keish,37 a North American Presbyterian theologian and a member of the worldwide Reformed church family, has raised some perceptive and challenging questions. Does Reformed ecclesiology really look to the word and the sacraments as marks of the church? It does indeed affirm that word and sacrament are the marks by which we know where the church is, but practice does not fully reflect this affirmation. Reformed theology has emphasized the centrality of the word, but

Significantly, Calvin did not follow Bucer and Oecolampadius, as did the Reformed tradition generally, in considering church discipline as nota ecclesiae, nor did he accept the Anabaptist view of the church, imbued as it was with the conviction of the necessity of perfect sanctity. Indeed, to insist on holiness of life as a mark of the true church is for Calvin a delusory pretension. Conscious as he is of the problem and importance of holy living to follow from the gospel,

296

what about the sacraments? Has it focused sufficient time and energy to due consideration of baptism and the Lords Supper as marks of the church? This critique is not new. Roman Catholics, Lutherans, high Anglicans and even leading ecumenists often remark that Reformed Christians have a somewhat inadequate view of the visible church because of their attitude towards the sacraments. Is that justified? In theory no, but in practice the answer is often yes. And if so, what are the causes? Is it a reaction against sacramentalist modes that hinder us from developing an ecclesial existence incorporating both preaching and sacraments? But above all, what are the remedies? Assuming that there is a tendency to undervalue the inextricable link between preaching and sacrament in Calvins thought, Moore-Keish goes on to suggest ways in which our understanding of the church might be enriched by the reintegration of sacramental theology into ecclesiology. Let me summarize them: Sacraments present and join us to Christ and, therefore, frequent reliance on them helps to better understand the church as the body of Christ. Sacraments draw us into community and therefore underscore the churchs identity as the people of the covenant. Sacraments call us to acknowledgement of sin and also call the church to confess its sinfulness and shortcomings.

Sacraments remind us of our dependence and so too, the church remembers that it is a dependent reality, founded on the gifts and actions of God. Sacraments acknowledge both our full humanity and Christs full humanity, so the church, too, is reminded to be a fully human institution with responsibilities for the bodies as well as the souls of its members. Sacraments are ethical acts and thus call the church to become a community of holy living, both in the private and in the public arena. Sacraments point toward Gods coming reign, and likewise the sacramental church is an eschatological community, a living dress rehearsal for the reign of God. On the whole, Moore-Keish seems to believe that for Calvin, sacraments consist of divine gift and human reception: Jesus Christ comes to us in and through the bread and wine and water, but we must have faith to receive that gift.This may be the most valuable and the most challenging thing we can learn from Calvins ecclesiology today: that the church is not something that we form of our own accord. It is not a product of our reaching out to God, but a gift of God reaching out to us. I would have nothing major to add to that except to underline how far our practice of the sacraments is from Calvins understanding of them.38 To be sure, this is not to blame Reformed churches for valuing scripture, doctrine and preaching in the way

297

that they door, at least, used to dofor even these aspects of his legacy are currently in eclipse among us, to our own great loss. Nonetheless, it must be said that the stress on text and talking has marginalized and depreciated the sacraments, so that their message about the crucified and living Lord as the life of the church is muffled, and the Eucharist thus becomes a mere extra, tacked onto a preaching service, rather than the congregations chief act of worship, as Calvin thought it should be. The wordsacrament antithesis adumbrated by Moore and other critics, most certainly is an exaggeration, but the disproportionate logocentrism of Reformed ecclesiology is a fact, and may even be a significant cause of an enfeebled Reformed churchliness.

temporal powers but rather, their mutual aid and reciprocal collaboration, each being free in its own sphere. However, the lines of demarcation were not clear, as a large part of scholarly criticism tends to indicate. In various provocative and lively surveys on this theme, William C. Naphy refers to the relationship between the two institutions in Calvins Geneva as incredibly interlocking, extremely complex but largely consensual.41 Let us be perfectly clear on this point, if only to avoid older inaccuracies and spreading around a romantic picture of the Genevan Reformer as harbinger of the formula a free Church in a free State. Like all his fellow reformers and almost everyone in the 16th century except the Anabaptists, Calvin held firmly to the concept of a state church to which all must belong. 42 The hallmark of their contention was that church and civic community were not two entirely separate bodies based on fundamentally different principles, but rather two elements of the same organism. The magistrate was not to usurp the spiritual function of the church. The church, on the other hand, was not to presume any kind of supremacy over secular authority. Although their tasks were distinct, both bodies were founded on common principles and both had to accept the principle of scriptural authority. Following these premises, close state involvement in church life was built, for example, into both the Geneva Ordonnances Ecclsiastiques and the

3. The church and the godly magistrate

In the Institutes, book IV, chapter 20 Calvin clearly elucidates his views on the relationship between the church and the magistrate.39 These were in marked contrast with a number of other positions. He firmly rejected the papal hierocracy of the late Middle Ages. He was equally opposed to the Erastian subordination of the church to the political authority, be it in Lutheran or Zwinglian fashion. Although he refused, like the Anabaptists, any confusion between the spiritual and the temporal orders, he did not hold with them that a Christian ought to remain apart from all offices. His ideal was not the separation of the spiritual and
40

298

Zurich Prediger- und Synodalordnung. In Geneva the elders, who together with the pastors formed the disciplinary body known as the Consistory, were drawn from the ranks of all three Genevan councilsthe Petit Conseil, the Conseil des Soixante, and the Conseil des Deux Cents, while the chairman was the Syndic. In Zurich all ministers and seven members of the council attended the synod which was chaired jointly by the senior pastor and the incumbent Brgermeister.43 The Genevan rulers like the Zurich magistrates maintained steady pressure to uphold the states jurisdiction over the church. Over the obligations of pastors towards the state, the states oversight of pastors and the relative roles of the clergy and the civil government, there were large areas of consensus as well as potential for recurrent discord both in Geneva and in Zurich. Specifically unique to Geneva was the involvement of magistrate-elders in the consistorial discipline and in the sanction of excommunication. The Zurich Reformation was, in contrast to the Geneva Reformation, very reluctant to develop its own church discipline and left it totallyor at least to a large extentto the city council. Even if the church was to police itself through measures of self-government exercised in the biannual meetings of the Synod, at no time did Bullinger argueas Calvin did in Genevathat excommunication be placed in the hands of clerical authority instead of those of the magistrates. The

Zurich model, characterized by Pamela Biel as a reciprocal relationship44, consisted essentially in a modus vivendi which took account of the concerns of both parties. While the final authority over the church lay in the hands of temporal rulers, the prophetic function (Wchteramt) of the church, with regard to the whole society, magistrates included, was maintained by the clergy. In addition, through the person of the antistes, the ministers had direct access to the city council and could raise their voices whenever they felt it important to make their opinions known to the government. 45 Accordingly, Bullinger rejected the Anabaptist position, no less than did Calvin and often more vigorously. In contrast, Bullinger spoke at times in a manifestly supportive tone about the Geneva model, although the confrontation between the two visions in the Palatinate, in what later was to be known as the Erastian controversy, exacerbated the differences between Zurich and Geneva. The overriding impression that emerges from the reading of the weighty chapter 20 of book IV of the Institutes is that Calvin, like Bullinger46, was anxious to impress on the secular authority the weighty responsibility of the cura religionis; but above all he was zealous to preserve the autonomy of the church from confusion with the jurisdiction of the godly magistrate. His model is characterized by a relative degree of autonomy and independence from the civil authority within the framework of a

299

state church, in particular in terms of the social and political implications of the imposition of church discipline. To use anachronistic terminology, we might say that Calvins view stresses the role of checks and balances in a system in which church and state worked as a single, national unit, comprising much of the same personnel and the same space.47 One cannot label the struggle about excommunication as a constitutional clash for the independence of the church from state, since there was no separation between church (Company) and state (Petit Conseil), but merely a disagreement between one institution of the State, the Consistory, and another, the Petit Conseil. 48 In other words, it was a question of jurisdiction and place in the institutional structure of the state between one bureaucratic body, the Consistory, and another, the Petit Conseil.49 This, let it be said, is a tall achievement. Calvins strongly-held views incite our admiration, because they have become the source of pulsating energies constantly adjusting to the various political cultures. His model of church organization was certainly more biblical and less dangerous than Bullingers model of the relationship between religious and temporal sphere and, in the long run, more influential both spiritually and politically. It must also be said that Calvin was dealing with a Christian society and with Christian rulers. The Geneva Reformation started in a distinct geographical area,

Europe, where the Constantinian pattern had been imposed and would not have survived without state support. There remains the basic question of our attitude to the medieval and early-modern pattern of a Christian society emerging from the Constantinian settlement. Some regard it as the greatest victory of the church and would argue that we are still reaping the benefits of it, while othersand as a Waldensian heretic I count my self among themhave seen it as a false trail. As a Reformation historian, however, I would be the last to criticize Calvin or Bullinger for not having challenged the idea of the corpus christianum. Yet another problem lurks here. We now face a pluralistic society and a secular state. To debate the duties of godly magistrate is fast becoming irrelevant. In this respect, Calvins Geneva may be of historical interest to us but it is of little immediately practical consequence. If at all comparable, our present situation is analogous not to that of the church in the early-modern period, but to that of the latter part of the third century, when the church was still a tiny minority within the Roman Empire. And the perennial trouble of minorities is that, by a process as understandable as it is regrettable, their care is for their own survival, and thus concern for the quickening and renewing of society is considerably reduced. Such a narrowing of care for society is a seedbed of sectarianism and ought never to occur. We must not react against

300

Constantinian politics into an inward, private spirituality. The church can and should influence society as a whole, not to dominate but to serve as innovative ferment. Bullingers Frtrge and Calvins unpretentious system of checks and balances both involve much more than defending the interests of the church. They believed and practised what we have to relearn time and time again, namely that the

Christian message of salvation becomes futile unless its implications are extended throughout the whole of human life, into political, social and international structures. Perhaps here lies Calvinsand let me add also Bullingersgreatest contribution in the field of political ethics, a contribution which exceeds by far the confessional borders and their own time and which embraces the whole Christian church.50

Notes
1

The theme has been addressed recently by Lukas Vischer, Pia Conspiratio. Calvins Commitment to the Unity of Christs Church (Geneva: John Knox International Reformed Center, 2000); Aladair Heron, The relevance of the Early Reformed Tradition, particularly of Calvin, for an Ecumenical Ecclesiology Today, in The Church in Reformed Perspective. A European Reflection (Geneva: John Knox, 2002) 47-74 and Gottfried W. Locher, Sign of the advent. A study in Protestant ecclesiology (Fribourg: Academic Press, 2004). 2 For example: visible and invisible church, true and false church, local and universal, unity in doctrine und diversity in organization, etc. 3 Willhelm Niesel, Die Theologie Calvins (Mnchen: Ch. Kaiser, 1938) [Engl. The Theology of Calvin, (Philadelphia PA: Westminster Press, 1956)]; Alexandre Ganoczy, Calvin, thologien de lEglise et du ministre (Paris: d. du Cerf, 1964); Otto Weber, Calvins Lehre von der Kirche, in Id., Die Treue Gottes in der Geschichte der Kirche (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1968) 19-104; Lopold Schmmer, LEcclsiologie de Calvin la lumire de lEcclesia Mater (Bern: P. Lang, 1981); Harro Hpfl, The Christian Polity of Jean Calvin, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982); Stefan Scheld, Media salutis. Zur Heilsvermittlung bei Calvin (Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, 1989); Richard C. Gamble, Calvins Ecclesiology: Sacraments and Deacons (NewYork & London: Garland, 1992). 4 Robert M. Kingdon, Catechesis in Calvins Geneva, in John van Engen, ed., Educating People of Faith (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2004) 294-313; John Hesselink, Calvins Use of Doctrina in His Catechisms (unpublished paper given at the International Calvin Congress, Emden, August 2006). 5 Peter Opitz, Calvins theologische Hermeneutik (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1994); Max Engammare, Sermons sur la Gense (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag,
301

2000); Id., Wilhelmus H. Th. Moehn, God calls us to His Service (Geneva: Droz, 2001); Herman. J. Selderhuis, Church on Stage: Calvins Dynamic Ecclesiology, in David Foxgrover, ed., Calvin and the Church (Grand Rapids: Calvin Studies Society, 2002) 46-64. 6 Jean-Daniel Benoit, Calvin and His Letters: A Study of Calvins Pastoral Counselling Mainly from His Letters (Oxford: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1986) trans. Richard Haig; William G. Naphy, Calvins Letters: Reflections on Their Usefulness in studying Geneva History, Archiv fr Reformationsgeschichte 86 (1995): 67-89. 7 Elsie A.McKee, Calvin and his colleagues as pastors: some new insights into the collegial ministry of word and sacraments, in Herman J. Selderhuis, ed., Calvinus Praeceptor Ecclesiae, Papers of the International Congress on Calvin Research, Princeton, August 20-24, 2002 (Geneva: Droz, 2004) 9-42. 8 William G. Naphy, Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan Reformation (Manchester/ New York: Manchester University Press, 1994); Id., Church and State in Calvins Geneva, in David Foxgrover, ed., Calvin and the Church (Grand Rapids: Calvin Studies Society, 2002) 13-28. Since 1987 a team of scholars (Thomas A. Lambert, Isabella M. Watt, Jeffrey R. Watt) under the supervision of Robert M. Kingdon is publishing the Registres du Consistoire de Genve au temps de Calvin and examining important aspects of church life and popular religious practice. See for a bibliographical overview Jeffrey R. Watt, Childhood and youth in the Geneva Consistory minutes, in Selderhuis, Calvinus Praeceptor Ecclesiae, 43-64, here 42. 9 Huldreich Zwingli, Smtliche Werke [= Z], vol. I, 538. 10 H. Bullinger, Decades, edited for the Parker society by Thomas Harding (Cambridge: University Press, 1852) vol. IV, 17. On Bullingers ecclesiology, see Peter Opitz, Heinrich Bullinger als Theologe. Eine Studie zu den Dekaden (Zrich: TVZ, 2004) 417-461. 11 Inst. IV.1.7. (hereinafter for quotations from the Institutes in English Ford Lewis Battles translation is used). 12 Inst. IV.1.10. 13 Cf. Raymond A. Blacketer, The School of God. Pedagogy and Rhetoric in Calvins interpretation of Deuteronomy (Dordrecht: Springer, 2006) 40-42. 14 Com. on 1 Tim 3:15, CO 52, 288. The church is the mother of all believers because she brings them the new birth by the Word of God, educates and nourishes them all their life, strengthens them and finally leads them to complete perfection.; Com. on 1 Tim 5:7, CO 52, 308. The church is Gods school, the pillar and ground of the truth, because instructs in the study of a holy and perfect life. Com. on 1 Tim 4:6, CO 52, 298. 15 Com. on Gal 4: 26-31 : In the same way, we must be careful today when we speak of the church, to ensure that we ourselves are not of that illegitimate seed; for if we have hypocritically uttered Gods name before men, he will surely reject us and banish us from his family. God bestows great honour upon the church here, when he calls her the mother of all believers. It reminds us of the words of Paul in another place, where he says that the church is the pillar which upholds Gods truth in this world [1 Tim 3:15]. It does not mean that the truth needs to be maintained by sinners like ourselves, inclined as we are to fickleness and inconstancy, and prone to falsehood. How could the truth of God rest upon the shoulders of men, unstable as we are? Yet, through his unfailing kindness, he desired that his Word should be proclaimed here below, and committed that responsibility to those whom he has called. It is for this reason that the church is referred to here as the mother of us all. As the Lord Jesus Christ declares, God alone is our Father [Mt 23:9]. God is our spiritual Father, and must have no rival. It is he that brings us the hope of eternal life by means of his true church, in which he has placed his incorruptible seed. As the prophet
302

Isaiah says, my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever [Isa. 59:21]. Thus, God governs his people through his Word. It is this message which he has bestowed as a deposit and priceless treasure for the salvation of his church, to bring us regeneration and nourish our spiritual lives. 16 Inst. IV. 1.1. 17 Inst. IV.1.4. Cfr. also Inst. IV.1.20. and Com. on Isa 33:24. 18 The metaphor of the church as mother goes back to Cyprian, De ecclesiae unitate 6, in PL 4, 519: Habere non potest Deum patrem, qui ecclesiam non habet matrem, and Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos, 88, serm. 2, in PL 39, 1512. See Joseph C. Plumpe, Mater Ecclesia. An Inquiry into the Concept of the Church as Mother in Early Christianity (Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1943). 19 Martin Luther, Large Catechism, part 2, The Creed, third article. 20 Heinrich Bullinger, Decades, vol. IV. 90-92. 21 For example Heinrich Bullinger, Daniel Sapientissimus Dei Propheta, Zrich 1565, 3a5a. 22 Inst. II.6.1. 23 Against Schmmer, op. cit., 50-53, and Scheld, op. cit., 128. 24 For the concept of accomodation in Calvins thought see John Balserak, Divinity Compromised. A Study of Divine Accomodation in the Thought of John Calvin (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2006). 25 Inst. IV.1.5. 26 Inst. IV.3.1. 27 Com. on Gal 4:26. 28 Heinrich Denzinger, Enchiridion Symbolorum , ed. Peter Hnermann (Freiburg in Breisgau: Herder, 1991) 1868: Sanctam catholicam et apostolicam Romanam Ecclesiam omnium ecclesiarum matrem et magistram agnosco; Romanoque Pontifici, beati Petri Apostolorum principis successori ac Iesu Christi vicario, veram oboedientiam spondeo ac iuro. 29 A tract born of despair at the terms of the Peace of Westphalia, discussing whether the Unity of Brethren in exile should dissolve itself. English translation: The bequest of the Unity of Brethren, trans. and ed. Matthew Spinka (Chicago: National Union of Czechoslovak Protestants in America, 1940). 30 See Isa 49; 50; 54; 66:7ff; Jer 3,4. The book of Revelation depicts the Church as a mother giving birth to the Messiah (Rev 12). Similarly, the Apostle Paul glories that the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all (Gal 4:26). D. G. Hart, Rediscovering Mother Kirk. Is High-Church Presbyterianism an Oxymoron?, Touchstone, 13 (2000) No. 10, in a generally useful overview, though with orthodox Presbyterian pathos, outlines the implications of these two metaphors for worship, ethics and church life. 31 Inst. IV.1.9. In the Confessio Augustana, art. 7, the church is defined as congregatio sanctorum, in qua evangelium pure docetur et recte administrantur sacramenta, in Bekenntnisschriften der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck. & Ruprecht,1967) 61. 32 Heinrich Bullinger, Decades, vol. IV,18. 33 Inst. IV.14.3. 34 Inst. IV.17.44. 35 Inst. IV.1.11. 36 Inst. IV.1. 13. In bearing with imperfections of life we ought to be far more considerate.
303

For here the descent is very slippery and Satan ambushes us with no ordinary devices. For there have always been those who, imbued with a false conviction of their own perfect sanctity, as if they had already become a sort of airy spirits, spurned association with all men in whom they discern any remnant of human nature. The Cathari of old were of this sort, as well as the Donatists, who approached them in foolishness. Such today are some of the Anabaptists who wish to appear advanced beyond other men. There are others who sin more out of ill-advised zeal for righteousness than out of that insane pride. When they do not see a quality of life corresponding to the doctrine of the gospel among those to whom it is announced, they immediately judge that no church exists in that place. This is a very legitimate complaint, and we give all too much occasion for it in this most miserable age. And our cursed sloth is not to be excused, for the Lord will not allow it to go unpunished, seeing that he has already begun to chastise it with heavy stripes. Woe to us, then, who act with such dissolute and criminal license that weak consciences are wounded because of us! But on their part those of whom we have spoken sin in that they do not know how to restrain their disfavor. For where the Lord requires kindness, they neglect it and give themselves over completely to immoderate severity. Indeed, because they think no church exists where there are not perfect purity and integrity of life, they depart out of hatred of wickedness from the lawful church, while they fancy themselves turning aside from the faction of the wicked. They claim that the church of Christ is holy [Ephesians 5:26]. But in order that they may know that the church is at the same time mingled of good men and bad, let them hear the parable from Christs lips that compares the church to a net bin which all kinds of fish are gathered and are not sorted until laid out on the shore [Matthew 13:47-58]. Let them hear that it is like a field sown with good seed which is through the enemys deceit scattered with tares and is not purged of them until the harvest is brought into the threshing floor [Matthew 13:24-3-]. Let them hear finally that it is like a threshing floor on which grain is so collected that it lies hidden under the chaff until, winnowed by fan and sieve, it is at last stored in the granary [Matthew 3:12]. But if the Lord declares that the church is to labor under this evilto be weighed down with the mixture of the wicked until the Day of Judgment, they are vainly seeking a church besmirched with no blemish. 37 Martha L. Moore-Keish, Calvin, Sacraments and Ecclesiology: what makes a Church a Church, in http://reformedtheology.org/SiteFiles/PublicLectures/Moore-KeishPL.html 38 See Inst. IV.17.38.: The Lord intended it [i.e. the Lords Supper] to be a kind of exhortation, than which no other could urge or animate us more strongly, both to purity and holiness of life, and also to charity, peace, and concord. For the Lord there communicates his body so that he may become altogether one with us, and we with him. Moreover, since he has only one body of which he makes us all to be partakers, we must necessarily, by this participation, all become one body. This unity is represented by the bread which is exhibited in the sacrament. As it is composed of many grains, so mingled together, that one cannot be distinguished from another; so ought our minds to be so cordially united, as not to allow of any dissension or division. This I prefer giving in the words of Paul: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many, are one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of that one bread, [1 Cor. 10: 15, 16] We shall have profited admirably in the sacrament, if the thought shall have been impressed and engraven on our minds, that none of our brethren is hurt, despised, rejected, injured, or in any way offended, without our, at the same time, hurting, despising, and injuring Christ; that we cannot have dissension with our brethren, without at the same time dissenting from Christ; that we cannot love Christ without loving our brethren; that the same care we take
304

of our own body we ought to take of that of our brethren, who are members of our body; that as no part of our body suffers pain without extending to the other parts, so every evil which our brother suffers ought to excite our compassion. Wherefore Augustine not inappropriately often terms this sacrament the bond of charity. What stronger stimulus could be employed to excite mutual charity, than when Christ, presenting himself to us, not only invites us by his example to give and devote ourselves mutually to each other, but inasmuch as he makes himself common to all, also makes us all to be one in him. For the ethical implications of Calvins sacramental theology see Brian A. Gerrish, Grace and gratitude, Minneapolis 1993. 39 See Josef Bohatec, Calvin und das Recht (Feudingen in Westfalen: Buchdruckereri u. verlagsanstalt, 1934); William Naphy, Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan Reformation; Harro Hpfl, The Christian Polity of Jean Calvin. 40 Hans Scholl, Der Geist der Gesetze. Die politische Dimension der Theologie Calvins dargestellt besonders an seiner Auseinandersetzung mit den Tufern, in Peter Opitz, ed. Calvin im Kontext der Schweizer Reformation. Historische und theologische Beitrge zur Calvinforschung (Zrich: Theologischer Verlag, 2003) 93-125. For a comprehensive description of the Anabaptist view, see Michael Driedger, Anabaptists and the Early Modern State: A Long-Term View, in A Companion to Anabaptism and Spiritualism, 1521-1700, ed. John D. Roth and James M. Stayer (Leiden/Boston : Brill, 2007) 507-544. 41 Naphy, Church and State in Calvins Geneva, 20 & 27. 42 See the useful overview by Otto Weber, Kirchliche und staatliche Kompetenz in den Ordonnances ecclsiastiques von 1561, in Id., Die Treue Gottes, 119-130. 43 Bruce Gordon, Clerical Discipline and Rural Reformation. The Synod in Zrich, 15321580 (Bern: P. Lang, 1992). 44 Pamela Biel, Doorkeepers at the House of Righteousness. Heinrich Bullinger and the Zurich Clergy 1535-1575 (Bern: P. Lang, 1991) 20. 45 I refer to the he peculiar custom of the Frtrge, the formal memoranda to the city authorities inaugurated by Bullinger and kept well into 17th century Zurich. See Hans Ulrich Bchtold, Heinrich Bullinger vor dem Rat. Zur Gestaltung und Verwaltung des Zricher Staatswesens in den Jahren 1531 bis 1575, Bern: P. Lang, 1982). Most of the Frtrge are now available in a modern German translation in Heinrich Bullinger, Schriften, vol.6, ed. Emidio Campi et al., Zrich: Theologischer Verlag, 2006). 46 See for the relationship of Church and State in Bullingers Zurich, Emidio Campi, Bullingers Rechts- und Staatsdenken, Evangelische Theologie 64 (2004): 116-126; Id., Bullingers Early Political and Theological Thought: Brutus Tigurinus, in Bruce Gordon and Emidio Campi, Architect of the Reformation. An Introduction to Heinrich Bullinger, 1504-1575 (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004) 181-199. 47 Naphy, Church and State in Calvins Geneva, 22. 48 Ibid., 26. 49 Ibid. 50 See the standard work by Andr Biler, La pense conomique et sociale de Calvin (Geneva: Georg,1959) trans. James Greig, Calvins economic and social thought, Geneva, 2005), Nicholas Wolterstorff, Until justice and peace embrace (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 1983); Id., The Wounds of God: Calvins theology of social justice, The Reformed Journal 37 (1987): 14-22. See also the public statement on The economic and social witness of Calvin for Christian life today issued by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, the John Knox Center and the Faculty of Theology of the University of Geneva, Reformed World 55 (2005

305

Views on Calvins ethics: reading Calvin in the South African context

Dirkie Smit

For Dirkie Smit, studying John Calvins theology in apartheid South Africa was more than a mere student exercise, particularly since being Calvinist was synonymous with standing for apartheid. But, he writes, with the arrival of a new theology professor who understood Calvins linking of knowledge of God and care for humanity, students became inspired and began to wonder about using Calvins theology to support apartheid. Hidden within the writings of Calvin was a conviction that radically spoke to their context and helped ultimately to drive the anti-apartheid movement.

Why do we celebrate the legacy of John Calvin? In South Africa, that is indeed far more than just a rhetorical question. I still vividly remember my first experience reading Calvins works, of hearing his voice.1 It was the time of apartheid in South African societyan oppressive system of racial classification, exclusion and injustice, a system partly born within Reformed worship and the Lords Supper2 and also built on an apartheid ecclesiology and biblical and theological justification provided by the Reformed tradition and community.3 I was a first-year student in theology in a whitesonly faculty where a professor of Reformed theology heading a section on mission helped develop the first comprehensive racial policy on apartheid,.4 Our professor in
306

doctrine was known as a Calvin expert and loyal follower, who had written his doctorate on Calvin while studying with orthodox Calvinists in the Netherlands. He was also known, like many others who were proudly known as Calvinist in church and public circles in white South Africa, as a staunch supporter of apartheid in church and society.5 In our context, being Calvinist was synonymous with standing for apartheid, for apartheid politics, apartheid economics and an apartheid worldview, in short, the whole ethos and ethics from which apartheid grew6 and which for many South Africans still holds. A new professor, W. D. (Willie) Jonker, had been appointed to the faculty. He was known to be deeply Reformed, steeped in

Calvin and the Reformed confessions and deeply critical of apartheid. He also had a reputation as a dissenter and hence, was seen as disloyal to the volk, perhaps even dangerous. He was a personal friend of Beyers Naud, Jaap Durand, David Bosch and others who were known to reject the pervasive ideology. He was a public voice arguing for the visible unity of the church, for reconciliation instead of separation, for justice instead of self-preservation and selfprivilege.7 In our very first week in the faculty, Jonker lectured on the nature of theology and the specific characteristics of Reformed theology.8 It is about the honour of God, soli Deo Gloria, we heard, but for the Reformed understanding of the biblical message, the honour of God is intimately interwoven with human salvation, with human life, wellbeing, in Calvins words where God is known, there humanity is also cared for. 9 This course inspired many of usand made us wonder. In the year I entered theological studies, Jonker published an essay in Afrikaans called The relevance of social ethics.10 For that context, it was a radically new argument, eagerly read and intensely discussed by many students. He explained how the contemporary worldit was the early 1970swas experiencing a remarkable upsurge of interest in social ethics. Unlike personal or individual ethics, which is interested primarily in individual people and their relationships with others and with their environment and social world, social

ethics is concerned with the social structures in themselves and with the complex ways in which they structurally, objectively and systemically have an impact on the lives of human beings. For centuries, he explained, even Christian ethics was primarily concerned with the moral behaviour of individual believers. Theories of natural law guaranteed the inevitability and necessity of existing social structures, simply to be accepted as the social context in which we have to conduct our personal lives. One would expect different views in the theology of the Reformation, he said, but in Lutheran thought too most social forms and institutions were regarded as matters of reason and common sense, not subjected to the claims of scripture. The most important approach to social-ethical questions during the time of the Reformation, he said, we find in Calvin. For Calvin, holy scripture is the ultimate norm, including with regard to the formation of human life in community and society. Natural law is indeed important for civil justice and public order, but ultimately all our social institutions should also come under the criticism of the word of God. Calvins own activities of wide-ranging social reform provide ample proof of how different his thought about social questions was compared to his time; he was not simply interested in conservative restoration, but rather was concerned with placing everything under the discipline of Gods word. Of course, Calvin was also only a child of his

307

age, and it was therefore impossible for him to do justice to many aspects of social ethics that would only come to the fore much later. His point of departure, however, created room for an approach to social ethics in which the social aspect is not reduced to the individual and in which the existing order and social and political systems and structures, the public institutions as they are, should no longer simply be accepted as given and eternal. Jonker went on to say that, unfortunately, Calvins approach would not always be followed and that the history of Reformed ethics would again show a clear reduction to individualism and a far too uncritical acceptance of existing social institutions and forms of community life as unchangeable creation orders of God. In our context, these words were nothing less than theological subversion. He quoted at length Bilers work on Calvins social and economic thought explaining that this study made it very clear that Calvinism should be a permanent force towards political and social reformation and transformation; that Calvin in his day actively participated in the improvement of the quality of life of so-called less privileged classes and that he did this for reasons of principle, because for him spiritual and political truth were inseparably bound to one another; Christians, according to Calvin, should always be a disturbing element in their societies by resisting all forms of injustice. These are the reasons why Calvin spoke so passionately and so profusely about

poverty and riches, interest and wages.11 In his conclusions, he argued that contemporary societies face questions that cannot be solved on the level of individual ethics alone; that there are forms of injustice that are caused by the ways in which societies are structured and how they function; that it is of no use to appeal to the attitudes of individual believers under such circumstances, since society itself must be transformed for justice to be maintained and that as Reformed churches in the tradition of Calvin we simply cannot ignore these social and ethical challenges. As long as we believe that Christ is the Lord and that his reign should be proclaimed over every inch of this earthly realityand should we not believe this we are no longer Reformed peoplethen we may not close our eyes for the injustice, poverty, oppression and frustration under which so many people in our world suffer. The biggest danger for us is that we resist the criticism of the existing social system as if nothing is or can be wrong with it. In fact, we should be more critical than everyone else, because we stand on the basis of the holy scripture that opens the eyes for every form of evil and injustice and calls towards doing Gods will in every sphere of our lives.12

Should Reformed people withdraw from these ethical challenges, they reveal that they are in fact not Reformed in the tradition of Calvin.

308

We should never comfort ourselves with the thought that everything is fine enough. The radical critique of holy scripture against every form of injustice should alarm us not simply to accept conditions in which people must suffer injustice or hardship. Accordingly, the way of pietistic escape from the world by claiming that church and theology have nothing to do with the burning social and political questions of our day, is completely closed to us. Whoever chooses this way, not only thereby leaves the way that the Dutch Reformed Church has always followed in the past, but they also leave the Reformed way and show thereby that they do not understand anything about the concrete implications of the gospel for all spheres of human life.13

Calvins ethics and Calvins ethos

However, we still had to read Calvin ourselves. In our very first course in ethics, we had to read three sections from the Institutes: the exposition of the moral law (Book II, 8), the description of the Christian life (Book III, 6-10) and the discussion of Christian liberty (Book III, 19).15 Of course, we would later learn that these are precisely the sections that scholars dealing with Calvins ethics continue to study and to explain. 16 Some focus on his attention to the law, in particular as seen in his exposition of the Ten Commandments as the moral law, as the best framework for understanding his ethics.17 Others see his depiction of the Christian life as dying to oneself and being raised with Christ and his discussion on discipleship and sanctification as the best statement of his ethics.18 Still others regard his analysis of Christian freedom as the best introduction to the social and political relevance of his ethics. 19 In a way, the actual content and the detailed positions of his ethics were for us of less importance. Calvin was a child of his time, and his ethics inevitably reflected thatthe impact of his upbringing in a particular humanistic, scholastic, neo-stoic and legal tradition; the conflicts with the Council of Trent and post-Reformation developments in Catholicism, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, with the Anabaptists and their radical potential; the

Following in the footsteps of Calvin, however, involves doing in our moment in history what he did in his time, in new ways of obedience to Gods word. It is obvious that we cannot simply be satisfied to repeat what Reformed ethicists have already said in the past. We have to discern and evaluate the social, political and public institutions of our own time. For that, however, we need a norm. We should here follow in Calvins footsteps and unconditionally choose the holy scripture as final norm. Of course, this makes the responsible use of scripture so utmost important for social ethics. In the last instance, the contemporary relevance of social ethics calls us back to our rooms (binnekamers) and our studies to bow ourselves once again over the one Book that is always already ahead of us, irrespective of the moment in history in which we may live.14

309

challenges of the new reality of the modern world that were already breaking through in various forms and ways.20 Yet, hidden within these writings there was something a vision, an ethos, fundamental commitments, basic theological concerns and convictionsthat radically spoke to us in our own situation. This ethos shone through in passing comments, in rhetorical remarks, in assumptions simply taken for granted, and it challenged and moved us. Calvin on the moral law Calvins ethos was obvious in his exposition of the moral law. The law itself is good and spiritualit is itself the form of grace and gospel; it does not only forbid, for its content is primarily positive; it is life-giving and life-affirming; it calls us to pursue justice and to serve life; it remains valid as a guideline for our everyday lives; it moves us to reflect on Gods paternal kindness; we should practise this kindness and love towards all and everyone, even if tradition and authorities urge us to act otherwise. For us, these were powerful words. Worship and justice, piety and righteousness belong together. Our pious fear of God, which is what the Institutes is intended to serve, shows itself in the practice of justice and mercy. Doctrine and ethics belong together, as one. After all, we are not our own (II/8.2). Our whole life should be spent in the cultivation of righteousness; the only legitimate service to this God is the practice of justice, purity, and holiness(II/8.2). Is it then true, you will ask, that it is a more
310
21

complete summary of righteousness to live innocently with fellow human beings, than piously towards God? By no means, but our Lord means, that in the law the observance of justice and equity towards human beings is prescribed as the means which we are to employ in testifying a pious fear of God, if we truly possess it (II/8.53).

Behind what is forbidden by the law, behind the prohibition and the negative, we should look for what is actually commanded, positively, for the principle. The commandment Thou shalt not kill, the majority of people will merely consider as an injunction to abstain from all injury, and all wish to inflict injury. I hold that it moreover means, that we are to aid our neighbors life by every means in our power I prove it thus: God forbids us to injure or hurt a brother or sister, because he would have their life to be dear and precious to us; and, therefore, when he so forbids, he, at the same time, demands all the offices of charity which can contribute to their preservation (II/8.9). Thus we are called to affirm, protect and serve the life of others, of the one and whole human race, to which we all belong. Therefore, the purport of this (sixth) commandment is, that since the Lord has bound the whole human race by a kind of unity, the safety of all ought to be considered as entrusted to each. In general, therefore, all violence and

injustice, and every kind of harm from which our neighbors body suffers, is prohibited. Accordingly, we are required faithfully to do what in us lies to defend the life of our neighbors, to promote whatever tends to their tranquility, to be vigilant in warding off harm, and, when danger comes, to assist in removing it This commandment, therefore prohibits the murder of the heart, and requires a sincere desire to preserve our brothers and sisters life (II.8.39).

murder. On the other hand, if you do not according to your means and opportunity study to defend their safety, by that inhumanity you violate the law (II/8.40).

What we obtain, possess and enjoy, perhaps legally in terms of human laws, may in fact be the result of social and economic injustice, even theft and oppression, in the eyes of God. The purport of the eighth commandment, Thou shalt not steal is, that injustice being an abomination to God, we must render to every person their due. In substance, then, this commandment forbids us to long after other peoples goods. There are many kinds of theft. One consists in violence, another in the more hidden craft which takes possession of them with a semblance of justice, another in sycophancy, which wiles them away under the pretence of donation. But we know that all the arts by which we obtain possession of the goods and money of our neighbors are to be regarded as thefts. Though they may be obtained by an action at law, a different decision is given by God. He sees the long train of deception by which the people of craft begin to lay nets for their more simple neighbors, until they entangle them in their meshes. He sees the harsh and cruel laws by which the more powerful oppresses and crushes the feeble, though all these escape the judgment of human beings, and no cognizance is taken of them. Nor is the violation of this commandment confined to money, or merchandise, or lands, but extends to every kind of right; for we defraud our neighbors to their hurt if we decline any

Human beings have dignity, are sacred, both because they are the image of God and because we are human too. Scripture notes a twofold equity on which this commandment is founded. Humanity is both the image of God and our flesh. Wherefore, if we would not violate the image of God, we must hold the human person sacredif we would not divest ourselves of humanity, we must cherish our own flesh. The practical inference to be drawn from the redemption and gift of Christ will be elsewhere considered [which means that later, especially in Book III, similar and even more powerful arguments will be made based on the gospel of Jesus Christ, DJS]. The Lord has been pleased to draw our attention to these two natural considerations as inducements to watch over our neighbors preservationthat is to revere the divine image impressed upon them, and embrace our own flesh. To be clear of the crime of murder, it is not enough to refrain from shedding peoples blood. If in act you perpetrate it, if in endeavor you plot, if in wish and design you conceive what is adverse to anothers safety, you have the guilt of

311

of the duties which we are bound to perform towards them (II/8.45).

We are called to practise social compassion and economic justice, through what we think and what we do. This commandment, therefore, we shall duly obey, if, contented with our own lot, we study to acquire nothing but honest and lawful gain; if we do not grow rich by injustice, nor to plunder our neighbors of their goods, that our own may thereby be increased, if we hasten not to heap up wealth cruelly wrung from the blood of others; if we do not, by means lawful and unlawful, with excessive eagerness, scrape together whatever may glut our avarice. On the other hand, let it be our constant aim faithfully to lend our counsel and aid to all so as to assist them in retaining their property. Let us contribute to the relief of those whom we see under the pressure of difficulties, assisting their want out of our abundance. Lastly, let each of us consider how far we are bound in duty to others. Let every one thus consider what in their own place and order they owe to their neighbors, and pay what they owe. Moreover, we must always have a reference to the Lawgiver, and so remember that the law requiring us to promote and defend the interest and convenience of our fellow human beings, applies equally to our minds and our hands (II/8.46).

Indeed, since human beings are naturally prone to excessive self-love, which they always retain, there was no need of a law to inflame a love already existing in excess. Hence it is perfectly plain, that the observance of the commandments consists not in the love of ourselves, but in the love of God and our neighbor; and that they lead the best and holiest life who as little as may be study and live for themselves; and that none lives worse and more unrighteously than they who study and live only for themselves, and seek and think only of their own. Nay, the better to express how strongly we should be inclined to love our neighbor, the Lord has made selflove as it were the standard, there being no feeling in our nature of greater strength and vehemence. The Lord did not make self-love the rule, as if love towards others was subordinate to it; but whereas, through natural depravity, the feeling of love usually rests on ourselves, he shows that it ought to diffuse itself in another directionthat we should be prepared to do good to our neighbor with no less alacrity, ardor, and solicitude, than to ourselves (II/8.54).

Our love towards our neighbour should not be restricted to those whom we prefer to love and our respect for human beings and their human dignity 22 should not depend on their actions or their being acceptable according to our criteria of evaluation and judgment. Our Savior having shown, in the parable of the Samaritan (Luke 10:36), that the term neighbor comprehends the most remote stranger, there is no reason

We are warned against excessive self-love and against the self-serving argument that self-love is actually demanded of us by the law.
312

for limiting the precept of love to our own connections. I deny not that the closer the relation the more frequent our offices of kindness should be. But I say that the whole human race, without exception, are to be embraced with one feeling of charity: that here there is no distinction of Greek or Barbarian, worthy or unworthy, friend or foe, since all are to be viewed not in themselves, but in God. If we turn from this view, there is no wonder that we entangle ourselves in error. Wherefore, if we would hold the true course in love, our first step must be to turn the eyes not to human beings, the sight of which might oftener produce hatred than love, but to God, who require that the love we owe to him be diffused among all humankind, so that our fundamental principle must ever be, Let a person be who they may, they are still to be loved, because God is loved (II/8.55).

what he orders, and to order what he wills. That Christians are under the law of grace, means not that they are to wander unrestrained without law, but that they are engrafted into Christ, by whose grace they are freed from the curse of the law, and by whose Spirit they have the law written in their hearts. This grace Paul has termed, but not in the proper sense of the term, a law (II/8.57) . A particular challenge to us was Calvins claim that this law of God, this call to justice, should trump all human authority and power. When custom, tradition or culture wish to restrict this piety of worship and justice, we should be willing to resist these voices of authority, for Jesus Christ is the only Lord.23 It ought to be observed, by the way, that we are ordered to obey parents only in the Lord. This is clear from the principle already laid down: for the place which they occupy is one to which the Lord has exalted them, by communicating to them a piece of his own honor. Hence, if they instigate us to transgress the law, they deserve not to be regarded as parents, but as strangers attempting to seduce us from our obedience to our true Father. The same holds in the case of rulers, masters, and superiors of every description (II/8.38).

This is the law of gracedifficult, but not impossible, for those engrafted into Christ and renewed by the Spirit: We are bound to love our enemies just as our friends. Those, then, show themselves to be in truth the children of Satan who thus licentiously shake off a yoke common to the children of God. The burden, they say, were too difficult for Christians to bear! As if anything could be imagined more difficult than to love the Lord with all the heart, and soul, and strength. Compared with this law, there is none which may not seem easy, whether it be to love our enemy, or to banish every feeling of revenge from our minds. To our weakness, indeed, everything is arduous and difficult. In the Lord we have strength. It is his to give

These are just a few examples, but it should hopefully be clear why this ethos spoke so powerfully to us. In our situation, many of these themes would of course attain new meaning and relevance and

313

become central motifs in the church struggle and in anti-apartheid theologythe interrelatedness of worship and justice; the call to protect, defend and preserve the lives of others; the respect for the image of God in all human beings; the dignity of all humanity, the sacredness of life; the inhumanity of not caring, by which we violate Gods law; the central importance of social and economic justice; the all-inclusive nature of the call to love our neighbour; the obedience owed to Jesus Christ as Lord who takes precedence over other authorities. Calvins rejection of the notion of selflove became particularly controversial. While we were students, Jonker wrote two short essays in the official church journal of the Dutch Reformed Church criticizing the widespread ideological use of self-love to justify apartheid, which was so clearly an ideology of self-interest and selfpreservation. He explicitly and extensively appealed to Calvin and to the New Testament. Even before these essays were published, the editor seemingly invited the professor of dogmatics of the other Dutch Reformed Church faculty, in Pretoria, to write a series of two essays rejecting Jonkers critique and defending the importance of love of self, based on broad principles of neoCalvinist philosophy.24 For many of us as students, the choice became increasingly clear. Calvin on the Christian life Calvins ethos was also obvious in his well-known and historically influential exposition of the

Christian life. For many scholars, this forms the heart of Calvins ethics. 25 His understanding of the Christian life rests on the knowledge, the confession and trust that we do not belong to ourselves, but that we belong to God in Jesus Christ. This is the sum of the Christian faith and life, and Calvin uses this almost as a refrain, a motto. In a way this ethic is the sum of everything that Calvin considered in the Institutes up to this point, concerning the knowledge of God the Creator and the knowledge of God the Redeemer in Jesus Christ. In the face of Jesus Christ we learn to know God, the One to whom we belong, our Creator and Redeemer. Christian faith is nothing else than faciem Dei contemplari, continuously to see the face of God in Jesus Christ and to consider this wonderful grace, to contemplate this grace, to seek to understand this grace. In a way it is also the sum of what Calvin will then continue to describe, as the work of God the Holy Spirit, concerning the wonderful ways in which we receive this grace of Christ, including its benefits and effects in our lives and the wonderful means by which God invites us into the society of Christ and holds us therein. Now the great thing is this: we are consecrated and dedicated to God in order that we may thereafter think, speak, meditate, and do, nothing except to his glory. For a sacred thing may not be applied to profane uses without marked injury to him. If we, then, are not our own [1 Corinthians 6:19] but the Lords, it is clear what error we must flee,

314

and whither we must direct all the acts of our life. We are not our own: let not our reason nor our will, therefore, sway our plans and deeds. We are not our own: let us therefore not set it as our goal to seek what is expedient for us according to the flesh. We are not our own: in so far as we can, let us therefore forget ourselves and all that is ours. Conversely, we are Gods: let us therefore live for him and die for him. We are Gods: let his wisdom and will therefore rule all our actions. We are Gods: let all the parts of our life accordingly strive toward him as our only lawful goal [Romans 14:8; 1 Corinthians 6:19] (III/7.1)

us to live our daily lives of service, love and well-doing (III/10). This is the sum, the heart and the thrust, of the Christian lifeaccording to Calvin. Belonging to God in Jesus Christ means that we also belong to one another. The glory of God depends on how we practise this mutual belonging, unity, solidarity, interconnectedness and sharing with one another. 26 We would later learn that major studies of Calvins thought and work endorse the centrality of this perspective for also understanding his own life and work, his

It is based on this motto that Calvin develops his ethicsshould someone prefer to call it thatin the chapters to follow. Belonging to God, we are called to lives of self-denial, searching for justice and righteousness in our relations with others and godliness in our relations with God (III/7). For that reason, we are called to take up our cross, as followers of Jesus Christ, accepting our sufferings and trusting in Gods power, learning patience and experiencing Gods comfort and consolation (III/8). For that reason, we are called to meditate on the future life, not in order to escape the present, but precisely to come to a right and proper estimation of the present life, and to receive orientation, perspective and proper priorities (III/9). We are called to enjoy and appreciate the wonderful gifts of God in this life, so that they can delight, sustain and support us, and enable and empower

theology and his biography, as preacher, teacher, and social and economic reformer. 27 From the perspective of his involvement in the ministry to congregations of refugees, exiles and strangers, and deeply aware of the hardships, suffering and daily worries and fears of widows, orphans, poor people, refugees, exiles and aliens, 28 he comforted them with the good news that they belonged to the Living God and his Christ, that they were safe, cared for, protected, one with Christ, already sitting in heaven at Gods right hand. This was of course the ethos of Calvinism that Ernst Troeltsch would so famously analyse as religious socialism;29 that Biler would call Calvins social humanism;30 that Nicholas Wolterstorff would describe as world-transformative Christianity in which justice and peace embrace, in a study of Reformed social and economic thought

315

dedicated to Allan Boesak;31 that the public statement on The economic and social witness of Calvin for Christian life today issued in November 2004 by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC), the John Knox International Reformed Center and the Faculty of Theology of the University of Geneva would so movingly formulate as a critical challenge to our economic policies and practices today.32 It was inspiring to belong to such a tradition. This was also the ethos that we would experience again and again from the circles of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches; the concern for justice since its very beginnings; the commitment to the plight of the marginalized and downtrodden; the search for visible unity, for more active and living ecumenicity, for stronger forms of belonging, community and solidarity in our contemporary world; the commitment for reasons of faith and theology to human dignity and human rights; the support in our own struggles against racism, exclusion and injustice; in short, the spirit shown by many of the leading Reformed ecumenical figures and theologians, so that it became characteristic of this community and tradition. 33 We were grateful for such ecumenical partners and for being part of this community. We would later also learn that major themes of Calvins theologyincluding the wonderful election by gracewere not in any way dependent on us but were to be seen in the mirror of Jesus Christ; Gods providential

care, covering the whole of creation, the actions and decisions of free and responsible human beings and the smallest eventualities threatening the poor and the suffering; Gods faithful, covenantal dealings with the work of Gods hands through all history, as a living, involved, compassionate and personal God; the continuous ministry of the resurrected and ascended Jesus Christ as prophet, priest and king, even todayare all related to this fundamental conviction that we belong to God.34 We were comforted by these promises. In short, this basic theological and ethical conviction of Calvin found major resonance in the Reformed tradition, from confessional documents to doctrinal discussions, from ecclesial decisions to sermons and popular publications. By the time that we read Calvin, we in fact already knew this conviction very well from the Heidelberg Catechism (1563). The first question and answer powerfully restate this central conviction. It is our ultimate comfort in life and death that we are not our own, but belong to Jesus Christ. The whole Catechism is a deeply personal, comforting exposition of this basic conviction.35 During the 20th century this central theme would again find powerful expression in the Theological Declaration of Barmen (1934). In words directly from the Heidelberg Catechism, Barmen claims that the church that belongs to Jesus Christ may not proclaim one message, yet practise another,

316

whether by its structure, obedience, ministries, public witness or mission.36 The church belonging to Jesus Christ is not free to exclude others at will. Other Reformed churches and bodies would also confess this fundamental theological and at the same time ethical conviction. It structures the opening statement of the Brief Statement of Faith (1993) of the Presbyterian Church (USA),37 and also the litany by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches in Debrecen (1997), presented to member churches for liturgical use in the face of global injustice and ecological destruction.38 We do not belong to ourselves, therefore. Of course, the concrete implications of this were deeply controversialeverywhere, including in apartheid South Africa. In our case, the struggle for the visible unity of the church was often called the acid test precisely for this reason. According to many, the real question was whether the church belongs to the volk or to Jesus Christ, whether it was possible to saywith Calvin that we do not belong to ourselves, but to God, yet refuse to accept our brothers and sisters as members in a church that is visibly one, irrespective of our backgrounds of colour and race. When we were students, reading this description of the Christian life by Calvin at last removed all possible doubt from our minds about the answers to these questions. Calvin on Christian freedom Calvins ethos was also very obvious in his famous

description of Christian freedom in the short essay On freedom.39 For many scholars, this is the real key to Calvins major legacy to social and political theoryincluding the many controversial claims about his contribution as the maker of modernity, as the layer of the foundation of Western democracy, as the inspirer of capitalism, or as the real founding father of American freedoms.40 Indeed, Calvins legacy regarding his understanding of freedom became a long tradition of conflictual interpretations among historians, biographers, 41 legal scholars, 42 political scientists 43 and theologians,44 and even scholars specifically concerned with studying Calvins personal views of ethics, politics and social life.45 Also within the historical context of apartheid South Africa, his views on freedom would be central in the overall impact of his ethos. Calvin himself also regarded freedom as extremely important. In fact, unless this freedom be comprehended, neither Christ nor gospel truth, nor inner peace of soul, can be rightly known (III/19.1). He discusses human freedom under three aspectsthe freedom of being saved by grace alone, the freedom of eager and cheerful gratitude and obedience, and the freedom to be indifferent towards human, cultural, ecclesial and religious obligations. It was the third aspect in particular that would work so inspiringly for many. This is the freedom from adiaphora, the freedom of conscience from all kinds of outward
317

claims which are in themselves indifferent: the freedom to be indifferent about the indifferent. In specific historical situations, this aspect can take the concrete form of human liberation from the power and influence of culture and tradition and can therefore be experienced as something very dramatic, radical and even revolutionary. With this third aspect, Calvin emancipates the Christian conscience from both particular cultures and particular traditions. He declared them indifferent in principle, thereby liberating believers from the stranglehold of cultural superstitions46 For many of us, this was indeed an experience of freedom. Many commentators consider this third aspect Calvins most radical contribution.47 Stevenson remarks that, in a European society bound in both its ecclesiastical and its secular aspects by tradition and cultural authority, this could indeed be regarded as Calvins most revolutionary teaching. 48 Christians are free to dissociate themselves from the cultural and time-bound context in which they live, and are thereby liberated both from cultural traditions and customs and liberated for the following of Gods truth and Gods call. If the existing social order is ultimately only temporary and superficial, then its reconstruction and even its destruction may indeed be called for, especially if it perverts and subverts the purposes of the reign of God in some crucial way.49 Not only in theory, but indeed also in

historical practice this ethos would lead to radical and sometimes revolutionary social and historical action. Calvin himself assumed that the first two aspects would be more readily understood, since they represented basic evangelical teaching, but admitted that the third aspect introduced a weighty controversy. This was the point where the spirits parted.50 For Calvin himself, this aspect of human freedom was the most significant part of all. For within the third part lay the churchs sense of its destiny within history. Christian believers must inevitably see themselves as both providentially embedded in historical context and providentially destined to emancipation from that context. If they misunderstand this part of freedom, they mistake their status and fall prey to either a debasement of historical order or an idolization of mere culture.51 Of course, Calvin himself did not and could not see all the implications of what this principle made possible. Much of the criticism against his personality and character, his strictness and harsh administration, the moral legalism of the city during his time, in fact the moral terror of which the Reformed tradition is still accused today has to do with this reality that we are all children of our own time, products of our contexts and cultures, and that we all fail in so many ways to practise the practical consequences of our own convictions. Regarding women, Dempsey Douglass would argue that this is precisely

318

what happened, because Calvin was unable to draw the conclusions from his own radical insight. Yet there were many crucially important aspects of his thought where he did draw some of these conclusions in ways that would also inspire a critical ethos in South Africa. Originally, this essay on freedom introduced his thoughts on the government of the church and on civil government. Even in the last version of the Institutes, these ideas about freedom from existing forms and practices still provide the key to understanding his discussions of the church, the sacraments and civil governmentthe three themes of Book IV. For us, this was subversive material. This ethos of freedom means that the church in its present form is not necessarily the church as it should be. Precisely because the church is so importantour mother, with no salvation outside the churchit is so important for us to recognize its abuses and failures, to self-critically discern the marks of the true church, to long for her visible unity and renewal. Of course, these thoughts were developed in the totally different historical context in which Calvin lived, but if they were true, they spoke directly into our own situation, calling us also to selfcritical examination. Moreover, this article of the Creed relates in some measure to the external Church, that every one of us must maintain brotherly and sisterly concord with all the children of God, give due authority to the Church, and, in short,

conduct ourselves as sheep of the flock. And hence, the additional expression, the communion of saints; for this clause must not be overlooked, as it admirably expresses the quality of the Church; just as if it had been said, that saints are united in the fellowship of Christ on this condition, that all the blessings which God bestows upon them are mutually communicated to each other For if they are truly persuaded that God is the common Father of them all, and Christ their common head, they cannot but be united together in brotherly and sisterly love, and mutually impart their blessings to each other (IV/1.3).

It was, for example, not without reason that Jonkers first published works were all on the order in the church, on the discipline in the church, on the mission policies of the church, and almost without exception by appealing to Calvin.52 He, together with several friends, was attempting to reform the Reformed churches in South Africa by reclaiming what he saw as true Reformed ecclesiology.53 It was not surprising that these so seemingly innocent, technical and insignificant pamphlets were causing such an uproar in church and society at the time, deeply upsetting many and inspiring and liberating others.54 This ethos of freedom means that the sacraments as we practise them are not necessarily what they should be. Precisely because the sacraments are so important and over the years scholarship would help us to understand much better how crucially important they really were for Calvin, whose
319

whole theology may be called sacramental it is of utmost importance for us to critically examine ourselves and our own practices concerning baptism and the Lords Supper, and to long for their reform and renewal. Precisely because the story of apartheid in a way started in the celebration of the Lords Supperwhen some believers were excluded based on culture, race and class, until this exclusion would become the norm, understood as the will of God and biblically justified, and the basis of separate congregations and churchesquestions concerning worship and the sacraments stood at the heart of the struggles within our churches. With this in mind, it was impossible not to be challenged and moved by Calvins ethos. The Lord intended it (this is my body, take eat) to be a kind of exhortation, than which no other urge or animate us more strongly, both to purity and holiness of life, and also to charity, peace, and concord. For the Lord there communicates his body so that he may become altogether one with us, and we with him. Moreover, since he has only one body of which he makes us all to be partakers, we must necessarily, by this participation, all become one body. This unity is represented by the bread which is exhibited in the sacrament. As it is composed of many grains, so mingled together, that one cannot be distinguished from another; so ought our minds to be so cordially united, as not to allow of any dissension or division (IV/ 17.38). We shall have profited admirably in

the sacrament, if the thought shall have been impressed and engraven on our minds, that none of our brethren is hurt, despised, rejected, injured, or in any way offended, without our, at the same time, hurting, despising, and injuring Christ; that we cannot have dissension with our brethren, without at the same time dissenting from Christ; that we cannot love Christ without loving our brethren; that the same care we take of our own body we ought to take of that of our brethren, who are members of our body; that as no part of our body suffers pain without extending to the other parts, so every evil which our brothers and sisters suffer ought to excite our compassion. Wherefore Augustine not inappropriately often terms this sacrament the bound of charity. What stronger stimulus could be employed to excite mutual charity, than when Christ, presenting himself to us, not only invites us by his example to give and devote ourselves mutually to each other, but inasmuch as he makes himself common to all, also makes us all to be one in him (IV/17.38). Moreover, as we see that this sacred bread of the Lords Supper is spiritual food to the pious worshippers of God, on tasting which they feel that Christ is their life, are disposed to give thanks, and exhorted to mutual love; so, on the other hand, it is converted into the most noxious poison to all whom it does not nourish and confirm in the faith, nor urge to thanksgiving and charity. For people who, without any spark of faith, without any zeal for charity, rush forward like swine to seize the Lords Supper, do not at all discern the Lords body. For, inasmuch as they do not believe that body to be their life, they put every possible affront upon it, stripping it of all

320

its dignity, and profane and contaminate it by so receiving; inasmuch as while alienated and estranged from their brethren, they dare to mingle the sacred symbol of Christs body with their dissensions. No thanks to them if the body of Christ is not rent and torn to pieces. By this unworthy eating, they bring judgment on themselves. They bear witness against themselves. Being divided and separated by hatred and illwill from their brethren, that is, from the members of Christ, they have no part in Christ, and yet they declare that the only safety is to communicate with Christ, and be united with him (IV/17.40). For this reason Paul commands everyone to examine themselves before they eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. By this, as I understand it, he means that everyone should descend into themselves, and consider whether with zeal for purity and holiness they aspire to imitate Christ; whether, after his example, they are prepared to give themselves to their brethren. And to hold themselves in common with those with whom they have Christ in common; whether, as they themselves are regarded by Christ, they in their turn regard all their brethren as members of their own body, or like their members, desire to cherish, defend, and assist them, not that the duties of faith and charity can now be perfected in us, but because it behoves us to contend and seek, with all out heart, daily to increase our faith (IV/17.40). It was, for example, not without reason that Allan Boesak would so often quote these words from Calvin in his speeches and writings, or that so-called gesamentlike aanbidding (shared worship) and the visible unity of the church would be the most

heatedly debated theological issues in the Reformed churches in South Africa over several decades. Hidden behind these issues, the very ethos of Calvins legacy was at stake. Calvins ethos of freedom also meant that the civil government and its administrative structures and regulations, the apartheid state with its hundreds of apartheid laws, its apparatus and its authority, the political powers of the day with their taken-forgranted assumptions, the cultural domination and the economic oppression together with their ideological justification, all these factors which collectively determined our everyday realities were not necessarily what they should be. It meant that public life could also be different. It meant that these powers are also historical, human products, that they are also called to serve the honour of God and therefore the well-being of all human beings, and that we are all together called to discern whether they are indeed fulfilling their true calling. There were many deeply existential debates at the time over the legitimacy of the apartheid government; over ways for the church to be the voice of the voiceless and to the limits of getting actively involved in the public sphere; over the possibility and nature of civil disobedience, including conscientious objection; over possible forms of non-violent resistance;55 even over the legitimacy of violence56 and of the armed struggle for freedomand in many of these debates Calvins convictions concerning the
321

responsibility of the magistrates to defend the weak and to resist tyrannical rule often played a major role.57

the tears of the social victim. He contrasts this theological pattern of Calvin with the thousand years of medieval mentality on sufferingboth human and divinerepresented by Augustine. In short, the portrayal of God by Augustine and the other ancients, followed by the medievals, was of a God of blissful apathy. To show that Calvins picture of God was radically different, he first quotes from Calvins commentary on Genesis 9:5-6. Human beings are indeed unworthy of Gods care, if respect be had only to themselves; but since they bear the image of God engraven on them, He deems himself violated in their person This doctrine is to be carefully observed, that no one can be injurious to their brother or sister without wounding God himself. Were this doctrine deeply fixed in our minds, we should be more reluctant than we are to inflict injuries.

Calvins pathos
Perhaps three brief systematic remarks can conclude some of what reading Calvin in South Africa and getting a sense of his ethics and ethos meant for us. In the first place, one could perhaps say that this ethos of his threefold ethicsrespect for Gods law, union with Christ and being freed by the Spiritwas a response of deep gratitude to Gods own pathos, to the pathos of the Triune God, revealed to us in the mirror of Jesus Christ.58 Nicholas Wolterstorff meditated in a moving way on this divine pathos in his 1987 essay The wounds of God: Calvins theology of social injustice.59 He thinks there is substantial truth in many of the claims about the role of early Calvinists in the formation of the modern world. At the same time, this world is pervaded by social injustice and thick with social misery. In Calvin himself, he believes there is a pattern of theological reflection that is rich, creative, provocative, and extraordinarily bold. It is a pattern that could help us deal with the social misery of the modern world. It is a pattern that to his knowledge all the Calvin scholars miss. It is a theology that could help those in privileged corners of the world to genuinely hear the cries of the victims. He calls this pattern Calvins theology of

Wolterstorff

summarizes

his

understanding of Calvins words. To inflict injury on a fellow human being is to wound God himself; it is to cause God himself to suffer. Behind and beneath the social misery of our world is the suffering of God. If we truly believed that, suggests Calvin, we would be much more reluctant than we are to participate in the victimizing of the poor and the oppressed and the assaulted of the world. To pursue justice is to relieve Gods suffering. He then quotes

322

from Calvins commentary on Habakkuk 2:6 and the words how long? When people disturb the whole world by their ambition and avarice, or everywhere commit plunder, or oppress miserable nationswhen they distress the innocent, all cry out, How long? And this cry, proceeding as it does from the feeling of nature and the dictate of justice, is at length heard by the Lord. For how comes it that all, being touched with weariness, cry out, How long? except that they know that this confusion of order and equity is not to be endured? And this feeling, is it not implanted in us by the Lord? It is then the same as though God heard himself, when he hears the cries and groanings of those who cannot bear injustice.

overemphasize the pervasiveness of this theme in Calvin, says Wolterstorff, the theme of world as gift for use and enjoyment, and the counterpart theme of the propriety of gratitude. Never, in this regard, was there a more sacramental theologian than Calvin, one more imbued with the sense that in world and history and self, we meet God.60 Even more important, however, is Calvins view of the divine image in humanity. The Creator willed that the Creators own glory be seen in human beings as in a mirror (II/7.6). God looks upon Gods self, and beholds Gods self in human beings as in a mirror (sermon on John 10:7).61 Gods children are pleasing and loveable to him, since he sees in them the marks and features of his own countenance. Whenever God contemplates his own face, he both rightly loves it and holds it in honour. A consequence of that, says Wolterstorff, is that we as human beings exist in profound unity with each other, since we all share in the image of God. There is no more profound kinship than this. We cannot but behold our own face as it were in a glass in the person that is poor and despised though they were the furthest strangers in the world. Let a Moor or a Barbarian come among us, and yet inasmuch as he or she is a man or a woman, they bring with them a looking glass wherein we may see that they are our brothers and sisters and neighbors.62

He again summarizes. Not only is the penetration of injustice against ones fellow human beings the infliction of suffering upon God. The cries of the victims are the very cry of God. The lament of the victims as they cry out How long? is Gods giving voice to his own lament. What led Calvin to such a bold theology of social injustice? he asks. Calvin rejected the Stoic view of humanity according to which we should cast off all human qualities and act like a stone not affected at all by anything. For Calvin, we are to let our wounds bleed, our eyes tear. We have to be capable of passion and compassion. He insists that we should see all the world as Gods gifts to us, not only to be used but as to enjoy, with gratitude. One cannot

This is essential to understanding

323

Calvins ethos. Calvin grounds the claims of love and justice in this phenomenon of our mirroring God. The standard picture of Calvin is that of obligation and duty and responsibility and the call to obedience loom large in his thought, and indeed they do. Yet for Calvin there is something deeper than these. All of us in our daily lives are confronted with other human beings. We find ourselves in the presence of an Other who, by virtue of being an icon of God, makes claims on us. Moral reflection can begin either from responsibility or from rightsfrom the responsibilities of the Agent or from the claims of the Other. The degree to which Calvin begins from the Other is striking.

A challenging passage from Calvins description of the Christian life illustrates this pattern. The Lord enjoins us to do good to all without exception, though the greater part, if estimated by their own merit, are most unworthy of it. But scripture subjoins a most excellent reason, when it tells us that we are not to look at what people in themselves deserve, but to attend to the image of God, which exists in all, and to which we owe all honor and love. Therefore, whoever be the person that is presented to you as needing your assistance, you have no ground for declining to give it to him or her. Say it is a stranger. The Lord has given that person a mark which ought to be familiar to you: for which reason he forbids you to despise your own flesh (Gal.
324

6:10). Say the person is mean and of no consideration. The Lord points him or her out as one whom he has distinguished by the luster of his own image (Isaiah 58:7). Say that you are bound to that person by no ties of duty. The Lord has substituted him as it were into his or her own place, that in that person you may recognize the many great obligations under which the Lord has laid you to himself. Say that the person is unworthy of your least exertion on his or her account; but the image of God, by which that person is recommended to you, is worthy of yourself and all your exertions. But if the person not only merits no good, but has provoked you by injury and mischief, still this is no good reason why you should not embrace him or her in love, and visit them with offices of love. That person has deserved very differently from me, you will say. In this way only we attain to what is not to say difficult, but altogether against nature, to love those that hate us, render good for evil, and blessing for cursing, remembering that we are not to reflect on the wickedness of people, but to look to the image of God in them, an image which, covering and obliterating their faults, should by its beauty and dignity allure us to love and embrace them (III/ 7.6).

Finally, refraining from injustice is not enough, we should rather positively act according to this pattern of Gods pathos. He quotes from Calvins commentary on Isaiah 58:6-7. It is not enough to abstain from acts of injustice, if you refuse your assistance to the needy. By commanding them to

break bread to the hungry, God intended them to take away every excuse from covetous and greedy people, who allege they have a right to keep possession of that which is their own. And indeed, this is the dictate of common sense, that the hungry are deprived of their right, if their hunger is not relieved. He means all people universally, not a single one of whom we can behold, without seeing, as in a mirror, our own flesh. It is therefore a proof of the greatest inhumanity, to despise those in whom we are constrained to recognize our own likeness.

in whom God delights is to bring sorrow to God. To wound his beloved is to wound him. The demands of justice are grounded in the vulnerability of Gods love for us his icons. God is not apathe These imposing words, the words of one who himself was an exile and himself suffered a good many indignities find striking parallels today in the words of some from Latin America, South Africa, and black North America. Perhaps, indeed only those who suffer the pain of injustice and poverty and indignity and exile far more intensely than most of us do, can adequately interpret them for us.63

He makes moving conclusions about Calvins ethos, contrasting it with other ethical positions and arguing that it is ultimately based in his particular understanding of Gods pathos, an understanding that not everyone today can or will appreciate. For Calvin, the demands of love and justice lie not first of all in the will of God, which is what much of the Christian tradition would have said; nor do they lie first of all in the reason of God, which is what most of the rest of the tradition would have said. They lie in the sorrow and in the joy of God, in Gods suffering and in Gods delight. If I abuse something that you love, then at its deepest what has gone wrong is not that I have violated your commandthough you may indeed have issued such a command. It lies first of all in the fact that I caused you sorrow. The demands of love and justice are rooted, so Calvin suggests, in what (may be called) the pathos of God. To treat unjustly one of these human earthlings In short, this pattern of the pathos of the Triune God that informs the threefold ethos of Calvins thought (respect for the law of God; being united with Jesus Christ and being set free by the Spirit) is a pattern to respond to actively. The call to justice is the call to avoid wounding God; the call to eliminate injustice is the call to alleviate divine suffering. If we believed that, and believed it firmly, we would be far more reluctant than we are to participate in the acts and the structures of injustice. If we believed that and believed it firmly, we would ceaselessly struggle for justice and against injustice, bearing with thankful, joyful patience the suffering which that struggle will bring upon us.64 This naturally leads to the next concluding remark. Pathos and ethos embodied In the second place, there is no doubt that for Calvin our response of gratitude, of worship and conformity, of piety and justice, is an

325

ethos that should be embodied; it should become concrete, practical, visible, it should be publicly institutionalized, in short, it should be done. Who will do it? is not a rhetorical question, according to a description of Calvin and his witness.65 This could also partly explain why the Reformed tradition has been so interested in questions of power, graceful power over against graceless power66, since power has to do with the possibility to act, to implement, to embody. At the end of his life, Calvin recalled that when he came to Geneva there was only preaching, no reformation. 67 With reformation he obviously meant concrete effortswhether through church order and structure, through moral life, through public institutions and practices, through social, educational and diaconical policies and activitiesto embody visibly the faith, preaching, the confession. This would become the characteristic trademark of his legacy.68 That is why Calvin himself wrote confessional documents and church orders embodying the confession for the worship and life of the congregation,69 a practice that would continue in the Reformed tradition.70 Time and again, confessions would be followed by church orders, so that the witness of the community through words, deeds and life could indeed correspond to the confession, which meant, to the gospel as heard in their historical context.71 Of course, there were different social and

political reasons behind Calvins conviction that even the order of the church should be reformed according to Gods word and for his interest in matters of institutional form, visible structure and discipline. Some scholars point out that the Reformed churches could not count in the same way as the Catholic and Lutheran communities on their regional and local public and political authorities to provide their legal structure. Some scholars underline Calvins own legal background and his continuing interest and, in fact, involvement in legal matters and in questions of justice, politics even international politicsand public administration. Some scholars prefer more psychological explanations and attempt to reconstruct and study his personality and temperament, his personal sense of order and discipline, including harsh moral discipline, applicable to himself also. Some scholars very interestingly emphasize the broader public mentality of the times, the widespread feeling or crisis and a collapse of the former public order and structures in general as a very important backdrop for these growing tendencies within the Reformed churches. There may be elements of truth in many or all of these explanations, yet the point remains that in Calvins legacy it became a strong claim and conviction that embodiment is of extreme importance and that even the visible form of the church should be determined by holy scripture, not by historical circumstance or political

326

authority.72 In South Africa, this became extremely controversial. This legacy came to us via the conflicts of the Confessing Church in Germany and the Theological Declaration of Barmen. For us, these represented other moments in the legacy of Calvin where attempts to structure the church according to the will of the volk, represented by the political authorities but also by church leaders, theologians and many church members, were resisted in the name of the gospel. Barmen was for us the claim that the truth (Wahrheit) of the church should determine its visible order and form (Existenzform), that the latter is not arbitrary and irrelevantor, in the apartheid idiom, to be determined by creation and not by recreationbut indeed central to the witness and the credibility of the church. For us, the unity of the church belongs to its being, not merely to its well-being, so that it may also, if necessary, be discarded for the sake of the seeming well-being and internal peace of the church.73 The smaller writings by Jonker and others on these issues were therefore extremely controversial and critically important. In all of them, he was appealing to Calvin and his legacy, to plead for the reformation of the Reformed churches in South Africa and forin his wordsthe rule of Christ in his Church.74 This was and remains perhaps the most challenging aspect of the struggle against apartheidto put the ethical convictions into practice, to embody the confession, in the Christian life

of those who confess, in new ways of ordering the church itself and in public life.75 It is for this reason that the writing of a new Church Order for the Uniting Reformed Church in Southern Africa was such a significant moment. The black churches in the Dutch Reformed Church family reunited, on the basis of the Confession of Belhar. In drafting a new order, we knew that we could not simply merge our former church orders, since they all embodied an apartheid ecclesiological vision. We rather had to ask the question as to what kind of church we believed we were called to be in South Africa at that moment in our history. The discussions which ensued were all about Calvin, about being Reformed, about the central place of local congregations, the centrality of worship, the importance of ordinary believers, the public role and witness of the church, about the concrete embodiment of visible unity, real reconciliation and compassionate justice.76 For many of us, this was an extremely meaningful experience. The challenge which followed was even more urgent: to truly embody this church order in our daily lives as congregations and believers. This challenge is integral to the legacy of Calvin. In the true church, the gospel should be preached and heard rightly and the sacraments should be administered properly. We continuously embody what we hear in our confession, we embody our confession in our worship and our order, we embody our worship and our order in our everyday

327

lives. The self-critical question is, therefore, whether we really do this, whether our Christian livesor some would prefer to say, our ethicsare responses of gratitude to the pattern of grace. This naturally leads to the final concluding remark. All embodiment critically considered In the third place, reading Calvin in South Africa led to an ethos of continuous discernment and self-criticism, and if necessary, of remorse and confession, transformation and renewal. In his now famous definition, the moral philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre described a living tradition as an historically extended, socially embodied argument, an argument precisely in part about the goods which constitute that tradition.77 In this sense, the legacy of Calvin particularly the legacy of his ethicsbecame for us a living tradition. We became very conscious that we belong, that we are socially embodied, that we have fathers and mothers, sisters and brothers, that we belong to others, not to ourselves, to a worldwide community. We were conscious that this community extended far back in history, even to Geneva in the time of the Reformation, but because of that, also further back, through the history of Christianity to the sources in holy scripture. And we were deeply conscious that this community through history was involved in an argument about what precisely constitutes, defines, makes this tradition who we are. We were at the same time grateful for belonging to

this community and history, and deeply critical and self-critical about the embodiment of this community and history, about its social form and its own role.78 This is precisely what Jonker was so deliberately teaching us, through his hermeneutical strategy. He was appealing to the tradition against the tradition. He was appealing to the community against the community. He was appealing to our deepest identity in order to critique our actual identity. He did that so often, in his lectures and in his sermons. He would often claim in so many words that there was something different in our tradition, even in the Dutch Reformed Church itself, something more than meets the eye, that there have been other people, other voices, and although they may now be completely silenced, temporarily suppressed and forgotten, their presence and their convictions are still there to guide us and to inspire uslike Calvin.79 It was, of course, not only Jonkerso many of our theologians and church leaders were doing exactly the same. They were appealing to the community and the tradition in order to critique and challenge the tradition and the communityAllan Boesak, when he wrote and spoke so passionately about being both black and Reformed, appealing to Calvin, Kuyper and Barth against the theology of apartheid; 80 Lekula Ntoane, when in his cry for life he appeals to the tradition against the tradition; 81 Russel Botman, when he calls on Barth against

328

Kuyper but also on Kuyper against Kuyper;82 Beyers Naud; David Bosch; John de Gruchy, when he speaks deliberately ambiguously about liberating Reformed theology, meaning at the same time Reformed theology that should be liberated and Reformed theology that is itself a theology with a liberating message and power.83 It was in this spirit that de Gruchy could claim that the problem in South Africa, contrary to what many claimed, was not too much of Calvin but too little. His work was therefore a deliberate attempt to retrieve the tradition anew, as a life-giving and liberating tradition.84 Sometimes, of course, this ethos can become so deeply self-critical that it becomes an ethos of remorse, of confession, of guilt. As long as it remained based on an apartheid ecclesiology and theology, Jonker saw increasing reason for such a deeply selfcritical response within the Dutch Reformed Church. In 1982, during the 125th year of the Faculty of Theology in Stellenbosch, he movingly expressed this self-critical appeal in a paper arguing that the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa found itself as it were on a fault line.85 Eventually, he made the well-known public confession of guilt also on behalf of others in the community and the tradition, during an ecumenical conference in Rustenburg. But is all this not precisely the intention behind the motto ecclesia reformata semper reformanda?86 Is a community that calls itself Reformed not always to be reformed

again, by God? Should such a Reformed church not always be engaged in a historically extended, socially embodied argument about the goods that constitute that tradition? Should that not be central to the communal ethos of such a community? Should we not be aware that we are involved in a socially embedded argument about what constitutes the goodness of our living tradition, that we all continuously answer this question by our preaching and our listening, by our confessions and our church orders, by our theological reflection and our public life, by our everyday actions and omissions, in short, by the diverse ways in which we embody our response of gratitude to the pathos of Godand should we not remember that all of this continuously falls short of being proper responses to the divine pattern?87 Did not Calvin himself teach us this ethos of self-critical discernment in his pastoral, rhetorical theology? Was this not the underlying motive, the true tenor of his critical reflections on the third use of law, on the calling of the Christian life, on proper preaching and hearing, on faithful participation in the sacraments, on the true church, on public life in honour of God and on grateful lives in the world, the theatre of Gods glory? Was there not always a critical and self-critical sense to all of this? And was not Calvin himself more aware than most others in the history of the church that this criticism applies to him as well? Was he not
329

continuously pointing us away from himself, to his Lord and Master?88 Was the heart of his piety not his deep awareness of his own failures and shortcomings?89 So, why and how do we celebrate Calvins legacy? As far as his ethics is concerned, not

by praising him,90 but rather by standing in his living legacy91, which includes seriously discussing and debating with one another what concretely embodying gratitude for this surprising pathos of the Triune God could mean, today and in our one common world.92

Notes
1

In recent years many scholars have paid renewed attention to the rhetorical nature of Calvins theology. He was very aware of how to address readers, of context and argument and forms of persuasion. It is therefore important to read him as if he were speaking. A wonderful contribution in this regard remains the study by Serene Jones, Calvin and the Rhetoric of Piety (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1995). 2 See for example Johannes C. Adonis, Die afgebreekte skeidsmuur weer opgebou (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1982); Christiaan J. A. Loff, Bevryding tot eenwording. Die Nederduitse Gereformeerde Sendingkerk in Suid-Afrika 1881-1994 (Kampen: Theologische Universiteit, 1997). 3 Some of the best-known historical reconstructions of the developments of apartheid theology still remain J.W. de Gruchy, The church struggle in South Africa (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1979) revised ed. S. de Gruchy, 2005; Willem A. de Klerk, The Puritans in Africa (London: Rex Collings, 1975; J. Kinghorn ed., Die Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk en apartheid (Braamfontein: MacMillan, 1986). For a brief overview, Dirkie J Smit, Apartheid, in H.D. Betz et al., eds., Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart Band 1 (Tbingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) 1986), 580-582, translated in Religion Past and Present, Vol 1 (Leiden: Brill, 2007) 293-295. 4 See the informative discussion in the major historical account by Hermann Giliomee, The Afrikaners. The biography of a people (Cape Town: Tafelberg, 2003) 476-477. The whole study is a valuable background to understanding the nature, historical development and role of the Reformed faith in South Africa. Giliomee himself proposes that it would have made a major difference to public life and local history if Reformed theology in South Africa had taken the thought of Reinhold Niebuhr more seriously, which is very interesting in that it already suggests something of the historical importance of different forms of reception of the Calvinist ethical legacy. It is true that Niebuhr did not really have any impact on Reformed thought in South Africa, although Steve de Gruchy wrote his doctoral thesis on Niebuhr during the struggle years, called Not liberation but justice. An analysis of Reinhold Niebuhrs understanding of human destiny in the light of the doctrine of the atonement, Bellville: UWC, unpublished, 1992.
330

5 F.J.M. Potgieter, Die verhouding tussen die teologie en die filosofie by Calvyn (Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit, 1939). See also his A brief characteristic of Calvins theology, in Calvinus Reformator. His contribution to theology, church and society (Potchefstroom: PUCHO, 1982) 33-47. Potgieter studied with Hepp and stood in the Calvinistic tradition of Abraham Kuyper. The Vrije Universiteit is also where J.D. du Toit (Totius), the famous Afrikaans theologian and poet who wrote the first biblical and theological justification for apartheid, had studied earlier. 6 We knew, of course, the polemics in the newspaper at the time involving J.D. Vorster, a very prominent church leader and theologian, and A.M. Hugo, a classical scholar, who wrote internationally respected studies of Calvins first published scholarly work, the 1532 commentary on Senecas De clementia (including an authoritative edition, translation and discussion together with Ford L. Battles, Calvins Commentary on Senecas De clementia, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1969). This remarkable public controversy thus involved prominent people who all claimed to stand in Calvins tradition, but who had radically divergent views of our situation in church and state. 7 For J.J.F. Durand, see for example The prophetic task of the church vis-a-vis the state, in Church and Nation (Grand Rapids: Reformed Ecumenical Synod, 1981) 3-15; as well as a longer version, Kontemporre modelle vir die verhouding van kerk en samelewing, Teks binne konteks (Bellville: UWK, 1986) 13-37. In this essay he dealt with Calvin, Barth and Kuyper, as he would do in many other contributions to public debates. For C F B (Beyers) Naud, see the recent volume in his memory, The legacy of Beyers Naud, ed. L. Hansen (Stellenbosch: African SunMedia, 2006). 8 J.A. Heyns & Willie D. Jonker, Op weg met die teologie, Pretoria: NGKB, 1974, 229-274. 9 Both K. Barth, Fragments grave and gay (London: Collins, 1971) 107 and E. Busch, Who was and is Calvin? Interpretations of recent times, background paper for this Consultation, 4 quote Calvin (ubi cognoscitur Deus, etiam colitur humanitas), although their translations of the verb colitur differ slightlycomes into glory, is cultivated, is nurtured, is nourished, flourishes, is cared for. For Barth, this of course became the theme of his well-known title essay in The humanity of God (Richmond VA: John Knox Press, 1960). The original meaning of humanitas for Calvin is, however, also controversial. 10 Jonker, Die aktualiteit van die sosiale etiek, Sol iustitiae illustra nos, PA Verhoef, ed. (Kaapstad: NGKU, 1973) 78-107. 11 Ibid., 102. 12 Ibid., 96. 13 Ibid., 97ff. 14 (Autors note: all quotes translated from the original and abridged, DJS). Ibid., 97-100. It is not surprising that responsible hermeneutics would become such an important theme for Reformed scholars in our context. An influential voice was that of the Stellenbosch philosopher H.W. Rossouw In his doctoral thesis Klaarheid en interpretasie (Amsterdam: Vrye Universiteit) 1963, he critically contrasted the biblical interpretation of the Reformers, including Calvin, with later developments within Protestantism. See also his Calvins hermeneutics of Holy Scripture, in Calvinus Reformator, 1982, 149-180. Another major influence was the New Testament scholar B.C. Lategan. For an interpretation of his legacy as Reformed scholarship, see D.J. Smit, Interpreter interpreted. A readers reception of Lategans legacy, The New Testament interpreted, ed. C. Breytenbach, J.C. Thom & J. Punt (Leiden: Brill, 2006) 3-25; for the influence of Calvin on hermeneutics in South Africa, also my Rhetoric and Ethic? A Reformed Perspective on the Politics of Reading the Bible, Reformed theology: Identity and Ecumenicity II, eds. W Alston and M Welker (Grand Rapids:

331

Wm B Eerdmans) 2007. Very helpful resources on Calvin and the Bible are Peter Opitzs extremely instructive Calvins theologische Hermeneutik (Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 1994) and Donald K. McKim, ed., Calvin and the Bible (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2006), which contains several excellent essays. 15 The following quotations from the Institutes come from the paperback edition that I used at the time as a student (published by MacDonald Publishing Company, MacDill, Florida, without translator or date). I went back to this edition to be reminded of my own comments and exclamation marks at the time of my first reading. I took the liberty to shorten some quotes and to make Calvins language somewhat more inclusive than was customary during his own day. 16 The term ethics is of course somewhat anachronistic. Calvin did not really use that or intend any part of his work as ethics in the contemporary technical sense of a scholarly discipline. He and his comtemporaries knew the Aristotelian tradition of virtue-ethics and, soon afterwards, forms of Protestant virtue ethics would indeed be developed. It would perhaps be more proper to speak of the Christian life. Still, it has become customary in scholarship to use the term ethics for both the social implications (for example Max Weber, Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism, 1904) and the more personal implications of his thought and work (for example Georgia Harkness, John Calvinthe man and his ethics (New York: Holt, 1931). 17 For example Christoph Strohm, Ethik im frhen Calvinismus (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1996); also in his Methodology in discussion of Calvin and Calvinism, in Calvinus Praeceptor Ecclesiae. Papers of the International Congress on Calvin Research, ed. Herman J. Selderhuis, THR 388, 2004, 65-105; as well as Guenther H. Haas, Calvins ethics, in The Cambridge companion to John Calvin, ed. D.M. McKim (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2004) 93105. For a detailed study, also I. John Hesselink, Calvins concept of the law (Allison Park PA: Pickwick Publications, 1992). 18 For example Ronald S. Wallace, Calvins doctrine of the Christian life (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959); John H Leith, Calvins doctrine of the Christian life (Louisville: Westminster, 1989). The same was true of theologians who developed their views of sanctification following Calvin, like Barth, Otto Weber and Willie D. Jonker (Die Gees van Christus, NGKU: Pretoria, 1981). 19 For example William R. Stevenson Jr, Sovereign grace. The place and significance of Christian freedom in John Calvins political thought (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). 20 Strohm, Ethik im frhen Calvinismus: Humanistische Einflsse, philosophische, juristische und theologische Argumentationen sowie mentalittsgeschichtlikche Aspekte am Beispiel des Calvin-Schlers Lambertus Danaeus is a most instructive source. The subtitle already summarizes the whole argument. Danaeus wrote the first ethics in the legacy of Calvin, is a careful and detailed study of the background and the influences that made this development possible but also necessary. He discusses the very strong humanistic background, already in Calvin as well, different philosophical influences, namely both from Aristotle and from stoicism, the crucial role of legal training and interests, fundamental theological decisions and convictions, and finally the changing mentality of the times, namely a strong sense of social crisis, of the falling apart of social order, and therefore the urgent need for new social order and reconstruction. 21 Although there has been a tradition within Reformed ethics to separate our relationship with God from our relationship with others and to regard only the latter as ethics, others have emphasized their inter-relatedness. One such voice has been Nicholas Wolterstorff
332

in works such as Liturgy, justice, and holiness, The Reformed Journal (December 1989): 12-20; Justice as a condition of authentic liturgy, Theology Today , XLVIII/1 (April 1991): 621; The Reformed liturgy, and Worship and justice, both in McKim, ed., Major themes in the Reformed tradition (Grand Rapids; Eerdmans, 1992) 273-304, 311-318. 22 The South African Reformed ethicist J M (Koos) Vorster argues that we should not read Calvins views on the rights and responsibilities of people through the eyes of the 20th century concept of human rights and the constitutional state, or see him as the father of human rights. That would be anachronistic and false. At the same time, he shows that Calvin proposed two principles that can be regarded as revolutionary in the political and ecclesiastical context of his time: the limitation of the authority of the government and the rights of subordinates. He based these principles on sound theological-ethical argumentation and in this sense he provided a sound basis on which Reformed theology can contribute to the establishment of an ethos of human rights in the present society, Calvin and human rights, The Ecumenical Review (1999): 209-220. 23 The lordship of Christ, which was part of the legacy opf the Barmen Declaration, played a major role in the struggle against apartheid. For Allan Boesak, for example, this was a key conviction that he often proclaimed. It is invoked in the closing words of the Confession of Belhar. 24 Willie D. Jonker, Selfliefde en selfhandhawing, Die Kerkbode, 14 August, 21 August 1974. 25 Wallace begins Calvins doctrine of the Christian life with The sanctification of the church in Christ. The first chapter describes the vicarious self-offering and sanctification of Jesus Christ as priest and king, through whom we already participate in the glorious reality of salvation and all its blessings. Through the Spirit, the people belong to the priest, the church partakes of Christ, the sanctification of Christ is imparted to the church. This is the given reality, the point of departure. Through the mystical union between Christ and church, of which the Holy Spirit is the bond, the church already belongs to Jesus Christ and partakes of him through faith. Based on this reality, the church can now offer itself in thankful response to Christ, through the power of the Spirit, also in and through our ordinary, daily activities. This self-offering of the church, this practical and visible sanctification, takes the form of the life of Jesus Christ, so that cross and resurrection, dying and rising with Christ, together describe the pattern or outward form of the Christian life. Within this logicwe already belong to Jesus Christ as belonging to his churchwe are called to practise this belonging concretely in our lives with others, showing our conformity with the life, the cross and the resurrection, the dying and the rising, of the one to whom we belong and whose name we carry. He then describes Calvins concrete views on the life and behaviour of Christian people in relationships and in society, as well as the practical implications for nurture and discipline within the church itself, including the many concrete detail with which Calvin dealt. Leith, in his John Calvins doctrine of the Christian life, uses this motto already on the first pages as the best summary of the Christian life. His supervisor Albert Outler stresses its importance: The heart of the matter for Calvin was the sola gloria Dei. This was echoed in his oft-repeated motto, We are Gods. From this it follows, and Calvin never tires of showing how it follows (as a theme and variations), that sovereign grace and redemptive grace are one and the same reality and that they are revealed in their full integrity, and supremely, in Jesus Christ. In the Christian life so conceived, our first and last end as humans really is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. We are consecrated and dedicated to God; therefore, we may not hereafter think, speak, meditate or do anything but with a view to his glory. We are Gods; to him, therefore, let us live and die.
333

26 See the collection of passionate quotations on the unity of the church from Calvin by Lukas Vischer, Pia conspiratio. Calvins legacy and the divisions of the Reformed churches today (Geneva: WARC, 2000); for more systematic treatments, Willem Nijenhuis, Calvinus oecumenicus. Calvijn en de eenheid der kerk in het licht van zijn briefwisseling (sGravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1959) and Gottfried W. Locher, Sign of the advent. A study in Protestant ecclesiology, (Fribourg: Academic Press Fribourg, 2004). Locher first describes the positions of different 16th-century reformers regarding the visibility and invisibility of the church, including Calvins, then analyses these positions systematically, and finally offers his own proposal based on the essential visibility of the church, with both transformative and significative dimensions. 27 This is for example the spirit of studies like W. Fred Graham, The constructive revolutionary. John Calvin and his socio-economic impact (Michigan State University Press, 1987) (reprint) and Ronald S. Wallace, Calvin, Geneva, and the Reformation. A study of Calvin as social reformer, churchman, pastor and theologian (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988); but also the more comprehensive social history of Philip Benedict, Christs churches purely reformed. A social history of Calvinism (New Haven: Yale University, 2002), although he deals with Calvin only as one figure within the much broader movement, and in his careful evaluation of the role of Calvinism in the making of the modern world argues that this influence should not be overly emphasized, as many earlier studies had done, 533ff. 28 For the nature of this social ministry, see for example E.A. McKee, Diakonia in the classical reformed tradition and today, Grand Rapids: Wm B Eerdmans, 1989. In his careful and informative study on Calvinism and social welfare, Calvin Theological Journal 17 (1982): 212-230, Robert M. Kingdon already showed that Calvin found to a large extent the hospitals, the social structures caring for the poor and the sick in place when he came to Geneva, where these were indeed based on radical changes to the earlier systems, but that he provided invaluable theological foundation for the work. His contributions were of vital importance to the success of this program. But they were not the contribution of a creator of new institutions. They were rather the contributions of a consolidator. Above all he consecrated these reforms. He persuaded the Genevans that their new institutions were holy creations, in unique conformity with the word of God. And this gave these institutions a vitality and a durability that they would not have possessed otherwise, 220. 29 The most widely known statement is probably Ernst Troeltsch, The social teachings of the Christian Churches, tr. O Wyon (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992), but also important is his Protestantism and progress. A historical study of the relation of Protestantism to the modern world (London: Williams & Norgate, 1912). This was a translation of an original lecture to the Convention of German Historians in 1906 on the importance of Protestantism for the modern world, the critical response from a theologian to the influential thesis of his friend, the sociologist Max Weber, two years earlier (1904) on Protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism. Around the celebration of Calvins birth after 400 years in 1909, Troeltsch published several other important contributions, including Calvinismus und Luthertum (1909), Die Genfer Calvinfeier (1909), Calvin and Calvinism (1909) and Die Kulturbedeutung des Calvinismus (1910). These four lectures have all been annotated and republished in Ernst Troeltsch. Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Band 8. Schriften zur Bedeutung des Protestantismus fr die moderne Welt (1906-1913) (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2001) 99-181. For brief but very informative discussions in the same intellectual tradition, see the recent monograph by Friedrich Wilhelm Graf, Der Protestantismus. Geschichte und Gegenwart (Mnchen: Verlag C H Beck, 2006), especially 61-117. 30 Andre Biler, La pense conomique et sociale de Calvin, Genve: Librairie de luniversit,

334

1959 (tr. Calvins economic and social thought, Geneva: WCC, 2005); also Calvin, prophte de lre industrielle (Geneva: Labor et fides, 1964); as well as The social humanism of Calvin, tr. P T Furhmann (Richmond: John Knox, 1964). In the foreword of Social humanism, W A Vissert Hooft summarized Bilers thought by saying the humanism of Calvin is founded on the humanism of God and demands a society wherein human beings act as creatures responsible before God and responsible for their brethren, 8. 31 Wolterstorff, Until justice and peace embrace (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm B Eerdmans Jr, 1983). 32 The economic and social witness of Calvin for Christian life today. Statement of an International Consultation, Geneva, November 2004, Reformed World 55/1 (2005): 5ff. 33 See for example the introductory essays by J Schaeffer, World Alliance of Reformed Churches, in Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement, ed. N. Lossky, J. Mguez Bonino, J.S. Pobee, T. Stransky, G. Wainwright and P. Webb (Geneva: WCC Publications; Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1991) 1078-1079; and WARCs historic commitment to justice and human rights, Reformed World 48/2 (1998): 63-78; also the overviews in Reformed faith and economic justice, Reformed World 46/3 (1996), Theology and human rights I, Reformed World 48/2 (1998) and Theology and human rights II, Reformed World 48/3 (1998). 34 For example convincingly argued in Heikoi A. Oberman, Two Reformations (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003) especially 97ff. This work is dedicated to the memory of Andr M. Hugo, described as A Puritan Calvin scholar who lived and died opposing apartheid. 35 On freedom as theme of the Heidelberg Catechism, see Eberhard Busch, Der Freiheit zugetan- im Gesprch mit dem Heidelberg Katechismus (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1998). 36 See Alfred Burgsmller and Rudolf Weth, eds., Die Barmer Theologische Erklrung. Einfhrung und Dokumentation (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1983); Karl Barth, Texte zur Barmer Theologischen Erklrung (Zrich: Theologischer Verlag, 1984); Eberhard Busch, Die Barmer Thesen 1934-2004 (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2004); specifically on freedom, Michael Welker, Die freie Gnade Gottes in Jesus Christus und der Auftrag der Kirche. Die VI Barmer These: 1934-1984-2004, epd-Dokumentation 29 (2004): 9-18. 37 See the official Book of Confessions of the Presbyterian Church (USA), Volume 1; also William C. Placher and DavidWillis-Watkins, Belonging to God: A Commentary on A Brief Statement of Faith (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1992). 38 See Milan Opocensk, Debrecen 1997. Proceedings of the 23rd General Council of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (Geneva: WARC, 1997). 39 This essay was already part of the first edition of his Institutes of the Christian Religion (1536) as an introduction to the explicitly political sixth and final chapter entitled De libertate Christiana, potestate ecclesiastica, et politica administration, which contained two other sections, on the polity of the church and on political government. It remained unchanged until the very last edition of the Institutes (1559), where it became the conclusion of the explicitly theological chapter on faith and justification in Book III. In this final edition (1559), the essay on church polity was moved to Book IV, chapters 8-12, and the essay On civil government became Book IV, chapter 20, still the last section of the whole work. 40 Willem Balke could claim In spite of later developments in Calvinism, we may therefore honour Calvin as one of the best advocates of freedom in the sixteenth century, in his Calvins concept of freedom, in Freedom, ed. A van Egmond and D. van Keulen (Baarn: Callenbach, 1996) 25-54. Karl Barth could say that Calvin has done more for the sake of freedom than all predecessors of modern doctrine of freedom in his time together, in
335

Church Dogmatics I/2, (Edinburgh: T & T Clark) 748. Jane Dempsey Douglass would conclude that Calvins theology of freedom has proved enduring, giving rise to new generations of freedom fighters in the following centuries, in her Women, Freedom, and Calvin (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1985). In his very instructive Sovereign grace. The place and significance of Christian freedom in John Calvins political thought (New York: Oxford University, 1999) political scientist William R. Stevenson Jr. argues in great detail that Calvins complex concept of freedom serves as bridge between theology and politics, providing the foundation for participation in the public arena, in such a way that it both anticipates and critiques modern ideas of freedom. 41 For example William J. Bouwsma, John Calvin: a Sixteenth Century Biography (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988); J Dempsey Douglass, Women, freedom and Calvin; John T. McNeill, The history and character of Calvinism (New York: Oxford University, 1966); and Michael Walzer, The revolution of the saints (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965). 42 For example Louis M. du Plessis, Calvin on state and politics according to the Institutes, in John Calvins Institutes (Potchefstroom: Institute for Reformational Studies, 1986) 174183; also John Witte, Jr, Moderate religious liberty in the theology of John Calvin, Calvin Theological Journal 31 (1996): 359-403. 43 For example Ralph C. Hancock, Calvin and the foundations of modern politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989); Harro Hpfl, The Christian polity of John Calvin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982); William R. Stevenson, Jr, Sovereign grace (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). Interesting for example is Alfred M. Davies, Foundation of American Freedom (New York: Abingdon Press, 1955). 44 For example John de Gruchy, Liberating Reformed theology (Grand Rapids: Wm B Eerdmans, 1991); and his Christianity and democracy (Cape Town: David Philip, 1995); as well as Willie D. Jonker, The gospel and political freedom, in Freedom, ed. A van Egmond, 243-262. 45 For example Andr Bieler, Calvins economic and social thought (Geneva: WARC, 2006); W. Fred Graham, The constructive revolutionary (Atlanta: John Knox, 1971); Nicholas Wolterstorff, Until justice and peace embrace (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983). 46 Stevenson, Sovereign grace, 105. 47 See also Heribert Schtzeichel, Calvins Verstndnis der christlichen Freiheit, Catholica (1983/4): 323-350. 48 Stevenson, Sovereign grace, 105. He also correctly points out that this conviction was already present in Calvins work from early on, albeit formulated in different ways. This was for example underlying his position in the Prefatory Address in the Institutes since 1536, namely that the truth of God deserves more respect than mere human custom. Gods eternal truth liberates believers from being bound to any form of historical event, cultural artefact or time-bound claim or custom, 105ff. 49 Stevenson, Sovereign grace, 106. Particularly interesting, although controversial, is what Stevenson discusses as Calvins views on change as progress, 121ff. He is, however, careful not to claim explicitly that Calvin held such a view. Perhaps the key significance of Calvins vision of providential hope concerns the sense in which hope of historical judgment and providential redemption imply a progressive view of history [Calvin] inspires a new appreciation for the political implications of such hope within historical time, and he does so at a time that a recognition of the full significance of historical change was beginning to germinate and sprout. Perhaps most important, Calvin challenged headon the transhistorical antispeculation of the medieval/Augustinian vision. As a result, we
336

can with little trouble see in Calvins doctrine of providence the theme of historical progress, 122-123. 50 The argument of Jane Dempsey Douglass in Women, freedom and Calvin on contemporary implications of Calvins views for women in church and society is largely based on this third aspect of human freedom. Calvin is the only sixteenth-century theologian who views womens silence in church as an indifferent matter, i.e. one determined by human rather than divine law. She situates this viewpoint, remarkable for his time, within his overall project. Her reading strategy is to read Calvin against his own practices and against major parts of his own Wirkungsgeschichte, arguing that at the heart of his theology and in some of his pastoral practices, one may discern a liberating potential that neither he nor his contemporaries fully understood and embodied, namely in this aspect of his teaching on freedom. 51 Stevenson, Sovereign grace, 147. It is, of course, this characteristic tension between affirmation and transformation that would lead H. Richard Niebuhr in Christ and culture (New York: Harper & Row, 1951) to describe Calvinism as an example of the Christtransforming-culture-type in his five-fold typology of possible relations between church and society. The continuous challenge for the tradition would accordingly be how to discern in a particular historical moment between affirmation and the need for transformation, between indifferent and no longer indifferent. This challenge would take the form of the question when a status confessionis has arrived, a state of confession, a moment of truth in which a certain state of affairs can no longer be regarded as adiaphora, but as threatening the credibility of the churchs message and the integrity of its witness; see for example D. J. Smit, A status confessionis in South Africa?, Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 47 (1984) 21-46. 52 Willie D. Jonker, En as jou broeder sondig, 1959; Die Sendingbepalinge van die Ned. Gereformeerde Kerk van Transvaal (Kerk en Wreld, Teologiese Studies oor die Sending van die Kerk in die Wreld, Nr. 4) (Bloemfontein: Sendingboekhandel, 1962); Aandag vir die kerk (Die stryd om die kerk. No. 1) (Potchefstroom: Die Evangelis, 1965); Om die regering van Christus in sy kerk (Pretoria: Unisa, 1965). 53 For example the moving study by P.F. (Flip) Theron, Die ekklesia as kosmies-eskatologiese tekenDie eenheid van die kerk as profesie van die eskatologiese vrede (Pretoria: NGKB, 1978). 54 See his autobiographical Selfs die kerk kan verander (Kaapstad: Tafelberg-Uitgewers, 1998). 55 Leonard Hulley, The present attitudes of various South African churches to violence, in Listening to South African voices, ed. G Loots (Port Elizabeth: Woordkor, 1990); Ilse Tdt, ed., Theologie im Konfliktfeld Sdafrika. Dialog mit Manas Buthelezi (Stuttgart: Ernst Klett, 1976); also the detailed report by the Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference, The things that make for peace, Pretoria, 1985. 56 Charles Villa-Vicencio, ed., Theology and violence. The South African debate (Johannesburg: ICT, 1987); J.J.F. Durand and D.J. Smit, Geweldwat s die kerk?, (Bellville: UWK, 1996) K. Nrnberger, ed., Conflict and peace, Pietermaritzburg; D. E. de Villiers, Die evangelie van vrede en vrede in Suid-Afrika, in n Woord op sy tyd, ed. C.J. Wethmar and C.J.A. Vos (Pretoria: NGKB, 1988), 9-22; also his Peace conceptions in South Africa in the light of the Biblical conception of peace, Scriptura 28 (1989): 28, 24-40; L.J. Sebidi, Towards an understanding of the current unrest in South Africa, in Hammering swords into ploughshares, ed. B. Thlagale and I. Mosala (Johannesburg: Skotaville, 1986) 255-259; B Thlagale, On violence: A township perspective, in The unquestionable right to be free,
337

ed. I. Mosala and B. Thlagale eds., (Johannesburg: Skotaville, 1986) 136-144; Institute for Contextual Theology, Violence. The new kairos. Challenge to the churches (Braamfontein: ICT, 1990). 57 See for example W.S. Vorster, ed., Views on violence (Pretoria: UNISA, 1985); J.H. van Wyk, Etiek van vrede, n Teologies-etiese evaluering van die Christenpasifisme (Stellenbosch: Cabo, 1984); Willa Boesak, Gods wrathful children. Political oppression and Christian ethics (Grand Rapids MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1995). 58 It is indeed possible to see the pattern to which we are called to respond according to Calvin as an explicitly trinitarian pattern. He himself does precisely that, for example, when he describes why and how we are exhorted to sanctification and to the Christian life. Ever since God exhibited himself to us as a father, we must be convicted of extreme ingratitude if we do not in turn exhibit ourselves as his children. Ever since Christ purified us by the laver of his blood, and communicated this purification by baptism, it would ill become us to be defiled with new pollution. Ever since he ingrafted us into his body, we, who are his members, should anxiously beware of contracting any stain or taint. Ever since he who is our head ascended to heaven, it is befitting in us to withdraw our affections from the earth, and with our whole soul aspire to heaven. Ever since the Holy Spirit dedicated us as temples to the Lord, we should make it our endeavour to show forth the glory of God, and guard against being profaned by the defilement of sin. Ever since our soul and body were destined to heavenly incorruptibility and an unfading crown, we should earnestly strive to keep them pure and uncorrupted against the day of the Lord. These, I say, are the surest foundations of a well-regulated life (III/6.3). In a very informative and well-documented argument, Philip W Butin, Revelation, redemption, and response. Calvins Trinitarian understanding of the divine-human relationship (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995) describes what he calls the Trinitarian basis, pattern, and dynamic of the divine-human relationship and then the human response as the contextuality, comprehensiveness, and coherence of the visibility of grace. It is primarily a study of the life of the church as response between revelation and redemption, but for that reason also a very helpful introduction to what could be called Calvins ethics. 59 Nicholas Wolterstorff, The wounds of God, The Reformed Journal 37 (1987): 14-22 (for the following quotations). 60 Wolterstorff, The wounds of God, 17-18. For an excellent study on the sacramental nature of Calvins theology, see see Brian A. Gerrish, Grace and gratitude (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). He integrates several central themes in Calvins theology, from the good gifts of the Father to the grace received in baptism and Lords Supper, to argue persuasively for the Christian life as a life of gratitude, according to Calvin. 61 Wolterstorff quotes Thomas F. Torrances Calvins doctrine of man (London: Lutterworth, 1949), where this theme is crucial. 62 Wolterstorff, The wounds of God, 18, quoting a sermon by Calvin on Gal 6:9-11 from Wallace, Calvins doctrine of the Christian life, 150. 63 Wolterstorff, The wounds of God, 20-22. The ethicist from the Stellenbosch Faculty, Nico Koopman, recently gave a still unpublished paper to the Society for Christian Ethics (Annual Meeting, 2007) arguing for An ethics of vulnerability as a proper approach to ethics for what he calls the vulnerable continent of Africa today. 64 Wolterstorff, The wounds of God, 22. This has been the kind of Reformed spirituality expressed in the third article of the Confession of Belhar, in the Kitwe Declaration, in the Debrecen processus confessionis and in the call to commitment from Accra in the face of economic injustice and ecological destruction. Kitwe explicitly appealed to Calvin, and
338

central motifs from his legacy play crucial roles in the other documents. 65 From The economic and social witness of Calvin for Christian life today. Statement of an International Consultation, Geneva, November 2004, quoting Eberhard Busch. 66 Peter Opitz summarizes this interest in questions of power very well, Es gehrt zu den charakteristischen Eigenarten besonders der reformierten Reformation, dass sie ihr Verstndnis des Evangeliums im Kontext der Machtfrage expliziert, und damit diese oft erst benennt und thematisiert. Die Frage sowohl nach religiser wie nach sozialer und politischer Macht ist ihr nicht lediglich ein Sekundrproblem, welches sich aus einer fundamental entweltlichten Existenz, aus dem religisen Selbstverstndnis eines zwar noch In-der-Welt-Seins, im Grunde aber nicht mehr Von-der-Welt-Seins (vgl. Joh 15,19) ergibt. Sie ist vielmehr ein ihrer Evangeliumsverkndigung immanentes Problem, das ihr als immer neu zu lsendes gleichsam in die Wiege gelegt ist, das aber auch von Anfang an, und erst recht in den vielfltigen Ausprgungen und Ausgestaltungen des reformierten Protestantismus, in unterschiedlichen Weise angegangen wurde. Dabei geht es sowohl um aus dem Evangelium abgeleitetete Machtkritik wie um das Einbringen des Evangeliums als Gestaltungsmacht An die bleibende Aufgabe eines sich auf die protestantische Tradition berufenden Denkens und Handelns kann ein Blick auf diese Anfnge allerdings erinnern: die Aufgabe, sich der Faktizitt von Macht und Mchten zu stellen, und in der je eigenen Situation in actu zwischen legitimer und illegitimer Macht, zwischen Gottesdienst und Gtzendienst innerhalb wie auerhalb die Gemeinde zu unterscheiden, ohne die Spannung in theoretisch vielleicht befriedigender, die Machtkonstellationen aber zugleich verharmlosender Weise aufzulsen. Man knnte geradezu formulieren: Ein ihrer Erbe treuer Protestantismus besteht nur dort, wo der diesbezgliche Streit lebendig ist, in his Machtkritik und Gestaltungsmacht. Zum Verstndnis des Evangeliums in den Anfngen des reformierten Protestantismus, 13, 27, in Zwischen Affirmation und Machtkritik. Zur Geschichte des Protestantismus und protestantischer Mentalitten, ed. R Faber (Zrich, TVZ, 2005) 13-28. It is probably against this background that the World Alliance of Reformed Churches some years ago conducted a study project intended to discern between graceless power and graceful power. 67 John Dillenberger, ed., John Calvin, Selections from his Writings (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971) 41. 68 According to Jaroslav Pelikan, Reformation of Church and Dogma (1300-1700). The Christian Tradition, Vol 4, (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1984) 217, this would become the distinguishing characteristic of the Reformed faith: The most characteristic difference between Lutheran and Calvinist views of obedience to the word and will of God, however, lay outside the area of church dogma, in what has been called, with reference to Bucer, his Christocracy: the question of whether, and how, the law of God revealed in the Bible ... was to be obeyed in the political and social order. That difference, when combined with the Reformed doctrine of covenant and applied to the life of nations, was to be of farreaching historical significance, for it decisively affected the political and social evolution of the lands that came under the sway of Calvinist churchmanship and preaching (217) and elsewhere: In contrast not only to Roman Catholicism, but eventually also to Lutheranism, they were to denominate themselves Reformed in accordance with the word of God (nach Gottes Wort reformiert) ... (T)he designation Reformed in accordance with the word of God contained the implicit judgment that although the word of God had been affirmed also by Luther and his followers, it had not been permitted to carry out the Reformation as thoroughly as it should have (183-184). 69 For a helpful discussion, see Jan R. Weerda, Ordnung zur Lehre. Zur Theologie der
339

Kirchenordnung bei Calvin, Nach Gottes Wort reformierte Kirche, Theologische Bcherei. Neudrucke und Berichte aus dem 20. Jahrhundert. Band 23. Historische Theologie (Mnchen: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1964) 132-161. 70 Nach reformierter Lehre trgt auch die Ordnung der Kirche bekenntnismssigen Charakter Die Kirche bezeugt mit ihrem Bekenntnis wie mit ihrer Ordnung, da Jesus Christus ihr Herr ist, Wilhelm Niesel et al., eds., forward to Bekenntnisschriften und Kirchenordnungen der nach Gottes Wort reformierten Kirche (Zrich: Evangelischer Verlag, 1938) v. 71 See for example Die Frage nach den Kirchenordnungen gehrt fr die reformierten Bekenntnisschriften eindeutig zum Bekenntnis der Kirche, Paul Jacobs, Theologie Reformierter Bekenntnisschriften in Grundzgen (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1959) 119 ff.; Wilhelm Niesel et al., eds., Bekenntnisschriften und Kirchenordnungen der nach Gottes Wort reformierten Kirche (Zrich: Evangelischer Verlag, 1938) 136-218. 72 Strohm, Ethik im frhen Calvinismus, for example, offers a detailed and persuasive argument for both the juristische Argumentationen as well as what he calls mentalittsgeschichtliche Aspekte: Krisenbewusstsein, Verinnerlichung und Tendenzen eines anthropozentrischen Ordnungsdenkens. Particularly interesting is also the discussions by Jaroslav Pelikan in his Credo. Historical and theological guide to creeds and confessions of faith in the Christian tradition (New Haven: Yale, 2003) where he regularly underlines the close relationship in the Reformed tradition between faith and order, between the rule of faith and the rule of prayer, the nature of confession as a political act, and in general, as he says, the role of polity as doctrine in the Reformed Confessions, 95ff., 107ff., 158ff., 220ff. 73 See for example the informative discussions by Wolfgang Huber, Folgen christlicher Freiheit. Ethik und Theorie der Kirche im Horizont der Barmer Theologischen Erklrung (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1985), especially 129-269; also the volumes of essays by the United Church in Germany on the practical embodiment of the different Barmen theses, Zum politischen Auftrag der christlichen GemeindeBarmen II (1975), Kirche als Gemeinde von Brdern. Barmen III, Bd. I und II (1980), Fr Recht und Frieden sorgen: Auftrag der Kirche und Aufgabe des Staates nach Barmen V (1986), Das eine Wort GottesBotschaft fr alle. Barmen I und VI. Bd. I und II (1993), Der Dienst der ganzen Gemeinde Jesu Christi und das Problem der Herrschaft. Barmen IV. Bd. I und II (1999). 74 Particularly Jonker, Om die regering van Christus in sy kerk (Pretoria: Unisa, 1965). 75 This emphasis by Calvin on life and ethics as integral to faith interested Karl Barth much during the 1920s, see H. Scholl, Themen und Tendenzen der Barth-Calvinforschung im Kontext der neueren Calvinforschung, in Karl Barth und Johannes Calvin, ed. Hans Scholl, (Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 1995) 19ff. For Barth, Reformed confession therefore involves ethics, as his well-known definition shows, Until further action confession defines (the communitys) character to outsiders and gives guidance for its own doctrine and life. 76 The present Church Order of the URCSA therefore represents the attempt to embody the truth of the gospel, as understood in the historical moment, in the life of the church that belongs to Jesus Christ. In ways reminding of Calvin, the worship of the local congregation is seen as the heart of the life of the church (Article 4), but in and through the worship the believers are called to serve one another and the world (Article 12). The churchs calling includes embodying social and economic justice in society, even explicitly using words from the Confession of Belhar. 77 Alasdair C. MacIntyre, After virtue. A study in moral theory (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, 1984).
340

78 In the Reformed tradition such conflicts are of course very well known, also regarding Calvin himself. This may have to do with the nature of this tradition, for example the absence of central authority. The only real authority is supposed to be holy scripture which has always to be read and interpreted anew. In his early essays, republished as Vortrge und kleinere Arbeiten 1922-1925. Gesamtausgabe III. (Zrich: Theologischer Verlag, 1990), Karl Barth often dealt with these characteristics of the Reformed tradition, for example in Das Wort Gottes als Aufgabe der Theologie, 144-175, Reformierte Lehre, ihr Wesen und ihre Aufgabe, 202-247, Die Kirche und die Offenbarung, 307-348, Das Schriftprinzip der reformierten Kirche, 500-544 and the well-known Wnschbarkeit und Mglichkeit eines allgemeinen reformierten Glaubensbekenntnisses, 604-643. In South Africa, under the influence of Dutch Calvinism, the two dominant theological traditions of reception became the legacies of Kuyper and Barth. Not only is there conflict between these two histories of reception, but also within both of them, so that there are major debates about the exact role of Kuyper and his followers in South Africa as well as about Barth and his followers. For question marks about being Reformed, see W.A. Boesak and P.J.A. Fourie, eds., Vraagtekens oor gereformeerdheid? (Belhar: LUS, 1988). 79 This is most certainly the thrust of his monograph on Reformed confessions, Willie D. Jonker, Bevrydende waarheid, Wellington: Hugenote-Uitgewers, 1994, as well as his essay Kragvelde binne die kerk, Aambeeld 26, No. 1 (1988): 11-14 analysing different forces struggling for the future direction of the Dutch Reformed Church. 80 A. Boesak, Black and Reformed. Apartheid, liberation and the Calvinist tradition (New York: Orbis, 1984); see also his recent The tenderness of conscience (Stellenbosch: African Sun Media, 2005), in which he again makes a strong and explicit argument based on the Calvinist tradition and piety. 81 L. R. Lekula Ntoane, A cry for life (Kampen: Kok, 1983). 82 Hayman Russel Botman, Dutch and Reformed and Black and Reformed in South Africa: A tale of two traditions on the move to unity and responsibility, in Keeping the faith, ed. Ronald A. Wells, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996) 85-105; also H.R. Botman, Belhar and the white DRC: Changes in the DRC: 1974-1990, Scriptura 76 (2001): 33-42. Botman argued that the greatest challenge facing the DRC is theological. So-called Kuyperians and Barthians were so severely beaten by the internal conflicts in the Church that they resigned from a visible and active role in reshaping the universe of theological discourse in the DRC precisely when direction was needed most. Botmans analysis was followed by P.J. Naud, Constructing a coherent theological discourse: The main challenge facing the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa today, Scriptura 83 (2003): 192-211. Naud agrees with Botman and attempts to address the challenge by constructing a theology with four co-ordinates, namely being Reformed, ecumenical, critical-public and African. 83 J.W. de Gruchy, Liberating Reformed theology (David Philip, Cape Town, 1991). On the one hand, the book argues that Reformed theology is best understood as a liberating theology that is catholic in substance, evangelical in principle and social and prophetic in witness. This makes the Reformed tradition liberating, in a variety of ways and from a whole range of forms of oppression. In order to demonstrate his thesis, he systematically treats the most typical Reformed convictions, especially by paying detailed attention to Calvins own position. In the first chapter, A ferment nourished by the gospel, he attempts to redefine what Reformed really means, in the process debunking a variety of mythologies, und using Ntoanes words a cry for life as a kind of Reformed motto. From chapters 2 to 6 he then successively treats the doctrine of Scripture and liberation from the tyranny of tradition, custom and philosophy; the doctrine of God and liberation from

341

idolatry, which is the tyranny of human power acting as though it is divine; the doctrine of soteriology and liberation by grace alone from the tyranny and terror of bad religion; the doctrine of the church and liberation from the tyranny of human tradition and falsehood; and the role of the church in society, the political task of the church and liberation from tyranny and anarchy. On the other hand, it is a major supposition of the book that the Reformed tradition has not always in history succeeded in actually practicing this liberating potential, but instead, in so many instances, became itself distorted and oppressive, as South Africas recent history demonstrated. That also explains the intentional ambiguity of the title. Reformed theology itself must be liberatedbut how is this possible? It seems that de Gruchy is suggesting two strategies. The one is to establish a conversation with contemporary liberation theologies. The other is to engage in critical retrieval, suspicious and creative reclaiming, (self-)critical engagement with the Reformed tradition itself, appealling to its liberating moments and trajectories and unmasking and criticizing oppressive moments and trajectories. 84 De Gruchy, Liberating Reformed theology, 34. 85 Jonker, Op die breuklyn, in Op die breuklyn, ed. D J Louw et al. (NGKU: Kaapstad, 1982) 5-19, especially 10, 18ff. He concluded passionately with the hope that celebrations of the faculty in 2009 will find that the church heeded the historical call and challenge. For Rustenburg, see The Road to Rustenburg, ed. Louw Alberts and Frank Chikane (Cape Town: Struik, 1991). 86 It seems that this expression itself is not from the earliest time of the Reformation some claim it is from Voetius, so for example Willem A. Visser t Hooft, The renewal of the church (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1956) 76; some claim it was coined by Schneemelcher and Steck for the 1952 Festschrift of E. Wolf. In spite of this, almost everyone agrees that the idea behind the expression indeed goes back to the very nature of the Reformation itself, see for example J. Frey, Ecclesia semper reformandaex fide scripturae sacrae, in Herausgeforderte Kirche, , ed. C. Dahling-Sander, M. Ernst and G. Plasger (Wuppertal: Foedus, 1997), 365-372; B. Oberdorfer, Ecclesia semper reformandaeine Tradition der Traditionsverzehrung?, in Gebundene Freiheit?, ed. P Gemeinhardt & B Oberdorfer, (Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlagshaus) 2007; Harold P Nebelsick, Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda, Reformed liturgy and music 18 (1984): 59-63. 87 This is the reason why it is so utterly in the spirit of Calvin when Eberhard Busch concludes his very helpful reflection on Calvin und die Demokratie. Aufsatz fr das Projekt Religion und Freiheit der A Lasco-Bibliothek in Emden (at http://wwwuser.gwdg.deebusch/cdemo.htm) with three self-critical questions, questions which according to him Calvin would raise against usagainst our theological foundation of democracy, our understanding of the church and its own social form, and against our actual political democratic practices. 88 This was certainly also the spirit of Bilers monumental study, not to adore or to attempt to copy Calvins own example, but rather to help some believers to find once again the meaning of a gospel ethic that embraces the whole of life, both personal and social. We should therefore however beware of seeking to elicit from Calvins thought an economic and social doctrine that could apply just as it is to our day. In support of this approach, he quotes Barth with approval who wrote in 1948: We recognize in Calvin a model or example only to the extent he showed unforgettably the way of obedience to the Church of his day: obedience in thought and actionsocial and political obedience. A true disciple of Calvin has only one path to follow: to obey not Calvin himself, but Him who was Calvins master, Calvins economic and social thought, xxxxiv.
342

89 See for example the selections representing his pastoral piety edited by Elsie A. McKee, John Calvin. Writings on pastoral piety (New York: Paulist, 2001) especially her general introduction, 1-37 and Gerrishs preface. 90 Both in 1909 and in 1964 many of the speeches and papers during the Calvin celebrations underlined the fact, that any form of hero adoration could never have a place in remembering John Calvin. Perhaps the words of Karl Barth represent these views very well, Whoever today commemorate Calvin must make sure that they have Calvin on their side in this matter and not against them. It was no coincidence that the place of his burial slipped into oblivion only a few years after his death. The monument erected to him and several other Calvinists of spiritual and secular standing of his time at Geneva was certainly not erected in his spirit. Calvin was no hero, and is not suited to hero-worship. He desired to be merely the first servant of the word of God for the Christian congregation at Geneva, as well as for others who came to him asking to be that. He wanted, therefore, neither to be honoured nor applauded, nor even loved. Rather he wanted to be heard. It was not for nothing that when he spoke of the order of the Christians existence he placed almost all the emphasis on the teaching of the necessary mortification of the self in favour of Gods self, Gods will and pleasure. That is how he lived. That is how he died. And in this, as far as his person is concerned, he is to be respected, Fragments grave and gay (London: Collins, 197) 105-110. 91 For academic scholarship, of course, this avenue may seem totally unacceptable. It is not without very good reason that Richard A Muller, The unaccommodated Calvin. Studies in the foundations of a theologial tradition (Oxford; Oxford University Press, 1998) has argued so strongly for historical scholarship, that does not seek to interpret Calvin according to the older model, typical of the heyday of Barthian studies of Calvin but now outdated, or according to newer approaches, dogmatically motivated (studies) of Calvins theology operating from the related assumption that an exposition of Calvins theology could provide significant points of departure for contemporary theologizing. It is of course necessary that scholars of history do proper work to lay bare the unaccommodated foundations of the tradition. At the same time, however, if MacIntyre is correct about the definition of a living tradition, people who actually regard themselves as part of that tradition will inevitably make use of the results of that scholarship to argue with one another about the goods that constitute that living tradition, today. Calvins ethics is probably a prime example of such claims about goods that challenge everyone belonging to this living tradition to engage in such an ongoing argument, for lifes sake. 92 In South Africa, there have been several recent initiatives to retrieve Calvins legacy and in fact to do it together, jointly, overcoming the painful divisions of the past. A major example of this was a conference organized by Pieter Coertzen in the Faculty of Stellenbosch commemorating the presence of the Reformed faith on South African soil, with contributions from may different backgrounds and denominations, collected in Coertzen, ed., 350 jaar/ year Gereformeerd/Reformed. 1652-2002 (Bloemfontein: CLF, 2002). Another important contribution has been the popular monograph by the moderator of the General Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church, C.W. Burger, Ons weet aan wie ons behoort. Nuut nagedink oor ons gereformeerde tradisie (Wellington: Lux Verbi BM, 2001). In the Faculty of Stellenbosch, Robert Vosloo together with colleagues and postgraduate studies from different racial and church backgrounds have embarked on a research project called Sharing History: Engagements with the interwoven histories of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) and the Uniting Reformed Church (URCSA) through the lenses of liturgical practices and theological reception. One important strand of this research will be a focus on The reception of Calvin in South Africa. This shared research, also engaging many

343

younger scholars, will directly contribute to the local anniversary of Calvins life and theology in 2009, which will also be the year of the 150th anniversary of theology in Stellenbosch. It is perhaps apt that some of the introductory papers in this research have dealt with the work of another French Reformed intellectualPaul Ricoeurs work on Gedchtnis, Geschichte, Vergessen (Mnchen: Wilhelm Fink, 2004) of which the last almost hundred pages deal with the difficulties of forgiveness.

344

Response to Dirkie Smit

Franois Dermange

1. A century ago, when our predecessors reflected on the significance of Calvins legacy for their own time, the answer seemed to be quite evident. Although the Geneva pastors considered the spiritual and literary heritage of the reformer to be important and published an anthology of his texts, this was not the main focus of their celebration. For most Christians of that time, Calvins contribution was political rather than religious, in that he was an advocate of democracy. Until 1909, no public monument had ever been erected in memory of the reformer, but in that year, an international committee decided to commemorate the Calvinist reformation and its principles, which laid the foundations of constitutional democracies. This is why Luther is not present and why, apart from Calvin, Beza, Farel and Knox, only political figures are represented, whether they were really reformers or not. I mention this to emphasize that each era identifies with certain characteristics of the reformer that, in retrospect, do not seem completely evident to us from the historical point of view. However, from a more positive perspective, we can say that a commemoration provides an opportunity to

find in the past the means to better define the challenges with which we are confronted today, looking towards the present and future, rather than the past. For, after all, our predecessors were by no means mistaken in their understanding of the reformers legacy when they ascribed to it both a specifically religious dimension and an ethical and political dimension, which could have repercussions beyond the Reformed family in the narrower sense, but showed the reformers concern for justice. 2. The challenge, therefore, is to dare to speak a double language. On the one hand, to say that Calvin wanted to be the minister of a holy community, devoted to Christ and obedient to his teachings. Reformed Christians must be reminded about the importance that the reformer attached to the church and the presence of the Holy Spirit, to radicalism and saintliness. Clearly, we would find it difficult to follow Calvin and the many Stoic implications of the ethics contained in his Very Excellent Treatise on the Christian Life1. However, in a world that often unilaterally extols self-fulfilment and gratification, someone must have the courage to say that the happiness promised in the gospel is that of the Beatitudes. The

345

disciple is not greater than his master and the quest for happiness often encounters the cross. This jubilee commemoration is an occasion to question ourselves with regard to the common witness that Christians, communities and churches must bear about the love we experience in Christ. Church unity, fellowship among the reformed families, who too often ignore each other, and perhaps even the reformulation in common of a treaty of virtues, are challenges facing Christians. 3. On the other hand, this ethic of love does not exclude giving due regard to justice. There is singular consolation, when we are persecuted for righteousness sake and that happens, said Calvin, when we are striving for the defence of the Gospel, and also when we are fighting for the defence of righteousness in any way by defending the good and innocent against the injuries of the bad.2 As an external observer, the philosopher Charles Taylor, remarked: The reconciled person feels the imperative need to repair the disorder of things, to put them right again in Gods plan. [] To the Calvinist, it seemed self evident that the properly regenerate person would above all be appalled at the offence done to God in a sinful, disordered world; and that therefore one of his foremost aims would be to put this right, to clean up the human mess or at least to mitigate the tremendous continuing insult done to God.3

defend the vulnerable and the equity that protects them, but it is their duty to be engaged. Reformed Christians must openly and publicly show that they are involved in the struggle against injustice and that Calvin, their prophet, showed them the way. 4. In this respect I completely agree with Dirkie Smit: those who see the foundations of Calvins ethics in his approach to the law, or to Christian life or to sanctification are all correct, and it is not necessary to choose between these different but complementary interpretations. Calvinist theology of the law and the importance it gives to the Decalogue opened the way for reflection towards a universalist approach to standards known to everyone, and that to some extent foreshadowed contemporary thinking on human rights. It is indeed the law since the time of creation and not the Mosaic law that must serve as the basis for social justice: 4 Since man is by nature a social animal, he is disposed, from natural instinct, to cherish and preserve society; and accordingly we see that the minds of all men have impressions of civil order and honesty. [] Hence the universal agreement in regard to such subjects, both among nations and individuals, the seeds of them being implanted in the breasts of all without a teacher or lawgiver.5

Christians are not the only ones to

Those men and women who, like Andr Bieler, saw in Calvin one of the fathers of social justice are right. But by virtue of the principle of synecdoche, the same law as

346

transformed into positive laws such as the commandments, (Institutes II, VIII, 9) leads believers to another imperative that transcends the law itself by revealing to the believer a knowledge of God that no human wisdom can completely fathom. It is not enough to defend widows and orphans, refugees and the persecuted, ensuring that they are treated as my equals (Institutes. III, VII, 3). In love, justice asks for selfrenunciation and self-abnegation: 6 Poverty, indeed considered in itself, is misery; so are exile, contempt, imprisonment, ignominy: in fine, death itself is the last of all calamities. But when the favour of God breathes upon us, there is none of these things which may not turn out to our happiness. Let us then be contented with the testimony of Christ rather than with the false estimate of the flesh.7

radicalism of the love of the gospels and the justice that each person, in his or her own conscience, can know naturally. Nor is there any need to see them as antithetical. As Paul Ricur, a contemporary reformed philosopher, often insisted, justice needs love to denounce its utilitarian excesses and love needs justice, which is the broadest practical application of love. Is not the golden rule in the heart of the Sermon on the Plain (Luke 6, 31)? A Reformed ethic should therefore be able to say, on a down-to-earth level, that a minimum order of justice and equity must be preserved by universal laws, by both Christians and non-Christians, so that human life can be genuinely human. Calvin reminds Christians that they must have the courage to bear witness to the radicalism of the gospel and that the call of love goes beyond simply respect for justice.

There is no need to choose between the

Notes
1

The Trait trs excellent de la vie chrestienne was published separately in 1545 and in 1551 and inserted by Calvin in his Institute (Institutes of the Christian Religion III, chap. VI-X) 2 Institutes of the Christian Religion III, VIII, 7. 3 Charles Taylor, The Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1989, p. 228. 4 The allegation, that insult is offered to the law of God enacted by Moses, where it is abrogated and other new laws are preferred to it, is most absurd. (Institutes of the Christian Religion IV, XX, 16) 5 Institutes of the Christian Religion II, II, 13. 6 This is the love of justice, to which we are not inclined by nature (III, VI, 2). Cf. Augustin, De moribus ecclesiae catholicae, XXVI. 44, XXV. 46, XXVIII.56. 7 Institutes of the Christian Religion III, VIII, 7.
347

Reformed World Volume 57 (2007) Index

I. Articles by author

Asling, John P. Editorial (June-September 2007) .........................................................................................103 Asling, John P. Editorial (December 2007)...........................................................................................................229 Busch, Eberhard. Who was and who is Calvin? Interpretations of recent times ............................237 Campi, Emidio. Calvins understanding of the church ........................................................................................290 Carvalhaes, Claudio. Louder please, I cant hear you - voices, spiritualities and minorities .....................................................................................................................................................................................................45 Dermange, Franois. Response to Dirkie Smit .........................................................................................................345 Foreward, What is the significance of Calvins legacy? ........................................................................................231 Hulbert, Alastair. Milan Opocensk (1931-2007) ..........................................................................................................71 Jeremiah, Anderson H. M. Privatization of water - a theological critique and ensuing challenges for the church ........................................................................................................................................03 Jones, Serene. Response to Christian Link...................................................................................................................264 Link, Christian. Calvin between humanism and discipleship ......................................................................251 Mateus Pedroso, Odair. Editorial (March 2007) ............................................................................................................01 Moiso, Aimee. How matters - the case for unity-focused methods of dialogue ................................58 Orthodox-Reformed international dialogue. Convergences on the doctrine of the Church (1996-2005).............................................................................................................................................................................86 Park Seong-Won. Response to Herman Selderhuis .............................................................................................286 Rawlins, Clifford Reinhold Leandro. Water, source of life - socioeconomic, theological and interreligious perspectives .................................................................................................................................................17 Roman Catholic-Reformed dialogue. The Church as community of common witness to the kingdom of God ...................................................................................................................................................................105 Selderhuis, Herman J. Calvins view of the Bible as the word ........................................................................270 Smit, Dirkie. Views on Calvins ethics: reading Calvin in the South African context ..................306 Thvenaz, Jean-Pierre & Dommen, Edward. Andr Biler (1914-2006) ...................................................78 Tron, Carola Ruth. Water and the Christian community in a liquid modernity - a Latin-American perspective ........................................................................................................................................................31 von Kloeden-Freudenberg, Gesine. Doors of righteousness: reflections on the question of justice ............................................................................................................................................................................208
^

348

II. Articles by title

Andr Biler (1914-2006), Jean-Pierre Thvenaz and Edward Dommen ................................................78 Calvin between humanism and discipleship, Christian Link ......................................................................251 Calvins understanding of the church, Emidio Campi ..........................................................................................290 Calvins view of the Bible as the word, Herman J. Selderhuis .......................................................................270 Convergences on the doctrine of the Church (1996-2005), Orthodox-Reformed international dialogue .......................................................................................................................................................................86 Doors of righteousness: reflections on the question of justice, Gesine von Kloeden-Freudenberg ...................................................................................................................................................................208 Editorial (March 2007), Odair Pedroso Mateus ............................................................................................................01 Editorial (June-September 2007), John P. Asling .......................................................................................................103 Editorial (December 2007), John P. Asling .....................................................................................................................229 How matters - the case for unity-focused methods of dialogue, Aimee Moiso.....................................58 Louder please, I cant hear you - voices, spiritualities and minorities, Claudio Carvalhaes........45 Milan Opocensk (1931-2007), Alastair Hulbert .........................................................................................................71 Privatization of water - a theological critique and ensuing challenges for the church, Anderson H. M. Jeremiah ...........................................................................................................................................03 Response to Christian Link, Serene Jones.....................................................................................................................264 Response to Dirkie Smit, Franois Dermange ............................................................................................................345 Response to Herman Selderhuis, Park Seong-Won ..............................................................................................286 The Church as community of common witness to the kingdom of God, Roman Catholic-Reformed dialogue ......................................................................................................................................................105 Views on Calvins ethics: reading Calvin in the South African context, Dirkie Smit........................306 Water and the Christian community in a liquid modernity - a Latin-American perspective, Carola Ruth Tron ....................................................................................................................................................31 Water, source of life - socioeconomic, theological and interreligious perspectives, Clifford Reinhold Leandro Rawlins .........................................................................................................................................17 What is the significance of Calvins legacy, Foreward ............................................................................................231 Who was and who is Calvin? Interpretations of recent times, Eberhard Busch..............................237
^

349

FINALLY IN ENGLISH A MASTERPIECE OF CALVIN SCHOLARSHIP

Calvin warned that social disorder is first and foremost disdain for the poor and oppression of the weak. The Swiss theologian and economist Andr Biler argues that Calvins economic and social thinking is an application of the teaching of the Bible to issues of the reformers time that speaks to us with continuous relevance.

Andr Biler. Calvins Economic and Social Thought. Geneva: World Council of Churches/World Alliance of Reformed Churches 2005. 588 pp. ISBN 2-8254-1445-X. Price: Sfr 65.00, US$ 50.95, 28.95 42.50 Available at www.warc.ch Publications and Subscriptions Other Publications

350

Subscription Rates-2007
USD EURO CHF GBP

Reformed World
1 year 2 years 3 years 16.00 13.00 20.00 9.00 29.00 24.00 37.00 17.00 42.00 35.00 54.00 24.00 13.00 11.00 17.00 8.00 24.00 20.00 31.00 14.00 36.00 30.00 46.00 20.00

Update
1 year 2 years 3 years

Combined subscription to Reformed World and Update

1 year 2 years 3 years 28.00 23.00 35.00 16.00 50.00 42.00 64.00 28.00 75.00 62.00 95.00 42.00

Update is the quarterly newsletter of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches. Published in English and French, it keeps its readers informed of developments in the life of WARC and its churches. Please say which language you wish to receive. Payment may be made at www.warc.ch or by cheque to the WARC office or through our postal cheque account: 12-2890-9, Switzerland. Please mention Reformed World and/or Update as appropriate. Payment may also be made through our authorized agents in the following countries: Japan: Committee of Ecumenical Relations 2-2 Yoshida, Kawagoe City 350-0807 New Zealand: Church Stores NZ Ltd., PO Box 11-1061 Ellerslie, Auckland 1131 Back issues, books and other publications are available from: Word Alliance of Reformed Churches, 150 route de Ferney, PO Box 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland. Tel 0041 22 791 62 40 e-mail: warc@warc.ch Prices include mailing.
Acting Editor: John P Asling . Assistant: Frederick Schlagenhaft Layout and cover: emblema idias visuais - So Paulo, Brazil - marcos.gianelli@gmail.com
Published by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches 150 route de Ferney, PO Box 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland

Fax 0041 22 791 65 05 web: www.warc.ch

351