Calvin as Theologian Rather than Theoretic: A Response to Naydich

While Calvin was somewhat less severe a theologian
than his reputation suggests, we at Groupthink regret
that he is still not quite as huggable as this Calvin.

Calvin is  one of the greatest Christian teachers thinkers of all times, whether you agree with his teachings or not.I want to thank Naydich for having written a piece that, in "relevant" language, reclaims one of the most influential figures of Christian history; Calvin has too long been demonized by folks in the modern church on the basis of a straw man oversimplification of a small percentage of Calvin's corpus.

I suspect Calvin might even be alright with you telling him that you don't agree with his claims about theology and the Christian life, as long as you were prepared to show him from Scripture where you think he is incorrect. Of course, of his odd bits of writing that seem chauvinistic or anti-Semitic. This, oddly enough, brings me to my first point about what we ought to understand about Calvin and his theology en toto: If "postmodern" thought has taught us anything, it has surely taught us that every text, in fact everything, has a context.

If we were to construct a Hegelian synthesis, Calvin's context forms the thesis and Calvin's work itself, the antithesis. Then, we could find the enduring value of his work in a synthesis taking account of both. Calvin, although his teachings can right be called "timeless" because of this enduring value, was not writing the Institutes for twenty-first century American readers. Calvin did, however, know that the church as it stood in his time in continental Europe was a corrupt and oppressive institution, both ideologically and economically, and that is the context of much of his writing.

Calvin argued that the church of his time was not yet holy because laity was taught to believe that those "in charge" of the church were holy. He spoke of the believer's utter dependence on God in part because people were taught to believe they could depend on divine forgiveness and help mediated through their financial contributions to the church.

Naydich states that "Calvin has his eyes constantly set upon God, the ultimate creator of the universe, and Calvin implicitly compares everything to the standard of God." I would add to this that Calvin has an eye constantly set upon God because he insists on seeing God past the standard of the church authorities of sixteenth century France. 

The reason that Calvin is so adamant about one's personal study of the Scripture is that he knows that in his era that was one of the most freeing acts a person could partake in. True freedom for the captives was available. 

This is my second main point, one to which Naydich rightly alludes: Calvin is one of the archetects of modern "devotional" practice. His Institutes should not be thought of in the same breathe as a sweeping philosophical reflection like Kierkegaard's Works of Love, even if both have the same potential to change a believer's life. The Institutes is meant to be an accessible guide to living a life of devotion to God, more accessible at least than a life of monasticism, which was very much emphasized as a superior mode of holiness in Calvin's day. The only way he saw to teach all Christians to live a holy life was to compose a work of practical theology for all literate people, lay or ordained. 

That legacy of practical theology for all people is one I'm happy to continue by blogging for Groupthink with other members of the Christian family, and I look forward to reading further responses on this topic.

John Calvin: Predestined to be Misunderstood

Calvin. The name alone can draw a powerful emotional response from today's Christians. The Young Reformed movement often found on university campuses ensures that many people know about John Calvin and his classic conflict with James Arminius. Tomes of blog posts have probably been written on the Calvinism vs. Arminianism debate, or the question of our “election.” I dare say I may be one of the few contemporary Christians who does not care about this debate at all! What is frustrating is how much it misses the point of what Calvin was trying to accomplish with his famous Institutes. 

The title page of the 1559 edition of the Institutes.
Calvin's classic work began as a slim, practical volume,
but he added to its content as his career continued. 

Calvin had more important things to say than whether or not we are predestined, or whether or not we have free will. He was above all a practical theologian. He was concerned with living a Christian life. If a theological point could not be used practically, he had no use for it. We often lose that when discussing this great thinker. What I want to do right now is bring up some less known aspects of Calvin’s thought expressed in The Institutes of Christian Religion. Hopefully, that will allow us to not throw the baby out with the baptismal font when we engage with today's “Calvinists.”

Man’s Dependence on God

Arguably, most of Calvin’s theology is dependent on humanity's state of utter dependence. His first writings in the Institutes all disparage the human being’s ability to measure up to God. For instance, Calvin writes: 

“[A]s soon as we lift up our thoughts to God and reflect on his nature and how absolutely perfect he is in wisdom righteousness and virtue, we realize that this is the standard to which we must conform.”

Calvin does not, as is often misconstrued, have a negative view of man, but view's man negatively only in comparison with God's absolute goodness. Abstract theological principles can arise from all of his musings about the absolute goodness and power of God. A philosophy class or two can be evidence of that. But Calvin does not concern himself with such matters! Instead, he focuses almost entirely on why such a position of reverence and self disparagement is necessary for building a relationship with God which focuses on submission and filling the lack all people have in themselves. 

From where does Calvin draw some of his most persuasive proofs on our dependence on God? 

Nature. Echoing the words of all Christians concerned with nature from Augustine to Pope Francis, Calvin attests the glory of God in creation. He seems to gasp in horror that, “Creation lights up all these bright lamps to demonstrate the glory of the Creator to us, all in vain.” Calvin’s theology of man’s dependence, and God’s absolute goodness are not abstract theological principles he is working out. His principles are realizations derived from life experience, and describes these beliefs as crucial for Christians who want to walk with God.

Scripture

Calvin had a lot to say about the Bible. He encouraged constant study of it. He himself was consumed by a constant effort to learn more, to distill more knowledge from the text. It was a tradition that was picked up later by Puritan theologians in the United States. 

Why did Calvin put so much focus on the scripture? Again, it was a practical concern. Calvin saw the Bible as a repository for sound teaching. If we could only learn everything about the Bible than we would no longer find ourselves in the throes of inadequate and dangerous theology. Becoming learned in scripture was a hedge around ungodliness, which would threaten our walk with our Creator

In this, Calvin gives the Holy Spirit one of its most important roles. The Holy Spirit guides the reader through scripture. This is where Calvin famously says, 

“Unbelievers think that religion is a matter of opinion and so demand rational proof that Moses and the prophets were inspired , if they are to sufficient grounds for belief. My reply is that the testimony of the Spirit is superior to reason.” 

I was always frustrated in college whenever someone who was Reformed would respond to any objection I had with, “Well that’s just a mystery.” Essentially, saying that reason is somehow the enemy. That view it is contrary to everything Calvin stood for. 

After explaining this idea Calvin goes on to dismiss “strange revelations from the Spirit” and praises studiousness of the word. 

Again, Calvin speaks with a practical voice. We might picture him saying something like, “Don’t worry if you don’t have an answer to every objection, keep studying the Word--the Spirit will reveal the answer to you.” Calvin demanded careful study of scripture in order to fully understand God, and this demand was made in order to preserve people’s walks. 

God’s Providence

You may note that I am skipping over Calvin’s discussions of the Trinity by moving on to his teaching on providence. Surely God will reward you for you astuteness. My reason for skipping the Trinity is simply to avoid spending too much time discussing essential orthodox Christianity since Calvin does not tread much new ground in his explanation. Also, providence is more fun. 

As I’ve been alluding to, and hopefully demonstrating, Calvin was concerned with practical theology. We often judge Calvin’s doctrine of providence in the opposite way. Instead, I hope I can contribute to important internet discussions of Calvin by thinking through this doctrine practically. I think a perfect summation of this is the statement by Calvin that, 

“The believer’s comfort in trouble is that everything they endure is ordained and commanded by God and that they are in His hands.”

Previously, Calvin had described God as a creator who is close to his creation, a creator who is actively involved in it. He is not sitting back, resting on his laurels while the world plays itself out. No! According to Calvin God is always close, actively sustaining you and everything else in love. So fret not! Even when God seems far, he is close. 

Now that sounds a lot nicer than when that line is quoted to show how Calvin makes God the author of sin, what Calvin was trying to do was God the author of comfort. There is very little evidence that Calvin was concerned with the meta-ethical implications of his view. Calvin connects this idea to Abraham when he exclaims that “God will provide.” Maybe Calvin’s view of providence is more akin to providing for us rather than presiding over us. 

Moreover, Calvin entitles the very next section “How to use this doctrine for our benefit.” Evidently, that’s what Calvin was thinking when discussing God’s ordering of the world. That God designed everything in order to “develop patience in his people, correct their vices, control their impurity, and stir them from laziness.” 

Sin, the Law, and Salvation

The doctrine of total depravity gets a really bad reputation. Are we really totally depraved. Is it really impossible for me to do something good without God. I think what we need to remember is that the doctrine was a tool for self-denial. Its use was to remind people to be humble. More importantly, Calvin has his eyes constantly set upon God, the ultimate creator of the universe, and Calvin implicitly compares everything to the standard of God. Therefore, in comparison to God, we probably aren’t all that great, Calvin’s views on sin and the fall seek to reinforce that. 

All of these insights temper Calvin’s view of the law. It was never meant to be a final solution, it was always meant to point to something else. The law is a tool of learning, to teach us to be more capable of being with God. In fact, practically speaking, Calvin’s view of the law connects very well to popular contemporary teaching on Paul’s view of the law. In a sense, the law was like training wheels, and it is still valuable like all scripture is: as a hedge against immorality which keeps us from our creator. 

Finally, we come to Christ. Christ, through whom God perfects humanity. Christ is God’s way of redeeming us, so that we may be like God. That insight is crucial, because with Christ it is possible to be like God. Not divine, but holy. Holy enough to be in a relationship with him. Calvin’s theology comes full circle. We are constantly told that we are not quite good enough, that God is so holy, but through Christ we experience communion with God. Through all of the other practical considerations of Calvin we can make ourselves ready for a relationship, and that relationship comes to being in Christ. Surely Calvin is not the pessimist that he is made out to be. Surely he is not the deep, complex, abstract thinker he is made out to be. 

Concluding Thoughts

I hope you saw that I never mentioned predestination. Calvin’s theology does not need it in order to be complete. All of our contemporary considerations of Calvin seem to miss the point of his practical theological musings. When we criticize and elevate this man, it ought to be through the lens he wrote. 

Of course there are numerous practical criticisms of Calvin that I did not even mention, and hopefully those will get brought up in the responses to this piece. What I hoped to accomplish in this piece was to reframe Calvin in a way that makes him a fresh theological voice again, he deserves as much. 

Ninth Sunday after Pentecost

As we prepare for our upcoming essays on John Calvin, we will also join in this prayer traditionally attributed to Calvin. 

"Lord, save us from being self-centred in our prayers and teach us to remember to pray for others. May we be so bound up in love with those for whom we pray that we may feel their needs as acutely as our own and intercede for them with sensitivity, with understanding, and with imagination."

Mondays with Marilynne: "Let the Poore be Mainteined"

President Obama presented Marilynne Robinson with the National Humanities Medal in 2013.

“Well, what is a Christian, after all? Can we say that most of us are defined by the belief that Jesus Christ made the most gracious gift of his life and death for our redemption? Then what does he deserve from us? He said we are to love our enemies, to turn the other cheek. Granted, these are difficult teachings. But does our most gracious Lord deserve to have his name associated with concealed weapons and stand-your-ground laws, things that fly in the face of his teaching and example? Does he say anywhere that we exist primarily to drive an economy and flourish in it? He says precisely the opposite. Surely we all know this. I suspect that the association of Christianity with positions that would not survive a glance at the Gospels or the Epistles is opportunistic, and that if the actual Christians raised these questions those whose real commitments are to money and hostility and potential violence would drop the pretense and walk away.” --Marilynne Robinson, qtd. by Robert Long, The American Conservative, 10/15/2013

Last week on Groupthink, we introduced a new series, “Mondays with Marilynne.” In the series introduction, we took a quick look at Robinson’s faith, literature values, and cultural impact. I referred a few times, in fact, to Robinson’s most famous fan, the President of the United States. 

When President Obama presented the National Humanities Medal in 2013, he addressed the recipients: “Your writings have changed me--I think for the better.” Then, turning directly to Robinson, he said, “I believe that Marilynne.” Since then, Obama has quoted Robinson in his weekly addresses and, most movingly, in his eulogy for the Reverend Clementa Pinckney (an important and deeply Christian sermon in itself).

While Robinson’s novels are not political manifestos, and people of all political persuasions have found great beauty and meaning in her words, it is worth spending some time this week looking over her political convictions and their relationship to her Christian faith.

Marilynne Robinson is nothing if not politically vocal. While she is well known in the world of American literature, fewer people know that, as political philosopher Peter Lawler so rightly notes, “Robinson is quite the theologian, historian and essayist, and she has devoted herself to recovering--pretty much on her own and against every grain--our authentic Puritan/Calvinist tradition [in American civic discourse].”* 

Robinson’s unique political vision is rooted in a sophisticated reading of the Bible, Calvinist theology, and the Protestant heritage of the United States. She does not hesitate to draw from the Christian gospel implications for policy on social services, income disparity, racial justice, gun control, and military spending, to name a few of the issues she has weighed in on over the years.

Robert Long of The American Conservative (whose coverage of Robinson’s work I highly recommend in spite of any ideological disagreements we might have), traces the roots of Robinson’s social thought to Calvin’s statement in The Institutes of the Christian Religion that “the image of God by which [your neighbor] is recommended to you deserves your surrender of yourself and all you possess.” In fact, she even traces the origins of liberal democracy to what many today consider an unlikely source: the Pentateuch.

“Only the tradition of Moses integrated civil law into the religious mythos, the sacred narrative,” she writes in her essay “Open Thy Hand Wide: Moses and the Origins of American Liberalism”. “For this reason it has the singular inflection of an attentive, passionate--and singular--divine voice. In what other body of law could compliance be urged with the phrase ‘for you know the heart of the stranger’?” (When I Was a Child I Read Books, 71).

Robinson is no biblical literalist. She shows a perfectly rational awareness of the many shortcomings of our forebears in faith. She does not “think we should stone witches.” But, in Robinson’s own words again, “if you choose to value one or two verses in Leviticus over the enormous, passionate calls for social justice that you find right through the Old Testament, that’s primitive.” 

(Here, Robinson addresses the true motives of those on the far right who believe they can safely ignore the biblical imperative to care for the orphan and widow while tossing about a few favorite verses in argument against abortion or gay marriage, but her words should be equally stinging to that portion of the progressive community that dismisses out of hand the possibility that religion could have anything to contribute to the common good.)

For Robinson, the centrality of law in Israel’s traditions and the development of a “rule of law” in Western culture are both results of a “high valuation of life in the world and in community,” a valuation we may acquire from a faithful reading of our religious traditions. Such a valuation will lead most naturally to a policy of liberalism in the oldest sense of the word--open-handedness, the willingness to “Give to everyone who begs from you, and … not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you” (Matthew 5:42).

Since she enjoys an enormous audience, which includes a fair number of conservative Christians, Robinson often receives criticism for her political statements. For instance, one of my colleagues who attended Calvin College's Festival of Faith and Writing a few years ago tells me she had to field a question from an audience member who said her speech "could have been ghost-written by Bill Moyers and aired on PBS," a fact which apparently destroyed her credibility with much of the assembled audience.

Robinson reportedly answered, "I don't recognize any other obligation than to say what it is true."

*Peter Lawler, "Tocqueville and Robinson in Defense of the Puritans' Sunday," Society 45.2 (September 2009), 445.