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. 

Hearing Christ's Voice: A Response to Reed Dressler

In our Wednesday Groupthink essay, my friend Reed Dressler takes on an important contemporary topic, one that is close to my own heart and that is difficult to talk about at our denominational conferences and church coffee hours: hearing the voice of God. Dressler points to the importance of remembering God’s continuing presence in God’s creation, a remembering which breaks down traditional barriers between the sacred and the profane.

I sincerely appreciate Dressler’s writing on the topic, but I am often nervous about discussing contemplative theology. Such discussions can quickly become overly abstract and self-absorbed, focusing (no less than evangelical pop theology) on the individual’s relationship with God to the neglect of a larger narrative of God’s action in history.

The best way, I think, to avoid the problem of atomizing individualism in the spiritual life is to hold the truths Dressler points us to in tandem with a spirituality that centers our union with the crucified and risen Christ within the community of his Body, the Church. Private contemplative practice will lead us astray if we pursue it overzealously and without equal commitment to our “common prayer” and service with others who commit their lives to the Way.

Authentic spirituality, for Christians, should always begin with the One we consider the ultimate expression of God’s being and character, “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation” (Colossians 1:15).

I don’t say this to denigrate anyone else’s religious traditions or to imply that only Christians can pray or meditate or know God. I do believe, though, that as people of faith, we best honor the traditions of others by living faithfully the best of our own, not by appropriating and generalizing until nothing is left but abstracted “spiritual but not religious” feelings of goodwill. Poet Christian Wiman likes to quote George Lindbeck: “You can no more be religious in general than you can speak language in general.” In Wiman’s own words, “the only way to deepen your knowledge and experience of ultimate divinity is to deepen your knowledge and experience of the all too temporal symbols and language of a particular religion” (My Bright Abyss 141). For Christians, those symbols and that language must center on Jesus Christ.

Many of the early Church Mothers and Fathers spoke at great length about Christ as Logos, the Word by which God made and sustains the world, the divine creative principle of the universe. The poet Gerard Manley Hopkins had just this conception of Christ in mind when he formulated his vision of every molecule of creation giving praise to God simply by being what it is truly is:

"As kingfishers catch fire, dragonflies draw flame;
As tumbled over rim in roundy wells
Stones ring; like each tucked string tells, each hung bell's
Bow swung finds tongue to fling out broad its name;
Each mortal thing does one thing and the same:
Deals out that being indoors each one dwells;
Selves — goes itself; myself it speaks and spells,
Crying Whát I dó is me: for that I came. 

"I say móre: the just man justices;
Keeps grace: thát keeps all his goings graces;
Acts in God's eye what in God's eye he is —
Chríst — for Christ plays in ten thousand places,
Lovely in limbs, and lovely in eyes not his
To the Father through the features of men's faces"

For Hopkins, and for many of us who see the beauty of his vision even if we have trouble with his metaphysics, it is not only the First Person of the Trinity we experience in creation and providence, but Jesus Christ as well.

I used to dismiss this talk of the Logos as so much overbaked Platonism, an aberration of the original concrete and social vision of Jesus.

It is true that, when overemphasized, a theology centered on the Logos can be used as a way of avoiding the most difficult teachings of Jesus found in the gospels.

However, a healthy understanding of the Logos in creation helps us to move beyond abstraction and see Christ’s face in this action, this experience, this experience this person. We need the actions, experiences, and presence of others to understand fully what Christ is doing among us. I think that is what our Orthodox siblings mean they greet each other, not with the familiar “The Lord be with you” “And also with you” found in my church, but with “Christ is in our midst” “He is and shall be.”

Jesus chose a meal with his friends, not solitary meditation,
as the main way we are to remember him.

One great way to begin cultivating a Christ-centered and communal spirituality is by reflecting on the sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist. Baptism, and the remembrance of our baptism, is a way of partaking in Christ's death and resurrection. In baptism, we are initiated into Christ's new creation, the world as God intended us to see it, with Christ the Logos visible, if only faintly, in all things. Whether we were baptized as infants or as adults, it remains true that none of us baptized himself or herself. It's a gift that only comes to us through the actions of other Christians.

Similarly, in the Eucharist, we remember our place as "living members of [God's] Son, our Savior Jesus Christ," in the words of the Book of Common Prayer. Here, St. Augustine says it best:

"If you are the body of Christ and his members, your mystery has been placed on the Lord's table, you receive your mystery. You reply 'Amen' to that which you are, and by replying you consent. For you hear 'The body of Christ,' and you reply 'Amen.' Be a member of the body of Christ so that your 'Amen' may be true. ... Be what you see, and receive what you are" (Sermon 272).

Spirituality is, as evangelicals are fond of saying, about one's "relationship with God," but it is also about our relationship with God. It's about who we are discovering Christ to be and ourselves to be in Christ as we gather in his name.

Christ is in our midst. He is and shall be. Amen.