'Out of the cradle, endlessly rocking...'

Saturday, May 21, 2011

that's it!

     I admire John Calvin. His theology is often beautiful. But there's always a, well, a problem, something that's bothered me for over a decade. There's a fatal flaw in the whole, something that once you see it, sends the vision galley-west.
     I finally figured it out.
     The real problem with John Calvin is simple - he doesn't believe in the sovereignty of God.
     Yes, that's right, for all his majesty and glory and power and wrath and benevolence and grace and suchlike, God in the theology of John Calvin just isn't sovereign. There are strict limits on what he can, and can't, do, limits expressed in later polemic by unfortunate latinisms like extra and non capax.
     Mind you, this is no judgment on the piety or genius of the man, who by all accounts was indeed a great, if difficult, pastor. Still, perhaps it was that piety that caused him trouble. He wanted so to honor God, to magnify God, to defend God, if you will; he wanted to use great care, caution even, as he spoke of and for God, lest he offend the divine majesty and cause the people to stumble willy-nilly into idolatry. He was so careful, so cautious, so circumspect, and in that was simply faithful to his inheritance. Still, in the end, against all his intentions, he ended up positing real and stubborn limits to the sovereignty of God.
     Let me say it again - John Calvin doesn't believe in the sovereignty of God. He only thinks he does, and he thinks so very carefully and discreetly too.
     So, mystery plumbed.

1 comment:

  1. You are technically correct, as Calvin himself says:

    'We, however, give no countenance to the fiction of absolute power, which, as it is heathenish, so it ought justly to be held in detestation by us. We do not imagine God to be lawless. He is a law to himself; because, as Plato says, men laboring under the influence of concupiscence need law; but the will of God is not only free from all vice, but is the supreme standard of perfection, the law of all laws. But we deny that he is bound to give an account of his procedure; and we moreover deny that we are fit of our own ability to give judgment in such a case. Wherefore, when we are tempted to go farther than we ought, let this consideration deter us, Thou shalt be “justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judges,” (Ps. 51:4).'

    Inst. 3.23.2

    ReplyDelete