Should we commemorate the European Reformation?

 In 2017 the Jubilee Centre in Cambridge commissioned some sculptures to mark the five hundredth anniversary of the display of Luther’s ninety five Theses. They also invited individuals to compose theses that were germane to the times in which we live and chose ninety five of these for publication. The Romanian sculptor Liviu Mocan created the sculptures on five themes:

The Book that reads you (inspired by sola scriptura), The Lamb of God (sola gratia), The Anchor cast up to heaven (sola fide), The Ladder of the World (solus Christus) and The Trumpet of the Universe (soli Deo gloria). These are based on the convictions that helped to define and shape the European Reformation.

Having displayed these sculptures in Cambridge for a lengthy time period the Jubilee Centre began to seek places that would be interested in taking one (or more ) of the sculptures for their own use.

An Evangelical Church in Cambridge, Christ Church is going to install The Anchor cast up to heaven in the hope that it will stimulate conversations about whom we rely on in times of crisis whilst St Botolph’s is aiming to procure The Lamb of God as a focus for reflection and prayer. An American Christian University, Wheaton College has bought The Trumpet in the Universe to place in the foyer of their centre for music and the arts. Two sculptures have yet to find a permanent location: The Book that reads you and The Ladder of the World.

In recent times following the “Black lives matter” campaign and the removal of a statue of Edward Coulson from a site in Bristol, (because of his perceived involvement in the slave trade), the use of statues and sculptures to commemorate people or events has attracted controversy. During the European Reformation, some of the protestant reformers were critical of installations of this kind. John Calvin wrote about the “papists” saying “The pictures or statues that they dedicate to the saints- what are they but examples of the most depraved lust and obscenity?” (Institutes I, 11,7). The European Reformation caused much bloodshed and there were both Protestant Martyrs (such as Latimer and Ridley) and Roman Catholic Martyrs (such as Thomas More) as examples from the English Reformation only. Given this bloodshed, the question of whether it is appropriate to commemorate people or events or the principles that led to the loss of human life and devaluation of human dignity has become pertinent to our time.

Would you be willing to buy or display one of the two remaining LiviuMocan sculptures from the Jubilee Centre?

How does interpretation of holy texts affect Theology and the Church?

 Calvin regarded the Bible as the text that was central to his thought- it contained the Word of God dictated to mortals by the Holy Spirit. But in Calvin’s eyes there was nothing magical about the texts he was aware that copyists were fallible and he regarded a knowledge of the original languages as essential to its exposition and explanation. He put the techniques he had learned with Seneca’s work, into practice with the holy scriptures. He was unsurprised therefore when there were inconsistencies in the Bible. The interpretation of the Bible was via the Holy Spirit acting through the conscience of human beings and it did not come automatically to every person. Do we read critically any piece of text we receive? How much damage is caused in our society by uncritical acceptance of news stories and rumours propagated by social media? For you is there such a thing as an inspired text? And if it is inspired then who is the mind behind it?

Calvin believed that God’s word was made law in the Old Testament, regarding the Ten Commandments as a basic text binding on all Christian believers. He also integrated the idea that the covenant was made by God with Abraham, then to the Patriarchs and David and so through Christ to all Christians because the covenant was a set of promises between God and His people.

In the New Testament God provided His Son as the great mediator of the covenant who would help God’s sinful people fulfil their calling as God’s chosen ones. The death and resurrection of Christ followed by His return at the day of judgment would enable humans to be reconciled to God. Until that day Christ was present in the Church and in the Lord’s supper (often known as the Holy Communion).

Calvin’s system of understanding the scriptures allowed him to be critical of those who did not rate God’s word highly. He wrote “For they mock the Holy Spirit when they ask: Who can convince us that these writings come from God?” (Institutes I, vii,1). Are there many people around today who would speak in a similar way? Would you be one of them?

What is the value of a human being? Calvin’s picture

 As thoughts turn to the vaccination program nations are offering to help assist with the management of the Covid-19 pandemic many people have wondered who should get priority vaccination? Governments have generated lists of the first few categories of people who may be invited to receive the vaccine. Often it has been the old and most vulnerable who have been the first in the queue. But some have asked why this should be the case. The lives of the old and vulnerable may have been fully lived and so is there a reason to prolong them? The question pivots around what is the value we place on the life of any one individual? This question is also at the heart of whether countries should admit any foreign nationals fleeing their own repressive governments or whether only such people who have a profession that will be benefit the nation who is receiving them. What is the value we place on one human life?

Calvin’s view of human worth focussed solely on the grace of God revealed in Jesus Christ to any one individual as he says “salvation flows from the wellspring of God’s mercy” (Institutes 3:21:7) and this is “freely given mercy without regard to human worth” (Institutes 3:21:7). So does it matter whether a person is an eighty year old former casual labourer who has rarely worked sufficiently to pay any taxes or a high powered business executive, surely that should not matter in the queue for a vaccine or entry to a foreign country for sanctuary? Does age and whether the potential of a person has been already realised or if the life is almost complete? Calvin would say not, it just depends on their acceptance of God’s mercy in Christ.

Calvin cites other distractions that distort human worth over God’s grace as “monstrosities” set up “in place of God” (Institutes 1:11:7). The initial comment of Calvin at the start of the Institutes sums up human aspiration “All our wisdom in so far as it is held to be true and perfect consists of two things, namely a right knowledge of God and of ourselves” (Institutes 1:1:1). Without this knowledge human value of age or financial status or health is worth nothing. Should this be something we apply to the vaccine priority debate?

How has Calvin been interpreted and adapted through the centuries?

 

This blog will chart the use of Calvin’s doctrine and teaching on predestination from its beginning in the Institutes through to its application at the time when Methodism was developing its distinctiveness apart from the Church of England. Calvin mentions predestination in several places in the Institutes as he explores and deepens his understanding of the subject, in Book 3 chapter 21 section 5 he writes “No one dares simply deny predestination by which God adopts some to hope of life and sentences others to eternal death” and a little later in the same section “We call predestination God’s eternal decree, by which he determined with himself what he willed to become of each man. For all are not created in equal condition; rather eternal life is foreordained for some eternal damnation for others.” Calvin always emphasises that it belongs to God’s power “to rule and direct everything by His hand” (Institutes 2, 27, 1).

This power is manifest within human beings such that “the covenant of life is not preached equally among all men and amongst those to whom it is preached it does not gain the same acceptance either constantly or in equal degree. In this diversity the wonderful depth of God’s judgment is made known to us” (Institutes 3, 21,1). The decision rests with God and God alone. Some will be predestined to life, others will not, it is not the decision of humans but God.

One of the first objectors to Calvin’s doctrine was Bolsec who argued the doctrine made God the author of evil, made God a tyrant, man a puppet of God and rendered human beings able to earn salvation from God leading to a Pelagian Church, focussed on works. Calvin refuted Bolsec and after this Bolsec was expelled from Geneva in 1551. Bolsec’s behaviour may have caused interest from the Church and State authorities in Geneva aside from his doctrinal deviations (his sexual preferences and activities had become notorious). But the question remained for the Church, could individuals who were part of the reprobate improve their situation by performing good works. Calvin’s teaching insisted that only God knows the destiny of human beings, (following St. Augustine), who is elected to new life in Christ and who is not elected, (reprobated), is known to God only.

The Church of England, when it was formed, followed the idea that some are elected to life and no-one knows the will of God with regard to the rest, detailed and upheld in the thirty nine articles (article 17). This is single predestination. Other denominations became concerned with the identity of the reprobate and followed the idea that some were chosen for life, others condemned and part of the reprobate. This attracted the term “double predestination.”

Centuries later the dispute that split John Wesley and George Whitfield was centred on predestination. The argument revolved around the extent to which an individual was chosen by God for eternal salvation or eternal damnation. Did God choose people for salvation or damnation from the start of their lives or did they have the free will to respond to God? Whitfield held the first view, Wesley upheld the second. This leads to a further question that is key to the matter: if God chooses the people He wishes to save (the elect) than did Christ die only for them or for all humanity? If Christ died only for the elect then they may not need to lead a holy life, some might contend, leading others to make the allegation of antinomianism (becoming lawless). Whitfield went to North America where he pursued preaching double predestination whilst Wesley began to develop the doctrines and ecclesiology that would shape Methodism and turn to a view that God would save all people (a position already elaborated by the theologian Jacob Arminius (1560-1609)).

Even today predestination is a subject that exercises many people and if applied to the Covid-19 situation raises deep questions, are some predestined to get the virus? What is the status of those who remain clear in God’s sight?

Is Covid-19 the judgement of God? What is Calvin’s view of judgement?

 

Is Covid-19 the judgement of God? What is Calvin’s view of judgement?

Some people would suggest that the Covid-19 pandemic is God’s judgement on the sins and transgressions of our society. A highly materialistic, self seeking and narcissistic world that abuses the created order leading to climate change and pollution with excess plastics. For Calvin the only judgement is that of rejecting God and His Son Jesus Christ “for a heavier judgement remains upon the wicked because they reject the testimony of God’s love”(Institutes Book III, 14:2). Calvin appears to believe that if human beings think that they can know God’s will for us, how we are predestined, then it is not possible for us to have access to this information. This renders any speculation about our destiny futile. If someone tries to find out “what decision has been made concerning himself at God’s judgement seat” then that person is cast into “the depths of a bottomless whirlpool”; tangled in “innumerable and inextricable snares and “buried in an abyss of sightless darkness” (Institutes Book III, 14:4).

For Calvin, the only route into God’s presence is through Christ “the sinner received into Communion with Christ is reconciled to God by His grace, while cleansed by Christ’s blood he obtains forgiveness of sins and clothed with Christ’s righteousness just as if it were his own, he stands free from care before the heavenly judgement seat” (Institutes Book II, 27:8). Is this the route you would take or would you rather plot your own course?

Servetus ? Different views?

Ferdinand (king of Aragon from 1479) and Isabella (queen of Castile from 1474) were married in 1469 thus uniting the thrones of Aragon and Castile.  This united kingdom, coupled with money from gold imported from America and the renaissance flowering of culture in Europe caused Spain to enter a glorious age with many developments in the arts and science.  Into this time frame Michael Servetus was born in 1511. He suggested the theory that blood circulated around the body, a novel concept at that time, yet he also attacked conventional notions of the Trinity.  For these he was condemned by the Sorbonne and forbidden to teach in Paris.  Some chapters of his Systematic Theology book “The Restoration of Christianity” were sent to Calvin for comments.  Calvin was opposed to them and so alerted the Inquisition.  Servetus was prosecuted by the church in Geneva for blasphemy.  This carried a sentence of death.  The government of Geneva accepted the Church decision and Servetus was burned in 1553.

About Servetus, Calvin wrote to his colleague Guillame Farel: He [Servetus] should ask pardon of God whom he has so basely blasphemed in his attempt to efface the three persons in the one essence saying that those who recognise a real distinction in the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit create a three headed hound of hell.

In Spain, Servetus was a ground breaking scientist.  In Geneva  he was a heretic.  The same person was viewed in different ways. How many people do you know in our twenty first century society who can be viewed in such polarised ways?

June and July 2020 COVID-19 – Do we obey our secular rulers? What does Calvin say?

As restrictions on our movements due to the COVID 19 pandemic are relaxed, how seriously do we need to take the advice offered by our Government?  Calvin devoted the whole of Book four, chapter 20 of the Institutes to the relationship of the Christian believer with the state authority. Luther had published work on this question, but no-one knows if Calvin ever read this.

Before we consider the contents of Book Four, Chapter 20 (the final chapter of the Institutes, entitled Civil Government) we must acknowledge that the Dedication of the 1559 version of the Institutes was to the secular King, Francis I.  In this Calvin assures the monarch of the political dutifulness of his protestant subjects. Is this then developed in the thirty two sections of Book Four, Chapter 20?

At the end of Book Four Chapter 20, the exhortation is that we must “obey God rather than men”  a reference to Acts 5:29 (when Peter and the Apostles appeared before the Council after their imprisonment).  Yet throughout the preceding chapters Calvin exhorts obedience to the secular authorities, for example in Book Four, Chapter 20, section 31:

But we must in the meantime be very careful not to despise or violate the authority of the magistrates, full of venerable majesty which God has established by the weightiest decrees even though it may reside with the most unworthy men who may defile it as much as they can with their own wickedness.

How can we comment on our own situation based on Calvin’s approach?  Calvin is known as a second generation Christian Reformer, working several years after Luther and the initial split of Protestantism from the Church of Rome.  By this time Protestantism was dividing into denominations (such as the Anabaptist rule in Munster from 1533-1535) and Catholicism was redefining itself through the Council of Trent in 1563.  Calvin may have seen the Christian religion as needing protection from radical Protestantism and from supporters of the Papacy.  He may have been of the view that the early Reformers such as Luther had given up too much to secular authority and so wanted a balance of church rule by clergy, with lay people policing the activities of the clergy.

Calvin assumed firstly that the Church was vigorous and independent of the state.  In the twenty first Century in England could it be that the Church of England is not in this place, being the Established Church of the nation?  Secondly he assumed that the secular power (mediated through the magistrates) was godly.  Are our politicians godly?  We can only wonder……………….