Or maybe Calvin would have been a patriot...

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 20 - Civil Government

30-32 - lesser magistrates ought to check tyranny; obey God first

30. In Scripture, God often avenged tyranny using other nations, or judges. The former had evil intentions of conquest, while judges were self-consciously carrying out God's command. Both got the job done.

31. So "let the princes hear and be afraid." But "let us not at once think that it is entrusted to us, to whom no command has been given except to obey and suffer. I am speaking all the while of private individuals." Lawful, subordinate governments may withstand evil kings. "If they wink at kings who violently fall upon and assault the lowly common folk, I declare that their dissimulation involves nefarious perfidy."

32. "Obedience [to evil kings] is never to lead us away from obedience to [God]" See Dan 6:22-23, where "the king had exceeded his limits, and had not only been a wrongdoer against men, but... against God." Israel wrongly willingly followed evil laws - Hos 5:11. Courtiers cloak their evil in the bad laws of the king. Sin's old excuse is, "but it's legal." The king's wrath can be great, in lawfully resisting him - Prov 16:14 - but "we must obey God rather than men" - Acts 5:29. We must "suffer anything rather than turn aside from piety."

Calvin ends the Institutes with "GOD BE PRAISED."

What about Obama? Or, Calvin would have been a Tory...

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 20 - Civil Government

22-29 - Obedience with reverence due even unjust rulers

22. From magistrates, to laws, now to the citizen's duty. First, we must honor the office. Some think it just a "necessary evil," but 1 Pet 2:17; Prov 24:21; Rom 13:5 say otherwise.

23. We must also obey them. Rom 13:1-2; Titus 3:1; 1 Pet 2:13-14. Included in this is abstaining from harassing public officials. Let them do their jobs. "Let [citizens] not raise a tumult."

24. So far, we've been assuming the ruler is a "father of his country," as Homer put it of Odysseus. But some "drain the common people of their money, and afterward lavish it on insane largesse... plundering houses, raping virgins and matrons, and slaughtering the innocent."

25. We are subject to "all who, by whatever means, have got control of affairs." "They who rule unjustly and incompetently have been raised up by Him to punish the wickedness of the people.... a wicked king is the Lord's wrath upon the earth." See Job 34:30; Hos 13:11; Isa 3:4; 10:5; Deut 28:29. "Let us... pause here to prove this, which does not so easily settle in men's minds." [No kidding].

26. God "removes kings and sets them up" - see Dan 2:21, 37; 4:17, 14. When Samuel warns the people about asking for a king, he basically says, "The willfulness of kings will run to excess, but it will not be your part to restrain it" - see 1 Sam 8:11-17.

27. Jer 27 is especially pertinent. See verses 5-8, 17. "We see how much obedience the Lord willed to be paid to that abominable and cruel tyrant for no other reason than that he possessed the kingship.... those seditious thoughts [should] never enter our minds that a king should be treated according to his merits...."

28. This is not "peculiar to the Israelites." See Prov 28:2; Job 12:18. Jer 29:7 also commands Israel "to pray for the prosperity of their conqueror." David dares not touch Saul's head, as Saul was God's anointed - 1 Sam 24:6, 11; 26:9-11.

29. Rulers do owe subjects just rule, "but if you conclude form this that service ought to be rendered only to just governors, you are reasoning foolishly." What if children decided their parents were too harsh, and thus didn't obey? We ought "not to inquire about another's duties, but every man should keep in mind that one duty which is his own." In the face of wicked rulers, "it is not for us to remedy such evils." God will avenge. See Ps 82.

Christians in Court?

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 20 - Civil Government

14-21 - Public law and judicial procedures

17. Some say the magistrate is unnecessary for Christians since we may not go to court - 1 Cor 6. But God gave him to us - Rom 13:4; 1 Tim 2:2 - and he "may without impiety be called upon and also appealed to." But others have a "rage for litigation." "If one is permitted to go to law with a brother, one is not therewith allowed to hate him, or be seized with a mad desire to harm him, or hound him relentlessly."

18. Coming to court is okay if the intent is right: "to defend what is his by right... without bitterness," anger, vengeance, etc. This is virtually never the case, you say? That doesn't negate the fact that the magistrate is there to help in such disputes, and "we must more diligently guard against its becoming polluted by our fault."

19. To "strictly condemn all legal contentions" is to accuse Paul of fault in Acts 24:12; 16:37; 22:1, 25; 25:10-11. Vengeance is not allowed - Lev 19:18; Matt 5:39; Deut 32:35; Rom 12:17, 19. Going to court isn't getting revenge for ourselves, but getting the justice of God. "The magistrate's revenge is not man's but God's, which He extends and exercises... through the ministry of man for our good."

20. This doesn't conflict with Matt 5:39-40. We should rather endure double injury than strike back in retaliation. "We are not leading them away from this forbearance." But we can work to keep what is ours when others try to take it away unlawfully, remaining friendly and of goodwill to our adversaries. One bears with his adversaries with patience "to increase the number of good men - not to add himself to the number of the bad by a malice like theirs."

21. In 1 Cor 6:5-8, Paul condemns a selfish and litigious spirit, not all court disputes. "When any man sees that without loss of love he can defend his own property, the loss of which would be a heavy expense to him, he does not offend... if he has recourse to law.... love will give every man the best counsel."

Of the laws of Moses and nations

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 20 - Civil Government

14-21 - Public law and judicial procedures

14. After the magistrate, now the law. Cicero said, "The law is a silent magistrate; the magistrate, a living law." Some say the laws have to follow "the political system of Moses, and... the common laws of nations" to be "duly framed," but this is absurd. The judicial laws are distinct from the moral law. It is true ceremonial and judicial laws touch on morals, but this doesn't require adherence to Mosaic judicial laws to be moral.

15. The moral law is summarized by loving God and neighbor. The ceremonial law was Jewish training in worship, "foreshadowing in figures" the coming fullness - Gal 4:3-4. The judicial law gave "formulas of equity and justice." Just as piety could continue with the abrogation of the ceremonial law, so justice and love to neighbor can continue without the exact form of the judicial law in Scripture. So laws today may "vary in form but [must] have the same purpose." Each nation is thus free to form its own laws.

16. All laws should work toward the same goal of equity. But there will be a diversity of punishments for various crimes, depending on the circumstances and dispositions of various countries. "How malicious and hateful toward public welfare would a man be who is offended by such diversity, which is perfectly adapted to maintain the observance of God's law?"

Calvin on Politics

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 20 - Civil Government

8-13 - Forms and duties of gov't; war and taxation

8. It's hard to say what form of government is superior - monarchy, oligarchy, democracy - since they are all easily corrupted to tyranny or anarchy. But "aristocracy... far excels all others," since a king cannot control himself as easily without others checking his will. God ordained in Israel "an aristocracy bordering on democracy" in Ex 18:13-26; Deut 1:9-17. In the best government "freedom is regulated with becoming moderation," and the rulers are careful to not diminish those freedoms. But it is generally more harmful "to desire a change of government," when "it is our duty to show ourselves compliant and obedient to whomever he sets over the places where we live."

9. "The office of the magistrates... extends to both Tables of the Law" - 1st 4 commandments as well as the last 6. If laws "neglect God's right and provide only for men" they are "preposterous." Faithful kings restored the worship of God, but "because there was not king in Israel, each man did as he pleased" in anarchy - see Judges 21:25. Magistrates should do justice - Jer 22:3; Ps 82:3-4; Deut 1:16-17; 17:16-19; 16:19; Ps 101:4-7. They should "provide for the common safety and peace of all." They are given the power of reward and punishment by the sword to ensure this - Rom 13:3.

10. But if God forbids Christians to kill, how can pious believers order the death of men as judges? Because they act as God's agents, not on their own authority. "Nothing is done here from men's rashness." If magistrates want God's approval, they need to follow His law in carrying out theirs. See Rom 13:4; 2 Tim 2:15; Ex 2:12; Acts 7:24; Ex 32:27-28; 1 Kings 2:5-6, 8-9; Ps 101:8; 45:7; 44:8. These bloody deeds were required and they would have been unfaithful to leave them undone. Prov 16:12; 20:8; 20:26; 25:4-5; 17:15, 11; 24:24. We can't "favor undue cruelty" or require that clemency dilute justice in every case, though clemency is "the chief gift of princes." A Roman writer said, "It is indeed bad to live under a prince with whom nothing is permitted; but much worse under one by whom everything is allowed."

11. "Kings and people must sometimes take up arms to execute such public vengeance." A country must be protected from invaders, robbers, etc.

12. Some object that the NT gives no warrant for war. But John didn't tell the soldiers to quit the army, just to not exploit that position - Luke 3:14. "Everything else ought to be tried before recourse is had to arms." The right to wage war also applies to stationing troops and weapons, and making treaties.

13. "Tributes and taxes are the lawful revenues of princes." Using them "for the magnificence of their household" is allowed, to show forth the authority and dignity of their office. Scripture supports this in David and Solomon's palace, Ezek 48:21; Joseph and Daniel were "lavish at public expense" without fault. But the treasuries are not the private property of the magistrate. He must use them well, without waste. It is "tyrannical extortion" to impose taxes "upon the common folk without cause." Citizens must be careful not to "rashly and shamelessly decry any expenses of princes..."

Take heed what you do, magistrate

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 20 - Civil Government

3-7 - Need and call for civil government

3. It is as necessary as "bread, water, sun, and air." Gov't must prevent public sacrilege and ensure "that a public manifestation of religion may exist among Christians." We will treat 3 parts of gov't separately: the magistrate, the laws, and the people.

4. The magistrate rules in God's place, as inferred from Ex 22:8; Ps 82:1, 6; John 10:35; Deut 1:16-17; 2 Chron 19:6; Prov 8:14-16; Rom 12:8; 1 Cor 12:28. Rom 13:1-2 is even more clear. And several OT saints were civil magistrates: David, Josiah, Hezekiah, Joseph, Daniel, Moses, Joshua. This office is "holy and lawful before God."

5. Some radicals say they don't need civil gov't, "but they claim a perfection of which not even a hundredth part is seen in them." See Ps 2:12; Isa 49:23; Ps 21; 22; 45; 72; 89; 110; 132; 1 Tim 2:2, "in which the right of rulers is asserted."

6. Magistrates must be faithful, since they act in God's place. See 2 Chron 19:6-7; Isa 3:14-15.

7. Radicals claim Luke 22:25-26 rejects earthly authority over others, but Scripture elsewhere honors it - Rom 13:1; Prov 8:15; 24:21; 1 Pet 2:17 - even the power of one, a monarch, which is "least pleasant" to us.

Why a government at all?

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 20 - Civil Government

1-2 - How civil and spiritual government are related

1. We are under a two-fold gov't. One spiritual, the other regarding "civil justice and outward morality." We have to avoid the error of "overturn[ing] this divinely established order," and the error of flattering princes and letting them go "against the rule of God Himself." We may not mingle the spiritual and civil elements of government, though. "It is a Jewish vanity to seek and enclose Christ's Kingdom within the elements of this world." He makes clear in 1 Cor 7:21 that "spiritual freedom can perfectly well exist along with civil bondage" [sorry Patrick Henry!]

2. Civil gov't is distinct from spiritual, but "they are not at variance." The magistrate must protect the worship of God, defend sound doctrine and the sound church, "to adjust our life to the society of men, to form our social behavior to civil righteousness, to reconcile us with one another, and to promote general peace and tranquility." Some say the church should be sanctified enough to handle all problems, but mankind is too depraved and needs the power of the sword to punish and deter our evil.

Send them to a mental hospital

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 19 - Rome's five other "sacraments"

34-37 - Marriage is no sacrament

34. It wasn't treated as such until the time of Gregory (400s). It is a sign of union between Christ and His church. But if we make every sign a sacrament, everything will be a sacrament, even theft - 1 Thess 5:2. The one who calls them all sacraments "ought to be sent to a mental hospital."

35. The mystery (sacramentum) of Ephesians 5:32 is the spiritual union of Christ and the church, not earthly marriage.

36. Rome insists on the latin word sacramentum there in Eph 5:32, but not in 1 Tim 3:9; Eph 1:9; 3:3, 9. They call marriage a sacrament, but also polluted by lustful copulation. They say the Spirit is conferred in sacraments, but "deny that the Holy Spirit is ever present in copulation."

37. They multiply regulations about marriage, taking it from the civil sphere, going "against the laws of all nations and also against the ordinance of Moses." Too much to go into, but at least "I have partly pulled the lion's skin from these asses."

We are all priests

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 19 - Rome's five other "sacraments"

22-33 - Holy Orders not a sacrament

22. Rome tries to make 7 sacramentlings out of this one, with 7 grades of priesthood. But their writers don't even agree among each other about the number or definitions or of each grade.

23. Their theory that Christ fulfilled all 7 grades of the office is too ridiculous to respond to. I can't read it without laughing, and can't believe they were written seriously. They say He was doorkeeper in cleansing the temple (John 2:15; Matt21:12) and in John 10:7, reader (Luke 4:17), exorcist (Mark 7:32-33), acolyte (John 8:12), subdeacon (John 13:4-5), deacon (Matt 26:26), and priest (Matt 27:50; Eph 5:2).

24. Those in the lower offices don't do their duties at all. Others do, or they go undone. Once they are ordained, they stop doing it! They are ordained "just to do nothing." The exorcists "cannot persuade the demons that they are endowed with such power, because the demons not only do not yield to their commands but even command the exorcists!"

25. They shave the top of the head, leaving a "crown" of hair, since we are kings and priests - 1 Pet 2:9. But this is true of all believers, not to be claimed only for the ordained priesthood. They say they do this to take vows of poverty, meditation and chastity, "but is there no class of men more greedy, stupid, and lustful?"

26. They say Paul did this in Acts 18:18, but he did this out of love for weaker brethren, not in worship to God [I'm not sure about this]. When they try to imitate the Nazirite vows of Num 6 today, they are "raising up another Judaism." [true]

27. This haircut began to distinguish from effeminate long hairstyles among men in the culture of Europe.

28. They ordain priests with all kinds of crazy ceremonies, giving the power to perform sacrifices, when Christ was the once-for-all sacrifice. Christ gave ministers to preach and feed, "not to sacrifice victims." We are all priests, in Christ - Rev 1:6; 1 Pet 2:9. This is a Scriptural command, to ordain elders, but not a sacrament since "it is not ordinary or common with all believers."

29. They breath on priests being ordained, as Christ breathed on the disciples in John 20:22. But this was not an example for us to follow. They "dare affirm that they confer the Holy Spirit."

30. Rome claims to get its priesthood from Aaron. But the Aaronic priesthood was fulfilled and done away with in Christ! "While they long to emulate the Levites, they become apostates from Christ."

31. The oil of anointing does not alone make a priest. As Augustine said, "it is the word that makes it a sacrament." Calvin: "What word will they show to accompany their grease?" If they point to Ex 30:30, then why don't they keep the whole Levitical law, of which it is a part?

32. They anoint deacons to the task of assisting priests with sacraments, liturgical service, "to dust images, to sweep churches, to catch mice, and to chase away dogs.... Is there one word here of the true ministry of deacons?" They are similar to the OT Levites, but Rome dresses deacons "in the plumage of others."

33. Subdeacons are ordained by receiving chalices, cruets, towels, manuals "and trash of this sort." There is no promise of God shown forth in the ceremony, which is what makes it a sacrament.

Merely playacting

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 19 - Rome's five other "sacraments"

18-21 - Extreme unction not a sacrament

18. Rome anoints the deathly sick with oil, praying for their forgiveness and healing. See James 5:14-15. This is "playacting... to resemble the apostles... without reason and without benefit." Jesus and the apostles healed with varying outward methods. The oil in James 5:14 points us to the source of healing and forgiveness, the Spirit - Ps 45:7. "That gift of healing, like the rest of the miracles, which the Lord willed to be brought forth for a time, has vanished away in order to make the new preaching of the gospel marvelous forever."

19. God still heals today, but not through the hands of apostles.

20. The criteria for a sacrament - "a ceremony instituted by God," with His promise - must also apply to us today. Circumcision doesn't count, since it has been replaced. Same with healing, which applied only in the apostolic age.

21. If they really have a sacrament of healing, "it is cruel of them never to heal in time," but only at the last life breath.

This feigned sacrament

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 19 - Rome's five other "sacraments"

14-17 - Penance not a sacrament

14. Public penance in the early church was a good thing - receiving back one who confessed with laying on of hands in the assembly. Later, the church added private confession and absolution. "Although I dare not disallow it or speak too sharply against it, I nevertheless deem [it] less necessary." Neither one is a sacrament commanded by God; both were "ordained by men."

15. A sacrament is "an outward ceremony instituted by the Lord to confirm our faith." There is no outward thing in penance.

16. Why not make absolution the sacrament, instead of penance, by their same logic?

17. But it has no special promise of God regarding the outward act, and the ceremonies are man-made. Baptism is the true sacrament of repentance - Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3.

An overt outrage against baptism

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 19 - Rome's five other "sacraments"

4-13 - Confirmation not a sacrament

4. The early church had a laying on of hands ceremony for those being restored to the faith who were already baptized (instead of baptizing them again). This was a good practice.

5. But Rome has made it into a sacrament all its own - confirmation - with no warrant for it in the Bible.

6. The apostles laid hands on the Samaritan believers and they received the Spirit. We no longer receive the Spirit in this way, though we still have the Spirit, our "guide and director." See John 7:37; Isa 55:1; John 4:10; 7:38. "But those miraculous powers and manifest workings, which were dispensed by the laying on of hands, have ceased; and they have rightly lasted only for a time. for it was fitting that the new preaching of the gospel and the new Kingdom of Christ should be illumined and magnified by unheard-of and extraordinary miracles. When the Lord ceased from these, He did not utterly forsake His church, but declared that the magnificence of His Kingdom and the dignity of His word had been excellently enough disclosed." Because this gift ceased, Rome can't claim anything in the sacrament of confirmation by laying-on hands.

7. Rome should not use oil in confirmation and call it the "oil of salvation," as they do. This violates Gal 4:9; Col 2:20; 1 Cor 6:13. "Who taught them to seek salvation in oil?"

8. Rome says baptism can't be complete without confirmation. "What wickedness!" See Rom 6:4-6. The council of Milevis is also against them on this point, anathematizing those who deny that baptism is "a help for grace to come." Rome's assertion draws us away from our baptism, against Gal 3:27. Confirmation is "an overt outrage against baptism."

9. They say you have to be confirmed to be a Christian, but this ceremony isn't in the Bible. And they let half their congregations be unconfirmed, stating by this practice that "it is not so important [even to them] as they claim."

10. They say confirmation is more important than baptism, since only bishops confirm while any priest may baptize. This gives the sacrament worth based on the worth of the minister, like the Donatist heresy. By the same token, if they restrict confirmation to the bishop, why don't they restrict the bread and wine to them?

11. They say confirmation is more important than baptism, since only the top of the head receives water in baptism, while the forehead is smeared with oil in confirmation. This is "trifling, foolish, and stupid." Their oil is "not worth one piece of dung."

12. Not having the Word of God, they claim the antiquity of the church's practice, as usual. And they did lay hands on corrected heretics to receive them, but not as a sacrament. "What else is laying on of hands than prayer over a man?" Augustine asked.

13. Calvin wanted this confirmation recovered in the form of catechism. Formulate "a manual... containing and summarizing in simple manner most of the aritcles of our religion, on which the whole believers' church ought to agree without controversy. A child of ten would present himself to the church to declare his confession of faith, would be examined in each article, and answer to each..." This "would certainly arouse some slothful parents, who carelessly neglect the instruction of their children as a matter of no concern to them; for then they could not overlook it without public disgrace."

What makes a sacrament a sacrament?

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 19 - Rome's five other "sacraments"

1-3 - not authorized in the Word nor used in the early church

1. They may call these other 5 practices sacraments all they want. But neither command nor promise are attached to them.

2. Only God's Word makes a sacrament a sacrament, as Augustine said. We have to distinguish between a sacrament and any religious practice, or everything we do can be called a sacrament.

3. Augustine lists only baptism and the Lord's Supper as sacraments - Rome can't claim the early church asserted 7 sacraments.

Be content with these two sacraments

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 18 - Rome's Mass a sacrilege

19-20 - Conclusion - only two sacraments

19. Baptism is a single entrance into the church; the Supper is a repeated feeding. There are no other sacraments, since the promise of salvation is always attached to a sacrament.

20. We should be content with these 2. Israel had various sacraments: manna, water from the rock, the bronze serpent. But we have 2 unchanging ones, because the unchanging Christ has been revealed in these last days. So we are not to go inventing new doctrines or practices. We need to stick with the Word, which makes a sacrament a sacrament.

As often as they find a buyer

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 18 - Rome's Mass a sacrilege

12-18 - Sacrifice in Mass and in Scripture

12. Before Christ, Israel had signs emphasizing the sacrificial nature of Christ's work. Now, after Christ, the church has signs emphasizing the benefits from that sacrifice. We have a table, not an altar.

13. There are sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving, and there are sacrifices of propitiation, seeking to achieve God's favor. OT sacrifices prefigured Christ's sacrifice of propitiation.

14. The mass is not a sacrifice that merits any favor before God, even if they claim the cross as the source of that favor. Then they claim to apply the benefits of a mass to a particular person, and sell the Mass "as often as they find a buyer."

15. In Plato's Republic, he mocks men who sacrifice to the gods and then think they can sin with impunity. This is what Rome encourages with the Mass.

16. Sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving include "all the duties of love." See Mal 1:11; Rom 12:1; 1 Pet 2:5-6; Heb 13:16; Phil 4:18. Part of this "reasonable worship" is the spiritual manner of NT worship, in contrast with "carnal sacrifices" in the OT.

17. The OT saints already understood this kind of sacrifice - Ps 141:2; Hos 14:2; Ps 50:23; 51:19; Heb 13:15. In this way we are a priesthood, and the Supper involves a sacrifice of praise, through the only mediator, Jesus Christ.

18. Apart from all the further corruptions of it, the Mass in its purest form "swarms with every sort of impiety, blasphemy, idolatry, and sacrilege." Kings and nations are drunk with it; Satan uses it to get men to trust it instead of Christ for their salvation. The Mass is the Helen for which empires fight with rage; it involves "spiritual fornication."

Mass-doctors

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 18 - Rome's Mass a sacrilege

8-11 - Early practice and rise of misconceptions

8. Private masses are forbidden, as Christ told us to take and divide the elements among ourselves - Luke 22:17; 1 Cor 10:16. Once they did this, they also started multiplying Masses all over, instead of bringing the body together.

9. Rome must show where this is required in Scripture or withdraw it, for obedience is better than sacrifice - 1 Sam 15:22.

10. They "thrust forward detached sentences of the ancient writers," but those ancients didn't hold to their view. They were careful when using the word sacrifice about the Supper to refer it back to Christ's cross, "as a memorial, an image, and a testimony of" it.

11. Some of the fathers referred to Communion as a "repeated or at least renewed sacrifice." They were all right in intent to interpret through the Old Testament, but wind up in error. "They have turned aside too much to the shadows of the law.

The Supper destroyed by the Mass

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 18 - Rome's Mass a sacrilege where Christ's Supper is not only profaned but annihilated

1-7 - Rejection of the Mass

1. Rome says "the Mass is a sacrifice and offering to obtain forgiveness of sins." It "buries and oppresses [Christ's] cross."

2. Christ is our priest forever - Heb 5:6; Ps 110:4 - and no priest at Mass is required. Posing as priests under Christ, they actually deprive Christ of His honor as our High priest, because Heb 7:17-24 shows Christ as our sole priest, in contrast with all the human old covenant priests before Him.

3. The cross is overthrown when an altar is set up. Heb 9:12, 26; 10:10, 14, 18; John 19:30; 1 Cor 5:7-8 all show that Christ's sacrifice was once for all. But if the Mass is a sacrifice, then the cross "lacked the power to cleanse eternally."

4. When Mal 1:11 speaks of the Gentiles offering an offering in every place, God is only referring to our spiritual worship in terms of the OT law. In the same way, turning to God is ascent to Jerusalem - Isa 2:2-3; Mic 4:1-2; knowing God more is dreams and visions - Joel 2:28.

5. The Mass makes us forget Christ's death, and look to the re-sacrifice in that Mass, instead. Is Christ slain, again (Heb 9:25-26)? They object that it is a sacrifice without blood, but men can't redefine "sacrifice" like that, and shedding blood is required for cleansing, anyway - Heb 9:22.

6. Rome says we are redeemed by Christ if we partake of Mass. But this means "we have been redeemed by Christ on condition that we redeem ourselves." This takes us away from the cross. "There is only one sacrifice, so that our faith may be made fast to His cross."

7. The Mass is a giving to God and expecting salvation as a result. The Supper is receiving from God salvation, with thanksgiving. The Mass undoes the Supper, in effect.

Give them the cup!

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

47-50 - Keeping the cup from the people is wrong

47. Rome wants to keep the cup only for the priests, but Jesus commanded everyone to drink of it - Matt 26:27. They say the blood is in the body/bread, anyway, but "still they defraud pious souls of the confirmation of faith which Christ gives us as something necessary."

48. The Bible doesn't limit the cup to the apostles, and neither did the early church.

49. Gelasius as late as the 490s said the church is "either to receive the sacraments entire or to be entirely barred from them." How can they be strengthened to shed their blood in confessing Christ, if they don't first receive His blood? he argued.

50. Jesus says all should eat the bread, and all should drink of the cup. If only the apostles were to receive the cup, then by what right should anyone else receive the bread? Was Paul lying in 1 Cor 11:23-26?

Great pile of ceremonies

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

38-46 - Miscellaneous points

41. Who is "worthy" to partake?

Rome says those in a state of grace, purged of all sin are worthy. This would leave everyone out. Or they say that examining ourselves to account for and confess all our sins makes us worthy [often the conservative Protestant view today!]. But this doesn't work "for consciences dismayed and defected and striken with the horror of their own sin."

42. Faith and love required, but not perfection

Rome deprives sinners of receiving benefit from the supper: assurance in conscience that we are God's. Worthiness is laying our sin before God and praying for His mercy to make us worthy. This is faith and love. We cannot expect perfect faith and love before partaking "for it is a sacrament ordained not for the perfect, but for the weak and feeble."

43. On the proper celebration of the Supper

It doesn't matter how the bread and wine are distributed, if the bread is leavened or unleavened, if the wine is red or white. Using unleavened bread is more of a novelty than helpful. The Supper should be administered "at least once a week." After prayers, a sermon, and the placing of elements on the table, the minister repeats the words of institution, recites the promises for us, fences the table from those unworthy, prays for the partaking to enrich us, and distributes. During this, "either psalms should be sung, or something be read." Afterward, an exhortation to faith, love and conduct, a prayer and song of thanks, and dismissal.

44. The Lord's Supper should be celebrated frequently

"that they might frequently return in memory to Christ's Passion." In the early church "it became the unvarying rule that no meeting of the church should take place without the Word, prayers, partaking of the Supper, and almsgiving."

45. Augustine bemoaned where the church was ONLY partaking once a week, instead of daily. Chrysostem said it was crazy to go to church but then not partake of the Supper: "I am unworthy, you say. Therefore, you were also not worthy of the communion of prayer..."

46. Partaking only once a year is an "invention of the devil." The guy who started this just wanted to get everyone to confess their faith all together and publicly once a year - a good idea. But now after they commune once they think "they have beautifully done their duty for the rest of the year, [and] go about unconcerned."

Sacrilegious impiety

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

38-46 - Miscellaneous points

38. The Supper implies mutual love

The bread pictures unity, as many grains are baked indistinguishably into one loaf. "The Lord so communicated His body to us there that He is made completely one with us and we with Him." If we disagree with a brother, we disagree with Christ. If we love Christ, we must love His people.

39. The Supper can't exist apart from the Word

Promises spoken at the supper aren't directed to the elements, in consecration, but to the people receiving them. The minister should not be silent when administering the supper: "silence involves abuse and fault."

40. Unworthily partaking of the Sacrament

The Supper becomes "deadly poison" for the one who tramples upon it. The elements, entering a corrupt soul, "cast it down with a greater ruin." They "foully defile [the Lord's body and blood] with sacrilegious impiety." Defiling the Lord's Table is possible.

Fantasies of our own brains

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

35-37 - Adoration of elements is a forbidden superstition

35. They say if Jesus' body is in the bread, then He is in the bread, so it should be adored as Jesus. But Jesus said to receive and eat, not to adore the bread.

36. It isn't safe "to wander from God's simple word to the "fantasies of our own brains." Instead of adoring the elements, we should raise our hearts to heaven, where Jesus is - Col 3:1-2. Adoring the elements violates Rom 1:25, and makes the bread "a hateful idol."

37. Superstition makes no end of sinning, once it gets "past the proper bounds." The words "This is My body" are to be defined in part by the following command to "take and eat." Thus we don't adore the bread as His body.

Partaking of Christ

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

32-34 - True nature of Christ's corporal presence

32. I don't claim to understand His presence and feeding of our souls with His body. "I rather experience than understand it.... I reject only absurd things" about it. "From the substance of His flesh Christ breathes life into our souls."

33. The inquisitive demand an exaggerated mode of Christ's presence in the bread itself, but the Spirit unites us with Him. If He is present physically and automatically in the bread, then unbelievers could eat and partake of Christ without faith, just by eating bread. This can't happen. Eating and drinking judgment against oneself at the table (1 Cor 11:27) doesn't happen by eating, but by disregarding the Lord while eating.

34. Who receives the sacrament? Augustine said he "who eats with the heart, not who presses with the teeth." This is because the wicked can't be members of Christ - 1 Cor 6:15. Augustine again: "In the elect alone do the sacraments effect what they symbolize."

Trying to drag Christ from heaven

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

16-31 - No omnipresence of Christ's body; spiritual communion

[Deals with the Lutheran view]

20. Their most plausible objection is Christ's own words: "This is my body." This cannot be true in a literal sense, that bread is Jesus' body, lest it must be true that God is bread. "The bread is called the body in a sacramental sense.... Christ's words... ought not to be tested by grammar." This isn't to "diminish anything of that communication of Christ's body, which I have confessed."

21. "This is My Body" is a metaphor, like "Circumcision is a covenant" (Gen 17:13); "the lamb is the passover" (Ex 12:11); "the sacrifices... are expiations" (Lev 17:11; Heb 9:22; and "the rock... was Christ" (1 Cor 10:4). Because sign and reality are so closely connected "the name of the visible sign is given to the thing signified."

22. They don't allow "is" to be a figure of speech in this phrase, but it clearly is in 1 Cor 10:16; Gen 17:13; Ex 12:11; 1 Cor 10:4; John 7:39; Titus 3:5; 1 Cor 12:12. Why not here?

23. If we have to be this literal with our words all the time, figures of speech about God will become "boundless barbarism." Ex 15:3; Deut 11:12; 1 Kings 8:29; Job 7:8; Num 11:18; 2 Sam 22:7; 2 Kings 19:28; Isa 5:25; 23:11; Jer 1:9; 6:12; Isa 66:1; Matt 5:35; Acts 7:49. Also, "if we insist precisely upon the words," it wouldn't make sense to separate the body and blood. The bread is as literally blood, and the wine as literally the body.

24. They accuse us of believing nothing outside of common sense. As if "it is from physics we have learned that Christ feeds our souls from heaven with His flesh." We don't restrict what God could do, but what He has willed to do. "Flesh must therefore be flesh."

25. They think we have to overturn the whole order of nature to affirm God's power and mystery, here. They don't want to know how it works, but if a reasonable answer is ready, why not take it? Mystery remains, but we may inquire how it happens, like Mary - Luke 1:34.

26. The Spirit tells us Christ's body is finite and "contained in heaven" (see Acts 3:21), not Aristotle as they accuse us of relying on reason. Christ says He will leave - John 14:12, 28; 16:7; 12:8; Matt 26:8-11. He is not here but in heaven - Mark 16:6, 19. His departing and ascending are not in appearance only, but real, physically. He is still with us, "in majesty, in providence, and in ineffable grace" in the sacraments, according to Augustine.

27. They say of the Ascension of Christ that He was only removed from sight to show He isn't visible here anymore. But the text says He was taken up to heaven, and will come back from there - Acts 1:9, 11.

28. They claim Augustine agrees with them, but they are wrong. He said that Christ withdrew bodily to be present spiritually. Augustine: "We ought not to think that [Christ's body] is everywhere diffused according to this fleshly form, for we ought to beware lest we so affirm the deity of the Man that we take away the reality of His body."

29. They make Christ's body double: visible in heaven, invisible on earth. This defies the definition of "body." It messes up our resurrection hope, Christ's body being the example for ours - Phil 3:20-21; Acts 3:21. Jesus wants to be sought not in the bread, but in heaven. This is why He told Mary not to cling to Him in John 20:17. They claim evidence that Christ went through door, and disappeared from the two on the Emmaus Road (John 20:19; Luke 24:31), but this doesn't prove Jesus is invisibly, bodily omnipresent on earth.

30. This idea is "monstrous." Matt 28:20 doesn't mean bodily presence. They make Christ's human and divine natures a unity, like the early Eutychean heresy. The scholastics were right to say that "although the whole Christ is everywhere, still the whole of that which is in Him is not everywhere."

31. Christ is not brought down to us; we are lifted up to Him. "We do not think it lawful for us to drag [Christ] from heaven."

We are lifted up to heaven

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

16-31 - No omnipresence of Christ's body; spiritual communion

[Deals with the Lutheran view]

16. This would be fine if they just said the truth is connected with the sign, but they insist on "a ubiquity [of Christ's body] contrary to its nature." In the end they "insist on the local presence of Christ," ruling out a spiritual partaking of His physical body.

17. Their view of Christ's body is that it was always omnipresent, but came to us in Incarnation, death, resurrection appearances and ascension to show us that "He was made king in heaven." This reduces His earthly ministry to docetism (it only appeared to us to be so). What body did Jesus offer His disciples in the bread, then, when instituting that Lord's Supper?

18. If Christ's body is in the elements it'll be torn apart: is it in the bread, then the wine? Body without blood? Blood without flesh? No, "we are lifted up to heaven... to seek Christ there..... He feeds His people with His own body... by the power of His Spirit."

19. We can't diminish Christ's heavenly glory by subjecting Him to earthly elements; and we can't ascribe inappropriate things to His earthly nature, making Him infinite in that way.

Chewed by the teeth?

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

11-15 - Relation of symbol and reality misstated; transubstantiation

11. So the Supper is not just to give a bare mental assurance, "but to enjoy true participation with Him." It is to grow in union with Him, and to "feel His power."

12. The Roman error from Satan is that "Christ is attached to the element of bread!" He is not locally present, but remains in heaven. The Spirit makes the union real, anyway - Rom 8:9.

13. Lombard and Rome say the bread is a mask for the physical body of Christ under it.

14. They can only explain this with the "fiction" of transubstantiation. Ancient writers spoke of the elements as "converted," yes. But they meant that there was something more going on than just bread and wine, not that the earthly bread and wine were annihilated and replaced with Jesus' physical body. God uses physical bread to witness that "His flesh is food."

15. The root of this error is thinking the consecration does some magic. They claim for back-up the instance when the rods being changed to serpents, yet were called rods (Ex 7). But there was an actual change to be seen there. No, the bread is a seal and sacrament "only to those persons to whom the word is directed."

Our souls fed by the flesh and blood of Christ

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

8-10 - Communion brought about by the Holy Spirit

8. We lost communion with God in our sin. We must be restored to it, to live. This has begun, body and soul, in believers - John 6:48, 51-2, 55-6.

9. We must partake of Christ's body and blood to "aspire to heavenly life." We see this in Eph 1:23 (The church is the body of Christ); 4:15-16 (He is the head; we are the body); 1 Cor 6:15 (our bodies are members of Him); Eph 5:30 ("we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones"). "It would be extreme madness to recognize no communion of believers with the flesh and blood of the Lord" when Paul marvels at the mystery, rather than explaining it.

10. The flesh and blood of Christ feed our souls, in the Supper. This only happens by union. The Spirit "unites things separated in space." This is why 1 Cor 10:16 calls the cup a "participation in His blood." It isn't just a figure of speech. There is symbolism, but also the reality for those who believe. Whenever we see the sacraments we should "be persuaded that the truth of the thing signified is surely present there." Why would He give you the symbol, and not the reality?

Overwhelmed by the greatness

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

4-7 - Promise sealed - partaking of Christ's body a mystery

4. The point isn't just to offer us Christ, but to confirm the truth that He nourishes us. He is our bread (John 6:48, 50, 55-6), not because He is offered at the Supper, but because of what He did at the cross (1 Pet 3:22) and resurrection (1 Cor 15:53-54).

5. Applying these events to our lives is done by Gospel preaching, "but more clearly through the Sacred Supper." We should neither separate the spiritual reality of the Sacrament from the symbols "by too little regard for the signs," nor obscure the reality "by extolling [the symbols] immoderately." The Supper shows that partaking of Christ is more than "mere knowledge:" we don't just see the bread, we eat it. Our spiritual life is fed by union with Christ, not just knowing about Him.

6. Augustine and Chrysostom said this, too: it's okay to say that the physical eating is like spiritual faith, as long as that faith is more than "mere imagining" or seeing, but involves union with and partaking of Christ.

7. We don't understand the Supper fully, but something is more is going on than partaking of the Spirit only, "omitting [Christ's] flesh and blood." That error of omission isn't as great as Rome's transubstantiation nonsense, though. "My mind is conquered and overwhelmed by the greatness of the thing [meaning of the Lord's Supper]".

Consider them as if Christ were here present

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 17 - The Lord's Supper; what it brings to us

1-3 - It provides spiritual food

1. Taking us as His sons, God nourishes us at "a spiritual banquet." The bread and wine represent "the invisible food that we receive from the flesh and blood of Christ." Regeneration comes by means of baptism; He sustains us in this new life by Communion. "Christ is the only food of our soul." Our union with Christ is a mystery, so God gives this picture for us. As food feeds our bodies, so Christ feeds our souls. God "renews, or rather continues, the covenant which He once for all ratified with His blood... whenever He proffers that sacred blood for us to taste."

2. The supper witnesses our union with Christ, which makes posssible the great exchange: He takes our sin while we are "clothed with His righteousness.... By His descent to earth, He has prepared an ascent to heaven for us."

3. "Almost [the] entire force of the Sacrament lies in these words: 'which is given for you,' 'which is shed for you.'" Jesus Himself is offered in the Supper, as nourishment for us.

Let us offer our infants to Him

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 16 - Infant Baptism fits with the nature of baptism

31-32 - Servetus

31. Calvin deals with 20 weak objections by Servetus.

32. Satan "is trying to take away from us the singular fruit of assurance and spiritual joy which is to be gathered from [infant baptism].... Unless we wish spitefully to obscure God's goodness, let us offer our infants to Him, for He gives them a place among those of His family and household, that is, the members of the church."

Heaven is awarded to that age group

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 16 - Infant Baptism fits with the nature of baptism

25-30 - Texts seemingly against infant baptism; dying unbaptized

25. They object to infant baptism using John 3:5 - being born of water and Spirit. They say it means regeneration must precede baptism. But the water there just means the Spirit: without regeneration by the Spirit you can't enter the kingdom. And if water DOES mean baptism in that verse, notice that it comes before the Spirit - if we're going to play with words like that.

26. Remaining unbaptized can't be done "with impunity" for in doing so "the Lord's covenant will be violated." But all the unbaptized aren't automatically damned. John 5:24. In claiming so, they condemn all infants to hell, when "the Kingdom of Heaven is awarded to that age group" by Jesus - Matt 19:14.

27. They infer from the great commission - Matt 28:19; Mark 16:16 - that we must make disciples before we baptize. Jesus wasn't baptized until He was 30 - Matt 3:13; Luke 3:21-22. But if we infer in such a way, from word order, then John 3:5 is on our side, as is Matt 28:19-20, where baptizing comes before teaching! "Good God!"

28. But "I do not wish to slip out by such trivial shifts." Mark 16:16 refers to converting adults, not infants. "The gospel must be preached to those who are capable of hearing, before they are baptized. For it deals with these only."

29. Paul says those who don't work shouldn't eat (2 Thess 3:10), so we should withhold food from infants, by this twisted logic. Jesus was baptized at 30 only to closely connect His baptism with His preached message. If this is the example, why do they accept men into the church and baptism before 30. Servetus "boast[ed] himself a prophet" at 21!

30. "They object that there is no more reason to administer baptism to infants than the Lord's Supper, which is not permitted to them." The early church allowed paedo-communion, according to Augustine and Cyprian, but no longer, and rightly so. Communion is for those who can "take solid food." 1 Cor 11:28-29 requires self-examination before partaking, and "it is vain to expect this of infants." Only "those who were old enough to be able to inquire into its meaning" partook of Passover in the OT - Ex 12:26.

[This is one area I disagree strongly with Calvin. Using his own logic from section 29, 1 Cor 11:28 doesn't apply to infants, and we shouldn't withhold food (Communion) from them because they can't examine themselves and discern the body as well as adults can.]

In the covenant from his mother's womb

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 16 - Infant Baptism fits with the nature of baptism

21-22 - The Spirit at work in baptized children

21. We are buried with Christ in our baptism (Rom 6:4). This doesn't mean we have to be buried with Christ (have faith in) before our baptism. Rom 6:4 gives the meaning of baptism, not a prerequisite, just as Deut 10:16; Jer 4:4 did for circumcision. They object that 1 Pet 3:21 leaves nothing "for infant baptism but empty smoke." They are mistaken that "the thing [conversion] ought always to precede the sign [baptism] in order of time." What baptism does is "confirm and ratify the covenant."

22. They object that baptism is for forgiveness of sins. Right! "Infants receive forgiveness of sins; therefore, they must not be deprived of the sign." They object that the church is cleansed by the Word - Eph 5:26. Right! And children "are rightly considered a part of the church" as kingdom heirs - Matt 19:14. We may not part them from the body by withholding baptism from them - see 1 Cor 12:13.

23-24 - Infant baptism in the early church

23. They infer from Acts 2:37-38; 8:37, that baptism can only happen after a profession of faith, and repentance. But "other passages must be compared.... infants ought to be put in another category." In the OT, those outside the covenant had to be taught and accept the faith before receiving circumcision, just like the Acts passages.

24. Abraham was given the covenant and its meaning first (Gen 15:1), then the sign of circumcision (17:11). But Isaac received the sign in infancy. An adult should learn the meaning first, but "children of believers are partakers in the covenant without the help of understanding, [so] there is no reason why they should be barred from the sign merely because they cannot swear to the provisions of the covenant." They are in the covenant "from his mother's womb."

Infants baptized into future faith

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 16 - Infant Baptism fits with the nature of baptism

17-20 - "Yeah, but infants are incapable of faith"

17. We have to consider children as children of Adam until they can believe, they say. But Jesus called them to Himself because He is life (Matt 19:14); He did not leave them in their death (Rom 5:12ff) until they could believe. "To become heirs of life, we must have communion with Him." "But how, they ask, are infants... regenerated? We reply that god's work, though beyond our understanding, is still not annulled." God gives an example in John the Baptist, set apart from the womb - Luke 1:15. We can't restrict God from doing this, if He chooses.

18. Christ was set apart from infancy, to set apart His people of every age. They object that regeneration is only by God's Word believed - 1 Pet 1:23. But God can regenerate infants by His power "in any way He pleases."

19. But faith comes by hearing, they object. Rom 10:17. This is the normal way God works, yes, but what's the problem with saying infants "receive now some part of that grace which in a little while they shall enjoy to the full?"

20. They object that baptism is unto repentance and faith, which infants don't have yet. They are objecting to God, who gave circumcision as a sign of repentance (Jer 4:4; 9:25; Deut 10:16; 30:6) to infants. "Infants are baptized into future repentance and faith."

The condition of the Christian church is exactly the same

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 16 - Infant Baptism fits with the nature of baptism

10-16 - Objections to the circumcision parallel

10. They say the meaning of circumcision is carnal and earthly, making the Jews out to be no more than beasts.

11. Col 2:11-12 equates the spiritual promise behind circumcision and baptism, against their claim.

12. They say circumcision foreshadowed the NT church's spiritual infancy in their regeneration by the Spirit. This is partly true, but they deny OT saints had the spiritual truth in circumcision, which is false.

13. Circumcision and uncircumcision are "equal in honor" since Abraham received the promise without it, and received it as the sign of the promise. Gentiles who believe have Abraham as their father, "for they have baptism in place of [circumcision]."

14. Those against infant baptism try to say that physical descent means nothing - Rom 9:7. But the covenant promises came through the Jews to us. God did not abandon them, as "heirs of the gospel," though they forsook Him - Rom 11:16, 29.

15. "God's election... rules," but He gives promises to Abraham's physical children. "The condition of the Christian church is exactly the same." Also, the promise of circumcision is not fulfilled allegorically in the infancy of the church with the Spirit's coming, but literally with Christ's coming - Acts 2:39; 3:25; Eph 2:11-13. If we take it figuratively, what do we do with the Ex 20:6 promise of mercy to the thousandth generation?

16. They object that circumcision and baptism are different, because circumcision was commanded on the eighth day. This doesn't mean anything, other than waiting for the infant's body to handle it, and perhaps a pointer to Christ's resurrection, on the eighth day. They object that women weren't circumcised, so it must be very different from baptism; but women partook of their husband's circumcision.

Let the little children come

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 16 - Infant Baptism fits with the nature of baptism

7-9 - Jesus welcomed and blessed little children; we should not exclude them from the sign and benefit of baptism

7. Matt 19:13-15. Anabaptists respond that this has nothing to do with baptism. But how could we "shut out those He willingly receives"? They say Jesus says Let them come, that is, when they are able. But the text speaks of infants, and Jesus' invitation means they have access to Him.

8. They say infant baptism can't be allowed because there is no example of it in the NT. But neither is there an example of women partaking of Communion. We discern from the meaning of the sacrament "to whom the use of it ought to be granted."

9. If anyone mocks infant baptism "he is mocking the command of circumcision given by the Lord." They "condemn what they cannot comprehend."

Circumcision for them; baptism for us

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 16 - Infant Baptism fits with the nature of baptism

1-6 - It corresponds to circumcision; what it typifies

1."Frantic spirits" attack infant baptism. Their argument that God didn't command it seems plausible. If they are right, we should abandon infant baptism; if they are wrong, we must be careful not to grow insolent to God Himself, since they already spurn what He commands.

2. We should focus not on the outward sign, but start with the promises of God that baptism points to. These are our cleansing from sin's guilt, putting to death of sin present, and putting on new life.

3. OT saints had circumcision, where we now have baptism. Both signify God's promises (especially to Abraham) to be our God, to put to death our sin (Deut 10:16; Gen 17:1). It is to be spiritual in meaning, like baptism (Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; Ezwk 16:30), and Christ is the foundation of both as He is Abraham's promised seed (Gen 12:1). Both are covenant boundary markers (Eph 2:11-12)

4. The promises signified in baptism and circumcision are the same; the difference is in the externals.

5. Did God give circumcision to Israelite children to "mock them with trickery"? No. "If they are participants in the thing signified [Gen 17:12-13], why shall they be debarred from the sign?"

6. Jesus didn't lessen God's grace at His coming, but extended it. Israelite children were called God's holy seed in the OT (Ezra 9:2; Isa 6:13), and in the NT (1 Cor 7:14). "The covenant is common [between OT and NT], and the reason for confirming it is common [children of believers are holy]." Comparing the administration of circumcision and baptism, God's grace wouldn't be restricted, or revealed with a "weaker testimony," after Christ.

Omit from baptism all theatrical pomp

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 15 - Baptism

19-22 - Objections to ceremonies around baptism

19. Additions to baptism - consecrating the water, candles, breathing out on the baptizand, etc - dishonor baptism itself and show discontent with the authority of Christ. Only the essentials should be done: present him to the whole church, recite the creed, recount the promises of baptism, pray, baptize and dismiss. Immersion or sprinkling is "of no importance, but ought to be optional.... yet the word 'baptize' means to immerse," and that's how the ancient church did it.

20. Emergency baptism of babies near death by laity and/or women is not allowed nor necessary. We don't baptize children to bring them into salvation promises. "His promise of itself suffices." How could Christ fulfill the promises, if they aren't "valid without the aid of a sign." Also, "it is wrong for private individuals to assume the administration of baptism... [Christ] gave this command to those whom he had appointed apostles."

21. Women are not to baptize, as they are not to "claim for herself the function of any man" [preaching, baptizing, administering the Supper].

22. Zipporah circumcising Moses' son is no evidence for women baptizing. First, administrators of circumcision and baptism are different. Second, we have Christ's rule that apostles [and their successors, the elders] baptize. Third, Zipporah wasn't doing a godly thing, but an act of self-preservation. She shouldn't have done this, with Moses right there. Baptism is given with God's promise, not to make the promise work, but to confirm the promise to us. Because infants of believers "already belonged to the body of Christ, they are received into the church with this solemn sign."

As much as we receive in faith

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 15 - Baptism

14-18 - Baptism and faith in the promise it signfies

14. We should receive baptism as from God. He gives it, and washes our soul as surely as water washes our body. "We should see spiritual things in physical [things]." It is not just a show, but "leads us to the present reality."

15. Cornelius is an example - he is baptized after receiving the Spirit and forgiveness, not to get more grace but as "a surer exercise of faith." Faith joins the reality to the sign. In baptism "we obtain only as much [grace] as we receive in faith." Baptism remains a sign of our confession - 1 Cor 12:13.

16. Baptism doesn't depend on the worth of the one administering it. A letter has the same value, whoever the carrier is. We are not baptized into the man, but into Christ. When sacraments are viewed superstitiously, this doesn't negate their effect for those who have faith.

17. Can one be unrepentant for a long time after their infant baptism, and even forever? Yes. Rom 3:3. And when they come to faith, God never had the Jews do a second circumcision (!) "However the covenant might be violated by them, the symbol of the covenant remained ever firm and inviolable by virtue of the Lord's institution."

18. Why were the believers in Acts 19 rebaptized by Paul, then? It was a baptism of the Spirit, by laying on of hands, not by water, like at Pentecost - Acts 1:5; 2:1-4. "If ignorance vitiates a previous baptism," the apostles would've needed rebaptizing after the resurrection or ascension.

Through baptism believers are assured...

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 15 - Baptism

7-9 - John's baptism and Christian baptism

7. John the Baptist's baptism was "exactly the same" as the apostles' later. Both were for repentance and forgiveness (Luke 3:3), and into Christ. Only difference: for John, Jesus was still to come.

8. The Spirit was poured out more fully in the apostles' baptism, but this doesn't make John's baptism lesser. John said he baptized with water, buty Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit - Matt 3:11; Luke 3:16. This emphasizes the greater person of Christ, not a difference of baptism. John is like ministers today, baptizing with water, while Jesus sends the Spirit who regenerates.

9. Baptism shows our mortification and cleansing in Christ, as the Exodus did - 1 Cor 10:2. Freedom (Ex 14:21) from sin (Ex 14:26-28). Cleansing shown in the cloud (Num 9:15; Ex 13:21).

10-13 - Baptism doesn't free us from original sin; we profess faith by baptism

10. Saying baptism cleanses us from original sin misunderstands original sin. Only imputed righteousness can deal with that; baptism gives assurance it is removed.

11. Baptism also promises the complete drowning of our sinful nature, which is with us until death. This should keep us from despair or apathy, in our sin. Our mortification of sin continues from baptism until our death.

12. Paul speaks of this struggle in Romans 7.

13. We also profess our faith in baptism. Our loyalty to Christ is confirmed before others, so that we can't revoke it privately, without the church knowing it.

A token and proof of our cleansing

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 15 - Baptism

1-6 - Sign of forgiveness and participation in Christ

1. Baptism signals our admission into the church. It is proof of our cleansing. It is more than a sign of our confession. Matt 28:19; Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16.

2. The washing of baptism doesn't save, in itself, but points to the blood of Christ, where alone our cleansing comes from. Eph 5:26; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet 3:21.

3. Baptism doesn't just "cover" past sins, but all sin, by faith. If men sin willfully, "counting on impunity," they "provoke nothing but God's wrath and judgment."

4. Absolution for sin by the church's power of the keys refers back to baptism, not "the fictitious sacrament of penance." To find assurance for our forgiveness, we "may venture to remind [our]selves of [our] baptism."

5. Baptism is a blessing by faith it unites us to with Christ's death so our sins die, and we live by His Spirit - Rom 6:3-5, 8. 11; Col 2:11-12; Tit 3:5.

6. Christ Himself was baptized - Matt 3:13. We put on Christ in baptism - Gal 3:26-27. The apostles baptized in His name - Acts 8:16; 19:5. But we should baptize in all 3 Persons - Matt 28:19. The Father set the Mediator before us; and by the Spirit alone are we regenerated. For our salvation, we have "in the Father the cause, in the Son the matter, and in the Spirit the effect." This fits with John's baptism of repentance - Matt 3:6; 11; Luke 3:16; John 3:23; 4:1; Acts 2:38, 41.

Faith remains while signs change

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 14 - The Sacraments

21-26 - Relating OT sacraments to NT sacraments

21. Circumcision showed corrupt nature "needs pruning." It showed the righteousness of faith - Rom 4:11. Baptisms (purifications) showed our need for cleansing - by Christ - Heb 9:10, 14; 1 John 1:7; Rev 1:5. Sacrifices showed some satisfaction for sin needed, and a mediator/priest - Heb 4:14; 5:5; 9:11; Phil 2:8; Rom 5:19.

22. NT sacraments show Christ more clearly: baptism shows we are washed, the Supper shows we are redeemed. The Spirit is the source of these: Spirit, water, and blood: 1 John 5:8. The blood and water from Christ's side, Augustine called "the wellspring of our sacraments."

23. The Jews received not empty signs in their sacraments, but Christ - 1 Cor 10:3. They received Christ, too, just not as fully expressed.

24. Just because circumcision was "of the letter" (Rom 2:29) doesn't demean it below baptism, for baptism can be merely outward, too - 1 Pet 3:21. Paul argues against it as necessary to salvation (Col 2:11-12), not a legitimate sign. "Baptism is today for Christians what circumcision was for the ancients."

25. Paul and Hebrews appear to disparage the OT ceremonies because they were fulfilled in Christ. They were battling those seeking to go back to those ceremonies, to those distorting and misusing them superstitiously. OT rituals were right, when "directed to Christ."

26. Augustine overstated the difference a bit. "Faith remains while signs change." Receiving the sacraments is not a work of merit, as the scholastics said.

Many signs given to bolster faith in His promises

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 14 - The Sacraments

18-20 - Sacraments, generally, in Scripture

18. God has used natural things, and miracles as sacraments, generally, to convey promises or support faith. The tree of life and rainbow; the smoking fire pot (Gen 15:17), Gideon's fleece, and Hezekiah's sundial were miracles.

19. In the sacraments "God leagues Himself with us, and we pledge ourselves to purity and holiness of life." God promises to forgive our sin; we ask Him to do so, and pursue piety.

20. There were different sacraments in the Old Testament, according to God's will: circumcision - Gen 17:10; rites of purification (Lev 11-15) and sacrifice (Lev 1-10). We now have baptism and the Lord's Supper - Matt 28:19; 26:26-28. Laying on hands on ministers of the church could also be called a sacrament.

The same office as the Word

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 14 - The Sacraments

14-17 - Sacraments don't impart grace of themselves, but hold forth Christ

14. So, the view that sacraments attest our faith "overthrow[s] their use." Rome, on the other hand, gives sacraments "some sort of secret powers," saying they "justify and confer grace." This is "diabolical," and offers "a righteousness apart from faith." You can't expect anything in the sacrament apart from God's promise, but that promise "offers grace to believers." We have assurance of salvation in the Word - sacraments are not necessary to our assurance.

15. We have to distinguish between the actual grace we have in Christ, and the sign of it in the sacrament. "The sacraments effect what they represent" in the elect, Augustine said. It "was poison to Judas." "A sacrament is thus separated from its truth by the unworthiness of the recipient."

16. "Christ is... the substance of all the sacraments." Man can't void the sacraments' effectiveness by his infidelity. It remains spiritual but the unbeliever gets no benefit. We should avoid deprecating the outward sign, and avoid fixating on it instead of on Christ.

17. The sacraments have the same function as the Word: to "set forth Christ to us." God is present in the sacraments; the question is if He gives His power over to the outward symbols (He doesn't), or if they work by His power (yes).

The Communicating of Christ

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 14 - The Sacraments

7-13 - They confirm faith by the Spirit; we profess our faith by them

7. If the wicked can partake of the sacraments, this doesn't make them useless, any less than the wicked rejecting the Gospel preached makes preaching useless. According to Paul, the sacraments "include in them the communicating of Christ" - see Gal 3:27; 1 Cor 12:12-13 - while for the unbeliever they are "empty figures." You can't object that you either have faith or you don't, so sacraments can't help strengthen faith. Luke 17:5; Mark 9:24 both show we should seek a stronger faith.

8. The eunuch in Acts 8:37 received baptism on believing with all his heart, but this didn't mean his faith was fully mature - Eph 4:13. The sacraments are given to grow our faith. God gives us (1) His Word, (2) His sacraments to confirm the Word, and (3) His Spirit to "open our hearts for the Word and sacraments to enter in."

9. The power of the sacraments to confirm faith is not in the sacraments themselves, but in the Spirit, who uses them in this way. "What sight does in our eyes for seeing light... the Holy Spirit [does] in our hearts [to] conceive, sustain, nourish, and establish faith."

10. The Spirit must make us teachable (able to see), for the sacraments as a visible word to affect us.

11. Word and sacrament work equally to confirm our faith. As the Word is sown in us and can only "grow by heavenly blessing..."

12. ... so with the sacraments. The sign of the spiritual reality is included and spoken of AS the reality - Gen 3:22 (tree of life); Eph 2:11-12 (circumcision). This doesn't diminish God's glory, for there is "no power in creatures." God only uses us and sacraments as instruments. The sacraments "set [God's] promises before our eyes to be looked upon, indeed, to be guarantees of them to us." Our trust isn't in the sacraments, but in the promises they display.

13. Some try to say that since the word sacrament comes from the oath a Roman soldier took, that it refers mainly to the outward confession, which sets one apart. This is the secondary meaning - to "attest our confession before men." The main thing is that they "serve our faith before God," pointing to the promises - 2 Cor 6:16; Ezek 37:27.

As painted in a picture

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 14 - The Sacraments

1-6 - Signs of God's covenants

1. Sacraments are outward signs to seal God's promises to us, "to sustain the weakness of our faith."

2. Sacrament is Latin for the Greek "mystery," found in Eph 3:2-3; Col 1:26-27; 1 Tim 3:16.

3. God's promise in the Word always precedes the sacrament. The sacrament is "a sort of appendix" to it, not needed for the Word's inadequacy, but for our weakness. God gives us sacraments to firm up our wavering, tottering faith.

4. The Word with the sacrament "must make us understand" the sacrament. Just saying certain words doesn't "do it;" they must be believed - Rom 10:8; Acts 15:9; 1 Pet 3:21. So "the sacrament requires preaching to beget faith."

5. Rom 4:11 calls circumcision a seal, so sacraments are seals, for circumcision was an Old Testament kind of sacrament. Believers don't stop at the physical sign of the sacrament but see through it to the spiritual mystery.

6. Sacraments are signs of God's covenants. His promises are covenants - Gen 6:18; 9:9; 17:2. His sacraments are given to make His promises more certain to us.

They are free to leave

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 13 - Rash vows and their entanglements

20-21 - Unlawful and superstitious vows are not binding

20. Monastic vows are not binding. If God forbids taking them, He also forbids continuing in them. "If men have undertaken anything rashly through the fault of ignorance, why should they not desist from it when once freed of error?"

21. If God abrogates what man confirms, there is no bond to keep the vow. The cross removes the obligation to the law - Gal 3:13 - how much more does it release us from monastic vows?

Our hooded friends

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 13 - Rash vows and their entanglements

15-19 - Comparing past and present monks; women

15. So far we've only looked at problems inherent in the monastic systems. But there is also a clear difference in morals of monks, too. "You will scarcely find one in ten which is not a brotherl rather than a sanctuary of chastity.... they are fattened just like pigs." There are "still some good ones in their flock," but they are the exception.

16. Ancient monks were better, but still had "immoderate affectation and perverse zeal.... God prefers devoted care in ruling a household...."

17. The monks "invent any mode of life they please without regard for God's call." Vows of life-long chastity are unwise. Those "denied the power of continence are called to marriage by god's clear word." See 1 Cor 7:9. Men are given no recourse to this, should their desires rise, in the monk's life-long vow. They say the sin of breaking the vow and marrying is greater than fornication!

18. They try to quote 1 Tim 5:11-12 against this, but celibacy was not a thing religious in itself; the widow's call conflicted with marriage, and thus the vow couldn't be revoked.

19. Recruiting nuns at 12, 20, and 30 years of age doesn't fit with 1 the Tim 5 passage, which gives a minimum age limit of 60!

Of monks

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 13 - Rash vows and their entanglements

8-10 - Monastic vows; decline of monastic life

8. Monasteries in ancient times had great discipline, and supplied clergy for the church.

9. Augustine depicts monastic life's severity as tempered by love and sensitivity for one another.

10. Unlike back then, today's monasteries require what Scripture doesn't even mention. "They dream up some new sort of piety."

11-14 - The fallacy of monastic perfection

11. Monks claim perfection, when recruiting among the common folk. When pressed, they say they are closest to it. "All other callings of God are regarded as unworthy by comparison."

12. They say monks have a greater obligation to obey Christ's commands (not to swear or seek vengeance, to love enemies, etc). But all "men must... obey every little word uttered by Christ."

13. Matt 19:21 says "If you wish to be perfect, sell all you have and give to the poor." But Jesus said this "to teach [the rich young ruler] how little he had advanced toward that righteousness which he too boldly replied he had fulfilled." He points out his imperfection, more than showing him the way to perfection. Jesus was not recommending voluntary poverty as a way of life.

14. They blasphemously compare monasticism to baptism. Today's monks separate completely from the church, setting up their own worship, sacraments, fellowship. They are a "conventicle of schismatics."

Insane boldness in vows

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 13 - Rash vows and their entanglements

1-7 - Nature of vows, and prevalent errors about them

1. Besides the chains the church has laid on all, men put further unnecessary chains on themselves by rash vows. We must keep "a far closer observance" of careful vows. A vow is a promise before God.

2. Consider who you vow to, who you are, and what your intent is. It is important who God is, to whom we vow, as He has forbidden self-made religion - Col 2:23 - and commanded everything to be done with faith - Rom 14:23. Both these are very applicable to motives for vows.

3. Consider yourself, second. Don't promise something you can't do, or that conflicts with your calling. We can vow to Him anything He has given to us. Rash vows found in Acts 23:12; Judges 11:30-31. Celibacy is among these, as "insane boldness." It conflicts with Gen 2:18. Vowing lifelong celibacy is "to strive against the nature imparted by" God. Making lots of vows, constraining your freedom in externals, keeps you from serving God as you should with those externals.

4. Consider your intent, third. God knows if you are seeking merit in the vow itself or to serve Him through it. Some vows are made for past events: to thank God (Gen 28:20-22; Ps 22:25; 61:8; 56:12; 116:14, 18) or confess to God. A vow to restrain from fine food after sinning by gluttony may be useful. It may not be commanded as an obligation, but the sinner may make such a vow freely.

5. Other vows are made to restrain future behavior. We either vow to abstain from some allowed thing that leads us to sin, or we vow to keep some duty of piety.

6. All Christians make the same vow in their baptism, and it is confirmed "by catechism and receiving the Lord's Supper." This is part of the covenant of grace where we receive pardon in Christ. Vows generally should be temporary and occasional, or they become superstitious or burdensome.

7. It is "pernicious and damned" error to make unnecessary vows of abstinence or pilgrimage, just to obtain merit or feel holy.

Superstitious little fellows

Calvin's Institutes (1559)
Book 4 of 4 - External Means by which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein

Chapter 12 - Church Discipline in censures and excommunication

22-28 - Requiring celibacy of clergy a harmful innovation

22. Clerical discipline was tight, early on, rightfully; they should "be far less indulgent toward themselves than toward others." Today Rome cloaks clerical immorality in legalistic rules that look pious. Only 1 meal a day (it lasts 8 hours). No wine at the dinner table (they get drunk in the back room later). Etc.

23. The most rigid of these is forbidding marriage, while they wink at clerical fornication. 1 Tim 3:2; Titus 1:6; 1 Tim 4:1, 3 condemns them.

24. Rome calls marriage and the marriage act "uncleanness and pollution of the flesh," while Paul compares the union to Christ's with the church (Eph 5:23-24, 32)!

25. Rome says Levites being forbidden marital rites while they are serving in the temple (1 Sam 21:5) proves their point. But clergy today are not in the same position as Levitical priests, given Heb 13:4; 1 Cor 9:5.

26. The Nicene council approved marriage among clergy, calling faithfulness in marriage chastity.

27. Later on virginity was given undue praise, and thus over time only the super-spiritual were preferred for the clergy.

28. Rome tries to claim the ancient practice of the church, but then they better get rid of all the fornicating clergy first. Then they still can't rule out marriage to clergy, when God hasn't.