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!