Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
89
Calvin notes that the beginning of [this kind of ] righteousness . . . is a gratuitous reconciliation by which
all the faults of the faithful are buried: whence it happens also that their integrity, although not perfect, is still
pleasing to God.
90
Calvins explanation of the righteousness of Zacharias and Elizabeth in Luke 1:6 is another case in point.
Calvin understands the righteousness of Zacharias and Elizabeth in terms of devout and righteous living.
91
The righteousness ascribed to them was theirs not on account of their merit, but on account of the grace
of Christ, but it was because the Lord did not impute their sins to them, that He granted their holythough
imperfectlives the distinction of righteousness.
92
The righteousness of Zacharias and Elizabeth,
therefore, involved a genuine though imperfect commitment to doing Gods will in the context of covenant
grace. According to the covenant that God makes with his people, whose first article is free reconciliation,
and daily forgiveness . . . [m]en are reckoned righteous and blameless, because their whole life testifies that
they are devoted to righteousness.
93
Calvin also says that we should not neglect this definition, that the
righteous are those who form their lives according to the precepts of the Law.
94
This quotation captures
Calvins definition of covenant righteousness, which involves a person seeking to model the whole of ones
life in accordance with Gods will as revealed in his law and in the context of covenant grace.
Other examples that are worthy of mention at this point include Calvins interpretation of Peters use of the
term in 1 Pet 4:18. Here Calvin makes the point that the righteous [are] not those who are
altogether perfect in righteousness, but who strive to live righteously.
95
Likewise, in explaining the idea of
walking in the light in 1 John 1:7, Calvin says that this idea is not to be understood in terms of total purity;
rather, it is an expression that is accommodated to the grasp of men.
96
He is said to be like God who
aspires after His likeness, however distant from it he may yet be . . . he who in sincerity of heart spends
every part of his life in Gods fear and service and worships Him faithfully, may be regarded as walking in
the light, for he keeps to the right way, even though in
WTJ 71:1 (Spring 2009) p. 14
many things he may err and groan under the burden of the flesh.
97
Commenting on the idea in 1 John 2:17
that the doers of Gods will abide forever, Calvin says that John is not dealing here with the perfect keeping
of the Law, but with the obedience of faith, which, although imperfect, is nevertheless approved by God.
98
Finally, in what is a particularly interesting comment, Calvin acknowledges, in the context of Pauls teaching
on justification by faith in Rom 4:6, that in other parts of Scripture works, and other blessings also, are
sometimes stated to be imputed for righteousness.
99
2. Calvins Concept Of Justification
According to McGrath, The concept of justification (Latin, iustificatio) is inextricably linked with that of
righteousness (Latin, iustitia), both semantically and theologically.
100
In agreement with this statement, it is
necessary to consider briefly Calvins understanding of justification. As one would expect, the pattern of
justification that emerges in Calvins teaching neatly corresponds to the pattern that we have seen above
with respect to the concept of righteousness.
1 . The general meaning of justification . On the general concept of justification, Calvin understands
justification to mean acquittal from sin. Because iniquity is abominable to God, so no sinner can find favor in
[Gods] eyes in so far as he is a sinner and so long as he is reckoned as such.
101
To justify a person,
however, means nothing else than to acquit of guilt him who was accused, as if his innocence were
confirmed.
102
Applying this to the situation of being justified in the sight of God, a person is justified who is
reckoned in the condition not of a sinner, but of a righteous man.
103
Calvin also describes justification as
the acceptance with which God receives us into his favor as righteous men.
104
Calvins mention in this
context of coram Dei tribunali and his speaking of God in judicial terms shows that justification is
fundamentally forensic in nature in his understanding.
105
Being deemed or reckoned as righteous is the
core, therefore, of what it means to be justified. Calvin also notes that Paul speaks of justification in terms of
acceptance and the imputation of righteousness.
106
In discussing justification in further detail, he
distinguishes between two forms of justification, namely, justification by faith and justification by works.
2. Justification by faith. The importance of justification by faith for Calvin can be seen in the way that he
opens his defining chapter on justification in the Institutes, when he says that mans only resource for
escaping from the curse of the
WTJ 71:1 (Spring 2009) p. 15
law, and recovering salvation, lies in faith.
107
Justification by faith is necessary precisely because we
cannot be justified by works.
108
In other words, because no ordinary human being can meet the standard
of perfect obedience to Gods law, a solution must be found that does not involve our works before God;
hence the necessity of justification by faith. For Calvin, the person who is justified by faith is he who,
excluded from the righteousness of works, grasps the righteousness of Christ through faith, and clothed in
it, appears in Gods sight not as a sinner but as a righteous man.
109
Justification by faith consists in the
remission of sins and the imputation of Christs righteousness.
110
On the question as to what constitutes faith, Victor Shepherds finding that faith in Calvins thinking is
primarily a knowledge of Gods mercy in Jesus Christ but which includes the other aspects of Gods word
under the divine promise of mercy is corroborated by the evidence in Calvins Institutes.
111
Summarizing
Calvins discussion in the Institutes, 3.2.1-43, faith is defined as a knowledge of Gods will towards us,
perceived from his Word.
112
But what, strictly speaking, is it that faith knows about Gods will? Calvin
identifies Gods benevolence or . . . mercy as the core epistemological component of faith.
113
Thus, faith is
ultimately a firm and certain knowledge of Gods benevolence toward us, founded upon the truth of the
freely given promise in Christ, both revealed to our minds and sealed upon our hearts through the Holy
Spirit.
114
Faith is, in effect, a sure confidence in divine benevolence and salvation.
115
Even though the
knowledge of Gods mercy or the freely given promise of God is the core or the foundation of faith, Calvin
denies that the knowledge of Gods mercy is the only component of faith.
116
Faith is [also being] certain
that God is true in all things whether he command or forbid, whether he promise or threaten; and it also
obediently receives his commandments, observes his prohibitions, heeds his threats. Nevertheless, faith
properly begins with the promise, rests in it, and ends in it.
117
Calvins reason for emphasizing the promise
of mercy is because life [can] not be found in commandments or declarations of penalties.
118
[A]
conditional promise that sends us back to our own works cannot give life.
119
Thus, for Calvin, faith is
supremely the knowledge of Gods mercy in Christ as made known through Gods word.
WTJ 71:1 (Spring 2009) p. 16
3 . Justification by works. Calvin speaks of justification by works on two levels: where righteousness is
defined absolutely, there only exists a hypothetical doctrine of justification by works for sinful human beings.
But where the righteousness of individuals is viewed in the context of justification by faith already applied,
then a legitimate but subordinate doctrine of justification by works emerges.
On the level of absolute righteousness, Calvin teaches that a person is justified by works if in his life there
can be found a purity and holiness which merits an attestation of righteousness at the throne of God, or if by
the perfection of his works he can answer and satisfy the divine justice.
120
In other words, absolute
righteousness is the necessary condition for a person to be justified by works. Given the fact, however, that
all human beings (apart from Christ) commit sin, then it follows that the doctrine of justification by works
cannot help the mass of humanity.
121
It is to be noted, however, that Calvins system of theology does not simply contain a hypothetical doctrine of
justification by works on condition of absolute righteousness. It is significant that Calvin observes that it is
one thing to discuss what value works have of themselves, another, to weigh in what place they are to be
held after faith righteousness has been established.
122
In Calvins thinking, the fact that we . . . receive a
double grace through union with Christ through faith (i.e., reconciliation and regeneration) means that the
good works of believers are also imputed to them as righteousness.
123
Even though the idea of a legitimate
doctrine of the imputation of a believers good works as righteousness is viewed by some Reformed
scholars as heretical, Calvin clearly believed in such a concept:
After forgiveness of sins is set forth, the good works that now follow are appraised otherwise
than on their own merit. For everything imperfect in them is covered by Christs perfection....
Therefore, after the guilt of all transgressions that hinder man from bringing forth anything
pleasing to God has been blotted out, and after the fault of imperfection, which habitually
defiles even good works, is buried, the good works done by believers are accounted righteous,
or, what is the same thing, are reckoned [i.e., imputed] as righteousness.
124
In Calvins thinking, a person can be accepted by God solely on the basis of the absolute righteousness of
Christ; but because faith goes together with spiritual renewal and because the imperfect works of believers
are sanctified by the righteousness of Christ, then works righteousness also exists for the believer.
WTJ 71:1 (Spring 2009) p. 17
That is to say, because justification by faith is true, then a gracious justification by works is also true, or as
Calvin puts it: works righteousness . . . depends upon the justification of faith.
125
Thus, it follows from
justification of faith that works otherwise impure, unclean, half done, unworthy of Gods sight, not to mention
his love, are accounted [i.e., imputed as] righteousness.
126
At the same time, however, this legitimate
doctrine of justification by works is to be subordinated to the logically prior truth of justification by faith. As
Calvin states: Works righteousness . . . depends upon faith and free justification, and is effected by this
and ought to . . . be subordinated to [faith] . . . as effect to cause.
127
The picture that emerges from Calvins commentaries confirms his teaching in the Institutes. Two examples
will suffice at this point. Commenting on Luke 1:6, Calvin says that the righteousness of works flows from
the righteousness of faith and should be dependent and secondary to it, that is, subordinated . . . so as
not to conflict with the [righteousness of faith].
128
The second example concerns 1 John 2:17, where Calvin
says, The will of God is first shown to us in the Law. But as no one satisfies the Law, no happiness can be
hoped for from it. But Christ meets the despairing with a new aid, for He not only regenerates us by His
Spirit so that we may obey God, but also brings it to pass that our endeavour, of whatever kind, obtains the
praise of perfect righteousness.
129
There is, therefore, in Calvin a legitimate doctrine of justification by
works that is subordinate to the doctrine of justification by faith alone.
130
The significance of the truth of this subordinate doctrine of justification by works in Calvins system is that
the doctrine of justification by faith alone does not nullify the promises of the law or render them fruitless.
131
Calvin argues that the promises of the law are in a sense abolished when considered in themselves; but
when they are substituted by the promises of the gospel . . . which proclaim the free forgiveness of sins,
these latter promises not only make us acceptable to God but also render our works pleasing to him; and
thus the Lord also extends to [our works] the blessings which under the covenant were owed to the
observance of his law.
132
In this way, what the Lord
WTJ 71:1 (Spring 2009) p. 18
has promised in his law to the keepers of righteousness and holiness is paid to the works of believers.
133
It
is also for this reason that Calvin can go so far as to speak of works as inferior causes of salvation, in the
sense that the Lord ordinarily brings the elect into possession of the inheritance of eternal life . . . by means
of good works.
134
In a nutshell, Calvins view is that the unattainable absolute righteousness of works forces everyone to flee
to the absolute righteousness of Christ through faith, which in turn enables the original doctrine of
justification by means of the works of the law to have validity for the believer. Therefore Calvin can say: Let
him . . . who so wishes enlarge upon the recompense said to await the keeper of the law, provided he at the
same time ponder that our depravity makes us experience no benefit therefrom until we have obtained
another righteousness from faith.
135
No matter what weaknesses there may be with this theological
construction, it should nevertheless be acknowledged that Calvins understanding of justification represents
a remarkable synthesis of biblical teaching.
136
III. Conclusion
Calvins teaching on the concept of righteousness in the 1559 edition of the Institutes and in his
commentaries is rather complex, but a number of conclusions can be made on the basis of the evidence
presented above. Reflecting a Ciceronian definition of iustitia, the ideas of justice and equity are frequently
in Calvins mind when he speaks about righteousness. More importantly, however, Calvin defines
righteousness in terms of Gods will as revealed through his law. In this regard, the concepts of
righteousness as perfect uprightness and righteousness as a relative holiness co-operate in the experience
of the believer, although the latter is clearly subordinate to the former. The teaching on righteousness that
appears in Calvins Institutes and commentaries is thoroughly consistent, therefore, with Calvins
explanation of the concept of the righteousness of obedience to the law that appears in Ezek 18.
Furthermore, the evidence cited above corroborates Lillbacks opinion that Calvin taught a subordinate
[works] righteousness . . . that is imputed to the believers works, which operates in tandem with justification
by faith alone.
137
Those who assert
WTJ 71:1 (Spring 2009) p. 19
that Lillback makes Calvin teach the heresy of justification by faith and works have missed the point of
Lillbacks observation and, more importantly, have failed to understand Calvins teaching on this matter. It is
true that Calvin strongly rejects a doctrine of justification involving an admixture of faith and works, but the
evidence cited above proves that Calvin did teach a doctrine of justification that operates on two levels. In
Calvins thinking, justification by faith alone operates on the level of absolute righteousness, and justification
by works on the level of Gods gracious covenant. Those who deny that Calvin taught a subordinate and
legitimate doctrine of justification by works have arguably not understood the genius of Calvins teaching on
this issue.
1
See Steven R. Coxhead, John Calvins Interpretation of Works Righteousness in Ezekiel 18, WTJ 70
(2008): 303-16.
2
Peter A. Lillback, The Binding of God: Calvins Role in the Development of Covenant Theology (Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 188-89; see also p. 205.
3
David J. Engelsma, The Recent Bondage of John Calvin: A Critique of Peter A. Lillbacks The Binding of
God, Protestant Reformed Theological Journal 35 (November 2001): n.p., Online: http://
www.prca.org/prtj/nov2001.html#ReviewArticle (accessed 17 January 2008).
4
Mark W. Karlberg, Gospel Grace: The Modern-Day Controversy (Eugene, Ore.: Wipf & Stock, 2003), 219-
20.
5
Calvins understanding of righteousness as it applies to God is not in focus in this article, but it is important
to note that Calvin believed that God is the fountainhead of all righteousness ( John Calvin, Institutes of
the Christian Religion [ed. John T. McNeill; trans. Ford Lewis Battles; 2 vols.; Philadelphia: Westminster,
1960], 1:530 [2.17.2]. All quotations from Calvins Institutes in this article will be from the Battles translation
unless specified otherwise.) The concept iustitia Dei has three basic meanings in Calvins thinking. Firstly, it
can denote the righteousness of God himself either in his spotless character(Inst. 1:783 [3.14.16]), or as
revealed through the blamelessness of his actions (Inst. 1:311 [2.4.2]), or in the sense of his faithfulness
and mercy which he shows in defending and preserving his people (e.g., John Calvin, Commentary on the
Book of Psalms [trans. James Anderson; 5 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948], 1:59; see also Psalms,
1:92, 389, 499; 2:13, 229-30, 302-3; 3:90, 93), or Gods just government of the world (Psalms, 1:159, 169;
2:9-10). Secondly, it can denote the standard of perfection that is alone acceptable to God (Inst. 1:354
[2.7.6]; and also 1:265 [2.2.8]; 1:340 [2.5.19]; 1:736 [3.11.9]; 1:756 [3.12.2]), to which believers are
conformed in the process of spiritual renewal (Inst. 1:601 [3.3.9]; 1:684 [3.6.1]). Thirdly, it can denote the
purity of Christ (Inst. 1:730 [3.11.5]), in which believers are clothed (Inst. 1:508 [2.16.5]; 1:510 [2.16.6];
1:742 [3.11.12]; 1:753 [3.11.23]). In addition, iustitia Dei can be understood in a number of derivative or
combined senses: the righteousness that is bestowed upon believers, of which God is the author (Inst.
1:736 [3.11.9]); Gods righteous character and his work of justifying believers (Inst. 1:763 [3.13.1]); Gods
righteous standard of morality as revealed in his law (Psalms, 4:430, 456-57; 5:21-22, 35, 40); or eventhe
holiness manifested in the life that is so well-pleasing to [God] (Psalms, 3:73).
6
These meanings of iustitia are cited from Collins Latin Dictionary Plus Grammar (Glasgow: Harper Collins,
1997), 120.
7
Alister E. McGrath, Iustitia Dei: A History of the Doctrine of Justification (3d ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2005), 7.
8
Ibid., 16.
9
Ibid. McGrath cites D. H. van Zyl, Justice and Equity in Cicero (Pretoria, S.A.: Academica Press, 1991), as
evidence for Ciceros view of iustitia (Iustitia Dei, 16). He also quotes from Cicero himself: Iustitia virtus est,
communi utilitate servata, suam cuique tribuens dignitatem (ibid.). According to Braden J. Hosch, the so-
called Ciceronian definition of iustitia actually goes back to Simonides (Hosch, Truth in Our Practice:
Representing Justice in Miltons Poetry and Prose [Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 2003], 45).
Simonides definition of justice appears in Plato, Resp. 1.331d332c, in Socrates discussion with
Polemarchus: (Plato, Plato in Twelve Volumes [LCL;
ed. G. P. Goold et al.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1978], 5:20 [1.331e]).
10
McGrath, Iustitia Dei, 17.
11
Inst. 2:1497 (4.20.9). The Latin reads: Iustitia quidem est, innocentes in fidem suscipere, complecti, tueri,
vindicare, liberare ( John Calvin, Institutio Christianae Religionis cum brevi Annotatione atque Indicibus
locupletissimis ad Editionem Amstelodamensem accuratissime exscribi curavit A. Tholuck [Berlin: Gustaf
Eichler, 1834], 2:482).
12
Inst. 1:692 (3.7.3): Iustitia autem omnia aequitatis officia complectitur, ut reddatur unicuique quod suum
est (Institutio, 1:446). Other places in the Institutes where iustitia and aequitas are closely linked include
sections 3.14.2 and 4.20.9, 15.
13
John Calvin, Commentaries on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis (trans. John King; 2 vols.; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948), 1:482.
14
Ibid.
15
Ibid.
16
Psalms, 1:206.
17
Ibid., 2:179.
18
John Calvin, Commentaries on the Twelve Minor Prophets (trans. John Owen; 5 vols.; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1948), 3:343.
19
John Calvin, Commentaries on the First Twenty Chapters of the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel (trans.
Thomas Myers; 2 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948), 1:268; 2:83.
20
Ezekiel , 2:220.
21
Inst. 1:417 (2.8.53): in Lege nobis tantum praescribi iuris et aequitatis inter homines observantiam
(Institutio, 1:272).
22
Inst. 1:416 (2.8.52): For almost every time the prophets exhort men to repentance they omit the First
Table, and urge faith, judgment, mercy, and equityNam fere quoties hortantur ad poenitentiam, omissa
priore tabula, fidem, iudicium, misericordiam et aequitatem urgent (Institutio, 1:272).
23
John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah (trans. William Pringle; 4 vols.; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1947), 4:175-76.
24
John Calvin, A Harmony of the Gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke (Calvins New Testament Commentaries
1-3; ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance; trans. A. W. Morrison and T. H. L. Parker; 3 vols.;
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 1:48.
25
Inst. 1:377 (2.8.11): Principium ergo et fundamentum iustitiae vocamus Dei cultum (Institutio, 1:246).
26
Inst. 1:599-600 (3.3.7): praecipua iustitiae pars est, suum ius et honorem Deo reddere, quo impie
fraudatur, ubi nobis propositum non est, subiicere nos eius imperio (Institutio, 1:388).
27
John Calvin, Commentaries on the Last Four Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony
(Calvins Commentaries 2-3; trans. Charles William Bingham; 4 vols; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 1:363.
28
For equity as fairness in justice, see Inst. 2.8.19; 3.23.9; 4.20.4.
29
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (trans. Henry Beveridge; 2 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1970), 2:38 (3.11.3): acquirere iustitiam recte agendo (Institutio, 2:7).
30
Ezekiel, 1:315.
31
Inst. 1:422 (2.8.59).
32
Ibid., 1:372 (2.8.5): Legem nobis esse divinitus traditam, quae nos perfectam iustitiam edoceret: illic non
aliam iustitiam doceri, nisi quae ad praescriptum divinae voluntatis exigatur (Institutio, 1:242).
33
Inst. 1:810 (3.17.7): Ut dem Legis praecepta vocari iustitias, nihil mirum and iustitiae sunt singula eius
mandata (Institutio, 2:59).
34
Inst. 2:1267 (4.13.13): in se contineat Lex perfectam iustitiam and [Lex est] perfectae iustitiae doctrina
(Institutio, 2:344).
35
Psalms, 5:22.
36
Inst. 1:810 (3.17.7).
37
The Last Four Books of Moses, 1:363.
38
Psalms, 5:22.
39
Inst. 1:809 (3.17.7): At vero plus longe difficultatis esse videtur in his locis, qui et bona opera iustitiae titulo
insigniunt, et hominem illis asserunt iustificari. Plurimi sunt prioris generis, ubi mandatorum observationes,
iustificationes vocantur seu iustitiae (Institutio, 2:58).
40
Harmony of the Gospels , 1:130.
41
Inst. 1:246 (2.1.4): nihil melius esse, quam Dei mandatis parendo colere iustitiam (Institutio, 1:166).
42
The phrase perfect obedience, which appears as either perfecta obedientia or absoluta obedientia in the
Latin, is found in sections 2.7.3-4; 3.14.11; 3.17.7; 3.18.10; and 4.13.6, 13 of the Institutes.
43
The phrase the complete observance of the law , i.e., absoluta observatio, is found in Inst. 2.7.3.
44
Inst. 1:780 (3.14.13): Toties testificatur Dominus nullam se agnoscere operum iustitiam, nisi in perfecta
Legis suae observatione (Institutio, 2:39).
45
Inst. 1:351 (2.7.3): Si verum est perfectionem iustitiae in Lege nos edoceri: istud etiam con-sequitur,
absolutam eius observationem perfectam esse coram Deo iustitiam (Institutio, 1:230).
46
Inst. 1:780 (3.14.13): non alia iustitia admittitur in coelis quam integra Legis observatio (Institutio, 2:39).
47
Inst. 1:777 (3.14.10): etiamsi fieri posset, ut aliqua nobis essent omnino pura absolutaque opera, unum
tamen peccatum satis est ad delendam exstinguendamque omnem memoriam prioris iustitiae (Institutio,
2:37).
48
Inst. 1:777 (3.14.10): Lex . . . mortem ac iudicium omnibus denuntiet, qui non integram iustitiam opere
praestiterint (Institutio, 2:38).
49
Inst. (trans. Beveridge), 1:302 (2.7.3): Nec refragari licet, quin iustam Legis obedientiam maneat aeternae
salutis remuneratio, quemadmodum a Domino promissa est (Institutio, 1:230).
50
Inst. 1:352 (2.7.4): promissiones Legis, quatenus conditionales sunt a perfecta Legis obedientia
depende[nt] (Institutio, 1:230).
51
Inst. 1:357 (2.7.8): Deus enim in Legis praeceptis nonnisi perfectae iustitiae . . . remunerator (Institutio,
1:233).
52
Absolute righteousness is prescribed in the law ( John Calvin, The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the
Romans and to the Thessalonians [Calvins New Testament Commentaries 8; ed. David W. Torrance and
Thomas F. Torrance; trans. Ross Mackenzie; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973], 47).
53
John Calvin, The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians
(Calvins New Testament Commentaries 11; ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance; trans. T. H. L.
Parker; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 55.
54
Romans, 47.
55
Ibid., 87.
56
Galatians, 54, 51.
57
Ibid., 38.
58
John Calvin, The Acts of the Apostles (Calvins New Testament Commentaries 6-7; ed. David W. Torrance
and Thomas F. Torrance; trans. John W. Fraser and W. J. G. McDonald; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977),
2:40.
59
Romans, 130.
60
Last Four Books of Moses , 1:313.
61
Ibid.
62
Ibid., 3:262. This conclusion is not controversial, but it confirms Lillbacks observation that, for Calvin, the
condition of the covenant from the human side is perfect obedience (Lillback, The Binding of God , 186).
63
Inst. 1:810 (3.17.7): Fatemur ergo libenter, absolutam Legis obedientiam esse iustitiam (Institutio, 2:59).
64
Inst. 1:810 (3.17.7): Sed exstare usquam talem iustitiae formam negamus. Atque ideo Legis iustitiam
tollimus, non quod manca per se sit ac mutila: sed quod ob carnis nostrae debilitatem nusquam compareat
(Institutio, 2:59).
65
Inst. 1:351-52 (2.7.3).
66
Ibid., 1:352 (2.7.3): Legis imbecillitas se profert: nam quia in nullo nostrum illa Legis observantia
deprehenditur, a vitae promissionibus exclusi in solam maledictionem recidimus (Institutio, 1:230).
67
Inst. 1:352 (2.7.3): quum enim longe supra humanam facultatem sit Legis doctrina, potest quidem homo
eminus spectare appositas promissiones, non tamen fructum ex iis aliquem colligere (Institutio, 1:230).
68
Inst. 1:747 (3.11.17): quia nemo est qui impleat, non tantum ex vulgo, sed ex perfectissimis quibusque
(Institutio, 2:18).
69
Inst. 1:777 (3.14.10).
70
Ibid., 1:353-54 (2.7.5).
71
Last Four Books of Moses, 1:414.
72
Minor Prophets, 4:80.
73
A Harmony of the Gospels, 3:35.
74
Acts, 2:37.
75
Romans, 47.
76
Galatians, 54-55.
77
Ezekiel, 2:236.
78
Inst. 1:803 (3.17.1): Non enim promittit Dominus quippiam, nisi perfectis Legis suae cultoribus, qualis nemo
reperitur (Institutio, 2:55).
79
Inst. 1:807-8 (3.17.5): non sine causa dicitur illi placere fidelium vita, ad sanctitatem et iustitiam
composita.... Siquidem ut in omnibus misericordiae suae pactis integritatem ac sanctimoniam vitae vicissim
a servis suis Deus stipulatur...ne ludibrio sit sua bonitas (Institutio, 2:57).
80
Inst. 1:809 (3.17.6): Ne ergo ipsi adoptionis iure nos abdicemus, huc semper enitendum, quo tendit nostra
vocatio (Institutio, 2:58).
81
Inst. 1:814 (3.17.10):Multo iam minus rationis est, cur nos conturbare debeat appellatio iustorum, quae
fidelibus plerumque tribuitur. Iustos certe a vitae sanctimonia nuncupari fateor: sed quum in iustitiae studium
magis incumbant quam iustitiam ipsam impleant, qualemcunque hanc iustitiam, fidei iustificatione cedere
par est (Institutio, 2:61).
82
Inst. 1:820 (3.17.15): Neque interim negamus quin fidelibus sua integritas, dimidiata licet ac imperfecta,
gradus sit ad immortalitatem (Institutio, 2:65).
83
Inst. 1:787 (3.14.21).
84
Ibid., 1:829 (3.18.7): Semper meminerimus, hanc promissionem . . . nihil fructus nobis allaturam, nisi
praecederet gratuitum misericordiae foedus, cui tota salutis nostrae certitudo incumberet. Eo autem freti,
confidere secure debemus, obsequiis etiam nostris quamlibet indignis non defuturum a Dei liberalitate
praemium (Institutio, 2:71).
85
Inst. 1:829 (3.18.7): Iustitia igitur ista magis ad divinae promissionis veritatem, quam ad reddendam debiti
aequitatem refertur (Institutio, 2:71).
86
Genesis, 1:251.
87
Ibid., 1:251-52.
88
Ibid., 1:252.
89
Ezekiel , 2:74.
90
Ibid.
91
Harmony of the Gospels , 1:6.
92
Ibid., 1:7.
93
Ibid., 1:6.
94
Ibid.
95
John Calvin, The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews and the First and Second Epistles of St Peter
(Calvins New Testament Commentaries 12; ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance; trans. William
B. Johnston; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), 312.
96
John Calvin, The Gospel according to St John 11-21 and The First Epistle of John (Calvins New
Testament Commentaries 5; ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance; trans. T. H. L. Parker; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961), 238.
97
The First Epistle of John , 238.
98
Ibid., 255.
99
Romans, 86 (my emphasis).
100
McGrath, Iustitia Dei , 6.
101
Inst. 1:726 (3.11.2).
102
Ibid., 1:728 (3.11.3).
103
Ibid., 1:726 (3.11.2).
104
Ibid., 1:727 (3.11.2).
105
Institutio, 2:6 (3.11.2).
106
Inst. 1:728-29 (3.11.4). The terms that Calvin uses in the Latin are acceptio and iustitiae imputatio (Institutio,
2:7).
107
Inst. (trans. Beveridge), 2:37 (3.11.1).
108
Galatians, 38.
109
Inst. 1:726-27 (3.11.2).
110
Ibid., 1:727 (3.11.2).
111
Victor A. Shepherd, The Nature and Function of Faith in the Theology of John Calvin (National Association
of Baptist Professors of Religion Dissertation Series 2; Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1983), 10, 14-
16.
112
Inst. 1:549 (3.2.6).
113
Ibid., 1:550 (3.2.7): i.e., Gods benevolentia and misericordia (Institutio, 1:357).
114
Inst. 1:551 (3.2.7).
115
Ibid., 1:561 (3.2.15).
116
Ibid., 1:575 (3.2.29).
117
Ibid.
118
Ibid.
119
Ibid.
120
Inst. (trans. Beveridge), 2:38 (3.11.2).
121
Inst. 1:802-6 (3.17.1-3).
122
Ibid., 1:811 (3.17.8) (my emphasis): Sed aliud est disputare, quid per se valeant opera, aliud quo loco post
stabilitam fidei iustitiam habenda sint (Institutio, 2:59).
123
The quotation is from Inst. 1:725 (3.11.1): [Christi] participatione duplicem potissimum gratiam recipiamus
(Institutio, 2:6). Calvins discussion of the legitimate biblical doctrine of works righteousness is found in
sections 3.17.8-10 of the 1559 edition of the Institutes.
124
Inst. 1:811-12 (3.17.8) (my emphasis): Praeposita peccatorum remissione, quae iam sequuntur bona
opera aliam quam a suo merito aestimationem habent: quia quicquid in illis est imperfectum, Christi
perfectione contegitur.... Obliterata igitur omnium transgressionum culpa, quibus impediuntur homines ne
quicquam Deo gratum proferant, sepulto etiam imperfectionis vitio, quod bona quoque opera foedare solet:
quae fiunt a fidelibus bona opera, iusta censentur, vel (quod idem est) in iustitiam imputantur (Institutio,
2:60).
125
Inst. 1:812 (3.17.9): si a fidei iustificatione dependet qualiscunque tandem censetur operum iustitia, non
modo per hanc nihil imminui, sed potius confirmari (Institutio, 2:60).
126
Inst. 1:812 (3.17.9): Quodsi constat a iustificatione fidei proficisci, ut opera impura alioqui, immunda,
dimidiata, indigna Dei conspectu, nedum amore, iustitiae imputentur (Institutio, 2:60). In the context, the
subjunctive flavor of this protasis speaks of a real condition.
127
Inst. 1:813 (3.17.10): Iam si ista qualiscunque operum iustitia a fide et gratuita iustificatione pendet, et ab
ea efficitur: debet sub ea includi, et tanquam effectus causae suae (ut ita loquar) subordinari (Institutio,
2:61).
128
Harmony of the Gospels, 1:7.
129
The First Epistle of John, 255.
130
This teaching is commonly known as double justification. That Calvin taught a doctrine of double justification
is acknowledged by T. H. L. Parker and Anthony Lane, among others. See T. H. L. Parker, Calvins
Doctrine of Justification, EvQ 24 (1952): 105; and A. N. S. Lane, Justification by Faith in Catholic-
Protestant Dialogue: An Evangelical Assessment (London: T&T Clark, 2002), 33-36.
131
Inst. 1:804-5 (3.17.2-3).
132
Ibid., 1:805 (3.17.3): si [promissiones Legis] in se considerentur, quodammodo aboleri.... Sed dum
promissiones Evangelicae substituuntur, quae gratuitam peccatorum remissionem denuntiant, non efficiunt
modo ut ipsi Deo accepti simus, sed ut operibus quoque nostris sit sua gratia: neque hoc tantum, ut ea
Dominus grata habeat, sed benedictionibus etiam, quae ex pacto debebantur Legis suae observationi,
prosequatur (Institutio, 2:55-56).
133
Inst. 1:805 (3.17.3): Fateor ergo fidelium operibus rependi, quae iustitiae et sanctitatis cultoribus in Lege
sua Dominus promisit (Institutio, 2:56).
134
Inst. 1:787 (3.14.21): i.e., causae inferiors (Institutio, 2:43-44).
135
Inst. 1:804 (3.17.2) (my emphasis).
136
It is possible to argue, for example, that Calvins concept of nuda lex is problematic in that it abstracts
Mosaic and Messianic law from its gracious covenantal context. Calvins understanding of justification by
faith and justification by works as being abstract principles that operate in parallel throughout salvation
history is also problematic from the perspective of those who argue that the Pauline distinction between
these two forms of justification is strictly salvation historical or covenantal in nature, corresponding to the
distinction between the old and new covenants.
137
Lillback, The Binding of God, 185-93, 205.
current : : uid:851 (institution)