Weber Revisted II

Part I: Calvinism and the Infallible Assurance of Grace: The Weber Thesis Reconsidered
Author(s): Malcolm H. MacKinnon

Source: The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 39, No. 2 (Jun., 1988), pp. 143-177
Published by: Wiley on behalf of The London School of Economics and Political Science
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/590779
Accessed: 27-04-2017 16:24 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
The London School of Economics and Political Science, Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to The British Journal of Sociology
This content downloaded from 152.74.12.103 on Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:24:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Malcolm H. MacKinnon
Part I: Calvinism and the infallible assurance

of grace: the Weber thesis reconsidered*
ABSTRACT
Since first published in 1905, sociologists have sought to deal a

death-blow to the Weber thesis from an impressive range of
approaches. In the face of this onslaught the thesis has shown
remarkable powers of survival, a durability which-I submit is
largely due to the discipline's failure to question the theological
assumptions Weber makes on behalf of seventeenth-century
Calvinism. This is both a surprising and a critical omission since
the efiicacy of the thesis itself is most significantly anchored
on the causal adequacy of religious ideas. By Weber's account the
locus of this adequacy rests upon seventeenth-century dogmatic
Calvinism retaining Calvin's absolute conception of predestination
which arbitrarily withholds knowledge of salvation. The Genevan
Reformer's decretum horrible insists that the believer's efforts can
avail nothing in the pursuit of righteousness nor can the faithful
ever know their state of grace. According to Weber this redemptive
impasse in dogma, generates a psychological sanction for the
prosecution of a worldly calling as this is recommended by pastoral
works. Calvinism promotes the capitalist spirit precisely because
the ultimate value the desperate search for one's standing before
God-is thwarted by dogma. The unintended consequence is that
this-worldly works in clerical advice are seized as a convenient
substitute. If the devout can be successful in business affairs, this is
seen as a sign of God's blessing. Rejecting Weber's interpretation I
show that between Calvin and Westminster, covenant theology
obliterates Calvin's predestinarianism and thus his sola fide, making
deliverance available to all who sincerely and diligently labour for
it. Now, the infallible certainty of grace can be ascertained by
introspection and spiritual testing by all who implement the God-
appointed means, namely other-worldly works. Not only is there no
crisis of proof in dogma therefore, but also that covenant theology
appropriates works of this sort as the grounds of assurance; they
have nothing to do with the mundane as this is expressed in
Thc Brigish Journal of Sociology Volumc XXX1X Number 2
144 Malcolm H. MacKinnon
commercial success. Derived from biblical precedent, works call for

obedience to the law or the Ten Commandments in return for
everlasting life. As such, Calvinism is not unique in Weber's sense;
its divinity did not unintentionally direct the ultimate value at the
workaday world. Like Catholicism and Lutheranism, the Calvinist
promise of assurance doctrinally projects the ultimate value in an
other-worldly direction of the Spirit. Thus Calvinism could not and
did not promote the capitalist spirit in the way that Weber claims.
I INTRODUCTION
Here, I critically aSsess one of Weber's preconditions for the rise of the
modern world, the impact of Calvinism on capitalism. That Calvinism
is not the sole cause can be found in General Economic History and
Economy and Society where more weight is given to material and
institutional factors,2 in contrast to the near-idealistic determinism of
The Protestant Ethic.3 Still, the importance of the Calvinist contribution
in Weber's other work remains considerable, its status as a necessary
condition for the capitalist spirit left intact.4 Moreover this necessity is
given theoretical significance in Economy and Society where Weber's
reflections on rationality rest on the causal efficacy of religious ideas.
The inner-worldly ascetism and thus value rationality of the Puritan,
he maintains, breaks the grip of traditionalism, clearing the way for
the formal rationality of the capitalist order.5 While stopping short of
announcing that religious ideas are both necessary and sufficient for
the capitalist spirit therefore) Weber none the less conveys the temper
that such ideas rank first in a company of causal equals.
Although diluted by other causal agents then, the Protestant
ethic remains a formidable force in Weber's theoretical arsenal.
Its transformative weight rests on the assumption that Calvin's
absolute conception of predestination was dogmatically preserved by
seventeenth-century English Calvinism. His thesis is tenable, we are
informed, only to the degree that this condition holds.6 That it does so
hold receives recent support from Marshall who claims that Weber's
interpretation of English Protestantism is empirically plausible.7
I challenge both views and will show that Calvinism abandoned
Calvin's predestinarianism via the introduction of covenant theology.
No longer are the redemptive aspirations of the faithful blocked by the
impenetrability of God's purpose. Now, the infallible promise of
assurance is issued to 'all' who are prepared to sincerely labour for it.
This development effectively robs Weber of the religious sanction and
its ultimate use by the Puritan to transform the world in the name of
God. In no way did seventeenth-century Calvinism sanctify a worldly
calling, unintentionally or otherwise. As Weber conceives of it
Part I: Calvinism and the infallible assurance of grace 145
therefore, his Protestant ethic makes no contribution to capitalist

development.
I now present Weber's thinking on this linkage at the risk of
offending those who consider his thesis to be the common stock of
sociological discourse. The Protestant ethic has been and remains the
source of considerable misunderstanding, some of which can be
attributed to Weber himself: his notorious eccentricity on thematic
development; burying important observations in footnotes; and, the
clarification and extension of The Protestant Ethic's ideas in related but
separate pieces of work: all in their own measure, have contributed to
the confusion. My review thus seeks to put Weber's house in order on
these matters, while uncovering interrelated themes that heretofore
have largely been ignored.
1. THE WEBER THESIS
Throughout, Weber's most general ambition is to forge a link between

ideas and history. Substantively he focuses on religious ideas,
particularly those of Calvin and Calvinism as they evolve in the late
sixteenth and during the seventeenth centuries. Weber's distinction
between the 'religious system' (Calvin) and 'religious practice'
(Calvinism)8 establishes the initial framework. According to Weber,
each of these doctrines follows a distinctive though related line of
development. Calvin's thought is preserved by the religious system
(dogma) wherein the synods of Dort, Westminster and Savoy formally
renew and fortify his absolute conception of predestination.9 Calvin's
predestinarianism insists that no earthly means are available by
which salvation can be procured. Deliverance does not come from
man's efforts but from God alone whose eternal decree can never be
known. Calvinism takes the second line of development, found in
religious practice and the pastoral writings of Puritan divines. In
contrast to dogma where the use of means is prohibited, pastoral
advice suggests that means may be used to verify one's standing
before God. It does so by recommending the search for proof of
salvation via success in a worldly calling.
How does Weber reconcile the inconsistency between dogmatic and
pastoral teaching?
Dogmatic blockage of salvation we are told, thwarts the ambitions
of the believer's ultimate value, generating an irrational sanction for
worldly success in the pastoral literature. In the last resort a religious
ethic for Weber, receives its stamp of approval, not from political and
material sources, but 'the content of its annunciation and promise'.l
All religious movements thus carry an ultimate value by which the
faithful inevitably ask: 'How can I become certain of my salvation?" l
Calvin's dogma-and this is critical-cannot provide this assurance
to the ultimate value, its doctrine of justification resting on sola fide, by

faith alone. Calvin's sola Jide categorically rejects works and human
effort'2 to establish the certitude of election. In muted defiance of
dogma, pastoral divines introduce works in a calling as a sign of grace
whereupon the congregation applies this formula to the temporal
order. The ultimate value is redirected in this way because it was the
Reformed layman who was most deeply troubled by Calvin's decretum
horrible. His anxiety precipitates the creation of an alternate theology
whose terms of redemption are more humane.
Thus a crisis of proof in dogma and this is the whole point-
generates a sanction for pastoral works because they are perceived to
provide relief from this despair. For Weber, it is worldly activity alone
which 'disperses religious doubt and gives the certainty of grace'.l3
The discontinuity between credal authority and pastoral advice
therefore, arises from the restless and desolate search for one's
standing before the Almighty. By Weber's account this is no ordinary
quest, but one stimulated by irrational forces of great potency.
Nothing less than the ultimate value has been rejected by dogma, its
storehouse of ambition then unleased upon the world at large. The
search for proof in a worldly calling is a formidable force, both in a
motivational and behavioural sense.
Hence the gap between dogma and ministerial writing is above all
due to irrational circumstances. 'Fatalism would have been the logical
response to predestination', Weber writes, 'the search for proof a
psychological consequence'. 14 So that no doubt remains on this
conclusion, Weber informs the reader that worldly accumulation
continues to be beset by irrational forces even when detached from
religious meaning. Here, our attention is drawn to the secular
reflections of Pascale who sees proof-seeking motives lurking within
the ascetic-acquisitive impulse. Like the Puritan, the search for proof
through this impulse represents a form of self-deception designed to
conceal feelings of moral inferiority.l5 On the same point, Weber
challenges WilliamJames who argues that the mystical and irrational
nature of religious ideas negates their impact on day-to-day affairs.
Weber agrees with the premise but not the conclusion, reiterating an
important theme of his thesis: that it is precisely due to this
irrationality that the practical results realized are so profound.l6
Here we should note that when Weber uses the term; 'Calvinism', it
is meant in the double sense sketched above: dogmatic sola Mide and the
interdiction of means on the one hand, coincident with pastoral
writing and the use of means in a mundane calling on the other.'7
Weber's irrational sanction also provides the basis for his idea of
unintendedness. The contradiction between dogma and pastoral work
could only be created and sustained by irrational forces. How was
Calvin to know that his sola fide would culminate in pastoral
revisionism? His primary concern was the salvation of souls, not the
Part 1: Calvinism and the infallible assurance of grace 147
promotion of the capitalist spirit which he would have condemned.l8

Irrationality gives rise to yet another form of unintendedness, one
which is precipitated by dogma's crisis, but whose presence is
particular to pastoral terrain. Clearly the purpose of Calvinism was
not to patronize money-making but the reverse: its renunciation as a
source of temptation.l9 Despite this, pastoral divines were most
acutely aware of the despair created by dogma and respond by
inserting works in a worldly calling to circumvent its redemptive
impasse. They do so, despite the fact that the inclusion of a this-
worldly sanction flies in the face of their anti-Mammonism. Thus a
second irrationally grounded contradiction is created.
Weber candidly admits this disparity in Baxter, chosen as the
pastoral exemplar of English Calvinism. In Baxter's work, examples
of capitalist antipathy abound20 as they do in the Puritan literature as
a whole which is less tolerant of Mammon than the medieval
church.2' Yet coexisting with this aversion for commerce, are religious
recommendations to successfully pursue worldly works of accumulation.
In the past Weber's critics Brentano and Sombart among them
have seized upon this apparent defect. How can the Puritan
literature, they ask, sanction success in business in the face of overt
hostility for the very same activity? Weber successfully deflects this
criticism by falling back on unintendedness. The most powerful
motivational forces at work here, he would argue, are shaped by the
aspirations of the ultimate value: to prove regeneration to oneself in
response to dogmatic default. Hence in everyday activity these
denunciations of money-making were simply ignored, behaviour
following the route of worldly opportunism, as irrationally cleared by
the ultimate value.
In its capacity to irrationally underwrite a religious sanction for
worldly works and by extension the calling and its ascetic
ingredient Weber presents his version of Calvinism as unique
among the great religions of the world.22 Its doctrine of justification
makes it so, one of utter gloom and despair, complete with an
omniscient and vengeful deity. By his inscrutable mercy, God has
eternally decreed the fortunate few for election, while- the majority of
mankind is doomed to perdition. The most striking and practically
significant feature of this for Weber is the ultimate value, in quest of
divine assurance, settling for a this-worldly substitute. In contrast
to the Calvinist crisis, Lutheranism offers assurance through the
unio mystica. The ultimate value thus follows an other-worldly
direction of the Spirit wherein no religious significance can be
assigned to external activity.23 Furthermore, Lutheranism cannot
confer a positive incentive to the secularized calling and ascetism
because religious neutrality is explicitly assigned to practical conduct.24
Weber then presents Catholicism and its promise of grace through the
sacraments as also steering the ultimate value in an other-worldly
direction. Yet unlike Lutheranism which is solafide, Catholicism is more

this-worldly in the sense that it dogmatically rests on salvation by
works. Nevertheless it is unable to impart to them the motivational
sinew of Calvinism sacramental grace meeting the need of the
ultimate value. In consequence, Catholic works are performed as a
series of disconnected and randomized events.25 As far as the Catholic
calling goes, Weber reports that work in the world is regarded with
dogmatic indifference by the Church, Aquinas preaching its necessity
only for the maintenance of individual and community.26 And on
those occasions when Rome does lend its support to an ascetic calling,
the believer is led down the path of monastic seclusion: not into the
world but flight from it.27
The European uniqueness of Calvinism therefore, arises from its
dogmatic foreclosure on human means and knowledge of salvation.
This is followed by the incidence of a psychological sanction
which irrationally sanctifies worldly affairs. As the ultimate value
unintentionally penetrates pastoral writing and everyday life, works
unlike those of the Catholic-are undertaken as a rationalized
whole for the greater glory of God28 and not, incidentally, the
salvation of despairing souls. Works propelled by the ultimate value
take a this-worldly direction, both in defiance of dogma and pastoral
warnings on the dangers of covetousness. Thus the Calvinist
pastorally creates the 'duty in a worldly calling as the highest form
which the moral activity of the individual could assume'. 9 In turn,
these convictions provide religious legitimation for profit-making as a
sign of godly living.30 This state of blessedness is most readily secured
by submitting to the ascetic dictum: unremitting mental and bodily
toil.3 l
It is ideas and economic action impregnated with the irrational

search for rightousness therefore, that confer upon Calvinist thought
its enormous transformative weight in history. Only ideas of an
ultimate nature were capable of breaking the grip of Weber's
traditionalism. Nothing else could have given the Puritan capitalist
'the strength to overcome the innumerable obstacles, above all
the inifintely more intensive work which is demanded of the
modern entrepreneur'.32 Seventeenth-century survival and dogmatic
reinvigoration of Calvin's predestinarianism is indespensable for such
an outcome. Such endurance
prevented a premature collapse into a purely utilitarian doctrine of

good works which would never have been possible of motivating
such tremendous sacrifices for non-rational ideal ends.33
Weber realizes still larger theoretical consequences from this
irrational substratum of seventeenth-century economic conduct. It
holds causal significance for his reflections on the rationalization of
the western world.34 Described in The Protestant Ethic as the driving
force of inner-worldly ascetism, irrationality is recast in Economy and

Society as value rationality.35 Ultimately evolving from the value
rationality of the Puritan, the formal rationality of the capitalist order
is bereft of values in this sense.36 So though the seed of the capitalist
spirit was sown by these religiously-grounded irrational values, now,
this root of modern economic activity is dead. It can no longer be
found in the mature capitalist order which dictates its own rules of
action.37 Weber presents Franklin's capitalist spirit as signifying the
historical break with its irrational source. He pursues his vocation
with honesty, punctuality, industry and frugality but these are means
for utilitarian ends, not those of salvation. In a larger and more
contemporary sense however, the secular calling still retains some
irrational residues. 'Ideally', the modern entrepreneur seeks success
as an end in itself-a job well-done instead of avarice and self-
aggrandizement.38
2. OUTLINE OF INTENTIONS
I see two critical errors in the Weber thesis as outlined above: ( 1 ) that
dogmatic Calvinism by the time of Westminster is sola fide; and,
(2) that works within Christianity in general, and Calvinism in
particular, have a this-worldly referent.
Here in Part I, I dispute both these claims. As for the first I will
show that dogma, by the middle of the seventeenth century, bears
little resemblance to Calvin's doctrine. Between Calvin's death and
Westminster, covenant theology obliterates Calvin's sheer grace,
placing the onus of salvation squarely on man. The responsibility of
all believers is spiritual labour by which they can make their calling
and election infallibly sure to themselves. There is no crisis of proof in
dogma. Weber's second major mistake is the this-worldly direction he
assigns to works. By contrast I reveal that Christian, and thereby
Calvinist works, are other-worldly rather than this-worldly. In
their true nature they are acts of humility, contrition, piety and
devotion which are allied with the sincere effort to follow God's
commandments in return for everlasting life.
Furthermore I demonstrate that between Calvin and Westminster,
covenant theology incorporates works of this sort as the grounds of
assurance; they are prominently featured in both dogma and pastoral
writing. Not only is there no crisis of proof in dogma therefore, but no
marked discontinuity between it and pastoral writing both
preaching covenant theology. Weber meanwhile, sees works as
specific to the clerical realm, an irrational reaction to dogma's crisis.
Here they clash with denunciations of commerce, advising the
successful prosecution of a worldly calling. But if works are other-
worldly and have nothing to do with temporal toil in the first place,
then the pastoral contradiction - like the first evaporates.

Not in the remotest sense should works be confused with riches,
unintentionally or otherwise. Framed by the mission of the ultimate
value, these conclusions state that dogma does not thwart and repel
divine aspirations but nourishes and thus contains them. Moreover as
works find their place in dogma and the clerical sphere, man's acts
can only sustain the reward of righteousness through other-worldly
obedience to God's law. The other-worldly trajectory that Calvinism
gives the ultimate value therefore, renders it indistinguishable from
Catholicism and Lutheranism.
Having demonstrated no crisis of proof in dogma and the other-
wordliness of Reformed works, Part II reviews Weber's unavailing
attempts to accredit his own views: (I) dogmatic alienation of the
ultimate value; and, (2) sanctified, temporal works in a calling. As for
the first, Weber's reading of dogma subverts his own cause; he cites
passages which reveal that no crisis exists. On the second, Weber's
this-worldly works constitute the source of endless travail. Not only do
they cause him to assign a fictional contradiction to pastoral
Puritanism but several to Catholic theology itself which also rests on
salvation by works.
In Part II my investigations also cover the pastoral Baxter and the
calling. Problems created by Baxter's failure to comply with Weber's
Puritan ideal-type are raised, especially those Weber creates for
himself by admissions that Baxter's theology is non-predestinarian.
Puritan and Baxterian notions of the calling are then discussed. Both
a spiritual and a temporal calling are identified but works and
religious rewards only attach to the former. Weber's temporal calling
by contrast, is cast as doctrinally indifferent unless its fruits exceed
necessity whereupon it is slurred as a profanity against God.
Finally I review the thought of Troeltsch, Tawney and Marshall as
it relates to their approval of the Weber thesis. I show that all three
either misunderstand its substance, or misrepresent the properties of
Calvin or Calvinism.
While my critique denies the two major points of the Weber thesis,
I explicitly avoid proposing alternate explanations for the rise of
capitalism. My resources are wholly devoted to invalidating the thesis
as it stands.
II THE ROUTINIZATION OF CALVIN
Generally I trace the development of Calvinist thought in England,

briefly in the latter stages of the sixteenth and more extensively
throughout the seventeenth centuries. Observed, is the complete
transformation of the Genevan Reformer's decretum horrible by covenant
theology. Its consumation is an anthropocentric conception of
faith, one which attaches assurance to the will to believe. This

thoroughgoing voluntarism effaces Calvin's idea of man as the passive
and helpless recipient of God's foreordination and free mercy. Now
the responsibility for deliverance is consigned to human hands.
In as much as predestination represents a charismatic principle
therefore,39 I show that Weber errs on the process by which it was
routinized. His conflation of Calvin and dogmatic Calvinism is
symptomatic of this, betraying his failure to recognize the doctrinal
changes wrought between Calvin and Westminster. Hence when
tracing the evolution of Reformed thought, I make use of Calvin's
Institutes to establish a soteriological base line from which seventeenth-
century Calvinism so radically departed.40 The most significant
break4 with the Reformed movements founding father was established
by Perkins, regarded as the most popular and influential theologian in
seventeenth-century England.42 Even by the end of the sixteenth, he
had replaced the combined names of Calvin and Beza as sources of
authority.43 He inaugurates the enduring tradition of covenant
theology and introduces the Protestant world to casuistry in Whole
Treatise of Cases of Conscience.44 In it, scholasticism plays a leading role
in his experimentalism, the use of the practical syllogism to prove
salvation to ourselves.45 Not an original thinker, Perkins synthesized
prevailing lines of thought into a powerful and popular system, his
Cases of Conscience paving the way for a number of works on Puritan
moral theology, the most notable being those of Ames and later in the
century by Baxter.46
Perkin's illustrious pupil, William Ames, also helps lay the
groundwork of covenant theology. He retains the broad outlines of
Perkins's covenant motif but none the less departs from the master on
important points of detail. Perkin's system and the Amesian
amendments are ultimately given credal sanction by Dort and
Westminster. Above all else, Ames can be distinguished from Perkins
by his ecclesiology which concerns us here only to the extent that both
it and his soteriology became orthodoxy in Massachusetts Bay.
Ames's Marrow of Theology is said to represent the core of Puritan belief
and practice and was mandatory reading for those in the New World
and England who aspired to this way of life.47
Also examined in depth is the doctrinal content of the Westminster
Confession48 and Baxter's Christian Directoy49 the aim being to plot
theological continuity between each, as well as with Perkins, Ames
and Dort.
1. CALVIN AND THEODICY: THE COVENANT OF WORKS AND THE

COVENANT OF GRACE
I initially establish the scriptural and Christian record on works,
demonstrating the other-worldliness invariably attached to them.

Calvin's theology renounces works, his doctrine ofjustification resting
wholly on the new covenant by which man is saved by God alone.
This emphasis lies at the core of Calvin's predestinarianism, creating
an unbridgeable gulf between the Creator and man. Steeped in
wantonness and ruin, fallen man is incapable of goodness and must
depend on the All Merciful to unilaterally confer salvation as a gift of
grace. Thus for Calvin there is no theodicy problem; for in no way can
mankind's universal depravity be reconciled with God's absolute
wisdom and perfection. In their later acquisition of works, Calvinists
substantially revise man's relationship with God, reconstituting it as a
bilateral affair. In doing so, they succeeded in disposing of Calvin's
predestinarian determinism.
My discussion of works reveals them achieving biblical relevance

after the fall when God offers man renewed opportunity for salvation.
He does so by striking a covenant with the Jews or more correctly a
specific line of descent among them. This covenant is variously known
as the old covenant, covenant of works, law of works or simply as the
law. The old covenant is formally expressed by the ceremonial law of
the'Jews and the Ten Commandments handed down through Moses.
God extends his covenant to the Jews on the condition of perfect
obedience which cannot be fulfilled because, after the fall, human
nature is mired in corruption and decay and only capable of sinning.
TheJews are then offered a new covenant, known as the covenant of
grace. God submits his new testament through a Mediator or
him and arehistorically
Redeemer cast aside. manifest in Christ, but theJews refuse to accept
While most Christians could agree on these points, discord has

marked the redemptive weight assigned to either the old or new
covenant upon Christ's coming. For Calvin, this event marks the
complete termination of the law whereupon mankind is subject to the
covenant of grace; now he is solely saved by God's free grace not his
own effort. We are justified by faith alone which God implants in us
when we have been predestined for election.
As Calvin's theological mentor, Augustine had similar convictions;
that man's absolute depravity makes it impossible for him to
contribute to his own salvation. The Pelagians, by contrast, disputed
the Augustinian version of sheer grace, insisting that when man acts
virtuously before the law he does so of his own free-will, and is
rewarded by God for his efforts. Augustine was the victor in this
controversy and succeeded in having the Church declare Pelagianism
heretical while sanctioning his own views: deliverance as the sole
product of grace. Yet in the ensuing centuries, Scholasticism succeeds
in guilding works into Catholic doctrine under the guise of semi-
Pelagianism, of man participating in his calling. Here God assists the
elect in the performance of good works, upon which Christ mediates
on their behalf. Thus the new covenant, free grace and predestination
are retained but now coexist with the old covenant which calls for
man to perform good works albeit with God's help in the pursuit
of everlasting life. The Tridentine decree on justification ultimately
afErms this revisionism, free grace retained in the sense that GodXs
election is foreordained, is utterly gratuitous and independent of
personal merit. Works and the cooperation of man are then grafted
upon this predestinarianism, his will and good works evoked by the
eternal decree required for preparation prior to God's justification.
Once acquired, justifying grace is made fast by works but there is no
room for idle boasting since they come from God in the first place who
is, nevertheless, pleased to reward them when committed with a
devout disposition.50 Covenant theology takes a similar, though not
identical line of development, preserving grace and predestination in
connection with justification, while introducing works as necessary for
the personal certainty of salvation.
Calvin, by contrast, would have been appalled by this development,
the whole sum and substance of his thinking based upon the rejection
of works. He insists that even the original adoption of Jews flowed
from the Mediator's grace: they were bound to the Lord not through
merit but solely by His mercy. Moreover, because the old covenant
Jews knew of Christ the Mediator their election could not come from
works but grace alone.5l Even Abraham whose spiritual life is
described as 'well-night angelic' lacked suflicient merit in works to
acquire righteousness before God.52 Calvin's enmity for works is
further revealed in his support for Augustine against the Pelagians.s3
Like his spiritual leader, Calvin holds that fallen man cannot perform
good works in God's eyes because he lacks free-will in divine matters
and can only will evil.54 Equally offensive is the semi-Pelagianism of
the Schoolmen who erroneously see God's grace helping man in the
pursuit of holiness.55 Scripturally, Calvin's position on these issues
derives from Paul who speaks on the passivity of man in the
redemptive process; that he cannot even initiate faith on behalf of
himself which is a manifestation of God's power and conferred as a
gift of grace, not as a reward.56 It is o{Tensive for man to claim
anythinS in will or accomplishment because these rob God of His
honour5 and presuppose that human nature is free from sin which is
nothing more than earthly insolence, ensuring damnation not
salvation. 'Surely there is no one', Calvin intones, 'who is not sunken
in infinite filth!' 8
Calvin's persistent stress on human depravity against the absolute
perfection and sovereignty of God also extends to knowledge of
salvation. For him, the Spirit works secretly and mysteriously in
connection with predestination59 while mankind, intoxicated with the
false opinion of its own insight, is 'reluctant to admit that it is utterly
blind and stupid in divine matters'.60 Justifying faith can only be
understood as the knowledge and belief in God's potential promise

rather than personal conviction of election. Faith as belief in this
promise represents a persuasion that cannot be grasped61 and is some
mystical sense of communion with the infinite, not attainable through
'comprehension'. Nor can it be grasped by ordinary powers of
perception and rational proof whose utilities are restricted to
knowledge acquisition only in this temporal sphere.62 Thus through-
out his Inslritutes, Calvin constantly inveighs against internal examination
for proof of grace. Contemplation and introspection can only reveal
our worthlessness before God, Calvin reminds us, brinfing fear,
consternation and damnation rather than assurance.6 Forever
beyond the scope of human understanding, man cannot discern true
saving faith in himself because only divine wisdom can plumb this
secret.64
Hence Calvin's views on God and man reveal only one convenant, a
covenant of grace by which man is justified sola fide, by faith alone.65
The importance assigned to either covenant by Reformed theo-
logians, has profound implications for whether or not predestination
remains a central or a residual concern. For illustrative purposes this
can be conceived as a problem of theodicy, reconciling God's absolute
sovereignty with the helplessness and evil of fallen man. Calvin's
renunciation of the covenant of works, maximizes the distance
between man and the Creator so that no reconciliation is possible.
Calvin's man is the passive recipient of God's free mercy, lacking the
understanding and insight required to communicate with the Almighty
for knowledge of salvation. Mankind also lacks the will required to
perform works of perfect obedience and worship. Because of the
inherent wickedness of humanity's fallen nature, man's acts lack the
worthiness required to deserve reward from the Most High who must,
in consequence, unilaterally predestine election and reprobation.
Calvin's asymmetry in the man-God relationship is approximated by
the Antinomians, a seventeenth-century Calvinist sect. Like the
founding father they eschew works, relying wholly on the covenant of
grace. Yet unlike the founding father, the Antinomians place man
closer to God in so far as the elect can experience the inner operation
of the Spirit as a sign of grace.
Greatest closure between man and God is fashioned by the
Arminians who assign Pelagian free-will to man to perform the good
works that God, through Christ, will recognize and reward. Using the
covenant of works in this way undermines the foundation of
predestinarianism because it diminishes His omniscience, placing
God at the beck and call of man's efforts. Baxter's soteriology is
remarkably similar to the Arminian position. How does mainline
Calvinism reconcile divine perfection with human nature infected by
the stain of sin? It does so by striking a mediating position between
the polarities of Calvin and the Arminians, an attempt therein made
to balance the covenant of works and grace. The latter is used to

denote the arbitrariness of God's justification and sanctification while
the former is manifest in semi-Pelagianism, God operating through
the will of those He has chosen to sanctify. These God-assisted works
are held to be necessary for salvation.
Yet if dogmatic differences mark a Pelagian and semi-Pelagian
outlook as here described, in practical terms both dismantle Calvin's
decretum horrible. There is no disenchantment of the ultimate value
because both camps place the onus of redemption squarely on man,
calling on human agency to spiritually labour for its attainment. The
semi-Pelagianism of seventeenth-century Calvinism takes this form,
that man can only discern God's secret act of justification in himself
through the performance of good works. True, God initiates this
activity in the first place but the reality of the situation is such that
infallible assurance can be procured by human effort. Though
Calvin's double decree did generate pastoral anxiety as Weber
claims,66 Calvinist assurance by works eliminates this outcome.
Moreover why presume as Weber does that the amelioration of
Calvin's harsh doctrine did not transcend the writings of pastoral
divines? After all, a number of the most popular and influential
among them either in spirit or in presence carried great weight
as synodal gatherings. Particularly so in the case of Perkins and Ames,
both of whom influenced the doctrines of Dort and later of
Westminster. I now turn to these issues.
2. PERKINS, AMES AND DORT: THE PENETRATION OF WORKS INTO
CALVINISM
The encroachment of works onto the stage of sola fide English

Protestantism therefore, had profound consequences for the practical
impact of predestination, erasing its tortuous impact on the ultimate
value. Works begin to be heard as early as the first half of the
sixteenth century when Tyndale shifts emphasis away from sheer
grace, stressing in its stead obedience to the law.67 Biblical support for
this move is drawn from Peter 1:10 which preaches a mandate for
godly living which assures us of being saved.68 Like Tyndale before
him, Hooper continues with this emphasis on works and self-
determination when, in 1549, he wrote a Declaration of Ten Commandments
which decrees that each man's eternal destiny is determined by
himself, grace made available 'to every and singular of Adam's
posterity'.69 Martyr, professor of divinity at Oxford under Edward
VI, then begins the scholastic extension of Calvin, modifying his
predestinarianism and subsequently influencing Beza's reconceptual-
ization of it.70 Anticipating the form and substance of seventeenth-
century covenant theology, Beza makes sanctification and the
156
knowledge of good works arising from it as the infallible proof of

saving faith. 'Behold now both the effects which we feel working
within us,' he writes, 'the conclusion is infallible, that we have saving
faith and consequently Jesus Christ is in us unto eternal life as is
aforesaid.'71 The English extension of Beza's revisionism72 is ulti-
mately seen in the writing of Greenham who, early in the seventeenth
century, compiled a list of spiritual deeds that can be used as signs of
election.73 Yet despite the accumulating weight of these doctrinal
amendments, by the end of the sixteenth and the early part of the
seventeenth centuries, Puritan and Anglican soteriology remained
firmly in Calvin's hands.74
The most significant scholarly break with him was precipitated by
the enormous popularity of Perkin's work which succeeds in
theologically harmonizing the covenant of works with the covenant of
grace. Contact with predestinarianism is retained in the sense that
absolute certainty of salvation comes principally from faith 'and then
secondly, by such works as are inseparable companions of faith'.75
Foreordination is also present in God's act of justification which is
tendered irrespective of human merit. Once justified however, the
person is also sanctified and infused by the Holy Spirit which
produces all the saving graces, the most important of which is
'understanding' or the capacity to discriminate between truth and
falsehood.76 Semx-Pelagianism becomes an evident featureofPerkins's
theology then, to the extent that God gives the elect enabling powers
of understanding while the reprobate are imparted with an addiction
for unbelief.77 The same principle can be observed when God
activates the energies of the sanctified person in the pursuit of good
works which constitute the 'signes and tokens of truth faith'.78
Believers are then advised to apply their works in the great labour
required for glorification, the ultimate stage of regeneration from
whence good conscience testifies to us through the Spirit that we are
truly saved.79 To reach this end, Perkins advises that three things
must be procured: (1) a preparation for good conscience; (2) the
application ofthe remedy; and, (3) the reformation of conscience.80 In
response to the possible predestinarian objection that imperfect man
cannot satisfy God with his efforts, Perkins replies that under the
covenant of grace
. . . the will of God is not to require absolute obedience at our hands

in the Gospell as in the Law, but rather to qualify the rigour of the
Law by the satisfaction of a Mediator in our stead8l . . . Hence it
followeth, that God will accept of our imperfect obedience if it be
sincere: yea he accepts the will, desire and endeavour to obey for
obedience itself.82
From these assertions we see that Perkin's theology is aimed at

convincing men that they must, and how they can make their calling
sure to themselves. Such emphasis undoubtedly stems from God's free

justification and that man cannot ascertain his blessing unless he
successfully labours for good conscience. An added incentive for the
pursuit of this other-worldly objective, is the semi-Pelagian promise
that God assists in the search for whose who are sincerely committed.
But having said that Perkins's voluntarism makes redemption
available to all who will labour for it, he does at the same time retain a
robust doctrine of reprobation. Its outlines are most completely stated
in Whether a Man where thirty-six propositions are formulated to reveal
just how far the reprobate and his temporary faith can advance down
the path of deliverance. This book and its content is held to share
prominence with A Golden Chaine where Perkins elaborates his
doctrine of election.83
Turning now to Ames, we see the essential structures of Perkins's
covenant theology remaining intact while important differences in
detail and emphasis can still be observed. Like Perkins, his pupil
preserves God's sovereignty and foreordination in that prior to the
application of grace, nobody knows their calling.84 Similarly, 'The
calling does not depend on the dignity, honesty, industry or any
endeavour of the ones called, but only upon the election and
predestination of God'.85 Grace is then supplemented by works in
that, before one's estate before God can be determined, one must
diligently labour on behalf of the means provided by Him for this
purpose.86 Once glorification the final stage of Ames's ordo salutis
has been reached, infallible certainty can be grasped from the Holy
Spirit through introspection and meditation.87 Realizing that if
sanctification provides the grounds for assurance, Ames departs from
Perkins by placing the seat of faith in the will rather than
understanding. Thus 'the conversion of the will is the effiectual
principle in the conversion of the whole men'.88 The centrality of
Amesian will is made manifest by repentance preceding faith and
justification in the ordo salutis, priority that gives tacit recognition to
Pelagian free-will. As if realizing this, Ames then also makes
repentance a result ofjustification, retrieving semi-Pelagianism in the
sense that man's sanctified pilgrimage for grace receives the helping
hand of God.89 Such good works as the preconditions of assurance
must be done with all due sincerity because of their imperfection. And
although sincerity must necessarily accompany works, they still lack
suflicient merit to be the recipient of divine justice. Like Perkins,
Ames holds that works are rewarded not from indebtedness, but from
the covenant of grace and Christ's powers of redemption.90
Ames's soteriology therefore, is significantly preoccupied with the
will, so much so that the reprobate are simply those who fail to avail
themselves of the means provided by God. In short, the damned are
spiritually lazy or negligent. Following from this, and in contra-
distinction to Perkins, we see the near-total eclipse of reprobation in
Ames's writing. E:xpressed in these terms it is a comfortable doctrine,

implicitly assuming that its audience is already saved. This can be
said with some confidence because Ames never devoted a book to
reprobation, nor does he even bother to assign a separate chapter to it in
his Marrow. Here, references to damnation are only seen in the
chapter on predestination where it is discussed in the concluding
eleven of forty-nine sections.9'
The pastoral influence of both Perkins and Ames is ultimately
absorbed by dogma as articulated by the Synod of Dort, convened in
1619 to deal with the Arminian controversy.92 It was an international
affair, delegates arriving from England, Holland, Germany, France
and Switzerland. James's partiality for the Reformed faith is
displayed by his involvement in the selection of English representatives
and the keen interest he maintained in the proceedings. Ames
attended unofficially, having fled England in 1610 after persecution at
the hands of the King and Bancroft for his ecclesiology rather than his
soteriology. Working behind the scenes, he exercised great influence
on the final outcome which credally sanctioned the core elements of
covenant theology. Perkins's contribution was equally significant,
although his death in 1602 kept him from being physically present.
The final deliberations of Dort then, branded Arminianism as
heretical, accompanied by an obligatory defense of Calvin.93 He is at
the same time however, profoundly modified on three counts,
alterations which lay the dogmatic groundwork of covenant theology:
( I ) Perkin's practical syllogism by which the regenerate can infallibly
observe the substance of saving faith in themselves is endorsed; (2)
certification of a voluntaristic conception of faith;94 and, (3) in
sympathy with Ames, the reversal of Calvin's sequence for repentance
in the ordo salutis.95 Also reflecting the influence of Ames is the
diminuition of damnation as a possible prospect; for even those who
lack absolute confidence in their assurance should not despair if they
sincerely desire to do His service.96
All of the above provides ample testimony for the conclusion that
the trinity of Perkins, Ames97 and Dort made a weighty contribution
to Calvinist thought as it took shape in the first quarter of the
seventeenth century. Their legacy was perpetuated by Westminster
and to a lesser degree by Baxter whose theology, despite the fact that
it remains within a -convenanting framework, leans more towards
Arminianism than Calvinism.
3. THE ANTINOMIAN INTERLUDE
Before taking up these concerns, we must at the same time

acknowledge that covenant theology did not completely dominate
the Protestant world, as the proliferation of sects throughout
the seventeenth century clearly demonstrates. One of these, the

Antinomians, is of particular significance to us here because of its
rejection of works and the near revival of Calvin's orthosloxy. It was
only in sect-like form then, that Calvin survived into the seventeenth
century a peripheral element that never did succeed in capturing
the vessel of imagination of those who called themselves Calvinists.
To a remarkable degree, the Antinomians98 succeeded in reviving
Calvin's doctrine of justification. In doing so, their most notable
advocate was John Cotton who left England for America in 1632
whereupon he clashed with the Puritan establishment over its support
for Amesian soteriology. In England meanwhile, men of less stature
took up the cause: Tobias Crisp, John Eaton and Henry Dunne
among them. I will discuss the controversy precipitated by the
Antinomians primarily as it unfolded in the Bay Colony because it
was here that the line of dispute between Calvin and covenant
theology was most clearly drawn.99 The final outcome of the
controversy as whole, was the failure of Antinomian revivalism to
mount a successful challenge against Ames's authority in America, its
English ambitions meeting a similar fate at Westminster.
Cotton was the first major Calvinist figure to part company with
the principles of covenant theology which he nevertheless held in
England but then renounced after his arrival in America. Here, in
alliance with Anne Hutchinson and John Wheelwright, he charged
church elders with teaching a covenant of works over a covenant of
grace. Like Calvin, the Antinomians held that regeneration has
nothing to do with works and legal injunctions because the direct
impact of the Holy Spirit under grace, renders man's acts superfluous. '
Underscoring this conviction was Wheelwright's division of Christians
into two classes: those under the covenant of grace who belong to
Christ and those under the covenant of works who belong to the
Antichrist.10l Throughout the turmoil, Cotton repeatedly appealed to
Calvin for legitimacy, reiterating his justification by faith alone; that
prior to union with Christ there is no saving preparation via works,
nor is there anything man can do to create saving faith. In a fashion
that would meet with Calvin's approval, Cotton argues that works
cannot be used as evidence of assurance because true sanctification
may be less discernable in the elect than the reprobate.'02
The Antinomian controversy in America lasted from 1636-38
when, faced by the united opposition of the covenanting establish-
ment, Cotton disassociates himself from the movement. No less
gloomy were its prospects in England where Antinomianism was
regarded as the greatest theological threat by the Westminster divines
who issued a petition against it on August 10, 1643. They did so
because the Parliamentary selection of the Westminster delegates in
I642, sought to preserve soteriological consensus, an end more readily
accomplished by the exclusion of divisive influence. In placing this
160
embargo on Antinomian (as well as Arminian) 103 attendance,

Parliament guaranteed the result in advance, one ensuring that the
Confession of Faith would formally ratify the essentials of covenant
theology. As a sect with only marginal influence therefore, Anti-
nomianism and its vision of predestined free grace is dogmatically
repulsed by the political decision-lnaking surrounding Westminster.
As far as Weber is concerned, he appears unaware of the
significance attached to this Antinomian episode, especially the
ramifications it had for the dogmatic content of Westminster. And in
an instance that he makes a fleeting reference to it, his remarks betray
grave distortions on what it actually stood for. For instance, a source
is approvingly cited in which Antinomianism is seen as a psycho-
logical response to strict predestinarianism.l04 However, the historical
record reveals that Antinomianism cannot be understood as a
reaction to Calvin's teaching, but the failure of covenanting Calvinists
to preserve it. The movement does not represent some psychologically
induced departure from Calvin but the reverse-the recrudescence of
his teaching.
4. COVENANT THEOLOGY AND WESTMINSTER
Thus Antinomian intentions for the proximate restoration of Calvin's

thought were successfully thwarted and Westminster could now safely
proceed with the task of forging a specifically English-dogmatic
version of covenant theology. When reviewing the content of the
Confession, we shall see that this aim is substantially realized and that
the thinking of Perkins and Ames pervade its passages. Important for
my purpose, as determined by Weber's irrational sanction, is the
omnipresence of a voluntaristic conception of faith, one that naturally
conjoins with a creed resting upon the will and salvation by works.
Infallible assurance is the primary inducement for the assiduous
performance of these other-worldly endeavours, a divine reward
whose lustre is enhanced by effectively ruling out damnation as a
possible alternative. There is no elaborate doctrine dealing with the
temporary faith of the reprobate, no mention of an ineffectual calling
but only an effectual calling combined with the repeated insistance
that salvation is there for the taking. No estrangement of the ultimate
value can possibly be derived from its passages.
Like Perkins and Ames, Westminster symbolically retains pre-
destination and God's absolute sovereignty in His first bestowal of
justification. Here, the elect are the recipients of free grace according
to the 'hidden purpose' of God's God's will 'by which He offers and
withholds mercy at His pleasure'.l05
In order to manifest His glory, God has ordained that some men
and angels should be predestined to everlasting life and others

should be foreordained to everlasting death. . .
. . . This predetermination and foreordination of angels and men is
precise and unchangeable. The number and identity of angels and
men in each group is certain, definite and unalterable.l06
With these formalities observed, the divines get down to the real
business of elaborating convenant theology and its impending
effacement of these seemingly immutable decrees. In the first of many
frontal assaults on Calvin, it is said that this 'mysterious doctrine'
must be accorded special care so that 'men may be assured that they
have been eternally chosen from the certainty of their effiectual calling.
. . .)107 The vehicle used to reach this state of certainty, in
continuation of Ames, is primarily secured by man's will. No doubt
aware of the Antinomian rejection of the will on the theological right
and the freedom assigned to it by the Arminians on the left,
predictably the divines plot a middle course. Their semi-Pelagian
compromise is disclosed by God operating through the justified
person, that such 'believers must be directed by the Holy Spirit in
order to will what is pleasing to God.'l08 The imminent danger in this,
one seemingly grasped by the delegates, is that human anticipation of
divine aid may result in spiritual laxity and passivity. To exempt this
possibility, responsibility for salvation is then directly thrust upon
men who 'should diligently attempt to identify what good works God
has commanded in His word and then try their best to do all of
them."09 Further revelations of this semi-providential cast of mind
are then aimed at predestination itself, depreciating the mood of fixity
conveyed in the opening passages. It is said that some things are
destined to occur from 'secondary causes' so that human prospects,
far from being irrevocably cast, can be mediated by the voluntarism of
the agents involved." Unevenly stated to be sure, the message none
the less conveyed here is that the will can program human fortune:
salvation and damnation are subtley reduced to choice. Under the
covenant of grace Westminster affirms, the Holy Spirit is promised to
all those who 'may be willing and able to believe.'lll
Continued emphasis on the will is manifest by God foreordaining
'all the means by which . . . election is accomplished,'ll2 a statement
which seals a psychological sanction for their implementation as does
the premise that the saving graces are 'always' evident in the justified
person as 'works of love'.ll3 Good works done under the law in
obedience to God's commandments, provide evidence of our state of
grace.ll4 To secure the promise, the divines formulate an ordo salutzs
representing the stages of a regenerate life as: justification; adoption/
sanctification; saving faith and repentance. 115 Other than the
gratuitous consignment of justification, the remaining stages of
regeneration come attached with specific responsibilities. Reiterating
a well established theme in covenant theology, the divines report that

the good works required by these means are undeserving of reward;
they are the hapless strivings of imperfect man and come from God in
the first place.ll6 Nevertheless, He through Christ 'is pleased to
accept and reward what is sincerely doneXl 17 which, in this instance, is
Perkin's infallible assurance of grace. In the event that followers may
become complacent in their spiritual labours after receiving assurance,
they are forewarned in a fashion somewhat reminiscent of Arminian-
ism, that such lassitude is to fall from grace. Not by God's formal
withdrawal of justification but by his refusal to witness to the
conscience 'until they humble themselves, confess their sins and ask
forgiveness'.ll8 One naturally presumes backsliding to be the work of
Satan and returning to the fold that of God, but the practical
consequences for motives and action are the same: concerted
commitment and effort
assurance by other-wordly labour.to attain and then maintain a state of divine
The presumption here is that grace, as a product of the will, is

conditionally available to all. Trvae, divine assurance is conceived as
specific to the elect alonea but in the absence of an alternative doctrine
of reprobation, the whole thrust of the Westminster document is
positive: how one can, rather than how one cannot be saved.ll9
Resonating this optimism is the Confessionas failure to consider
damnation or the ineffectual calling as a likely prospect, directing its
attention instead to those who are effectually called. In the same vein
salvation is no longer restricted to membership in the visible church,
the terms of possession now enlarged to include all those professing
Christianity, magnanimity that must even admit the dreaded Papist
into the fold. Above all, redemption is tied to the will to believe as a
duty imcumbent on all Christians who must make their calling and
election sure to themselves.l20 Perhaps a no more vibrant example of
Westminster's
found humanism and attendant obliteration of Calvin can be
than in the following
. . . those who truly believe in the Lord Jesus, who honestly love
him and try to walk in good conscience before him, may in this life
be assured with certainty that they are in a state of grace.'21
5. BAXTER AND WESTMINSTER
How does the pastoral Baxter's theology accord with Westminster

and the more general current of Reformed thought as it unfolded in
the seventeenth century? On this, we should first note that he is full of
praise for the eminence and godliness displayed by the delegates at
the synods of Dort and Westminster.l22 If nothing else, this seal of
approval reveals that Baxter saw himself as a Calvinist who claimed
membership in the covenanting tradition. Yet while retaining its

essential structures the covenant of works and grace he boldly
pushes the meaning attached to the former to its inevitable
conclusion. If works provide us with the grounds of assurance, Baxter
seems to reason, then it is more consistent to assume that man
possesses free-will and that predestination, even in diluted form, has
no place in such a system. Calvin's omnipotent deity is now dead and
buried and in its stead, Baxter provides us with an anthropocentric
system of worship, of man who is capable of bargaining with God for
His ultimate reward. At the same time the covenant of grace still finds
a place in his system, Baxter even assigning greater importance to it.
He does so, it would appear, mainly in a prescriptive sense because
the whole thrust of the New Testament is built around this point. Still
in its entirety, grace is residual to his divinity which calls on man to
seize the initiative in the absence of foreordination of any sort.
Man can initiate the opening move because in the initial passages of
the Directory, he is drafted as God's creation who is 'an intellectual
and free agent, able to understand and choose the good, and refute the
evil . . .X123 Man so contrived, necessarily disposes of God's gratuitous
justification as it takes shape in Perkins, Ames and Westminster as
does Baxter's position on Christ and the covenant of grace. He argues
that grace has been provided for all men and that only stubbornness
and obstinacy will stop them from attaining it.l24 When the believer
desires to harvest regeneration, he must 'labour first to understand
the true nature of a state of sin, and a state of grace'.l25 Upon
reflection and self-conviction of personal misdeed, sanctification can
be grasped not by transcendental fiat, but by the willingness to pursue
it.l 6 It is with scant surprise therefore, that some of Baxter's
detractors accused him of Arminianism,l27 so overt- is his reliance on
free-will. Also responsible for activating the anti-Arminian ire of the
critics is the Baxterian universal man of reason. 'To have reason', he
informs us, 'is common to all men, even the sleepy and distracted'. As
a finite human resource, reason should not be temporally squandered
but reserved for the greatest of all purposes, to 'know for what end
God has made them reasonable'. Understanding the Word is its
primary purpose which we neglect only at the peril of allowing Satan
to triumph over us. For Baxter, when sin rules the body and mind we
are trapped in a condition of unreason while,'28 for Calvin, this is the
natural state of corrupted man.
With reason and free-will firmly in tow, Baxter now proceeds to
elaborate his doctrine of works. Presented to the reader is a list of
means fashioned by God on the understanding that man should
zealously pursue them.l29 When doing so, human effort is then
supplemented by a list of 'internal duties' from which spiritual
assurance is forthcoming. The 'true doctrine of good works', as Baxter
calls it, is obedience to the law embodied by the available means. In
164 Malcolm 11. MacKinnon
conjunction with their diligent prosecution, we must also strive for

mental renovation through unremitting struggle against satanic
temptation.l30 As far as works go, 'Your lives must be laid out in
doing God's service', Baxter reminds us, 'and doing all the good you
can, in works of piety, justice and charity, with prudence, fidelity,
industry, zeal and delight . . .X131 Perhaps in response to Calvin's
ghost or more likely the Antinomians who likewise held to the futility
of imperfect works, Baxter replies in the conventional fashion: 'that
Christ hath so fulfilled the Law of Works, as to merit for us'.l32 It is
precisely by the Redeemer meriting for us in this way that Baxter
dubiously retains the supremacy of grace in his system.l33 Perkins,
Ames and Westminster can make a better case on this score, for their
grace not only subsidizes imperfect works, but also imparts free
justification which Baxter rejects. None the less the importance of
Christ's mercy as it relates to works cannot be ignored, shedding light
on what is required by man. As long as he does his best in their
performance, this is sufiicient, provided that such endeavours are
animated by sincerity, humility and gratitude.l34 Uppermost in the
Puritan mind, was to wage war against the evil of hypocrisy.
If doing one's best signifies Baxter's generosity on the redemptive
prospects of churchgoers, he is prepared to go still further. Engaging
Perkins who condemned Catholicism as heretical, Baxter responds
that for many of them, 'their contradictory errors prevail not against
them to hinder their love of God and their salvation'.l35 And in
contrast to Westminster which restricts grace to Christians, Baxter
extends the promise to the heathen who has never heard of Christ.
Belief in the essentials of Scripture is the only requirement, something
which is possible for those who never read them, nor even heard of
their existence.l36
This is not the place to fashion a definitive account of why

Calvinism adopted works. Suflice to say that pastoral anxiety
generated by the double decree undoubtedly played a part. So too did
the argument mounted by the detractors of sheer grace who equated it
with spiritual passivity and moral sloth. I speak to the latter point as
it redounds on Weber.
Those who belittled sheer grace were able to marshall good grounds
for their case; for if man does not contribute to his salvation, if all is
predestined then why not simply lapse into fatalism and licentious
living? Another equally offensive corollary of sheer grace is that
salvation can be too readily secured, even by the hypocrite and those
visibly steeped in sin. Calvin was the first to bear the brunt of this
onslaught as it originated from Catholic sources. He bravely attempts
to deflect it, insisting that his doctrine does not oppose good works as
such, citing them as the inseparable companions of faith which can,

none the less, avail no favour before God.l37 During Perkin's time
Rome frequently accused Calvinism of solaySide, thereby inviting moral
turpitude and social chaos.l38 Even during Baxter's era, Catholic
propagandists sought to establish a Calvinist connection between
predetermined grace and degeneracy. After carefully elaborating his
doctrine of works, Baxter indignantly reacts to the calumny.
You see in all this, what our doctrine is about good works, and how
those Papists are to be believed, who pursuade their inorant
disciples, that we account them vain and needless things.l 9
Calvinists were no less sparing than Catholics, but more successful

in locating the perpetrators of sheer grace. Baxter accuses the
Antinomians of derogating God's law and its call for thankful
obedience to Him.l40 In the Bay Colony, rejection of the law by the
Antinomians led to the accusation that they were promoting a 'faire
and easie way to Heaven'.l4l And in a sermon before the Lords,
Christmas Day, 1644, Calamy castigates the Antinomians as 'patrons
of free vice under the mask of free grace'.l42 Still, the crescendo of
odium directed at sheer grace had no foundation when turned upon
the Antinomians who were generally free from the excesses ascribed to
them. But the Libertines, as Perkins reminds us, were another matter
altogether, using rejection of the law and sole reliance on grace as
divine accord for fatalistic indulgence,l43 abomination which caused
deep offense to the Calvinist gatekeepers of rectitude.
Had Weber thus known that Calvinists not only rejected but were
deeply offended by Catholic charges of solaySide; and had he also known
of Reformed contempt for the Antinomians and others who practised
it he would have been much less inclined to wrest works from its
dogmatic core.
III THE FICTION OF CALVINIST SINGULARITY
Calvin's routinization described, I now evaluate Weber's claim that

Calvinism is religiously unique. For obvious reasons this is not done
on a global scale, but only in relation to the main European rivals of
the Reformed movement, notably Catholicism and Lutheranism.
Compared to both, the uniqueness of Calvinism is said to be found in
this-worldly orientation imparted to the ultimate value. The result is
realized from dogmatic closure while Catholicism and Luteranism,
though by different means, carry the ultimate value in an other-
worldly direction salvation's door thrown open to the believer. By
contrast we shall see that there is little to choose among Calvinism,

Catholicism and Lutheranism on this point and that, all considered,
Catholicism is the least generous of the three in its offer of assurance..
We must therefore reject Weber's claim on Calvinist uniqueness, its
terms of redemption like Catholic and Lutheran versions, composed
to incite the ultimate value in an other-worldly direction.
Catholic benevolence on salvation for Weber, is furnished by the
sacrament'44 while Calvinists rejected the sacraments as eflicacious
for grace, its adherants unable to escape the oppressive grip of sin that
knew no dispensation.'45 This statement holds only for Calvinist
abolition of the sacraments. Aside from this, Calvinists gained full
remission from sin by the introduction of works and the use of
repentance in the ordo salutis as a necessary condition for salvation.
Weber's claim that the Catholic sacraments conferred the full
certainty of salvation is also open to question. On the possibility of
absolute assurance, unanimity in the medieval church only existed to
the extent 'that by special supernatural illumination, that is by
private revelation, God may give an individual certitude of his
salvation'.l46 However, on the capacity of the sacraments to confer
infallible assurance to the ordinary believer, no consensus existed.
Prior to the Tridentine decree of 1547, Scotists espoused the
'sacremental argument'; that through baptism and penance the
believer can acquire this certainty, provided no obstacle is placed in
their path, like the lack of a sufficiently devout disposition.l47 In
opposition to this, the Thomists argued that we are bound to believe
with unerring faith that the sacraments procure grace for us, which
they do so when the recipient places no obstacle before them.
Nevertheless the condition is exposed to human frailty and there can
only be 'moral certainty' which does not preclude the possibility of
self-deception.148 The Tridentine decree on justification formally
resolved this dispute. Following from it, the Church held that the
ordinary believer is not in a position to know 'with the certitude of
faith which cannot be subject to error' that he is in the grace of God,
that even the 'just' man cannot be sure of his predestination to eternal
salvation. 149
Generalizing on this issue thus has its historical hazards, unless of
course we accept the Church's post-Tridentine thinking as the
prevailing tradition. Doing so solely as a matter of convenience, the
Catholic doctrine on justification is less, rather than more generous
than the Calvinist offer of assurance.
As a matter of fact the Calvinist position on infallible assurance
precipitated a theological controversy with Catholicism towards the
end of the sixteenth century. The Calvinist side of the dispute was
ably represented by Perkins. His account of it states that members of
both the Reformed and the Catholic churches believe in the 'general'
certainty of salvation, the assured conviction of the truth of God's
Part I: Calvinism and the infallible assurance of grace
167
word. The difference arises over sanctification and the use of good
works as signs of true faith. Catholics argue that works cannot provide
absolute certainty, their imperfection making them the frequent
source of deception: one can only maintain assurance by hope.
Calvinists, by contrast, insist on the infallible certainty of salvation,
first by faith and then by works as the inseparable companion of
it. Perkins argues that 'special' or infallible certainty can be
experimentally grasped through self-examination wherein the pious
assess the quality of their works before coming to the conclusion of
true saving faith. Moreover, this special assurance can be 'ordinarily'
grasped without the aid of supernatural revelation because, 'if things
required in Gospell be both ordinarie and possible, then for a man to
have unfallible certentie of his own salvation is both ordinarie and
possible'.l50 'We hold this', Perkins writes, 'for a clear and evident
principle of the word of God, and contrariwise the Papists deny it
wholly'.l5l The practical syllogism is then introduced and Perkins's
scholasticism used in a way that no Catholic theologian of the period
would dare contemplate. Its testament is infallible certainty when the
Holy Ghost imprints it upon the mind of man.
Everyone that beleeves is the child of God:

But I doe beleeve:
Therefore I am the child of God:l52
Seventeenth-century Calvinists insisted that to strive for the

absolute conviction of salvation was essential for a healthy spiritual
life. For Ames, this conviction is realized from 'glorification', the
ultimate stage in his ordo salutis. Again it can be embraced without
special revelation in the following way: ( 1 ) the grace of God becomes
known and evident to the believer; (2) the gift of discernment allows
one to distinguish grace from its shadow; (3) the whisper of the
witness of the conscience that faith is fast; and (4) the Spirit makes
these ways of perceiving possible, imparting absolute certainty of
salvation.'53 The experimental ingredient in covenant theology
developed by Perkins and Ames testing the purity of faith in one-
self was then given credal sanction by Dort. It was also accepted by
Westminster which argues that the certainty gained from introspection
is not based on the 'fallible hope of guesswork or probabilities' but the
'infallible assurance of faith' whose acquisition does not depend on
unusual revelation but the ordinary working of the Spirit.l54 And
with the same spirit of confidence, Baxter advises the believer to
'make sure' of his salvation.through self-examination.l55 Thus both
dogmatically and pastorally, seventeenth-century Calvinists are
charged to diligently labour for good conscience.
If Catholics were offended by this doctrine, one can only imagine
the response of Calvin. One commits understatement by saying that
he would have condemned his successors for conferring on fallen man
the powers of will and understanding required to expose God's secret

decree. Most horrendous of all though is that his god of majesty and
perfection would never deign to communicate assurance to creatures
of the flesh. As for Weber, he simply fails to realize the revolutionary
transformation of Calvin's thought throughout the seventeenth
century, one which unequivocably points the ultimate value to the
world beyond.
Lutheranism for Weber, is other-worldly in virtue of the unio mystica
by which infallible assurance is secured.l56 By his reckoning, the unio
mystica or some approximation of it is unknown to Calvinism, 'the
actual absorption into the deity, that of a real entrance of the divine
into the soul of the believer'.l 7 Lutheran mysticism has important
consequences for Weber because he wishes to attribute practical
consequences from the way in which salvation is dogmatically
conceived. Two ideal polar types are introduced here: salvation as a
vessel of the Holy Spirit or tool of the divine will. Standing for the
former, is Lutheranism with its emotionalism and mysticism and
Calvinist concentration on ascetic action for the latter.'5 For Weber,
when the means of deliverance are embodied by contemplation'59 or
by an orgiastic-ecstatic character, no bridge between religious ideas
and practical action can be established because the economy is seen as
inferior to the 'supreme value'.l60 Theological blockage, by contrast,
produces disenchantment with the world, coupled with the rejection
of flight from it through contemplation. Instead the devout strive to
prove themselves before God 'solely' through the quality of their
ethical conduct; that 'ascetism has wished to rationalize the world
ethically in accordance with God's commandments'.l6l The irrational-
unintended outcome is that ascetic-Protestantism 'taught the principle'
that rational success in the world was 'the sole principle of proving
one's religious merit'.l62
I challenge Weber on these points and argue that Calvinism adopts
a contemplative element as a means used to determine the believer's
standing before God. A historically significant episode here, takes
place in 1595 when William Barrett questioned the absoluteness of
predestination, particularly its hostility to feelings and inner experience
as these may be used in determining one's state of grace. For doing so,
he was immediately branded a heretic by Cambridge officials upon
which Whitgift, Archbishop of Canterbury, entered the fray by
reminding Barrett of the Lambeth Articles which closely followed
Calvin's opinion. His intention was to have them published but
Elizabeth interceded, apparently wishing to halt the spread of
dissention in the Church of England which was already considerable,
particularly over externals and church government. Nevertheless
Whitgift pressed on, demanding that Barrett recant whereupon Lord
Burghley intervened and the matter was dropped. The leniency
shown here no doubt encouraged further written and public departures
from Calvin's prohibition on feelings Samuel Ward uttering in

1597 that 'Lutheranism begins to be established'.l63
The contemplative convergence of Lutheranism and Calvinism is
significant for us here only to the extent that, for both, inward
events communicate infallible assurance.l64 That mental events for
the Lutheran are experiential while those of the Calvinist are
experimental does no change this.
The Calvinist version of meditation is extensively developed by
Perkins who directs us to labour for the attainment of good conscience
by, among other things, a just and serious examination of ourselves to
judge our estate before God. When good conscience is secured, it
ceases to accuse and terrify, testifying to us through the Holy Spirit
that we are truly saved.l65 Religion in its purest form, Perkins advises,
is spiritual: when we take occasion to meditate on God and the
mystical conjunction between Him and His church. 166 Reformed
predestinarianism takes a similar shape in Ames where it is presented
as an incentive for spiritual testing and introsSection, grace made
available to all who are spiritually diligent.l 7 Dort accepts this
revisionism as does Westminster which affirms that God gives us the
gift of spiritual insight when we earnestly seek to embrace Him. 168 But
it is above all in Baxter where we find its most fulsome expression, the
spirit of prayer identified as necessary for salvation. When words are
lacking, he tells us, the Spirit may substitute groans on our behalf.
Serious and methodical meditation of the life to come is thus
recommended,'69 as is the advice to 'Diligently labour in that part of
the life of faith which consisteth in the constant use of Christ as the
means of the soul's access to God."70 To ensure passage from this life
to the next, Baxter provides a list of instructions on how to make
thoughts 'effectual' through meditation.l71 Much time and effort is
required in this because
. . . methinks it should be our wisdom to be suspicious of ourselves

in so great a business and diligent in searching and examining our
hearts whether they be truly sanctified or not.'72
IV CONCLUSION
Summarizing the comparisons of Calvinism with Catholicism and

Lutheranism, we can first note Weber's mistake on the properties he
assigns to seventeenth-century Calvinism. His claim that Calvin is
dogmatically preserved is the most blatent example of this. Yet for the
Calvinist, salvation is no longer shrouded by the divine veil but
illuminated for all determined to clasp it. Calvinism arrives at this
position by evolving as a hybrid, absorbing elements from both
Catholocism and Lutheranism. Against all of Calvin's objections,
works are appropriated from the former and comprehension as the

medium through which God seals election from the latter. By good
works the Puritan maintained constant contact with his spiritual
pulse, ultimately coming to the conclusion that faith is fast.
Borrowing but necessarily reworking Weber's terminology we see
that the Calvinist, Baxter aside, was a semi-Pelagian tool of the divine
will. Yet as God operates through man in the performance of good
works, he alse assists in the discernment of true saving faith. Thus the
Calvinist is also a semi-Pelagian vessel of the Holy Spirit. Moreover
this coupling transports the ultimate value away from the mundane:
the Reformed layman was both an other-worldly instrument and
vessel of the Almighty. Hence Calvinism is not unique in its this-
worldliness as Weber would have us believe. Accordingly its
prevalence in England did not promote capitalist accumulation by
directing the ultimate value to seek success in an ordinary calling,
though it may have done so in other ways. Conversely, the continental
dominance of Catholicism and Lutheranism did not retard capitalist
development in the way that Weber claims but, again, may have done
so by other means.
The other-worldly direction taken by the ultimate value informs
that Calvinism did not subscribe to sola fide and thus Weber's
conception of its dogmatic core. The introduction of works, spiritual
tesiing and infallible assurance are the manifestations of a voluntaristic
doctrine, of man who now transacts with God for his precious pearl.
Gone is Calvin's man who is the depraved and thus inert recipient of
God's free mercy under the hegemony of grace. Gone also is Calvin's
morbid preoccupation with damnation and the temporary faith of the
ineiCectual calling; for throughout the seventeenth century we see the
progressive decline of reprobation as a topic worthy of theological
speculation and elaboration. This recession culminates in Baxter
where hellfire is treated as the extraordinary exception for mankind
rather than the rule. Now there is only an effectual calling, perdition
declining in rough proportion to the wane of Calvin's predestination.
The negation of Calvin's pessimism proceeds first in pastoral
circumstances under the wardship of Perkins and Ames. Their
contribution is ultimately given credal sanction by Dort and
Westminster while Baxter though more prone to voluntarism
perpetuates the covenanting tradition. Both dogma and pastoral
advice are domiciled by this framework, especially its salvation by
works. By contrast Weber visualizes routinization as specific to
pastoral experience, dogma retaining the double decree in its
charismatic form. For him, pastoral counsel is reactive rather than
proactive. Weber afErms that the pastoral world digresses from
dogma in its introduction of works which carry the promise of
salvation denied by credal authority. A disenchanted ultimate value
then makes the promise fast through success in the workday world
despite the moral disrepute assigned to these activities. None of this is

salvageable.
Weber's account of Calvinist uniqueness and his claim for
its routinization now rejected, we can likewise dismiss his two
contradications: the twin pillars of the thesis. Hence in seventeenth-
century Calvinism there is no crisis of proof, no irrationally textured
psychological sanction, no unintendedness and above all-no
holy approval and blessing for the successful pursuit of a worldly
calling. Works in the pastoral literature, like dogma, call for the
ultimate value to apply itself to other-worldly labour, not the
wholesale immersion in business affairs. Recrimination of the profit
motive arises precisely because authentic works are debased rather
than glorified by its preoccupation. As Weber presents it to us
therefore, the Protestant ethic makes no recognizable contribution to
the capitalist spirit and its structural sequel. Inferentially, we can
likewise reject his deliberations on the rationalization of the western
world: the wellspring of formal rationality does not reside in the
irrational strivings of the Puritan.
Even more generally, preserving the role of ideas in history should
no longer rely on Weber's contrived point of contact between a
Puritan and a capitalist ethic. If the resolute advance of material
interests is to be checked, this is no longer the way to do it. For in
stripping Calvin's predestinarianism from the centre of Reformed
thought, covenant theology liberates the ultimate value from its thrall
of despondency and despair. No less than men of all ages, the
Calvinist creates his own deity, endowing him with a face of kindness
and mercy that bears scant resemblance to the remote and pitiless god
of Calvin.
Department of Sociology
Scarborough College
University of Toronto
NOTES
*Here, I must extend indebtedness to my Sociology, vol. XXIX, no. 1, March, 1978,
colleagues but above all my friend Shelly p. 79; N. M. Hansen, 'Sources of Eco-
Ungar, whose trenchant criticism through- nomic Rationality' in Green, Thc Wcber
out, made a profound contribution to the Thesis Controrcrsy, Toronto, Heath, 1973,
final outcome. Obligation is also tendered pp. 139-40.
to Joan Barnes who typed several drafts 2. J. Baechler, Thc Origins of Capi-
of this effort which given the subject talism, Oxford: Blackwell, 1975, p. 27;
matter was no easy task. G. Marshall, PrcsbytEs &f Profis, Oxford:
1. J. Freund, Thc Sociology of Max Clarendon, 1980, p. 5.
Wcber, Nemr York, Pantheon, 1968, 3. M. Weber, Thc Protestant Ethic and
p. 203; M. Fulbrook, 'Max Weber's the Spirit of Capitalism, New York, Scrib-
Interpretive Sociology', British Journal of ner, 1958, pp. 277-8.
4. M. Weber, Economy and Society,
34. Weber, op. cit.,Univ

Berkeley, 167, p. 281.
1978, 35. G. Mueller, 'Rationality
pp. 479, in the
M. Work of Max Weber', European
Weber, Gene Journal of
York, Sociology,
Collier, vol. XX, 1979, p. 215.
5. In due36. J. J. R. Thomas,
cours 'Weber and
more fully disc
Direct Democracy', British Journal of Soci-
6. ology,
232. vol. XXXV, no. 2, June,
Weber,
p. 1984,
op.
7. G. Marshall,
of 37. Weber, op. cit., 1961, p. 270;
Capitalism, N
pp. 69, 95. Weber, op. cit., 1958, p. 70.
8. Weber, op cit., 1968, pp. 97, 217, 38. Ibid., pp. 48-52, 71.
229. Ibid., pp. 99, 102, 226. 39. It is described by Weber in this
10. M. Weber, From Max Weber, New way. See, op. cit., 1978, p. 1205.
York, Oxford, 1967, pp. 269-70. 40. J. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian
11 . Weber, op. cit. , 1958, pp. 11 0, Religion, Philadelphia, Westminster Press,
1960.
229.
12. Ibid.,p.228. 41. Here, space does not permit evalu-

13. Ibid.,p.112. ation of the ascetic sects which Weber
also holdspaccountable
14. Weber, op cit., 1978, 573; for capitalism.
Weber,
op. cit., 1958, p. 232. Despite this, he claims that
Accepting forCalvinism
the
moment that the Puritan makes thedid
most powerful
respond contribution,in
the motivation of the
this way, can it plausibly be sectscast
forming 'anas
irrational? Elsewhere attenuation
Weber of the inner
speaks power and of
consistencythe
'elective affinity' whereby of Calvinism'. See, op. cit.,
individual 1958, p. 128.
selects ideas that are consistent with his
material interests. If 42. C. Hill, Puritanism
this is so and inthe Revol-
the
present instance, whichution,is
New plausibly
York, Schocken, 1964,the
p. 216;
case, it is stretching G. Yule, Puritans in Politics
matters to label 1640-1647,
Britain, Sutton
success in a wordly calling an and Courtnay Press,
irrational
response. 1976, p. 30.
15. Weber, op. cit., 1958, p. 229. 43. R. T. Kendall, Calvin and English
16. Ibid., pp. 232-3. Calvinism to 1649, Oxford, University
Press, 1979, pp. 52-3.
17. This leads to endless confusion in
Ch. 4 of The Protestant Ethic where Weber 44. W. Perkins, Williams Perkins,
uses 'Calvinism' in connection with both 1558-1602: English Puritanist (His Pioneer
dogma and pastoral work, though each Works on Casuistry), (a) 'A Discourse
stands upon dissonant principles. on Conscience'; 'The Whole Treatise of
18. Ibid.,p.89. Cases of Conscience', The Hague, Nieuw-
19. Weber, op. cit.,koop,1978,
duction.
1966. See, p. 10 p. 1200.
of Merrill's intro-
20. Weber, op. cit., 1958, p. 259.
21. lbid., p. 157. 45. Meanwhile, Weber insists that
Puritans
22. Weber, op. cit., 1978, pp. held unreserved
1198- contempt for
Scholasticism and Aristotle. See, op. cit.,
1 20 .
23. Web r, op. cit., 1958, p. 1 3. 1958, p. 160. While Calvin held these
24. Ibid., p . 84, 160, 215. views, Calvinist came to terms with these
25. Ibid.,pp. 115-16. old enemies.
26. Ibid.,p.211. 46. B. Hall, 'Calvin Against The

27. Ibid., pp. 80, 121. Calvinists' in Duffield, John Calvin,
28. Ibid.,pp. 115-16. London, Sutton Courtenay, 1966,
29. Ibid., p. 80. pp. 28-9.
30. Ibid., p. 162. 47. W. Ames, The Marrow of Theology,

31. Ibid.,p. 158. Boston, Pilgrim, 1968. See, p. 1 of Eus-
32. Ibid., p. 69. don's Introduction.
33. Ibid., pp. 125-6. 48. The Westminster Confession of Faith,

Greenwood, S. C., Attica Press, 1981.
49. R. Baxter, A Christian Directory, W. K. Stoever, A Faire and Easie Way to

London, Robert White, 1678. Heavan: Cosenant Thcology and Antinomianism
50. H. Jedin, A History of the Council of in Early Massachusetts Connectzcut, Wesleyan,
Trent, vol. II, Edinburgh, Thomas Nel- 1978, p. 34.
son, 1961, p. 251. 67. Yule, op. cit., 1976, p. 43.
51. Calvin, op. cit., 1960, pp. 428-31. 68. Kendall, op. cit., 1979, p. 43.
52. Ibid., pp. 744 5. 69. Quoted from E. H. Emerson,
53. Ibid., p. 299. English Puritanism from John Hooper to John
54. Ibid., pp. 264, 286, 288-9. Milton, Durham, N. C., Duke University
55. Ibid., p. 745. Press, 1968, p. 47.
56. Ibid., p. 768. 70. Yule, op. cit., 1976, pp. 28-9.
57. Ibid., p. 302. 71. Quoted from Kendall. See, op.
58. Ibid., p. 763. cit., 1979, p. 133.
59. Ibid., pp. 537-42. 72. As Calvin's immediate successor
60. Ibid., p. 278. at Geneva, it does not take long for Beza
61. Ibid., p. 559. to disarm the decretum horrible.
62. Ibid., p. 560. 73. The message is found in Green-
63. Ibid., pp. 746, 749, 759, 765-6, ham's Garden of Spiritual Flowers, which
786-7. went through eleven printings between
64. Ibid., pp. 280, 542-3, 580-1. 1607 and 1638. He takes up a theme
65. Ibid., p. 342. common among Puritan preachers of the
66. Calvin himself was aware of the day. If a man believes he is saved,
fears expressed by the laity, his unex- Greenham asks, are there means by
pectedly ambivalent response to them which this can be known? Yes, he
presaging the changes ultimately wrought. responds before elaborating the necessity
Earlier in life he scorns those who reject of forgiving our enemies, a delight in
predestination because it troubles weaker God's saints, the regular use of the
souls. 'If we ask why God takes pity on means of grace (prayer, searching the
some and leaves others go', he admon- Word, hearing sermons) and the like.
ishes, 'there is no other answer but that Detecting within oneself these signs of
it pleased Him to do so'. See, quoted election is to recognize oneself as a saint.
from F. Wendel, Calvin, The Origins and See, Emerson, op. cit., 1968, pp. 147-8.
Development of His Religious Thought, 74. The end of Calvin's unrivalled
London, Collins, 1963, pp. 271-2. Yet in authority in England can be conveniently
later years he becomes more conciliatory, set in 1619 when the Synod of Dort was
feeling that the harshness and mystery of convened and attended by English dele-
predestination makes it unfit for preach- gates. Weber appears not to realize that
ing for which it should never be included the Anglican Church through the reigns
in children's catechism. See, Eusdon, of Elizabeth and James subscribed to
Introduction in Ames, op. cit., 1968, Calvin's predestinarian determinism.
pp. 25-6. Inheriting Calvin's legacy, Beza See, Emerson, op. cit., 1968, p. 35;
directly addresses the topic in 'A treatise A. Hyma, Renaissance tq Reforrnation,
for comforting such as are troubled about Michigan, Eerdmans, 1951, p. 564;
their Predestination' which was trans- H. Martin, Puritanism in Richard Baxter,
lated and published by Perkins. See, London, SCM, 1954, p. 13; L. Stone, The
Hall, op. cit., 1966, p. 30. The concern of Causes of the English Revolution, 1529-1642,
both Beza and Perkins was no doubt London, Routledge, 1972, p. 119. Weber
precipitated by congregational despair, arrives at the oblique recognition of this
agreed to be a general reaction to the when reporting that the Lambeth Articles
double decree. See, Kendall, op. cit., counselled 'predestination unto eternal
1979, pp. 5, 22; Yule, op. cit., 1976, death.' Still, the reason for raising the
pp. 25, 83. Even among Antinomians issue in the first place is to spuriously
who taught Calvin's sheer grace, its establish state and thus royal aversion
parishioners frequently expressed doubt (in factJames was a devout Calvvinist) for
and foreboding on their calling. See, predestination, symbolized by the Queen's
refusal to 'ratify' them. See, Weber, op. ing on economic development. By arguing
cit., 1958, p. 219. This is a poor choice of to the contrary in each case and abetted by
terms on Weber's part, distorting the his historical error, Weber seals his own
events of the episode in question. The fate. For when he states that the 'com-
Lambeth Articles did not require ratifi- mercial artistocracy' of the period was
cation as such because the Anglican not the primary bearer of capitalism, the
hierarchy already subscribed to Calvin's claim rests on the mistaken assumption
double decree found in them. Granted that predestination did not enjoy official
they possessed consensual as opposed to support. But because this support was
credal authority, but were still none the forthcoming, these monopolistic entre-
less regarded as orthodoxy. See, Kendall, preneurs by Weber reasoning, should be
op.cit., 1979,p. 79. pivotal, not incidental for captialist de-
Weber's failure to note the prominence velopment.
of predestination in the Church of 75. Perkins, op. cit., 1966a, p. 68.
England in the period under review 76. Ibid.,p.S.
holds strategic significance for his larger 77. Ibid.,pp.20-1.
argument. First and foremost this neglect 78. Ibid., p. 68.
compromises Weber's position that 'fiscal 79. Ibid.,p.70.
monopolistic capitalism' thrives in an 80. For more details see, ibid.,
English situation where predestination pp. 70-8.
does not enjoy state support. See, Weber, 81. Ibid.,p.21.
op. cit., 1958, pp. 82, 179. What we do see 82. Ibid., p. 45.
by contrast is the reverse; that this form 83. Kendall, op. cit., 1979, p. 68.
of accumulation flourished under the 84. Ames, op. cit., 1968, p. 152.
guiding hand of James' predestinarian 85. Ibid., p. 157.
state (See, R. Ashton, The Crown and the 86. Ibid., p. 154.
Monfy Market, 1603-1640, Oxford, Claren- 87. Ibid., pp. 171 -74.
don, 1960; C. Hill, Reformation to Industrial 88. Ibid., p. 159.
Revolution, London, Weidenfeld, 1969, 89. Ibid., p. 160. Semi-Pelagianism is
p. 57) precisely when the Weberian con- also evident in Ames when he speaks on
ditions for bourgeois capitalism are the awareness of one's election, 'I ap-
maximized. Royal prerogatives and prehend', he writes, 'because I have been
abuses featured by fiscal monopolistic apprehended'. See, ibid., p. 159.
capitalism then continued unabated 90. Ibid., pp. 232-6.
under Charles (see, R. Ashton, 'Charles 91. Ibid., pp. 152-6.
I and the City' in Fisher, Essays in 92. For an account of Arminian the-
Economis Histoty of Tudor and Stuart ology, see Kendall, op. cit., 1979,
England,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 141 -50. The Arminians, or Remon-
1961, pp. 138-63) who gave his full strants as they were more frequently
support to the doctrinal negation of called, taught a soteriology much akin to
predestination when he made Arminian- Calvinist thought. Their main difference
ism the state church. Then later in the was Arminian preference for the Pelagian
century when Westminster and Baxter end of the continuum on the will. The
fashion their own emasculation of ab- Remonstrants believed that man can
solute predestination, we see the rapid resist grace, lose it when he falls away,
acceleration of bourgeois capitalism. then recapture it with renewed effort. In
Thus fiscal monopolistic capitalism is spite of this, they still retained pre-
compatible with both a predestinarian destination in connection with man's
and non-predestinarian environment. faith and will to believe as preconditions
Moreover bourgeois capitalism also of election.
. . . . .
waxes ln a non-predestlnarlan settlng. 93. Calvin is upheld in the sense that

All of this tells us that doctrines of grace is irresistable, that Christ died only
justification the generosity with which for the elect and so on. See, Kendall, op.
they tender or their tight-fistedness in cit., 1979, p. 150.
withholding salvation have little bear- 94. Though still secondary in a formal
sense, man's will to believe is dog- grace maintaining that we must concen-
matically decreed by Dort. The everyday trate on obedience to the law rather than
consequence of this emphasis on the will depend on righteousness from Christ.
can be seen in the repeated exhortations See, ibid., p. 1 19. Also a preparationist,
of English and New England Puritans to Hooker maintains that repentance and
diligently attend upon the means of humiliation precede regeneration in the
grace; to obey the ordinances of the ordo salutis and that contrition cannot be
church; to cultivate the preparatory states implemented by the reprobate. See, ibid.,
of conviction and humiliation. By this pp. 135-6. As shall be seen, Westminster
adroit circumvention of Calvin's rigour, does not make an explicit statement on
acts of human inspiration can now secure preparation, but none the less does so
grace. See, Stoever, op. cit., 1978, p. 113. implicitly. By contrast, Baxter is an overt
95. Calvin positions repentance after
. .
preparahonlst.
justification in the ordo salutis, revealing 98. Literally, Antionomianism means
his bias for sheer grace. See, Calvin, 'against the law'.
op. cit., 1960, pp. 592-621. Weber mean- 99. See, C. A. Adams Thc Antinomian
while sees penitence 'foreign to the spirit Controrcrsy, New York, Da Capo, 1976;
of ascetic Calvinism . . . not in theory but E. Battis, Saints and Scstarics: Anec Hut-
in practice', its redemptive energies di- chison and thc Antinomian Controrcrsy in
rected at the mundane. See, Weber, Massachusetts Bay Colony, Chapel Hill,
op. cit., 1958, p. 237. Here, Weber is University of North Carolina Press, 1968;
saying that Calvinism includes the call D. D. Hall, Thc Antinomian Controrcrsy,
for repentance but because its application 1636-1638, Middleton Conn., Wesleyan,
bears no result, it attracts little attention. 1968.
The search for proof is then predictably 100. Stoever, op. cit., 1978, p. 10.
routed in a worldly direction. Yet when 101. Ibid.,p.28.
Weber says that penitence can avail no 102. Kendall, op. cit., 1979, pp. 169-
result he is correct only in the case of 70; Stoever, op. cit., 1978, p. 10.
Calvin. Even Perkins and Westminster 103. Kendall, op. cit., 1979, pp. 184-5.
who retain Calvin's sequencing, part 104. Weber, op. cit., 1958, p. 227.
company with him when making re- 105. Westminster, op. cit., 1981, p. 8.
pentance a sign of true saving faith. See, 106. Ibid.,p.7.
Perkins, op. cit., 1966a, p. 21; West- 107. Ibid.,p.8.
minster, op. cit., 1981, p. 24. Baxter 108. Ibid., p. 25.
stands with Ames and Dort in his 109. Ibid., p. 25.
ordering. Here he states: 'It is true . . . 110. Ibid., p. 10.
that if you truly repent you are foregiven'. 111. Ibid.,p.13.
See, Baxter, op. cit., 1678, p. 7. Hill also 112. Ibid.,p.7.
reports that a conspicuous feature of 113. Ibid.,p.19.
seventeenth-century Calvinism was its 114. Ibid., pp. 19, 31.
cultivation of a sense of a sin. See, op. cit., 115. Ibid., pp. 1 9-24. Ordering the
1964, p. 257. stages of regeneration in this way, in
96. Kendall, op. cit., 1979, p. 150. contrast to Ames, Dort and Baxter, cast
97. Other English divines of some repentance as an effect of grace. Still, the
importance, also carry Calvinism away practical consequence for believers is the
from Calvin. For instance, Baynes asserts same who are warned that they cannot
that temporary faith and reprobation both be saved unless they repent. See, ibid.,
given prominence by Calvin and Perkins p. 24.
are delusions from Satan. If you 'wish' 116. This doctrine, common to both
to be saved, Baynes tells us, infallible Calvinism and Catholicism, subverts
assurance can be realized. See, ibid., Calvin's ideal of an all powerful and
p. 96. Sibbes never speaks of temporary perfect god. Here, when operating
faith. See, ibid., p. 107. Preston is a through fallen and helpless man, God
'preparationist' in that he places the ultimately has His works corrupted by
covenant of works above the covenant of His creation which is reminiscent of the
tail wagging the dog. It can still be the natural faculty of choosing and
argued that God permits this to happen, refusing) . . .'
but this hardly edifies His omniscence in 124. Ibid., p. 1.
Calvin's sense. To preserve his conception 125. Ibid.,p. 6.
of the Almighty therefore, Calvin's god 126. Ibid., p. 9.
must unilaterally distribute grace, ir- 127. Baxter, op. cit., 1931, p. 222.
respective of the merit of those who are 128. Baxter, op. cit., 1678, p. 9.
called. 129. Ibid., pp. 17-18.
1 17. Ibid., p. 25. 130. Baxter lists eight-nine te
118. Ibid.,p.19. originating with Satan along w
119. For instance, elect infants
for neutralizing w
each of them
die before hearing pp. 21-30. the Word are s
while those 'not 131. elect' Ibid., cannot
p. 106. be sa
See, ibid., p. 18. 132. Implicit Ibid., 107. here is t
claims that absolute predestination
133. Ibid.,pp.15,40.
applies to infants who are unable to 134. Ibid., pp. 18, 57, 107, 140.
energize secondary causes. Though their 135. Baxter, op. cit., 1931, p. 118.
fate is irreversibly sealed, this does not 136. Ibid., pp. 117, 139.
apply to adults who understand Scripture 137. Calvin, op. cit., 1960, pp. 5
and then through the will fulfill God's 595, 602-3, 803.
commandments by good works. Notable 138. See, Merrill, Introduction in
here also is the use of 'not elect' as Perkins, op. cit., 1966, p. 11.
opposed to more ominous terminology 139. Baxter, op. cit., 1678, p. 107.
like 'damned' or 'reprobate'. 140. Ibid.,p.140.
120. Ibid., p. 28. 141. Stoever, op. cit., 1978, p. 12.
121. Ibid., p. 28. 142. InMartin,
my review
op. cit., 1954, p. 134. I do
not consult the Savoy 143. Perkins,Declaration,
op. cit., 1966, p. 44. an
Independent synod Weber convened with the
considers fatalism as a potentially
support of Cromwell in 1658.
rational response Although
to predestination. In-
Weber makes use of it, its exclusion stead, the Puritan responds irrationally,
is here justified on grounds that its seizing the apparent opportunity for
soteriology, in all essentials, follows that salvation created by pastoral works. As
of Westminster. See, Martin, op. cit., such, Weber must intellectually conclude
1954, p. 31; Yule, op. cit., pp. 242, 247. the debauched solution of the Libertines
The doctrinal difference between West- to be a rational response, despite the fact
minster and Savoy can be found in that his 'heroic ethic' would find it
ecclesiology, the former advocating thepersonally repugnant.
Presbyterian system of church govern- 144. Weber, op. cit., 1958, pp. 104-5,
ment and the latter standing behind the 230.
Independent model. Neither succeeded 145Ibid.,p.117.
in implementing their ecclesiologies on a 146. Jedin, op. cit., 1961, p. 251.
national scale. Not only did Presbyterians 147. Ibid., p. 251.
and Independents continue to feud on 148. Ibid., p. 252.
this issue, each had to contend with 149. Ibid.,p.308.
the resistance mounted by those who 150. Perkins, op. cit., 1966a, p. 22.
episcopal and prelatical sympathies, to 151. Ibid., p. 68.
say nothing of the sects. 152. Ibid.,p. 68.
122. R. Baxter, The Autobiography of 153. Ames, op. cit.,
Richard Baxter, London, Dent, 1931, 154. Westminster, op
pp. 71-2. 155. Baxter, op. cit., 1678, p. 3.
123. See Baxter, op. cit., 1678, Intro- 156. Weber, op. cit., 1958, pp. 112,
duction, p. 1. See also p. 3 where Baxter 215. The Council of Trent was convened
states: 'I suppose thee to be a man [the to deal with Lutheranism on this point
reader], and therefore that thou hast which maintained that sola ide justifi-
reason and natural free will, (that is cation is identical with the absolute
certainty of salvation. The final decree of with mysticism as Weber generally

the Council condemned the Lutheran argues.
position as heretical. See, Jedin, op cit., 160. Weber, op. cit., 1967, p. 289.
1961, p. 308. 161. Ibid., pp. 290-1.
157. Weber, op. cit., 1958, p. 112. 162. Weber, op. cit., 1978, pp. 541 -44.
158. Ibid., p. 114. Precisely, Lutheran- For related points of view see, ibid.,
ism does not represent the purest type of pp. 522-3, 527, 532-4, 545-8.
the contemplative ideal, Weber reserving 163 Emerson, op. cit., 1968, pp. 35-6.
this designation for Buddhism. See, op. 164. For Weber, Calvinism is unable
cit., 1978, p. 544. to incorporate knowledge of assurance
159. Weber, op. cit., 1967, p. 281. Yet because of the absolute transcendality of
at one point in The Protestant Ethic, Weber its god and the inability to fathom His
mentions that mystical contemplation secret decrees. See, Weber, op. cit., 1978,
and a rational approach to the world are pp. 541-4, 548. God is perceptible to the
not mutually contradictory which is only Puritan 'only' in the sense that he is
so when the religion 'takes on a directly conscious of His inner presence as it
hysterical character'. See, op. cit., 1958, relates to worldly activity. See, Weber,
pp. 229-30. He then proceeds to ignore op. cit., 1958, pp. 113-14.
his own caveat, arguing that Lutheran- 165. Perkins, op. cit., 1966a, pp. 70-3.
ism did not contribute to rational de- 166. Ibid.,pp.46-7.
velopment despite the fact it is without 167. Ames, op. cit., 1968. See, Eusdon,
the hysteria he speaks of. Moreover the Introduction p. 27.
Antinomians, though they stood on pre- 168. Westminster, op. cit., 1981, p. 28.
destined grace, none the less still believed 169. Baxter, op. cit., 1678, pp. 17- 18.
in spiritual union with God. Thus a 170. Ibid., p. 59.
robust form of predestination under Anti- 171. Ibid., pp. 255-61.
nomian tutelage, is not incompatible 172. Ibid.,p.3.

Weber Revisted II

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Weber Revisted II

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Part I: Calvinism and the Infallible Assurance of Grace: The Weber Thesis Reconsidered

Author(s): Malcolm H. MacKinnon

Part I: Calvinism and the infallible assurance

Since first published in 1905, sociologists have sought to deal a

Thc Brigish Journal of Sociology Volumc XXX1X Number 2

commercial success. Derived from biblical precedent, works call for

therefore, his Protestant ethic makes no contribution to capitalist

1. THE WEBER THESIS

Throughout, Weber's most general ambition is to forge a link between

to the ultimate value, its doctrine of justification resting on sola fide, by

promotion of the capitalist spirit which he would have condemned.l8

direction. Yet unlike Lutheranism which is solafide, Catholicism is more

It is ideas and economic action impregnated with the irrational

prevented a premature collapse into a purely utilitarian doctrine of

force of inner-worldly ascetism, irrationality is recast in Economy and

then the pastoral contradiction - like the first evaporates.

II THE ROUTINIZATION OF CALVIN

Generally I trace the development of Calvinist thought in England,

faith, one which attaches assurance to the will to believe. This

1. CALVIN AND THEODICY: THE COVENANT OF WORKS AND THE

I initially establish the scriptural and Christian record on works,

demonstrating the other-worldliness invariably attached to them.

My discussion of works reveals them achieving biblical relevance

While most Christians could agree on these points, discord has

understood as the knowledge and belief in God's potential promise

to balance the covenant of works and grace. The latter is used to

2. PERKINS, AMES AND DORT: THE PENETRATION OF WORKS INTO

The encroachment of works onto the stage of sola fide English

knowledge of good works arising from it as the infallible proof of

. . . the will of God is not to require absolute obedience at our hands

From these assertions we see that Perkin's theology is aimed at

sure to themselves. Such emphasis undoubtedly stems from God's free

Ames's writing. E:xpressed in these terms it is a comfortable doctrine,

3. THE ANTINOMIAN INTERLUDE

Before taking up these concerns, we must at the same time

the seventeenth century clearly demonstrates. One of these, the

embargo on Antinomian (as well as Arminian) 103 attendance,

4. COVENANT THEOLOGY AND WESTMINSTER

Thus Antinomian intentions for the proximate restoration of Calvin's

and angels should be predestined to everlasting life and others

a well established theme in covenant theology, the divines report that

The presumption here is that grace, as a product of the will, is

5. BAXTER AND WESTMINSTER

How does the pastoral Baxter's theology accord with Westminster

membership in the covenanting tradition. Yet while retaining its

conjunction with their diligent prosecution, we must also strive for

This is not the place to fashion a definitive account of why

such, citing them as the inseparable companions of faith which can,

Calvinists were no less sparing than Catholics, but more successful

III THE FICTION OF CALVINIST SINGULARITY

Calvin's routinization described, I now evaluate Weber's claim that

contrast we shall see that there is little to choose among Calvinism,

Everyone that beleeves is the child of God:

Seventeenth-century Calvinists insisted that to strive for the

the powers of will and understanding required to expose God's secret

from Calvin's prohibition on feelings Samuel Ward uttering in

. . . methinks it should be our wisdom to be suspicious of ourselves

Summarizing the comparisons of Calvinism with Catholicism and

works are appropriated from the former and comprehension as the

despite the moral disrepute assigned to these activities. None of this is

34. Weber, op. cit.,Univ

12. Ibid.,p.228. 41. Here, space does not permit evalu-

26. Ibid.,p.211. 46. B. Hall, 'Calvin Against The

30. Ibid., p. 162. 47. W. Ames, The Marrow of Theology,