Exotic Journeys: A Tourist's Guide to Philosophy
brought to you by Ron Yezzi
Emeritus Professor of Philosophy
Minnesota State University, Mankato
© Copyright 1986, 1993, 2015, 2020 by Ron Yezzi
Exotic Journeys: A Tourist's Guide to Philosophy
brought to you by Ron Yezzi
Emeritus Professor of Philosophy
Minnesota State University, Mankato
© Copyright 1986, 1993, 2015, 2020 by Ron Yezzi
Topics
John Calvin
Some Objections and Possible Replies
ThoughtExcursions
Sources
(Author's Note: The account below, with slight modifications, is taken from Ron Yezzi, Philosophical Problems: God, Free Will, and Determinism (Mankato: G. Bruno & Co., 1993), pp. 96 - 98.)
The roots of determinism are either religious or scientific. Religious determinism, usually termed predestination, is the position that a superior being such as God structured the universe in such a way that human events must occur as they do.
John Calvin (1509 - 1564 C.E.), a leading Protestant theologian of the Reformation, was born and educated in France. He studied theology and law, breaking with Roman Catholicism while still a young man. From 1541 until his death, he acquired and exerted enormous political control in Geneva, Switzerland―establishing a theocracy in which the state was subordinate to the church. Calvin's Geneva was a city of strict religious discipline with every area of life regulated by state activity meant to promote God's laws.
Calvin's most important work, Institutes of the Christian Religion, has been extremely important in Protestant theology. Both Presbyterians and the Reformed churches in Europe drew considerable inspiration from his theological work. Calvin is also credited with wedding religion to business in a way conducive to the development of capitalism. Generally, he encouraged trade and manufacture at the same time that he encouraged thrift, industry, and sobriety as religious virtues.
In the words of the theologian John Calvin , "Predestination we call that eternal decree of God by which he has determined in Himself what is to become of every human individual. For men are not created with the same destiny, but eternal life is foreordained for some and eternal damnation for others."1 Calvin thinks that free will entails a denial of God's omnipotence and, most importantly, that it is contrary to Scripture, which he takes to be the supreme authority for human beings. The crucial passage comes from St. Paul, "He hath chosen us before the foundation of the world, according to the good pleasure of his will, that we should be holy and without blame before Him." (Ephesians, i, 3-4)
Although we are predestined, we are still morally responsible for our actions, particularly if we are damned eternally. Calvin says:
In conformity, therefore, to the clear doctrine of Scripture, we assert that by an eternal and immutable counsel God has once for all determined both whom He would admit to salvation, and whom He would condemn to destruction. We affirm that this counsel, as far as concerns the elect, is founded on His gratuitous mercy, totally irrespective of human merit; but that to those whom He devotes to condemnation, the gate of life is closed by a just and irreprehensible, but incomprehensible, judgment.2
Human beings are so sinful by nature that they deserve eternal damnation; hence, the damned are properly held responsible for their actions and receive their just reward. Furthermore, we cannot question God's justice, "For the will of God is the highest rule of justice, so that what He wills must be considered just for the very reason that He wills it."3 If we cannot understand why God has mercy on some, but not others, this is not surprising,
For it is unreasonable that man should scrutinize with impunity those things which the Lord has determined to be hidden in Himself; it is unreasonable that man should investigate to all eternity that sublimity of wisdom which God, in order to incite our admiration of His glory, would have us adore but not comprehend. Those secrets of His will which were to be revealed to us He tells us in His word [namely, Scripture]; and these were all, as He foresaw, that would concern us or be to our advantage.4
Although Calvin insists upon God's justice and human moral responsibility in the predestining process, not all advocates of this position would agree. For example, Omar Khayyam accepts predestination but attaches no significance to moral responsibility. And most of those who reject predestination find the position incompatible with moral responsibility.
(Note About Objections and Possible Replies: You should look upon the objections and possible replies as opportunities for further thought rather than as definitive statements. Holders of the original position are not likely to be overwhelmed by the objections; and critics of the original position are not likely to be convinced by the possible replies. These objections and possible replies accomplish a proper goal if they push you to think more deeply about an issue, leading you to seek more clarity and justification in drawing your own conclusions.)
Obviously, Calvin's position is refuted if God does not exist or does not predestine and if Scripture is not a supreme authority or is subject to all sorts of different interpretations, particularly with respect, to free will. Aside from these possible objections however, the senselessness of assigning moral responsibility stands out glaringly. According to Calvin, human beings are so sinful by nature that the damned receive their just reward. Yet if they sin because of the nature God gives them, why should they be responsible for any of these sinful acts? The only refuge from this objection is God's incomprehensibility, which then becomes sufficient justification for any religious doctrine―no matter how strange, irrational, or dangerous.
A Possible Reply: Since God is so much greater than human beings, we cannot comprehend God rationally. Consequently, we must rely upon His revealed word in Scripture. As for the charge that God's incomprehensibility justifies strange, irrational, or dangerous religious doctrines, we need respond only by pointing to Scripture as the clear guide to what is correct as religious doctrine.
2.30 How would you evaluate John Calvin's predestination position?
2.31 The quotation, "For the will of God is the highest rule of justice, so that what He wills must be considered just for the very reason that He wills it," raises a long-standing theological problem: Is a good action right because God wills it, or does God will it because it is a good action? Calvin thinks that God's will establishes what is good. A philosopher such as Immanuel Kant however thinks that God must will the categorical imperative because it is good. What do you think?
1. F. W. Strothmann, ed., John Calvin on God and Man (New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., 1956), p. 50.
2. Quoted in Will Durant, The Story of Civilization VI: The Reformation (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1957), p. 464.
3. Strothmann, ed., op. cit., p. 52.
4. Ibid., pp. 48-49.
(Note: The 1986 copyright was initially held by University Press of America, Ron Yezzi, Directing Human Actions: Perspectives on Basic Ethical Issues--but was then transferred to me.)