Institutes of the Christian Religion (Vol. 2 of 2)
XI. That there is this property in the external word, our
Lord has shown in a parable, by calling it “seed.”[1110]
For
as seed, if it fall on a desert and neglected spot of ground, will
die without producing any crop, but if it be cast upon a well
manured and cultivated field, it brings forth its fruit with
an abundant increase,—so the word of God, if it fall upon
some stiff neck, will be as unproductive as seed dropped
upon the sea-shore; but if it light upon a soul cultivated by
the agency of the heavenly Spirit, it will be abundantly
fruitful. Now, if the word be justly compared to seed,—as
we say that from seed, corn grows, increases, and comes to maturity,—why
may we not say that faith derives its commencement,
increase, and perfection, from the word of God? Paul,
in different places, excellently expresses both these things.
For, with a view to recall to the recollection of the Corinthians
with what efficacy God had attended his labours, he glories
in having the ministry of the Spirit, as if there were an
indissoluble connection between his preaching and the power
of the Holy Spirit operating to the illumination of their minds,
and the excitement of their hearts.[1111]
But in another place,
with a view to apprize them how far the power of the word of God
extends, merely as preached by man, he compares ministers to
husbandmen; who, when they have employed their labour and
industry in cultivating the ground, have nothing more that
they can do. But what would ploughing, and sowing, and
watering, avail, unless heavenly goodness caused the seed to
vegetate? Therefore he concludes, “Neither is he that planteth
any thing, neither he that watereth; but God, that giveth
the increase.”[1112]
The apostles, then, in their preaching, exerted
the power of the Spirit, as far as God made use of the
instruments appointed by himself for the exhibition of his
spiritual grace. But we must always keep in view this distinction,
that we may remember how far the power of man extends,
and what is exclusively the work of God.
XII. Now, it is so true that the sacraments are confirmations
of our faith, that sometimes, when the Lord intends to take
away the confidence of those things which had been promised
in the sacraments, he removes the sacraments themselves.
When he deprived Adam of the gift of immortality, he expelled
him from the garden of Eden, saying, “Lest he put
forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and
live for ever.”[1113]
What can be the meaning of this language?
Could the fruit restore to Adam the incorruption from which
he had now fallen? Certainly not. But it was the same as
if the Lord had said, Lest he should cherish a vain confidence,
if he retain the symbol of my promise, let him be deprived of
that which might give him some hope of immortality. For
the same reason, when the apostle exhorts the Ephesians to
“remember that” they “were without Christ, being aliens
from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenant
of promise, having no hope, and without God in the
world,” he states that they were not partakers of circumcision;[1114]
thereby signifying that not having received the
sign of the promise, they were excluded from the promise itself.
To the other objection which they make, that the glory
of God is transferred to creatures to whom so much power is
attributed, and thereby sustains a proportionate diminution, it
is easy to answer, that we place no power in creatures; we
only maintain that God uses such means and instruments as he
sees will be suitable, in order that all things may be subservient
to his glory, as he is the Lord and Ruler of all. Therefore,
as by bread and other aliments he feeds our bodies, as by the
sun he enlightens the world, as by fire he produces warmth,—yet
bread, the sun, and fire, are nothing but instruments by
which he dispenses his blessings to us,—so he nourishes our
faith in a spiritual manner by the sacraments, which are instituted
for the purpose of placing his promises before our eyes
for our contemplation, and of serving us as pledges of them.
And as we ought not to place any confidence in the other
creatures, which, by the liberality and beneficence of God, have
been destined to our uses, and by whose instrumentality he
communicates to us the bounties of his goodness, nor to admire
and celebrate them as the causes of our enjoyments,—so neither
ought our confidence to rest in the sacraments, or the glory of
God to be transferred to them; but, forsaking all other things,
both our faith and confession ought to rise to him, the Author
of the sacraments and of every other blessing.
XIII. The argument which some persons adduce from the
very name of sacrament is destitute of any force;—though
the word sacrament has various significations in authors of the
first authority, yet it has but one which has any agreement or
connection with signs or standards, (signa;) that is, when it
denotes the solemn oath taken by a soldier to his commander
when he enters on a military life. For as by the military oath
new soldiers bind themselves to their commander, and assume
the military profession, so by our signs we profess Christ to
be our Leader, and declare that we fight under his banners.
They add similitudes for the further elucidation of their opinion.
As the dress of the Romans, who wore gowns, distinguished
them from the Greeks, who wore cloaks; as the different
orders among the Romans were distinguished from each
other by their respective badges, the senatorial order from the
equestrian by purple habits and round shoes, and the equestrian
from the plebeian by a ring; as French and English ships
of war are known by flags of different colours, the French flags
being white and the English red; so we have our signs or
badges to distinguish us from unbelievers. But from the observations
already made, it is evident that the ancient fathers,
who gave our signs the name of sacraments, were not at all
guided by the previous use of this word in Latin writers; but
that they gave it a new sense for their own convenience,
simply denoting sacred signs. And if we wish to carry our
researches any further, it may be found that they transferred
this name to the signification now given, on the same principle
of analogy which induced them to transfer the word faith to
the sense in which it is now used. For as faith properly signifies
truth in the fulfilment of promises, yet they have applied
it to the assurance or certain persuasion which a person has of
the truth itself; so, as a sacrament is an oath by which a soldier
binds himself to his leader, they have applied it to the sign
by which the leader receives soldiers into his army. For by
the sacraments the Lord promises that he will be our God, and
that we shall be his people. But we pass over such subtleties,
as I think I have proved by sufficient arguments that the
ancients had no other view, in their application of the word
sacrament, than to signify that the ceremonies to which they
applied it were signs of holy and spiritual things. We admit
the comparison deduced from external badges, but we cannot
bear that the last and least use of the sacraments should be
represented as their principal and even sole object. The first
object of them is, to assist our faith towards God; the second,
to testify our confession before men. The similitudes which
have been mentioned are applicable to this secondary design,
but the primary one ought never to be forgotten; for otherwise,
as we have seen, these mysteries would cease to interest us,
unless they were aids of our faith, and appendices of doctrine,
destined to the same use and end.
