Institutes of the Christian Religion (Vol. 2 of 2)
CHAPTER XXIII.01
A Refutation Of The Calumnies Generally, But Unjustly, Urged Against This Doctrine - Reading 01
CHAPTER XXIII.
A REFUTATION OF THE CALUMNIES GENERALLY, BUT UNJUSTLY, URGED AGAINST THIS DOCTRINE.
When the human mind hears these things, its petulance
breaks all restraint, and it discovers as serious and violent
agitation as if alarmed by the sound of a martial trumpet.
Many, indeed, as if they wished to avert odium from God,
admit election in such a way as to deny that any one is reprobated.
But this is puerile and absurd, because election itself
could not exist without being opposed to reprobation. God is
said to separate those whom he adopts to salvation. To say
that others obtain by chance, or acquire by their own efforts,
that which election alone confers on a few, will be worse than
absurd. Whom God passes by, therefore, he reprobates, and
from no other cause than his determination to exclude them
from the inheritance which he predestines for his children.
And the petulance of men is intolerable, if it refuses to be restrained
by the word of God, which treats of his incomprehensible
counsel, adored by angels themselves. But now we have
heard that hardening proceeds from the Divine power and will,
as much as mercy. Unlike the persons I have mentioned,
Paul never strives to excuse God by false allegations; he only
declares that it is unlawful for a thing formed to quarrel with
its maker. [500] [501] [502]
II. These things will amply suffice for persons of piety and
modesty, who remember that they are men. But as these virulent
adversaries are not content with one species of opposition,
we will reply to them all as occasion shall require. Foolish
mortals enter into many contentions with God, as though they
could arraign him to plead to their accusations. In the first
place they inquire, by what right the Lord is angry with his
creatures who had not provoked him by any previous offence;
for that to devote to destruction whom he pleases, is more
like the caprice of a tyrant than the lawful sentence of a judge;
that men have reason, therefore, to expostulate with God, if
they are predestinated to eternal death without any demerit
of their own, merely by his sovereign will. If such thoughts
ever enter the minds of pious men, they will be sufficiently
enabled to break their violence by this one consideration, how
exceedingly presumptuous it is only to inquire into the causes
of the Divine will; which is in fact, and is justly entitled to
be, the cause of every thing that exists. For if it has any
cause, then there must be something antecedent, on which it
depends; which it is impious to suppose. For the will of God
is the highest rule of justice; so that what he wills must be
considered just, for this very reason, because he wills it.
When it is inquired, therefore, why the Lord did so, the answer
must be, Because he would. But if you go further, and
ask why he so determined, you are in search of something
greater and higher than the will of God, which can never be
found. Let human temerity, therefore, desist from seeking
that which is not, lest it should fail of finding that which is.
This will be a sufficient restraint to any one disposed to reason
with reverence concerning the secrets of his God. Against
the audaciousness of the impious, who are not afraid openly to
rail against God, the Lord will sufficiently defend himself by
his own justice, without any vindication by us, when, depriving
their consciences of every subterfuge, he shall convict them
and bind them with a sense of their guilt. Yet we espouse
not the notion of the Romish theologians concerning the absolute
and arbitrary power of God, which, on account of its
profaneness, deserves our detestation. We represent not God
as lawless, who is a law to himself; because, as Plato says,
laws are necessary to men, who are the subjects of evil desires;
but the will of God is not only pure from every fault, but the
highest standard of perfection, even the law of all laws. But
we deny that he is liable to be called to any account; we deny
also that we are proper judges, to decide on this cause according
to our own apprehension. Wherefore, if we attempt to
go beyond what is lawful, let us be deterred by the Psalmist,
who tells us, that God will be clear when he is judged by
mortal man. [503]
III. Thus God is able to check his enemies by silence. But that we may not suffer them to deride his holy name with impunity, he supplies us from his word with arms against them. Therefore, if any one attack us with such an inquiry as this, why God has from the beginning predestinated some men to death, who, not yet being brought into existence, could not yet deserve the sentence of death,—we will reply by asking them, in return, what they suppose God owes to man, if he chooses to judge of him from his own nature. As we are all corrupted by sin, we must necessarily be odious to God, and that not from tyrannical cruelty, but in the most equitable estimation of justice. If all whom the Lord predestinates to death are in their natural condition liable to the sentence of death, what injustice do they complain of receiving from him? Let all the sons of Adam come forward; let them all contend and dispute with their Creator, because by his eternal providence they were previously to their birth adjudged to endless misery. What murmur will they be able to raise against this vindication, when God, on the other hand, shall call them to a review of themselves. If they have all been taken from a corrupt mass, it is no wonder that they are subject to condemnation. Let them not, therefore, accuse God of injustice, if his eternal decree has destined them to death, to which they feel themselves, whatever be their desire or aversion, spontaneously led forward by their own nature. Hence appears the perverseness of their disposition to murmur, because they intentionally suppress the cause of condemnation, which they are constrained to acknowledge in themselves, hoping to excuse themselves by charging it upon God. But though I ever so often admit God to be the author of it, which is perfectly correct, yet this does not abolish the guilt impressed upon their consciences, and from time to time recurring to their view.