Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T00:34:49.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Calvin on deification: a reply to Carl Mosser and Jonathan Slater

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2010

Yang-Ho Lee
Yang-Ho Lee*
Affiliation:
College of Theology, Yonsei University, Seoul, 120-749, South [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Calvin scholars have disputed whether Calvin had the concept of deification. Carl Mosser was eager to find deification in Calvin's theology. On the other hand, Jonathan Slater was earnest to deny deification in Calvin's thought. Calvin distinguishes between divine essence and divine kind. According to Calvin, we will be partakers of the divine kind, but not of the divine essence. We will be like God, but we will not be God. For Calvin, righteousness and immortality are called divine righteousness and divine immortality because God is its author. They are gifts from God, not God's own essence. Calvin says that we are God's offspring, but in quality, not in essence, inasmuch as he, indeed, adorned us with divine gifts. On the other hand, although Slater argues that Calvin's position is that believers share in what is Christ's according to his human nature, in accordance with Calvin, all the actions which Christ performed to reconcile God and man refer to the whole person, and are not to be separately restricted to only one nature. In this article, I find that Calvin distinguishes between divine essence and divine kind, in other words, essential and non-essential or central and peripheral.

Type
Research Article
Information
Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 63 , Issue 3 , August 2010 , pp. 272 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Norris, F. W., ‘Deification: Consensual and Cogent’, Scottish Journal of Theology 49/4 (1996), p. 420CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Ibid., p. 422.

3 Mosser, Carl, ‘The Greatest Possible Blessing: Calvin and Deification’, Scottish Journal of Theology 55/1 (2002), p. 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Ibid., p. 36.

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid.

7 Slater, Jonathan, ‘Salvation as Participation in the Humanity of the Mediator in Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion: A Reply to Carl Mosser’, Scottish Journal of Theology 58/1 (2005), p. 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Ibid.

9 Ibid.

10 Ibid.

11 Concordia Triglotta, ed. F. Bente and W. H. t. Dau (St Louis, MO: Concordia, 1921), p. 153, quoted in Weis, James, ‘Calvin versus Osiander on Justification’, Calvin's Opponents, vol. 5 of Gamble, Richard C. (ed.), Articles on Calvin and Calvinism (New York: Garland Publishing, 1992), p. 356Google Scholar.

12 Concordia Triglotta, p. 156, quoted in Weis, ‘Calvin versus Osiander’, pp. 356–7.

13 Cf. Weis, ‘Calvin versus Osiander’, p. 362.

14 Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles (2 vols Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1960), 3.11.8 (hereafter cited as Institutes, followed by book, chapter, and section).

15 Institutes, 3.11.9.

16 Ibid.

17 Ibid., 3.11.5.

18 Ibid.

19 Ibid., 3.11.6.

20 Ibid.

21 Ibid.

22 Ibid.

23 Ibid.

24 Ibid.

25 Ibid., 3.11.1.

26 Ibid., 3.11.12.

27 Ibid., 3.11.11.

28 Cf. Tylenda, Joseph, ‘Christ the Mediator: Calvin versus Stancaro’, Calvin's Opponents, vol. 5 of Gamble, Richard C. (ed.), Articles on Calvin and Calvinism (New York: Garland Publishing, 1992), p. 161Google Scholar.

29 The text is trans. into English, ibid., pp. 167–72.

30 Ibid., p. 168.

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid., p. 169.

33 Ibid.

34 Ibid., pp. 169–70.

35 Ibid., p. 170.

36 CO 9.340. CO = Ioannis Calvini opera quae supersunt omnia, ed. G. Baum, E. Cunitz and E. Reuss (59 vols Brunswick and Berlin: C. A. Schwetschke, 1863–1900). ‘Vere etiam dicitur omnes, quibus ad reconciliandum nobis Deum functus est, actiones ad totam personam spectasse, ut non debeant separatim ad unam tantum naturam restringi.’

37 Tylenda, ‘Christ the Mediator’, pp. 170–1.

38 Calvin, John, The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews and The First and Second Epistles of St Peter, trans. Johnson, William B. (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1963), p. 330Google Scholar.

39 Ibid. CO 55.446. ‘Notemus ergo hunc esse evangelii finem, ut aliquando conformes Deo reddamur: id vero est quasi deificari, ut ita loquamur.’

40 Second Peter, p. 330.

41 Ibid., p. 331.

42 Mosser, ‘Greatest Possible Blessing’, p. 41.

43 Ibid.

44 Ibid., p. 49.

45 Ibid.. p. 54.

46 Ibid., p. 46.

47 Slater, ‘Salvation as Participation’, p. 41.

48 Tylenda, ‘Christ the Mediator’, pp. 170–1.

49 Institutes, 1.15.5.

50 Ibid.

51 Ibid., 2.2.1.

52 Mosser, ‘Greatest Possible Blessing’, p. 41.

53 Ibid., p. 42.

54 Slater, ‘Salvation as Participation’, p. 42.

55 Institutes, 3.11.9.

56 Ibid.

57 Ibid., 1.15.5.

58 Ibid., 3.2.24.

59 Mosser, ‘Greatest Possible Blessing’, pp. 47–8.

60 Ibid., p. 43.

61 Institutes, 1.13.24. Mosser, ‘Greatest Possible Blessing’, p. 43

62 Slater, ‘Salvation as Participation’, pp. 52–3.

63 Ibid., p. 52.

64 Tylenda, Joseph N., ‘Calvin's Understanding of the Communication of Properties’, An Elaboration of the Theology of Calvin, vol. 8 of Gamble, Richard C. (ed.), Articles on Calvin and Calvinism (New York: Garland Publishing, 1992), p. 153Google Scholar.

65 Slater, ‘Salvation as Participation’, p. 49.

66 Institutes, 2.1.6.

67 Slater, ‘Salvation as Participation’, p. 43.

68 Tylenda, ‘Christ the Mediator’, pp. 170–1.

69 Joannis Calvini Opera Selecta ed. Peter Barth, Wilhelm Niesel and Dora Scheuner (5 vols. Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1926–52), 4.191, 26–30. ‘Porro ne suis cavillis decipiat imperitos, fateor hoc tam incomparabili bono nos privari donec Christus noster fiat. Coniunctio igitur illa capitis et membrorum, habitatio Christi in cordibus nostris, mystica denique unio a nobis in summo gradu statuitur:’. The French version translates unio mystica by union sacrée. CO 4.238. ‘Parquoy i'esleve en degré souverain la conionction que nous avons avec nostre chef, la demeure qu'il fait en noz coeurs par foy, l'union sacrée par laquelle nous ioussions de luy:’.

70 Institutes, 3.11.10.

71 Niesel, Wilhelm, The Theology of Calvin, trans. Knight, Harold (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1956), p. 126Google Scholar.

72 Wendel, François, Calvin: The Origins and Development of his Religious Thought, trans. Mairet, Philip (Glasgow: William Collins Sons & Co., 1980), p. 237Google Scholar.

73 Tamburello, Dennis E., Union with Christ: John Calvin and the Mysticism of St. Bernard (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994), p. 105Google Scholar.

74 Institutes 4.17.2.

75 Mosser, ‘Greatest Possible Blessing’, p. 44.

76 Ibid., pp. 44–5.

77 Slater, ‘Salvation as Participation’, p. 55.