Chapter 981 of 981

Commentary on Ezekiel Chapters 1-20 John Calvin (continued)

EZEKIEL

Phoenician rites, he is then said to look towards the north, which was the situation of

Phoenicia witch regard to Jerusalem consequently, he before stood southward, the situation of Egypt with regard to the same place. And when from thence he is bid to turn into the inner court of the Lord's house, to see the Persian rites, this was east, the situation of Persia. With such exactness is the representation of the whole vision conducted.'' He sees ``these three capital superstitions'' portrayed again in Ezekiel

16, when the Egyptians are described as ``great of flesh.'' This phrase Warburton considers to apply to Egypt, because it was ``the grand origin and invention of idolatry.'' The ``mark upon the forehead,'' in Ezekiel 9:4, he treats as an expression of

God's special and particular providence. Jehovah was their Tutelary Deity, and their sin was immeasurably heightened by the theocratic privileges which they preeminently enjoyed. Hence this learned writer is enabled to press into his service Ezekiel

14:13, and Ezekiel 25:8, while he forcibly illustrates both the language and the idea of the Prophet. His view is confirmed by a passage in Diodorus Sieulus, who, in lib.

1 p. 59, edit. Wess., records: ``Round the room in Thebes where the body of King

Osymanduas seemed to be buried, a multitude of chambers were built, which had elegant paintings of all the beasts sacred in Egypt.'' Notices of the worship of the

Persians will be found in Perronius's Itinerary, p. 665, and D'Auquetil's Voyages, tab.

3. n. 3, 4. Hebenstreit has written a dissertation on the rites of Bacchus to illustrate this chapter; and Hyde's Religion of the Ancient Persians, lib. 1 chap. 27 edit. Oxon.,

1760, may be consulted with advantage.

Dissertation Ninth.

THE MAN IN THE LINEN GARMENT.

Ezekiel 9:2

Calvin (Ezekiel 9:2) does not altogether reject the idea that this person prefigured

Messiah. Theodoret's view seems judicious. ``The dress of the seventh person was that of a priest: for he did not belong to those who punished, but to those who redeemed those worthy of preservation.'' In Jerome's day it was thought to represent the Savior, ``who is a priest,'' says he, and quotes Psalm 110:4, very appropriately.

C. D. Michaelis has remarked the customary method of carrying the inkhorn in the

East in the present day. Syl. Com. Theol. Edit. Pott., volume 2, page 75. The fourth verse explains the reason why it was carried. Calvin's allusion to the use of the mark

(Ezekiel 9:3, 4,) is fully explained by Origen, as quoted by Montfaucon in his notes to the Hexapla. The invention which Calvin calls ``puerile'' is recorded by

Jerome, who made good use of Origen, and added other conjectures. Rosenmuller has quoted in full the passages to which Calvin merely alludes. Pradus and Vitringa have also amply illustrated the point.

On Ezekiel 9:9, Calvin translates correctly ``fined with bloods.'' (Ezekiel 9:9,)

Although this is the common reading, it is not without exception., {,}חמסchemes,

has been found instead of {,}דמיםdemim, ``bloods.'' A Jewish critic of some note, R. Sal. Norzi, published a critical commentary in 1742, at Mantua, and states that the reading ``violence'' is found in one accurate and ancient MS., and in one ancient edition. Kimchi attests the same thing; but neither De Rossi nor Kennicott were able to verify the statement. This destruction was to begin at

JOHN CALVIN

the sanctuary, or, as the Septuagint and Theodoret understand it, with the holy ones, ({ἀπο} {τῶν} {ἁγίων} {αὐτοῦ},) meaning the priests, who were the leaders in the desecration of the temple worship. Pradus agrees with Calvin in the reason given for the slaughter of the priests and elders first. (Ezekiel 9:6.) Although the person mentioned in Ezekiel 9:11 is clothed as before, yet the Septuagint omits the word ``linen,'' using simply {ποδὴρη}: Theodotion is satisfied with the Hebrew word Baddein, and Aquila has stola. There is a marginal reading, too, suggested by the Masoretes; but most of the codexes of Kennicott and Be Rossi support the received text, as well as the Soncine and Complutensian editions, and the Babylonian

Talmud. Calvin's translation and interpretation of this chapter is in accordance with the researches of modern critics. Maldonatus may be consulted for the opinions of

Jewish writers on important words and phrases.

Dissertation Tenth.

THE COALS SCATTERED OVER THE CITY.

Ezekiel 10:2

Jerome, explains this scattering of the coals over the city as a symbol of its punishment and cleansing by fire, and quotes Isaiah 10:17, in support of his interpretation; and in accordance with Psalm 120:3, he calls them ``hot burning coals,'' the penalty of ``the false tongue'' --- remedium lingua, atque mendacii, and justifies his idea of purifying by Isaiah 6. S. Jarcin explains as follows: ``Sanctus ine Benedictus dixit Gabrieli, qui petiit a cherubino, ut ine sibi daret prunes quo ini paululum refrigescerent leviusque efticerentur decretum pcena, quoad Judmos sive urbem

Heirosolyroam;'' and refers to the commentary of Abarbenel, fol. 170, col. 4 reed.

Maldonatus supposes the coals to indicate not the cleansing but the destruction of the city; and their collection by the angel at the command of God, and ``from amidst the wheels,'' implies that this burning did not arise by chance and by man's design, but by God's providence and commandment. At Ezekiel 10, we have already referred to OEcolampadius, but as his comments are most spiritual, and very inaccessible to the ordinary student of prophecy, we shall quote a few explanatory passages here.

The sprinkling of the coal, he thinks, to be an image of the burning city,'' quod ex neglecto aut certo male administrando cultu.'' Has real he supposes to represent

celestial tabernacles into which the Great high Priest entered once by his own blood, after procuring eternal redemption.'' In the whole vision he sees ``Christ the head of his body, in which the law and spirit of life is included,'' and ``how the golden consummation of the elect turns its face towards Christ. For the are of the

Church contains all its parts most elegantly (elegantissime).'' He sees Christ in all parts of the Scriptures, as their end, scope, and spirit; and especially the man clothed in linen he says is ``Christ acting in this dispensation on the outside of the eternal tabernacles which he at length entered with his blood.'' The third verse refers to

judgment which Christ as man shall exercise by God's authority.'' The voice of the wings signifies ``horrenda vox mah ingruentis,'' and the motion of the wheels

in administratione concordia.'' To us these comments seem very fanciful, as it is obvious that any writer may put forth similar guesses according to his own private though fallible judgment. The cherubim on the right side Jerome considers as

EZEKIEL

representing those holy and exalted beings who dwell at God's right hand, while evil spirits dwell on his left hand. Michaelis, however, with less display of fancy, takes a simpler new, not dwelling on reproaching punishment, but upon the departure of

God's glory from the temple and city. See Sylog. Corn. Theol., volume 5 page 134;

Eichhorn die Bibl. Proph., part 2, page 456; and Pradus in loc. especially on Ezekiel

10:20.

Dissertation Eleventh.

THE FIVE-AND-TWENTY EVIL COUNSELLORS.

Ezekiel 11:1

IT is very probable, says Pradus, that as there were twenty-four rulers, and as many regions into which Jerusalem was divided, and a chief over them all, so the magistracy of the city is here brought before us. He recognizes the analogy to the twenty-four elders in the Apocalypse. But there seems to be no authority for this division of the city into twenty-four ``regions'' or wards. See on this point Jahn Bibl.

Arch., part 2 volume 2 section 187. The conduct of these evil counselors is well portrayed by Theodoret. Some commentators take this third verse as a question, so do the Arabic and Syriac versions, ``Is it. not near?'' but Calvin's view is the best, and he is supported by good authorities. Jarcin understands the prophetic denunciations to be intended, ``ina mala de quibus prophetic vaticinantur nec in propinqua est poena.'' The death of Pelatiah (in Ezekiel 11:13,) as well as the 12th verse, (Ezekiel 11:12) are omitted in the Roman and Alexandrian codexes; and in the Arabic version of the London and Paris Polyglotts. See Wakon's Proleg. 14:21.

There are some minor variations in the readings of Theodoret, the Complutensian edition, and the Syriac version. From the concluding verses of the chapter, the old commentators understand that the prophets were not bodily transferred to either

Jerusalem or Chaldeea. The whole scene is called an ``ecstasy.'' The Spirit of God acting on that of the Prophet, and enduing him with this celestial eye sight.

Dissertation Twelfth.

{α} THE FALSE PROPHETS.

Ezekiel 13:1

The very existence of such a chapter as this suggests some instructive reflections. It may first remind us of the great moral difference between the position of the Jew and our own. The existence of prophets implies the corresponding possession of miraculous witness. A new prophet was a new herald of a fresh truth; and before he could claim attention he was called upon to show his new credentials. The false prophets had in reality no such proofs that they were sent, of God, and yet by speaking smooth things they succeeded in deluding the people. If surprised at the possibility of such complete success, we may be reminded of similar instances in the practice of medicine in our own day among the uneducated. How blindly they rush to any clever impostor who settles among them with no better credentials than his ready skin and his audacious pretensions. The more unenlightened men are the more they catch at any prophet who asserts roundly and audaciously his mission from God. Now the Jew was called upon not to inquire first into the doctrine taught, but into ``the sign'' worked by the teacher --- his first inquiry was to be not what God

JOHN CALVIN

had revealed, but whom he has commissioned to teach it. Our position is rather the reverse. St. Paul assures us, that if an angel from heaven were to teach any other gospel than that taught by him we are to reject it. We, then, the readers of the Old

Testament prophecies, are not to find in them a revelation of the Gospel, but, pointing to the coming Author of the Gospel. ``Search the Scriptures,'' but for what? ``they testify of Me.'' Types are fulfilled in the great Antitype --- shadows become substance, and dimness splendor. This chapter of Ezekiel makes the teacher and his authority the subject of questioning, not the matter of his instructions. His coming in his own name is his first and all absorbing sin. However smooth his after communications, this is the great test of his unholy imposture. The Reformers, in the earnestness of their zeal, often append such chapters as these directly to themselves and their enemies. This led them to deal forth the wrath of God with too indiscriminating a name, and has given rise to the assertion that their system was a compound of ``Moses and the Inquisition.'' 639 CEcolampadius, for instance, designates the false teachers of his day, ``pinlauti, indocti, stulti, somniatores, caeci, vuloes dolosae, rapaces, in desertis et it neglectis locis agentes, timidi, et canes muti.'' 640 Whenever there is a strict parallel between true and false teachers in our own times, such language may be justifiable, but where the right of private judgment is so largely exercised by ourselves, it is but consistent to allow others an equally extensive sphere for its operation. Contending earnestly for the faith and the truth is possible, without the accumulation of strong epithets on the heads of others.

{Β} ON THE PRINCIPLE OF ACCOMMODATION.

Ezekiel 13

Our Commentator, in various passages throughout this Prophet, finds it necessary to introduce the principle of accommodation. And as this necessity has been so largely insisted on by succeeding interpreters, we may well attempt to discover the true method of applying so elastic a principle. For instance, in this thirteenth chapter, on Ezekiel 13:9, he says --- ``Ezekiel here accommodates his language to the common usage of mankind,'' attemperat sermonera; and also, ``pro modulo et ruditate roentis nostrae;'' on Ezekiel 13:16, he asserts that false prophets are so called

not implying any want of propriety in using the name; but showing that the name only is intended, and that the reality is not asserted. The formidable list. of German writers on this important point, collected by Wegscheider in his Institutiones Theologicae, page 99, Hal. 1826, shows it to be worthy of our attentive notice; for when once we permit ourselves to resolve everything into ``dictio gnomica et parabolica,'' we may refine away the force and meaning of the prophecies altogether. While we confine ourselves to the topic immediately before us, a few general suggestions may be here thrown out. 1. In judging of the correctness of

Calvin's language, we should remember the peculiar intellectual tendencies of the

Reformers, in consequence of their religious antagonism to the prevailing doctrines of their day. They saw all around them the grosset superstitions; they lived among a people who believed in a real and permanent moral efficacy, proceeding from sa-

639See Spectator: January 19, 1850. Review of T. H. Dyer's "Life of John Calvin." 640See Com. in Ezekiel 13:5.

EZEKIEL

cred rites and ceremonies. They naturally supposed an analogy to exist between the false teachers of Rome then rampant, and of Israel once beloved. The majority of the divines of the day were in all their habits of thought and reasoning --- realists; that is, they treated abstract religious ideas as if they were undoubted realities. ``Grace,'' for instance, must be something infused, and must be received only through one holy rite, and communicated fresh and fresh, in union with the elements of another.

The schoolmen, who taught that our nature was actually stained and polluted by the propagation of original infection, held also that the laver of regeneration actually washed away this original depravity: if, in after life, fresh pollution was incurred, then through penance and the eucharist, fresh grace was transfused by actual and corporal union with the real body and blood of Christ. The language of Dr. M'Hale in the present day states the peculiarity of a sacrament to be, that it impresses an indelible character. 641 Chateaubriand speaks of those ``who receive their God'' at the altar, ``while each incorporates with his own flesh and blood the flesh and blood of his God.'' 642

This is Realism run to seed' and against all this the Nominalist contended, not by denying the spiritual realities, but by looking for them in the right places. In the fourteenth century the University of Paris was famous for its learning, its resources, and influence over the mind of Europe. The majority in power and rank were Realists.

At length William Occam, an English friar, assailed their philosophy, and damaged their religious influence. Himself a disciple of the great Scotus Erigena, he gathered around him a band of devoted adherents, and became in philosophy what Luther and Calvin afterwards were in religion. He succeeded sufficiently to attract the notice of the reigning pope, John 22nd. who was sharp-sighted enough to see that if

Nominalism spread Romanism must perish. Hence by his command in 1339, the

University of Paris publicly condemned and denounced the philosophy of Occam. 643 As usual, when the man is denounced, the principles take root and flourish. In another age, Luther and Melancthon own him as their master and their guide. The former calls him ``Carus maister meus;'' the latter ``Deliciae quondam nostrae.'' 644

The next century finds the disputes at Paris as fierce as ever. The famous Gerson and his persevering disciples caused their enemies to respect their mental sway, till

Rome again interfered. In 1743, the Bishop of Avrancis felt the philosophy of the schools, on which the false doctrines of Rome were built: in danger, and then he persuaded Louis 11th, the ruling monarch of France, to order their writings to be seized and their persons imprisoned. But as time passed on, the king relented, for about eight years afterwards he revoked his edict, and restored the party to their former philosophical position. The Reformers lived amidst this perversion of ideas on religious subjects, and their writings show them to be unconsciously tinged with the sentiments of the Realists. The schoolmen, for instance, still argued for a corporeal propagation of what was termed fomes or concupiscentia, calling it a qualitas

641The Evidences and Doctrines of the Catholic Church, page 402. 642Genie du Christianisme. 643Boulay Hist. Acad. Par., volume 4 page 257; and volume 5 page 708. 644See Admon. Ad Eccl. ap. Coelest., page 261; et Orat. pro M. Luth. Opera, volume 2 page 58.

JOHN CALVIN

corporis, derived either from contagione pomi, or afflatu serpentis 645 While the

Lutherans took one step in the right direction, the Zuinglians added another: and the influence of the prevailing opinions of their day is very perceptible in the tone in which the Reformers comment on the prophets. Calvin, for instance, is remarkable for his sound common-sense view of difficulties: if an apparent inconsistency occurs, he is ready at once with his phrases, forma loquendi, per concessionem, ironice, {καταχρηστικῶς}, improprie, all implying his own riglit to use his private, judgment in solving a difficulty according to his pleasure. He often finds it necessary to exercise it. In Ezekiel 20:28, he ventures to suppose a phrase used in a sense directly contrary to its obvious meaning; and in verses 5-8, (Ezekiel 20:5-8,) he treats the Prophet's words as ``translatiae locutiones.'' His desire to identify the prophetic teaching with the law of Moses on the one side, and with the precepts of the gospel on the other, leads him to invent these varying schemes for avoiding the literal meaning. The inexperienced student will learn wisdom by allowing the Law, the Prophets, and the Apostles, to speak their own separate language, and gradually to develop the designs and the character of God without either confusion or distortion. Still, the use of the word improprie must not mislead us; it does not signify ``improperly'' in the ordinary sense, but is used as in and proprie in Latin. It implies that a phrase does not bear the meaning which it seems to have it denies the Realist's view of a question, and asserts that of the Nominalist. For instance, righteousness infused is the doctrine of one school; righteousneiss imputed that of the other the text of the fifty-fifth lecture speaks the language of the former; the comment of Calvin that of the latter. The Reformers have taught us to look for spiritual realities where only they can be found, and to deny their necessary connection with outward observances and tangible elements, whether under the temple rites, or the prophetic visions, or the apostolic ordinances.

{γ} ON THE PHRASE ``PROSTITUERUNT DEUM.''

Ezekiel 13:19

The remarks of the last article apply directly to Calvin's language respecting the

Almighty he says about the wicked ``defile his glory,'' ``corrupt his justice,'' and

even God himself,'' (Ezekiel 13:19,) and then ``drown in the lowest abyss of hell the whole world when disappointed of their gains.'' This is the language of

Realists, who suppose it possible for men thus to treat either the Almighty or their fellow-creatures. The anathemas of the Council of Trent are founded on the same fallacious bases, and the strong language of the vulgar savors of the same innate belief.

The modern reader at once supplies the word ``name'' after the offensive verb ``to prostitute.'' Calvin probably understood it so, but, he did not write it so. His phraseology is largely tinctured with the errors of his times, though he has written enough to be correctly interpreted by himself. When we moderns think on the subject for a moment, we admit that no man can defile God's glory, or corrupt his justice, or devote his fellow-sinner to the lowest abyss: we take any such expressions as simply denoting the views of the speakers or writers about matters immeasurably beyond them.

If we more thoroughly understood the teaching of Locke and the continental Nomi-

645See Apol. Confess. ap. Coelest., page 2, and Scotus, lib. 2. destined. 32.

EZEKIEL

nalists respecting abstract ideas, we should live without any fears of the success of those who unchurch all sects but their own, and who assert the cleansing efficacy of suffering, and the possibility of discovering the whole body of Catholic tradition. With us, for instance, altars are not only prohibited, but impossible. They are now a mere name --- their reality is confined to the one altar, the Cross. It is equally as impossible to prostitute God as to erect an altar. The reader of these Commentaries must have observed that Calvin's idea of God is rather more familiar than infinite he introduces his name into the minutest concerns, and thinks of him not as acting by general and settled laws, but as personally and constantly intervening between the conduct and the destined of men. He naturally transfers the conceptions and instincts of morality and holiness which he finds within himself to the Almighty --- he clothes his idea of an awful Spirit with the attributes of a human conscience he imagines his Deity a divine man, purified, exalted, and unlimitedly endowed. Our acquaintance with the physical sciences leads us to see the Great Supreme acting through the visible universe by fixed and undeviating laws: so we expect that revelation will unfold to us laws of similar harmony, although apparently disturbed by the anomaly of rebellion and the mystery of sin. But Calvin without hesitation supposes ]the to interfere perpetually with the ordinary processes of our animal nature. For instance, in the

14th verse of this chapter, he supposes the Almighty to withdraw from the ordinary bread of this life its usual nourishment by way of punishing the wicked. He is said to break the staff of bread by puffing it up, and depriving it of its power of affording aliment to the body. He repeats this singular comment as the correct explanation of the language of Moses in Deuteronomy 8:3. (Ezekiel 14:14.) It may be perfectly true, that ``unless God breathes into the bread the virtue of nourishment the bread is useless;'' but where is the proof that he withdraws this nourishing power when the bread is tasted by the ungodly? The ignorance of the Reformers of those physical laws by which it pleases the Almighty that the natural universe should be governed, was very injurious to them as commentators on sacred writ' they were constantly in danger of being like men who write on glass with diamonds, and thus obscure light with scratches. And not. only so, when Calvin speaks of ``a secret virtue infused into the bread,'' he adopts the language of the Realists: he assumes the existence of a quality which is philosophically incorrect. A disciple of Locke will be aware that this supposed virtue is only an abstract idea existing in the mind of man and not in the bread, and that it is only an admissible form of speech when it is understood as a general term for the aggregate of those chemical agents and properties which are realities. If God then withdraws this ``infused virtue,'' it is only a form of saying that he withdraws or suspends certain chemical agencies' and who will now confidently assert this to be his method of interfering with the never-ceasing operations of his creation? So in Ezekiel 13:14, the action of Pinnehas, Numbers 25, is said to be infectum aliqto vitio. This again is the language of the Realists, and is erroneous.

His work could not be infected morally either way it must have been his mind or his affections. The language erroneosly transfers moral attributes to the deed instead of to the man.

And here it may appositely be stated, that a correct exposition of the Prophecies

JOHN CALVIN

never requires any violation of either physical or moral truth. Faith in the unity and supremacy of truth is one form of faith in God. The prophecies are rather illustrated than obscured by our increasing knowledge of the material universe. No true success in prophetic interpretations can be attained without a hearty reliance on the unity and majesty of all truth, without a calm confidence that contradictions are only apparent, and if we cannot explain them now, they will become clear hereafter. Reason, in its calmest and clearest vision, can be superseded only by being surpassed; feeling, in its tenderest mood, must still be ennobled by trust; and conscience must witness audibly and reverently to our need of the Spitit's mysterious guidance ``into all truth.''

Throughout the Prophet Ezekiel, Calvin is nobly consistent in pleading for God's justice. There is no instinct more deeply seated in the human soul than this, --- the

Godlike must be just nothing can be permanently opposed to this essential principle. It must sooner or later be vindicated, and bring a certain measure of retribution, which must follow hard upon its transgression. Still many traditional modes of thought concerning the Almighty occur in these Commentaries, which modern information has very largely modified. God's handwriting is now legible in many ways, where of old it was a blank. If his interposition is not now recognized in cherubs, and wheels, and burning flame, we are more conscious of the natural wonders developed in the dewdrop and the flower. Our age believes so many things of which the Reformers were ignorant, and disbelieves so much on which they laid stress, that we are in danger of overlooking the existence of great primeval truths, which constitute the essential religious life in man in all ages unchangeably. Veneration for what we believe God to be must be at the foundation of all diety; and imitation of what we believe God to do must ever be the substance of all duty. 'The first qualification for persuing Ezekiel with advantage is the spiritual purification of self; and in this attainment Calvin materially assists us, by setting before us large conceptions of the

Almighty's character, and mature judgments of his purposes.

Dissertation Thirteenth.

{α} ISRAEL AN ADULTERESS.

Ezekiel 16:1

The allegory which runs through this chapter is by no means an unusual one in the Prophets. The beginning of Ezekiel 16:3 has occasioned some variety of remark.

OEcolampadius takes {,}מכורהmekoreh, meaning ``birth,'' ``origin,'' for {,}מגורה megoreh, meaning ``dwelling;'' as Calvin translates it habitationes. Houbigant derives it from {,}כרהkereh, ``to dig,'' which Newcome prefers: it may come from

sell,'' and thus means ``dealings;'' but this is not so appropriate here. Rosenmuller reviews these derivations, adding as another, viz. formationes; but approves of the sense ``origin,'' effossione, from {,}כורcor, ``to dig.''

This is clearly the best, the Jews having constantly before them the digging out of a rock --- as in Isaiah 51:1. Both Theodoret and Jerome explain Ezekiel 16:3 with precision' the former has --- {ἀραῖς} {γὰρ} {ὁ} {Χανααν} {ὑπεβλήθη} {κὰι}

{δουλείαν} {ὑπὸ} {τοῦ} {προπάτορος} {Νῶε} {κατεδικάσθη}; the latter writes ---

Cham quippe, pater Chanaan, princeps fuit gentis Aegvptiae… radicem Ierusalem

EZEKIEL

terram AEgypti esse dicemus. In Ezekiel 16:4 the salting and swaddling the body is said to represent the Almighty's care of the people when under Egyptian bondage.

The custom of throwing the skirt over the female is alluded to by Theocritus Idyll.

18:19; and a fragment of Euripides preserved by Stobaeus. This cleansing from pollution is explained by the Chaldee paraphrast to mean the deliverance from Egypt.

Those who are curious in the various articles of clothing in Ezekiel 16:10 to 14 may consult Schroeder de Vestitu Mul., chapter 14 page 221; Bochart Hieroz., part 1 lib. 3.; Jablonskii Opuscula, t. 1 p 290, etc.; and J. D. Michaelis in Suppl., page

1565. ``The images of men,'' (Ezekiel 16:17,) Jerome interprets of the idols of Bel,

Chemosh, and Ashtoreth, which were made out of the sacred gold and silver of the temple. The passing through the fire, (Ezekiel 16:21,) the Vulgate renders consecrans illos; but Aquila, Synmachus, and Theodotion take the same view as Calvin.

Theodoret interprets the 26th verse of the grossness of the Egyptian idolatry in worshipping the ibis, the cow and the crocodile. The punishment of the Jews (Ezekiel

16:36-43) is figuratively predicted by similar language, which Theodoret clearly illustrates --- {οὐ} {γυναῖκας} {τὰς} {γυναῖκας} {ὀνομάζει} {ἀλλὰ} {τροπικῶς}

{τὰς} {πόλεις} {οὔτω} {καλεῖ} {ἐπαιδὴ} {καὶ} {αὐτὴν} {πόλιν} {οὖσαν} {δίκην}

{γυναικὸς} {εἰς} {τὸ} {δικαστήριον} {εἰσάγει} The comment of OEcolampadius on Ezekiel 16:20 and Ezekiel 16: 23 is copious and instructive.

{β} CAPTIVE ISRAEL AND PAPAL ROME.

Ezekiel 16:20

In commenting on this verse, Calvin draws a striking comparison between the Jews of Ezekiel's day and the Romanists of his own. And as the controversy with Rome is at present a subject of absorbing interest, it is very important to ascertain the exact views of the Reformers as to that giant apostacy. The parallel between them seems to our Reformer most complete. He allows both to be true Churches, while he condemns them as breakers of God's covenant. Both Israel and the Papacy are still said to be under covenant with God; so, had ``our baptism requires no renewal''

(Ezekiel 16:20,) yet still the devil reigns in the Papacy without quite extinguishing

God's grace. The Church is there amidst all its corruptions; otherwise Antichrist could not sit in God's temple. The papal priests are said to imitate the Jewish in all things, even to the material of which the surplice is made. The priests of Rome are called

--- the language of the Realists; which is erroneous, bee,, use it admits too much. It asserts that they offer sacrifice: the Protestant denies the fact, and disallows the term. In the controversy with Rome, we should be more careful than even Calvin in the terms we employ. To allow the analogy here pointed out, is to allow too much. While we assert, that the pretense to sacrificial functions is a gross imposture, we must at the same time refuse their claim to be acknowledged as priests. We must instantly erect the standard of nominalism, showing that there is but one high Priest, but one sacrifice, and one altar in the religion of Christ. This is real --- all the rest mere accommodation. On this ground, too, Calvin's view of the covenant actually remaining among them, and of their being such a temple that

Antichrist can be seated therein, is very questionable. It is necessary that the reader should see the consequences of allowing too much to the advocates of the papacy:

JOHN CALVIN

there are many reasons, on which we cannot enter here, for believing that St. Paul did not refer in any way to Papal Rome by the phrase, ``the temple of God`` and if this be conceded, then Calvin's argument concerning Antichrist falls to the ground.

It is very important to be aware of the tinge which the theological language of the sixteenth century gave to all the writings of that stirring age.

{γ} ON THE WORD ``NEPHESH,'' SOUL.

Ezekiel 16:27

Calvin expresses himself rather hastily when he says (Ezekiel 16:27,) this word

means ``lust,'' or desire, ``appetite.'' It occurs eighteen times in these twenty chapters of Ezekiel; and in every case except this, when our version reads ``will,'' it is properly translated ``soul,'' or ``person.'' As the word is in itself exceedingly important, and occurs some hundred times throughout the Old Testament, it is desirable to ascertain how far it admits of so many various meanings.

We thought to lay it down as a general rule, that the usual sense of a word is not to be departed from without extreme necessity; and there seems none here for deviating from the ordinary meaning. Both Castell and Shindler, in their Lexx., give all the various uses of the word at full length; and both Gesenius and Lee fall into the error of stating too great a variety of meanings without giving the reasons for such discordant senses. Its original meaning is ``breath;'' and as ``life'' was supposed to reside in the breath, hence it expresses anything that has life, any living energy or mental activity, so that ``the soul'' is said to hunger and thirst, to fast and become cold. (See Proverbs, Psalms, and Job.) Schroeder de Vestitu Mulierum, and

Gesenius, both give the sense of ``fragrance'' on Isaiah 3:20. The Rabbis distinguish three kinds of nepish in man, the vegetative, the brutal, and the intellectual. This description is philosophically correct, since it is now ascertained that ``the life'' of man strictly partakes of the elements of vegetable and animal vitality, together with the intellectual power and the moral sentiments, usually termed, ''soul'' in modern divinity. Connecting this word with {,}לבleb, ``heart,'' we observe that Gesenius agrees with Calvin on Ezekiel 16:30, that it signifies ``the seat of intelligence.'' The

Hebrews supposed that the human heart ``was actually the seat of the affections;'' these are now known to 'act through the brain, and hence the old phraseology of

the heart to God'' should be allowed to become obsolete. There is no proof that the word nephesh implied this immortal principle in man; the hunting souls, and slaying them, as in the thirteenth chapter, refer to the destruction of life. In the time of the translators, and in the distant counties of England at this day, the word

is used where more refined speakers use the word ``person.'' For instance, in Ezekiel 18, ``the soul that sinneth it shall die,'' may be reduced to modern English by saying, ``the person who sins shall die himself.'' It is by no means necessary, in

Ezekiel 16:27, to deviate, with Calvin and our translators, from the ordinary sense; it is readily rendered, ``and delivered thee up to the persons who hate thee, viz., the daughters,'' etc. Thus two English words only are required as the correct equivalent for nephesh throughout Ezekiel --- a point on which we thought to insist, as giving certainty and definiteness to any version of the Prophet's language.

{δ} THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH AND THE NEW TESTAMENT.

EZEKIEL

Ezekiel 16:61

It is worthy of notice, that in Calvin's time, as in our own, appeals were frequently made to the teaching of ``the primitive Church.'' The Reformers were especially anxious to ascertain what the primitive Church really taught, and to compare it with Holy

Scripture they did not repose implicitly on its dicta, because they looked upon the phrase as an idea rather than a reality. Here again the necessary collision between realism and nominalism arises. There is no such thing as the primitive Church in the sense in which it was used in Calvin's day, and has been revived in our own. The words stand for an abstract idea, comprehending many single churches, and stating what is held to be common to all. For instance, the Church at Antioch was in reality the primitive Gentile Church; its doctrines, discipline, and worship, were realities, and, could they be ascertained accurately, would present to our minds a destined and definite object; but any representation of doctrines and ceremonies said to be common to many Churches, and thus spoken of as appertaining to the primitive

Church, is a mental deduction after the process of selection and assortment has been carried on. We have to guard against the erroneous view of the Realist, lest we should look to the primitive Church ``to reveal what is to be believed, rather than to teach what has been revealed.'' See an admirable letter of the Archbishop of Canterbury to Rev. W. Maskell.

Although Calvin's language throughout this chapter is precise and correct, yet he inadvertently falls now and then into that of the earliest. On Ezekiel 16:29 he uses the phrase ``guttam pietatis in animis`` --- the erroneous language of his Romanist adversaries. Piety, he knew well enough, was not a thing infused into man --- righteousness infused is the doctrine of realism --- righteousness imputed is nominalism: the former has of late been revived and systematized by Newman and Ward; while the latter has the inspired sanction of the Pauline Epistles. In his comments on this verse, our Reformer uses the word ``testament'' and ``covenant'' for the same idea. It is better to avoid this partial confusion. The word ``testamentum`` should properly be applied to the record, which informs us of the ``foedus.'' Grotius has expressed the difference accurately: with him ``testamentum`` is equivalent to ``libri feoderis,'' and, as accuracy in theological expressions is most desirable, it is wiser to translate {διαθήκη} in every instance by ``covenant,'' and to confine the word testament most strictly to the written record. This will aid us in keeping before our minds the covenant between the Almighty and his living Church; we shall appreciate our position as children of the New Covenant, and avoid the error of regarding the

Old Testament, with it's laws, and ceremonies, and sacrifices, as binding upon us, who are no longer ``children of the bond woman, but of the free.''

Dissertation Fourteenth.

{α} THE GREAT EAGLE.

Ezekiel 17:3

The allegory of ``The Great Eagle'' is well sustained throughout this chapter. A golden eagle with extended wings was the standard of the king of Persia in the time of Cyrus, (Xenoph. Cyrop., lib. 7 chap. 1,) and it was probably adopted from the

Assyrian empire. The length of its wing is supposed by Grotius to apply to the widely-

JOHN CALVIN

extended empire of Nebuchadnezzar. Kimchi interprets ``the variegated color like a peacock'' of the majesty and dignity of his kingdom; but Michaelis agrees with

Calvin. The interpretation of Lebanon, to which Calvin objects, is adopted by Jerome and Theodoret; but Rosenmuller agrees with our Author. He also takes the word

(Ezekiel 17:4,) exactly in Calvin's sense, quoting Proverbs 31:24,

incolae ejus terrae, utpote maris accolae, mercaturae erant deditissimi.'' See also Dathe's edit. of Glass. Phil. Sac., p. 1184. The sense which Calvin disapproves is adopted by the Septuagint, the Roman Codex, the Arabian version, Theodoret, and the Chaldee paraphrast. The criticism in the note to verse 8 is correct; and the interpretation generally is in accordance with the explanations of Jarcin, Kimchi,

Jerome, Michaelis, Grotius, and other critics ancient and modern. Newcome has noticed some various readings, and others are easily gathered from De Rossi, and the different versions and codexes; but they are not of sufficient interest, to need further detail.

{β} THE LOFTY BRANCH OF THE TALL CEDAR.

Ezekiel 17:22

The interpretation of Ezekiel 17:22 is worthy of remark. Kimchi and Grotius think that Zerubbabel is intended here, but Rosenmuller agrees with Calvin in referring it to Christ. The Chaldee paraphrast and Jarchi apply it to ``King Messiah.'' (See Talm.

Schabba,, fol. 30, and Cholin, fol. 139, b., and R. Abendana ad Michal Jopin.) Calvin's supposition, however, that where the prophets speak of ``this hope of freedom to the elect,'' it should be dated from the rebuilding of the temple, and continued to the end of Christ's kingdom, is incorrect. It causes him, to date this kingdom from the rebuilding of the temple, in forgetfulness of the many disasters which happened to the people between the times of Ezra and of our Lord. The building of the second temple was not an event of any immediate spiritual import to the Jews' it was followed by overwhelming temporal disasters; so that the reign of Messiah did not commence till the Mediator of the New Covenant was revealed, and ``the new kingdom of the heavens'' fully heralded into the world at large.

Dissertation Fifteenth.

THE EATING SOUR GRAPES.

Ezekiel 18:1

THE proverb of the fathers eating sour grapes and the children's teeth being set on edge, requires a few remarks, in consequence of the conjectures of some modern writers on sacred subjects. Andrew Norton, in his elaborate notes on ``The Genuineness of the Gospels,'' 646 has attempted to show a discrepancy between Ezekiel and the Pentateuch. He compares this proverb with the language of Exodus, Exodus 20, where God is said to visit the iniquity of the fathers on the children; he then quotes the Talmud as objecting to Ezekiel's prophecies, as contradictory to the Pentateuch and thus he insinuates that the two passages cannot be reconciled. If this be so, it is further implied that the Divine authority of either Exodus or Ezekiel is doubtful.

But there seems no reason to conclude these two passages to be contradictory. The circumstances under which they were spoken give the tone and meaning to each.

646Vol 2, page 140.

EZEKIEL

Moses enunciates a general law of God's moral government, which we see carried out every day before our eyes. Let the parent of a family, by honest industry and religious conduct acquire for himself the esteem and respect of his fellow-men, then it follows by an established law of God's providence, that his family gain honorable advantages by their parent's reputation. But let a parent by intemperance and dishonesty bring disgrace and poverty on himself, and it is equally a law of providential government that his children will suffer by his misconduct. The wickedness of the father will often fall dreadfully on his unconscious offspring. This is an undeviating, an irreversible law applicable at all times, and daily operating before us in ten thousand instances. But the Jews attempted to excuse their own sins by throwing them on their fathers. The generation which Ezekiel addressed were personally blameworthy; the language of this passage was theirs it is the language of a false excuse --- an attempt to charge the Almighty with unfairness, that they might throw the blame from themselves. No argument, then, can be drawn from its occurrence contrary to the Divine authority of the Pentateuch. Ezekiel records the language and chastises it, thereby upholding the authority of the law, and vindicating rather than destroying the unity of the Divine records. The destruction to be received from the chapter has been well pointed out by the present Archbishop of Canterbury, in his ``Apostolic

Preaching.'' --- Sixth edit., page 69.

A translation of a work: of the Professor of Biblical Criticism at Heidelberg having been published in London, it becomes desirable to notice the result of his critical labors on this chapter of our Prophet. G. L. Bauer, in his ``Theologie des alten

Testaments,'' has the following comment ``The whole book of Ezekiel is an illustration of the Judaic belief, that Jehovah is the King and Governor of his people Israel.

He rewards and punishes them: blesses them with prosperity, and afflicts them with adversity. Ezekiel teaches (in direct opposition to the Mosaic doctrine that God will visit the sins of the fathers. upon the children unto the third and fourth generation), that the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father that moral conduct will ensure to the individual length of days that the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him, and that the soul that shineth he shall die. The eighteenth chapter is the most beautiful and the most useful in the book, but it has reference exclusively to God's conduct towards his own people.'' Here we have the usual mixture of Neologian wisdom and folly.

There is no real contrast between Moses and this Prophet. Moses states a general law of God's moral government of mankind, and Ezekiel protests against an abuse of that doctrine. The Jews of his day wished to throw all the blame on their fathers, and to charge the Almighty with unfairness in punishing' them for the faults of their ancestors. They forgot their own personal share in rebellion against the Most high.

Nor is it the slightest objection that ``it has reference exclusively to God's conduct towards his own people.'' Here the Jews are specially addressed, and the principle is readily applicable to all mankind as soon as it is shown that they are under similar relations to the Almighty as the Jews. The writer who cannot see how easily Moses and Ezekiel are reconciled has but very slight pretensions to occupy a divinity chair; he may make hasty assertions, and give shrewd guesses; but his opinion thought to

JOHN CALVIN

be well weighed before it is reckoned either valuable or trustworthy. Bauer's criticisms on various passages of this Prophet are by no means so objectionable as those on the other Old Testament writers; though he is open to the charge of exercising that ``fertile imagination'' 647 which he brings so irreverently against Ezekiel.

A question of still larger import arises naturally out of their own defense of this eighteenth chapter; namely, what degree of authority have the laws of the Old

Covenant over us, the children of the New? If, on the one hand, the reasonings of Professor Norton, as contained in the notes to his second volume of his ``Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels'' are unsound, the following assertion of a writer, in reply to the Queen's Professor of Modern History at Cambridge is unwise

--- ``One inspired declaration is all that is needed, and whether it be found in the Old

Testament or in the New, is all one to us Christians; it is God's word, and God's word cannot deceive.'' 648 It is clear enough that the Old Testament is God's word --- but is it so to us? Is its authority the same ``to us Christians'' as that of the New? He who would avoid Judaizing must answer in the negative: he who best understands the nature of our New Covenant in Christ Jesus will destined carefully between the authority of the inspired records of the two covenants over the conscience of the disciples of the new kingdom of the heavens. When we speak of Holy Writ collectively, as contrasted with all uninspired compositions, it is emphatically the Word of God; but when we are attempting to define the relation in which each Testament separately stands to ourselves, we must not hastily adopt the mere popular language of the day. By doing so, we are unable to repel the assaults of the worldly wise, and are in danger of lowering the value of the Sacred Oracles in the eyes of the scientific inquirers of our times.

To the scholar who is acquainted with the difficulties which are reviewed by Professor Norton, the following observations will appear elementary; but as there are some simple-minded believers who may be perplexed by the specious arguments of the skeptic, a few remarks may be instructive. First of all, we should not treat the

Old Testament as one book all written at the same time. It should be divided into various portions corresponding to the periods in which each book was written. The

Pentateuch, for instance, should be studied separately from the Prophets; while the interval of nearly 1000 years, between the death of Moses and the visions of Ezekiel, should be constantly borne in mind. The Pentateuch, but not exactly as we have it, was the Word of God for Jews --- its authority as a law to Christians was never admissible. St. Paul's whole life was a protest against this going back again to Moses, instead of going forward to Christ. The ministration of death was exchanged for a dispensation of life while God's moral law remains unchangeable, its authority rests on other grounds to us than the thunders of Sinai and the tables of stone. Thus, again, the prophetic announcements were direct and special for Israel and Judea; but they contain guidance and warning for us only when we are placed in a similar position morally before God. Ezekiel, for instance, is a watchman to us only so far as it can be shown that our sins, needs, and responsibilities are similar to those of the Hebrews.

647See Edit. London. Eng. trans., page 125. 648See a Pamphlet by the Revelation W. B. Hopkins, in reply to Sir James Stephen, LL.D., Professor of Modern History in the University of Cambridge, section 2, page 37.

EZEKIEL

It must be uttered again and again that we are discipled into the New Covenant of which St. Paul was a chief herald unto us Gentiles; and our highest attainment is to stand fast in the liberty wherewith our Redeemer has made us free. Wherever there is a spiritual analogy between our state and that of the captives at Chebar, Ezekiel is for us; his stirring voice is for our reproof and destruction in righteousness; but wherever the difference of condition is so great that this analogy fails, then Ezekiel is only indirectly our monitor from heaven. The light from heaven is reflected directly upon us through Jesus and his Apostles, and only obliquely through Moses and the

Prophets. 649

By the expression of this view of the value of the Old Testament to us, we do but give form and voice to the feelings which exist in the minds of many earnest and thoughtful Christians. They cannot receive all that is in the Old Testament as equally binding on them with what is revealed in the New. Their cannot sympathize with the antagonist of the Queen's Professor of History: they feel that many proposed solutions of acknowledged difficulties are superficial and evasive rather than self-evident and satisfactory. Such obstacles are not necessarily connected with the

Christian verities, they are not essential portions of our religion: we may safely confess ourselves ignorant of the true solution, without endangering a single particle of

faith once delivered to the saints.'' By upholding the Pentateuch as the Word of God to the Jews of former ages, we defend and enforce its inspiration and suitability for its original time and purpose; by treating the prophecies of the era of the

Captivity as spoken originally to the people alive at the time, we vindicate the Divine inspiration of the Prophet, and we prepare our own minds to receive intelligently any indirect destruction which may be applicable to ourselves. The integrity of the Jewish canon is thus acknowledged and preserved, while we are free to inquire how far its sacred books are instructive for all times and all nations. The whole life and ministry of St. Paul taught one invariable truth on this important question, and its significant witness was clear and emphatic to our higher privileges and nobler aims under the

New Covenant in Christ Jesus our Lord.

{β} USURY AND INTEREST.

Ezekiel 18:8

The manner in which this subject is treated illustrates our remarks on the nonapplication of the Jewish law to Christian duties. Calvin is evidently at a loss how to distinguish between lawful and unlawful interest. He does not clearly say that one law was applicable to the Jew and another to us. Usury may be sinful, but not because it was forbidden to Israel of old. The comment on this verse is not based upon principles in accordance with the New Covenant. It may fairly be stated that this eighteenth chapter is not law to us; our duties depend upon another foundation.

The law which is to decide what is ``interest'' and what ``usury,'' must rest upon the golden rule of doing unto others as we would that they should do unto us. If we be formed after the image of Christ, we shall educate conscience, and cultivate justice and mercy, and decide these points by a different standard from that of the

Jewish law; and when Calvin states ``in lege ea est perfectio ad quam nihil possit

649See Augustine De Civit. Dei, lib. 18 chapter 38 page 836. Ed. Paris. 1838.

JOHN CALVIN

accedere,'' he does not state the sense in which he uses 'qege,'' and seems to confine it to the Mosaic precepts. This instance is sufficient to show the true use which we are to make of the Old Testament, and to guard us against a misapplication of its statements.

A singular instance of the fallacy of applying the Old Testament directly to the events of the world in the present day occurs in the State Trials in the reign of James the Second. In the case of the East India Company 5 Sandys, a question arose respecting the right of the King's subjects to trade with nations eastward of the Cape of

Good Hope without the King's license. Holt, afterwards the celebrated Chief-Justice, argued his point with more, zeal than discretion. He gravely cites the doctrine of Lord

Coke, that ``infidels are perpetual enemies;'' and then, in the same breath, quotes the book of Judges, to show by analogy, that as the Jews were restrained from merchandise with the Canaanites, so Christians thought to be restricted in their dealings with Pagans. 650 One instance out of many may suffice to remind us, that the assumption that Christians are in all cases to act according to God's commands to the

Jews, is the bashes of modern Judaism; and the frequency of such reasonings, though supported at times by the writings of some of our venerable Reformers, calls loudly for the voice of another Paul to proclaim, ``Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made you free.''

The imprudent manner in which some commentators have connected the incidents of the Old Testament with the doctrine of the New is readily illustrated by a passage in the first epistle to the Corinthians by Clement of Rome. In quoting the narrative of Rahab receiving the spies before the destruction of Jericho, he adverts to their suggesting the hanging out a scarlet thread from her house, and then adds directly, ``making: it manifest that by the blood of the Lord redemption shall be to all those who believe and trust upon God. You see then, beloved, that there was not only faith, but prophecy in the woman.'' 651 if this method of illustration be considered allegorical, and as only suggestive of a remote comparison, it is tolerable; but if it be intended to imply any typical connection between the accident of the scarlet color and the redemption through Messiah, it is irreverent and inappropriate in the extreme. The learned Wotton defends Clement by the example of his master, Paul, and quotes Justin Martyr, who treats the same event ``as a symbol of the blood of Christ.'' 652 Guided by such illustrious names, the Reformers often adopted the same ``spiritualizing'' system. The sounder and soberer criticism of later days has instructed us not to adopt the imaginations of men as if they were inseparably bound up with the supreme word of God. The following extract is worthy of notice, as illustrating the principles for which we contend: ---

same freedom of thought [as that of Luther] on topics not strictly theological formed a prominent feature in the character of Calvin. A curious instance of it occurs in one of his letters, 653 where he discussed an ethical question of no small moment

650See State Trials, 10, 519, and Lord Campbell's Lives of the Chief-Justices, volume 2 page 126. 651See Wotton's Edit., 1718, Cantab., chapter 12 page 54. 652Dial. cum Tryphone. 653See also his views expressed in his Tracts.

EZEKIEL

in the science of political economy, `How far it is consistent with morality to accept of interest for a pecuniary loan?' On this question, which, even in Protestant countries, continued till a very recent period to divide the opinions both of divines and Lawyers,

Calvin treats the authority of Aristotle and that of the Church with equal disregard.

To the former he opposes a close and logical argument not unworthy of Mr. Bentham: to the latter he replies, by showing that the Mosaic law on this point, was not a moral, but a municipal prohibition --- a prohibition not to be judged of from any particular text of Scripture, but upon the principles of natural equity.'' 654

{γ} PERPLEXING AND THORNY QUESTIONS.

Ezekiel 18:20

In this and the following verses Calvin pronounces rather too dogmatically upon matters which are beyond human comprehension. He strives to reconcile statements apparently contradictory, and in doing so enunciates principles which cannot be positively determined. For instance, the will of an infant, before its birth, is said to be

and rebellious against God,'' Ezekiel 18:20. Although we are reminded

(Ezekiel 18:23) that God's secret counsels are inscrutable to us, yet the assertion is hazarded that he ``has devoted the reprobate to eternal destruction, and wishes them to perish.'' Some effort is made to reconcile the freeness of this will with the certainty of the destruction the knot is said to be ``easily untied;'' but the experience of nearly three centuries has proved that these exciting disputes have not been satisfactorily settled: they are still what they are called in Ezekiel 18:25, ``perplexing and thorny questions,'' and must remain so till the promise is accomplished, that faith shall be exchanged for sight. It does not seem desirable to enter upon these abstruse points when commenting upon a Hebrew Prophet: the revelation to Ezekiel was far different in its subject-matter from that to St. Paul: there is no necessity for supposing either that the evangelical doctrines were fully made known to the

Prophets, or that their language is verbally binding upon us --- the offspring of the far-off Gentiles.

In these ``Dissertations'' we only venture to suggest some general principles of correct interpretation, and to point out some errors into which our Reformer has fallen, partly through the infirmity natural to man, and partly through the philosophical systems and the false divinity current in his times. While he so evidently surpassed his own age in stern and devoted piety, and avoided the fanciful conjectures in which many of the Reformers indulged; Calvin is at times open to the charge of teaching dogmatically questions which have never been decided by Revelation. Let us bear with him on this point, while we profit by his judicious and instructive lectures; remembering that within the fringes of his shadow his modern revilers are not worthy to tread.

Another instance of perplexity occurs in Ezekiel 20:39. The ``Indecision'' refers to the decree of the Emperor Charles V. called ``The Interim.'' Calvin's hatred of it was sincere but injudicious. It was a first step to better things. See Mosheim, cent.

16 sect. 1, and the authorities quoted in Maclaine's note.

Dissertation Sixteenth

654Prof. Dugald Stewart's Preliminary Dissertation to the Encyc. Britt.

JOHN CALVIN

THE SABBATH A SACRAMENT AND A MYSTERY.

Ezekiel 20:13, 14

We have already cautioned the modern reader of Calvin not to be startled at his assertion, that ``the Sabbath is Sacrament.'' We have in these days become so thoroughly imbued with the notion that; there can be but two Sacraments, that we reject at once the possibility of, third. This causes us again to call the reader's attention in detail to the principles expressed in the note to the 20th verse of this chapter.

A number of words occur in theological discussions which are not met with in

Holy Scripture. Among these are the words Sacramentum, Persona, Trinitas, Unitas.

If these were merely translations of equivalent Greek words found in the New Testament, all difficulty would cease; but they are not although they express the ideas of the Apostles correctly, if taken in the sense in which they were originally used. The

Protestant of these later times, if he would understand them aright, should study their use in the Schoolmen, and by the leading writers of the Church of Rome, and then, approach the writings of the Reformers. Lawrence's Bampton Lectures have already been mentioned: besides these, Bishop Davenant's Determinationes of theological questions, when Margaret Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, are a valuable specimen of the subject-matter of theological dispute in the days immediately preceding his own. (See edit. 1634, and also 1639, in Lib. of Queen's Coll., Cam.) The greatest mistakes have been committed by English writers on Theology in consequence of their unconscious subjection to a traditional phraseology. It may fairly be called a slavery to words. They have lost sight of realities, through anxiety for a verbal orthodoxy. This has led them to look for spiritual realities where riley are not to be found. In tracing the cause of this, we find it to arise from our receiving so many of our theological expressions through the Latin Vulgate. And not only are the words, but the ideas, of the Reformers tinctured by their education under the religious philosophy which they rejected. Calvin, for instance, in Ezekiel 20:16, uses the phrase ``guttam pietarts;'' in Ezekiel 20:20, ``guttam fidei;'' and in Ezekiel 20:19,

commentis inficiunt legem ipsius,'' the two former expressions implying that piety and faith are qualities within the soul, measurable by quantity' and the latter, that the fictions of man can in any way affect the purity of the law of God. Instances of this kind are here pointed out, that we may be aware of the principle on which

Calvin's expressions on many interesting points frequently rest. Other words as well as sacramentum are used by Calvin in a sense rather different from their modern meaning. For example, virtus and virtutes, doctrina and religio, occur throughout these Lectures, and sometimes need a circumlocution for their English equivalents.

In Ezekiel 20:29 religio occurs for respect paid to idols, and ``mysterium`` must be taken rather in its classical than its familiar meaning. The Greek {μυστηριόν} was translated ``sacramentum`` in the copies used by Tertullian, Cyprian, and Ambrose.

Tertullian accordingly calls the doctrines of the Trinity and of our Lord's Incarnation

Prudentius uses it for ``the whole Christian doctrine,'' as St. Paul does the word {μυστηρίον} 1 Corinthians 4:1. It is sufficient to point out this difference in the use of terms, that no reader may judge Calvin hastily, but rather be

EZEKIEL

led to discover the error or the unsoundness in himself. Those Reformers who were more strenuous Nominalists than Calvin, did not deny the realities of the faith but they thought for them where they are only to be found: not in rites, and words, and creeds, and ceremonies, but in the inner soul of man; in our moral and spiritual nature; in the character and revelation of God; in the teachings and guidings of the

Holy Spirit; and in the renewed lives and peaceful deaths of all who are new-created in Christ Jesus their Lord.

Index of Scripture References

Genesis

1:6

1:7

1:8

4:9

9:13

13:15

17:8

19:2

19:3

27:34

32:30

Exodus

3:2

3:3

9:24

12:22

12:23

19:4

19:20

20:5

20:18

25:20

28:20

37:9

40:34

40:35

EZEKIEL

Leviticus

5:3

6:12

6:13

7:21

25:13

25:14

25:15

26:26

Numbers

7:89

9:15

11:16

14:18

16:11

Deuteronomy

5:9

5:33

6:4

8:3

14:1

17:3

28:46

28:54

28:55

30:19

32:15

32:21

Judges

2:2

1 Samuel

15:22

2 Samuel

6:2

12:12

16:21

16:22

1 Kings

6:5

JOHN CALVIN

8:10

8:11

8:64

12:20

12:28

13:2

2 Kings

19:15

19:35

23:23

23:36

24:8

24:15

25:4

25:5

2 Chronicles

34:14

35:18

Job

1:6

4:18

22:14

Psalms

3:4

11:4

18:8-15

18:12

22:2

27:5

29:5

29:6

29:9

32:1

32:2

32:3

33:12

36:6

40:8

69:10

EZEKIEL

74:9

74:12

76:9

80:1

80:11

89:36

89:37

89:38

90:1

91:11

91:12

100:3

102:1

103:8

103:19

103:20

103:21

132:14

137:1

137:6

138:8

Isaiah

1:9

1:10

6:1

6:2

6:9

6:10

8:12

8:13

8:16

8:18

9:20

JOHN CALVIN

10:15

11 13

18:1

18:7

28:11

28:13

28:15

29:11

29:15

30:21

31:2

33:22

37:16

37:36

45:9

48:22

55:11

57:3

57:21

60:7

64:3

66:1

Jeremiah

1:2

1:13

1:19

2:10

2:11

2:28

7:2

7:4

7:17

9:1

11:7

11:13

15:2

15:16

15:20

18:18

EZEKIEL

20:2

29:5

29:21

29:24

31:33

32:7

32:8

32:9

35:14

36:25-27

39:4

39:5

39:10

43:2

43:3

43:4

44:15

44:16

44:17-19

Lamentations

4:10

4:20

Ezekiel

1:1

1:1-2

1:2

1:3

1:4

1:5

1:6

1:7

1:8

1:9

1:10

1:11

JOHN CALVIN

1:12

1:13

1:14

1:15

1:16

1:17

1:18

1:19

1:20

1:21

1:22

1:23

1:24

1:25-26

1:27

1:28

2:1-2 2:3

2:3

2:4-5

2:5

2:6

2:7

2:8

2:9-10

3:1-2

3:3

3:4-7

3:8-9

3:10-11

3:12

3:13

3:14

3:15

3:16-17

3:17

3:18

3:19

3:20

3:21

3:22-23

EZEKIEL

3:24

3:25-26

3:27

4:1-3

4:4-8

4:9

4:10-11

4:12-13

4:14-15

4:16

4:16-17

5:1-4

5:5-6

5:7-8

5:9-10

5:11

5:12

5:13

5:14

5:15

5:16

5:17

6:1-3

6:4

6:5

6:6

6:7

6:8

6:9

6:10

6:11

6:12

6:13

6:14

7:1-2

7:3

7:4

7:5

7:6

7:7

7:8

7:9

7:10

JOHN CALVIN

7:11

7:12

7:13

7:14

7:15

7:16

7:17

7:18

7:19

7:20

7:21

7:22

7:23

7:24

7:25

7:26

7:27

8:1

8:2

8:3

8:4

8:5

8:6

8:7-11

8:12

8:13-14

8:15-16

8:17

8:18

9:1

9:2

9:3-4

9:5-6

9:7

9:8

9:9

9:10

9:11

10 10

10:1

10:2

10:3

EZEKIEL

10:4

10:5

10:6-7

10:8

10:9

10:10

10:11-12

10:13

10:14

10:15

10:16

10:17

10:18-19

10:20

10:21

10:22

11:1-2

11:3

11:4

11:5

11:6-7

11:8-11

11:12

11:13

11:14-16

11:17

11:18

11:19-20

11:21

11:22-23

11:24

11:25

12:1-2

12:3

12:4

12:5-6

12:7

12:8-11

12:12

12:13

12:14

JOHN CALVIN

12:15

12:16

12:17-19

12:20

12:21-23

12:24

12:25

12:26-28

13:19

16:3

19 20

20 23

24 24:18

25 25

33 35

Daniel

6:10

7:9

Hosea

2:8

4:10

5:11

Amos

5:18

Micah

6:14

6:16

Habakkuk

1:2

Zephaniah

3:9

Haggai

2:9

Zechariah

12:10

Matthew

3:16

4:4

10:12

10:13

EZEKIEL

10:29

15:14

24:13

24:27

Luke

4:4

6:39

10:5

10:6

12:6

16:15

John

1:5

5:17

12:41

14:10

14:11

15:18

Acts

7:56

14:17

20:28

20:31

Romans

2:12

6:12

7:14

8:9

9:6

9:7

9:20

9:29

11:29

1 Corinthians

1:25

4:20

4:21

7:29

7:30

JOHN CALVIN

7:31

9:16

10:3

10:4

2 Corinthians

2:15

2:16

5:14

6:8

6:11

10:5-7

10:6

12:4

Ephesians

2:10

3:10

Philippians

1:23

2:7

2:12

2:13

3:18

Colossians

1:16

1 Thessalonians

5:4

5:5

1 Timothy

3:16

6:16

2 Timothy

2:19

4:2

Hebrews

2:13

10:7

11:7

James

4:12

EZEKIEL

1 Peter

1:23

3:14

3:15

4:11

2 Peter

1:19

2:7

1 John

2:19

3:9

5:20

Revelation

4:3

Genesis

2:2

4:13

6:3

6:7

7:1

10:19

11:5

12:3

13:10

14:13

15:6

15:13

15:14

16:11

18:18

19:15

19:24

19:25

21:9

21:27

21:32

22:9

22:10

22:17

49:9

Exodus

1:16

1:22

JOHN CALVIN

3:7

3:17

4:2

4:22

5:21

12:37

13:2

13:21

13:22

15:20

16:14

16:15

16:16

17:6

19:6

20:3

20:4

20:5

20:7

20:11

20:25

22:25

22:29

27:20

31:13

31:14

32:6

32:25

34:7

34:19

34:20

35:23

36:19

Leviticus

2:1

3:9

3:13

3:17

18:5

18:19

20:18

EZEKIEL

26:6

Numbers

3:13

8:16

11:9

13:32

13:33

14:1-3

14:18

14:23

14:24

15:15

15:16

20:11

25:1-3

25:7

25:8

32:10

Deuteronomy

4:7

5:7

5:8

5:9

5:11

5:14

8:3

8:15

8:16

11:10

13:3

18:15-18

18:18

18:22

24:6

27:5

27:6

28:37 29:17

29:29

30:12-14

30:15

JOHN CALVIN

30:15

30:19

32:8

32:9

32:11

32:30

32:47

33:10

Joshua

24:2

24:3

Judges

4:4

1 Samuel

15:22

1 Kings

2 Kings

15:29

16:7-9

22:14

23:30-32

24:15-17

2 Chronicles

36:10

Ezra

2:2

Psalms

2:4

14:1

14:2

15:2

15:4

15:5

19:12

24:4

30:5

EZEKIEL

32:2 33

36:6

36:9

37:13

40:3

48:10

51:5

51:12

51:15

68:20

69:27

69:28

73:1 78:26

80:9-12

95:11

102:18

103:8

106:4

106:23

106:30

106:31

110:1

110:4

111:10

114:2 118

120:3

130:6

137:7

137:9

Proverbs

1:7

31:24

Isaiah

2:2

2:3

3:10

3:20

5:12

JOHN CALVIN

6 6:1 6:2

8:16

10:17

10:22

11:1

13:22

29:11

29:14

30:21

45:7

45:9

45:23

51:1

51:2

52:7

53:3

55:8

55:9

58:13

59:20

Jeremiah

2:21

2:30

5:3

15:1

17:21

17:22

18:6

20:7

22:10

22:15

25:12

25:13

27:17

29:10

31:15

31:31-33

31:32

31:33

EZEKIEL

31:33

31:34

34:5

36:30

37:1

39:7 44:22

48:10

52:11

Ezekiel

1:1

1:1-3

1:3

1:10

1:21

3:1

3:12

3:15

4:1

4:1-3

4:1-4

4:4-8

4:5

4:9-12

4:13-17

5:5-17

6:1-15 6:9

7:1-27

7:3-13

8:1

8:1-11

8:1-14

JOHN CALVIN

8:2

8:3

8:12-16

8:13

8:14

8:15

8:17

9:1-11

9:2

9:3

9:4

9:6

9:9

9:11

10:1-22

10:2

10:20

11:1

11:1-25

11:12

11:13

11:19

11:24

12:1

12:1-16

13:1

13:1-3

13:1-23

13:4

13:5 13:5

13:6

13:7

13:8-9

13:9

EZEKIEL

13:9

13:10-11

13:12

13:13

13:14

13:15

13:16

13:17-18

13:19

13:20

13:21

13:22-23

14:1-3

14:1-23

14:3

14:4

14:5

14:6

14:7

14:8

14:9

14:10

14:11

14:12-13

14:13

14:14

14:15-16

14:17-18

14:19-20

14:21-22

14:22

14:23

15:1-5

15:1-8

15:6

15:7-8

JOHN CALVIN

16:1

16:1-14

16:3

16:4

16:4-5

16:6

16:7

16:8

16:9

16:10

16:10-13

16:14

16:15

16:15-34

16:16

16:17

16:18-19

16:20

16:21

16:22

16:23-25

16:26

16:27

16:28

16:29

16:30

16:31

EZEKIEL

16:32

16:33

16:34

16:35-37

16:35-59

16:36-43

16:38

16:39

16:40

16:41

16:42

16:43

16:44-46 16:45

16:47

16:48

16:49

16:50

16:50 16:50

16:51

16:52

16:53

16:54

16:55 16:55

16:56-57

16:58

16:59

16:60

16:60-63

16:61

16:62

16:63

17:1-2

17:1-10

17:2

17:3

17:3-4

17:4

17:5-6

17:7

JOHN CALVIN

17:8

17:9-10

17:11-16

17:11-24

17:17

17:18

17:19

17:20

17:21

17:22

17:23

17:24

18:1

18:1-4

18:1-32

18:5-9

18:8

18:10-13

18:14-17

18:18-19

18:20

18:21-22

18:23

18:24

18:25

18:26-28

18:29

18:30

18:31

18:32

19:1-4

19:1-9

EZEKIEL

19:5

19:6

19:7

19:8

19:9

19:10-12

19:10-14

19:13

19:14

20:1

20:1-32

20:2-3

20:4

20:5

20:5-8

20:9

20:10

20:11

20:12

20:13

20:13-14

20:14

20:15

20:16

20:17

20:18-19

20:19

20:20

20:21-24

20:25

20:26

20:27-28

20:28

20:29

20:30

20:31

20:32-33

20:33-44

JOHN CALVIN

20:34

20:35-36

20:37

20:38

20:39

20:40

20:41

20:42

20:43

20:44

20:45-49

21:1-7

21:8-27

21:9

22:1-22

22:23-31

23:1-49

24:1-14

24:15-27

25:1-7

25:8

25:8-11

25:12-14

25:15-17

28:1-19

28:20-26

29:1-7

29:8-21

29:20

30:1-5

30:6-19

30:20-26

31:1-9

31:10-18

32:1-21

32:22

32:23

32:24

32:25

EZEKIEL

32:26-28

32:29-32

33:1-16

33:17-33

34:1-10

34:11-31

35:1-15

36:1-7

36:8-38

36:26

36:27

37:1-14

37:15-20

37:21-28

38:1-23

39:1-16

39:17-20

39:21-29

40:1-49

41:1-26

42:1-20

43:1-9

43:8-27

43:10-12

43:13-1

44:1-31

45:1-8

45:9-25

46:1-25

47:1-12

47:13-23

48:1-29

48:30-35

Daniel

4:8

4:9

JOHN CALVIN

4:17-19

Hosea

1:9

2:4

2:5

2:5-8

2:9

2:10

2:23

11:4

14:9

Joel

2:28