Calvin on Apostasy and Temporary Faith (1 of 3)

Theological Letters

A quick note: I’m producing The East-West Series, a comprehensive 25-lecture exploration of the theological differences between Eastern and Western Christianity. We’re crowdfunding to complete production — watch the trailer and learn more at theeastwestseries.com.

---

The following is not a letter but some research that I never got around to publishing. Common amongst contemporary “Calvinists”¹ is the view that those whom God has predestined to salvation also persevere in the faith. That is to say, having been predestined to be saved, God brings them to faith and does so in such a way that they persevere to the end. On this view, it is impossible that one might come to saving faith, then fall away from faith and be damned. For this reason, contemporary “Calvinists” tend to see New Testament warnings to not fall away as “problem passages” (i.e., passages that appear to run counter to their doctrine and must therefore be explained in a way that coheres with the doctrine of predestination so understood). The most common approach to such passages today is something like the following. Paul assures his readers that they have been saved, but he places this statement in the conditional, indicating that if they fall away, they have believed in vain (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:2). Many “Calvinists” read such passages as applying a conditional to Paul’s understanding of the reader’s faith — they have believed and are saved, unless they fall away; in which case, their faith was not genuine, and they were never saved.² I am no “Calvinist” nor am I Reformed. Nonetheless, from a purely historical perspective, I find it intriguing that the contemporary approach to such problem passages by contemporary “Calvinists” is divergent from Calvin’s own view. In what follows, I look at what Calvin has to say about such passages and highlight the differences between his approach and the more contemporary approach.

A mere perusal of John Calvin’s works is needed to see that he understands faith as “the principal work of the Holy Spirit”; or put another way, “faith itself has no other source than the Spirit.”³ He calls faith “a supernatural gift,” which is given to “those who would otherwise remain in unbelief…. For light would be given the sightless in vain had that Spirit of discernment not opened the eyes of the mind.”⁴ Calvin understands this spiritual atrophy to extend to the entire man. It’s not merely saving faith that stands beyond the reach of man’s will but even the most basic aspirations to do good. Thus, following his defense in the Institutes of the pervasive effects of original sin, he writes, “we have sufficiently proved that man is so held captive by the yoke of sin that he can of his own nature neither aspire to good through resolve nor struggle after it through effort.”⁵ This aspect of Calvin’s theology is well known.

In his commentary on the book of Acts, however, Calvin makes a statement that may be surprising, given this view of faith. In reference to Simon Magus, Calvin writes, “I am not of their mind who think that [Simon] made only a semblance of faith, seeing he did not believe. Luke saith plainly that he believed.”⁶ Such a statement seems, on first blush, contrary to what one would expect from Calvin, given his doctrine of perseverance. For in saying this, Calvin concedes the genuineness of Simon’s temporary faith. This concession raises a number of questions. Four stand out:

1. What is Calvin’s understanding of the apostate and the apparent temporary faith manifest in such persons?

2. If such persons are reprobates, how does Calvin explain the phenomenon of temporary faith, given the unregenerate person’s utter inability to do good, yet less confess Christ?

3. If 1 and 2 lead to the conclusion that temporary faith is peculiar to the reprobate, what does Calvin see as the purpose of biblical warnings to the elect against apostasy?

4. How does Calvin see the reality of temporary faith affecting the elects’ assurance of salvation and final perseverance?

These questions point to a lacuna in the study of Calvin’s thought. David Foxgrover has dealt with the fourth of these questions.⁷ And in drawing out the problematic relationship between temporary faith and the assurance of salvation, Foxgrover provides a good overview of temporary faith in Calvin’s work. Yet, aside from Foxgrover’s essay, little has been done on Calvin’s view of apostasy or the questions surrounding it.⁸ Much can be found on the so-called “Calvinist” doctrine, perseverance of the saints, but treatments of this topic rarely focus on Calvin’s thought with special care and hardly ever deal with the phenomenon of temporary faith.⁹ In what follows, I will begin by answering the first of the three questions mentioned above, which have gone largely unaddressed in the scholarship: What is Calvin’s understanding of temporary faith? How is the phenomenon of temporary faith possible in Calvin’s thought? What, for Calvin, is the purpose of biblical warnings against apostasy? Because of the work already done by Foxgrover, I will not concern myself with the question of the relationship between the assurance of salvation and temporary faith.

1. Calvin on Temporary Faith

In Acts 8:4-24, we find the story of Simon Magus, who, after believing the gospel and being baptized (8:13), committed the blasphemy of seeking to purchase the Holy Spirit from the apostles (8:18-19). In response, the apostle Peter pronounced a curse upon Simon (8:20); and thenceforth, Simon would be known as the token apostate of the early Church.¹⁰ While one might expect Calvin to view Simon’s confession of Christ as a false show of belief, given that true faith is a gift from the Holy Spirit to only the elect, on his view, Calvin’s conclusion is not so stark. He makes plain that he is not inclined to dismiss Simon’s faith due to the unbelief that follows, but takes Luke at his word: “Luke saith plainly that [Simon] believed.”¹¹

The first question this raises is whether Calvin thinks it is genuinely possible for one to truly partake of Christ for a time and then fall away. Or put another way, can the reprobate be grafted into Christ by faith only to be cut off and cast away through unbelief and a lack of perseverance? A survey of Calvin’s comments on related passages would indicate that Calvin does not think this is possible. In 1 John 2:19, the apostle indicates that those who “went out from” the elect were never truly members of the invisible Church. In commenting on this passage, Calvin states,

By saying, They went out from us, he means that they had previously occupied a place in the Church, and were counted among the number of the godly. He, however, denies that they were of them, though they had assumed the name of believers, as chaff though mixed with wheat on the same floor cannot yet be deemed wheat.¹²

And again, “[John] plainly declares that those who fell away had never been members of the Church.”¹³ Equally pointed are Calvin’s comments on the metaphor of the vine and the branches. Calvin makes quite clear that he reads this metaphor, not as indicating that the elect can fall away, but as indicating that those who are cut off never truly believed: “Not that it ever happens that any one of the elect is dried up, but because there are many hypocrites who, in outward appearance, flourish and are green for a time, but who afterwards … show the very opposite of that which the Lord expects and demands from his people.”¹⁴

Such comments are in keeping with what is expected from Calvin on the topic of apostasy. But what are we to make of Calvin’s affirmation of Simon Magus’ belief? Perhaps the best clue comes amid Calvin’s comments on Acts 8:13. There, he states, “there is some mean between faith and mere dissimulation.”¹⁵ This comment brings to light a point found elsewhere in Calvin’s writings, namely, that there are varying degrees of belief, not all of which save. In the Institutes, Calvin submits, “there is only one kind of faith among the pious.”¹⁶ Nevertheless, he thinks it true that “there are diverse forms of faith,” some of which are rightly titled “faith” and even constitute a certain type of “knowledge of God … among the impious,” even though these forms of faith and types of knowledge do not save.¹⁷

Calvin lays out two forms of impious faith. First, he suggests that basic belief in the existence of God and even Bible history is a faith of sorts: “most people believe that there is a God, and they consider that the gospel history and the remaining parts of Scripture are true.”¹⁸ Second, there are those who go beyond a general belief in God and the Bible, and respond to the commands of Scripture: “they do not utterly neglect [God’s] precepts, and are somewhat moved by his threats and promises.”¹⁹ To such responses, the title “faith” is ascribed. Now, this title, Calvin admits, is a “misapplication,” if taken to indicate that these deficient forms of faith are equal to the faith that saves. Those manifesting these lesser faiths only “pretend a certain show of obedience,” whereas faith in its proper sense goes beyond both of these superficial beliefs to an inward submission to God.²⁰ Calvin, nevertheless, thinks the term “faith” may still be applied to reprobate belief, so long as the distinction between temporary faith and true faith is kept in mind.²¹ There is, then, a sense in which Simon truly believed, even though he did not believe unto salvation—his was the faith of “hypocrites.”

But here we face the question raised by Foxgrover: “if Simon did not pretend in words to have a faith which was not in his heart, why does Calvin suggest that Simon is a hypocrite?”²²