Hello Bill, I finally found the source of Calvin's quote saying the Trinity was a "popish God, or idol, a mere human invention, a barbarous, insipid, and profane word." According to Charles Wiley, Associate for Theology, Office of Theology and Worship, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the quote is from from a work of Calvin's in Latin that has not been translated into English, Epistola Joannis Calvini apud Polonos Confirmar, published in Geneva in 1563. The work is not found in the standard publication of Calvin's Latin works, Opera Selecta, but, according to Wiley is "included in the exhaustive publication of Calvin's works, Opera Quae Supersunt Omnia, edited by G. Baum, E. Cunitz and E. Reuss. 59 vols. Vol. 29-88, Corpus Reformatorum, Brunswick and Berlin: C.A. Schwetschke et Filium, 1863-1900."
The question, of course, is whether Calvin is expressing his own views--utterly at variance with his views in his other writings--or simply summarizing the views of Polish anti-Trinitarians. Without the context of the quote, preferably in Latin, the prudent person will reserve judgement in light of, well...
This is an excellent point and based on some of Calvin's other statements regarding the Trinity this could well be a warning to anti-Trinitarian Polish Protestants. Hopefully I will eventually find out.
=== Jimmy Thankyou. I do not know how to verify what you say. If you can tell me how to verify it, then I will attempt to do so. Schaff acknowledges in his History that Baum's edition is the best of Calvin's Opera . However, Schaff observes no inconsistency between any comment by Calvin in that work and Calvin's Trinitarianism as elsewhere extensively expressed. Before, in the other thread, I alerted you to locations in both The Institutes and The Commentaries where Calvin incessantly affirmed the Trinity. These major works present a theology inconsistent, therefore with your unconfirmed interpretation of that reference. Additionally I might point out that Calvin specifically wrote against anti-Trinitarianism in Defensio Orthodoxae fidei S. Trinitatis adversus prodigiosos errores Severti, 1554. The Spaniard, Michael Severtus , was of course unfortunately burned at the stake under Calvin's regime in 1557 for devoting his energy to a refutation of Trinitarianism. It does not seem consistent that Calvin denied in 1563 what he affirmed in his work against Severtus in 1554.[ neither was that burning event consistent with the Jesus who stayed Peter's sword when Jesus' own life was in peril. This Truth is not spread by fire or sword! ]. Also, Calvin wrote at least six other works from 1554 to 1563 specifically to denounce anti-trinitarianism. This seems not fitting if he believed what you imply by your (so far) unverified quote (or understanding of that). I might also mentioned that Calvin in 1559 composed the large French Confession of Faith, to which Wiley, himself, whom you mention, on the net, has an Introduction. Calvin addressed this to the French sovereign. If you look there at articles 6 and 7, you will will see the Trinity plainly taught. This Creed, therefore, also is inconsistent with your interpretation of what Calvin supposedly said. It is also worth mentioning I think, that the Presbyterian Church, USA claims to base a preponderance of its doctrine on Calvin's theological sentiments. Yet, this modern denomination in 101 says Jesus is fully God along with the other trinal Persons. I , therefore, suggest that either your reference or your understanding of it somehow is not correct. Consequently, I believe here a dictum, as very basic as it is, found in the Unizul guidelines to graduate Theological study is nevertheless very apropos to this present situation: "DO NOT ACCEPT EVERYTHING READ OR HEARD AT FACE VALUE. TEST IT BY COMPARING IT WITH OTHER RELIABLE SOURCES."
Re: Re: FOR BILL GROVER Bill, of course you're right in this. I have always been surprised by this quote knowing Calvin's strong Trinitarian views in most of his writings. I kind of viewed it from the perspective one can find minor and major theological inconsistencies in the writings of many theologians. Hicks and Stone, as well as Campbell, contradict themselves on such things as the Virgin Birth, the Trinity, etc. But there again, are these contradictions or changes of minds/opinions as they grew older and studied more? Granted though, that Calvin may be one of the most consistent theologians in his writings. Considering his statements about Servetus and his tacit approval of Servetus' execution, I doubt he ever really denied the Trinity.
Re: Re: Re: FOR BILL GROVER +++ Jimmy: Many modern Evangelicals, also, IMO, do, as you say, contradict themselves. I don't see this happening in one writing vs. another , but I do see it in one concept vs. another. IMO the Truett Prof and prolific writer ,Erickson, contradicts his own statement , on God's immutability, when he says that God limited Himself in the incarnation [ Erickson seems to think that the mind of Jesus was the mind of the Logos decreased to fit humanity--I'm cautious on this interpretation of E. and am trying to contact Prof E to verify it. That view would be the Apollinaraianism he, himself, refutes!]. But, you know, Calvin did object to some interpretations of the Nicene Trinitarianism in this manner: That Creed often is said to teach the eternal, *ongoing*, begetting of the Son. This doctrine is taught , eg, by Berkhof (ST 2:93) and Shedd (DT 1:294,295). But Calvin in the Institutes rejects such. He says the idea is, "...absurd fiction" (1:13:29). There are many different sorts of Trinitarianism and many divergent views on the Incarnational effects , I am discovering in my research for Unizul, even within the framework of Evangelicalism itself. There is no consensus ; either the Scripture is too deep or we are too dense!
Re: Re: Re: Re: FOR BILL GROVER Bill, you are away too far being dense! I would say the Trinity is by far the most complex theological doctrine of all. Even in Unitarian circles there is much debate and no unanimity. There is a wide divergent of Christological beliefs among such as Channing, Parker, Emerson, Bellows, Fenn, and Park. Such terms as "Preacher of Jesus Christ," "The Conventional Christ," and "The Humane Jesus." etc., describe these men's views and preaching.
