Calvin’s treatment
of faith, permanent and temporary, has features that make it strikingly similar
to Augustine’s discussion of perseverance. So it is interesting that though he
quotes Augustine many times in connection with God’s imparting of his grace he
does not refer to him explicitly on perseverance in the Institutes. Though it seems as if his influence is still being
felt; he uses much of the textual evidence from Scripture that Augustine
appeals to, for example. In this post I shall try to bring out similarities and
differences of emphasis in the treatments of perseverance by these great
theologians of grace.
In the Institutes Calvin’s discussion of
temporary faith is preceded by a section in which he rebuts the idea that
faith, true faith, can exist in isolation from other graces. ‘Christ cannot be
known without the sanctification of his Spirit: therefore faith cannot possibly
be disjoined from pious affections.’ (Inst.
III.2.8) The ‘faith’ that is disjoined from other graces ‘is unworthy of the
name’. The discussion is conducted in terms of faith and particularly this
thought, that although believers are justified by faith only, the faith that
justifies is inevitably accompanied by other sanctifying graces. This is
Calvin’s ‘two-fold gift’ which we have discussed before at Helm’s Deep.
As Augustine was
concerned to combat Pelagian moralism and self-confidence, and did so by
stressing the Christian’s utter dependence on God’s grace at all times, in a
parallel way Calvin had in view the Roman Catholic view as faith as mere assensus. (III.2.9) Faith that is
merely assent does not penetrate the heart, ‘so as to have a fixed seat there’.
(III.2.10) He goes on to introduce the phenomenon of temporary faith, beginning
with Simon the Magician (Acts 8) who did not simply pretend to have a faith he did not
possess, but he (sincerely) gave some kind of assent to the Gospel. He thought
he believed. In his Commentary on
Acts, Calvin says
Such,
therefore, was Simon’s faith; he perceiveth that the doctrine of the gospel is
true, and he is enforced to receive the same with feeling; but the groundwork
is wanting; that is, the denial of himself. Whereupon it followed that his mind
was enwrapped in dissimulation, which he uttered forthwith. But let us know
that his hypocrisy was such as he deceived himself in……(Comm. Acts. 8.13)
This is very
similar to Augustine’s view at this point, but there is no direct evidence that
Calvin took it from him.
So how does it
come about that in Scripture faith is ascribed to the reprobate when Paul
teaches that faith is a fruit of election? The answer he gives is ‘though there
is a great resemblance and affinity between the elect of God and those who are
impressed for a time with a fading faith, yet the elect alone have that full
assurance which is extolled by Paul, and by which they are enabled to cry,
Abba, Father.’ (Inst. III.2.11)
Here’s one
significant difference in Calvin’s treatment of the nature of perseverance;
true faith, the faith which continues to the end, persevering faith, is assured faith. (III.2.11) ‘However
feeble and slender the faith of the elect may be, yet as the Spirit of God is
to them a sure earnest and seal of their adoption, the impression once engraved
can never be effaced from their hearts, whereas the light which glimmers in the
reprobate is afterward quenched.’ It is not only that Calvin features
assurance and Augustine doesn’t; his understanding of assurance is that it is a
distinctive impression made known to the believer through introspection, self-knowledge,
which tells him that however weak his faith may be it can never
be extinguished. By contrast, in referring to ‘perseverance’ (Calvin never uses
the word in this discussion, though he had earlier (II.3.10-13) referred
approvingly to Augustine’s remarks on merit and perseverance), Augustine never
mentions assurance as far as I can see, but uniformly refers to ‘piety’ as the
sign of perseverance, indeed as what perseverance is.
The prominence
that Calvin gives to assurance as an interior impression suggests that he
reckons that the believer knows that he will endure to the end, because he
presently is favoured with an infallible sign of his adoption as a child of
God. By contrast the use of the language
of ‘perseverance‘ by Augustine suggests a linear progression, a walk, a race, a
fight, a climb. Then the answer to the question of personal belief is grounded
on the fact that the Lord continually makes the person to stand. That is,
the Lord enables him to press on as a Christian, to have ‘pious thoughts’ which
produce faith which works by love. (Gift
of Perseverance, ch.20) There is
also a suggestion of regeneration through baptism. Augustine refers to the
laver of regeneration which both those who persevere and those who come not to, enjoy, but this need not be to have any more sacramental implications (or less) than Paul's 'washing of regeneration'. There is no suggestion of baptismal regeneration
in Calvin, of course. And this continuation of the believer’s ‘standing’ is
expression by Augustine in terms of obedience, virtue, and continued communion
with visible church.
In my view this emphasis, rather than Calvin's on assurance, makes
much more sense of Scripture’s warning passages. This is another difference
between Calvin and Augustine. The Bishop of Hippo discusses the warnings of the
New Testament as integral to the question of perseverance, but Calvin is silent
on them in the Institutes in his
treatment of temporary faith. The reason for Calvin’s silence is presumably
that if someone has a God-given, infallible assurance that he is adopted into
God’s family, one of the elect, what need of warning? Nothing that could happen to him could
dislodge him, for having the inward impression he can be confident that no-one
can pluck him out of the Father’s hands.
In his treatment
of I Cor. 10.12, which Augustine also discusses, Calvin says ‘we must not glory in
our beginnings’, [that is, our ‘conversion story’]. And he is concerned about the
Papists [who]
wrest
this passage for the purpose of
maintaining their impious doctrine of faith, as having constantly doubt
connected with it, let us observe that there are two kinds of assurance. One arises
from reliance on the promises of God which yet keeps in mind its own infirmity,
casts itself upon God, and with carefulness
and anxiety commits itself to him. This kind of assurance is sacred, and
is inseparable from faith…..The other arises from negligence, when men, puffed up with the gifts that they have,
give themselves no concern, as if they
were beyond the reach of danger, but rest satisfied with their condition’.
(Comm. I Cor 10.12, italics added.)
So here is a more
balanced outlook than we saw earlier. The sense of assurance must be coupled with watchfulness, and
assured Christians must not regard themselves as being out of danger.
‘Perseverance’ is
a gift of God’s effective grace, and is one of the petals of the Calvinistic
tulip. But what our discussion shows, perhaps, is that different pastoral situations
may call for different emphases, now on the assurance of faith, now on the
fruit of faith, now on adherence to the public means of grace. ‘Perseverance’
is capable of considerable nuance, therefore, but the key to it is that those
who enjoy the grace of perseverance actually persevere.
We can see here the misguidedness of continually stressing 'once saved, always saved' without keeping in place other New Testament emphases, the need for watchfulness, the need for fruit, and the danger of making a merely formal profession.
