Calvin on Apostasy and Temporary Faith (1 of 3)

Theological Letters

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. To all my subscribers, thank you for subscribing; to my paid subscribers, thank you for your support; to everyone else, please consider subscribing and supporting my work!

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 The answer becomes clear when we look at Calvin’s distinction between outward obedience and the true affections of the heart. In Calvin’s view, the apostate manifests only an outward obedience and faith, which lacks the most central component of true faith, namely, the heart. For Calvin, the heart is what distinguishes transient faith from true faith. Here, we find echoes of the Augustinian roots of Calvin, according to which two deeds may look outwardly alike, but the inner character of the deed determines whether the act is salvific. In Augustine, it is the inner order of loves beneath the act — whether it is done out of true love of God or some other lower love — that determines whether a deed has merit. Such a distinction between the inner and outer character allows Augustine to harmonize the need for grace with the operation of the will, the Holy Spirit healing or reordering the underlying loves, which the believer then freely operates in accord with to produce saving deeds.²³ Here, Calvin offers a similar distinction. The will may be capable, in a fallen state, of turning toward God with some semblance of belief and obedience, but the conversion of the heart by the Holy Spirit is required to produce the type of faith that saves. Calvin claims that the hypocrite may withhold his heart flagrantly in undeniable hypocrisy, or he may withhold the heart subtlety, but both modes of withholding are forms of hypocrisy.²⁴ The latter, more subtle hypocrisy is perhaps more dangerous because it entails a certain response to the gospel and obedience to God, which not only fool others but “dazzle[s] their own [i.e., the hypocrite’s] eyes, so that they seem to themselves to worship God aright.”²⁵ It is this self-deception that Calvin thinks is so dangerous. And ultimately, Calvin categorizes Simon’s temporary faith, not as “gross hypocrisy,” but as this type of “inward hypocrisy.”²⁶

We see this same association of hypocrisy and temporary faith in Calvin’s treatment of the parable of the sower. There, Calvin again names two forms of hypocrisy, represented by the two groups in the parable who receive the Word only to fall away. In the stony ground the seed springs up but has no root. Calvin speaks of such recipients as manifesting a “temporary faith” that, again, demonstrates a lack of submission of the heart: “this class … eagerly embrace the Gospel, and shortly afterwards fall off; for they have not the lively affection that is necessary to give them firmness and perseverance.”²⁷ We will return to Calvin’s talk of affections later, but for now, suffice it to say that the reprobate’s lack of “lively affection” is in keeping with the theme of a non-submissive heart.²⁸ Yet, despite their lack of inward submission, Calvin suggests that they are rightly said to “believe for a time; because that honor which they render to the Gospel resembles faith.”²⁹ Moreover, there is a clear sense in which “they are widely different from unbelievers, who give no credit to God when he speaks, or who reject his word.”³⁰ As for those who are described as receiving the word only to have it choked by thorns, Calvin again roots the problem in their heart, which does not turn its affections toward God: “the sinful affections of the flesh prevail over the hearts of men, and overcome faith, and thus destroy the force of the heavenly doctrine, before it has reached maturity.”³¹ In both of these forms of hypocrisy, then, we find the mean between faith and mere dissimulation mentioned above; both embody a response to the gospel that is distinct from unbelief, but neither group yields their hearts.

The seed metaphor of faith comes up frequently in Calvin’s talk of the distinct forms of faith—even when not addressing agricultural metaphors. As in the parable of the sower, one clear distinction between those who persevere and those who only believe for a time is their laying down of roots. In the parable, all, hypocrite and true believer, receive the seed; in all which manifest some form of faith, the seed springs forth. But those who fall away fall away because of a lack of firm roots. In contrast, it is because of the laying down of lasting roots that the elect persevere. And this metaphor Calvin carries into his other talk of true and false faith.

Even the disciples display a certain ignorance and even unbelief throughout the gospels, Calvin tells us. Calvin highlights that when the disciples see the empty tomb, “the resurrection of their Master seems to them like a dream.”³² And though they believed the words of Christ “whom they knew to be truth, the ignorance that as yet occupied their minds so enveloped their faith in darkness that they were almost dumbfounded.”³³ In light of such ignorance and unbelief in even the apostles, Calvin concludes that “unbelief is, in all men, always mixed with faith.”³⁴ Thus, it is not the presence or absence of some unbelief or ignorance that ultimately distinguishes true faith from temporary faith, but it is the distinction between the way in which the seed springs forth. Those in whom it is truly affective, it will bear lasting fruit with strong roots. Thus, while we may be inclined to judge the disciples’ faith as defective in the light of some of their early failings, the results prove otherwise: “[the disciples] finally believed after they themselves had discovered the truth of Christ’s words through the very fact of his resurrection. Not faith—which had been dead, as it were, in their hearts—at that time burst through with renewed vigor.”³⁵

The importance of all this as we consider a figure like Simon Magus is that Calvin finds such distinctions to be useful in affirming, with Luke, that Simon believed. Yet, this affirmation does not require us to affirm that Luke intended to indicate that Simon was regenerate or that his obedience penetrated to the heart. Rather, Calvin thinks Simon manifested the subtle form of hypocrisy mentioned above: His faith was of such a kind that it acquiesced to the truth of the gospel and gave a superficial obedience, but in lacking the affections necessary to persevere, the sinful affections of his heart prevented the seed from reaching maturity: “conquered by the majesty of the gospel, [Simon] showed a certain sort of faith, and thus recognized Christ to be the author of life and salvation, so that he willingly enlisted under him.”³⁶ In the end, Simon’s faith was incomplete and at some remove from saving faith, for Simon’s submission did not constitute a denial of self: “And yet he giveth not himself over sincerely to Christ.”³⁷ Calvin thinks this lack of self-denial and withholding of the heart is the defining mark of those who fall away after a time; they “do not addict themselves unto God with the true affection of the heart.”³⁸

Both in Calvin’s treatment of the story of Simon and his comments on the parable of the sower, we see the common theme of the affections of the heart not rising toward God, but remaining fixed on sinful things. Though we will talk more about this point in our next section, for the question at hand, it is worth noting that the downward turn of the affections is the plight of the reprobate who not regenerate. His will is still corrupt and incapable of turning to God with “true affection of the heart.”³⁹ The defect of transient faith resides, therefore, not in the seed that is sown, but in the one receiving the seed. Calvin does not think that because the apostate manifests an inferior faith this means the seed that is sown is different than what is sown in the elect. The apostate tastes the real thing. As Calvin comments regarding 1 John 2:19, “[John], in short, means that they who fall away had never been thoroughly imbued with the knowledge of Christ, but had only a light and a transient taste of it.”⁴⁰ Some reprobates do taste of the light (pardon the mixed metaphor), even though their taste is transient. Similarly, the theme of Calvin’s comments on Matthew 13:18-23 do not distinguish what is sown but only the response of the one in whom it is sown. The reprobate genuinely tastes the knowledge of Christ.⁴¹ Moreover, what the reprobate experiences in this tasting is divine grace; the tasting of the Spirit and the transient ascent is a genuine experience of God. As Calvin puts it,

I cannot admit that all this is any reason why [God] should not grant the reprobate also some taste of his grace, why he should not irradiate their minds with some sparks of his light, why he should not give them some perception of his goodness, and in some sort engrave his word on their hearts. Otherwise, where would be the temporal faith mentioned by Mark 4:17? There is therefore some knowledge even in the reprobate, which afterwards vanishes away, either because it did not strike roots sufficiently deep, or because it withers, being choked up.⁴²

The inadequacy of the faith manifest by someone like Simon lies not in what is sown but in the soil. The heart must be given over to Christ if faith is going to be saving: “And as hearing is the beginning of faith, so it should not be sufficient of itself, unless the majesty of doctrine should also move the heart.”⁴³

In short, Calvin thinks there is such a thing as temporary faith, which is a genuine type of belief brought about in the reprobate by the message of the gospel and the work of the Holy Spirit. But this belief is not a belief unto salvation, for it is not accompanied by regeneration. The affections of the heart, thus, never turn upward toward God but remained fixed on lower, sinful objects. Regeneration, then, is a specific touch of grace unique to the elect. As Calvin makes clear in his comments on Hebrews 6:4, “God indeed favors none but the elect alone with the Spirit of regeneration, and that by this they are distinguished from the reprobate.”⁴⁴ And for this reason, the reprobate cannot produce the defining feature of saving faith, namely, true affections for God.

Calvin on the Phenomenon of Temporary Faith

Continued in part 2 (forthcoming)

1. I place “Calvinist” in scare quotes for two reasons. First, the term is a late one. This label does not appear amongst the early Reformed figures. Second, as the work of Richard Muller shows, Calvin was not the litmus test for “Reformed orthodoxy” throughout the height of 16-17th century Reformed thought, which explains why the term was not used amongst early Reformed thinkers. Third, contemporary figures who tend to adopt this label are often followers of Calvin as read through the lens of Jonathan Edwards, which results in a version of “Calvinism” that is highly anachronistic, historically speaking. On this point, see my letter “Predestination, John Piper, and the ‘New Calvinists’.” See also Richard Muller, “Jonathan Edwards and the Absence of Free Choice: A Parting Ways in the Reformed Tradition,” Jonathan Edwards Studies 1, no. 1 (2011): 3-22.

2. Some examples can be found in footnote 9 below.

3. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, John T. McNeill, ed., and Ford Lewis Battles, trs. (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960), 3.1.4. All quotations from Calvin’s Institutes are taken from the McNeill-Battles edition. All quotations from Calvin’s commentaries are taken from John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, 22 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1977). All references to Calvin’s sermons on Galatians are taken from John Calvin, Sermons on Galatians by John Calvin (Audubon, New Jersey: Old Paths Publications, 1995) with the exception of “Enduring Persecution for Christ,” in Daniel A. Poling, ed., A Treasury of Great Sermons (New York: Greenberg Publisher, 1944). All Latin quotations are taken from Ioannis Calvini Opera Quae Supersunt Omnia, 59 vols., eds. Guilielmus Baum, Eduardus Cunitz, and Eduardus Reuss (Brunswick: Schwetschke, 1863-1900).

4. Inst., 3.1.4.

5. Inst., 2.4.1.

6. Acts 1-13, 18:334; cf. with Inst. 3.2.10; CO 2:405: Credidisse dicitur Simon magus, qui tamen suam incredulitatem paulo post prodit (Act. 8, 13. 18). Quod fides illi tribuitur, non intelligimus cum quibusdam, simulasse verbis quam in corde nullam haberet; sed potius arbitramur evangelii maiestate victum qualemcunque fidem adhibuisse, atque ita Christum, vitae et salutis autorem agnovisse, ut libenter illi nomen daret.

7. See David Foxgrover, “‘Temporary Faith’ and the Certainty of Salvation,” Calvin Theological Journal 15:2 (1980). Another less helpful work related to Foxgrover’s same quesiton is Robert Shank, Life in the Son: A Study of the Doctrine of Perseverance (Springfield, Missouri: Westcott Publishers, 1960), ch. 18. The first half of the chapter recognizes the phenomenon of temporary faith in Calvin and the questions it raises for assurance. But in the end, Shank’s treatment of Calvin is done with a view to offering his own proposal; it is not a study of Calvin proper. Dennis A. Bratcher offers a study of apostasy in Calvin in his Th.M. Thesis The Concepts of Conditionality and Apostasy in Relation to Covenant (Glenside, PA: Westminster Theological Seminary, 1986). The bulk of this work, however, is based on Elton M. Eenigenburg, “The Place of the Covenant in Calvin’s Thinking,” Reformed Review 10 (1957); and A.A. Hoekema, “The Christian Reformed Church and the Covenant” in Peter DeKlerk and Richard De Ridder, eds., Perspectives on the Christian Reformed Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1983). For the relationship between conditionality and covenant, see also Peter Alan Lillback, “The Continuing Conundrum: Calvin and the Conditionality of Covenant,” Calvin Theological Journal 21:9 (1994). But since Bratcher’s study, as well as those studies he draws on, focus largely on the relationship between apostasy and covenant, the work is generally unhelpful for the questions at issue here.

8. Work exists on some secondary matters related to the topic of apostasy, including covenant (see note 7 above), general election versus individual salvation (e.g., Habib Badr, “Medium Quiddam: The Problematic Relation of General Election and Individual Salvation in Calvin’s Theology,” Theological Review 10:1-2 [1989]), and the believer’s union with Christ (e.g., Robert C. Doyle, “The Preaching of Repentance in John Calvin: Repentance and Union with Christ,” in God Who is Rich in Mercy: Essays Presented to David Broughton Knox [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1986], ch. 16). But these topics only loosely relate to Calvin’s own view of apostasy and are at some remove from the focus here.

9. See, e.g., Paul Helm, “Preserving Perseverance,” International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 33:2 (1993); Dean Mills, “How Are We Kept” in Trust God: A Symposium on Calvinism (Cincinnati, OH: The Christian Restoration Association, 2001); or any contemporary “Calvinist” Systematic Theology; e.g., Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House Co., 1987), ch. 47; or Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994), ch. 40.

10. See, e.g., Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1.29 and 2.9.2. Calvin, although recognizing that “the old writers affirm with one consent, that [Simon] was a great enemy to Peter afterward,” raises some question over Simon’s reprobation, given that he responds to Peter’s warning with “no small signs of repentance.” Acts 1-13, 18:347.

11. Acts 1-13, 8:334.

12. 1 John, 22:191-2.

13. 1 John, 22:192.

14. John 12-21, 18:110.

15. Acts 1-13, 18:334.

16. Inst., 3.2.9.

17. Inst., 3.2.9.

18. Inst., 3.2.9.

19. Inst., 3.2.9.

20. Inst., 3.2.9. These lesser forms of faith, Calvin calls a “shadow or image of faith,” one that “does not deserve to be called faith.” Inst., 3.2.10. These latter comments, Calvin qualifies by admitting the title “faith” is an acceptable title, provided one recognizes the distinction between true faith and temporary faith. And this distinction, Calvin thinks is at work in Luke’s (and other biblical authors’) talk of reprobate “faith.”

21. See Inst., 3.2.10.

22. Foxgrover, “‘Temporary Faith’,” p. 222.

23. On the relationship between virtue and the order of loves, see, e.g., Augustine’s On Christian Doctrine, I.27-28; or On the Morals of the Catholic Church, XV.25. On the relationship between free choice and grace — both the necessity of grace for the reordering of the human will and the free cooperation with this grace — see his On Grace and Free Will, passim.

24. See 1 John, 22:192. Calvin describes the flagrant hypocrite as those who “feign piety, while a bad conscience reproves them within.” 1 John, 22:192; See also John 1-11, 17:77-8.

25. 1 John, 22:192. See also John 1-11, 17:78.

26. Acts 1-13, 18:335.

27. Gospels, 16:114.

28. The term affection is precisely what it seems in English, a desire or disposition toward something, referring to “the affection animi, or affection of soul, that is the faculty of desire.” Richard A. Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House Co., 1985), p. 29. Cf. with affectione animi in CO 2:214.

29. Gospels, 16:115.

30. Gospels, 16:116.

31. Gospels, 16:116.

32. Inst., 3.2.4.

33. Inst., 3.2.4.

34. Inst., 3.2.4.

35. Inst., 3.2.4. Cf. with Calvin’s comments on the need for even a genuine faith to be fully formed in Galatians 21:132, and his talk of progress in Colossians, 21:160.

36. Inst., 3.2.10.

37. Acts 1-13, 18:334.

38. Acts 1-13, 18:334.

39. Acts 1-13, 18:334.

40. 1 John, 22:192.

41. It should be noted that Calvin denies “that the reprobate proceed so far as to penetrate into that secret revelation which Scripture vouchsafes only to the elect.” Inst., 3.2.12.

42. Hebrews, 22:138.

43. Acts 1-13, 18:330.

44. Hebrews, 22:138.