This post is part of my year long study of Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion.
Calvin's Institutes of Religion: 2.1.8
It would seem that I have fallen hopelessly behind the Princeton Seminary's pace, in the reading of Calvin's "Institutes".
Reading the "Institutes" is one thing. Understanding them, and allowing God's word to permeate your being, and seeing your worldview changing before your eyes, in another thing altogether.
Also, I just received a written copy of Calvin's Institutes today, from the UPS dude, as I have also found it frustrating to attempt to read this text, with the available online versions.
I have chosen to use the Ford Lewis Battles translation, as well as Battle's "Analysis of the Institutes of the Christian Religion of John Calvin".
So...when you think total depravity, is there room in your understanding that this is a photograph of your deranged nature?
Our post-modern Christian culture will likely object.
I must confess, it has taken me more than a week to begin to attempt to write this post, as I mulled this subject around in my mind, and sought my heavenly Father in prayer.
Furthermore, I certainly don't profess to be expert on the matter. This teaching is contrary to the worldview that I had somewhere developed!
Let's dig in, and seek to understand what Calvin is teaching here...
Calvin defines "Original Sin" as a depravity of nature, which deserves punishment, but which is not from nature as created.
Here are Calvin's words:
"Original sin is a hereditary depravity and corruption of our nature, diffused into all parts of the soul, which first makes us liable to God's wrath then also brings forth in us 'works of the flesh'".
Furthermore, Calvin desires that we understand two things:
- we are so vitiated and perverted in every part of our nature that we stand justly condemned and convicted before God: all, even infants, are guilty not of another's fault but of their own.
- this perversity never ceases in us but continually bears new fruits
- it is not a mere absence of original righteousness, but the presence of active power and energy for evil.
- it is not mere concupiscence [strong lust] of one part - the whole man is defiled.
Before you start to pull your hair out, and scream at the top of your lungs, I recommend that you seek the Holy Spirit's wisdom, and understanding. If this is true, then your depraved nature is going to fight this with all of its might. Right?
In seeking to further understand this doctrine, let's take a peek at a few contrary positions.
Pelagianism
"He [Pelagius] began to teach
views which were totally at variance with Scripture. He taught
that every child which is born into the world is born good, without
any sin. In fact he insisted that every child was as good as Adam
when he came forth from the hands of his Creator and before he
ate of the forbidden tree. If you would ask Pelagius: "What
is the explanation then for the fact that there is sin in the
world?" he would answer: "That is to be determined by
the choice which man is able to make either for good or for bad."
His nature, Pelagius said, is inclined to the good. In fact there
have been in the history of the world men who have lived their
entire lives without sinning at all. But some people sin. And
they sin because of the fact that they pick up from their fellow
men bad habits. Sin therefore, in the view of Pelagius, is a habit.
And as is true of any habit, the more a particular sin is committed,
the stronger also the habit becomes. The more a man is guilty
of one particular type of sin, the more deeply this habit becomes
rooted in his nature. Nevertheless, sin always remains nothing
more than a habit. And inasmuch as sin is only a habit, the solution
to the problem of sin lies in the breaking of the habit. Nothing
else. There is no need, Pelagius insisted, for salvation. There
is no need for grace; much less for sovereign grace. All that
a man has to do if he wants to break the habit of sin is have
a firm enough resolve. By a choice of his own will he will presently
succeed." (
Protestant Reformed Church of America)
Semi-Pelagianism (Also, evidently Roman Catholic doctrine)
"But there arose instead in the church
a view which became known as Semi-pelagianism. The men who held
these views did not want to go to the ridiculous and absurd extremes
of Pelagius himself. And yet, at the same time, they did not want
the system of Augustine either. They attempted a compromise. And
as is true of all compromises, they only invented a new heresy.
They taught that it is indeed true that a man who is born into
the world is not good. He does not stand in the state in which
Adam stood in Paradise before the fall. But while they insisted
on that, they nevertheless also insisted on the fact that man
was not totally depraved. They said he was sick. And indeed, while
the kind of sickness which he had was a fatal sickness, so that
if this sickness was not cured, presently it would result in death,
nevertheless, in this period of sickness man was capable of accomplishing
a great deal of good. Particularly, he was capable, by an exercise
of his own will, to summon to his aid the Great Physician to come
with the balm of healing grace to save him from his fatal disease.
God on His part, said the Semi-pelagians, has prepared salvation
for all men. He has prepared the cure for this malady which afflicts
mankind. And God is also prepared to give this healing balm to
all men. In fact, God even goes one step farther than this, and
offers this balm to all men to be accepted or rejected by them.
But beyond that, the Semi-pelagians insisted, God will not go.
That healing balm will ultimately be applied to man to cure his
malady if man himself wants it. The whole matter of his cure therefore,
of his salvation, turns upon the choice of his own will."
Here is the heart of the matter from the Canons of Dordt:
"The result of the fall is total depravity or corruption. By this
is meant that every part of man is rendered corrupt. The Canons
say that man "became involved in blindness of mind, horrible
darkness, vanity, perverseness of judgment; became wicked, rebellious,
obdurate in heart and will and impure in his affection."
There was no part of his nature that was not affected by sin.
The word "total" must not be taken in the absolute sense
as though man is completely depraved. Man is not as bad as he
can be. Article 4, which we hope to consider more fully later
in this series, speaks of "glimmerings of natural light which
remain in man since the fall." God does restrain the working
of sin in the life of man on earth. And sinful man still has a
sense of right and wrong. His corruption is total in the sense
that there is no part of his being that is pure and holy; and
the good he does is done for God and for His glory."
More from the PRCA:
"When Calvin and the fathers of Dordt insisted that depravity was
total, they knew what words mean. And they knew that "total"
means precisely that. They intended that the expression "total
depravity" be a description of what Scripture calls "death".
The sinner is dead; spiritually dead. He comes into this world
from his mother a spiritual still-born. He is not sick. He is
not afflicted with a malady or a disease no matter how fatal.
He is dead. And this is the emphatic teaching of Scripture. Always
the Scriptures insist that the sinner is dead."
I highly recommend that you read this article, from the PRCA, on this subject of Total Depravity. I found it highly useful.
As I read my Bible [Romans 3], I don't see support for Pelagius' viewpoint, nor, for that matter, a Semi-pelagian viewpoint.
At the same time, like many other teachings in the Bible, it also doesn't mean that the truth is easily understood.
So, my friend, back to my original question....Are you Totally Depraved?
