John Calvin on Evangelism and Missions

The Founders Journal ^ | Summer 1998 | Ray Van Neste

[Gamecock]

From his own lifetime onward John Calvin has been a controversial person. One controversy stems from the accusations leveled against him by many that he was completely unevangelistic and unconcerned about missions. A. M. Hunter, in his book on Calvin's teaching, said, "Certainly he [Calvin] displayed no trace of missionary enthusiasm."[1] Some have even said that Calvin's teaching on predestination necessarily destroyed evangelistic fervor; "we are all familiar with the scornful rationalization that facilely asserts that his horrible doctrine of divine election makes nonsense of all missionary and evangelistic activity."[2] Others, however, have said: "One of the natural results of Calvin's perspective of predestination was an intensified zeal for evangelism."[3] Though some have used Calvin's teachings to excuse their apathy towards evangelism, a close examination of Calvin's historical context, his writings, and his actions would prove John Calvin to be a man truly committed to the spread of the gospel.

Historical Context

In order to understand John Calvin, or any other historical figure, one must understand the time in which the person lived and worked. Calvin emerged as a Reformation leader in 1536 with the publication of The Institutes of the Christian Religion and remained in leadership until his death in 1564. Thus, Calvin was a generation after Luther, and the Reformation, well entrenched in Germany, was spreading all over Europe. However, there was little organization among the churches that had split with Rome. Historian Owen Chadwick noted that

The problem now was not the overthrow of the papacy, but the construction of new modes of power . . . In breaking down papal authority, the Reformation seemed to have left the authority of the Christian ministry vague and uncertain.[4]

Protestant groups, who had been accustomed to strong central authority in Rome, were now only loosely organized and, though they claimed scripture for their authority, they disagreed on what the scriptures meant with regard to certain doctrines. By the time that Calvin gained prominence in 1536, Protestant churches were in great need of organization and structure in their doctrine and practice.

In addition to the disorganization within, there was a persecution from without. The scattered condition of Protestantism was only worsened by the intense efforts of the Roman Church to eradicate the Protestant movement. Protestant churches were struggling not only for their identity but also for their very survival. Calvin himself had to leave France for personal safety, and he wrote the first edition of the Institutes in response to the ill treatment of French Protestants. Identification with Protestantism brought immediate punishment, including torture and even death.

Obviously, Calvin's era was a time of intense difficulty for Protestant churches. The demands of the day led him to spend a considerable amount of his energy developing a church organization, writing theology, and training ministers. With such pressing needs one might understand if Calvin neglected evangelism or missions. After all, the church itself and its message must first be established. Moreover, preaching Reformation doctrine in areas other than the Protestant cities would mean almost certain death. However, even these pressing needs and problems, which would immobilize many churches today, did not stop the evangelistic efforts of Calvin and his followers.

Calvin's Writings

Calvin's writings on predestination have most often been targeted as unevangelistic and destructive to missionary zeal. Calvin addressed predestination primarily in related parts of his Institutes and in his treatise, Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, which J. K. S. Reid called "the longest and most sustained exposition which Calvin wrote on the subject."[5] Dealing with predestination in the Institutes, Calvin does not directly address evangelism specifically, but neither does he describe it as unnecessary. He does, in fact, write several times about the gospel being preached to the masses, resulting in the salvation of the elect and the hardening of the non-elect (III.23.10; II.5.10). In other words, Calvin did not limit the preaching of the gospel to those considered to be elect. He explains his views more fully in his treatise on predestination:

Since we do not know who belongs to the number of the predestined and who does not, it befits us so to feel as to wish that all be saved. So it will come about that, whoever we come across, we shall study to make him a sharer of peace . . . even severe rebuke will be administered like medicine, lest they should perish or cause others to perish. But it will be for God to make it effective in those whom He foreknew and predestined.[6]

Calvin clearly encouraged Christians to be involved in evangelism! "It befits us" to desire all people to be saved. The result of this proper desire should make us try to lead everyone "we come across" to faith in Christ, for that is the only way they could share in peace. This is not to be a half-hearted effort. Christians are to use "even severe rebuke" if necessary to prevent others from ignoring the gospel and perishing. Christians must make the effort to evangelize everyone knowing that only God can save.

Calvin's doctrine of predestination did not make the preaching of the gospel unnecessary; instead, it made preaching necessary because it was by the preaching of the gospel that God had chosen to save the predestined.

Aside from his writings on predestination, Calvin also strongly supported the idea of missions with passages widely scattered throughout his commentaries.[7] Commenting on Micah 2:1-4, Calvin states, "The Kingdom of Christ was only begun in the world when God commanded the gospel to be every where proclaimed and . . . at this day its course is not as yet complete."[8] In other words the Great Commission was not fulfilled by the apostles and, consequently, this mission is still the responsibility of Christians.

Calvin expressed similar views as he commented on 1 Tim. 2:4, saying "there is no people and no rank in the world that is excluded from salvation; because God wishes that the gospel should be proclaimed to all without exception."[9] He is not, of course, saying that everyone in the world would be saved, but that certain people from all parts of the world would be saved. The whole idea of the passage is that God desires "foreign nations" to hear the gospel and to be included in salvation. It is the Christian's duty "to be solicitous and to do our endeavor for the salvation of all whom God includes in his calling."[10]

No one should be denied the opportunity of hearing the gospel proclaimed. Continuing to verse five of the same passage, Calvin writes that those people insult God "who, by their opinion, shut out any person from the hope of salvation."[11] The gospel is to be preached indiscriminately to all people, and the decision about who will believe is to be left to God.

Indeed, Calvin never portrays God as a cruel tyrant grudgingly allowing some to be saved. In a comment on Ezek. 18:23, he states:

God certainly desires nothing more than for those who are perishing and rushing toward death to return to the way of safety. This is why the gospel is today proclaimed throughout the world, for God wished to testify to all the ages that he is greatly inclined to pity.[12]

God desires for men to be saved and by His election has assured that some will be. It is the fact that God will definitely call some that encourages believers to "bestow more toil and exertion for the instruction of rebels," realizing that "our duty is, to be employed in sowing and watering, and while we do this we must look for the increase from God."[13] Clearly, Calvin recognized the need for Christians to exert effort in evangelism in order to be used of God to call out His elect. He saw evangelism as a duty and employment involving "toil and exertion." Such is far from an indifferent attitude toward evangelism.

Calvin's Activity

Perhaps the best evidence of Calvin's concern for missions is the mission activity of the Genevan church under his leadership. Under Calvin's leadership, Geneva became "the hub of a vast missionary enterprise"[14] and "a dynamic center or nucleus from which the vital missionary energy it generated radiated out into the world beyond."[15] Protestant refugees from all over Europe fled to Geneva; they came not merely for safety but also to learn from Calvin the doctrines of the Reformation so they could return home to spread the true gospel. Philip Hughes notes that Geneva became a "school of missions" which had as one of its purposes

to send out witnesses who would spread the teaching of the Reformation far and wide . . . . It [Geneva] was a dynamic centre of missionary concern and activity, an axis from which the light of the Good News radiated forth through the testimony of those who, after thorough preparation in this school, were sent forth in the service of Jesus Christ."[16]

Thus was Calvin's missionary concern reflected in the church he served and the students he taught.

The pastors of Geneva, including Calvin himself, met regularly and kept sporadic notes of their actions in a register, which became the greatest source of information on the missionary activity in Geneva. In April 1555 the Register of the Company of Pastors for the first time listed men who were sent out from Geneva to "evangelize Foreign Parts."[17] The entry that mentioned these men stated that they had been sent out prior to April 1555, and they were already ministering in the Piedmont valleys.[18] More ministers may have been sent out before this time without being recorded in the Register because the notes were not complete and it was often dangerous to record the names of missionaries.

By 1557 it was a normal part of business for the Genevan pastors to send missionaries into France. Robert M. Kingdon called it a "concentrated missionary effort."[19] By 1562, religious wars had broken out in France, and it was no longer safe to record the names of missionaries. However, between 1555 and 1562 the Register records 88 men by name who were sent out from Geneva to different places as "bearers of the gospel."[20]

In reality many more than 88 were sent. In one year, 1561, though the Register mentions only twelve missionaries, other sources indicate that at least 142 missionaries were sent![21] Hundreds of men were sent out, reaching Italy, Germany, Scotland, England, and practically covering France.[22] From all over Europe requests came to Geneva for ministers of the gospel and the Genevan Company of Pastors filled as many as possible. At times even their own churches were deprived of pastors in order to meet the needs of struggling groups abroad.[23] Thus, Geneva, under Calvin's direction, served as the heart of the Reformation in Europe, pumping out the lifeblood of trained ministers into all areas.

In addition to the extensive work in Europe, one group of Genevan missionaries was sent to Brazil. The Register simply states that on Tuesday, August 25, 1556, M. Pierre Richier and M. Guillaume were sent as ministers to Brazil. "These two were subsequently commended to the care of the Lord and sent off with a letter from this church."[24] The ministers were sent in response to a request from Admiral Coligny, a Huguenot leader. They were to serve as chaplains for a group of Protestants who were going to Brazil to establish a colony, and they would have opportunity to instruct the natives in the gospel.[25] One man who went on the trip wrote that, upon receiving the request,

the church of Geneva at once gave thanks to God for the extension of the reign of Jesus Christ in a country so distant and likewise so foreign and among a nation entirely without knowledge of the true God.[26]

Sadly, the mission was not successful because the leader of the group betrayed the Protestants. Some were killed, and others were sent back to Europe. Though the mission failed, it remains "a striking testimony to the far reaching missionary vision of Calvin and his Genevan colleagues."[27]

Conclusion

Though evangelism was not discussed as much in the sixteenth century as it would be later, Calvin proved himself to be genuinely concerned for the spread of the true gospel. In light of the situation of the world around him, his mission activity, and that of his colleagues, is truly admirable. His writings also show that he believed the gospel should be preached to all. The missionary endeavors of the Genevan church especially prove Calvin's commitment to missions. Speaking of these efforts, Philip Hughes states,

Here is irrefutable proof of the falsity of the too common conclusion that Calvinism is incompatible with evangelism and spells death to all missionary enterprise.[28]

Clearly, Calvin must have believed his teachings were compatible with mission work since he was so involved in such work himself. Whether or not one agrees with all of Calvin's views or actions, one must admit the great reformer's teachings (including predestination) do indeed support evangelism and mission work.

Selected Bibliography

Beaver, R. Pierce. "The Genevan Mission to Brazil." In The Heritage of John Calvin, ed. J. H. Bratt, 55-73. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1973.

Calvin, John. Calvin's Commentaries. Ephesians - Jude. Wilmington, DE: Associated Publishers and Authors, n.d.

. Calvin's Commentaries. Vol. 7, The Gospels. Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors, Inc., n.d.

. Calvin: Commentaries. Edited by Joseph Haroutunian. Vol. 23, The Library of Christian Classics, eds. Baillie, McNeill, Van Dusen. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963.

. Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Vols. 20-21, The Library of Christian Classics, eds. Baillie, McNeill, Van Dusen. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.

. Calvin's New Testament Commentaries. The Epistles Paul the Apostle to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians. Edited by David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance. Translated by T. H. L. Parker. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965.

Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God. Translated by J. K. S. Reid. London: James Clarke and Co. Limited, 1961.

Chadwick, Owen. The Reformation. Vol. 3, The Penguin History of the Church, ed. Owen Chadwick. Pelican Books, 1964; reprint, New York: Penguin Group, Penguin Books, 1990.

George, Timothy. Theology of the Reformers. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1988.

Gerstner, John H. A Predestination Primer. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960; reprint, Winona Lake, IN: Alpha Publications, 1980.

Hughes, Philip E. "John Calvin: Director of Missions." In The Heritage of John Calvin, ed. J. H. Bratt, 40-54. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1973.

. ed. and trans. The Register of the Company of Pastors of Geneva in the Time of Calvin. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1966.

Hunter, A. Mitchell. The Teaching of Calvin, A Modern Interpretation. Glasgow: Maclehose, Jackson, and Company, 1920.

James, Frank A., III. "Calvin and Missions." Christian History 5, no. 4 (Fall 1986) : 23.

"It was both 'a horrible decree' and 'very sweet fruit."' Christian History, 5, no. 4 (Fall 1986) : 24-26.

Kingdon, Robert M. "Calvinist Religious Aggression." In The French Wars of Religion, How Important Were Religious Factors?, ed. J. H. M. Salmon, 6-11. Problems in European Civilization, eds. Ralph W. Greenlaw and Dwight E. Lee. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Company, 1967.

Kuiper, R. B. God Centered Evangelism. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1961; reprint, Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1978.

McGrath, Alister E. A Life of John Calvin, a Study in the Shaping of Western Culture. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1990.

McNeill, John T. The History and Character of Calvinism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1954.

[WriteOn]

"A Moderate Calvinist might say that."


Kind of makes an oxymoron out of orthodox Calvinist.:)

[T.L.Sink]

He felt (probably so) that Servetus' Christology ultimately
led to denial of the Trinity.

[P-Marlowe]

He felt (probably so) that Servetus' Christology ultimately led to denial of the Trinity.

Well obviously anyone with those kinds of beliefs should be burned at the stake. You need to get them used to those high temperatures, eh?

I suppose Jesus told his followers to burn heretics at the stake somewhere in the bible, didn't he? After all Calvin was a sola scriptura kinda guy, wasn't he? He wouldn't have done that unless there was a scripture or two that could be interpreted to command the elders to burn non-trinitarians at the stake, would he?

BTW, do they burn Jehovah's witnesses in Presbyterian assemblies these days? I've never been to one, so I'm not really familiar with their sacraments.

[suzyjaruki]

I see from your webpage that you are Episcopalian. I know that a Licentiate from my denomination (OPC) left to become a pastor of a Reformed Episcopalian church. I didn't know until last year that there was a Reformed Episcopalian denomination. Are you "Reformed" or Anglican in the manner of J.I. Packer?

[suzyjaruki]

Does not God share that desire with you? (1 Tim 2:4)
In that sense is not your will aligned with His?

Certainly, in view of how I interpret the passage you cited.

[P-Marlowe]

Certainly, in view of how I interpret the passage you cited.

It's pretty plain to me what it says. It doesn't take a theologian to interpret it. But how do you interpret it?

Do you have to add or subtract a word or two around "all men" or change men to "the elect"? Or do you accept it exactly as the holy spirit inspired Paul to write it, i.e, "all men"?

[P-Marlowe]

Kind of makes an oxymoron out of orthodox Calvinist.:)

An "Orthodox" Calvinist might say that a "Moderate" Calvinist is an Arminian.

An Orthodox Calvinist might say that.

[T.L.Sink]

After many years in the priesthood of the Episcopal Church (ECUSA), I
left it to join another orthodox Anglican body. The first
thing that precipitated my decision was the ordination of women. This
had nothing (contrary to secular propaganda)to do with male
chauvinism or Judeo-Christian patriarchialism. The reason
was that the Form and Intention (excuse the theological
jargon) of the Sacrament of Ordination was violated --
which made the female "ordinations" invalid from a catholic
orthodox perspective. The second major event was the
ordination of gays. In addition to the above, ECUSA was
becoming thoroughly secular, LEFTIST, PC, and in some
ways anti-American. I often say that I didn't leave ECUSA,
it LEFT me. Forgive my ignorance but what denomination
is "OPC"? One of my seminary classmates went to the
Reformed Episcopal Church. If you'd like to learn more
about it, I'll give you his e-mail. All best,

[suzyjaruki]

It doesn't take a theologian to interpret it.

Whew! I'm not a theologian, so I guess my interpretation is as good as yours, huh, since it is pretty plain to me also.

Since the passage is talking about prayer, I interpret it to mean that I should pray for all men and not just one particular group. I am to include neighbors, coworkers, etc. in my prayers and not just my family, for instance.

[P-Marlowe]

Whew! I'm not a theologian, so I guess my interpretation is as good as yours, huh, since it is pretty plain to me also.

Would you agree with the following in regard to 1 Tim 2:4:

What then? Shall we try to put another meaning into the text than that which it fairly bears? I trow not. You must, most of you, be acquainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text. "All men," say they,—"that is, some men": as if the Holy Ghost could not have said "some men" if he had meant some men. "All men," say they; "that is, some of all sorts of men": as if the Lord could not have said "all sorts of men" if he had meant that.

The Holy Ghost by the apostle has written "all men," and unquestionably he means all men. I know how to get rid of the force of the "alls" according to that critical method which some time ago was very current, but I do not see how it can be applied here with due regard to truth. I was reading just now the exposition of a very able doctor who explains the text so as to explain it away; he applies grammatical gunpowder to it, and explodes it by way of expounding it. I thought when I read his exposition that it would have been a very capital comment upon the text if it had read, "Who will not have all men to be saved, nor come to a knowledge of the truth." Had such been the inspired language every remark of the learned doctor would have been exactly in keeping, but as it happens to say, "Who will have all men to be saved," his observations are more than a little out of place.

My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself; for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent? But I do think it a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it, "God our Savior; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."

Does not the text mean that it is the wish of God that men should be saved? The word "wish" gives as much force to the original as it really requires, and the passage should run thus—"whose wish it is that all men should be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth." As it is my wish that it should be so, as it is your wish that it might be so, so it is God's wish that all men should be saved; for, assuredly, he is not less benevolent than we are.

[suzyjaruki]

I often say that I didn't leave ECUSA, it LEFT me.

That causes me to feel so sad.

Forgive my ignorance but what denomination is "OPC"?

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church

I understand what you are saying about women and ordination. I am a firm believer in the doctrine of male headship. I also believe that when women are ordained in a denomination, the next step is mysticism and ordination of gays.

[connectthedots]

He was also very clear about why he had Servetus burned at the stake.

So, Calvin was responsible for the execution of Servetus?

[T.L.Sink]

The period we're discussing was a VERY intolerant age --
with wars of religion, inquisitions, sundry persecutions.
It wasn't until after the Thirty Years War (1618-48)
that tolerance gradually began to pervade European thought.
Of course, if one arbitrarily selects certain biblical
passages and interprets them according to one's own
presuppositions anything can be justified. This is often
a perversion of the teachings of Christ and tells more
about the interpreter than is does about the Gospel. The
theologians and philosophers call this "absolutizing
the relative". I know of no instance in which Jesus
advocated violence or execution against those with whom
one disagrees. Much more could be said about the psychology
involved in religious intolerance but that would take a few
volumes!

[P-Marlowe]

The period we're discussing was a VERY intolerant age --

Excusing sin because of extrinsic circumstances is called.... Moral Relativism.

Was Calvin a Moral Relativist?

[suzyjaruki]

Would you agree with the following
Does not the text mean that it is the wish of God that men should be saved? The word "wish" gives as much force to the original as it really requires, and the passage should run thus—"whose wish it is that all men should be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth."

I do not agree with the change from will to wish. So I prefer the reading as it is translated, "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come..."

Ours is not a God who wishes, ours is a God who wills, and whatsoever He wills comes to pass.

[T.L.Sink]

Yes, as you said "the next step" was ordination of gays
for ECUSA. Please don't feel sad about my departure from
ECUSA -- it was a step that was taken after much prayer,
soul-searching, and spiritual introspection -- but after
the decision was made old LAZARUS COMING BACK FROM THE
DEAD COULDN'T HAVE FELT BETTER THAN I DID!! It was a
genuine sense of renewal and rejuvenation! How does the
OPC relate to the U.S. Presbyterian church? From what
I've read the Presbyterians are getting a little of the
ECUSA Leftist disease. Is that correct?

[P-Marlowe]

I do not agree with the change from will to wish. So I prefer the reading as it is translated, "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come..." Ours is not a God who wishes, ours is a God who wills, and whatsoever He wills comes to pass.

For places in the New Testament where the greek word in 1 Tim 2:4 that is translated “will”, means to "desire" or "wish," see Luk_8:20; Luk_23:8; Joh_16:19; Gal_4:20; Mar_7:24; 1Co_7:7; 1Co_11:3; 1Co_14:5; Mat_15:28.

So other than your disagreement that "will" means "to wish" the suggestion that will means to wish, do you have any other disagreements with that post?

[P-Marlowe]

Correction:

So other than your disagreement with the suggestion that "will" could be translated to mean "to wish", do you have any other disagreements with that post?

[suzyjaruki]

LAZARUS COMING BACK FROM THE DEAD COULDN'T HAVE FELT BETTER THAN I DID!!

Fantastic!

How does the OPC relate to the U.S. Presbyterian church?

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church website would better answer your questions about the history, etc. of the organization. It is the Presbyterian Church, USA that has moved left not the OPC or the PCA(Presybterian Church in America).

[suzyjaruki]

Sure, The Holy Ghost by the aspostle has written "all men" and unquestionably he means all men. - as if the Holy Ghost could not have said "some men" if he had meant "some men."

Well, there it is. I guess this writer must think the Holy Ghost doesn't really care about women. He doesn't mention that the Holy Ghost could have said "all humans" or "all people", but only said "all men", so there it is so I guess I'll have to disagree with that part of the post too.