Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
History and Religion
Church Authority & the Canon (vs. Calvin #59)

Church Authority & the Canon (vs. Calvin #59)

Last updated on: June 6, 2026 at 12:43 am by Dave Armstrong

Church Authority & the Canon (vs. Calvin #59) 2026-06-06T00:43:04-04:00 Dave Armstrong

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This is an installment of a series of replies (see the Introduction and Master List) to much of Book IV (Of the Holy Catholic Church) — and some portions of Books I-III — of Institutes of the Christian Religion, by early Protestant leader John Calvin (1509-1564). I utilize the public domain translation of Henry Beveridge, dated 1845, from the 1559 edition in Latin; available online. Calvin’s words will be in blue. All biblical citations (in my portions) will be from RSV unless otherwise noted.

Related reading from yours truly:

Biblical Catholic Answers for John Calvin (2010 book: 388 pages)

A Biblical Critique of Calvinism (2012 book: 178 pages)

Biblical Catholic Salvation: “Faith Working Through Love” (2010 book: 187 pages; includes biblical critiques of all five points of “TULIP”)

*****

I, 7:1-2, 5 / 8:10, 12

***

With great insult to the Holy Spirit, it is asked, who can assure us that the Scriptures proceeded from God; who guarantee that they have come down safe and unimpaired to our times; (I, 7:1)

This is not an exegetical issue, but since it has directly to do with the Bible, I shall treat it in this and the next section.

Accuracy of manuscript transmission is indeed an important issue. In order for it to obtain, one must presuppose or accept that those who are transmitting it reverence the source enough to transmit it accurately. Historically, that task fell to monks: many of whom devoted their entire lives to it. This is of paramount importance, and is not mere fodder for Calvin’s tauntings and mockery, as if it were of no importance.

But note how Calvin is treating two different topics in his first and second clauses above. Cleverly, but sophistically, in the first clause, he directly ties in transmission with the notion of divine authorship (second clause), whereas they are two quite distinct matters. Ultimately (and somewhat technically), the Church doesn’t “guarantee” that Holy Scripture is inspired. That is held in faith, by the internal witness of the Holy Spirit. But it does claim some direct responsibility in accurate transmission.

In any event, the Catholic position, rightly understood, is no insult to the Holy Spirit at all, whereas misrepresentation and bearing of false witness about fellow Christians, certainly is such an insult.

who persuade us that this book is to be received with reverence, and that one expunged from the list, did not the Church regulate all these things with certainty? (I, 7:1)

It is historically unarguable that without authoritative Church pronouncements, differences about the canon of Scripture would have persisted, since they did (among equally godly men and eminent Church leaders) in the days before such pronouncements were made (notably in the late fourth century). This is easily demonstrable by documenting many historical facts; for example:

It was as late as 367 A.D. that St. Athanasius first listed the present 27 books of the New Testament.

Moreover, St. Athanasius did seem to lower the status of the deuterocanonical books (Old Testament books accepted by Catholics but rejected by Protestants) somewhat, but not to a sub-biblical level. He cites Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobit, and Susanna without distinguishing them from other biblical books.

James wasn’t even quoted by western Christians until around 350.

There were also disputes regarding canonicity about Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, and Revelation well into the fourth century.

In the same period, the Epistle of Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas were included in the prominent manuscript Codex Sinaiticus, and 1 and 2 Clement in the Codex Alexandrinus.

The Shepherd of Hermas was considered canonical by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, and Clement of Alexandria, and the Didache and Epistle of Barnabas by the latter two. Clement of Alexandria accepted The Apocalypse of Peter as Scripture, and Origen thought The Acts of Paul should be in the Bible.

The canon issue is quite distinct from the question of biblical inspiration. All Catholics have contended is that an authoritative declaration of canonicity was necessary in order to settle the issue once and for all, lest disagreements continue on indefinitely without resolution. This is patently obvious from facts such as the above (and they are only the tip of the iceberg).

Another way of stating this is to say that the biblical books are not “self-attesting” to the extent that Christians would spontaneously all come to an agreement on the canon. It’s similar to the issue of perspicuity (clearness) of Scripture. There is no way to prove that it exists (in the way that Protestants claim), except for actual historical agreement.

But we know that is not the case, by observing denominations and competing theologies in Protestantism. Likewise, we know that the biblical books (though we believe them in faith to be inspired) are not all equally obvious as to their inspiration. Therefore, the Church was quite necessary to declare the canon and clear up any confusion. Yet Calvin oddly mocks and slams this as if it were at all controversial or historically arguable.

On the determination of the Church, therefore, it is said, depend both the reverence which is due to Scripture, and the books which are to be admitted into the canon. (I, 7:1)

Once again, Calvin resorts to a sleight-of-hand in mixing categories that don’t belong together at all. The “reverence which is due to Scripture” doesn’t depend on the Church at all, and the Catholic Church never states that it does. It’s a bum rap. But the canon is dependent historically on authoritative Church decisions. The former aspect is not intrinsically tied to the latter (except, apparently in Calvin’s head). It’s neither a logical nor historical juxtaposition.

Thus profane men, seeking, under the pretext of the Church, to introduce unbridled tyranny, care not in what absurdities they entangle themselves and others, provided they extort from the simple this one acknowledgement—viz. that there is nothing which the Church cannot do. (I, 7:1)

None of this follows at all, as just shown, so it is mere empty anti-Catholic rhetoric, packed with hyper-charged insulting words (profane, tyranny, absurdities) for polemical effect. Shame on Calvin! Later, however, he states the actual truth of the Catholic position (while being unaware that it is the Catholic position): “Add, moreover, that, for the best of reasons, the consent of the Church is not without its weight” (I, 8:12).

But what is to become of miserable consciences in quest of some solid assurance of eternal life, if all the promises with regard to it have no better support than man’s Judgment? On being told so, will they cease to doubt and tremble? On the other hand, to what jeers of the wicked is our faith subjected—into how great suspicion is it brought with all, if believed to have only a precarious authority lent to it by the good will of men? (I, 7:1)

This is all quite true. The only problem is that it is a straw man. None of this is taught by Catholicism. Therefore, Calvin is right in principle, but dead wrong in application of any of this to the Catholic Church.

Nor is there any room for the cavil, that though the Church derives her first beginning from thence, it still remains doubtful what writings are to be attributed to the apostles and prophets, until her Judgment is interposed. (I, 7:2)

Let it therefore be held as fixed, that those who are inwardly taught by the Holy Spirit acquiesce implicitly in Scripture; that Scripture, carrying its own evidence along with it, deigns not to submit to proofs and arguments, but owes the full conviction with which we ought to receive it to the testimony of the Spirit. Enlightened by him, we no longer believe, either on our own Judgment or that of others, that the Scriptures are from God; but, in a way superior to human Judgment, feel perfectly assured—as much so as if we beheld the divine image visibly impressed on it—that it came to us, by the instrumentality of men, from the very mouth of God. (I, 7:5)

We retort that if this were indeed the case, why was there so much significant disagreement on the canon in the early Church, as shown above? Many godly men did not see that several books we consider Scripture today were indeed Scripture, by self-attestation, and conversely, saw in non-biblical books attributes that led them to falsely conclude that they were inspired.

Such, then, is a conviction which asks not for reasons; such, a knowledge which accords with the highest reason, namely knowledge in which the mind rests more firmly and securely than in any reasons; such in fine, the conviction which revelation from heaven alone can produce. I say nothing more than every believer experiences in himself, though my words fall far short of the reality. I do not dwell on this subject at present, because we will return to it again: only let us now understand that the only true faith is that which the Spirit of God seals on our hearts. (I, 7:5)

This is far too simplistic and subjective. We do indeed receive illumination and confirmation and internal witness in our spirits, concerning the inspired revelation of God, but we’re not infallible in how we perceive or receive it. One cannot, as a result, casually eliminate (as Calvin does) the historical role of the Church in the determination of the canon.

It’s often been pointed out that this highly subjective criteria that Calvin offers is essentially no different from the Mormon “burning in the bosom” that leads them to accept many heterodox doctrines and indeed, three more allegedly “scriptural” writings beyond the Bible.

Ironically, Calvin recognizes the important role of the Old Testament priests in preserving Scripture (even citing a deuterocanonical book), while at the same time minimizing or cavalierly dismissing the role of the New Testament Church (i.e., the Catholic Church), as if the latter preservation was somehow of lesser importance than the former:

An objection taken from the history of the Maccabees (1 Macc. 1:57, 58) to impugn the credibility of Scripture, is, on the contrary, fitted the best possible to confirm it. First, however, let us clear away the gloss which is put upon it: having done so, we shall turn the engine which they erect against us upon themselves. As Antiochus ordered all the books of Scripture to be burnt, it is asked, where did the copies we now have come from? I, in my turn, ask, In what workshop could they have been so quickly fabricated? It is certain that they were in existence the moment the persecution ceased, and that they were acknowledged without dispute by all the pious who had been educated in their doctrine, and were familiarly acquainted with them. Nay, while all the wicked so wantonly insulted the Jews as if they had leagued together for the purpose, not one ever dared to charge them with having introduced spurious books. Whatever, in their opinion, the Jewish religion might be, they acknowledged that Moses was the founder of it. What, then, do those babblers, but betray their snarling petulance in falsely alleging the spuriousness of books whose sacred antiquity is proved by the consent of all history? But not to spend labour in vain in refuting these vile calumnies, let us rather attend to the care which the Lord took to preserve his Word, when against all hope he rescued it from the truculence of a most cruel tyrant as from the midst of the flames—inspiring pious priests and others with such constancy that they hesitated not, though it should have been purchased at the expense of their lives, to transmit this treasure to posterity, and defeating the keenest search of prefects and their satellites. (I, 8:10)

***

(originally 2012)

Photo credit: Historical mixed media figure of John Calvin produced by artist/historian George S. Stuart and photographed by Peter d’Aprix: from the George S. Stuart Gallery of Historical Figures archive [Wikimedia Commons / Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license]

***

Catholic-Protestant debate

Church authority & biblical canon

Council of Carthage

Council of Hippo

Dave Armstrong

Dave Armstrong vs. John Calvin

INstitutes of the Christian Religion

John Calvin

St. Athanasius

Previous Post

August 31, 2020

Seidensticker Folly #48: Peter's Denials & Accusers

Next Post

September 2, 2020 Catholic & Calvinist Agreement on Justification & Works

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category & Last Things About Me Anti-Catholicism Atheism & Agnosticism Baptism and Sacramentalism Bible and Tradition Blessed Virgin Mary Books by Dave Armstrong C. S. Lewis Calvinism & General Protestantism Catholic Apologetics Catholic Apologists Catholic conversion Catholic converts Christmas Church (Ecclesiology) Church History Conversion and Converts Development of Doctrine Eastern Orthodoxy Ecumenism & Christian Unity Eucharist & Liturgy Fathers of the Church French Translations G. K. Chesterton Hell Hell & Satan Hell & Satan & Last Things Heresies & Comparative Religion Holistic Health Inquisition & Crusades & Scandals James White Jews & Judaism & Old Testament John Calvin John Henry Newman Liberal / Modernist Theology Life Issues Literary Resume Lutheranism Mariology Martin Luther Music Orthodoxy Papacy & Infallibility Personal Page Philosophy & Science Political & Ethical & Moral Issues Protestant Persecution & Intolerance Protestantism Purgatory Purgatory & Penance Romantic & Imaginative Theology Saints & Purgatory & Penance Salvation Salvation & Justification Satan & Last Things Sexuality and Gender Issues Spanish Translations Traditionalism vs. Radical Catholic Reactionaries Traducciones al español / tradução para português Trinitarianism & Christology Uncategorized Videos

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 October 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 March 2009 February 2009 October 2008 September 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 October 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 July 2004 May 2004 April 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz