What do you think?
Rate this book
John Calvin: A Sixteenth-Century Portrait
Historians have credited--or blamed--Calvinism for many developments in the modern world, including capitalism, modern science, secularization, democracy, individualism, and unitarianism. These same historians, however, have largely ignored John Calvin the man. When people consider him at all, they tend to view him as little more than the joyless tyrant of Geneva who created an abstract theology as forbidding as himself.
This volume, written by the eminent historian William J. Bouwsma, who has devoted his career to exploring the larger patterns of early modern European history, seeks to redress these common misconceptions of Calvin by placing him back in the proper historical context of his time.
Eloquently depicting Calvin's life as a French exile, a humanist in the tradition of Erasmus, and a man unusually sensitive to the complexities and contradictions of later Renaissance culture, Bouwsma reveals a surprisingly human, plausible, ecumenical, and often sympathetic Calvin. John Calvin offers a brilliant reassessment not only of Calvin but also of the Reformation and its relationship to the movements of the Renaissance.
This volume, written by the eminent historian William J. Bouwsma, who has devoted his career to exploring the larger patterns of early modern European history, seeks to redress these common misconceptions of Calvin by placing him back in the proper historical context of his time.
Eloquently depicting Calvin's life as a French exile, a humanist in the tradition of Erasmus, and a man unusually sensitive to the complexities and contradictions of later Renaissance culture, Bouwsma reveals a surprisingly human, plausible, ecumenical, and often sympathetic Calvin. John Calvin offers a brilliant reassessment not only of Calvin but also of the Reformation and its relationship to the movements of the Renaissance.
310 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1987
6 people are currently reading
118 people want to read
About the author
William J. Bouwsma
13 books5 followersWilliam James Bouwsma was an American scholar and historian of the European Renaissance. He was Sather Professor of History Emeritus at the University of California Berkeley and president of the American Historical Association (AHA) in 1978.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
December 29, 2021
one of the lesser-known of america's founding fathers
February 19, 2018
I may be among a small minority of laymen (from both the clergy and the academy) to read this book. In my estimation it is not written for the wide audience, although it is not as arcane by a long shot as other academic works can be. Bouwsma's biography is dense, but has enough to stay interesting for those interested in the intersection of protestant theology, medieval cultural history, and humanist thinking.
However, looking back on my reading, I struggle to recall clear take-away's. Bouwsma does not have a crystal clear thesis, in fact he very much embraces complexity, in individuals, in history, in culture. Despite this, I have found the following points illuminated for me.
One: there is a central dualism between Calvin the conservative theologian and the Calvin the humanist rhetorician at the heart of Calvinism. First, Bouwsma describes the traditionally-understood Calvin as systematic theologian, who is at his heart conservative, orthodox, and doctrinaire. This Calvin is a man of the old world, with ideas seemingly contradictory with the tolerance and eclecticism of the upcoming Renaissance. However, Bouwsma also draws compelling textual evidence for Calvin the humanist, who is a man of the world, who wishes to reconcile faith to the realities of the world. This Calvin sees the clergy not as purist defenders of unadulterated doctrine, but as mediators who are responsible for making the gospel tangible for all Christians, of high and low learning. This Calvin tolerates ambiguity and contradiction in scripture, and puts greater emphasis on the human as divine rather than the divide between the two. The two Calvin's are in stark contrast to each other, they are hard to reconcile against each other, and Bouwsma makes no attempt to do so for us.
Two: early Protestantism is surprisingly zealous. My impression of "Calvinism" was a waspy mainline faith that emphasized culture over dogma. To my surprise, Bouwsma's Calvin had a lot more of the fire and brimstone baptist in him, who's message of sin, judgement, and the general misery of the human condition was louder than his humanist pronouncements of the divinity in man, of mercy and grace as the central message of the gospel. I was surprised at the backwardness of some of Calvin's conservatism (though I should not have been). His conception of the role of the woman was true to the 16th century - women should be the obedient and submissive party of the marriage, it is right that they should serve and not lead, cook and not think. Even his thoughts on church and state were less progressive than I expected. Calvin seemed to imagine a pseudo theocracy in which the clergy were different people than civil magistrates, but they worked hand in hand to strengthen a thoroughly Christian city-state. And this from Geneva, certainly not associated with theocracy or religious dogma in the modern world.
Three: Bouwsma doesn't make a compelling case for Calvin as a remarkable historical figure. I've learned quite a bit about his theology, but as Bouwsma admits himself, Calvin's theology is recombination of old ideas. Very little, if any, of his ideas are novel. In that case then, why are we to believe that he was a significant figure in history. Was the growth of Calvinism little more than historical coincidence? Having little to do with any heavy lifting by Calvin himself? Bouwsma seems uninterested in addressing this question, so we are left to wonder.
However, looking back on my reading, I struggle to recall clear take-away's. Bouwsma does not have a crystal clear thesis, in fact he very much embraces complexity, in individuals, in history, in culture. Despite this, I have found the following points illuminated for me.
One: there is a central dualism between Calvin the conservative theologian and the Calvin the humanist rhetorician at the heart of Calvinism. First, Bouwsma describes the traditionally-understood Calvin as systematic theologian, who is at his heart conservative, orthodox, and doctrinaire. This Calvin is a man of the old world, with ideas seemingly contradictory with the tolerance and eclecticism of the upcoming Renaissance. However, Bouwsma also draws compelling textual evidence for Calvin the humanist, who is a man of the world, who wishes to reconcile faith to the realities of the world. This Calvin sees the clergy not as purist defenders of unadulterated doctrine, but as mediators who are responsible for making the gospel tangible for all Christians, of high and low learning. This Calvin tolerates ambiguity and contradiction in scripture, and puts greater emphasis on the human as divine rather than the divide between the two. The two Calvin's are in stark contrast to each other, they are hard to reconcile against each other, and Bouwsma makes no attempt to do so for us.
Two: early Protestantism is surprisingly zealous. My impression of "Calvinism" was a waspy mainline faith that emphasized culture over dogma. To my surprise, Bouwsma's Calvin had a lot more of the fire and brimstone baptist in him, who's message of sin, judgement, and the general misery of the human condition was louder than his humanist pronouncements of the divinity in man, of mercy and grace as the central message of the gospel. I was surprised at the backwardness of some of Calvin's conservatism (though I should not have been). His conception of the role of the woman was true to the 16th century - women should be the obedient and submissive party of the marriage, it is right that they should serve and not lead, cook and not think. Even his thoughts on church and state were less progressive than I expected. Calvin seemed to imagine a pseudo theocracy in which the clergy were different people than civil magistrates, but they worked hand in hand to strengthen a thoroughly Christian city-state. And this from Geneva, certainly not associated with theocracy or religious dogma in the modern world.
Three: Bouwsma doesn't make a compelling case for Calvin as a remarkable historical figure. I've learned quite a bit about his theology, but as Bouwsma admits himself, Calvin's theology is recombination of old ideas. Very little, if any, of his ideas are novel. In that case then, why are we to believe that he was a significant figure in history. Was the growth of Calvinism little more than historical coincidence? Having little to do with any heavy lifting by Calvin himself? Bouwsma seems uninterested in addressing this question, so we are left to wonder.
August 30, 2017
In John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait, William J. Bouwsma presents a different perspective on the life and various aspects of the thought of the French reformer. In this work, Bouwsma states that his main goal in writing this book is “to interpret Calvin as a figure of his time: as a representative French intellectual, an evangelical humanist and therefore a rhetorician, and an exile.” Thus, his treatment of Calvin differs from that of most works on the subject in that he states that his goal is to write a portrait rather than a biography. Thus, he is not primarily concerned with presenting the life of Calvin or his overall theology (although he does touch upon these at various points in his work). Also, while the work is “not primarily a psychological study” he also attempts to explore the complexities of Calvin’s personality. He does this by presenting different aspects of his religious and philosophical thought as well as portions of his life and attempting to derive an idea of his psyche from these.
Since this work was not intended to be biographical in nature, Bouwsma dedicates only the first chapter to giving a brief summary of Calvin’s life, beginning with his birth in Noyon in 1509 to his death in Geneva in 1564, going through his education and the influences that shaped him before and after his conversion to Protestantism. It is noted how he pays tribute to Luther for his role in bringing about the reformation, and influence on his thought. More prominently, the author notes how Calvin was influenced by Erasmus’ thought. This is heavily emphasized throughout the book, as the author states that Calvin “inhabited the Erasmian world of thought and breathed its spiritual atmosphere; he remained in major ways always a humanist of the late Renaissance.” This is in keeping with Bouwsma’s stated goals at the beginning, although it must be noted that he does appear at times to exaggerate the similarity in thought between the two figures (especially when he states that “there was little in the reformism of Erasmus and Rabelais that did not become a permanent part of Calvin’s reform program”), and underemphasizes the differences in their thought, such as Calvin’s emphasis on the reformation principles such as five solas (which was never a part of Erasmus’ thought since he never actually broke with the Roman Church).
Also, the author stresses Calvin’s reliance on the writings of pagan writers, especially orators such as Cicero, Seneca and Quintilian. This is once again in line with the author’s conception of Calvin as being in the same line as the Renaissance Humanists. While these pagan writers undoubtedly left their mark on Calvin’s thought and methods, Bouwsma does at times tend to exaggerate this influence. For example, there is a lack of evidence to support his contention that “emotionally, if not theologically, a large part of Calvin remained pagan.” It is also interesting to note that while Bouwsma touches heavily upon Calvin’s use of pagan writers, he scarcely mentions his reliance on patristic authors such as Augustine, which is an odd omission given how important patristic influences were to the humanists and reformers.
One other criticism that has to be made regarding Bouwsma’s approach to Calvin is his tendency to try and psycho-analyze the reformer. Oftentimes, he tries to explain Calvin’s thought in terms of perceived “anxiety,” even devoting an entire chapter to this theme, as well as bringing it up at regular intervals in subsequent chapters and interpreting his doctrinal positions in that light. A good example of this is how Bouwsma uses this to explain Calvin’s emphasis on predestination, saying this “provides a remedy for the anxiety accompanying activity in society.” While this may be true to some extent, it is giving the idea of “anxiety” more emphasis than is due to it. Besides, psycho-analyses of historical figures in the distant past will always involve a certain level of speculation, since the one making the analysis was not around to observe the subject, and has to rely on extant written records.
Overall, Bouwsma’s portrait of John Calvin is a worthy addition to the long list of works dealing with Calvin and the other reformers. It is well-researched, as can be seen by the copious references to Calvin’s sermons, commentaries and Institutes throughout the book. Primary sources from other authors living in the same time period are referenced as well, with only sparse quotations of secondary sources. Regardless of whether one agrees with his analysis of Calvin or not, it cannot be denied that Bouwsma took plenty of time to go back the primary sources to bolster his theses. Also, his approach to Calvin is fairly even-handed. While he does not idealize the reformer, neither does he demonize him, and in fact goes out of his way to dispel some of the negative myths surrounding Calvin (such as the controversy regarding Michael Servetus). He presents both the positive and negative aspects of Calvin’s thought (including some aspects that are not often covered in most other studies of Calvin). This is good, as it means that the author does not attempt to please either supporters or detractors of John Calvin, but rather attempts to come up with his own analysis of the reformer.
Finally, it must be said that John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait is not an introductory text to the life and thought of Calvin, nor does it claim to be. The book does to a large extent presuppose that the reader already has some prior background knowledge regarding the reformer, as it is expected that one already has a basic outline of who he is and what ideas he is known for. Thus, this book is good for readers who want a supplementary work to other extant writings on John Calvin, but if one is looking for an introduction to his life and thought, then one has to look elsewhere, and save this book for when one has already acquired information regarding him from other sources.
Since this work was not intended to be biographical in nature, Bouwsma dedicates only the first chapter to giving a brief summary of Calvin’s life, beginning with his birth in Noyon in 1509 to his death in Geneva in 1564, going through his education and the influences that shaped him before and after his conversion to Protestantism. It is noted how he pays tribute to Luther for his role in bringing about the reformation, and influence on his thought. More prominently, the author notes how Calvin was influenced by Erasmus’ thought. This is heavily emphasized throughout the book, as the author states that Calvin “inhabited the Erasmian world of thought and breathed its spiritual atmosphere; he remained in major ways always a humanist of the late Renaissance.” This is in keeping with Bouwsma’s stated goals at the beginning, although it must be noted that he does appear at times to exaggerate the similarity in thought between the two figures (especially when he states that “there was little in the reformism of Erasmus and Rabelais that did not become a permanent part of Calvin’s reform program”), and underemphasizes the differences in their thought, such as Calvin’s emphasis on the reformation principles such as five solas (which was never a part of Erasmus’ thought since he never actually broke with the Roman Church).
Also, the author stresses Calvin’s reliance on the writings of pagan writers, especially orators such as Cicero, Seneca and Quintilian. This is once again in line with the author’s conception of Calvin as being in the same line as the Renaissance Humanists. While these pagan writers undoubtedly left their mark on Calvin’s thought and methods, Bouwsma does at times tend to exaggerate this influence. For example, there is a lack of evidence to support his contention that “emotionally, if not theologically, a large part of Calvin remained pagan.” It is also interesting to note that while Bouwsma touches heavily upon Calvin’s use of pagan writers, he scarcely mentions his reliance on patristic authors such as Augustine, which is an odd omission given how important patristic influences were to the humanists and reformers.
One other criticism that has to be made regarding Bouwsma’s approach to Calvin is his tendency to try and psycho-analyze the reformer. Oftentimes, he tries to explain Calvin’s thought in terms of perceived “anxiety,” even devoting an entire chapter to this theme, as well as bringing it up at regular intervals in subsequent chapters and interpreting his doctrinal positions in that light. A good example of this is how Bouwsma uses this to explain Calvin’s emphasis on predestination, saying this “provides a remedy for the anxiety accompanying activity in society.” While this may be true to some extent, it is giving the idea of “anxiety” more emphasis than is due to it. Besides, psycho-analyses of historical figures in the distant past will always involve a certain level of speculation, since the one making the analysis was not around to observe the subject, and has to rely on extant written records.
Overall, Bouwsma’s portrait of John Calvin is a worthy addition to the long list of works dealing with Calvin and the other reformers. It is well-researched, as can be seen by the copious references to Calvin’s sermons, commentaries and Institutes throughout the book. Primary sources from other authors living in the same time period are referenced as well, with only sparse quotations of secondary sources. Regardless of whether one agrees with his analysis of Calvin or not, it cannot be denied that Bouwsma took plenty of time to go back the primary sources to bolster his theses. Also, his approach to Calvin is fairly even-handed. While he does not idealize the reformer, neither does he demonize him, and in fact goes out of his way to dispel some of the negative myths surrounding Calvin (such as the controversy regarding Michael Servetus). He presents both the positive and negative aspects of Calvin’s thought (including some aspects that are not often covered in most other studies of Calvin). This is good, as it means that the author does not attempt to please either supporters or detractors of John Calvin, but rather attempts to come up with his own analysis of the reformer.
Finally, it must be said that John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait is not an introductory text to the life and thought of Calvin, nor does it claim to be. The book does to a large extent presuppose that the reader already has some prior background knowledge regarding the reformer, as it is expected that one already has a basic outline of who he is and what ideas he is known for. Thus, this book is good for readers who want a supplementary work to other extant writings on John Calvin, but if one is looking for an introduction to his life and thought, then one has to look elsewhere, and save this book for when one has already acquired information regarding him from other sources.
January 5, 2020
John Calvin was born in France in 1509 and died in 1564, the same year that Michelangelo died and the year that gave birth to Shakespeare, Marlowe, and Galileo. Although this book gives a thumbnail sketch of Calvin’s life, it is primarily about the influences on his thought and the philosophy he developed.
What I found most fascinating in the book was the depth of Calvin’s learning and scholarship. He was fluent in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, which enabled him to study all of the classical authors of the Hellenistic and Hebraic traditions inherited by Europe. When he was exiled from France in 1534 and settled in Switzerland, he came under the influence of Erasmus and other Reformation and Italian Renaissance figures who also took refuge there. The book quotes Calvin extensively throughout, so you feel you are getting the story of his thinking from the horse’s mouth.
Of particular interest was this passage: “His identification by posterity with a body of thought known as ‘Calvinism’ would have given him particular trouble.” While devoutly Christian to be sure, his thinking was considerably more balanced than today’s popular notions about Calvinism and Puritanism.
It is also amusing to read Calvin’s thoughts on tyranny and hypocrisy in this age of Trump: “[Where] no one yields to others, everyone tests how much he can get away with. The result is freedom to plunder and ravage, deception and killing.” And: “When tyranny has lost its concern for justice, there are no limits to its wickedness; and lamentations do not soften it but aggravate its cruelty. And flatterers excite it by saying that the shortest way to control subjects and keep them quiet is so to oppress them that they do not even dare to open their mouths…”
Anyone interested in the history of philosophy and the history of religion will find this book of interest.
What I found most fascinating in the book was the depth of Calvin’s learning and scholarship. He was fluent in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, which enabled him to study all of the classical authors of the Hellenistic and Hebraic traditions inherited by Europe. When he was exiled from France in 1534 and settled in Switzerland, he came under the influence of Erasmus and other Reformation and Italian Renaissance figures who also took refuge there. The book quotes Calvin extensively throughout, so you feel you are getting the story of his thinking from the horse’s mouth.
Of particular interest was this passage: “His identification by posterity with a body of thought known as ‘Calvinism’ would have given him particular trouble.” While devoutly Christian to be sure, his thinking was considerably more balanced than today’s popular notions about Calvinism and Puritanism.
It is also amusing to read Calvin’s thoughts on tyranny and hypocrisy in this age of Trump: “[Where] no one yields to others, everyone tests how much he can get away with. The result is freedom to plunder and ravage, deception and killing.” And: “When tyranny has lost its concern for justice, there are no limits to its wickedness; and lamentations do not soften it but aggravate its cruelty. And flatterers excite it by saying that the shortest way to control subjects and keep them quiet is so to oppress them that they do not even dare to open their mouths…”
Anyone interested in the history of philosophy and the history of religion will find this book of interest.
October 23, 2022
If you're looking for an historical biography of John Calvin, this is not particularly helpful. Surprisingly little historical information is given, and that which is presented is somewhat disorganized, not chronological, and feels as though it is assuming a knowledge of Calvin's context and the figures of his time that most laypeople would not possess. This book is moreso a scholarly psychological study of Calvin's thought in the context of the 16th century (as the title might suggest), and reads like a dissertation (for better or worse). As such, occasionally, some of Calvin's intellect and unique theology comes through, and the book can be a helpful primer, with copious quotations from the Reformer from all available primary sources. Often, however, Calvin's words are placed through the author's filter; a filter which doesn't seem to hold Calvin himself in terribly high esteem. Interestingly, very little is said about Calvin's doctrines of predestination, and most attention is paid to things like Calvin's anxiety and emotional content, some of his paradoxical teachings, his polity, his doctrine of man and sin, etc., all of which are interesting, but are not necessarily what would draw most people to a work on a figure like John Calvin. So, if you're looking for a book to learn more about the historic Calvin and his doctrines of predestination, this book will not be terribly helpful. If you want Bouwsma's understanding of the "two Calvin's", and a psychological interpretation of why Calvin thought the way he thought, there could be some value in this book.
July 10, 2025
Not your father's Calvin, but certainly a Calvin closer to thw man himself. Bouwsma's knowledge and reading of Calvin's writing--not just the Institutes--is encyclopedic, broader & deeper than I've found just about anywhere else.
May 11, 2017
You don't have to buy the argument of this book to appreciate its value. It is an important biography.
July 18, 2023
This book makes me want to run personality tests on Calvin.
April 25, 2022
The Theology of John Calvin is a fitting magnus opus for Charles Partee, who devoted a lifetime to studying and understanding the work of the Reformer. This book is a great addition to the literature on Calvin’s theology as well as the debates that have surrounded the 16th Century Reformer since his first edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion was published in 1536. Partee’s knowledge of Calvin’s writings as well as the writings of Calvin’s proponents and opponents provides the strength to this work. This vast knowledge is also the book weakness. To get to Partee’s understanding of John Calvin, one has to wade through page after page of debate around various interpretations of the Reformer. Although this is an important work, this is not a book that I would recommend for one unfamiliar with the issues surrounding Calvin. To fully appreciate this book, one needs to have some understanding of the major issues of the Reformation as well as many of the theological debates of the past five centuries.
Partee begins his study with “three introductory conclusions” in which he identifies the opponents of Calvin (who often argue with a caricature of the reformer), the proponents of Calvin and, as he labels them, the misponents (those who think they are arguing for Calvin but have made wrong assumptions about the Reformer). As Partee points out neither Calvin nor Luther were philosophical theologians, but many of their followers were. (14) The theologians who followed both Reformers, with their philosophical insight, often create a haze over the original Reformers’ work. Partee finds agreement with Holmes Ralston (John Calvin Verses the Westminster Confession), who credits Calvin with rescuing him from the Calvinists. (17) For this to happen, one has to read and understand John Calvin and not just look at what the Reformers who followed Calvin had to say about him.
After his introductory chapter, Partee follows the outline that John Calvin used in the Institutes of the Christian Religion. Here, as he does throughout the book, Partee notes the disagreements over various interpretations of Calvin on this point. Many have followed the idea put forth by Benjamin Warfield that the Institutes are based on the four articles of the Apostles’ Creed. Others, such as Edward Dowey suggest the structure to be based on a two-fold knowledge of God (God the Creator and Redeemer). More recently, Philip Butin has suggested the Institutes follow a Trinitarian structure. The fourth interpretation of the structure, one that Partee uses throughout this study, emphasizes “union with Christ,” and sees the structure being divided into two parts: God for Us (Books 1 & 2, God the Creator and God the Redeemer) and God with Us (Books 3 & 4, The Faithful Person(s) and The Faithful Community). (40)
Going into a review of the various sections of Calvin’s study as outlined by Partee is beyond the scope of this review. But a few general comments are necessary here. Throughout the book, Partee argues that the writings of John Calvin are more Biblical than theological and that the Reformer is more confessional than logical or argumentative. Partee also argues that “union with Christ” is the center of Calvin’s theology. He deals with issues like election and predestination, but reminds his readers that although Calvin’s opponents (and some of his proponents) try to make this the core of his theology, it’s not. Surely, Calvin believed and wrote about predestination, but it was not the center of his theology. The topic isn’t even broached until well into the Institutes. This changed in later Reformed doctrines such as the Westminster Confession which moved the doctrine of election to the 3rd article and placed Jesus Christ as the 8th article. (243) Predestination, for Calvin, was taught because it’s Biblical. Furthermore, Calvin sees the doctrine as a comfort to the elect, who know that they can’t screw up their election if it is in God’s hands. Furthermore, the doctrine should create humility in the believer (you can’t brag about your salvation if it is God’s doing).
Not only does Partee have a wealth of information about theological debates, he is also well versed in the classics and sprinkles this work with quotes by the likes of John Bunyan, John Milton, William Shakespeare and Herman Melville.
For those with knowledge of Calvin and the theological issues of the 16th Century, I recommend this book. For others, I would recommend starting with Francois Wendel’sCalvin: The Origin and Development of His Religious Thought. As a disclaimer, I should note that a quarter of a century or so ago, I studied under Charles Partee and found him to be a wonderful and fascinating professor
Partee begins his study with “three introductory conclusions” in which he identifies the opponents of Calvin (who often argue with a caricature of the reformer), the proponents of Calvin and, as he labels them, the misponents (those who think they are arguing for Calvin but have made wrong assumptions about the Reformer). As Partee points out neither Calvin nor Luther were philosophical theologians, but many of their followers were. (14) The theologians who followed both Reformers, with their philosophical insight, often create a haze over the original Reformers’ work. Partee finds agreement with Holmes Ralston (John Calvin Verses the Westminster Confession), who credits Calvin with rescuing him from the Calvinists. (17) For this to happen, one has to read and understand John Calvin and not just look at what the Reformers who followed Calvin had to say about him.
After his introductory chapter, Partee follows the outline that John Calvin used in the Institutes of the Christian Religion. Here, as he does throughout the book, Partee notes the disagreements over various interpretations of Calvin on this point. Many have followed the idea put forth by Benjamin Warfield that the Institutes are based on the four articles of the Apostles’ Creed. Others, such as Edward Dowey suggest the structure to be based on a two-fold knowledge of God (God the Creator and Redeemer). More recently, Philip Butin has suggested the Institutes follow a Trinitarian structure. The fourth interpretation of the structure, one that Partee uses throughout this study, emphasizes “union with Christ,” and sees the structure being divided into two parts: God for Us (Books 1 & 2, God the Creator and God the Redeemer) and God with Us (Books 3 & 4, The Faithful Person(s) and The Faithful Community). (40)
Going into a review of the various sections of Calvin’s study as outlined by Partee is beyond the scope of this review. But a few general comments are necessary here. Throughout the book, Partee argues that the writings of John Calvin are more Biblical than theological and that the Reformer is more confessional than logical or argumentative. Partee also argues that “union with Christ” is the center of Calvin’s theology. He deals with issues like election and predestination, but reminds his readers that although Calvin’s opponents (and some of his proponents) try to make this the core of his theology, it’s not. Surely, Calvin believed and wrote about predestination, but it was not the center of his theology. The topic isn’t even broached until well into the Institutes. This changed in later Reformed doctrines such as the Westminster Confession which moved the doctrine of election to the 3rd article and placed Jesus Christ as the 8th article. (243) Predestination, for Calvin, was taught because it’s Biblical. Furthermore, Calvin sees the doctrine as a comfort to the elect, who know that they can’t screw up their election if it is in God’s hands. Furthermore, the doctrine should create humility in the believer (you can’t brag about your salvation if it is God’s doing).
Not only does Partee have a wealth of information about theological debates, he is also well versed in the classics and sprinkles this work with quotes by the likes of John Bunyan, John Milton, William Shakespeare and Herman Melville.
For those with knowledge of Calvin and the theological issues of the 16th Century, I recommend this book. For others, I would recommend starting with Francois Wendel’sCalvin: The Origin and Development of His Religious Thought. As a disclaimer, I should note that a quarter of a century or so ago, I studied under Charles Partee and found him to be a wonderful and fascinating professor
October 27, 2010
This book lays out John Calvin's ideas and points out the progression of his thought and his continuous modification of it as he sought to avoid absolutes. One can understand that the man was serious and a genius. I really enjoyed reading it . . . BUT . . .
Any reader should realize that this book is only a partial portrait of Calvin. It is not really a full biography. Rather, it is a biography of Calvin's brain. To the detriment of the reader and the book's authority, the author does not lay out the circumstances of Calvin's personal or public life except on a most superficial level. This is one of the book's extremely great weaknesses. Because of it, the reader does not obtain a full view of a very complex and significant man. Moreover, the author's remarks about Calvin's state of "anxiety" and other psychological or pseudo-psychological brief and unsupported comments have no meaning or content or real life context or supporting data. This gives rise to scepticism not only about the remarks themselves, but also about the basis of the book's whole structure or plan or theses. Therefore, this should NOT be the only book one reads about Calvin. Caveat Emptor!
Another problematical feature of the book is the use of the analogies to "labyrinth" and "abyss" as informing Calvin's thought (and even his personality!). The author points out that the analogies were common and meaningful in Calvin's time. Well, perhaps the use of the words was more common than now, but I would venture to say that the concepts or predicaments represented by the words are timeless and universal. They certainly apply to people these days! One wonders if the structure of the book is, therefore, forced into a mold in order to meet the presumed expectations of "scholarship". This provides more grounds for scepticism.
Any reader should realize that this book is only a partial portrait of Calvin. It is not really a full biography. Rather, it is a biography of Calvin's brain. To the detriment of the reader and the book's authority, the author does not lay out the circumstances of Calvin's personal or public life except on a most superficial level. This is one of the book's extremely great weaknesses. Because of it, the reader does not obtain a full view of a very complex and significant man. Moreover, the author's remarks about Calvin's state of "anxiety" and other psychological or pseudo-psychological brief and unsupported comments have no meaning or content or real life context or supporting data. This gives rise to scepticism not only about the remarks themselves, but also about the basis of the book's whole structure or plan or theses. Therefore, this should NOT be the only book one reads about Calvin. Caveat Emptor!
Another problematical feature of the book is the use of the analogies to "labyrinth" and "abyss" as informing Calvin's thought (and even his personality!). The author points out that the analogies were common and meaningful in Calvin's time. Well, perhaps the use of the words was more common than now, but I would venture to say that the concepts or predicaments represented by the words are timeless and universal. They certainly apply to people these days! One wonders if the structure of the book is, therefore, forced into a mold in order to meet the presumed expectations of "scholarship". This provides more grounds for scepticism.
Want to read
October 10, 2012[Calvin] abominated “mixture,” one of the most pejorative terms in his vocabulary; mixture in any area of experience suggested to him disorder and unintelligibility. He had absorbed deeply not only the traditional concern for cosmic purity of a culture that had restricted mixture to the sublunary realm but also various Old Testament prohibitions. Mixture, for Calvin, connoted “adulteration” or “promiscuity,” but it also set off in him deep emotional and metaphysical reverberations. He repeatedly warned against “mixing together things totally different.” “When water is mixed with fire,” he observed, “both perish”…
The positive corollary of Calvin’s loathing of mixture was his approval of boundaries, which separate one thing from another. He attributed boundaries to God himself: God had established the boundaries between peoples, which should therefore remain within the space assigned to them, a painful thought for an exile. “Just as there are in a miltary camp separate lines for each platoon and section,” Calvin observed, “men are placed on the earth so that each nation may be content with its own boundaries.” In this manner, he concluded, “God, by his providence, reduces to order that which is confused.” He sometimes conceived of Scripture itself as a God-given system of boundaries imposed on human existence…
The positive corollary of Calvin’s loathing of mixture was his approval of boundaries, which separate one thing from another. He attributed boundaries to God himself: God had established the boundaries between peoples, which should therefore remain within the space assigned to them, a painful thought for an exile. “Just as there are in a miltary camp separate lines for each platoon and section,” Calvin observed, “men are placed on the earth so that each nation may be content with its own boundaries.” In this manner, he concluded, “God, by his providence, reduces to order that which is confused.” He sometimes conceived of Scripture itself as a God-given system of boundaries imposed on human existence…
May 28, 2012
Bouwsma's Calvin is much more of a humanist than I was expecting, but he makes a good case for it. He also puts emphasis on Calvin's fears about disorder, which were common at the time, which I found strikingly similar to what I have read both about Luther and from Luther's own writings. Still, I wonder if he doesn't overdraw the connection just a bit between Calvin and humanism, and if he isn't short changing his theology a bit. Nonetheless, I bought the book because it was by a secular historian and not, at least as far as I can tell, influenced by confessional concerns. On the whole, I thought the book was stimulating and that he defends his "portrait" of Calvin fairly well.
June 6, 2011
The "labryinth" and the "abyss" are key words in Bouwsma's portrait of Calvin here, Bouwsma paints Calvin as a man full of the terror of God, yet also full of the love of God. A most enjoyable read on a one of the most influential minds in western civilization.
January 2, 2011
If you buy into psychoanalytic approaches to history, this book is for you. Otherwise, read Richard Muller's complete refutation of Bouwsma's book in The Unaccommodated Calvin.
March 16, 2016
Read for Reformation Europe.
June 13, 2016
This was an interesting look at Calvin in the context of his era. If you are looking for a pure biography this may not be the best, never the less it's still a good read.
May 1, 2017
Deleniti sit consequatur esse ex. Corporis incidunt sed. Quam non et qui. Perspiciatis dolore aut et maxime.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews