Abstract
This chapter explains the role of ‘double predestination’ in the sixteenth-century Reformation. It was an idea rejected by the Roman Catholic Church; it was also never (despite the claims of some Reformation historians) fully embraced by Protestants since they too, like Catholics, needed to deny that God was the ‘author of sin.’ This chapter outlines the views of various Reformers and Reformed Confessions on the subject of double predestination, showing the extent to which this concept was embraced or rejected by Protestant theologians. These theologians appreciated the way the theory placed more power in the hands of God and less in the hands of humans, but at the same time, they did not want to assign God the responsibility for sin.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Luther, “On the Bondage of the Will,” 223. For the usual view, see for instance, Aquinas , who says:
hardening of heart seems allied to sin … Consequently, if God hardens the heart, He is the author of a sin—contrary to what is said in James (1:13): ‘God is no tempter to evil.’ The answer is that God is not said to harden anyone directly, as though He causes their malice, but indirectly, inasmuch as man makes an occasion of sin out of things God does within or outside the man; and this God Himself permits. Hence, he is not said to harden as though by inserting malice, but by not affording grace.
Thomas Aquinas , Lectures on the Letter to the Romans, trans. Fabian Larcher , (Aquinas Center for Theological Renewal), http://nvjournal.net/files/Aquinas_on_Romans.pdf, 388.
- 2.
Luther, “On the Bondage of the Will,” 259. For some additional citations from this text supporting Luther’s acceptance of double predestination, see Joel R. Beeke, Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), 19.
- 3.
Kolb, Bound Choice, 269.
- 4.
Luther, “On the Bondage of the Will,” 231.
- 5.
Jerom Zanchius, The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination Stated and Asserted, trans. Augustus Toplady (New York, Paul and Thomas: 1811), 147 (Chapter 4, position 5).
- 6.
Qtd. in R.T. Kendall , Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), 30.
- 7.
William Perkins, “A Golden Chaine: or, the Description of Theologie” (Armilla Aurea), trans. Robert Hill , in The Workes of … William Perkins. 3 vols. (London, 1626–1631), 1:109 (chapter 54).
- 8.
Augustine, “Miscellany of Questions in Response to Simplician I,” in Selected Writings on Grace and Pelagianism, trans. Roland Teske (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2011), 61.
- 9.
John Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.5, 926.
- 10.
Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.1, 947.
- 11.
For the Latin, see John Calvin, Institutio Christianae religionis (Geneva, 1559), 345.
- 12.
John Calvin , Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, trans. J.K.S. Reid (London: James Clarke & Co., 1961), 120–1.
- 13.
Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.1, 947. Calvin goes on, some pages later, “they would maintain that the wicked perish because God permit it, not because he so wills. But why shall we say ‘permission’ unless it is because God so wills?,” 956. Similarly, William Perkins notes, “there is an unchangeable decree of election of some men … and therefore necessarily by the law of contraries, there is an opposite decree of reprobation.” “An Exposition of the Symbole,” in Workes, 1:279.
- 14.
Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.7, 955.
- 15.
“Decretum quidem horribile, fateor,” Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.7, 955, note 17.
- 16.
Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.7, 955–6.
- 17.
Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.8, 957. Calvin’s reluctance to fully endorse double predestination thinking is rarely noted. For instance, Leif Dixon’s recent study says “everybody agrees” that “Calvinism ” is a synonym for “the doctrine of double predestination.” Practical Predestinarians in England, c. 1590–1640 (Farnham, Surrey and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2014), 9.
- 18.
Robert Kolb, “Nikolaus Von Amsdorf on Vessels of Wrath and Vessels of Mercy: A Lutheran’s Doctrine of Double Predestination.” Harvard Theological Review 69.3–4 (July–October 1976), 325–43.
- 19.
Peter Martyr (Pietro Martire) Vermigli, Predestination and Justification, 16, 23.
- 20.
Jerom Zanchius, The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination , 146 (Chapter 4, position 4). In Strasbourg, Zanchius was aggressively criticized by Johann Marbach (1521–1581) for maintaining such a strong double predestination view. See Beeke, Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination, 37–45.
- 21.
Theodore Beza, A Briefe Declaration of the Chiefe Poyntes of the Christian Religion, Set Foorthe in a Table (Tabua Praedestinationis, 1555), trans. William Whittingham (1575) (London, 1613), 13.
- 22.
Nicholas Tyacke, “Anglican Attitudes: Some Recent Writings on English Religious History, from the Reformation to the Civil War.” Journal of British Studies 35 (April 1996), 142.
- 23.
William Perkins, “A Christian and Plaine Treatise of the Manner and Order of Predestination, and of the Largeness of Gods Grace,” trans. (from Latin), Francis Cacot and Thomas Tuke , in The Workes of … William Perkins. 3 vols. (London, 1626–1631), 2:611.
- 24.
Qtd. in Richard A. Muller, Calvin and the Reformed Tradition: On the Work of Christ and the Order of Salvation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 191.
- 25.
Peter Martyr Vermigli, Predestination and Justification, 27.
- 26.
Bullinger, Fiftie Godlie and Learned Sermons, 642.
- 27.
Michael Breuning , “Francophone Territories Allied to the Reformation” in A Companion to the Swiss Reformation, eds. Amy Nelson Burnett and Emidio Campi (Leiden, Netherlands : Koninklijke Brill NV, 2016), 385–6. A similar event occurred at the Synod of Dort , where Bullinger’s compatibility with Calvin regarding predestination was asserted by Johann Jakob Breitenger (1575–1645), head of the Swiss delegation. See Bruce Gordon, “Calvin and the Swiss Reformed Churches,” in Calvinism in Europe, 1540–1620, eds. Andrew Pettegree , Alastair Duke , and Gillian Lewis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 64.
- 28.
Qtd. in Cornelis P. Venema , Heinrich Bullinger and the Doctrine of Predestination: Author of “The Other Reformed Tradition”? (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 61–2. Venema’s study provides an efficient overview of the difficulties Bullinger faced as he attempted to work through the implications of various predestination opinions. About Bullinger , Calvin wrote, “he only hesitated as to Predestination, on which head, however, he subscribed upon the whole to my views, except that he could not unravel or describe explicitly the difference between foreknowledge and providence,” See John Calvin, “Letter XXX: To (William) Farel ” (28 February 1539), in John Calvin: Works and Correspondence, Letters of John Calvin, ed. Jules Bonnet , trans. David Constable. 4 vols. (Edinburgh: T. Constable; London: Hamilton , Adams, 1855–1857); 1:111. Charlottesville, VA: InteLex Past Masters Series, Electronic Edition, 2002.
- 29.
Alister E. McGrath argues that Luther came to a “decisive break” with pactum theology at the time of “the Romans lectures of 1515–16.” To McGrath, “during the period 1508–14 the young Luther appears to have adopted an understanding of the ‘righteousness of God’ essentially identical to that of the via moderna.” But by the time of the Romans lectures “Luther states that the idea that humans can do quod in se est is nothing more and nothing less than Pelagian,” McGrath, Iustitia Dei , 218–21; see also Alister E. McGrath, The Intellectual Origins of the European Reformation, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 111–13.
- 30.
Erasmus , “On the Freedom of the Will” (“De Libero Arbitrio”), trans. E. Gordon Rupp and A.N. Marlow , in Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation, 73. Erasmus’s remark, and other references to ‘merits,’ is a reminder of the pactum theology approach that distinguished ‘condign’ from ‘congruent’ merit, thereby attempting to make space for human contributions to salvation while nonetheless prioritizing prevenient grace. For a quick summary of the issue, see Peter A. Lillback, The Binding of God: Calvin’s Role in the Development of Covenant Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 48–9. Luther and almost all other Protestants rejected the idea of cooperative grace, although Melanchthon tried hard to integrate it with Protestant theology with his theory of ‘synergism.’
- 31.
Arminius, Arminius and his Declaration of Sentiments, 103–4. Arminius opposed both infralapsarian and supralapsarian views of predestination, considering there to be little difference between God arbitrarily reprobating people before the Fall or after it, 130–5.
- 32.
Martin Bucer, Commonplaces of Martin Bucer, trans. and ed. D. F. Wright (England: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1972), 98.
- 33.
Bucer, Commonplaces, 98.
- 34.
John Calvin, Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, 121.
- 35.
Perkins, “An Exposition of the Symbole,” in Workes , 1:278.
- 36.
“The Lambeth Articles, 1595,” trans. Gerald Bray , in Documents of the English Reformation, ed. Gerald Bray (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994), 399. “The Canons of the Synod of Dort, 1619,” 458.
- 37.
“The Canons of the Synod of Dort, 1619,” 459.
- 38.
There are many other examples to cite. Zanchius , for instance, retreated quickly from his initially bold statements concerning God as the author of sin; he soon distinguished “preterition or bare non-election” (which does not create sin and therefore is properly part of the “will of God”) from divine “appointment to punishment” which was the direct fault of the “sins of the non-elect.” Zanchius , The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination, 146. Richard A. Muller aptly summarizes this predicament involved in double predestination logic and its efforts to absolve God of being the author of sin. Beza , to Muller, “maintains a doctrine of full double predestination while nevertheless insisting that reprobation justly refers to man’s own wickedness and obstinate refusal to apply the blessings of Christ to himself.” Muller , Christ and the Decree, 81. Similarly, Muller says about Peter Martyr Vermigli : “The very fact that Vermigli so carefully defines reprobation as a passing over but nevertheless allows a reprobating will in God manifests the problem posed by theories of ‘double’ and ‘single’ predestination .” Muller, Christ and the Decree, 66–7.
- 39.
Peter Marshall , Reformation England 1480–1642 (London: Hodder Arnold, 2003), 129.
- 40.
Beeke, Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination, 56.
- 41.
Martin Luther, “Psalm 51 [51:14],” trans. Jaroslav Pelikan, in Luther’s Works, American Edition, eds. Jaroslav Pelikan , Helmut T. Lehmann , Christopher Boyd Brown, et al. 79 vols. to date (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Press; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1955–), 12:392.
- 42.
Martin Luther, “Preface to the Complete Edition of Luther’s Latin Writings,” trans. Lewis W. Spitz , Sr., in Luther’s Works, American Edition, eds. Jaroslav Pelikan , Helmut T. Lehmann , Christopher Boyd Brown, et al. 79 vols. to date (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Press; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1955–), 34:336.
- 43.
Nicholas Tyacke, Anti-Calvinists: The Rise of English Arminianism c.1590–1640 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), 31; emphasis in original.
- 44.
Erasmus, “On the Freedom of the Will,” 41.
- 45.
“Formula of Concord,” 519.
- 46.
Qtd. in Peter White , Predestination, Policy and Polemic: Conflict and Consensus in the English Church from the Reformation to the Civil War. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 99. Harsnett’s sermon is dated 1584 in the 1656 printed version, but F.W. Brownlow makes a strong case that the sermon was actually delivered in 1594. See Shakespeare, Harsnett, and the Devils of Denham (Cranbury, NJ, London, Ontario: Associated University Presses, 1993), 42. Harsnett was advised by Archbishop John Whitgift (1530–1604) “to preach no more of” this subject, 45.
- 47.
Peter Baro, “Summary of Three Opinions Concerning Predestination,” in The Works of James Arminius, trans. James Nichols. 3 vols. (London: 1825), 1:97.
- 48.
Baro, “Summary of Three Opinions,” 93.
- 49.
The implications of this encounter between the stricter Calvinists at Cambridge and those who challenged double predestination thinking are still being assessed, especially in terms of finding an appropriate term to describe such figures as Baro , Barrett , and Harsnett . For a summary of the matter, see Peter McCullough, “Avant-Garde Conformity in the 1590s,” in The Oxford History of Anglicanism, ed. Anthony Milton. 5 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 1:388–9.
- 50.
Augustine, “The Gift of Perseverance,” in Works, I/26:206.
- 51.
Luther, “On the Bondage of the Will,” 330.
- 52.
Calvin, Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, 116.
- 53.
Hugh Latimer, The Sermons of … Hugh Latimer. 2 vols. (J. Scott: London, 1758), 2.846 (sermon 39).
- 54.
Cited in Brownlow, Shakespeare, Harsnett, and the Devils of Denham, 45; also White, Predestination, Policy, and Polemic, 118.
- 55.
“The Second Helvetic Confession, 1566,” 241. These sorts of remarks are prevalent in the Lutheran “Formula of Concord” also.
- 56.
“The Heidelberg Catechism, 1563,” trans . Allen O. Miller and M. Eugene Osterhaven , in “Reformed Confessions of the Sixteenth Century,” ed. Arthur C. Cochrane (Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox Press, 2003), 316.
- 57.
“The Canons of the Synod of Dort, 1619,” 459.
- 58.
Calvin, Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, 153. William Perkins wrote similarly: “all men that are ordained to salvation , are likewise ordained in the counsell of God to use all the good meanes whereby they may come to salvation ,” “An Exposition of the Symbole,” in Workes, 1:283. The argument that preaching predestination could build confidence on the part of the elect was frequently promulgated by Protestants; see White, Predestination, Policy, and Polemic for a discussion of Theodore Beza’s endorsement of preaching predestination, 15.
- 59.
Calvin, John, Institutes, 3.23.14, 963. Calvin contrasts such an insensitive approach to the tact of Augustine.
- 60.
Calvin, Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, 153.
- 61.
Calvin, Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, 139. This work was published in 1552; in 1551, Calvin had engaged in a high-profile debate with Jerome Bolsec , also on the subject of predestination. Although Bolsec is not named in Calvin’s text, his public disagreements with Calvin make his presence an important component of Calvin’s treatise.
- 62.
Calvin, Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, 139.
- 63.
“The Forty-Two Articles, 1553; The Thirty-Eight Articles, 1563; The Thirty-Nine Articles, 1571,” 294–5.
- 64.
Field says , quoting Romans 9:11: “speaking of Esau and Jacob … one was elected and the other rejected before they had doone [sic] either good or euil.” This is quoted in Beth Lynch, “Bunyan’s ‘certain place’: Fleeing Esau in the 1670s,” in Religion, Culture and National Community in the 1670s, eds. Tony Claydon and Thomas N. Corns (Cardiff, Wales: University of Wales, 2011), 72. Lynch provides an interesting discussion of Calvin’s sermons on Esau and Jacob in the context of John Bunyan .
- 65.
See Peter White, Predestination, Policy and Polemic, 13–4. White discusses Beza’s views of predestination, 13–22. Beza’s table was further disseminated when it appeared at the start of William Perkins’s widely read “A Golden Chaine.”
- 66.
Qtd. in Jonathan D. Moore , English Hypothetical Universalism: John Preston and the Softening of Reformed Theology (Grand Rapids, MI and Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans , 2007), 63.
- 67.
William Barrett, “A Coppye of a Recantation of Certaine Errors …,” trans. William Prynne, in The Church of Englands Old Antithesis to New Arminianisme (London, 1629), 44. For some additional examples of aggressive promulgation of double predestination thinking in England at the time, see Tyacke, Anti-Calvinists, 32–5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gleckman, J. (2019). The Reformation and the Revival of Double Predestination Thought. In: Shakespeare and Protestant Poetics. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9599-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9599-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-32-9598-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-32-9599-5
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)