I am not sure whether it is expedient to borrow analogies from human
affairs to express the nature of this distinction. The ancient fathers
sometimes do so, but they at the same time admits that what they bring
forward as analogous is very widely different. And hence it is that I
have a great dread of any thing like presumption here, lest some rash
saying may furnish an occasion of calumny to the malicious, or of
delusion to the unlearned. It were unbecoming, however, to say nothing
of a distinction which we observe that the Scriptures have pointed out.
This distinction is, that to the Father is attributed the beginning of
action, the fountain and source of all things; to the Son, wisdom,
counsel, and arrangement in action, while the energy and efficacy of
action is assigned to the Spirit. Moreover, though the eternity of the
Father is also the eternity of the Son and Spirit, since God never could
be without his own wisdom and energy; and though in eternity there
can be no room for first or last, still the distinction of order is not
unmeaning or superfluous, the Father being considered first, next the
Son from him, and then the Spirit from both. For the mind of every man
naturally inclines to consider, first, God, secondly, the wisdom
emerging from him, and, lastly, the energy by which he executes the
purposes of his counsel. For this reason, the Son is said to be of the
Father only; the Spirit of both the Father and the Son. This is done in
many passages, but in none more clearly than in the eighth chapter to
the Romans, where the same Spirit is called indiscriminately the Spirit
of Christ, and the Spirit of him who raised up Christ from the dead. And
not improperly. For Peter also testifies (2 Pet. 1:21, cf. 1 Peter
1:11) that it was the Spirit of Christ which inspired the prophets,
though the Scriptures so often say that it was the Spirit of God the
Father.
- John Calvin (Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.18)
No comments:
Post a Comment