Calvin's Institutes.4.7.6. Educate Romanists

Calvin’s Institutes, 4.7.6

Observations:

1. The subject under review: The origin and growth of Romanism until it raised itself to a height that the freedom of Christ’s True Churches were oppressed, repressed, oppugned, maligned and all doctrinal restraint was hiked.

2. We saw the modest position of Rome in the Councils of Nicaea and Ephesus.

3. We saw the modest position of Rome in the Council of Chalcedon and the Fifth Council of Constantinople.

4. We saw that the pompous and arrogant titles for the bishop of Rome were not yet embraced or practiced for six hundreds years into Christ's Churches.

5. We have seen the limitations of authority in relation to emperors and other metropolitans.

6. The power under review here in 4.7.6 involves the ordination of bishops, calling of councils, hearing appeals from other jurisdictions, and the issuance of motions of chastisement or censures.

7. All ancient councils call for bishops to be ordained by metropolitans; nowhere may or does the bishop of Rome do this except in his own patriarchate.

8. Gradually, a custom began in Italy for Italian bishops to come to Rome; this is Italy, however, and not the rest of the other patriarchates or provinces.

9. Other patriarchates were not reduced to subservience to Rome, e.g. Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem, etc. Rome’s claim to “universal jurisdiction” is an historical fiction.

10. When a Metropolitan from another province was to be consecrated, Rome sent a “Presbyter” to be “present,” but not to “preside.”

11. After a Metropolitan was consecrated, the patriarchs would write synodical epistles affirming the faith contained in the Councils. Rome did likewise as one among other provinces, but not as the head of the church.

12. This is exemplified in Gregory’s Letters to Anastasius (Alexandria), Cyriacius (Constantinople) and others. Gregory1, as previously noted, oppugned, resisted, and lambasted anyone who might claim the title "universal bishop."

Observations on observations:

1. Calvin’s intent here is not to place an imprimatur on the form of episcopal government per se. As noted before, he does not take issue with episcopal at earlier points, calling an “holy office.”

2. Ref21.org skipped over the observation in (1) above.

3. We still need to track down Calvin’s views of Reformation episcopacy observed in England, Norway, and Sweden.

4. Calvin is “trimming back” and putting Roman imperialism on a “diet;” Papist imperialism is dying on view here.

Correlations:

1. Needed: a study on the growth of beaucracies.

2. Social psychological study on hegemonism, elite leadership (Marxism, fascism, corporate studies, etc.)

3. Analysis of top leadership in terms of communication with wider corporate life, e.g. doctoral studies on hegemonism and corruption as in Third World countries, absence of communication, lack of accountability, and lack of transparency. These academic studies exist.

Interpretation

Papists in the rank and file have not heard of the modest position of Papas, but only the triumphalist rings of “universal jurisdiction.”

Application:

1. Revise the Prayer now in use for MP and EP for accuracy, to wit, “Good Lord, ever spare us from Romery and its variant deviants: Federal Vision, Anglo-Romanism, Arminianism, Charismaticism, non-Confessionalists, liberals and others who belittle that Sovereign Word, through the triumphs of Thy Son’s work for us, Amen.”

2. Speak up to Romanist friends about these arrogant Papist claims. Contrary to the double-, triple-, and four-minded men, e.g. ECT, Packer, George and Christianity Unanchored, evangelize Romanists.

3. Teach the next generation as opportunity is afforded.

4. Encourage leaders of the Catholic Churches of the Reformation to address these matters publicly. Work to educate and reduce this wicked monster of hegemonism with its false gospel.