Help in Finding Calvin Reference

[Marrow Man]

I was having lunch today with a professor and another student. We are both going to be working as graduate assistants for an upcoming church history class (this is part of my requirement for completing my M.Th.). During the course of conversation on Luther and Calvin, the prof just sort of mentions something about Calvin, and insinuates that Calvin made the comment somewhere that he would be in favor of ordaining a woman to ministerial office if she were especially intelligent, learned, etc.

Needless to say, that is very surprising to me. It would seem that every feminist would have come out of the woodwork with such a quote if it were true. I did not want to be combative with the prof and show him proper respect. I asked where this source was, and it seemed that he had not actually read it, but was told about it. He said it was a footnote in Calvin's commentaries (which he later admitted he did not own). He thought it was in 1 Timothy. Well, later today I spent a while reading through Calvin's comments in 1 Timothy 2 and 3 concerning women, church office, etc. Nothing. I also went to his comments on 1 Corinthians 14, but also drew a blank. In the 1 Corinthians commentary were words that would essentially disprove the statement by the prof, as Calvin roots the prohibition from teaching office in the roles of men and women (women being in submission to women, as this being a part of church office). The only thing I can find that even remotely matches what the prof says is a comment about Deborah in 1 Timothy 2 -- that this was an extraordinary situation and the extraordinary does not supplant the ordinary governance of God's church.

Does anyone have any ideas about what the prof meant? And how do you think I should handle this? I'm sure the comment was influential on the other student, who accepted it quite eagerly. I'm also afraid that the prof might repeat this in class, and I don't think I can let that go.

 

[Puritan Sailor]

I just looked up Calvin's comments on Acts 21:9, referring to Phillipp's 4 prophetess daughters, and even there Calvin speculates that they only prophecied at home or in private, not in the church since women were forbidden from speaking.

Also, Acts 18:26, Calvin comments on Priscilla's instucting of Apollos, noting that she "did execute this function of teaching at home in her own house, that she might not overthrow the order prescribed by God and nature."

I find it hard to believe with all the clear statements to the contrary that he could turn around and support female teachers in the Church. My guess is that it is either urban myth, or it was a statement taken out of context by one author, and taken further out of context by someone else, until it got to you.

 

[MW]

I'm taking a guess but I imagine the idea is coming from a misapplication of what Calvin says about Deborah in his comments on 1 Timothy 2 -- "Accordingly, if women at one time held the office of prophets and teachers, and that too when they were supernaturally called to it by the Spirit of God, He who is above all law might do this; but, being a peculiar case, this is not opposed to the constant and ordinary system of government."

 

[Wayne]

Best, most authoritative answer might come from the Meeter Center for Calvin Studies, in Grand Rapids. They have an amazing reference file there, and given the CRC's ordination of women, I would suspect as you do, that if it's there at all, they'd want to be able to pull it up in evidence.

I sincerely doubt that any such quote can be located. If it were there, it would have already been widely trumpeted.

 

[Puritan Sailor]

This articles argues that Calvin had mixed views citing Calvin's commentary on 1 Cor 14 and the Institutes. Here's a quote toward the end of the article.
Calvin on Gender Equality

There are several other entries in the Calvin corpus that agree with the above citations for the woman's subordinate role in church.55 But, there are two inharmonious remarks, however, in his commentary on 1 Corinthians 14:33-35 and there are several other inharmonious remarks in the Institutes 4.10.27-30 that compromise Calvin. He cracked open the door for mitigating the degree of female subordination in the church when he wrote, "For a situation can arise where there is a need of such a kind as calls for a woman to speak. But Paul is confining himself to what is fitting in a properly organized congregation."56 And Calvin also cracked open this door while commenting on verse 35. He wrote, "The discerning reader should come to the decision, that the things which Paul is dealing with here, are indifferent [adiaphora], neither good nor bad; and that they are forbidden only because they work against seemliness and edification."57

Also, Calvin's principle of accommodation together with his principles of propriety, order and decorum in the Institutes 4.10.27-31, may have made a tiny opening for women in the "glass ceiling" of church hierarchy. Things that are "not necessary to salvation . . . ought to be variously accommodated to the customs of each nation and age."58 Calvin left a hint that "these things" may include "women teaching in the church."59

It is important to note here that while Calvin may have cracked open the door for women, potentially, to teach, there is no evidence to suggest that he ever actually permitted it. Furthermore, it would not seem plausible to suggest that Calvin would ever have permitted women, even potentially, to teach in such a way that their universal subordination to men, especially their male pastors and male husbands, would have been violated.60

Here's the Calvin quotes in full. I bolded the parts that the article quotes.
From 1 Cor 14:34-35 Commentary on Corinthians - Volume 1 - John Calvin

It appears that the Church of the Corinthians was infected with this fault too, that the talkativeness of women was allowed a place in the sacred assembly, or rather that the fullest liberty was given to it. Hence he forbids them to speak in public, either for the purpose of teaching or of prophesying. This, however, we must understand as referring to ordinary service, or where there is a Church in a regularly constituted state; for a necessity may occur of such a nature as to require that a woman should speak in public; but Paul has merely in view what is becoming in a duly regulated assembly.

34. Let them be in subjection, as also saith the law. What connection has the object that he has in view with the subjection under which the law places women? “For what is there,” some one will say, “to hinder their being in subjection, and yet at the same time teaching?” I answer, that the office of teaching is a superiority in the Church, and is, consequently, inconsistent with subjection. For how unseemly a thing it were, that one who is under subjection to one of the members, should preside over the entire body! It is therefore an argument from things inconsistent — If the woman is under subjection, she is, consequently, prohibited from authority to teach in public. And unquestionably, wherever even natural propriety has been maintained, women have in all ages been excluded from the public management of affairs. It is the dictate of common sense, that female government is improper and unseemly. Nay more, while originally they had permission given to them at Rome to plead before a court, the effrontery of Caia Afrania led to their being interdicted, even from this. Paul’s reasoning, however, is simple — that authority to teach is not suitable to the station that a woman occupies, because, if she teaches, she presides over all the men, while it becomes her to be under subjection.


35. If they wish to learn any thing. That he may not seem, by this means, to shut out women from opportunities of learning, he desires them, if they are in doubt as to anything, to inquire in private, that they may not stir up any disputation in public. When he says, husbands, he does not prohibit them from consulting the Prophets themselves, if necessary. For all husbands are not competent to give an answer in such a case; but, as he is reasoning here as to external polity, he reckons it sufficient to point out what is unseemly, that the Corinthians may guard against it. In the meantime, it is the part of the prudent reader to consider, that the things of which he here treats are intermediate and indifferent, in which there is nothing unlawful, but what is at variance with propriety and edification.

Here's the quote from Institutes 4.10.27-30, Institutes of the Christian Religion | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

30. But as there is here a danger, on the one hand, lest false bishops should thence derive a pretext for their impious and tyrannical laws, and, on the other, lest some, too apt to take alarm, should, from fear of the above evils, leave no place for laws, however holy, it may here be proper to declare, that I approve of those human constitutions only which are founded on the authority of God, and derived from Scripture, and are therefore altogether divine. Let us take, for example, the bending of the knee which is made in public prayer. It is asked, whether this is a human tradition, which any one is at liberty to repudiate or neglect? I say, that it is human, and that at the same time it is divine. It is of God, inasmuch as it is a part of that decency, the care and observance of which is recommended
2436by the apostle; and it is of men, inasmuch as it specially determines what was indicated in general, rather than expounded. From this one example, we may judge what is to be thought of the whole class—viz. that the whole sum of righteousness, and all the parts of divine worship, and everything necessary to salvation, the Lord has faithfully comprehended, and clearly unfolded, in his sacred oracles, so that in them he alone is the only Master to be heard. But as in external discipline and ceremonies, he has not been pleased to prescribe every particular that we ought to observe (he foresaw that this depended on the nature of the times, and that one form would not suit all ages), in them we must have recourse to the general rules which he has given, employing them to test whatever the necessity of the Church may require to be enjoined for order and decency. Lastly, as he has not delivered any express command, because things of this nature are not necessary to salvation, and, for the edification of the Church, should be accommodated to the varying circumstances of each age and nation, it will be proper, as the interest of the Church may require, to change and abrogate the old, as well as to introduce new forms. I confess, indeed, that we are not to innovate rashly or incessantly, or for trivial causes. Charity is the best judge of what tends to hurt or to edify: if we allow her to be guide, all things will be safe.

As you can see the article author has clearly taken both quotes out of context. There is no hint anywhere that Calvin was cracking the door for female teachers in the church. Ordained ministry was not an adiophora issue. Here clearly refers to external forms of worship (i.e. kneeling or standing in prayer) not changing qualifications for office holding.

But it's another example of Calvin being quoted out of context to argues ideas he never articulated himself and in fact spoke against.