Where Did Calvin Say This?

[bookslover]

Where, in his writings, did Calvin make the famous remark that he didn't write a commentary on the Book of Revelation because he didn't understand it? I'd like to read what he said in its context. Thanks.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I have not seen this comment by Calvin. I would be surprised to find this. He did write a commentary on Daniel and Ezekiel, books that are rich in the same prophetic and symbolic genres as Revelation. Perhaps he just ran out of time to write a commentary on Revelation.

 

[Rev. Todd Ruddell]

I have not seen this in Calvin either. I have read a few of Calvin's biographers who have said this, but, alas, with no attribution or reference.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

I've never seen such quote, but perhaps it exists. Others of the day wrote commentaries on Revelation, but there was certainly a great deal of speculation mixed in with sober exegesis. And this was probably worrisome to Calvin.

I have a theory: that Calvin recognized (or intuited) that the book of Revelation massively relied on the OT, and he wanted to do a complete work of the OT before tackling Revelation for commentary.

My theory is not without difficulty. So far as I am aware, it is exceeding hard to find in Calvin's entire opera references or allusions to Revelation. I believe T.H.L. Parker in his book on Calvin's commentaries suggests (or mentions) the possibility that Calvin privately questioned the inspiration of Revelation, and the other NT writings he did not write commentaries upon (also 2 & 3 John, I believe). I'm aware of no hesitation by Calvin to confess the received NT canon, so I'm not personally inclined to think that he questioned the place of the book in the NT. Yet, what can explain this almost incredible lacuna--a major NT book with virtually no citation in a commentary, sermon, or treatise by Calvin?

I think it bespeaks possibly a genuine trepidation, even the intimidation of the greatest exegete of his generation. Or, it is also possible that Calvin was as fascinated by Revelation as most readers are; however, his interpretive instincts went contrary to much of the "received wisdom" of the day, and maybe even confused his own conditioning. I think Calvin was a remarkable mixture of boldness and humility. If he thought something was true, and worth fighting for, he spoke up regardless of the threat. But he was also wary of needless offenses. I suspect that had he lived another ten years, once he finished commenting on the rest of the Bible, he would have felt duty-bound to attempt this last NT volume. I reckon he might still have been concerned about major disagreements with friendly scholars, but he would have been most sure of himself due to his encyclopedic mastery of the rest of the written Word.

But it is still a mystery why there are so few references, and even borrowing of cadences, from such language in Revelation as seems fairly clear and unambiguous.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

I have a theory: that Calvin recognized (or intuited) that the book of Revelation massively relied on the OT, and he wanted to do a complete work of the OT before tackling Revelation for commentary.

Rev. Buchanan, do you think the fact that Calvin was working on a commentary on Ezekiel at the time of his death has any bearing on your theory? I realise this notion is somewhat speculative, but a certain amount of informed speculation based on circumstantial evidence is probably not avoidable when dealing with matters of intellectual history. Your theory sounds reasonable enough to me, even if there are some problems with it.

I think Calvin was a remarkable mixture of boldness and humility. If he thought something was true, and worth fighting for, he spoke up regardless of the threat. But he was also wary of needless offenses.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

I did a computer-scan of Calvin's commentaries (in such condition as they are available to me) for editorial noted references and allusions to Revelation.

In this scanned-CCEL version to which I have access, about 72% of the entries (32/47) making reference to texts in Revelation are found in the editorial notes.

Some of the remainder appear to me to be dubious editorial appeals to texts in Rev., when a more obvious text is available; or maybe no text can be said for certain is in Calvin's head.

For example: the comment on Is.24:16,

...When the Lord has extended his Church, it appears to be in a flourishing state, and free from all danger; but when its very inwards or bowels, that is, its own members, give it uneasiness, it is grievously tormented. Hypocrites arise, by whom it is more annoyed than by enemies who “are without.”

Those final two words are offered to us in quotation marks, followed by a reference in parenthesis, (Rev.22:15). It is not obvious to me that Mk.4:11 or 1Cor.5:12 (a clear passage on church discipline) are not superior candidates, especially when we consider that the "outsiders" mentioned in Rev.22:15 are not being viewed there as enemies vexing the church, or even who lately vexed her; there is no tie-in to hypocrites in the context.

Comment on Is.66:19,

...he seems rather to allude to what, Moses tells us, happened at the departure and deliverance of the people. It is also declared (Rev.7:3) that “as many as the Lord hath sealed” shall be safe, even when his anger shall be fiercely kindled throughout the whole world; just as they whose door-posts were marked in Egypt escaped safely.

Again, we may suppose that the Scripture reference has been editorially supplied. It is also likely that the "quotation marks" are also supplied. There is no obvious text being quoted here, though Rev.7 could be alluded to. But 2Tim2:19 stands in at least as good a stead, " But God's firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: 'The Lord knows those who are his,' and, 'Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.'"

Consider Calvin on Ams.6:10,

...they would dread the very name of God, for they would know that nothing would be better for them than to be hid from his presence. As it is said of the reprobate, ‘They will say to the mountains, Cover us; and to the hills, Bury us,’

The editor inserts (Rev.6:16) at the end of the quote. But that text doesn't use this language. It is the exact language of Hos.10:8, and is quoted by Jesus, Lk.23:30. The Rev.6 passage is an echo of the former. It simply isn't obvious that Calvin has Revelation in mind at all.

Calvin on 1Cor.16:2,

...Nor am I more inclined to admit the view taken by Chrysostom — that the term Sabbath is employed here to mean the Lord’s day...,

and the editors drop a parenthesis (Rev.1:10). Sorry, that's not Calvin's appropriation of the reference; besides which, it might have been better for Master Calvin to allow Chrysostom to guide him at this point.

Calvin makes a couple references to John's "Apocalypse," Ex.28:9, and Dan.7:25; and to John's "Revelation," Act.6:5 and Heb.11:5. The three last comments are insubstantial to the meaning; a couple of them are Calvin's own dismissal of connections. Calvin's comment at Ex.28:9 is an unmistakable reference to Rev.1:6.

It is interesting to note how nearly all the (relatively) clear allusions to Revelation are to the first and final chapters of the book. To ch.1 see Ex.28:9; Is.23:18 (but not alone, cf. 1Pet.2:9); Jn.20:22; 2Cor.1:5. And to ch.22 see Ps.69:27; Mt.25:6.

Php. 4:3, Calvin's comment, "until the books are opened," does seem to be an allusion to Rev.20:12.

And lastly, what I think is his most clever allusion (of those I found)--1Cor.7:37, buried in a passage about how a father should treat his virgin daughter, Calvin makes this allusion to Rev.14:4,

...For it is as though he had said — “I would not have them resolve before knowing that they have power to fulfill, for it is rash and ruinous to struggle against an appointment of God.” But, “according to this system,” some one will say, “vows are not to be condemned, provided these conditions were annexed.” I answer that, as to the gift of continency, as we are uncertain respecting the will of God as to the future, we ought not to form any determination for our whole life. Let us make use of the gift as long as it is allowed us. In the meantime, let us commit ourselves to the Lord, prepared to follow whithersoever he may call us.

There are probably many more items that can be found. But still, Calvin seems to appeal to Revelation rather sparingly. But he still does refer to it.