2. A Brief History Of Reformation Views

Reformation Views¹

Calvin

Among the Reformers, views on this matter varied widely.² Calvin held firmly that salvation came only through explicit faith in Christ. He wrote in his Institutes: “Surely after the fall of the first man no knowledge of God apart from the Mediator has had power unto salvation (cf. Rom. 1:16; I Cor. 1:24). For Christ not only speaks of his own age, but comprehends all ages when he says: ‘This is eternal life, to know the Father to be the one true God, and Jesus Christ whom he has sent’ (John 17:3).”³ In the same section he wrote: “No worship has ever pleased God except that which looked to Christ

Thus, all the more vile is the stupidity of those persons who open heaven to all the impious and unbelieving without the grace of him whom Scripture commonly teaches to be the only door whereby we enter into salvation (John 10:9).” Later in the Institutes, Calvin states: “But because it is now our intention to discuss the visible church, let us learn even from the simple title ‘mother’ how useful, indeed how necessary, it is that we should know her. For there is no other way to enter into life unless this mother conceive us in her womb, give us birth, nourish us at her breast, and lastly, unless she keep us under her care and guidance until, putting off mortal flesh, we become like the angels [Matt. 22:30].”⁴ In his commentary on Ephesians he writes:

From what has been said, the conclusion will be easily drawn that out of Christ there are only idols. Those who were formerly declared to be without Christ, are now declared to be without God; as John says, ‘Whosoever hath not the Son hath not the Father,’ (I John ii. 23); and again, ‘Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.’ (2 John 9.) Let us know, therefore, that all who do not keep this way wander from the true God. We shall next be asked, Did God never reveal Himself to any of the Gentiles? I answer no manifestation of God without Christ was ever made among the Gentiles, any more than among the Jews. It is not to one age only, or to one nation, that the saying of our Lord applies, ‘I am the way;’ for he adds, ‘no man cometh unto the Father but by me.’ (John xiv. 6.)⁵

In his commentary on Romans 10:17 he states: “It must be further noticed, that faith is grounded in nothing else but the truth of God; for Paul does not teach us that faith springs from any other kind of doctrine, but he expressly restricts it to the word of God

Hence also the Papal conceit respecting implicit faith falls to the ground, because it tears away faith from the word . . . .”⁶ Similarly, in his Institutes he wrote: “Before the advent of Christ, about four thousand years passed away, during which he hid the light of saving doctrine from all nations.”⁷ In seeking an explanation as to why God reveals saving truth to some and not to others, he answered that it was in the electing will of God: “They will in vain torment themselves in seeking for a deeper cause than the secret and inscrutable counsel of God . . . . (W)hile we maintain that none perish without deserving it, . . . it is owing to the free goodness of God that some are delivered . . . .”⁸

Though he did not believe it was salvific, Calvin did recognize the value of natural or general revelation. He stated in his comments on Romans 10:10:

God has already from the beginning manifested his divinity to the Gentiles, though not by the preaching of men, yet by the testimony of his creatures; for though the gospel was then silent among them, yet the whole workmanship of heaven and earth did speak and make known its author by its preaching. It hence appears, that the Lord even during the time during which he confined the favour of his covenant to Israel did not yet so withdraw from the Gentiles the knowledge of himself, but that he ever kept alive some sparks of it among them. He indeed manifested himself then more particularly to his chosen people, so that the Jews might be justly compared to domestic hearers, whom he familiarly taught as it were by his own mouth; yet as he spoke to the Gentiles at a distance by the voice of the heavens, he showed by this prelude that he designed to make himself known to them at length also.⁹

He did believe that once the time came for the gospel to go to the Gentiles, that it was widely disseminated throughout the world after the coming of Christ: “Christ, we know, penetrated with amazing speed, from the east to the west, like the lightning’s flash, in order to bring into the Church the Gentiles from all parts of the world.”¹⁰

It should be noted that Calvin believed that no one truly sought for God who did not find Him:

Since faith alone is required, wherever it is found, there the goodness of God manifests itself unto salvation: there is then in this case no difference between one people or nation and another. And he adds the strongest of reasons. For since he who is the Creator and Maker of the whole world is the God of all men, he will show himself kind to all who will acknowledge and call on him as their God: for as his mercy is infinite, it cannot but be that it will extend itself to all by whom it shall be sought . . . . (H)e promises salvation to all who would call on the name of the Lord. It hence follows, that the grace of God penetrates into the abyss of death, if only it would be sought there; so that it is not by any means to be withheld from the Gentiles.¹¹

Calvin believed that even at the moment of death, God’s grace would be extended to anyone who sought it.

Calvin did believe that, though God’s ordinary means of bringing people to faith was through the preaching of the word through a human messenger, it was not the only means at his disposal. He states in his Institutes concerning the salvation of infants:

Many he certainly has called and endued with the true knowledge of himself, by internal means, by the illumination of the Spirit, without the intervention of preaching . . . . Therefore, if it please him, why may the Lord not shine with a tiny spark at the present time on those whom he will illumine in the future with the full splendor of his light—especially if he has not removed their ignorance before taking them from the prison of the flesh? I would not rashly affirm that they are endowed with the same faith as we experience in ourselves, or have entirely the same knowledge of faith—this I prefer to leave undetermined—but I would somewhat restrain the obtuse arrogance of those who at the top of the lungs confidently deny or assert whatever they please.¹²

Calvin believed, then, that God could illumine infants regarding the means of salvation, even if not in the fullest sense, and that he would more fully illumine them after they had departed this world. He did not, however, limit this means of illumination to infants alone, but also contemplated it as the means by which many adults had been converted. In his commentary on Romans 10:14 (“And how will they hear without a preacher?”) he states it explicitly: “But were any on this account to contend that God cannot transfer to men the knowledge of himself, except by the instrumentality of preaching, we deny that to teach this was the Apostle’s intention; for he had in view only the ordinary dispensation of God, and did not intend to prescribe a law for the distribution of his grace.”¹³

Zwingli And Zanchius

Zwingli, basing his hope on God’s electing grace, was even more optimistic about those who lacked explicit knowledge of Christ.¹⁴ In his commentary on Romans 2:14–15, Zwingli states: “For nothing prevents God from choosing from among the heathen men to serve Him, to honor Him, and after death to be united to Him. For his election is free.”¹⁵ In another place, he states: “Let their ignorance, therefore, not be counted against them to whom none hath come to preach the mystery of Christ.” ¹⁶ In a famous passage, he included “Hercules, Theseus, Socrates, Aristides, Antigonus” and others who lacked knowledge of the gospel among those we can expect to see in heaven: “In short there had not been a good man and will not be a holy heart or faithful soul from the beginning of the world to the end thereof that you will not see in heaven with God.”¹⁷ In his commentary on Romans 2:14–15, he makes this noteworthy statement: “For though those heathen knew not religion in the letter of it and in what pertains to the sacraments, yet as far as the real thing is concerned, I say, they were holier and more religious than all the little Dominicans and Franciscans that ever lived.”¹⁸

Some, such as the Polish reformer John Lasko and the Italian reformer Jerome Zanchius, held similar views as Zwingli’s. Zanchius believed that though God had withheld the outward means of salvation from many nations, nonetheless, he believed it was “not . . . improbable but some individuals, in these unenlightened countries, might belong to the secret election of grace; and the habit of faith wrought in these . . . .”¹⁹

Luther And Melanchthon

Luther quite adamantly rejected Zwingli’s views in these words:

Tell me, any one of you who wants to be a Christian, what need is there of baptism, the sacrament, Christ, the gospel, or the prophets and Holy Scripture, if such godless heathen, Socrates, Aristides, yes, the cruel Numa, . . . and Scipio the Epicurean, are saved and sanctified along with the patriarchs, prophets, and apostles in heaven, even though they knew nothing about God, Scripture, the gospel, Christ, baptism, the sacrament, or the Christian faith?²⁰

In his Large Catechism Luther said, “For where Christ is not preached there is no Holy Spirit creating, calling and gathering the Christian church, outside of which no one can come to the Lord Christ . . . . But because outside the church there is no Gospel, there is no forgiveness there either, and sanctification is therefore an impossibility as well.”²¹

In his Smalcald Articles, Luther stated: “And in those things which concern the spoken, outward Word, we must firmly hold that God grants his Spirit or grace to no one, except through or with the preceding outward Word, in order that we may [thus] be protected against the enthusiasts . . . .”²² Melanchthon shared Luther’s view: “It is certainly true that outside the Church, where there is no gospel, no sacrament, and no true invocation of God, there is no forgiveness of sins, grace, or salvation, as among the Turks, Jews, and heathen.”²³

Luther did, however, voice hopes that some of the unevangelized might be granted mercy by God. Concerning Cicero, he said, “I hope our Lord God will be gracious to him and his like, though it is not for us to judge and determine this matter. Rather we should remain with the revealed word: ‘He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved’ (Mark 16:16). But as to whether God could make some other provision and discriminate among other people in His own time and way, it does not behoove us to know.”²⁴

In his lecture on Genesis 4, Luther speaks of those outside God’s covenant people who were saved by God’s “accidental mercy.” Yet he speaks of their being saved through “the knowledge of Christ” and due to God’s electing grace.²⁵ In his lecture on Psalm 117, Luther says:

Now if all heathen are to praise God, this assumes that He has become their God. If He is to be their God, then they must know Him, believe in Him, and give up all idolatry. One cannot praise God with an idolatrous mouth or an unbelieving heart. And if they are to believe, they must first hear His Word and thereby receive the Holy Spirit, who through faith purifies and enlightens their hearts. One cannot come to faith or lay hold on the Holy Spirit without hearing the Word first, as St. Paul has said (Rom. 10:14): ‘How are they to believe in Him of whom they have never heard?’ and (Gal. 3:2): ‘You have received the Spirit through the proclamation of faith.’ If they are to hear His Word, then preachers must be sent to proclaim God’s Word to them . . . .”²⁶ In his comments on Genesis 47:26, he stated: ‘I do indeed not exclude the heathen, but I say that they could not be saved in any other way than through the Word of Christ.’²⁷

Yet, Luther does make some remarks which suggest that he recognized a work of grace in the hearts of some prior to their knowing Christ, and which evidences itself in their obedience to what they know of God’s law written on their hearts, at least to some degree. In his commentary on Romans 2, he states:

One could ask the question whether the Gentiles, who live outside of Christ but still fulfill the Law naturally and according to conscience, are saved, especially since original sin is not taken away without Christ and no commandment is fulfilled without grace . . . , and salvation is given through Christ alone. To be sure, the apostle seems to make the point here that some of the Gentiles have done and are doing the things of the Law by nature . . . . Original sin God could forgive them (even though they may not have recognized it and confessed it) on account of some act of humility towards God as the highest being that they know. Neither were they bound to the Gospel and to Christ as specifically recognized, as the Jews were not either. Or one can say that all people of this type have been given so much light and grace by an act of prevenient mercy of God as is sufficient for their salvation in their situation, as in the case of Job, Naaman, Jethro, and others

Whatever was lacking (and for this lack they are excused on account of their invincible ignorance) God in His forbearance without doubt supplied so that it might be made perfect through Christ in the future. This is not different from what He did for the children who were uncircumcised and killed for His sake (cf. Matt. 2:16). He does the same thing today for our children.²⁸

Here he compares God’s grace toward the Gentiles he just described with children who are saved without coming to explicit faith in this life. A bit later in this section of his commentary, however, when discussing “Gentiles who do by nature things which are of the Law,” Luther says:

I prefer to think (as I did above) of the people who are in the middle between the ungodly Gentiles and the believing Gentiles, those who through some good action directed toward God as much as they were able earned grace which directed them farther, not as though this grace had been given to them because of such merit, because then it would not have been grace, but because they thus prepared their hearts to receive this grace as a gift . . . . They nevertheless still need the grace and mercy of Christ, just as it will be of no advantage to the Jews that they have observed the law externally. Thus both are under sin, no matter how much good they may have done, the Jews according to the inner man because they have observed merely the letter of the Law, the Gentiles in a twofold way, because they have fulfilled the Law only in part and not with their whole heart . . . . (A)ll men, and therefore both of these, are sinners and in need of the mercy of God.²⁹

It would seem, then, that though Luther usually spoke in ways that emphatically required faith in Christ for salvation, he believed that prior to obtaining this faith there was a prevenient work of grace that prepared some people for the completion of their salvation.

With regard to those who die outside the faith, in a letter to an inquirer, Luther wrote these interesting words:

If God were to save anyone without faith, he would be acting contrary to his own words and would give himself the lie; yes, he would deny himself. And that is impossible for, as St. Paul declares, God cannot deny himself (II Tim. 2:13). It is as impossible for God to save without faith as it is impossible for divine truth to lie . . . . It would be quite a different question whether God can impart faith to some in the hour of death or after death so that these people could be saved through faith. Who would doubt God’s ability to do that? No one, however, can prove that he does this. For all that we read is that he has already raised people from the dead and thus granted them faith. But whether he gives faith or not, it is impossible for anyone to be saved without faith. Otherwise every sermon, the gospel, and faith would be vain, false, and deceptive, since the entire gospel makes faith necessary.³⁰

Here, he at least entertains the possibility that God may lead some to saving faith at the time of death.

Arminius

Arminius expressed his opinion on this matter in his “Apology Against Thirty-one Defamatory Articles.”³¹ He endorses the view presented in this statement: “The ordinary means and instrument of conversation (sic) is the preaching of the Divine word by mortal men, to which therefore all persons are bound; but the Holy Spirit has not so bound himself to this method, as to be unable to operate in an extraordinary way, without the intervention of human aid, when it seemeth good to Himself.”³² By “extraordinary way” Arminius implies an “internal revelation or the address of an angel.”³³ In another place he says:

The instrumental cause of vocation is the word of God, administered by the aid of man, either by preaching or by writing; and this is the ordinary instrument; or it is the divine word immediately proposed by God, inwardly to the mind and will, without human [operam] aid or endeavor; and this is extraordinary. The word employed, in both these cases, is that both of the law and of the gospel, subordinate to each other in their separate services.³⁴

Arminius also embraces the belief that, “God will bestow more grace upon that man who does what is in him by the power of divine grace which is already granted to him, according to the declaration of Christ, To him that hath shall be given.”³⁵ In another place he says: “But consider whether a promise is not contained in that declaration of Christ, ‘Unto every one which hath shall be given,’ by which God pledges himself to illuminate, with supernatural grace, him who makes a right use of natural grace, or at least uses it with as little wrong as is possible for him.”³⁶ That is to say that if a person “profitably uses” the grace he already has, God will grant him more grace (which would include the revelation of the gospel, whether by ordinary or extraordinary means).³⁷ He does emphasize that even if conversion comes in an extraordinary way, “no one is converted except by this very word, and by the meaning of this word, which God sends by men to those communities or nations whom He hath purposed to unite to himself” (that is by the gospel).³⁸ Whereas Arminius attributes the revelation of saving truth to a person’s “profitable use of grace already granted,” Calvin attributes it to the “secret and inscrutable counsel” and “free goodness of God.”³⁹ Nonetheless, Calvin and Arminius (as well as Luther) appear to be agreed that the instrument of conversion is the word of God, whether communicated by ordinary or extraordinary means.

Confessions Of The Reformation Era

The views of the Reformers were endorsed in large measure by the Reformed and Lutheran confessions, which voiced the conviction that salvation is mediated only through the gospel. This can be seen, for example, in the French Confession of Faith written primarily by Calvin (1559), which affirmed that “we enjoy Christ only through the gospel.”⁴⁰ The Augsburg Confession (1530) of the Lutherans states: “For the Holy Spirit is given to people through the Word and sacraments, the tools through which God works. Wherever and whenever it pleases God, this ministry creates faith in those who hear the gospel.”⁴¹ The Canons of Dort (1619) state: “And that men may be brought to believe, God mercifully sends the messengers of these most joyful tidings to whom He will and at what time He pleases . . . .”⁴² The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) states: “All those whom God hath predestined unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call by his Word and Spirit . . . to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ . . . .”⁴³

As is the case with the statement just cited, some of the confessions likewise emphasize God’s determination of the times and places where the gospel is proclaimed. The Canons of Dort reject those who teach “That the reason why God sends the gospel to one people rather than to another is not merely and solely the good pleasure of God, but rather the fact that one people is better and worthier than another to whom the gospel is not communicated.”⁴⁴

The Second Helvetic Confession (1566) written by Zwingli’s successor Heinrich Bullinger (and accepted by a number of national Reformed churches) affirms that “faith comes from hearing, and hearing from the word of God by the preaching of Christ.”⁴⁵ Nonetheless, it not surprisingly goes on to say (in agreement with Zwingli’s views): “At the same time we also recognize that God can illuminate whom and when he will, even without the external ministry, for that is in his power, but we speak of the usual way of instructing men . . . .”⁴⁶

Many of the Reformed confessions also explicitly reject the notion that the “light of nature” or other religions are of any saving value. The 39 Articles of the Church of England (1563) states: “They also are to be accursed who presume to say, That every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law, and the light of Nature. For Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved.”⁴⁷ The Canons of Dort rejected those who teach, “That in election unto faith this condition is beforehand demanded, namely, that man should use the light of nature aright, be pious, meek, fit for eternal life, as if on these things election were in any way dependent.”⁴⁸ They also reject as promoting error those who teach:

That the corrupt and natural man can so well use the common grace (by which they understand the light of nature), or the gifts still left him after the fall, that he can gradually gain by their good use a greater, that is, the evangelical or saving grace, and salvation itself. And that in this way God on His part shows Himself ready to reveal Christ unto all men, since He applies to all sufficiently and efficiently the means necessary to conversion.⁴⁹

The Westminster Confession of Faith states: “(M)uch less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to so frame their lives according to the light of nature and the laws of that religion they do profess; and to assert and maintain that they may is very pernicious, and is to be detested.”⁵⁰ The Helvetic Consensus (1675) also rejects the idea that “God will provide the light of grace to those who use the light of nature correctly . . . .”⁵¹

The belief that the opportunity for salvation is limited to this life was also implied in some of the confessions by their statements that the souls of the unbelieving dead remain forever under judgment.⁵²

During the post-reformation era a debate ensued among Protestants, between those who were convinced that an explicit faith in Christ was necessary for salvation, and those who believed that an implicit faith in God was sufficient (or who at least believed that God would grant greater grace to those who respond to the “light of nature”). The former view (that explicit faith was necessary) was endorsed by most conservative Calvinists and Lutherans. Attention will be given to this discussion in the following chapters.

---