<<   Title  Contents  >>

General Introduction

Introductory Selections from Calvin

III. EPISTLE TO SIMON GRYNAEUS ON THE COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

John Calvin, to Simon Grynaeus,[64]a most illustrious man.

I remember that three years ago we had a friendly talk about the best way of expounding Scripture. The method which you liked best, I myself approved most of all others. We both felt that the chief virtue of an interpreter consists in clarity combined with brevity. And indeed, since about the only business he has is to lay open the mind of the writer he has set out to explain, the more he leads the reader away from it, the more he deviates from his own purpose and is sure to wander out of bounds.

We expressed the desire that, from among all those are today engaged in aiding [the cause of] theology with this kind of work, someone would come forward who would strive for simplicity and would write so as not to discourage his readers too much with long-winded expositions. At the same time, however, I know that not everybody agrees with us in this matter; and that those who do not accept [our views], have good arguments on their side. Still, I cannot budge from my love of brevity. Of course, since it happens that there is a variety of disposition among men, and different people find pleasure in different things, let everyone, in this case also, enjoy his own judgment, provided that he does not try to make it a law for everybody else. Let us not, on our part, repudiate or condemn the labor of those who are more wordy and expansive in their expositions of the Sacred Books. But let them in return do the same to us, even though they may think our [exposition] is too compressed and concise.

I simply could not resist trying my hand at something along this line, which might be of benefit to the church of God. I am not sure that I have succeeded in doing what we thought was desirable; nor did I hope as much when I began. But I did make the effort to discipline my style, so that one could see I was aiming at the ideal we set down. How far I have succeeded, it is not for me to decide; I leave it to you and others like you to judge.

I can indeed see that many people will be offended by my undertaking and condemn me because of all things I have dared to try [my ability] on this epistle of Paul. Since men of excellent learning have already labored at expounding it, it is unbelievable that any room is left for others to produce something better. And I must say that even though I hoped my labor would produce some good results, I was at the beginning deterred by this very consideration. I was afraid that, if I set my hand to this task after so many excellent workmen, I would incur the reputation of temerity.

There are commentaries on this epistle by many ancient and many modern writers. Indeed they could not have labored at a better task; because when anyone understands this epistle, the way is open before him to an understanding of the whole of Scripture. I do not need to say anything about the ancient [interpreters] whose piety, erudition, saintliness, and age invest them with such authority that we should not condemn anything we have received from them. As to those who are living, nothing will be gained by mentioning all of them by name. I will speak my mind about those who have labored zealously and done outstanding work [in the field]. Philip Melanchthon,[65]by his singular learning and industry, and the power of his competence in every kind of intellectual discipline has shed much light on this epistle; more than all who came before him. But he evidently set himself to examine closely only those matters which were worthy of his own attention; he stopped with these, and deliberately passed by a great deal which cannot but trouble the ordinary mind. Then comes Bullinger,[66]who also received much praise; and that rightly, because he has combined simplicity with learning, and for this he has been highly approved. Finally there is Bucer[67]who, by his tireless labors, has just about said the last word. He is a man (one of us) of exceptionally profound learning, with an immense knowledge of many subjects, endowed with an extraordinarily lucid mind; a great reader, possessor of other qualities, many and various, in which nobody today can surpass him, few can equal him, and he excels most people; and beyond all this, he deserves special praise because I can think of nobody who has turned to the exposition of Scripture with equal diligence and [desire for] precision. I submit, therefore, it never entered my head to compete with such men, as this would have been a most impudent rivalry; nor did I want to grab for myself the smallest part of the praise which belongs to them. Let them have the blessing, and favor, and authority, which all good men acknowledge they deserve. But I hope this much will be conceded to me: nothing is so perfect among men that those who come after them will find no room for refining and clarifying it, and adding to its beauty. As for myself, I do not dare to say anything except that I thought my work might perhaps be of some use; and that I undertook it for no other purpose than to promote the common good of the church.

To this end, I hoped that when I wrote in my own way, no [charge of] odious rivalry would be pressed against me, as I was at first afraid it would be. Philip succeeded in what he set out to do: to clarify to the utmost what is essential. He had no intention of preventing others from doing what must not be neglected; and he did omit much because he was occupied with the things that come first. Bucer is too prolix to keep the interest of busy people; his [thoughts] are so high that the lowly and those whose attention is not the best are in no position to understand him. Whenever he deals with any subject, his unbelievably forceful and fecund mind brings up so many things that he does not know how to take his hand off the paper (tabula). Therefore, because Melanchthon has not dealt with everything, and Bucer has written too much to be read through in a short time, my intention does not in the least look like rivalry with them.

And yet, I wondered for some time whether I would do better to make some gleanings from these other men, so as to be able to put together something to help those of mediocre mentality; or whether I should compose a complete commentary, in which I would have had to repeat much that has been said before by all or at least by some of them. But these men often differ among themselves, which gives much trouble to readers who are not very acute, causing them to hesitate with whom they should agree. Therefore, I thought I would not regret my labor if I could point out the best interpretation, and thus relieve those whose judgment is not sufficiently strong from the trouble of judging; especially since I was determined to compress and be succinct, so that my readers would waste no time, and would learn, by reading my work, what is in [the books of] the others. In short, I vowed not to give just cause for the complaint that much [of my work] has been superfluous.

As to its usefulness, I shall say nothing. However, men of good will who read it have acknowledged having benefited from it more than I dare modestly promise in so many words.

It is only right that I should be excused when I at times disagree with others and differ from them. [I know that] we must have such reverence for the Word of God that we do not, so far as it is possible, set it against itself with our contradictory interpretations. I dare not think how much damage is done to its majesty, especially when we do not treat it with great discernment and sobriety. And, if to contaminate anything dedicated to God involves a great crime, anyone who handles the most sacred thing in the world with unclean or incompetent hands ought not to be endured.

Therefore, it is sacrilegious audacity rashly to turn Scripture this way and that (as we please), and to fool with it as though it were a game; many people have been doing this very thing long enough.

But we ought always to remind ourselves that even those who have not been wanting in zeal for piety, and have handled the mysteries of God with conscience and sobriety, have not always agreed among themselves. God has in no instance honored his servants with such blessing as to endow them with full and perfect knowledge of every subject; and doubtless his reason for this has been to keep them humble and desirous to keep in communication with their brothers. It is of course highly desirable that we should constantly agree in our understanding of Scripture passages. But there is no hope for such a thing in this life. Therefore, we must do our best neither to be pushed by a desire for novelty, nor to deprecate others through envy; neither to be aroused by hatred, nor to be goaded by ambition; rather, we should do only what is necessary, our aim being nothing else than to make progress, disagreeing only for reasons which are honorable. When we follow this rule in our interpretation of Scripture, there will be less license with regard to the essentials of our religion, in which principally God would have his own of one mind. The readers will easily see that I have tried to do both [to make progress and to maintain unity].

But because it is not proper that I state or establish the value of my own work, I am happy to leave criticism to you. Since everybody defers to your judgment in many things, I also, who have been intimate with you and know very well the kind of man you are, owe you deference in everything. Familiarity has a way of diminishing respect, but as men of learning know very well, in your case, it greatly increases esteem. Farewell.

[64][65][66]Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575), a Swiss Reformer, was the successor of Zwingli in Zurich. His commentary on Romans and the other epistles of the New Testament was published in 1537.

[67]See note 3, p. 54.

<<   Title  Contents  >>