"For do I persuade men or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ." -- Galatians 1:10

In Gal. 1.10c, we suggested that humility, teachability, and courage result from a "re-orientation to reality", namely, developing a high view of God’s Sovereignty with this result: fearlessly seeking God’s good favor. Something of a humbling arises from this perspective, as well as a teachability. Re: one aspect, elemental courage, Paul demonstrated that virtue as he resisted the anathematized gospel spreading "in the churches" (1.2).

Commenting on Gal.1.10, Calvin draws an intriguing connection to teachers/theologians. Calvin asserts that "ambitious men, those who court men’s favor, cannot serve Christ" (1). Their skewed focus alters things. "When there reigns in our hearts such ambition that we want to frame our speech so as to please men, we cannot teach properly" (2). What is the relationship between one’s spiritual focus and being a teacher? Say, pride and teaching? Or humility and teaching? IMHO, this was Calvin’s strength; he could not be bribed by Pope or Magistrate. Seeking "God’s pleasure" was reflected by an inexorable commitment to biblical exegesis, which influenced nations through sermons, commentaries on almost every Bible book, and The Institutes of the Christian Religion. Immutably, he sought "God’s favor" in an exemplary way, laboring, as was his duty, in God’s Word (Acts 6.4; 2 Tim.4.2).

Amplifying on an aspect of this, I recall reading somewhere that Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria, Egypt detected pride in his colleague, Bishop Arius. Again, what is the relationship between piety and exegesis? Or one’s view of God and miracles? (4). Due to the increasingly political nature of the Roman church under Constantinian influences (and a decree to an Egyptian magistrate to "repress" Athanasius), this African Bishop endured seven exiles as a result of his stand for Christ’s deity.(5) A program of slander, the weapon of choice by his detractors, was activated against Athanasius(6), as it was for Calvin (7). But Athanasius, like Paul, sought God’s favor. Arius was not the benchmark or focus, nor was a Roman Emperor, a Roman bishop, an Egyptian magistrate, or his culture. Swimming against strong currents, his fearlessness stemmed the tide of semi-Arianism. Like Paul, like Calvin, Athanasius sought "God’s favor".

More widely, people like this, with chests, influence churches and nations. W.H.Griffith Thomas, an Anglican divine, observed:

"The practical effect of this doctrine has been to make strong Christians. The men who had come to believe that they were nothing, and God everything, and yet that God was working in them and through them, could do their work in the world, since God gave it to them to do, without fear of men or the devil. The Protestants of Geneva, the Hugenots of France, the Covenanters of Scotland, the Puritans of the English Civil War, and our own Pilgrim Fathers, got the iron in their blood from their Calvinism...it has been associated with an unusual manifestation of moral vision, enthusiasm, and strenuousness...abasing man before God, but exalting him again in the consciousness of a new-born liberty in Christ, teaching him his slavery through sin, yet restoring to him his freedom through grace, leading him to regard all things in the light of eternity, it contributed to form a grave, but very noble and elevated character, rearing a race not afraid to lift up the head before kings." (8)

Such were the Genevans, the Hugenots, the Covenanters, the Puritans, and the Pilgrims, a people who feared God rather than kings. People who sought the Divine smile. Paul was a pace-setter: "For do I persuade men or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ." (Gal.1.10) (9)

Prayer : Let the words of our mouths and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable in Thy sight, O LORD, our Strength and our Redeemer, Amen.

1. Calvin, NT Commentary, Vol. 11, p. 17.

2. Calvin, NT Commentary, op.cit. p. 17.

3. Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978), p.36-67. Various depositions by Arius are recorded as well as letters/notes by Athanasius on the Nicene formulation (325 AD) in this excellent and difficult volume.

4. It would be revealing to review the denial/reduction of Christ’s deity in 20th century, liberal Protestant theology, e.g. the Kaseman case (Presbyterian Church, USA), which allowed an ordination to proceed for one who denied Christ’s divinity. Perhaps a Presbyterian scholar can amplify on this. (I forget where, but I recall reading one theologian who said that had Arianism prevailed, Christianity would have shriveled up into a mystery religion. There is room for development on this thought too.) Or Bishop Spong (Episcopal Church, USA, Newark, NJ diocese), who has never been disciplined and who drove his diocese into the ground for over 20+ years (50% drop in attendance), but who likewise denies Christ’s divinity. I suspect both would have been roundly disciplined, if not excommunicated, by this "iron-hearted" African Bishop, Athanasius. DVirtue236@aol.com and his website offers further insights on Spong and the built-in-death-wish of liberalism. David offers a curious insight here, the "built-in-death-wish".

5. For one succinct expression of Christ’s deity and humanity in two distinct natures and one Person, see the Westminster Shorter Catechism, Q & A. 21.

6. Henry Sheldon, History of the Christian Church (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), p.425.

7. Theodore Beza, The Life of John Calvin (Durham, UK: Evangelical Press, 1997), pp.12, 127-140. Beza refutes enumerated slanders. Calvin’s detractors feared his exegetical/theological prowess and his steely resolve for reform. It was an attempt to insulate people from Calvin.

8. W.H.Griffith Thomas, The Principles of Theology: An Introduction to the Thirty-nine Articles (Philadelphia: Theological Seminary of the Reformed Episcopal Church, 1996), pp.252-253. Being an Anglican divine, Thomas’ omission of Anglican reformers "raises one eyebrow". Perhaps an Anglican scholar out there can redirect or correct this point. I think Thomas’ fundamental insight is correct though, namely, high views of God’s sovereignty made for a people of courage and moral vision. A.J. Froude, another Anglican, says somewhere that Calvinists carried the reformation on an additional hundred years compared to, what I believe he calls, a "half-heartedness" reflected in other orientations. Help on this would be appreciated.

9. Was James 1 of England afraid of the Geneva Bible? Was it defective as a translation? Or was it the "notes in the margins", which might challenge the monarchy? Look forward to responses here.