 |
 |
 |
Did Calvin teach that there would be children a span long in Hell?
He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool. (Proverbs 10:18)
From time to time, I come across this rather serious charge that John Calvin taught that there are children a span long in Hell. It usually pops up in sites where the desire is to refute the whole Doctrines of Grace. Not content with disagreeing with the Calvinistic interpretation of the Bible, (which is one thing) the writer cannot resist the urge to blacken the man whose articulation of these doctrines gives them their common name. It seems to matter little that if the charge is unfounded, then it is a gross slander of a man of God - a man, of whom even John Wesley (no friend of Calvinism) wrote: "I believe Calvin was a great instrument of God; and that he was a wise and pious man..." Legally, you cannot slander or libel a dead man, but you can morally and I suggest that the Lord in his holiness will take the higher view. One thing I notice though: No reference is ever given for this supposed quote. Which leads me to (at the very least) query its truthfulness. Personally, if I cannot substantiate any quote - especially if it attacks someone - then I let it go and decline to use it.
An example of how others go about this business of clarifying this particular quote pops up here on this site and reproduced below. Granted it is not an Evangelical site (where sadly the allegation does
appear from time to time) but see how they seem determined to pin it on
Calvin anyway, even though all they can scrape up for their charge
is "It may come from..." Ask yourself a question: Would this allegation stand a chance even in a human court of law? Even when they cannot back their first allegation, they proceed to father another and tell us that "Calvin did believe that unelect babies do go to Hell." But, notice again, no references. In the finest tradition of Sir Oracle, they have said and evidently expect us all to believe it, without giving any proof. No wonder their followers are so deluded!
|
John Calvin, the father of Calvinism said: "There are babies a span long in hell." (Note: we have been unable to locate the source of this quotation. It may come from oral tradition or in something he actually wrote that we have not located yet. However, the key difference is that Calvin did believe that unelect babies do go to hell. And since Jesus said that "few there be that find the kingdom of God", this is a clear conclusion Calvin would have drawn, even if he never actually said this. If you have found the source of this quote, send it to the webmaster. Aug 18, 2006) |
Anywhere
I have seen this quote attributed to Calvin, I have politely contacted
the quoter (or repeater of the slander) to ask for a reference. I have never yet been afforded a verifiable reference. Is
this what ethics have come to in the church that bears the
gracious name of Jesus Christ? If the pen (or its modern
equivalent) is indeed mightier than the sword, then we should be
careful how we wield it. When Saul of Tarsus injured the flock of
Christ, it was as if he had injured Christ Himself: Why persecuted thou me? (Acts 9:4) I suggest that things haven't changed any over the two thousand years or so since.
A LOOK AT CALVIN'S WRITINGS:
In an exercise that only took a few minutes, I checked out my Calvin Ages CD which includes many of the Reformer's writings. I typed the word "span"
into the search engine for two editions (Beveridge and Battles) of his
Institutes, also the 7 volumes of other writings, plus twenty two
volumes of his sermons and commentaries plus other writings including
(you would think most significantly) his writings on the Secret
Providence of God (available online here) The word "span"
only turned up in a very few occasions and NONE in relation to children
of that length being in hell. These occasions are as follows:
| Harmony of the Law (Volume two) | Only appeared in the Bible text in Exodus 28:16 |
| Harmony of the Law (Volume three) | Only appeared in the Bible text in Exodus 39:9 |
| Psalms (Volume two) | "The comparison taken from the heavens is a very happy illustration; for how long have they continued to exist, when contrasted with the briefspan of human life, which passes or rather flies away so swiftly?" (Psalm 102:25) |
| Isaiah (Volume two) | Only appeared in the Bible text in Isaiah 40:12 |
| Lamentations | Only appeared in the Bible text in 2:12* |
| 1st Corinthians | "O happy Sestius! the brief span of human life forbids us to indulge a distant hope. Soon will night descend upon thee, and the fabulous Manes, and the shadowy mansion of Pluto.” — Hor. Carm. I. 4, 13-17." Not actually the words of Calvin, but the editor's note. |
* We must refer to this Lamentations reference because it uses the phrase "children of a span long." I quote: "Behold, O Lord, and consider to whom thou hast done this. Shall the women eat their fruit, and children of a span long? Shall the priest and the prophet be slain in the sanctuary of the Lord?" The Latin translation is also given: "Vide, Jehova, et aspice cui feceris sic; an comedent mulieres fructum suum (hoc est, foetus suos,) parvulos educationis? An occidetur in sanctuario Domini sacerdos et propheta?"
You can read Calvin's comments on this passage and verse here, and you will find that there is no reference to the eternal destinies of these children at all, and certainly not that they will be in hell.
JOHN CALVIN'S COMMENTS ON JESUS SAYING, 'SUFFER THE LITTLE CHILDREN COME UNTO ME' (MATTHEW 19:14)
| 14. Suffer children. "He declares that he wishes to receive children; and at length, taking them in his arms, he not only embraces, but blesses them by the laying on of hand; from which we infer that his grace is extended even to those who are of that age. And no wonder; for since the whole race of Adam is shut up under the sentence of death, all from the least even to the greatest must perish, except those who are rescued by the only Redeemer. To exclude from the grace of redemption those who are of that age would be too cruel; and therefore it is not without reason that we employ this passage as a shield against the Anabaptists. They refuse baptism to infants, because infants are incapable of understanding that mystery which is denoted by it. We, on the other hand, maintain that, since baptism is the pledge and figure of the forgiveness of sins, and likewise of adoption by God, it ought not to be denied to infants, whom God adopts and washes with the blood of his Son. Their objection, that repentance and newness of life are also denoted by it, is easily answered. Infants are renewed by the Spirit of God, according to the capacity of their age, till that power which was concealed within them grows by degrees, and becomes fully manifest at the proper time. Again, when they argue that there is no other way in which we are reconciled to God, and become heirs of adoption, than by faith, we admit this as to adults, but, with respect to infants, this passage demonstrates it to be false. Certainly, the laying on of hands was not a trifling or empty sign, and the prayers of Christ were not idly wasted in air. But he could not present the infants solemnly to God without giving them purity. And for what did he pray for them, but that they might be received into the number of the children of God? Hence it follows, that they were renewed by the Spirit to the hope of salvation. In short, by embracing them, he testified that they were reckoned by Christ among his flock. And if they were partakers of the spiritual gifts, which are represented by Baptism, it is unreasonable that they should be deprived of the outward sign. But it is presumption and sacrilege to drive far from the fold of Christ those whom he cherishes in his bosom, and to shut the door, and exclude as strangers those whom he does not wish to be forbidden to come to him." |
While
it is true that Calvin morphs the matter at hand here to Christian
baptism, yet he says nothing to suggest that baptism is either
necessary for salvation, or that only those children who are baptised
will be in Heaven. (The matter of Infant vs Believer's Baptism
is another matter for another day.) He says nothing about any children
being damned and a natural reading of the passage would suggest that he
actually states that To exclude from the grace of redemption those who are of that age would be too cruel. I
accept that there is always a certain degree of danger in reading
folk's comments through the medium of a particular controversy which
was probably not on their mind when they put pen to paper. However, it
must be said that if there was a passage to expound the thought that "there are children a span long in hell," (as charged, though without any shred of evidence) then here is as good a place as any.
I think that part of this charge against Calvin comes from believing the propaganda that is often spread that Calvin had no heart for sinners or evangelism etc., Contrary to this nonsense, Calvin had a great burden for the lost, as here and here amply prove.
These passages, of course, bring all sorts of problems to all Christians of whatever school. Suffice to say that, there are no one line answers. However, again, you would think that if Calvin believed, as charged by his enemies, that he believed that there were children a span long in hell, then here surely would be just the kind of place where such a thought would turn up.
Such passages include: Deuteronomy 2:34, Joshua 11:11-15/1 Samuel 15:3,7-8/Psalm 137:8-9/Isaiah 13:16-18/Amos 1:13/Nahum 3:10 where sometimes Calvin did not comment in his Commentaries nor make mention in his Institutes. (Note: I do not have access to the very cumbersome and expensive facsimile copy of Calvin's sermons on Deuteronomy, but I do not think that his comments there would be radically different to what is written elsewhere.) Where Calvin does make comment, he is careful to acknowledge that such acts towards such children were cruel but he also clears God of any charges of cruelty or sin. For example, in his comments on Isaiah 13:16-18, he is careful to write:
"We ought not to think it strange that the Lord, though he is not cruel, yet makes use of agents who are so cruel, for he acts righteously even by the agency of wicked men, and is not stained with their wickedness. It would therefore be improper to form our judgment of the work of God from the executioners of it, for they are prompted either by ambition, or by covetousness, or by cruelty; but we ought to consider God’s righteous punishment which the Babylonians deserved on account of their transgressions."
His comments on these passages are often harrowing because the passages themselves are harrowing and demand such treatment. It is not for us to water down the word of God and reduce it to what we are comfortable with. But in none of the above, does he ever make any statement such as that with which he is often charged i.e. that there are babies a span long (or whatever length) in hell. There is simply no evidence and therefore the charges do not stick. To repeat them without providing any proof is therefore to slander or libel a dead man who is incapable of defending himself. Is that Christian?
But let us continue. We will leave no stone unturned in our quest. One infants dashed in pieces passage that appears to be more harrowing (as far as Calvin's comments are concerned, is Hosea 13:16 ("Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up..")
I will reproduce the whole comment in the box below:
Calvin here makes no mention of hell. Yes, the children as yet unborn, carry original sin and guilt as does the whole human race. Yes, the sins of the fathers are sometimes devolved upon their children (i.e. the consequences of sins affect the offspring). Yes, there is judgment mentioned in the passage, but please note: there is no mention of Hell or eternal judgment. I suggest to that if Calvin believed what he is being charged with, then you are going to find it in harrowing chapters like that above, where he deals with the judgment of God. Yet, we don't find anything there that would even point towards the matter. I contend that Calvin never uttered or wrote these attributed words and I have yet to see any evidence that he did.
I think that part of this charge against Calvin comes from believing the propaganda that is often spread that Calvin had no heart for sinners or evangelism etc., Contrary to this nonsense, Calvin had a great burden for the lost, as here and here amply prove.
WHAT ABOUT JOHN CALVIN'S COMMENTS ON THOSE OT PASSAGES THAT RECORD THE DESTRUCTION OF HEATHEN INFANTS?
These passages, of course, bring all sorts of problems to all Christians of whatever school. Suffice to say that, there are no one line answers. However, again, you would think that if Calvin believed, as charged by his enemies, that he believed that there were children a span long in hell, then here surely would be just the kind of place where such a thought would turn up.
Such passages include: Deuteronomy 2:34, Joshua 11:11-15/1 Samuel 15:3,7-8/Psalm 137:8-9/Isaiah 13:16-18/Amos 1:13/Nahum 3:10 where sometimes Calvin did not comment in his Commentaries nor make mention in his Institutes. (Note: I do not have access to the very cumbersome and expensive facsimile copy of Calvin's sermons on Deuteronomy, but I do not think that his comments there would be radically different to what is written elsewhere.) Where Calvin does make comment, he is careful to acknowledge that such acts towards such children were cruel but he also clears God of any charges of cruelty or sin. For example, in his comments on Isaiah 13:16-18, he is careful to write:
"We ought not to think it strange that the Lord, though he is not cruel, yet makes use of agents who are so cruel, for he acts righteously even by the agency of wicked men, and is not stained with their wickedness. It would therefore be improper to form our judgment of the work of God from the executioners of it, for they are prompted either by ambition, or by covetousness, or by cruelty; but we ought to consider God’s righteous punishment which the Babylonians deserved on account of their transgressions."
His comments on these passages are often harrowing because the passages themselves are harrowing and demand such treatment. It is not for us to water down the word of God and reduce it to what we are comfortable with. But in none of the above, does he ever make any statement such as that with which he is often charged i.e. that there are babies a span long (or whatever length) in hell. There is simply no evidence and therefore the charges do not stick. To repeat them without providing any proof is therefore to slander or libel a dead man who is incapable of defending himself. Is that Christian?
But let us continue. We will leave no stone unturned in our quest. One infants dashed in pieces passage that appears to be more harrowing (as far as Calvin's comments are concerned, is Hosea 13:16 ("Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up..")
I will reproduce the whole comment in the box below:
This is the conclusion of the discourse: this verse has then been improperly separated from the former chapter for the Prophet enters not here on a new subject, but only confirms what he had said of the ultimate destruction of Samaria and of the whole kingdom. Samaria then shall be desolated; as though he said “I have already often denounced on you what you believe not, that destruction is nigh at hand; of this be now persuaded; but if you believe not, God will yet execute what he has determined, and what he now pronounces by my mouth.” At the same time he adds the cause, For they have provoked their God. That they might not complain that they were severely dealt with, he says, that they only suffered the punishment which they deserved. He also specifies the kind of destruction that was to be, They shall fall by the sword, their children shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women squall be torn asunder, that the child may be extracted from the womb. In saying that the citizens of Samaria, and the inhabitants of the whole country, shall fall by the sword, he doubtless intimates that God would make use of this kind of punishment by sending for enemies who would consign them to destruction. We now then see what is included in the words of the Prophet. He first shows that it was all over with Samaria and the whole kingdom of Israel; as God could by no means bring them to repentance, he would now take vengeance on so desperate an obstinacy. He afterwards shows that God would do this justly, because he had been provoked; and, lastly, he shows what kind their punishment would be. That they might not think that the Assyrians would come by chance, the Prophet says that this army, which was to invade and destroy the country of Samaria, would be, as it were, conducted by the hand of God; for though the Assyrians wished to extend their own borders, and were influenced by their own avarice and cupidity, yet God would use them as instruments to execute his own judgement; and that they might know how dreadful the vengeance would be, he relates two kinds of evils, — that their children would be dashed in pieces, and that their women would be rent asunder, and their offspring extracted from their wombs. Even to speak of this is horrible; and it is what never takes place, except when enemies are greatly enraged and extremely provoked. We now then comprehend the meaning of the Prophet. But if any one objects and says, that infants, and babes as yet concealed in the wombs of their mothers, deserve not such a grievous punishment, as they have not hitherto merited such a thing; it may be answered, that the whole human race are guilty before God, so that infants though not yet come forth to the light, are yet included as being under guilt; so that God cannot be charged with cruelty, though he may use his own right towards them. And further, we hear what he declares in many places, that he will devolve the sins of parents on their children. Since it is so, let us learn to acquiesce in these awful judgements of God, though very repugnant to our feelings; for we know that we must not contend with God, and that it would be extreme presumption to do so; nay, it would be impious audacity. Though then the reason for this punishment may not appear to us, we ought yet reverently to regard this judgement of God. We may moreover thus reason — If infants be not spared, even those as yet hid in the mother’s womb, what will become of adults? what will become of the old, who through their whole life have continued to provoke the vengeance of God? The Lord no doubt intended by these words to terrify those godless despisers of his word, with whom he had to do. “How great a judgement,” he says, “hangs over you, and how tremendous! since your
infants shall not be exempted: for I shall involve you in the same judgement, when they shall be dashed against the stones, after having beendrawn out of their mothers’ womb. When such a dreadful punishment shall be inflicted on them, what shall be done to you? for the cause of the evil exists in you.” We have now then explained this verse. Then follows an exhortation. (Calvin on Hosea 13:16) |
Calvin here makes no mention of hell. Yes, the children as yet unborn, carry original sin and guilt as does the whole human race. Yes, the sins of the fathers are sometimes devolved upon their children (i.e. the consequences of sins affect the offspring). Yes, there is judgment mentioned in the passage, but please note: there is no mention of Hell or eternal judgment. I suggest to that if Calvin believed what he is being charged with, then you are going to find it in harrowing chapters like that above, where he deals with the judgment of God. Yet, we don't find anything there that would even point towards the matter. I contend that Calvin never uttered or wrote these attributed words and I have yet to see any evidence that he did.
CH SPURGEON'S COMMENTS ON THIS MATTER
Spurgeon, of course, was a very zealous Calvinist. He spoke very highly of Calvin's person, of Calvin's commentries and Calvin's Institutes. When he opened his famous Metropolitan Tabernacle in 1861, he conducted a series of meetings around the Doctrines of Grace. One sermon was especially given over to answering those objections which people raised against them. He dealt with the charge that Calvinists held that little infants would be damned. (I remind you that Spurgeon had a great heart for children, opening and running an orphanage in Victorian London for many years. Along with numerous Sabbath Schools, they were subjects very dear to him.)
 |
"Among the cross
falsehoods which have been uttered against the Calvinists proper, is
the wicked calumny that we hold the damnation of little infants. A
baser lie was never uttered. There may have existed somewhere, in some
corner of the earth, a miscreant who would dare to say that there were infants in hell, but I have never met with him nor have I met with a man who ever saw such a person." "The most infamous allegations have been brought against us, and sometimes, I must fear, by men who knew them to be utterly untrue; and, to this day, there are many of our opponents, who, when they run short of matter, invent and make for themselves a man of straw, call that John Calvin and then shoot all their arrows at it. We are not come here to defend your man of straw — shoot at it or burn it as you will, and, if it suit your convenience, still oppose doctrines which were never taught, and rail at fictions which, save in your own brain, were never in existence." (CHS MTP 7 p.550) |
Perhaps, in closing, we should let John Calvin have the last word.
|
candour US, candor [ˈkændə]
n
1. the quality of being open and honest;
frankness
2. fairness; impartiality
3. Obsolete purity or brightness
[from Latin candor, from candēre to be white,
shine]
|
"If you will attack my
doctrine, why not at least show candour enough to quote my own language." (Secret Predestination of God" |
This page will be added to when appropriate.