John Calvin teaches that the church does not require 100% agreement among pastors or councils, and that schism is a serious sin comparable to divorce; however, he provides criteria for when separation may be justified: when a church attempts to bind conscience without the word of God, when it demands participation in ceremonies not instituted by God, or when it exercises discipline without the word. Calvin emphasizes that church discipline serves as the 'sinews' holding the church together, and that believers should exercise patience and mutual forbearance while remaining in the church to reform it, rather than immediately separating.
Deep Dive
Prerequisite Knowledge
- No data available.
Where to go next
- No data available.
Deep Dive
John Calvin on SCHISM, Part 2: Did I miss something?
Added:I'm James Cubie and this is Foundation and Fire.
Welcome back. We're looking at John Calvin on schism part two. And just a little bit about myself, if you're here for the first time, I'm a confessional evangelical pastor in the Presbyterian Church USA.
Schism continues to be in the news. The most recent news out of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church their General Assembly is that as many as two denominations might um separate from the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. One complementarian, the other egalitarian.
There's a very helpful video from a pastor named John Cleveland um that I saw. It gave the history leading up to that General Assembly and then what happened at that General Assembly. I'll put those in the show notes.
Have again in the back of my mind, um the Scottish divines and especially Samuel Rutherford, their strong emphasis on the visible unity of the church and that schism is a very serious sin.
Um kind of on the level or to be thought in analogy with um the sin of divorce, right? That it is not something to enter into lightly. Um and that the onus is to stay as long as possible.
I also um kind of have in mind the fact that by the end of the last video on schism part one in John Calvin, we saw that he really had provided no exhaustive list. Here are the 10 things where if seven of those 10 conditions are met, then you can start a new church.
He also in that section, book four, chapter one, didn't have real discussion about councils above the local church.
So, I thought it would be good to return to that. I also had a helpful comment from Daniel Eisner on that first YouTube video say, "Hey, have you looked at chapter two in book four?" Um I did, but I do want to return to that, cuz maybe there's something there that I missed.
So, today we're going to look at three places in book four of the Institutes where Calvin talks about councils and our freedom of conscience with respect to councils above the local church.
Then we're going to look at church discipline, which I think is kind of the major driving factor in a lot of modern discussions around whether to separate or to stay in communion. And then we'll look at the the chapter that Daniel highlighted, true and false church.
Looking at all of this, it's helpful to remind ourselves again of the primary conversation partners that Calvin has in these different sections. So, in part one or in chapter one, what we saw kind of last week, it's the Anabaptists. When he's looking at schism, he's primarily has the Anabaptists in mind. They were the ones causing the most trouble in terms of keeping unity among the reform movement because they saw in the church, they thought, people who did not believe as they believed, who were not holy as they were holy.
When we're looking now at councils and freedom of conscience and also the true and false church, it's primarily the Roman Catholic Church that Calvin has in mind.
And when we look at church discipline, yes, it's the Anabaptists again, but it's also the Lutheran Church.
Calvin at this point does not have um, church discipline as a third mark of the church. It's really something that grows out of his understanding of the Lord's Supper. It's very important for Calvin, but at this point not a third mark of the church.
So, again, we're we're trying to kind of understand, you know, hold on, Pastor James, you know, if you missed something important because here in chapter two of book four, the summary from Ford Lewis Battles is here it says, "Why we must separate from the corrupted church." So, again, we're going to take a look at that at the end, but first we're going to look at councils together.
Calvin begins his observations about councils and their status as early as book one, and he looks there at councils that have canceled one another out, which have been not just conversations or debates about theology, but that attached anathemas to them, so that entire groups of people within the church were anathematized at that kind of national or even international level council.
Once he turns to councils and their authority, which is book four, chapter nine in the Institutes, he really goes out of his way to say councils can be signs of unity. A good council based in the word of God where the council is governed by God's word and spirit, and um where everyone is gathered together in Jesus's name, beginning as early as kind of Matthew 18, where two or three are gathered. If Christ is there, Christ is there among them if they gather in his name.
But he's always wanting to basically land at the point of saying that a council is good so long as it's based in God's word, and that it does not, he says, bind my faith to the decree of men. So, here is a kind of first statement of freedom of conscience under the word of God, right? Captive to the word of God.
And then he writes this. It's here on your screen. They, Roman Catholic Church, suppose that the truth does not abide in the church unless there is agreement among the pastors.
And that the church itself exists only if it becomes visible in general councils. Yet this is far from having always been true. The prophets have left us true testimonies of their times.
Then cites Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea. Says nothing else recurs more frequently there than that there is not agreement among the pastors.
Um and that they do not have visible unity in general councils. This reminds us of what Calvin said about the prophets in schism. That even though the majority of Israel had gone over to demon worship, the sacrifice of children, still the prophets did not set up another place to preach, another place to offer things on the altar, but remained.
So, the prophets and the apostles foretold that we should expect this, that there will be times in the church when the majority of pastors, of leaders, and even of councils will defect. We're warned, he says, by examples from almost every age that the truth is not always nurtured in the bosom of the pastors.
And the wholeness of the church does not depend on their condition. So, their condition, their holiness of life, even by the objective standard of scripture, not just how we see it, and that the health of the church does not depend on their full agreement, their doctrine, or their subscription to a council of the church.
Calvin encourages us always, when considering councils, to look at that council in context. When was it held? What was the intention? What sort of people were present? And then, in light of all that, to consider how scripture was brought to bear on that council.
So, those are important for us to remember as we consider Calvin or Samuel Rutherford.
What were the circumstances, right? In Calvin's time, reformation, kind of world historical event. And then, with Rutherford, you have a national council, right? A council called by the then Lord Protector to basically start over again, try to create a national church.
It asks us also a powerful question about our circumstances, right? Are we dealing with in our discussions about separation or communion a reformation level event where we must make a decision and separate? Or should we, as Paul counsels in Romans 12, right, by the grace given to him, "Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought to, but with sober judgment, each according to the measure of the faith that God has assigned."
Why?
"For as in one body, we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function.
So we, though many, are one body in Christ and individually members of it."
Think with sober judgment about the council that we give our churches because we want to preserve the unity of the body of Christ.
As Calvin continues, looking at councils, he again returns to councils like Constantinople, Nicaea II, Chalcedon, Ephesus II, and says, you know, we have contradictory councils here.
And um which are we to obey? And also, right, here is church discipline exercised on a national or even international level with anathemas to boot, right? Church constitutions and freedom of conscience, mutual submission and forbearance under the authority of the word. It's It's that important, and Calvin is beginning to highlight that and put that in front of us.
When he turns to church discipline, it's now 11 chapters after his discussion of schism.
And he writes this, "As the saving doctrine of Christ is the soul of the church, so does discipline serve as its sinews, through which the members of the body hold together, each in its own place.
So, here pastors and presbyters, pastors and elders, are to be especially mindful of encouraging and admonishing house to house, person to person. This is kind of the general practice of church discipline, which really is discipling and care and visitation first before it becomes what we would call, what the Bible would call, discipline, where people are being brought before the church, following the Matthew 18 steps. First one-on-one, then with a witness, and only then bringing this person before the church.
Calvin distinguishes private and public sins, sins that are faults, that are crimes, and that are shameful acts, which might lead to excommunication, where the elders are in agreement, and there is a vote by the people.
And that finally the end of church discipline really centers around participation in the Lord's Supper.
Um and that the good not be corrupted by those who are openly um in sin and rebellion or acting shamefully.
And that in all these things, discipline, the visitation, the care that precedes it, is meant to lead someone to repent.
But he highlights, Calvin says, if these vices are not purged quickly, right, he counsels patience. And again, he cites the Donatists and Augustine, that whole controversy.
And he sees the same set of problems that he addressed with schism, especially with the Anabaptists, and repairs to Ephesians 4. Again, this mutual forbearance that is the precept, it's the principle of the church in Ephesians, that great constitutional statement about the church that we keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace.
Again here, Calvin does not lift church discipline up to the level of a kind of third mark of the church. I may return to that in a future video.
So, let's take a look here at what Daniel highlighted um in the comments on the YouTube video. This is where Calvin in chapter 2 is looking at comparison the false and the true church. This would seem to be the place where he's going to give us some criteria by which to separate when we might have to separate. Again here, he's speaking primarily with the Roman Catholic Church, not the Anabaptist because Roman Catholic Church are claiming to be the one true church, right? And that the Reformed and the Reformed movement, they are the ones who have broken off.
So, Roman Catholic Church is claiming that they have antiquity. They've been around forever.
Um that they also have an unbroken succession of bishops and of martyrs.
Calvin wonders what this means about the Greek about the Orthodox Church. Don't they also have an unbroken line of bishops?
For Calvin, it's the Roman Catholic Church that even though it is larger, though it has more power, it's the true schismatic church because they've departed from the truth by claiming things like a succession of bishops and etc. over against how true succession should be measured.
Fidelity to the word, the gospel at the center.
Again and again, Calvin repairs to the prophets, right? Who in critiquing those who applied to the temple or who repaired to sort of saying, "We have the temple, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord." He says, "The Lord nowhere recognizes any temple as his save where his word is heard and scrupulously observed, right? The word must rule in the temple of God's people.
It also applies to any succession in office. Calvin writes, "God denies that he is bound to wicked priests by the fact that he has covenanted with their father Levi. Nothing is more absurd than to lodge the succession in persons alone to the exclusion of teaching."
The true church, he says, is where the sheep hear their shepherd, citing John 6 John 10.
He also points out Roman Catholic Church has already expelled Calvin and company, Pope Leo the 10th's Exsurge Domine.
Here we turn to, I think, two key parts to help us to continue to think with Calvin about separation, when that might be possible.
It's up on your screen.
"When they wish to constrain us to the communion of their church, they demand two things of us. The first is that we should participate in all their prayers, sacraments, and ceremonies. The second that we should grant to their church every honor, power, and jurisdiction that belongs to the church of Christ."
Calvin admits, as he pointed out in his conversation extended conversation on schism that the prophets did not erect or uh separate ceremonies or create separate assemblies.
Right, that's the whole point of his discussion in schism. He goes on.
"The chief point of the whole question, they were not compelled, the prophets, to any superstitious worship, not compelled.
Indeed, they were obligated to nothing that had not been instituted by God."
So, Calvin says that in their case the case of the reformed, it's different because they are being compelled. Being compelled, and that this is why they have reformed their worship, but again without declaring that they have started a new church. They in effect said, "This is where the true church is. Come and join us. Remain with us to the Roman Catholic Church. Repent and change. Bring your teaching, your worship, and your life in line with what we see taught in scripture."
So, this is the part where right, Calvin is talking about true and false church. So, you know, lay it on us, Calvin, right?
What is going on? Like, when can we separate?
He keeps repairing again and again to the fact that the Roman Catholic Church here is telling everyone to keep its communion scrupulously in all respects, right? They are attempting to bind the conscience of the reformed and the reformers. There's no freedom of conscience under the word.
He writes, "For if they are churches, Roman Catholic churches, the power of the keys is in their hands.
But, the keys have an indissoluble bond to the word. It's the preaching of the word, the gospel at the center that effects the keys that Christ uses to open, to shut, to bind, and to loose.
But, that ministry of the word, that indissoluble bond with the word, says Calvin, has been destroyed among them.
So, the issue is that if a church, national or local church, church attempts to discipline without the word, then we are, kind of bring this into more modern context with Thoreau, we're kind of at the point of ecclesial disobedience, not necessarily separation, but disobedience until we're at the point where we are excommunicated, told to leave.
So, Calvin here is basically saying, he's calling the remnant within the Roman Catholic Church to remain and to reform, not to retreat or to retrench.
It's powerful witness.
So, here we are. Just to summarize kind of where we've been, sort of three points.
Calvin does not believe that the church is required to have 100% agreement among pastors or sort of visibly so in general council. That for him would be a kind of Donatism. That is not possible. If we're living in a time where the majority have defected, Christ and his apostles and the prophets have all pointed to that, but have not given us a clear command to leave, right? To the Corinthian church, Paul does not finally say, "You know what? It would probably be better if you started second Corinthian church in town and just invited everybody to go there."
And then to the Christians at Laodicea, Christ does not say through John the Revelator, "Okay, start second Laodicean church."
Second point. Um the strongest argument to be made around separation, communion, when to go, when to stay, is around understanding of church discipline. Cuz at the local level, it's maybe not as much of a problem as it is in the regional or national level. That's where you have the church speaking in its authority to matters of doctrine or morals, where it might attempt to bind the conscience of those who are in fellowship, who have made vows to be in fellowship.
Third.
Um even though the way I read Calvin here, even at the point of constraint and compulsion, Calvin again and again is saying to trust the word and the spirit to do its work of reformation in his timing, right? It's the great desire for people who see skin see sin and who see bad teaching unorthodox teaching to want to leave immediately to leave on a timetable that they've set and not like Calvin to remain in place to be confident right even though Calvin had the you know consistory kind of reaching into the life of the church in a way that he wanted didn't want that lasted his whole life long that is something that did not change Calvin stayed and he reformed so that I think he would say you know if a council decision goes against you you have the word and the spirit and so long as you have freedom of conscience at the local level and you can still speak to and try to reform the church that you're in you have a duty to you have a duty to that it's also true that Calvin's context right significantly different from the concerns that we might have as a church that is kind of nationally gathered nationally organized in general assemblies and so he's not as familiar with the pain that councils above presbytery can cause he hasn't felt that his is a very different kind and so what I want to do next time is to look at Samuel Rutherford and the Westminster divines because there you're trying to organize around a national church and Rutherford makes powerful case against schism speaking about negative and positive separation if this has been helpful to you I would love for you to like to subscribe to share it and to comment drop comments or questions in the boxes below I am a local pastor so I will try to answer them in good time but again thank you for stopping by
Related Videos

Open Tab is a new interview series hosted by Substack co-founder Hamish McKenzie
Hypeflicksss
1K views•2026-05-21

Street Epistemology: Maritza (1) | Student Demands the Truth (Valuation)
magnabosco210
124K views•2019-06-27

Nel Noddings | Feminist philosophy and education | Whiteboard Video
studioninety9110
3K views•2019-10-13

LEGAL METHOD CLASS: Law, Order, Justice & Freedom | Understanding the Concept of Law in Society
LAW-MADE-SIMPLE.c
371 views•2025-11-22

Does evolution DEBUNK morality?
MajestyofReason
7K views•2025-03-06

How the Gospels Pass the Historical Test | Tim and Lydia McGrew
TheAaronRennShow
713 views•2025-12-02

Pluriversal Design SIG Book Club 13: bell hooks' Theory as Liberatory Practice
pluriversaldesignsig2851
777 views•2022-05-24

NICK LAND MEETS THEORY UNDERGROUND (w/ Michael Downs and David McKerracher)
PhilosophyPortal
9K views•2023-10-23
Trending

Playstation NO DISC/NO BUY Fight Is Over...
DavidJaffeGames
4K views•2026-07-23

Steam and Xbox Just Dropped The Hammer On PlayStation
OhNoItsAlexx
9K views•2026-07-23

Americans Confused in Australia for 17 Minutes Straight
IWrocker
17K views•2026-07-23

LIVE NOW! Cellular Structure and Functions | Complete Cell Biology Lecture | Anatomy & Physiology
MukhtarAliyu-t7m
387 views•2026-07-23