The True Wisdom Of Dual Knowledge: How Calvin’s first sentence is foundationAL for Book I of his Institutes
This article originated as a theology paper written as part of my studies with Union Theological College in Autumn 2026.
The Westminster Shorter Catechism famously begins by declaring, ‘Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy him forever.’[1] However, almost a century earlier, John Calvin composed a different answer. In his Catechism of the Church of Geneva, he identifies our chief end as, ‘To know God by whom men were created.’[2] This emphasis on the knowledge of God, and its relationship to man, is also evident from how Calvin begins his Institutes. The first sentence of his final Latin edition of 1559 strikingly declares, ‘Nearly all the wisdom we possess, that is to say, true and sound wisdom, consists of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves.’[3] This assignment argues that this claim functions as the foundation for Book I of the Institutes. It demonstrates this by critically assessing the (1) historical development, (2) literary structure, and (3) pastoral emphasis of Book I.
(1) Historical Development
Calvin’s opening statement draws on a tradition of similar claims by figures such as Clement of Alexandria, Augustine, and Aquinas.[4] Despite the many revisions that he made throughout his life, Calvin always retained this opening emphasis. The first edition in 1536 began with a statement that is almost identical to the one included in 1559.[5] However, as Calvin produced new editions, this opening claim became increasingly influential and foundational. Ford Lewis Battles helpfully charts Calvin’s changes across five key Latin versions of the Institutes.[6] While Alister McGrath suggests some were poorly organised,[7] Richard Muller argues these editions show his ‘gradual but methodical development of system’.[8] In particular, considering how Book I developed shows Calvin’s opening claim occupies an increasingly foundational role. While the 1536 edition began by discussing the knowledge of God and man, these functioned as the first subtopics in Calvin’s chapter on the law. In contrast, by the second edition of 1539, Calvin began with a standalone chapter on each theme respectively, only then proceeding to address the law in his third chapter.[9] The claim continued to increase in prominence throughout Calvin’s further editions. Indeed, while it became an important introductory theme in 1539, it was ‘a continuous theme of the work’ by 1559.[10]As shown below, Calvin was not content to limit it to the opening chapters and expanded it out to encompass the first of his four books. By 1559, aspects of Calvin’s work on the law had even been moved into Book I (chapters 11–12). As a result, the order from 1536 was partly reversed, with aspects of the law now being considered under the knowledge of God and man, not the other way around. As Erik Kayayan concludes, such changes demonstrate Calvin reorganised his work around the governing theme set out within its opening sentence.[11]
Literary Structure
Calvin’s opening statement clearly shaped the final structure of the Institutes. However, there were other important influences. For example, the structure adopted from 1539 aligns the order in Romans.[12] This is unsurprising, given Calvin commentated on the book while preparing the 1539 edition.[13] Additionally, scholars often suggest the most significant stimulus for the final structure is the Apostles’ Creed, with Calvin’s four books corresponding to its four parts.[14] Nevertheless, even if this is accepted, Calvin could be utilising this familiar structure to address his subject. Significantly, Casper Olevian, who studied in Geneva from 1558–1559, took this view. In his commentary on the Institutes, he argues Calvin adopted the arrangement of the Apostles’ Creed as a means of handling his ultimate theme of the knowledge of God and man.[15]
A brief structural survey of Book I validates Olevian’s view. While it aligns with the first part of the Apostles’ Creed, its ‘overarching theme’ is undoubtedly the knowledge of God and ourselves.[16] Chapter 1 introduces the significance of this theme and how its two parts relate. A division is drawn in chapter 2 between Book I and Book II, distinguishing between knowing God as creator and redeemer. Two sources of divine knowledge are then considered: nature (chapters 3–5) and scripture (chapters 6–10). Having done this, Calvin immediately refutes those who seek divine knowledge from another source, namely idols (chapters 11–12). It is only after covering such preparatory material about divine knowledge that Calvin directly addresses the substance of the doctrine of God, writing on the Trinity in chapter 13. In this way, Book I introduces the knowledge of God from the perspective and experience of man. Calvin spends longer showing us the path than the destination. This aligns with his proposal at the start of Book I, slowly following the streams of divine knowledge back to their original fountain.[17]
The end of Book I continues to show the foundational nature of its opening claim. It concludes with creation (chapter 14), mankind (chapter 15) and providence (chapter 16–17). The fact that only chapter 15 is directly devoted to man aligns with Calvin’s opening comments. In chapter 1 he explained that while they are ‘bound together by a mutual tie, due arrangement requires’ we address divine knowledge before ‘descend[ing]’ to man.[18] Calvin references this again in chapter 15, further proving that his introductory comments are foundational for the whole book.[19] Additionally, in chapter 15, Calvin only considers mankind in its created state, leaving fallen man until Book II, where it introduces God as redeemer.[20] In this way, the knowledge of man in Book I is repeatedly subordinated to that of God. As T. F. Torrance observed, anthropology ‘has no independent status’ for Calvin.[21] This further underlines the foundational nature of Calvin’s opening claim, which Eric Kayayan points out he amended slightly after 1559. In the final edition, prepared in 1560 by Calvin in French, he emphasises how the two parts relate by adding, ‘in knowing God, each of us would also know himself.’[22] The structural position the knowledge of man takes in chapter 15, flowing from and following his exploration of the knowledge of God, is a clear demonstration of this approach in Book I.
Pastoral Emphasis
The pastoral emphasis of Book I also provides additional evidence of the foundational nature of Calvin’s opening claim. We must remember that Calvin does not identify the knowledge of God and man alone as his chief subject. Instead, he speaks of the ‘true and sound wisdom’ that almost entirely consists of these two parts.[23] By making wisdom his ultimate goal, rather than its two constituent parts, Calvin ensures the emphasis is placed on ‘that sort of knowledge that enables us to enjoy the favor and presence of God, and to bring us to our everlasting home.’[24] As Bruce Gordon puts it, ‘Calvin would have hated the designation of his Institutes as a book of academic theology... Above all, his creation was a structured exposition of the biblical account of divinity and humanity, of what Christians should know and how they should live. The opening words of the book set the tone for the whole.’[25] Examples of this abound throughout Book I, including Calvin’s instructions on rooting divine knowledge in our hearts (Inst. 1.5.9), warning against false teaching (Inst. 1.14.19), and recommendation to generate trust and thankfulness by contemplating God’s goodness (Inst. 1.14.22). Book I even finishes with a pastoral emphasis, not with Calvin’s chapter on the doctrine of providence (chapter 16), but the use to be made of this doctrine in our lives (chapter 17).
Conclusion
As John Frame observes, while most Reformed theologians since Calvin start with the doctrine of revelation or God, Calvin begins with a striking epistemological claim. This is why Frame argues it is a ‘foundational concept’ for Calvin, for it is ‘a concept by which he sought to make all his other concepts understood.’[26] By critically assessing the historical development, literary structure, and pastoral emphasis of Book I of the Institutes, this assignment has shown that Calvin’s opening claim functions as its foundation. As John T. McNeill summarises, ‘These decisive words set the limits of Calvin’s theology and condition every subsequent statement.’[27]
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Calvin, John, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles, 2 vols. (Philadelphia, 1960).
___________, Institutes of the Christian Religion: 1536 edition, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Grand Rapids, 1995).
___________, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Massachusetts, 2008).
___________, Tracts and Letters, ed. and trans. Henry Beveridge, 7 vols (Edinburgh, 2009).
___________, Institutes of the Christian Religion: A New Translation of the 1541 Institutes, trans. Robert White (Edinburgh, 2016).
Secondary Sources
Battles, Ford Lewis, Analysis of the Institutes of the Christian Religion (Grand Rapids, 1990).
Creeds, Confessions, & Catechisms: A Reader’s Edition, ed. Chad Van Dixhoorn (Wheaton, 2022).
Frame, John, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Philipsburg, 1987).
Gordon, Bruce, John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion: A Biography (Princeton, 2016).
Helm, Paul, ‘John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion’, in Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Reformed Theology (Oxford, 2020).
Kayayan, Eric, ‘Revisiting Calvin’s Cognitio Dei et Nostri in the Light of the French Editions of the Institutes and his Commentary on Psalm 139,’ Westminster Theological Journal, 81 (2019), 231–56.
McGrath, Alister, Reformation Thought: An Introduction (Oxford, 1993).
Muller, Richard, The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of a Theological Tradition (Oxford, 2002).
___________, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy (Grand Rapids, 2003).
Olevian, Casper, ‘Method and Arrangement, or Subject of the Whole Work’, in John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Massachusetts, 2008).
Oliphint, K. Scott, ‘A Primal and Simple Knowledge: Institutes I:1–5’, in David Hall and Peter Lillback (eds), Theological Guide to Calvin’s Institutes: Essays and Analysis (Phillipsburg, 2008).
Parker, T. H. L., Calvin’s Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Edinburgh, 1969).
Torrance, T. F., Calvin’s Doctrine of Man (Westport, 1957).
[1] Westminster Shorter Catechism, Q&A 1.
[2] John Calvin, Tracts and Letters, ed. and trans. Henry Beveridge, 7 vols (Edinburgh, 2009), ii.37.
[3] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles, 2 vols. (Philadelphica, 1960), i.1.1.1.
[4] Calvin, Institutes, i.1.1.1, fn 3.
[5] Bruce Gordon, John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion: A Biography (Princeton, 2016), 25.
[6] Ford Lewis Battles, Analysis of the Institutes of the Christian Religion (Grand Rapids, 1990),15.
[7] Alister McGrath, Reformation Thought: An Introduction (Oxford, 1993), 246.
[8] Richard Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy (Grand Rapids, 2003), 56–57.
[9] Gordon, John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, 25.
[10] Paul Helm, ‘John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion’, in Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Reformed Theology (Oxford, 2020), 206.
[11] Eric Kayayan, ‘Revisiting Calvin’s Cognitio Dei et Nostri in the Light of the French Editions of the Institutes and his Commentary on Psalm 139,’ Westminster Theological Journal, 81 (2019), 240.
[12] K. Scott Oliphint, ‘A Primal and Simple Knowledge: Institutes I:1–5’, in David Hall and Peter Lillback (eds), Theological Guide to Calvin’s Institutes: Essays and Analysis (Phillipsburg, 2008).
[13] Richard Muller, The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of a Theological Tradition (Oxford, 2002),146.
[14] T.H.L. Parker, Calvin’s Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Edinburgh, 1969), 6.
[15] Casper Olevian, ‘Method and Arrangement, or Subject of the Whole Work’ in John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Massachusetts, 2008), xxviii.
[16] Kayayan, ‘Revisiting Calvin’s Cognitio Dei et Nostri ‘, 241.
[17] Calvin, Institutes, i.1.1.1.
[18] Calvin, Institutes, i.1.1.3.
[19] Calvin, Institutes, i.1.15.1.
[20] Calvin Institutes, i. 2.1.1.
[21] T. F. Torrance, Calvin’s Doctrine of Man (Westport, 1957), 14.
[22] Kayayan, ‘Revisiting Calvin’s Cognitio Dei et Nostri ‘, 231.
[23] Calvin, Institutes, i.1.1.1.
[24] Helm, ‘John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion’, 207.
[25] Gordon, John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, xiii.
[26] John Frame, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Philipsburg, 1987), 1.
[27] Calvin, Institutes, i.1.1.1, fn 3.