John Calvin's usage of Sympathies

Now, our genealogy of the Premodern doctrine of sympathies becomes interesting. Unlike Foucault, Hacking, and other Postmodern structuralists, I argue that the Premodern discursive practice of sympathies can be found in the great Protestant Reformer, John Calvin. So the distinctions between Renaissance, Hermetic, and Reformation become so vague that these historical taxon(s) are worthless. Foucault and his followers are not interested in this reduction, because they want to segregate as much as possible theology from their studies of Premodernity. The fundamental distinction between Calvin’s usages of the Premodern doctrine of sympathies is not structurally different from Ficino, Porta, or Bruno's use of sympathies. Instead of a world soul governing the world through planets, Calvin transforms the anima mundi to providence, so all the sympathies of the cosmos stem from the providence of God and those links between various subjects in the heavens and the world are actively governed by God. While Ficino, and Porta have the links governed by superior or inferior bodies due to a cosmic doctrine of Eros or attraction, or Bruno's sequence of internal relations between these links; Calvin will use the philosophical framework of the anima mundi to create the role of providence and its specific aim of regeneration of the elect. Just as the sun empowers the metal gold with its special qualities, so the Holy Spirit empowers through providence the soul of the elect by regenerating his fallen state from grace. By collapsing the distinction between Renaissance and Reformation and reducing them to Premodernity, my genealogy is substantially different from Foucault's structuralism or archeology of knowledge, because he never makes this reduction in any of his works.

The structural similarity between the doctrine of sympathies and Calvin’s usage of providence is that Calvin (like Ficino, Porta, and Bruno) has a moving agent which, regardless of distance, has the power to cause and empower a human, from a degenerate state such as his fallen nature to a regenerated state. Porta’s example of the power of the sun to transform and a generate piece of basil into a serpent is not structurally different from Calvin’s claim that providence empowers the degenerate fallen man, and regenerates him to saved man, who is God’s elect. Secondly, just as the sun is attracted to gold, plants, and the human heart, so the Holy Ghost through providence is attracted to the elect. Just as water is under the domain of the moon, so the elect is under the domain of providence and Holy Ghost.

The syntax of the doctrine of sympathies and Calvin’s concept of regeneration of the elect are identical: 1) moving agent (God or planet), 2) motion or empowerment (transformation of putrefied basil to a serpent or fallen man transformed to saved regenerated elect man), 3) dominion over a class of terrestrial entities due to attraction (i.e., moon is attracted to water and providence is attracted to the elect). In short, Calvin theological doctrine of regeneration is deeply rooted in the Premodern doctrine of sympathies. Although he modifies the doctrine to suit his theological agenda, not much different from Bruno, he still maintains the basic syntax of sympathies to explain a theological concept of the regeneration of fallen man to the elect. Interestingly, Calvin’s concept of the “elect” itself is suspiciously Hermetic. Calvin is not altogether ignorant of the Hermetic tradition: “Whatever fables Greek writers may retail concerning the Egyptian [Hermetic] theology, no monument of any religion exists, which is not long posterior to the ages of Moses” (Calvin, 37).

In the Insitutes of the Christian Religion (1536), Calvin is not altogether clear about astrology. Astrological forces are not directly, on the one hand, moving agents for the “destiny” or “providence” of man. Destiny and providence, on the other hand, are the same. You either have a celestial entity ruling, or you have God directly and indirectly through planet governing your future. Calvin makes this clear: “But as unbelievers transfer the government of the world from God to the stars, imagining that happiness or misery depends on their decrees or presages, and not on divine will, the consequence is, that their fear, which ought to have reference to Him only is diverted to stars and comets” (Calvin, 116). Calvin does not question destiny or providence, but questions the astrologers’ attribution of the power to celestial bodies.

The astrologers are not wrong that our lives are in the hands of some greater entity, but are wrong on whom that entity is. “Let him, therefore, who would beware of such unbelief, always bear in mind, that there is no random power, or agency, or motion in the creatures, who are governed by the secret counsel of God, that nothing happens but what he has knowingly and willingly decreed” (Calvin, 116). Calvin is clear that “power,” “agency” and “motion” of lower creatures come from a higher power, so he agrees with Plotinus view that superior bodies rule over inferior bodies. In addition, he does not necessarily disagree with the astrologers in their respective theory of sympathies, but reminds them that these celestial influences are not “random,” but are ordained by God and his providence. Porta would agree with Calvin in that the links which make sympathies between superior and inferior entities are prescribed by “law” and are part of God’s providence.

For Calvin, God is the source of all “power,” “motion,” and “agency” in the universe. Ficino, Porta, and Bruno would not disagree with Calvin, because all secondary agents are reducible to God, or are secondary agents, or interchangeable with God. Calvin shifts from God directly ruling over creation to appointing laws to govern nature. Calvin says, on the one hand, “by withholding government, it makes God the ruler of the world in name only, not in reality” (Calvin, 117). Calvin is clearly challenging Ficino, Porta, and Bruno who give governance to secondary entities ( such as celestial spheres) over terrestrial objects, because this makes God only ruler by name, not by fact. Calvin goes onto to clarify his disdain towards those who partition God’s power to other entities: “the world is governed by God, not only because he maintains the order of nature appointed by him, but because he takes a special charge of every one of his works (Calvin, 117). Calvin wants to emphasize God’s power by attributing a) the order of the cosmos and its respective links, and b) God takes special charge of the governance of the cosmos, which is meant to distinguish a “passive role” in governance of cosmos in the first sense and an “active role” in the second sense.

This “passive” and “active” distinction enables God not to be bound by the law non contradiction. God’s has “passive order” which is bound by the laws of non-contradiction, but God can act outside of “the passive order” in active manner, which is not bound by the law non-contradiction. Ironically, Ficino also believes that God is not bound by the law of non-contradiction, because God is the One, not ousia, which means He has no opposite. Calvin claims that God takes “special charge,” but God still delegates His responsibilities to secondary agents: “He, in assigning the office of each, appointed a certain law, namely, that they should always with uniform tenor observe the same course, day succeeding night, month succeeding month, year succeeding year” (Calvin, 117). The celestial spheres move in perfect motion perpetually around the earth, which shows day and night, and time in general.

The motions of celestial spheres determine generation and degeneration of terrestrial entities, because these entities degenerate in time. Ficino and Porta believe that the celestial spheres have an influence upon the generation and degeneration of terrestrial entities, because putrefaction (decaying flesh) is an agent of transformation or generation of another entity. Calvin could not object, because man is nothing more than the cycle of the putrefaction of the flesh, since the fall of Adam. Both man’s soul and body has been corrupted due to the fall. Man’s soul itself is not protected from putrefaction. “The intellect and will of the whole of man is corrupt. The term flesh applies not only to sensual but also to the higher part of the soul” (Calvin, 176). Man’s cycle of putrefaction is measured by cycles of celestial spheres. God passively has the superior world reflect the putrefaction of the lower world due to the fall of Adam. 

Calvin transforms the Hermetic anima mundi, to whom he wrongly credits to the Stoics, as the philosophical framework for his concept of providence, which is the motion and order of the cosmos. Providence governs man’s outcome, man’s free will has very little to effect upon the outcome of his fate. Calvin denies the anima mundi, but cannot explain providence without its aid, so he discusses the anima mundi, and then adds God as though adding him would alter the meaning or usage of the anima mundi. "For we do not with the Stoics imagine a necessity consisting of a perpetual chain of causes and a kind of involved series contained in nature, but we hold that God is the disposer and ruler of all things --- that from the remotest eternity, according to his own wisdom, he decreed what he was to do, and now by his power executes what he decreed” (Calvin, 120). Calvin is juxtaposing the “Stoic concept of anima mundi” next to God to show that God has the characteristics of anima mundi, but the Stoics wrongly attributed these characteristics to the anima mundi instead of God.

Unlike Bruno, the perpetual chains of causes are not contained in nature by itself, but by God’s power. Calvin does not disagree about the perpetual chains (or links) in nature, but believes that God is the source, not the world itself. “Hence we maintain, that by his providence, not heaven and earth, and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which was destined” (Calvin, 120). Calvin is clarifying that not only is the anima mundi under God’s governance, but also the fate of man. There is no difference between the involuntary movements of celestial spheres and the actions of man. Man’s happiness is no more a product of his free will than the perfection of metals by certain celestial spheres: “Since, then, the natural desire of happiness in man no more proves the freedom of the will, than the tendency in metals and stones to attain perfection of their nature” (Calvin, 174). Accordingly, Calvin is using the fatalism of anima mundi to explain providence. 

The putrefaction of man is part of God’s providence, because the seed of his putrefaction is not God’s fault, because Adam willingly ate free from the tree of knowledge. “They cannot charge God, since they perceive the whole wickedness in themselves, and nothing in him save the legitimate use of their wickedness” (Calvin, 127). Calvin is arguing that those, who maintain that wickedness is part of God’s intentions in providence, have problem of perspective, because they are seeing their personal wickedness as essential chained to providence, but not as an accidentally effect. Calvin uses macro-micro analogy with the sun to explain the wickedness and putrefaction of man. “And whence, I pray, the fetid odor of a dead body, which has been unconfined and putrefied by the sun’s heat? All see that it is the rays of the sun, but not man therefore says that the fetid odor is in them” (Calvin, 127).

Just as the sun provides light and heat, so God provides the order of the natural world, but his order is no more responsible for the odor of dead body as the sun. Just as the sun is attracted to gold, certain plants, and other terrestrial phenomena, so God is attracted in his providence to some (sympathy), while other he is repulsed (antipathy), regardless of their perceived wickedness by us, because we do not have the same perspective as God. Our perspective is corrupted by not only our bodies, but also by our souls: "Since the will of God is said to be the cause of all things, all counsels, and actions of men must be held to be governed by his providence; so that he not only exerts his power in the elect, who are guided by the Holy Spirit, but also forces the reprobate to do him service (Calvin, 138). God has two roles with the elect which are very similar to the doctrine of sympathies. First, God exerts his Power to the Elect. Just as the Moon exerts her power over the water by the tides due to her attraction to water, God exerts His grace or power in the elect through providence because of His attraction to the elect. Second, the elect are guided by the Holy Ghost. Just as the magnet draws iron, the Holy Ghost guides the elect in his providence. Clearly, two characteristics of the doctrine of sympathies (i.e., empowerment and causal motion) are involved in Calvin’s notion of the elect in God’s providence.

Calvin speaks of the regeneration of elect by God, which reflects the Premodern usage of sympathies and antipathies. While Ficino extends the doctrine to theological level by arguing that the universe is guided by Divine Eros, Porta applies the doctrine to secondary agents, such as celestial spheres, but admits that these links are part of God's providence. Calvin applies the doctrine in which has God (the superior agent) empowering by regeneration those to whom he is attracted. Calvin cynically says that “men are indeed to be taught that the favor of God is offered, without exception, to all who ask “(Calvin, 186), because later he says only those who ask are chosen by God. “But since those only begin to ask whom heaven by grace inspires, even this minute portion of praise must not be withheld from Him” (Calvin, 186).

Just as in the doctrine of sympathies terrestrial entities are put under the guidance and governance of celestial spheres, the elect (unlike most men) are under the guidance and governance of God: “it is the privilege of the elect to be regenerated by the Spirit of God, and then placed under his guidance and government” (Calvin, 186). Calvin is removing the old chains and causes of the anima mundi and replacing them with God and providence, but the syntax is still present of the anima mundi, because God is still attracted to i) certain people (the elect), ii) provides guidance to them, iii) the elect are under His governance, and iv) the elect are regenerated by the Holy Spirit; while rest of humanity is the putrefaction of flesh. Essentially, Calvin is replacing celestial spheres with God, Holy Spirit, and Providence to turn out a theological doctrine of regeneration of the elect, which uses the doctrine of sympathies and antipathies in such a manner, that one could justly call Calvin’s theological doctrine a form of theo-astrology. The regeneration of the elect turns on all the key points of that Premodern doctrine of sympathies: i) attraction, ii) moving agent, iii) governance of specific type, and iv) cosmic influence and empowerment.