François Turretin (1623-1687) was a Genevan-Italian Reformed scholastic theologian and renowned defender of the Calvinistic (Reformed) orthodoxy represented by the Synod of Dort, and was one of the authors of the Helvetic Consensus (1675). He is generally considered to be the best Calvinist apologist besides John Calvin himself. His Institutes of Elenctic Theology (three volumes, Geneva, 1679–1685) used the scholastic method. “Elenctic” means “refuting an argument by proving the falsehood of its conclusion.” Turretin contended against the conflicting Christian perspectives of Catholicism and Arminianism. It was a popular textbook; notably at Princeton Theological Seminary, until it was replaced by Charles Hodge‘s Systematic Theology in the late 19th century. Turretin also greatly influenced the Puritans.
This is a reply to a portion of Institutes of Elenctic Theology (Vol. 2, Eleventh Topic: The Law of God, Seventh Question: The First Commandment), in which he addresses the communion of saints, including the invocation and veneration of saints. I utilize the edition translated by George Musgrave Giger and edited by James T. Dennison, Jr. (Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, Phillipsburg, New Jersey: 1992 / 1994 / 1997; 2320 pages). It uses the KJV for Bible verses. I will use RSV unless otherwise indicated. All installments of this series of replies can be found on my Calvinism & General Protestantism web page, under the category, “Replies to Francois Turretin (1632-1687).” Turretin’s words will be in blue.
*****
XII. Second, invocation of saints has neither a precept, nor promise, nor example in Scripture for its foundation. Thus it is nothing else than a corrupt and damnable will-worship (ethelothrēskeia).
Wrong! Abraham is invoked in Luke 16, with two petitionary requests. Don’t blame us! Jesus taught it.
Invocation of God is indeed everywhere urged, but mention is nowhere made of the invocation of creatures.
Is that so?
Genesis 19:15, 18-21 When morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, “Arise, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be consumed in the punishment of the city.”. . . And Lot said to them, “Oh, no, my lords; behold, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have shown me great kindness in saving my life; but I cannot flee to the hills, lest the disaster overtake me, and I die. Behold, yonder city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one. Let me escape there — is it not a little one? — and my life will be saved!” He said to him, “Behold, I grant you this favor also, that I will not overthrow the city of which you have spoken.
Here an angel is not only invoked with two prayer requests, but both are also granted, too!
Genesis 21:17-18 And God heard the voice of the lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven, and said to her, “What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not; for God has heard the voice of the lad where he is. Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him fast with your hand; for I will make him a great nation.”
If an angel can communicate with a human being from heaven, the implication — or plausible analogy — is that we can do the reverse and communicate to an angel in heaven.
1 Samuel 28:15-16 Then Samuel said to Saul, “Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?” Saul answered, “I am in great distress; for the Philistines are warring against me, and God has turned away from me and answers me no more, either by prophets or by dreams; therefore I have summoned you to tell me what I shall do.” And Samuel said, “Why then do you ask me, since the LORD has turned from you and become your enemy?
Saul petitions the dead prophet Samuel. The answer is no, but Samuel never rebuked him for a supposedly impossible and forbidden request. The current consensus among commentators is that this is Samuel the prophet, after his death, not a demon impersonator as a result of the occultic practices of the medium (see, e.g., New Bible Commentary, p. 301; Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 292).
This was also the view of the ancient rabbis, St. Justin Martyr, Origen, and St. Augustine, among others. Samuel was in Sheol or Hades, which explains his being “brought up” and saying that Saul would “be with” him when he dies. Samuel’s true prophecy of the Israeli defeat and Saul’s death (28:19) mitigates against an impersonating demon, as does the medium’s stunned reaction (28:12-13). Samuel speaks prophetically just as he did while on the earth.
Matthew 27:46-50 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, la’ma sabach-tha’ni?” that is, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” [47] And some of the bystanders hearing it said, “This man is calling Eli’jah.” [48] And one of them at once ran and took a sponge, filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave it to him to drink. [49] But the others said, “Wait, let us see whether Eli’jah will come to save him.” [50] And Jesus cried again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit. (cf. Mk 15:34-36)
The “bystanders” are presented as allies of Jesus, since one of them gave Him a drink, in the next verse (Matthew 27:48). The next verse (27:49) again shows that this was common belief at the time: “But the others said, ‘Wait, let us see whether Eli’jah will come to save him.’”
Thus, it was believed that one could pray to a dead person such as Elijah (who had already appeared with Jesus at the transfiguration), and that he had power to come and give aid; to “save” a person (in this case, Jesus from a horrible death). It’s not presented as if they are wrong, and in light of other related Scriptures it is more likely that they are correct in thinking that this was a permitted scenario.
Jesus, after all , had already referred to Elijah, saying that he was the prototype for John the Baptist (Mt 11:14; 17:10-13; cf. Lk 1:17 from the angel Gabriel), and it could also have been known that Elijah and Moses appeared with Jesus at the transfiguration (Mt 17:1-6), if these were His followers.
Yet the word “to pray” is often put simply for to pray to God because no other lawful invocation than that of God can be granted.
I just provided four biblical counter-examples. Turretin is wrong. Here are two more: Jesus invoked a dead man (Lazarus), saying, “Laz’arus, come out” (Jn 11:43). If it is objected that this is a special case, because Jesus did it, then we have St. Peter also doing so:
Acts 9:40 But Peter put them all outside and knelt down and prayed; then turning to the body he said, “Tabitha, rise.” And she opened her eyes, and when she saw Peter she sat up.
Thus, Peter consecutively prayed for the dead, and invoked the dead. He surely would have flunked out of most Protestant seminaries.
Under the New Testament, however, we read of no address either to the virgin or the apostles or any saints (which affords a clear argument of its impropriety).
False. Abraham is invoked (Luke 16).
As to the saints, on the contrary, we have no proof of their knowledge, . . . Scripture . . . frequently ascribes to the saints an ignorance of the affairs of earth (Is. 63:16; Ecc. 9:6; 2 K. 22:20).
His first text is scarcely about heaven at all; the second is about Sheol, not heaven, and uses phenomenological language that has been abused by advocates of the heresy of soul sleep (as I have written about). The third passage is vaguely about heaven, but that’s the thing. During Old Testament times, the doctrine of heaven was only very basic and undeveloped. I have collected some classic Protestant commentaries with regard to Ecclesiastes 9:5-6:
See Ecclesiastes 8:12, note; Ecclesiastes 8:14, note. . . . the dead . . . are no longer excited by the passions which belong to people in this life; their share in its activity has ceased. Solomon here describes what he sees, not what he believes; there is no reference here to the fact or the mode of the existence of the soul in another world, which are matters of faith. The last clause of Ecclesiastes 9:6 indicates that the writer confines his observations on the dead to their portion in, or relation to, this world.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:
dead know not anything—that is, so far as their bodily senses and worldly affairs are concerned (Job 14:21; Isa 63:16); also, they know no door of repentance open to them, such as is to all on earth.
neither … reward—no advantage from their worldly labors (Ec 2:18-22; 4:9).
The dead know not anything, to wit, of the actions and events in this world, as this is limited in the end of the next verse. . . .
A reward; the reward or fruit of their labours in this world, which is utterly lost as to them, and enjoyed by others. See Ecclesiastes 2:21. For otherwise, that there are future rewards after death, is asserted by Solomon elsewhere, as we have seen, and shall hereafter see.
Is forgotten, to wit, amongst living men, and even in those places where they had lived in great power and glory; as was noted, Ecclesiastes 8:10.
The context of 9:6 (“they have no more for ever any share in all that is done under the sun”) is crucial in order to understand and properly exegete the passage. It places the “vantage-point” of the passage as “under the sun.” The dead (at least the unrighteous dead) “know nothing” about or have any “share” in the things of the earth. The exegesis of Isaiah 38:18 in some of the classic commentaries, provides a good overview of the incomplete, primitive Old Testament view of the afterlife in heaven:
Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers:
In that region of dimness there are no psalms of thanksgiving, no loud hallelujahs. The thought of spiritual energies developed and intensified after death is essentially one which belongs to the “illuminated” immortality (2Timothy 1:10), of Christian thought. (Comp. Psalm 6:5; Psalm 30:9; Psalm 88:11-12; Psalm 115:17; Ecclesiastes 9:4-5; Ecclesiastes 9:10).
All these gloomy and desponding views arose from the imperfect conception which they had of the future world. It was to them a world of dense and gloomy shades – a world of night – of conscious existence indeed – but still far away from light, and from the comforts which people enjoyed on the earth. We are to remember that the revelations then made were very few and obscure; and we should deem it a matter of inestimable favor that we have a better hope, and have far more just and clear views of the employments of the future world. . . .
The word ‘praise’ here refers evidently to the public and solemn celebration of the goodness of God. It is clear, I think, that Hezekiah had a belief in a future state, or that he expected to dwell with ‘the inhabitants of the land of silence’ Isaiah 38:11 when he died. But he did not regard that state as one adapted to the celebration of the public praises of God. It was a land of darkness; an abode of silence and stillness; a place where there was no temple, and no public praise such as he had been accustomed to. A similar sentiment is expressed by David in Psalm 6:5 :
For in death there is no remembrance of thee;
In the grave who shall give thee thanks?
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:
Plainly Hezekiah believed in a world of disembodied spirits; his language does not imply what skepticism has drawn from it, but simply that he regarded the disembodied state as one incapable of declaring the praises of God before men, for it is, as regards this world, an unseen land of stillness; “the living” alone can praise God on earth, in reference to which only he is speaking; Isa 57:1, 2 shows that at this time the true view of the blessedness of the righteous dead was held, though not with the full clearness of the Gospel, which “has brought life and immortality to light” (2Ti 1:10).
Now we know from the New Testament data (none of which Turretin referenced, for some odd reason) that saints are intensely aware of earthly events, like spectators in an arena, which is what Bible commentators across the board believe is taught in the following passage:
Hebrews 12:1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us.
If they have such an awareness (cf. Rev 6:9-10), it simply cannot be ruled out that they could hear our prayers, as part of that, and can function as intercessors for us. We also know that heaven will be extraordinary and that we will have glorified bodies (1 Cor 15:35-54), and that now we only “see through a glass, darkly” as Paul stated (1 Cor 13:12), and that “eye has not seen” (1 Cor 2:9) etc. what God has prepared for us. Paul wrote how he was “caught up into Paradise” and “heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter” (2 Cor 12:3-4).
John teaches that “when he [Jesus] appears we shall be like him” (1 Jn 3:2). Jesus said we would be “equal to angels” (Lk 20:36). Christians “are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another” (2 Cor 3:18). This will be perfected in heaven. Human beings can be “filled with all the fulness of God” (Eph 3:19) and attain “the fulness of Christ” (Eph 4:13) and become “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet 1:4). All of that will fully and massively occur in heaven too. But Turretin ignores all of this when he considers the state of consciousness and activities of departed saints in heaven, tying into the subject of the invocation and intercession of saints.
Why is that? How can he not take into account any of this super-relevant biblical data? As I’ve seen countless times in my Catholic apologetics efforts these past 33 years, polemical anti-Catholic apologetics (not all Protestant apologetics, mind you) is always woefully deficient in its interpretation of the Bible, and inevitably will ignore the fullness and comprehensive nature of Catholic exegesis on the same topics. Accordingly, Turretin absurdly trots out three barely relevant, insufficient Old Testament verses, thinking he has resolved the issue.
I, on the other hand, provide exhaustive exegesis, citing all Protestant commentators, and a wealth of New Testament data that conveys the extraordinary state of things in heaven, and what creatures there think and do. It’s a very exciting topic, yet all Turretin can muster up is to claim that departed saints have “an ignorance of the affairs of earth.” It’s as pathetic as it is astonishing.
In sum, saints hearing millions of prayers and presenting them to God as intercessors is no “problem” for God at all. He can make that possible (especially if saints in heaven are outside of time, which is likely or at least a plausible possibility). This simply doesn’t require them to be omniscient or omnipotent, as is falsely and irrelevantly claimed; rather, it is made possible through God’s will, omniscience, and omnipotence.
. . . as it is gratuitously invented without Scripture, it is rejected with the same facility with which it is proposed.
See the abundant biblical prooftexts above.
. . . they will see in God no other things than those which he is pleased to represent (and who can say what they are?). Or by a revelation of God since he reveals to the saints the prayers and thoughts of believers; for besides such a revelation being thrust forward in vain when Scripture is silent, . . .
The Bible doesn’t spell out all of these things in specificity, however, the biblical descriptions of the exceptional and extraordinary nature of what human beings will be like in heaven, arguably contain or incorporate these elements as part and parcel of our glorified nature and union with God in heaven.
why should such a circuitous course be chosen when God calls us directly to himself? And what would be the use of God’s revealing to the saints our necessities and prayers that they might offer them to him again?
Thanks for the question! Happy to answer . . . It should be because Scripture throughout calls for intercessory prayer, and teaches that the prayers of more righteous people are relatively far more powerful. So we go (or can and should go) to the especially righteous person, who goes to God. There is no reason why we can’t do this with departed saints. It makes even more sense seeing that they are perfected in heaven and in profound union with God (making their prayers all the more powerful).
If God sometimes willed to reveal to prophets the thoughts of the heart in order that they might perform their duty (as was done to Elisha, 2 K. 5:16), it does not follow that this is ordinarily done to the saints since Scripture says nothing about it, . . .
Well, it looks like Scripture does indeed say something about that, and Turretin just proved it, while being unaware that he did. He says God can reveal secret things to prophets, then turns around and says “Scripture says nothing about” what he just got through alluding to from Scripture. That’s contradictory and incoherent. But I really appreciate the ironic humor. Perfected saints in heaven have far, far more knowledge than prophets on the earth.
nor do they have any duty towards men, to perform which such knowledge would be necessary
It’s not a matter of legalistic duty, but of voluntary love. Departed saints pray for us because they care about us and love us and want the best for us, and want us to enjoy what they do in heaven.
Nor can . . . the example of . . . Paul (caught up into the third heaven and hearing there unutterable things) prove that the saints living in heaven see the thoughts of the heart (which belongs to God alone).
Here he again makes the same logical mistake that I alluded to above. He gives an example of Paul receiving special knowledge, and then denies that God can do this in a general way with departed saints. Then he engages in sophistry in claiming that such knowledge must involve seeing into others’ hearts (as God does). Nice try . . . These saints don’t see our thoughts based on their own inherent power, but rather, because God chose to reveal it to them. God — and only God — is omniscient, and He can share any portions of this knowledge with whomever He wills. Or do Turretin and Calvinists wish to deny that too? God is unable to do this: that’s what we have to believe? We know that God already reveals knowledge to human beings on the earth:
1 Corinthians 12:7-8, 10 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. [8] To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, . . . [10] . . . to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits . . .
We see this imparted knowledge in, for example, the dead Samuel’s message to Saul. Samuel knew the future, but he could only have known it through a revelation from God:
1 Samuel 28:19 “Moreover the LORD will give Israel also with you into the hand of the Philistines; and tomorrow you and your sons shall be with me; the LORD will give the army of Israel also into the hand of the Philistines.”
Prophets routinely did this. They spoke the “word of the Lord” (a phrase that appears 243 times in the Protestant Old Testament, in RSV). But Turretin would have us believe that God can’t give saints in heaven knowledge of people on earth and their desires in prayer? He has no basis for that. Many scriptural analogies of prophetic and “spiritual gift knowledge” (or all of biblical revelation itself, which is special divinely granted knowledge) and what the Bible tells us in many fascinating, intriguing passages about saints in heaven prove otherwise.
*
*****
*
Practical Matters: Perhaps some of my 4,500+ free online articles (the most comprehensive “one-stop” Catholic apologetics site) or fifty-five books have helped you (by God’s grace) to decide to become Catholic or to return to the Church, or better understand some doctrines and why we believe them.
*
Or you may believe my work is worthy to support for the purpose of apologetics and evangelism in general. If so, please seriously consider a much-needed financial contribution. I’m always in need of more funds: especially monthly support. “The laborer is worthy of his wages” (1 Tim 5:18, NKJV). 1 December 2021 was my 20th anniversary as a full-time Catholic apologist, and February 2022 marked the 25th anniversary of my blog.
*
PayPal donations are the easiest: just send to my email address: apologistdave@gmail.com. Here’s also a second page to get to PayPal. You’ll see the term “Catholic Used Book Service”, which is my old side-business. To learn about the different methods of contributing (including Zelle), see my page: About Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong / Donation Information. Thanks a million from the bottom of my heart!
*
***
Photo credit: geralt (10-24-17) [Pixabay / Pixabay Content License]
Summary: As part of my series of replies to Calvinist expositor Francois Turretin, I address the communion of saints, particularly their invocation and intercession.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In