Day 72 — Book 1, Chapter 12, §1

New chapter. And look at the very first word: We said. Not I begin, not We now turn — We said at the commencement of our work (chap. 2). Calvin opens Chapter 12 by reaching backward sixty-eight days, to Day 4, to the sentence that defined knowledge of God as something that carries worship along with it. Underline that. Chapter 11 ended on a council — men arguing about images. Chapter 12 begins by refusing to argue about words at all. That is the hinge of the whole chapter, and it is in S2: it does not contend for a mere name.

Twenty sentences — the longest section you have had in a month — but the architecture is three clean blocks, so hold it in three fingers.

S1–S8 = the argument from words. Calvin says the unity of God is not a naming dispute, then proves it from the names themselves: the Greek ευ σε βεια (S3), Cicero on relego (S4), his own preference (S5), superstition (S6) — and then, in S7, he throws the whole etymological apparatus away: But to say nothing more of words…. Watch that move. He wins the word-game and then tells you the word-game was never the point.

S9–S12 = the argument from God's own testimony. a jealous God (S9), the Law with its two limbs — who is worshipped, how he is worshipped (S10) — the Law as a bridle (S11), and the thesis restated in the sharpest form of the day: unless everything peculiar to divinity is confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour (S12).

S13–S20 = the anatomy of the subtlety. This is the block that makes the chapter necessary. Superstition, Calvin says, is not the denial of the Supreme God. It is far cleverer than that. It gives him the highest place, but at the same time surrounds him with a tribe of minor deities, among whom it portions out his peculiar offices (S15). And then the sentence to memorise: the glory of the Godhead is dissected, and not allowed to remain entire (S16). Not denied. Dissected. Then three parallel exhibits marching under the same drumbeat — In the same way (S17), In the same way, too (S18) — Jews and Gentiles of old, and then, for some ages past, departed saints. That is where Chapter 11's council lands.

Grammatically today is mood and measure day: verbs that are not indicative, and frames that measure one thing against another.

Today's 3 Big Points

1. enjoins that nothing which belongs to Divinity be applied to any other (S2) — the mandative subjunctive. Not is applied. Not should be applied. Bare be. After a verb of commanding (enjoin, command, require, decree, order), the that-clause takes the bare form of the verb — no tense, no agreement, no do-support in the negative. The subject here is heavy — nothing which belongs to Divinity — so the subjunctive be sits four words away from the noun it agrees with (or rather, fails to agree with, which is the whole tell). Companions all through the section: purpose clauses with might/may — in order that God **might** not be worshipped absurdly (S3), that it **may** stand with a firm step (S5), in order that the human race **may** be kept in obedience (S9). One family, three tenses of it.
2. derives the name religion from relego (S4) and seems to take its name from its not being contented (S6) — the etymology frame, and a gerund with a possessive subject and a negation in front of it. Derive X from Y = trace X back to Y. Then S6 does the same job with a different frame — take its name from ___ — and fills the slot with a gerund, and the gerund has its own subject in the possessive (**its** not being contented) and its own negative in front (**not** being). Restore it and the fog clears: superstition takes its name from the fact that it is not contented with the measure which reason prescribes. Three moving parts in five words. This is where students stall today.
3. unless everything peculiar to divinity is confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour (S12) — unless = if … not, plus rob X of Y in the passive. Two traps in one clause. First, unless already carries the negative, so there is no second not — students hunt for one and mis-parse. Second, rob is a three-slot verb of deprivation: rob [person] of [thing]. Passive: [person] is robbed of [thing]. The person becomes the subject, the thing keeps its of. Same family as yesterday's deprive X of Y (§16 S2), and today's cousin confine X to Y (S12), confine itself within due bounds (S5). Note who is the victim in S12: he — God. Not the worshipper.

Trap words I will test. the commencement of our work (S1) = the beginning of this book. frigid (S1, S19) ⚠️ = cold, lifeless — a temperature word used of thought; frigid speculation = bloodless theorising, and it returns in S19 as a frigid opinion of his supreme power. Two ends of the section, one word — that is deliberate. carries X along with it (S1) = brings X with it inseparably. touched by the way (S1) = mentioned in passing. copiously (S1) = at length, fully. viz. (S1, S4, S12) = videlicet, namely (Period 5). duly (S1) = rightly, as is due. contend for (S2) ⚠️ = argue for, fight over — does not contend for a mere name = is not fighting over a label. enjoins (S2) = commands — and it takes the subjunctive. in what respect (S2) = in what way, on what point. groping in darkness (S3) = feeling their way blindly. absurdly (S3) = irrationally, in a way that misfits its object. shrewdly (S4) = cleverly, sharply — a compliment, and Calvin gives it before he refuses the argument. and yet (S4) = and nevertheless — the pivot word of the sentence. forced and farfetched (S4) = strained and remote. assigns (S4) = gives, puts forward (a reason). worshipers (S4) — printed with one p; as in the source. I rather think (S5) ⚠️ = I am more inclined to think — not "I think somewhat." vagrant license (S5) = wandering, unrestrained freedom — the key image of the day. rashly (S5) = without thought. whatever first comes in their way (S5) = whatever they happen upon first. whereas (S5, S19) = while by contrast. confines itself within due bounds (S5) = keeps itself inside its proper limits. the measure which reason prescribes (S6) = the limit reason lays down. superfluous (S6) = more than needed, overflowing (super-fluere). vanities (S6) = empty things — Scripture's word for idols. to say nothing more of words (S7) = to drop the subject of terminology. vitiated (S7) = corrupted, spoiled (vitium, a fault). inconsiderate zeal (S7) ⚠️ = thoughtless fervour — inconsiderate = unconsidered, not rude. pretext (S7) = an alleged excuse. cloak (S7) = cover up (verb). in every man's mouth (S8) = on everyone's lips, universally professed. forthwith (S8) = immediately. inasmuch as (S8) = in that, seeing that. cleave to (S8) ⚠️⚠️ = stick fast to — two English verbs spelled alike: cleave (split) and cleave (adhere). Here: adhere. use any selection (S8) = exercise any discrimination. vindicating his own right (S9) = asserting and defending what is his. stern avenger (S9) = severe punisher. confounded with (S9) ⚠️ = mixed up with, confused with — not "bewildered." embraces (S10) = takes in, includes. binds … in allegiance (S10) = puts under sworn loyalty. Lawgiver (S10) = the one who issues the law. manifold (S11) = many and various. advert to (S11) = turn attention to, mention. bridle (S11) = a horse's restraint — the image, not the wedding word. curb (S11) = hold back (originally the chain under a horse's jaw). spurious (S11) = counterfeit, illegitimate. set out (S12) = started, began — the observation with which I set out. peculiar to (S12, S15) ⚠️⚠️ = belonging exclusively to — not strange. This is the single most important trap of the day. robbed of (S12) = stripped of. subtleties (S13) = fine, crafty distinctions. revolting to (S14) ⚠️ = defecting to, going over to (re-volvere, to turn back) — not disgusting. avoids the appearance of (S14) = keeps from looking as if. reducing him to the same rank (S14) = lowering him to the same level. a tribe of minor deities (S15) = a whole clan of lesser gods. portions out (S15) = parcels out, distributes in shares. offices (S15) ⚠️ = functions, duties — not rooms. dissembling (S16) = concealing one's real intent. crafty (S16) = cunning. dissected (S16) ⚠️ = cut apart (dis-secare) — the day's key metaphor. entire (S16) = whole, undivided. the people of old (S17) = the ancients. in subordination to (S17) = ranked under. departed saints (S18) = the holy dead. exalted to partnership with God (S18) = raised to be God's partners. lauded (S18) = praised. in his stead (S18) = in his place. abomination (S19) = a thing God detests — Scripture's word for idolatry. in a great measure (S19) = to a large extent. extinguished (S19) = put out (a light). retain (S19) = keep, hold on to. entanglements (S20) = snares, things that tangle. deluded (S20) = deceived. go astray after (S20) = wander off after — Scripture's whoring-after-other-gods idiom. divers (S20) ⚠️ = various, several — the old spelling of diverse, and here the sense is sundry, not different in kind.

1. We said at the commencement of our work (chap. 2), that the knowledge of God consists not in frigid speculation, but carries worship along with it; and we touched by the way (chap. 5 s. 6, 9, 10) on what will be more copiously treated in other places (Book 2, chap. 8)—viz. how God is duly worshipped. Now I only briefly repeat, that whenever Scripture asserts the unity of God, it does not contend for a mere name, but also enjoins that nothing which belongs to Divinity be applied to any other; thus making it obvious in what respect pure religion differs from superstition. The Greek word ευ σε βεια means “right worship;” for the Greeks, though groping in darkness, were always aware that a certain rule was to be observed, in order that God might not be worshipped absurdly. Cicero truly and shrewdly derives the name religion from relego, and yet the reason which he assigns is forced and farfetched—viz. that honest worshipers read and read again, and ponder what is true. I rather think the name is used in opposition to vagrant license—the greater part of mankind rashly taking up whatever first comes in their way, whereas piety, that it may stand with a firm step, confines itself within due bounds. In the same way superstition seems to take its name from its not being contented with the measure which reason prescribes, but accumulating a superfluous mass of vanities. But to say nothing more of words, it has been universally admitted in all ages, that religion is vitiated and perverted whenever false opinions are introduced into it, and hence it is inferred, that whatever is allowed to be done from inconsiderate zeal, cannot be defended by any pretext with which the superstitious may choose to cloak it. But although this confession is in every man’s mouth, a shameful stupidity is forthwith manifested, inasmuch as men neither cleave to the one God, nor use any selection in their worship, as we have already observed. But God, in vindicating his own right, first proclaims that he is a jealous God, and will be a stern avenger if he is confounded with any false god; and thereafter defines what due worship is, in order that the human race may be kept in obedience. Both of these he embraces in his Law when he first binds the faithful in allegiance to him as their only Lawgiver, and then prescribes a rule for worshipping him in accordance with his will. The Law, with its manifold uses and objects, I will consider in its own place; at present I only advert to this one, that it is designed as a bridle to curb men, and prevent them from turning aside to spurious worship. But it is necessary to attend to the observation with which I set out—viz. that unless everything peculiar to divinity is confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour, and his worship is violated. It may be proper here more particularly to attend to the subtleties which superstition employs. In revolting to strange gods, it avoids the appearance of abandoning the Supreme God, or reducing him to the same rank with others. It gives him the highest place, but at the same time surrounds him with a tribe of minor deities, among whom it portions out his peculiar offices. In this way, though in a dissembling and crafty manner, the glory of the Godhead is dissected, and not allowed to remain entire. In the same way the people of old, both Jews and Gentiles, placed an immense crowd in subordination to the father and ruler of the gods, and gave them, according to their rank, to share with the supreme God in the government of heaven and earth. In the same way, too, for some ages past, departed saints have been exalted to partnership with God, to be worshipped, invoked, and lauded in his stead. And yet we do not even think that the majesty of God is obscured by this abomination, whereas it is in a great measure suppressed and extinguished—all that we retain being a frigid opinion of his supreme power. At the same time, being deluded by these entanglements, we go astray after divers gods.

Sentence count: 20 (S1–S20). Three paragraphs: S1–S8 / S9–S12 / S13–S20.

Text note (not a correction to the quotation). Five things about the printed page, all left as they stand. (i) ευ σε βεια (S3) — the Greek is printed with spaces and without breathings or accents; Beveridge set εὐσέβεια. Same corruption family as the λατρια/δυλια you met in §11 (Day 66) and §16 (Day 71). Reproduced as printed; do not memorise the mangled spelling. (ii) One footnote marker has been stripped: ³⁹ after ponder what is true (S4). The note reads: "Cic. De Nat. Deor. lib. 2 c. 28. See also Lactant. Inst. Div. lib. 4 c. 28." — Cicero's derivation is at De Natura Deorum 2.28; Lactantius's rival derivation is at Divine Institutes 4.28. That footnote is doing real work today; see Period 6. (iii) A page break falls inside S9, between defines what due and worship is, with the running header and footnote in between; it has been closed up. (iv) Three end-of-line hyphenations closed: accumu-lating (S6), in-troduced (S7), inconsid-erate (S7). (v) Page numbers 104, 105, 106, 109 and the running header removed. worshipers (S4) is printed with one p and worshipping (S10) with two — as printed. Nothing else altered.

[BACK-REFERENCE]   S1     "WE SAID at the commencement (chap. 2)": knowledge of God ≠ frigid speculation,
                          it CARRIES WORSHIP ALONG WITH IT           ← the ch.2 thesis, recalled on purpose
[THESIS]           S2     whenever Scripture asserts THE UNITY OF GOD it does NOT contend for A MERE NAME
                          but ENJOINS that nothing belonging to Divinity BE APPLIED to any other
                          → "in what respect pure RELIGION differs from SUPERSTITION"
[PROOF 1: WORDS]   S3     Gk ευσεβεια = "RIGHT worship" — even the Greeks knew a RULE was required
                   S4     Cicero: religion < RELEGO (read-and-reread) — "truly and shrewdly" BUT
                          the reason is "FORCED AND FARFETCHED"
                   S5     Calvin: rather, against VAGRANT LICENSE — most men grab what comes first,
                          piety "CONFINES ITSELF WITHIN DUE BOUNDS"
                   S6     superstition = NOT CONTENTED with reason's measure → "a SUPERFLUOUS MASS"
                   S7     ← "BUT TO SAY NOTHING MORE OF WORDS" — the etymology is dropped;
                          universally admitted: FALSE OPINIONS vitiate religion; zeal is no defence
                   S8     and yet everyone says it and nobody does it: men neither CLEAVE to one God
                          nor USE ANY SELECTION in worship
[PROOF 2: GOD'S    S9     God "in VINDICATING HIS OWN RIGHT": (a) I am A JEALOUS GOD, a stern avenger
 OWN TESTIMONY]              if CONFOUNDED with a false god; (b) then he DEFINES what due worship is
                   S10    both limbs are in HIS LAW: WHO (only Lawgiver) + HOW (rule for worshipping)
                   S11    the Law here viewed under ONE use: a BRIDLE to CURB men from SPURIOUS worship
                   S12  ★ THESIS RESTATED: "UNLESS everything PECULIAR TO DIVINITY is confined to God
                          ALONE, HE IS ROBBED OF HIS HONOUR, and his worship is VIOLATED"
[THE SUBTLETY]     S13    now: the SUBTLETIES superstition employs
                   S14    it AVOIDS THE APPEARANCE of abandoning / demoting the Supreme God
                   S15    gives him THE HIGHEST PLACE — then surrounds him with A TRIBE OF MINOR
                          DEITIES and PORTIONS OUT HIS PECULIAR OFFICES among them
                   S16  ★ "the glory of the Godhead is DISSECTED, and NOT ALLOWED TO REMAIN ENTIRE"
                   S17    exhibit 1 — Jews & Gentiles of old: an immense crowd SHARING the government
                   S18    exhibit 2 — "for some ages past": DEPARTED SAINTS worshipped, invoked, lauded
                          IN HIS STEAD                                  ← ch.11's council lands here
                   S19    and we do not even THINK the majesty is obscured — though it is "SUPPRESSED
                          AND EXTINGUISHED"; all we keep is "A FRIGID OPINION of his supreme power"
                   S20    result: "we GO ASTRAY AFTER DIVERS GODS"

Examiner's Eye. Four traps, in rising order of nastiness.

Trap 1 — peculiar (S12, S15). Everything **peculiar to** divinity; his **peculiar** offices. It means belonging exclusively to — proprius. An item will offer "everything strange about divinity" or "his odd functions." Both are gibberish, and both will collect answers, because the modern sense is the only one most students carry. Learn it here: in Calvin, peculiar = exclusive property. It is the same root as peculiar in a peculiar people (Titus 2:14) — a people that are God's own.

Trap 2 — the direction of S12. He is robbed of his honour. Who is he? God. The item will read: "Calvin says the worshipper is robbed of his honour when he confines worship to God alone." Two flips in one: the victim is God, not the worshipper, and the robbery happens when worship is not confined. Track the unless.

Trap 3 — what S14–S15 actually claim. This is the scope trap, and it is the important one theologically. Calvin does not say superstition denies God, or dethrones God, or ranks God with the others. He says the exact opposite three times: it avoids the appearance of abandoning the Supreme God, it avoids reducing him to the same rank with others, and it gives him the highest place. The crime is what comes after the concession: but at the same time surrounds him with a tribe of minor deities. An item that says "superstition, according to Calvin, openly demotes God to the level of lesser deities" is a direction-flip of the entire block. The word for the crime is in S16, and it is not demotion: it is dissected.

Trap 4 — S7's but. But to say nothing more of words… An item may treat Calvin's etymologies (S3–S6) as the ground of his argument. They are not. S7 formally sets them aside — the load-bearing proof is S9's jealous God and S10's Law. The argument heading says it in order: 1st, By the etymology of the term. 2d, By the testimony of God himself. The etymology is the warm-up; the testimony is the case. If an item asks "on what does Calvin finally rest the claim?", the answer is God's own declaration in the Law, not the Greek word.

Formula 1 — the mandative subjunctive: V(command) + that + S + BARE VERB (S2), with purpose that/in order that + S + may/might (S3, S5, S9)

he ENJOINS  that  nothing which belongs to Divinity   BE APPLIED  to any other
            ^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   ^^^^^^^^^^
            that   SUBJECT (3rd sg.)                   BARE FORM — no -s, no tense

TRIGGERS (verb / noun / adj. of commanding-requiring-proposing):
   enjoin · command · order · require · demand · insist · propose · move · decree · request
   it is necessary/essential/imperative/vital  that S + BARE V

NEGATIVE:  that nothing BE applied   /   that he NOT BE deceived     ← never "does not be"
BRITISH ALT: that … SHOULD be applied  (Beveridge writes the bare subjunctive)

COUSIN — PURPOSE CLAUSES (these keep the modal):
   S3  in order that God     MIGHT not be worshipped absurdly   ← past sequence
   S5  that it              MAY   stand with a firm step        ← present sequence
   S9  in order that the human race MAY be kept in obedience

⚠️ Traps
  · "enjoins that nothing IS applied" — indicative after a command verb. Wrong.
  · Do not confuse the two: COMMAND-that → bare verb (no modal); PURPOSE-that → may/might.
  · The subject can be long ("nothing which belongs to Divinity"); agreement never appears anyway.

Transformation drill. Rewrite with a mandative subjunctive plus a negative purpose clause: The Law commands that no honour belonging to God should be given to a creature, so that his glory may not be divided. → The Law enjoins that no honour peculiar to God be given to a creature, in order that his glory may not be dissected.

Formula 2 — deprivation verbs: rob / deprive / strip X of Y and their passive (S12), with confine X to/within Y (S5, S12) and unless = if … not

UNLESS  everything peculiar to divinity  IS CONFINED TO  God alone,   he  IS ROBBED OF  his honour
^^^^^^                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^
= if … NOT (no second "not"!)            confine X TO Y                  passive of ROB X OF Y

ACTIVE   : idolatry ROBS God OF his honour        → PASSIVE: God IS ROBBED OF his honour
SAME FAMILY: deprive X of Y (§16 S2) · strip X of Y · bereave X of Y · cure X of Y · convince X of Y
OTHER FAMILY (thing = object): steal Y FROM X · take Y FROM X
CONFINE: confine X TO Y (S12, restrict to)  ·  confine oneself WITHIN bounds (S5, keep inside)

⚠️ Traps
  · "unless … is NOT confined" — double negative; UNLESS already means "if not".
  · "unless … WILL BE confined" — no future in the unless/if-clause; use the present.
  · "robbed FROM his honour" / "robs his honour from God" — wrong frame. ROB [victim] OF [thing].
  · S12's victim is GOD, not the worshipper.

Transformation drill. Rewrite using unless + confine X to Y + passive rob X of Y: If we do not keep prayer for God alone, we take his honour away from him. → Unless prayer is confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour.

Formula 3 — the nominative absolute: [NP + V-ing/being + …] with no finite verb (S5, S19); plus gerunds with a possessive subject and a fronted negative (S6)

S5:   the greater part of mankind  RASHLY TAKING UP  whatever first comes in their way
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      SUBJECT of the participle    PARTICIPLE (no finite verb — the clause is "absolute")
      Restore: (while) the greater part of mankind rashly TAKES UP …

S19:  all that we retain  BEING  a frigid opinion of his supreme power
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  ^^^^^
      SUBJECT             BEING → restore: all that we retain IS a frigid opinion

S6 (GERUND, not participle):   from  ITS  NOT  BEING CONTENTED  with the measure …
                                     ^^^  ^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                                     possessive SUBJECT of the gerund
                                          NEGATIVE goes BEFORE the gerund
      Restore: from the fact that IT IS NOT CONTENTED with the measure …
      …and the coordinated second gerund shares the same "from": but (from its) ACCUMULATING …

⚠️ Traps
  · Do not "correct" TAKING → takes or BEING → is. The main clause already has its finite verb.
  · Gerund negation: NOT being contented (✓) / being NOT contented (✗).
  · "its" in S6 is the gerund's SUBJECT, not a possessive modifying a noun.

Transformation drill. Rewrite with one absolute and one negated gerund with a possessive subject: Most worshippers seize the nearest comfort, and superstition gets its name because it will not stop where reason stops; the only thing left is a cold respect. → Most worshippers seizing the nearest comfort, superstition takes its name from its not stopping where reason stops — all that remains being a cold respect.

Where we are. Chapter 11 argued that images are illegitimate. Chapter 12 asks the prior question: what is worship, and who may receive it? The chapter has three sections, and the argument heading maps them exactly — §1 (today): Scripture's assertion of God's unity is a worship claim, proved (1) from the words and (2) from God's own testimony; §2 (tomorrow): the Papists gain nothing by the dulia/latria distinction; §3: the Scripture passages that destroy it. So §1 is the premise, and §§2–3 are the application. Note what that means for how you read today: nothing in §1 mentions images at all. That is deliberate. Calvin is establishing the rule on ground the opponent must concede before he applies it where the opponent will resist.

The IOU from §11. Back in ch. 11 §11 (Day 66) Calvin promised the dulia/latria distinction would be dealt with see infra, s. 16, and chap. 12 s. 2. Yesterday paid the historical half (the council that invented the distinction could not keep it). Tomorrow pays the exegetical half. Today is the bridge: before you can show that the distinction fails, you must state the rule it is trying to evade — S2 and S12. Keep the three parts straight; the exam will ask which section does which.

The etymologies, and how much weight they bear. Cicero, De Natura Deorum 2.28, has Balbus derive religiosi from relegere, "to go over again," so that the religious are those who review the things of the cult — as against superstitiosi, whom he derives (in the same passage) from those who prayed all day that their children might survive them (superstites). Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.28, rejects Cicero and derives religio from religare, "to bind fast" — we are bound to God by the bond of piety. Beveridge's footnote sends you to both, and it is telling you what Calvin is doing: he sides with Lactantius in substance (religion = restraint, boundedness, over against vagrant license) without adopting his etymology as a proof. Modern philology, for what it is worth, does not settle it — religio may come from relegere after all, and superstitio's formation is genuinely obscure. Which is exactly why S7 exists. Calvin gets four sentences of profit out of the words and then writes But to say nothing more of words. Treat his etymologies as illustration, never as the argument; he tells you to.

The S6 guardrail — the most over-quoted line of the section. The measure which reason prescribes (S6) is a remark about how the word superstitio was formed, inside a paragraph Calvin is about to set aside. It is not a claim that reason is the norm of worship. Calvin's norm is stated four sentences later and it is the Law: God prescribes a rule for worshipping him **in accordance with his will** (S10). If you see §1 cited as evidence that Calvin grounded worship in natural reason, check whether the citation stops at S6. It usually does.

What is actually new here: idolatry as dissection. The analysis in S13–S16 is the most original thing in the section, and it is worth naming precisely. Calvin's claim is not that idolaters are polytheists who deny the one God. It is that idolatry characteristically preserves monotheism at the level of profession and dismantles it at the level of function: God keeps the highest place, and his peculiar offices are portioned out among intermediaries. The glory is not denied; it is dissected. That analysis has a long afterlife — it is the engine of the Reformed critique of the cult of saints, it shapes the Heidelberg Catechism's treatment of the first commandment (Q. 94–95, where idolatry is defined as trusting anything besides the one true God, not as denying him), and it is why the Reformed tradition treats invocation (S18's second verb) as the decisive test rather than adoration: you can ask something of a creature while sincerely believing God is supreme, and the asking is the dissection.

Where Calvin's opponents would push back. Three places, and you should know them. (1) Rome's answer to S18 is that invocation of saints is intercessory request, not worship — asking a saint to pray is formally the same act as asking a living Christian to pray. Calvin's reply, developed in Book 3 ch. 20, is that the request presupposes the saint's omniscient availability, which is itself a peculiar office. (2) The Eastern answer is that S15's analysis simply does not describe the theology of Nicaea II, whatever the Latin summaries said — a point on which most modern historians side with the East (see yesterday's guardrail). (3) A fair critic will note that S17's both Jews and Gentiles does a lot of work with no citation; Calvin means Israel's high places and host-of-heaven cult, but he does not argue it here. Hold the analysis as a powerful diagnostic frame, not as a proof that every honour paid to a creature is idolatry; Calvin himself distinguishes civil honour from religious honour (he says so explicitly two sections from now, in §3).

The legal register. Notice how much of today's vocabulary comes from law: contend for (S2), vindicating his own right (S9), avenger (S9), binds … in allegiance (S10), Lawgiver (S10), prescribes (S10), robbed of (S12), violated (S12), peculiar (S12, peculium = private property). Calvin took a law degree at Orléans and Bourges and never stopped thinking in it. The chapter's underlying picture is a property suit: God is the owner, glory is the estate, idolatry is conversion of the estate to the use of others, and the Law is the instrument recording title. Read the section that way once and every word snaps into place.

1. Exod 20:5; 34:14; Deut 4:24; 6:15 — a jealous God (S9). Hebrew אֵל קַנָּא (ʾēl qannāʾ), LXX θεὸς ζηλωτής; Exod 34:14 goes further — the LORD, whose name is Jealous (שְׁמוֹ קַנָּא). Calvin quotes without citing, which is his way of signalling that this is the section's load-bearing text. His use: jealousy is not an emotional defect but the legal refusal of a rival claim — which is why S9 pairs it with vindicating his own right.
2. Deut 6:4; Isa 45:5–6; 1 Cor 8:4–6 — whenever Scripture asserts the unity of God (S2). Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God is one LORD (שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל … יְהוָה אֶחָד); I am the LORD, and there is none else. Calvin's thesis is a claim about what these texts are doing: not settling a count, but forbidding a transfer. Note that 1 Cor 8 makes the same move — there be gods many, and lords many, but to us there is but one God — a worship statement, not a census.
3. Exod 20:2–6 — the two limbs of S10. First commandment (thou shalt have no other gods before me) = God binds the faithful in allegiance to him as their only Lawgiver, the who. Second commandment (thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image … thou shalt not bow down thyself to them) = he prescribes a rule for worshipping him in accordance with his will, the how. This is Calvin's standard division of the first table, and S9's first … thereafter is built on it.
4. Isa 42:8; 48:11 — he is robbed of his honour (S12). I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, כְּבוֹדִי לְאַחֵר לֹא־אֶתֵּן. This is the verse S12 is a paraphrase of, and it supplies the property logic: glory is God's possession, and its transfer is a taking.
5. Deut 32:16–17; Ps 81:9; 1 Cor 10:20 — strange gods (S14). They provoked him to jealousy with strange gods… they sacrificed unto devils (Heb. זָרִים / שֵׁדִים, LXX δαιμονίοις). Deut 32:16 is the single verse that holds today's two key terms together — jealousy and strange gods — which is very likely why Calvin's vocabulary in S9 and S14 is what it is.
6. Deut 4:19; 2 Kgs 21:3–5; Jer 8:2 — both Jews and Gentiles (S17). The host of heaven, an immense crowd, given a share in the government — and Israel adopting the arrangement under Manasseh. This is the unstated evidence for S17's most aggressive phrase. Calvin does not cite it; he assumes his reader supplies it.
7. Rom 1:21–23 — a frigid opinion of his supreme power (S19). When they knew God, they glorified him not as God … and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image. Paul's sequence is Calvin's: real knowledge → withheld glory → substituted image → darkened heart. A frigid opinion is Calvin's name for the residue Paul describes as knowing God while not glorifying him as God.
8. Judg 2:17; Deut 31:16; Hos 2:5 — we go astray after divers gods (S20). Hebrew זָנָה (zānâ), to go a whoring after — the covenant-marriage metaphor. And its exact antonym, דָּבַק (dābaq), to cleave, is the verb behind S8's cleave to the one God (Josh 23:8; Deut 10:20). Calvin frames the section between the two halves of one biblical metaphor: cleave at S8, go astray at S20.
9. Ps 106:36–37; Acts 17:22–23 — a tribe of minor deities (S15). They served their idols … they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils; and Paul at the Areopagus finding an altar TO THE UNKNOWN GOD among the crowd of the known ones. Athens is exactly S15's structure: a supreme place preserved, and the offices distributed.

How Calvin uses Scripture here: almost entirely unquoted. There is not one formal citation in twenty sentences — no chapter-and-verse, no as it is written. Instead the section is built out of biblical phrases dropped into ordinary prose (a jealous God, strange gods, cleave to, go astray after, abomination, vanities) so that a reader who knows the Bible hears the argument being made in Scripture's own vocabulary before any proof-text is offered. That is a deliberate rhetorical choice, and it is the mirror image of §§14–16, where the method was quotation is the refutation. Here the method is: saturation is the argument. The proof-texts arrive tomorrow, in §3.

① Grammar — which underlined part is wrong?

Whenever Scripture asserts the unity of God, it does not contend for a mere name, but also ⓐ enjoins that nothing which belongs to Divinity be applied to any other. In the same way superstition seems to take its name ⓑ from its not being contented with the measure which reason prescribes. I rather think the name is used in opposition to vagrant license — ⓒ the greater part of mankind rashly taking up whatever first comes in their way. But ⓓ unless everything peculiar to divinity is not confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour.

Answer: ⓓ. Unless already means if … not; adding not makes a double negative and reverses the sense. Correct: unless everything peculiar to divinity **is confined** to God alone. ⓐ is Formula 1 — the mandative subjunctive be applied after enjoins; it only looks wrong. ⓑ is Formula 3 — a gerund with a possessive subject (its) and the negative correctly placed before the gerund. ⓒ is Formula 3's other half — a nominative absolute with its own subject and no finite verb, which is legal because the main clause already has is used. Exam-setter's rationale: the item is built so that the three strange-looking but correct structures crowd out the one normal-looking but wrong one. Students who have just learned that unless = if not will still supply the redundant not by reflex, because the clause is long and the negative feels "missing." Count negatives, don't feel them.

② Comprehension — which statement is TRUE according to the passage?

(A) Calvin rejects Cicero's derivation of religion from relego as untrue, and puts forward the etymology of superstition as the decisive proof of his case. (B) According to Calvin, superstition openly abandons the Supreme God and reduces him to the same rank as lesser deities. (C) Calvin holds that unless everything belonging exclusively to God is confined to God alone, God is robbed of his honour and his worship is violated. (D) Calvin argues that the measure prescribed by human reason is the rule by which God has appointed that he be worshipped.

Answer: (C). That is S12, verbatim in substance: unless everything peculiar to divinity is confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour, and his worship is violated. Exam-setter's rationale: (A) is a double error — Calvin calls Cicero's derivation truly and shrewdly made and rejects only the reason which he assigns; and S7 formally sets the whole etymological argument aside (But to say nothing more of words), so no etymology is "the decisive proof." (B) is the direction-flip of S14–S15, and it is the trap that catches the most people: Calvin says the opposite three times over — superstition avoids the appearance of abandoning, avoids reducing him to the same rank, and gives him the highest place. The crime is dissecting the glory while professing it, not denying it. (D) is the scope-overreach on S6: the measure which reason prescribes is part of a remark on how the word superstitio was formed, and the rule Calvin actually names is God's own, in accordance with his will (S10).

③ Composition — apply Formulas 1 and 2

Translate, using the mandative subjunctive (enjoin/require that S + bare verb) for the first sentence and unless + confine X to Y + passive rob X of Y for the second:

(1) 율법은 신성에게만 고유한 것은 무엇이든 다른 어떤 것에도 돌려지지 말 것을 명한다. (2) 기도가 하나님께만 한정되지 않는 한, 그분은 자신의 영예를 빼앗기시고 그분의 예배는 침해된다.

Model: The Law enjoins that whatever is peculiar to divinity be applied to no other. Unless prayer is confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour, and his worship is violated. 채점 포인트: ① enjoins that … **be** applied — bare subjunctive after a command verb; is applied or should be applied loses the pattern mark (the second is acceptable British usage but is not the formula being tested). ② whatever is **peculiar to** divinity — the day's key adjective, used in its Calvinian sense of belonging exclusively to; strange to divinity scores zero. ③ **Unless** prayer **is** confined — one negative only, and present tense in the unless-clause; unless prayer is not confined and unless prayer will be confined are both wrong. ④ **he is robbed of** his honour — the passive of rob X of Y, with God as the subject; his honour is robbed and he is robbed from his honour both break the frame. ⑤ Bonus: keeping and his worship is violated as a second coordinated passive, as in the source.

One-line summary. Chapter 12 opens by reaching back to Chapter 2 — the knowledge of God consists **not in frigid speculation**, but **carries worship along with it** (S1) — and turns that into the chapter's thesis: whenever Scripture asserts God's unity, it does **not contend for a mere name**, but also **enjoins that nothing which belongs to Divinity be applied to any other** (S2), which is where pure religion differs from superstition; four sentences of etymology follow — ευ σε βεια = right worship from Greeks **though groping in darkness**, Cicero **truly and shrewdly** deriving religion from relego **and yet** with a reason **forced and farfetched**, Calvin's own preference for a word set **in opposition to vagrant license** where piety **confines itself within due bounds**, and superstition named **from its not being contented** with the measure which reason prescribes — and then, in one clause, the whole apparatus is dropped: **But to say nothing more of words** (S7), because everyone already grants that **inconsiderate zeal** is no defence, and grants it while neither **cleaving to** the one God, nor using any selection (S8). Then the real proof: God **in vindicating his own right** first proclaims himself **a jealous God** who will not be **confounded with** any false god, and **thereafter defines what due worship is** (S9) — the two limbs of the Law, who and how (S10) — a **bridle to curb** men from **spurious worship** (S11) — and the rule itself: **unless everything peculiar to divinity is confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour**, and his worship is violated (S12). Finally the anatomy: superstition **avoids the appearance of abandoning** God, **gives him the highest place**, and then **surrounds him with a tribe of minor deities, among whom it portions out his peculiar offices** (S14–S15), so that **the glory of the Godhead is dissected, and not allowed to remain entire** (S16) — Jews and Gentiles of old (S17), and for some ages past, **departed saints** … worshipped, invoked, and lauded **in his stead** (S18) — while **we do not even think** the majesty is obscured, though it is **suppressed and extinguished**, all that we retain **being a frigid opinion** of his supreme power (S19), and so we **go astray after** divers gods (S20). Idolatry, in this chapter, is not the denial of God. It is the dismemberment of his glory by people who would sincerely deny denying it.

Grammar, the three to carry out of here. ① V(command) + that + S + BARE VERB — the mandative subjunctive: enjoins that nothing … **be** applied, no -s, no tense, no do-support, negative as that … **not be** …; distinguish it from the purpose clause, which keeps the modal (in order that God **might** not be worshipped, that it **may** stand, in order that … **may** be kept). ② rob / deprive / strip X of Y and its passive X **is robbed of** Y — the victim is the subject, the thing keeps its of; with confine X **to** Y / confine oneself **within** bounds, and unless = if … not (one negative only, present tense in the clause). ③ the nominative absolute — [NP + V-ing/being …] with no finite verb: the greater part of mankind rashly **taking up** … (S5), all that we retain **being** a frigid opinion (S19) — do not "correct" the participle; plus the gerund with a possessive subject and a fronted negative: from **its** **not** **being contented** … (S6).

Homework (10 min).

1. 구조 복원. Write out S6 and split it into its three parts: (a) the possessive subject of the gerund, (b) the negative and where it sits, (c) the second gerund and which preposition it shares. Then rewrite the whole sentence as a that-clause with a finite verb (superstition seems to take its name from the fact that it…). Second, do the same for S19: turn all that we retain being a frigid opinion into a finite whereas-clause. Answer in one line: why does Calvin put his verdict on the many into an absolute both times rather than a main clause?
2. 영작. Using Formula 1, write one sentence in which a law or a council enjoins that something be done — bare subjunctive, no modal. Then, using Formula 2, write a second sentence beginning Unless … whose main clause is a passive is robbed of with a person as subject. Test: does your subjunctive verb carry no -s? Does your unless-clause contain exactly one negative and a present-tense verb? Is the victim, not the thing, the subject of is robbed?
3. 내일 예습 한 줄. Tomorrow is §2, and it opens: **The distinction of what is called δυλια and λατρια was invented for the very purpose of permitting divine honours to be paid to angels and dead men with apparent impunity.** Note what has changed: today Calvin never once named the distinction — he built the rule instead. Tomorrow the rule meets the evasion, and the first word out of his mouth about it is **invented**. Ask yourself tonight: if S12's rule is right — that everything peculiar to divinity must be confined to God alone — what exactly does a distinction between two grades of honour have to prove in order to survive it?

Where we stopped: Book 1, Ch. 12, §1 끝. 다음은 Book 1, Ch. 12, §2 (Day 73) — The Papists in opposing this pure doctrine, gain nothing by their distinction of δυλια and λατρια.