# Calvin vs. Ignatius

# Who is the heretic?

To determine whether John Calvin or Ignatius of Antioch could be considered a heretic in relation to their views on the Eucharist, we need to compare their teachings to the early Christian understanding, particularly as represented by Saint Paul and Justin Martyr, and consider the historical and theological contexts in which heresy is defined. The term “heretic” historically refers to someone who holds beliefs contrary to established orthodox doctrine, as defined by the church at a given time. Since the question likely relates to their Eucharistic theology, I’ll focus on their views on the Eucharist and evaluate them against early Christian teachings and the standards of their respective eras.

# Ignatius of Antioch’s View on the Eucharist

Ignatius, a 1st-century bishop of Antioch (died c. 108–140 CE), is one of the earliest Apostolic Fathers. His letters, written en route to his martyrdom, provide early testimony to Christian beliefs. His Eucharistic theology is found in texts like the Letter to the Smyrnaeans and Letter to the Ephesians.Key points from Ignatius’ teaching:

Real Presence: In Letter to the Smyrnaeans 7:1, Ignatius writes:
“They [heretics, likely Docetists] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again.”
- Ignatius explicitly identifies the Eucharist as “the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ,” emphasizing a real presence and rejecting the Docetist view that Christ’s body was not real.
Purpose: In Letter to the Ephesians 20:2, he describes the Eucharist as “the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but that we should live forever in Jesus Christ.” It is a unifying act, tied to Christ’s incarnation and passion.
Orthodoxy: Ignatius defends the Eucharist against Docetists, who denied Christ’s physical incarnation. His teaching aligns with early Christian tradition, as seen in Paul (1 Corinthians 11:23–26) and Justin Martyr (First Apology 66), who affirm the Eucharist as Christ’s body and blood.
Context: As a bishop in the early 2nd century, Ignatius’ writings reflect apostolic tradition and were widely accepted by the early church. No major church council or authority labeled him a heretic; his letters were preserved as orthodox.

# John Calvin’s View on the Eucharist

John Calvin (1509–1564), a key figure in the Protestant Reformation, developed his Eucharistic theology in Institutes of the Christian Religion (Book IV, Chapters 17–18) and other writings, reacting against both Roman Catholic and other Protestant views (e.g., Luther’s consubstantiation and Zwingli’s memorialism).Key points from Calvin’s teaching:

Spiritual Presence: Calvin rejects the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation (where the bread and wine become Christ’s body and blood in substance) and Zwingli’s view that the Eucharist is merely a symbol. In Institutes IV.17.10–11, he argues for a “spiritual presence”:
“The body of Christ is given to us in the Supper, not physically, but spiritually, by the Holy Spirit, who applies and bestows upon us the benefits of Christ’s death.”
- Believers partake of Christ’s body and blood spiritually through faith, not by a physical transformation of the elements.
Purpose: The Eucharist is a sign and seal of God’s grace, strengthening faith and uniting believers with Christ and each other (Institutes IV.17.1). It commemorates Christ’s sacrifice but does not repeat it as a sacrifice.
Rejection of Sacrifice: Calvin denies the Catholic view of the Eucharist as a propitiatory sacrifice, arguing that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was once-for-all (Hebrews 10:10). The Eucharist is a memorial and spiritual nourishment, not a re-offering of Christ.
Context: Calvin’s theology emerged during the Reformation, challenging the Catholic Church’s authority and doctrines like transubstantiation. His views were condemned as heretical by the Council of Trent (1545–1563), which reaffirmed transubstantiation and the sacrificial nature of the Mass (Session 13, Canon 1). However, Calvin’s teachings were foundational for Reformed Protestantism and accepted as orthodox within that tradition.

# Comparing Ignatius and Calvin to Early Christian Teaching

To assess whether either is a heretic, we’ll compare their views to the early Christian understanding of the Eucharist (as seen in Paul and Justin) and consider the standards of orthodoxy in their respective contexts.

Nature of the Eucharist (Real Presence):
- Paul and Justin: Paul states, “This is my body” and “This cup is the new covenant in my blood” (1 Corinthians 11:23–25), implying a real connection to Christ’s body and blood. Justin explicitly calls the Eucharist “the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh” (First Apology 66), indicating a real presence, though without defining the mechanism (e.g., transubstantiation).
- Ignatius: Aligns closely with Paul and Justin, identifying the Eucharist as Christ’s flesh and blood (Smyrnaeans 7:1). His language is consistent with the early church’s belief in a real presence, countering Docetist denials of Christ’s physicality.
- Calvin: Rejects a physical or substantial presence, advocating a spiritual presence where believers partake of Christ through faith via the Holy Spirit. This departs from the early church’s language of “flesh and blood” and the later Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation.
- Comparison: Ignatius’ view is nearly identical to Justin’s and compatible with Paul’s, reflecting early Christian orthodoxy. Calvin’s spiritual presence diverges from the early church’s stronger emphasis on the elements being Christ’s body and blood, aligning more with Protestant critiques of Catholic doctrine.
Purpose (Memorial and Sacrifice):
- Paul and Justin: Paul emphasizes the Eucharist as a memorial proclaiming Christ’s death (1 Corinthians 11:26). Justin adds a sacrificial dimension, calling it a “pure offering” fulfilling Malachi 1:11 (Dialogue with Trypho 41), and sees it as spiritual nourishment.
- Ignatius: Views the Eucharist as “the medicine of immortality” (Ephesians 20:2), aligning with Justin’s emphasis on nourishment and participation in Christ’s sacrifice, though he does not explicitly call it a sacrifice.
- Calvin: Sees the Eucharist as a memorial and spiritual nourishment but denies it as a propitiatory sacrifice, rejecting the Catholic Mass as a re-offering of Christ. He emphasizes faith and union with Christ.
- Comparison: Ignatius aligns with Paul and Justin in viewing the Eucharist as a memorial and participation in Christ’s sacrifice, though his sacrificial language is less developed. Calvin’s rejection of the sacrificial aspect conflicts with Justin’s and later Catholic teaching but is grounded in his interpretation of Paul (e.g., Hebrews 10:10).
Orthodoxy and Context:
- Ignatius: Writing in the early 2nd century, Ignatius’ teachings were consistent with apostolic tradition and accepted by the early church. No council or contemporary authority labeled him a heretic; his letters were preserved as orthodox, and his emphasis on the real presence countered Docetism, a recognized heresy.
- Calvin: Writing in the 16th century, Calvin’s rejection of transubstantiation and the sacrificial Mass was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent (Session 13, Canon 1). However, his views were orthodox within Reformed Protestantism, which rejected Catholic authority. The charge of heresy against Calvin depends on whether one accepts the Catholic Church’s authority to define orthodoxy.
- Comparison: Ignatius’ views were unchallenged in his time and align with the consensus of the early church. Calvin’s views were controversial in his context, condemned by Catholics but embraced by Reformed Christians, reflecting the fractured nature of 16th-century Christianity.

# Defining Heresy

Heresy is a deviation from established orthodox doctrine, but the definition depends on the authority defining orthodoxy:

Early Christian Context: Orthodoxy was based on apostolic tradition, as reflected in Paul, Ignatius, and Justin. Ignatius’ teachings align with this tradition, particularly in defending the real presence against Docetism.
Catholic Context (16th Century): The Council of Trent defined transubstantiation and the sacrificial nature of the Mass as dogma, labeling Calvin’s views heretical for rejecting these.
Reformed Context: Calvin’s theology was orthodox within Protestantism, which prioritized Scripture over church tradition and rejected Catholic doctrines like transubstantiation.

From the perspective of early Christian teaching (Paul and Justin), Ignatius’ views are fully consistent, while Calvin’s spiritual presence and rejection of sacrifice diverge significantly. From a Catholic perspective, Calvin is a heretic; from a Reformed perspective, he is not.Conclusion

Ignatius of Antioch: Not a heretic. His Eucharistic theology aligns with Paul and Justin, emphasizing the real presence of Christ’s flesh and blood and the Eucharist’s role as a memorial and nourishment. His teachings were accepted by the early church and countered recognized heresies like Docetism.
John Calvin: Considered a heretic by the Catholic Church for rejecting transubstantiation and the sacrificial nature of the Mass, as defined by the Council of Trent. However, his views were orthodox within Reformed Protestantism. Compared to early Christian teaching (Paul and Justin), Calvin’s spiritual presence and denial of sacrifice represent a significant departure, though grounded in his interpretation of Scripture.

# Conclusion

If we judge by the standard of early Christian Eucharistic theology (as represented by Paul and Justin), Ignatius is orthodox, while Calvin’s views deviate in key aspects (real presence and sacrifice). Thus, in this context, Calvin is more likely to be considered a heretic. Ignatius, by contrast, is universally regarded as orthodox in Christianity.