Fides 20 N1 - Revista do Centro Presbiteriano Andrew Jumper

FIDES REFORMATA XX, Nº 1 (2015): 89-105
instance of different terminology is when Calvin calls Noah “the stipulator
of the covenant.” 35 He uses this term to describe Noah as the subject with whom
the covenant is being made and that his sons are incorporated to the agreement
by association. Although the word can be used in reference to one who accepts
a deal without requiring any kind of guarantee, in later developments of the
doctrine of the covenant the word was used mainly in reference to Yahweh’s
role of setting up the details of the agreement. 36
The parties of the Noahic Covenant, for Calvin, are God and Noah. As
already noted, Noah’s family and the animals are part of God’s promise (or,
using Calvin’s terminology, condition) to Noah in order to encourage him to
present obedience and future hope. This is why this covenant results in both
human and cosmic preservation. 37 But Calvin observes that the entrance of
Noah’s family into the covenant has a “subordinated place.” Noah’s sons and
their wives are “joined with their father” and are “associated with him.” 38 It
seems that Calvin considers Noah as the federal head of his family, like Adam,
and his posterity, both near and far, participate with him in the covenant. Calvin
uses this conclusion in order to refute the Anabaptists, who reject infant baptism
35 Calvin, Commentaries on Genesis, 1:297.
36 One of the first Reformed creeds to give attention to the doctrine of the covenant was the
Erlauthaler Confession of 1562. It expresses in concise but precise form what was understood by a divine
covenant. According to Peter De Jong, in it “God the Father is recognized as ‘stipulator et promissor.’
However, since in all covenant there are two parts, so too in the new covenant of God with man there
are obligations which must be met. Recognizing and elaborating upon this the confession states: ‘In
nove foedere Deus stipulator est, Christus autem factor obligator nostro nomine.’” Peter Y. De Jong, The
Covenant Idea in New England Theology, 1620-1847 (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1945),
30. In this sense, stipulator means the one who begins the arrangement and set its requirements. In
the seventeenth-century, Johannes Cocceius seems to be the one who, using Roman law terminology,
applies the term stipulator only to God meaning “the initiator, the one who lays down the conditions
of the agreement.” And to man he applies the term astipulator, who consents to the conditions laid
down by the stipulator. Charles S. McCoy, “The Covenant Theology of Johannes Cocceius” (PhD
diss., Yale University, 1957), 157-194. See particularly 169n2. Calvin uses to term in reference to God
in his commentary to the prophecy of Malachi. There he explains the divine covenant in terms of the
marriage covenant. He affirms that “God is as it were the stipulator, who by his authority joins the man
to the woman, and sanctions the alliance.” John Calvin, Commentaries on the Twelve Minor Prophets,
trans. John Owen, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2005), 553. It seems that here Calvin
acknowledges God’s role as one who officially unites and bonds a couple in their marital vows. The notion
of an initiator and one who dictates obligations seems to be absent here. In his excellent historical
study of covenant theology, Andrew Woolsey explains that there was in Calvin’s covenantal thought
the idea of “mutual stipulations.” But, used in this sense, the word means condition instead of initiation.
Andrew A. Woolsey, Unity and Continuity in Covenantal Thought: a Study in the Reformed Tradition
to the Westminster Assembly (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 306-317.
37 “In other words, the world today does not survive apart from the power of that covenant God
placed between men and himself…he wants to preserve us and all living creatures because of his infinite
goodness even though we deserve to be exterminated.” Calvin, Sermons on Genesis 1 to 11, 752.
38 Calvin, Commentaries on Genesis, 1:297.
97