Yes, this is largely just a reworking of my post about Vol. 1. It’s not like I’m going to have a lot of different things to say about this, so why torture myself by trying? I reckon the same will be true in December/January when I write about Vol. 3. Still, it’s different enough to justify my time. Hopefully yours, too.
by Francis Turretin, George Musgrave Giger (Translator), James T. Dennison, Jr. (Editor)
DETAILS:
Series: Institutes of Elenctic Theology, Vol. 2
Publisher: P & R Publishing
Publication Date: February 1, 1994
Format: Hardcover
Length: 724 pg.
Read Date: May 5-Augst 25, 2024
What’s Elenctic Theology Anyway?
Elenctic refers to a logical method involving asking questions, of defending a position (or arguing to persuade people to accept it) by proposing alternatives and asking a series of questions—practically cross-examing the alternatives, to show the problems of the alternatives. A good deal of what we call the “Socratic method” is elenctics.
Therefore, Elenctic Theology is a form of defending the truth of Christianity or Christian dogmas by suggesting alternatives and demonstrating their lack by way of asking and answering questions about them. Or by asking a question about a true dogma and asking questions that affirm them. Aquinas’ Summa Contra Gentiles is one example. This book is another.
What’s Institutes of Elenctic Theology Then?
For a long time, it was the standard textbook to train Presbyterian and Reformed ministers in various parts of the world—including the U.S.—until Charles Hodge’s systematic theology overtook it in popularity (Hodge, it should be noted had his students read Turretin’s Institutes).
Turretin wrote it at the height of Protestant Scholasticism, defending the Reformed understanding of Christianity in a post-Synod of Dordt and post-Westminster Assembly-era. He interacts with the best of Roman Catholic theology of the era, as well as Socinians, Remonstrants (read: Arminians), Lutherans, and others.
He examines the big issues of the time—and several smaller issues, as well. In this volume, of the 20 topics these volumes cover, we get topics 11-17. Yes, the last three topics get an excess of 600 pages devoted to them—he’s going to really get into the details with those. But I’m not thinking about that yet. The topics in this volume are:
The Law of God
The Covenant of Grace and Its Twofold Economy in the Old and New Testaments
The Person and State of Christ
The Mediatorial Office of Christ
Calling and Faith
Justification
Sanctification and Good Works
Turretin’s Method
I think the best way to show how Turretin approaches these discussions is to show you the list of questions from one of the topics. Here’s what he looks at in the roughly 130 pages of The Fifteenth Topic: calling and Faith:
I. Are decrees in God, and how?
Il. Are the decrees of God eternal? We affirm against Socinus.
Ill. Are there conditional decrees? We deny against the Socinians, Remonstrants and Jesuits.
IV. Does the decree necessitate future things? We affirm.
V. Is the fixed and immovable end of the life of each man with all its circumstances so determined by the decree of God, that he cannot die in another moment of time or by another kind of death than that in which he does die? We affirm against the Socinians and Remonstrants.
VI. Ought predestination to be publicly taught and preached? We affirm.
VII. In what sense are the words “predestination,” prognōseōs, eklogēs and prosthesōs used in this mystery?
VIII. Was there a predestination of angels, and was it of the same kind and order with the predestination of men? The former we affirm; the latter we deny.
IX. Whether the object of predestination was man creatable, or capable of falling; or whether as created and fallen. The former we deny; the latter we affirm.
X. Is Christ the cause and foundation of election? We deny against the Arminians and Lutherans.
XI. Is election made from the foresight of faith, or works; or from the grace of God alone? The former we deny; the latter we affirm.
XII. Is the election of certain men to salvation constant and immutable? We affirm against the Remonstrants.
XIII. Can the believer be certain of his own election with a certainty not only conjectural and moral, but infallible and of faith? We affirm against the papists and Remonstrants.
XIV. Is the decree of reprobation absolute, depending upon the good pleasure (eudokia) of God alone; or is sin its proper cause? We distinguish.
XV. Is infidelity, or unbelief of the gospel, presupposed as a cause of reprobation? We deny against the Remonstrants.
XVI. Is the will of God to save persevering believers and condemn the unbelieving, the whole decree of reprobation? We deny against the Remonstrants.
XVII. Can there be attributed to God any conditional will, or universal purpose of pitying the whole human race fallen in sin, of destinating Christ as Mediator to each and all, and of calling them all to a saving participation of his benefits? We deny.
XVIII. Is any order to be admitted in the divine decrees, and what is it?
Like I said last time, I texted a friend saying that I wish I could break down an idea like Turretin. He made me feel a little better by replying, “You and everyone else born in the 20th century.” Because from these questions, he’ll spend a few pages breaking down the idea further, systematically working his way through the question and seemingly every possible angle of it.
There’s part of me that wants to abandon this re-read and just focus on observing his method and trying to replicate it in my life. I’m not going to, but it’s a thought.
There are times, however, where I wonder why Turretin would spend time on something like, “Was Christ caught up into heaven before beginning his public ministry in order to be taught there by the Father? We deny against the Socinians.” The answer is, obviously, that these were topics being discussed in the Church, and it seemed necessary to Turretin. It’s just so far out of our experience to think of.
So, what did I think about Institutes of Elenctic Theology Vol. 2?
Let me get this out of the way first: This is dry. Dry like a stale crouton. I know most people think that about Theology in general—and sure, bad theology is usually dry, but not the good stuff. This is one of those exceptions that proves the rule.
There are moments, I should note, that some of Turretin’s personality shows through, some moments expressing the awe appropriate to the topic, the emotions stirred by the Gospel, and even a little humor/snark at the thoughts of his opponents. But those moments are brief and rare. But they’re golden. There were segments in this book where Turretin focused on the gospel and some of those practically sung. It was just great.
As it’s dry, it’s a little harder to read than others (say, Calvin or Bavinck). But it’s absolutely worth the effort—and after a little while, you won’t notice the effort. It’s so crisp, so clear, so helpful that you relish getting to read it. Giger and Dennison likely are due as much credit for this as Turretin is. Giger’s also likely due some credit for the arid language (he was translating in the early Nineteenth Century, not one an era known for punchy prose).
I can’t recommend this highly enough.
We have now said enough on this subject. God grant that, dismissing a vain confidence in our own merit, we may rest in the most perfect merit of Christ alone and so keep faithful to him and fight the good fight even unto the end that we may receive a crown of righteousness; due not to our merit, but most graciously promised to us from the heavenly rewarder. To him, the author and finisher (archēgō kai teleiōtē) of our salvation, the one and triune God, “from whom, by whom and to whom are all things, be praise and glory world without end.” Amen.
This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
This was a hard post to come up with a name for‡, essentially this post came from 
