（按上圖或按此免費下載）

撮要

老一輩的學者認為加爾文批判「絕對能力」的觀念，就等於否定中世紀唯名論的看法。雖然如此，部分當今研究加爾文的學者卻反對這看法。基於修正派對中世紀唯名論的新了解，他們認為加爾文錯解了唯名論的觀念，他們亦強調加爾文與正統改革宗的差異。但最近有部分研究挑戰修正派的立論，指出在中世紀後期「絕對能力」的用法有很大改變。此用詞帶有法律含義，並附有很多不合宜的猜測。本文作者指出加爾文並非否定傳統「絕對能力」的觀念，而是反對中世紀後期荒唐的猜測。加爾文對其身處時代所理解的「絕對能力」這用詞和其引申的猜測甚為不悅。加爾文在高舉神的旨意的同時，亦強調神的能力不能與祂公義的本質分割。此外，本研究也支持加爾文與正統改革宗的連貫性。他們的分別在於正統改革宗較容易採用傳統中世紀用詞，但二者的教導基本上是一樣的。

ABSTRACT

Older interpreters agree that Calvin’s condemnation of the idea of “absolute power” is equivalent to his rejection of the nominalist idea of absolute power. Nevertheless, some modern Calvin scholarship, equipping with the revised concepts on medieval nominalism by the revisionists, disagrees with the traditional assessment. They basically believe that either Calvin misunderstands the nominalist concept. They also emphasize the discontinuity between Calvin and the Reformed orthodoxy in this issue. Yet, some recent scholarship has undermined the conclusion of the revisionists. They show that there is a significant change of the use of potentia absoluta in late medieval period. The term has been used then more in legal sense and with more ridiculous speculations. In this paper, the author argues that Calvin rejects not the classical concept of potentia absoluta, but the late medieval scandalous speculation on the concept of potentia absoluta. Moreover, Calvin does not like the term as used in his times and the speculation involved. While Calvin upholds the primacy of God’s will, he also emphasizes that God’s power cannot be separated from His just nature. Furthermore, the study supports the thesis that there is a strong continuity between Calvin and the Reformed orthodoxy. The difference of them in this case is that the Reformed orthodoxy is more comfortable with classical medieval terminology, though their teachings are basically the same.

原載於《建道學刊》15期（2001年1月），頁53-72。