Ecumenical Christian Library

  • Loading…

P.2. The first establishment of new discipline by Mr. Calvin’s industry in the Church of Geneva; and the beginning of strife about it amongst ourselves.

159435 min read

II. 1A founder it had, whom, for mine own part, I think incomparably the wisest man that ever the French Church did enjoy, since the hour it enjoyed him. His bringing up was in the study of the civil law. Divine knowledge he gathered, not by hearing or reading so much, as by teaching others. For, though thousands were debtors to him, as touching knowledge in that kind; yet he to none but only to God, the author of that most blessed fountain, the Book of Life, and of the admirable dexterity of wit, together with the helps of other learning which were his guides: till being occasioned to leave France, he fell at the length upon Geneva; which city the bishop and clergy thereof had a little before (as some do affirm) forsaken2, being of likelihood frighted with the people’s sudden attempt for abolishment of popish religion: the event of which enterprise they thought it not safe for themselves to wait for in that place. At the coming of Calvin thither3, the form of their civil regiment was popular, as it continueth at this day: neither king, nor duke, nor nobleman of any authority or power over them, but officers chosen by the people yearly out of themselves, to order all things with public consent. For spiritual government, they had no laws at all agreed upon, but did what the pastors of their souls by persuasion could win them unto. Calvin, being admitted one of their preachers, and a divinity reader amongst them, considered how dangerous it was that the whole estate of that Church should hang still on so slender a thread as the liking of an ignorant multitude is, if it have power to change whatsoever itself listeth. Wherefore taking unto him two of the other ministers4 for more countenance of the action, (albeit the rest were all against it,) they moved, and in the end persuaded5 with much ado, the people to bind themselves by solemn oath, first never to admit the Papacy amongst them again; and secondly, to live in obedience unto such orders concerning the exercise of their religion, and the form of their ecclesiastical government, as those their true and faithful ministers of God’s word had agreeably to scripture set down for that end and purpose.

When these things began to be put in ure, the people also (what causes moving them thereunto, themselves best know) began to repent them of that they had done, and irefully to champ upon the bit they had taken into their mouths; the rather, for that they grew by means of this innovation into dislike with some Churches near about them, the benefit of whose good friendship their state could not well lack6.

It was the manner of those times (whether through men’s desire to enjoy alone the glory of their own enterprizes, or else because the quickness of their occasions required present despatch; so it was,) that every particular Church did that within itself, which some few of their own thought good, by whom the rest were all directed. Such number of Churches then being, though free within themselves, yet small, common conference beforehand might have eased them of much after trouble7. But a greater inconvenience it bred, that every later endeavoured to be certain degrees more removed from conformity with the Church of Rome, than the rest before had been8: whereupon grew marvellous great dissimilitudes, and by reason thereof, jealousies, heart-burnings, jars and discords amongst them. Which, notwithstanding, might have easily been prevented, if the orders, which each Church did think fit and convenient for itself, had not so peremptorily been established under that high commanding form, which tendered them unto the people, as things everlastingly required by the law of that Lord of lords, against whose statutes there is no exception to be taken. For by this mean it came to pass, that one Church could not but accuse and condemn another of disobedience to the will of Christ, in those things where manifest difference was between them: whereas the selfsame orders allowed, but yet established in more wary and suspense manner, as being to stand in force till God should give the opportunity of some general conference what might be best for every of them afterwards to do; this I say had both prevented all occasion of just dislike which others might take, and reserved a greater liberty unto the authors themselves of entering into farther consultation afterwards. Which though never so necessary they could not easily now admit, without some fear of derogation from their credit: and therefore that which once they had done, they became for ever after resolute to maintain.

Calvin therefore and the other two his associates, stiffly refusing to administer the holy Communion to such as would not quietly, without contradiction and murmur, submit themselves unto the orders which their solemn oath had bound them to obey, were in that quarrel banished the town9.

A few years after10 (such was the levity of that people) the places of one or two of their ministers being fallen void, they were not before so willing to be rid of their learned pastor, as now importunate to obtain him again from them who had given him entertainment, and which were loath to part with him, had not unresistable earnestness been used. One of the town ministers, that saw in what manner the people were bent for the revocation of Calvin, gave him notice of their affection in this sort11. “The senate of two hundred being assembled, they all crave Calvin. The next day a general convocation. They cry in like sort again all, We will have Calvin, that good and learned man, Christ’s minister. This,” saith he, “when I understood, I could not choose but praise God, nor was I able to judge otherwise than that ‘this was the Lord’s doing, and that it was marvellous in our eyes,’ and that ‘the stone which the builders refused was now made the head of the corner12.’ ” The other two13 whom they had thrown out, (together with Calvin,) they were content should enjoy their exile. Many causes might lead them to be more desirous of him. First, his yielding unto them in one thing might happily put them in hope, that time would breed the like easiness of condescending further unto them. For in his absence he had persuaded them, with whom he was able to prevail, that albeit himself did better like of common bread to be used in the Eucharist, yet the other they rather should accept, than cause any trouble in the church about it14. Again, they saw that the name of Calvin waxed every day greater abroad15, and that together with his fame, their infamy was spread, which had so rashly and childishly ejected him. Besides, it was not unlikely but that his credit in the world might many ways stand the poor town in great stead: as the truth is, their minister’s foreign estimation hitherto hath been the best stake in their hedge. But whatsoever secret respects were likely to move them, for contenting of their minds Calvin returned (as it had been another Tully) to his old home.

He ripely considered how gross a thing it were for men of his quality, wise and grave men, to live with such a multitude, and to be tenants at will under them, as their ministers, both himself and others, had been. For the remedy of which inconvenience, he gave them plainly to understand, that if he did become their teacher again, they must be content to admit a complete form of discipline, which both they and also their pastors should now be solemnly sworn to observe for ever after. Of which discipline the main and principal parts were these: A standing ecclesiastical court to be established; perpetual judges in that court to be their ministers; others of the people to be annually chosen (twice so many in number as they) to be judges together with them in the same court: these two sorts to have the care of all men’s manners, power of determining all kind of ecclesiastical causes, and authority to convent, to control, to punish, as far as with excommunication, whomsoever they should think worthy, none either small or great excepted.

This device I see not how the wisest at that time living could have bettered, if we duly consider what the present estate of Geneva did then require. For their bishop and his clergy being (as it is said) departed from them by moonlight, or howsoever, being departed; to choose in his room any other bishop, had been a thing altogether impossible. And for their ministers to seek that themselves alone might have coercive power over the whole church, would perhaps have been hardly construed at that time. But when so frank an offer was made, that for every one minister there should be two of the people to sit and give voice in the ecclesiastical consistory, what inconvenience could they easily find which themselves might not be able always to remedy?

Howbeit (as evermore the simpler sort are, even when they see no apparent cause, jealous notwithstanding over the secret intents and purposes of wiser men) this proposition of his did somewhat trouble them. Of the ministers themselves which had stayed behind in the city when Calvin was gone, some, upon knowledge of the people’s earnest intent to recall him to his place again, had beforehand written their letters of submission, and assured him of their allegiance for ever after, if it should like him to hearken unto that public suit. But yet misdoubting what might happen, if this discipline did go forward; they objected against it the example of other reformed churches living quietly and orderly without it. Some of chiefest place and countenance amongst the laity professed with greater stomach their judgments, that such a discipline was little better than Popish tyranny disguised and tendered unto them under a new form16. This sort, it may be17, had some fear, that the filling up of the seats in the consistory with so great a number of laymen was but to please the minds of the people, to the end they might think their own sway somewhat; but when things came to trial of practice, their pastors’ learning would be at all times of force to over-persuade simple men, who knowing the time of their own presidentship to be but short would always stand in fear of their ministers’ perpetual authority: and among the ministers themselves, one being so far in estimation above the rest, the voices of the rest were likely to be given for the most part respectively, with a kind of secret dependency and awe: so that in show a marvellous indifferently composed senate ecclesiastical was to govern, but in effect one only man should, as the spirit and soul of the residue, do all in all18. But what did these vain surmises boot? Brought they were now to so strait an issue, that of two things they must choose one: namely, whether they would to their endless disgrace, with ridiculous lightness dismiss him whose restitution they had in so impotent manner desired; or else condescend unto that demand, wherein he was resolute either to have it, or to leave them. They thought it better to be somewhat hardly yoked at home, than for ever abroad discredited. Wherefore in the end those orders were on all sides assented unto: with no less alacrity of mind than cities unable to hold out longer are wont to shew, when they take conditions such as it liketh him to offer them which hath them in the narrow straits of advantage.

[5.] Not many years were over-passed, before these twice-sworn men adventured to give their last and hottest assault to the fortress of the same discipline; childishly granting by common consent of their whole Senate, and that under their town seal, a relaxation to one Bertelier, whom the Eldership had excommunicated19: further also decreeing, with strange absurdity, that to the same Senate it should belong to give final judgment in matter of excommunication, and to absolve whom it pleased them: clean contrary to their own former deeds and oaths. The report of which decree being forthwith brought unto Calvin; “Before,” saith he, “this decree take place, either my blood or banishment shall sign it.” Again, two days before the communion should be celebrated, his speech was publickly to like effect: “Kill me if ever this hand do reach forth the things that are holy to them whom the Church hath judged despisers20.” Whereupon, for fear of tumult, the forenamed Bertelier was by his friends advised for that time not to use the liberty granted him by the Senate, nor to present himself in the church, till they saw somewhat further what would ensue. After the communion quietly ministered, and some likelihood of peaceable ending of these troubles without any more ado, that very day in the afternoon, besides all men’s expectation, concluding his ordinary sermon, he telleth them, that because he neither had learned nor taught to strive with such as are in authority, “therefore,” saith he, “the case so standing as now it doth, let me use these words of the apostle unto you, ‘I commend you unto God and the word of his grace21;’ ” and so bade them heartily all adieu22.

It sometimes cometh to pass, that the readiest way which a wise man hath to conquer, is to fly. This voluntary and unexpected mention of sudden departure caused presently the Senate (for according to their wonted manner they still continued only constant in unconstancy) to gather themselves together, and for a time to suspend their own decree, leaving things to proceed as before till they had heard the judgment of four Helvetian cities23 concerning the matter which was in strife. This to have done at the first before they gave assent unto any order had shewed some wit and discretion in them: but now to do it was as much as to say in effect, that they would play their parts on a stage. Calvin therefore dispatched with all expedition his letters unto some principal pastor in every of those cities, craving earnestly at their hands, to respect this cause as a thing whereupon the whole state of religion and piety in that church did so much depend, that God and all good men were now inevitably certain to be trampled under foot, unless those four cities by their good means might be brought to give sentence with the ministers of Geneva, when the cause should be brought before them: yea so to give it, that two things it might effectually contain; the one an absolute approbation of the discipline of Geneva as consonant unto the word of God, without any cautions, qualifications, ifs or ands; the other an earnest admonition not to innovate or change the same. His vehement request herein as touching both points was satisfied. For albeit the said Helvetian Churches did never as yet observe that discipline, nevertheless, the Senate of Geneva having required their judgment concerning these three questions: First, “After what manner, by God’s commandment, according to the scripture and unspotted religion, excommunication is to be exercised:” Secondly, “Whether it may not be exercised some other way than by the Consistory:” Thirdly, “What the use of their Churches was to do in this case24:” answer was returned from the said Churches, “That they had heard already of those consistorial laws, and did acknowledge them to be godly ordinances drawing towards the prescript of the word of God; for which cause they did not think it good for the Church of Geneva by innovation to change the same, but rather to keep them as they were25.” Which answer, although not answering unto the former demands, but respecting what Master Calvin had judged requisite for them to answer, was notwithstanding accepted without any further reply: in as much as they plainly saw, that when stomach doth strive with wit, the match is not equal. And so the heat of their former contentions began to slake.

The present inhabitants of Geneva, I hope, will not take it in evil part, that the faultiness of their people heretofore is by us so far forth laid open, as their own learned guides and pastors have thought necessary to discover it unto the world. For out of their books and writings it is that I have collected this whole narration, to the end it might thereby appear in what sort amongst them that discipline was planted, for which so much contention is raised amongst ourselves. The reason which moved Calvin herein to be so earnest, was, as Beza himself testifieth26, “For that he saw how needful these bridles were, to be put in the jaws of that city.” That which by wisdom he saw to be requisite for that people, was by as great wisdom compassed.

But wise men are men, and the truth is truth. That which Calvin did for establishment of his discipline, seemeth more commendable than that which he taught for the countenancing of it established27. Nature worketh in us all a love to our own counsels. The contradiction of others is a fan to inflame that love. Our love set on fire to maintain that which once we have done, sharpeneth the wit to dispute, to argue, and by all means to reason for it. Wherefore a marvel it were if a man of so great capacity, having such incitements to make him desirous of all kind of furtherances unto his cause, could espy in the whole Scripture of God nothing which might breed at the least a probable opinion of likelihood, that divine authority itself was the same way somewhat inclinable. And all which the wit even of Calvin was able from thence to draw, by sifting the very utmost sentence and syllable, is no more than that certain speeches there are which to him did seem to intimate that all Christian churches ought to have their Elderships endued with power of excommunication, and that a part of those Elderships every where should be chosen out from amongst the laity, after that form which himself had framed Geneva unto. But what argument are ye able to shew, whereby it was ever proved by Calvin, that any one sentence of Scripture doth necessarily enforce these things, or the rest wherein your opinion concurreth with his against the orders of your own church?

We should be injurious unto virtue itself, if we did derogate from them whom their industry hath made great. Two things of principal moment there are which have deservedly procured him honour throughout the world: the one his exceeding pains in composing the Institutions of Christian religion; the other his no less industrious travails for exposition of holy Scripture according unto the same Institutions. In which two things whosoever they were that after him bestowed their labour, he gained the advantage of prejudice against them, if they gainsayed; and of glory above them, if they consented. His writings published after the question about that discipline was once begun omit not any the least occasion of extolling the use and singular necessity thereof. Of what account the Master of Sentences28 was in the church of Rome, the same and more amongst the preachers of reformed churches Calvin had purchased; so that the perfectest divines were judged they, which were skilfullest in Calvin’s writings. His books almost the very canon to judge both doctrine and discipline by29. French churches, both under others abroad and at home in their own country, all cast according to that mould which Calvin had made. The Church of Scotland in erecting the fabric of their reformation took the selfsame pattern. Till at length the discipline, which was at the first so weak, that without the staff of their approbation, who were not subject unto it themselves, it had not brought others under subjection, began now to challenge universal obedience30, and to enter into open conflict with those very Churches, which in desperate extremity had been relievers of it.

To one of those churches which lived in most peaceable sort, and abounded as well with men for their learning in other professions singular, as also with divines whose equals were not elsewhere to be found, a church ordered by Gualter’s discipline, and not by that which Geneva adoreth; unto this church, the Church of Heidelberg, there cometh one who craving leave to dispute publicly defendeth with open disdain of their government, that “to a minister with his Eldership power is given by the law of God to excommunicate whomsoever, yea even kings and princes themselves31.’ Here were the seeds sown of that controversy which sprang up between Beza and Erastus about the matter of excommunication, whether there ought to be in all churches an Eldership having power to excommunicate, and a part of that Eldership to be of necessity certain chosen out from amongst the laity for that purpose. In which disputation they have, as to me it seemeth, divided very equally the truth between them; Beza most truly maintaining the necessity of excommunication, Erastus as truly the non-necessity of lay elders to be ministers thereof.

Amongst ourselves, there was in King Edward’s days some question moved by reason of a few men’s scrupulosity32 touching certain things. And beyond seas, of them which fled in the days of Queen Mary, some contenting themselves abroad with the use of their own service-book at home authorized before their departure out of the realm, others liking better the Common Prayer-book of the Church of Geneva translated, those smaller contentions before begun were by this mean somewhat increased33. Under the happy reign of her Majesty which now is, the greatest matter a while contended for was the wearing of the cap and surplice34, till there came Admonitions35 directed unto the high court of Parliament, by men who concealing their names thought it glory enough to discover their minds and affections, which now were universally bent even against all the orders and laws, wherein this church is found unconformable to the platform of Geneva36. Concerning the Defender37 of which Admonitions, all that I mean to say is but this: there will come a time when three words uttered with charity and meekness shall receive a far more blessed reward than three thousand volumes written with disdainful sharpness of wit. But the manner of men’s writing must not alienate our hearts from the truth, if it appear they have the truth; as the followers of the same defender do think he hath; and in that persuasion they follow him, no otherwise than himself doth Calvin, Beza, and others, with the like persuasion that they in this cause had the truth. We being as fully persuaded otherwise, it resteth that some kind of trial be used to find out which part is in error.

← Chapter 1 · Contents · Preface, Ch. iii. 2. →

Footnotes

  1. [Compare the second chapter of Abp. Bancroft’s Survey of the pretended Holy Discipline: in which a similar sketch is given of Calvin’s proceedings at Geneva.] ↩

  2. [Pierre de la Baume, of a noble family in France, was the last bishop acknowledged in Geneva. “Il partit à la mi-Juillet [1533] pour se ranger au party de Savoye contre la Ville.” Besides the agitation occasioned by the new opinions, he was at the time engaged in a dispute with the Syndics regarding the judicial prerogative. Spon, Hist. de Genève, I. 344. Aug. 27, 1535, Protestantism was established by ordinance of the Syndics. ibid. p. 366.] ↩

  3. [Aug. 1536. He was on his way to Basle or Strasburgh, but went round by Geneva on account of the war, and was persuaded by Farel to remain. Spon, II. p. 14.] ↩

  4. [Farel and Couraut. Beza, Vit. Calv. [first published 1564] prefixed to his Works. Gen. 1617: from which most of these particulars are taken.] ↩

  5. [20 July, 1537.] ↩

  6. [“Sous pretexte de conserver les libertez de la ville, et de ce qu’ils n’avoient pas voulu se conformer à l’usage de Berne pour la Communion, ils firent prononcer un arrêt au Conseil,” &c. Spon. II. 18.] ↩

  7. [Chr. Letter, p. 39. “You blame them, that in that troublesome time they wanted common conference.” Hooker, MS. note. No man blamed for those defects, which necessity casteth upon him.”] ↩

  8. [Chr. Letter, p. 43. “The Church of Rome favourablie admitted to be of the house of God; Calvin with the reformed churches full of faults, and most of all they which indevoured to be most removed from conformitie with the Church of Rome.”Hooker, MS. note. “True. For are not your Anabaptists, Familists, Libertines, Arrians, and other like extreme reformers of popery grown by that very meanes hatefull to the whole world? Are not their heresies a thousand times more execrable and hatefull than popery?“Is it then a matter heinous to looke awry upon any man which hath been earnest against the Pope? As earnest men that way as M. Calvin are nothing spared by you and yours in any such conflict. You honour Calvin as the father of discipline; this is the boil that will not be touched.”] ↩

  9. [MS. note on Chr. Letter, p. 39. “De Calvino vere quod Tullius de Q. Metel. ‘De civitate decedere maluit quam de sententia.’ Orat. vol. III. p. 151. Oratione pro Balbo.” c. 5.] ↩

  10. [1541, 1 May. Spon. II. 25.] ↩

  11. Epist. Cal. 24, [p. 27, ed. Gen. 1617. “In crastinum Ducentorum congregatur concilium, et omnes petunt Calvinum: congregatur et generale sequenti die, itidem clamant omnes, Calvinum probum et doctum virum Christi ministrum volumus. Quod cum intellexissem, non potui non laudare Deum, aliterque [neque aliter?] judicare, quam quod a Domino esset factum istud, et esset mirabile in oculis nostris: quodque lapidem quem reprobarant ædificantes in caput fieret anguli.” Bernard to Calvin. 6 Feb. 1541.] ↩

  12. Luke xx. 17. [Ps. cxviii. 22, 23.] ↩

  13. [There seems to be a slight oversight here. Farel and Couraut (not Viret) were the two ejected with Calvin in 1538. Couraut died the same year. (Calv. Ep. p. 10.) Viret was before that time settled at Lausanne, but returned to Geneva for a time to assist Calvin in the new settlement, 1541; as did Farel from Neufchatel, where he had obtained an appointment. Bayle, art. Viret. Spon. II. 19, 25.] ↩

  14. [“Calvinus bonos nonnullos ista mutatione usque adeo offensos, ut etiam a cœna sibi abstinendum putarent, serio monuit, ne ob istud ἀδιάϕορον litem moverent.” Beza. Vit. Calv.] ↩

  15. [By his theological lectures at Strasburgh; his settlement of the church there; his defence of the church itself of Geneva against Cardinal Sadolet; his Institutes, Commentary on the Romans, and Book on the Lord’s Supper.] ↩

  16. [Capito, of Basle, writes thus to Farel in Calvin’s Epist. p. 6. “Auditis, ‘Tyranni esse voluistis in liberam ecclesiam, voluistis novum Pontificatum revocare.’ Beza: Non deerant … . qui Papisticam tyrannidem sic revocari clamitarent.”] ↩

  17. Chr. Letter, p. 39. “After speaking of his restoring and reestablishing of discipline, you have in one place, ‘Many things might lead them (to be more desirous of him’). And in another place, ‘he rightelie considered,’ &c. ‘This devise I see not howe the wisest,’ &c. Therefore we pray you to tell us how such ‘might lead’ and ‘may bees,’ such entring into his thought, and crosse commending that for his divise which he simply propounded as out of the scriptures of God, may not drop into your reader’s heart such unheeded impressions, as may make him highly admire R. H. great gravitie and judicious wisedome, and J. Calvin’s carnall policie, fine hipocrisie and peremptorie follie.”Hooker, MS. note. “Safer to discuss all the saincts in heaven than M. Calvin. Howe bold they are themselves with as great men as M. Calvin, namely, Chrysostome, Jerome, Ambrose, Austin. Calvin him self not hereby justifyed from censuring both the deedes and writings of men which went before him.—The acts of every present age most sincerely judged of by posterity. While men are living the judgment of their friends is perverted with love, the verdict of their enemies corrupt through envie.“That Calvin’s bitternes was a great cause to augment his troble. His nature from a child observed by his own parents, as Beza noteth, was propense to sharpe and severe reprehension where he thought any falt was. (‘Destinabat eum pater ab initio theologiæ studiis, ad quæ ultro illum inclinare ex eo colligebat, quod in illa etiam tenera ætate mirum in modum religiosus esset, et severus omnium in suis sodalibus vitiorum censor.’) And this not to be misliked in him.“But his maner of dealing against them which were in deed bad men was that which wrought him self much woe, and did them no good. His friends saw this, as appeareth by his 95 Epist. unto Farellus. [N. suo more rescripsisse non infitiatus est Bucerus. Nam hoc unum causatus est cur mihi non recitaret, quia nollet mihi frustra stomachum movere. Hinc collige quantum amarulentiæ fuerit, quod ille judicavit pro sua prudentia non posse a me sine graviore offensione transmitti.” p. 388.] “His own wordes declaring how in his sermons he handled and delt with his adversaries, Epist. 15.” [“Ita ejus impietatem palam et aperte etiam pro concione sugillabam, ut nihilo minus aut ipsi aut aliis dubius esset sermo, quam si vel nominassem, vel digito demonstrassem.” p. 19. On his deathbed he thus expressed himself to the senators of Geneva: “Ultro certe agnosco me vobis hoc quoque nomine plurimum debere, quod vehementiam illam meam interdum immoderatam æquo animo tulistis.” Beza.] “His usage of H. 8, hir M. father that now is. Such courses condemned by Beza in the fourth of his Epistles against one Adrian a Dutch minister, p. 42.” (“Hoc certe non fuit vel prudentis vel boni etiam pastoris in illustrissimum illum Principem nominatim declamare.”)Id. note on p. 37. “Remember to make a comparison between Calvin and Beza, how different they were in naturall disposition, and yeat how linked in amity and concord, Calvin being of a stiff nature, Beza of a pliable, the one stern and severe, the other tractable and gentle. Both wise and discreet men. Whereby we see what it is for any one church or place of government to have two, one succeeding another, and both in theire waies excellent, although unlike. For Beza was one whom no man would displease, Calvin one whom no man durst. His dependants both abroad and at home; his intelligence from forrein churches; his correspondence every where with the chiefest; his industry in pursuing them which did at any time openly either withstand his proceedings or gainsay his opinions; his booke intitled, ‘contra Nebulonem quendam;’ his writing but of three lines in disgrace of any man as forcible as any proscription throughout all reformed churches; his rescripts and answeres of as great authority as decretall epistles. His grace in preaching the meanest of all other guifts in him, [‘Facundiæ contemptor et verborum parcus.’ Beza.] yeat even that way so had in honour and estimation, that an hearer of his being asked wherfore he came not sometime to other men’s sermons as well as Calvin’s, answered, That if Calvin and S. Paul himself should preach both at one hower, he would leave S. Paul to heare Calvin. Zanch. tom. VII. Epist. ante Miscell.” This reference is from the C. C. C. Transcript.] ↩

  18. [Compare Bancroft, Survey, p. 20.] ↩

  19. [Calv. Epist. p. 163.] ↩

  20. [“Inter concionandum, elata voce ac manu, multa de sacris mysteriis in eorum contemptores locutus: ‘At ego, inquit, Chrysostomum secutus vim quidem non opponam, sed ultro me potius occidi facile patiar; quam hæc manus contemptoribus Dei, rite judicatis, sancta Domini porrigat.’ ” Beza.] ↩

  21. [Acts xx. 32.] ↩

  22. [“Locum illum insignem Actorum Apostolicorum forte tractans, in quo Paulus Ecclesiæ Ephesinæ valedicit, testatus se eum non esse, qui adversus magistratum pugnare sciret aut doceret, cætumque multis verbis cohortatus, ut in ea quam audivisset doctrina perseveraret, tandem, veluti postremam hanc concionem Genevæ habiturus, ‘Et quandoquidem, inquit, ita se res habent, liceat mihi quoque, fratres, apud vos hæc Apostoli verba usurpare, Commendo vos Deo et sermoni gratiæ ipsius:’ quæ voces tum sceleratos illos mirifice perculerunt, tum bonos etiam tanto magis serio officii admonuerunt.” Beza.] ↩

  23. [Zurich, Berne, Schaffhausen, Basle. See the letters from Calvin to Viret and Bullinger, and the case submitted to the Church of Zurich, with Bullinger’s answer, in Calvin’s Epistles, p. 163-171.] ↩

  24. Epist. 166. ↩

  25. [Bullinger to Calvin, Epist. p. 170. “Dudum audivisse nos de legibus istius Ecclesiæ Consistorialibus, et agnoscere illas pias esse, et accedere ad verbi Dei præscriptum: ideoque non videri admittendum ut per innovationem mutentur.” Calvin’s own statement of the affair may be found in his correspondence, p. 163-172.] ↩

  26. “Quod eam urbem videret omnino his frenis indigere.” ↩

  27. [Chr. Letter, p. 42. “If such bold and bare affirmations may go for payment, why may wee not as well heare and believe Maister Harding, which calles all the whole and pure doctrine beleeved and professed in England, A wicked new devise of Geneva?”Hooker, MS. note. “Do not you yourself call the discipline which they use in Geneva, a new found discipline? p. 45. If it be a new found thing, and not found elswhere till Geneva had erected it, yourself must say of discipline, It is a new devise of Geneva: except you recant your opinion concerning the newnes of it. For all the world doth know that the first practise thereof was in Geneva. You graunting it to be but a new found thing must either shew us some author more ancient, or els acknowledge it as we do to have been there devised. If you excuse the speech and say it is ironicall, you betray yourself to be a favourer of that part, and confess yourself an egregious dissembler.“Because the anti-Trinitarians doe say, that our doctrine of the glorious and blessed Trinity is a wicked new devise of the Pope, will you say that this may as well be believed as their speech which say that sundry other things in the papacie are both new and wicked? Although I terme not their discipline wicked for mine owne part. Only I hold it a new devise.”The passage referred to stands thus in p. 45 of the Chr. Letter:“Is that new found discipline so nearlie seated with our English creed, that such expert archers ayming at the one must needes hit the other?” On which Hooker’s note is, “A new found discipline! who is able to endure such blasphemy? You speake but in jeast. Were it known that you meane as you say, surely those wordes might cost you dear. But they are incident into your part, and have in that respect their safe conduct.”] ↩

  28. [Peter Lombard. ad 1141. See Cave, Hist. Lit. I. 667, and Heumann ap. Brucker. Hist. Phil. III.717. “Fastigium summum theologiæ scholasticæ assecutus illi ætati visus est, ejusque vestigiis insistere pulchrum duxit ipsius posteritas scholastica.”] ↩

  29. [“What should the world doe with the old musty doctors? Alleage scripture, and shew it alleaged in the sense that Calvin alloweth, and it is of more force in any man’s defense, and to the proofe of any assertion, than if ten thousand Augustines, Jeromes, Chrysostomes, Cyprians, or whosoever els were brought foorth. Doe we not daily see that men are accused of heresie for holding that which the fathers held, and that they never are cleere, if they find not somewhat in Calvin to justify themselves?” MS. note of Hooker in the titlepage of “A Christian Letter,” &c.] ↩

  30. [“Two things there are which trouble greatly these later times: one, that the Church of Rome cannot, another, that Geneva will not erre.” MS. note of Hooker on Chr. Letter, p. 37.] ↩

  31. [“Accidit, ut Anglus quidam, qui propter rem vestiariam ex Anglia ferebatur excessisse, doctoris titulo cuperet insigniri, et de adiaphoris et vestibus disputationem proponeret. Hanc theologiadmitterenoluerunt, ne scilicet Anglos offenderent, … . ut autem nostræ res turbarentur, pro nihilo, ut videtur, duxerunt. Quare inter alias hanc thesin proposuit; oportere in quavis recte constituta ecclesia hanc servari procurationem, in qua ministri cum suo delecto ad eam rem presbyterio jus teneant, quosvis peccantes, etiam Principes, excommunicandi.” Erastus, Præf. Thesium. The dispute occurred ad 1568. But the work was not published till after Erastus’ death, 1589: the dispute having been quieted for the time by the interference of the Church of Zurich, and Frederic, Elector Palatine. Beza replied, 1590, by his tract “de vera Excommunicatione et Christiano Presbyterio;” in the Preface to which he charges the publisher of Erastus’ work as follows, “An boni et pii homines auctores tibi fuerunt, ut clam ista excuderes? ut pro Londini, vel alterius in Anglia civitatis nomine, Pesclavium fictitium supponeres?” And in a letter to Whitgift, (Strype, Whitg. III. 302,) he intimates the same: and Whitgift in his reply (II. 168) allows it, though disclaiming all connivance at the publication on his own part.] ↩

  32. [See Strype, Cranm. I. 302-309. Mem. II. i. 350-354. Burnet, Reform. II. 282. III. 349-351. Wordsworth’s Eccl. Biog. II. 437-440.] ↩

  33. [See Strype, Grind. 13-16. Mem. II. 404-411. Burnet II. 612, and especially “Troubles at“Frankfort,” (of which book vid. Strype, An. II. i. 482,) in Phœnix II. 44, &c.] ↩

  34. [In the convocation of 1562, about half of the lower house were for concession in these and one or two other points. (Strype, Ann. I. i. 499-506.) In 1564, complaints having been made from different quarters of positive molestation given by the nonconformists, Archbishop Parker endeavoured to enforce conformity, but was checked by the interest of the Puritans with Lord Leicester; so that he could not obtain the royal sanction for the “Advertisements” then issued, (Str. Parker, I. 300-345. Ann. I. ii. 125-175,) until the following year; when they occasioned several deprivations in the diocese of London. (Parker I. 420-460. Grind. 142-146.) In 1567 this had led to the establishment of conventicles, (Parker I. 478. Grind. 168,) and more extensive reform began to be talked of, (Ann. I. ii. 349,) especially in 1570, at Cambridge, which caused Cartwright’s expulsion (ibid. 372). In 1571, a bill of alterations was proposed in parliament, which occasioning the Queen’s interference, had the effect, as it should seem, of preventing the adoption of the “Reformation Legum Ecclesiasticarum,” which the archbishop at the time had thoughts of, (Ann. II. i. 93-99. P. II. 62. 63.)] ↩

  35. [The rejection of Mr. Strickland’s bill above mentioned, by the parliament of 1571, led to the immediate publication of the first “Admonition to the Parliament.” It was so eagerly read, that it went through four editions before the end of 1572, (Parker II. 110,) in which year Field and Wilcox were imprisoned for it. (Ann. II. i. 274. Parker II. 139.)] ↩

  36. [Bishop Cooper, Adm. to the People of England, p. 160, takes the following view of the gradual advance of Puritanism. “At the beginning, some learned and godly preachers, for private respects in themselves, made strange to wear the surplice, cap, or tippet: but yet so that they declared themselves to think the thing indifferent, and not to judge evil of such as did use them.” (He seems to mean Grindal, Sandys, Parkhurst, Nowel, and others, 1562.) “Shortly after rose up other,” (Sampson, Humfrey, Lever, Whittingham, &c.) “defending that they were not things indifferent, but distained with antichristian idolatry, and therefore not to be suffered in the Church. Not long after came another sort,” (Cartwright, Travers, Field, &c.) “affirming that those matters touching apparel were but trifles, and not worthy contention in the Church, but that there were greater things far of more weight and importance, and indeed touching faith and religion, and therefore meet to be altered in a church rightly reformed. As the Book of Common Prayer, the administration of the Sacraments, the government of the Church, the election of ministers, and a number of other like. Fourthly, now break out another sort,” (the Brownists,) “earnestly affirming, and teaching, that we have no church, no bishops, no ministers, no sacraments; and therefore that all that love Jesus Christ ought with all speed to separate themselves from our congregations, because our assemblies are profane, wicked, and antichristian. Thus have you heard of four degrees for the overthrow of the state of the Church of England. Now lastly of all come in these men, that make their whole direction against the living of bishops and other ecclesiastical ministers: that they should have no temporal lands or jurisdiction.”] [Cf. Bacon on Church Controversies, (1589,) Spedding Life, &c. i. 86.] 1886. ↩

  37. [Thomas Cartwright. Whitgift’s Answer to the Admonition was sent to Parker, Oct. 21, 1572, (Str. Whitg. I. 86,) and replied to by T. C. early the next year. For Whitgift was far advanced in his Defence, June 4, 1573: (Park. II. 254:) and it was sent to Lord Burghley, 5 Feb. 157¾, Cartwright’s 2d Reply came out in two portions, 1575 and 1577.] ↩

Backlinks