PREFACE TO VOLUME THIRD
Literary men in France, Switzerland, Germany, and England, urged on by a spirit of examination and research, are constantly enquiring after the original documents on which modern history is founded. I wish to contribute my mite to the accomplishment of the important task which our age appears to have undertaken. Hitherto I have not deemed it enough to peruse contemporary historians. I have interrogated eye-witnesses, private letters, and original narratives, and made use of some manuscripts, particularly that of Bullinger, which has since been printed. (Frauenfield, 1838–1840.) The necessity of having recourse to unpublished documents became more urgent on approaching, as I do in the twelfth book, the Reformation of France, with regard to which, in consequence of the continual turmoil in which the reformed church of that country has lived, we have only a few printed memoirs. In the spring of 1838, I endeavoured, as far as was in my power, to examine the manuscripts of the public libraries of Paris; it will be seen that a manuscript of the Royal Library, hitherto I believe unknown, throws great light on the first stages of the Reformation. In the autumn of 1839, I consulted the manuscripts in the library of the consistory of pastors of Neufchâtel, a collection which is very rich in regard to this period, from a bequest of the manuscripts of Farel’s library, and through the kindness of the proprietor of Meuron, I obtained the use of the manuscript life of Farel by Choupard, into which the greater part of these documents have been transcribed. These manuscripts have enabled me to remodel one entire section of the Reformation in France. In addition to this assistance, and that furnished by the library of Geneva, I made an appeal, through the medium of the Archives du Christianisme, to all the friends of history and the Reformation, who may have any manuscripts at their disposal, and I here express my gratitude for different communications which have been made to me, in particular by the Rev. Mr. Ladevèze of Meaux. But though religious wars and persecutions have destroyed many precious documents, there doubtless still exist in different parts of France several which would be of essential service to the history of the Reformation, and I earnestly entreat all who may possess or have any knowledge of them to have the goodness to communicate with me on the subject. Documents of this nature are felt in our days to be common property, and, therefore, I hope that this appeal will not be in vain.
It will perhaps be thought that in writing a general history of the Reformation, I have entered too much into detail on its first beginnings in France. But these beginnings are little known: the events which form the subject of my twelfth book occupy only three or four pages in the ‘Histoire Ecclesiastique des Eglises Reformées au Royaume de France,’ by Theodore Beza, while other historians confine themselves almost entirely to political developments. It is true that in this part of my work I have not been able to describe scenes so imposing as the Diet of Worms. Nevertheless, independent of the religious interest attached to it, the humble but truly divine movement which I have attempted to describe, had perhaps more influence on the destinies of France than the celebrated wars of Charles V and Francis I. In a large machine the result is often produced not by the parts which make the greatest appearance, but by the most hidden springs.
Complaints have been made of the delay which has taken place in the publication of this third volume. Some would even have had me not to print the first before the whole was completed. There may be certain superior intellects to which conditions may be prescribed, but there are others whose feebleness must give conditions, and to this class I belong. To publish a volume at one time, at another time when I am able a second volume, and then a third, is the course which my primary duties and humble abilities allow me to take. Other circumstances, moreover, have interposed; severe afflictions have on two occasions interrupted the composition of this third volume, and concentrated all my affections and all my thoughts on the tomb of beloved children. The thought that it was my duty to glorify the adorable Master, who addressed those powerful calls to me, and accompanied them with so much divine consolation, could alone have given me the courage necessary to prosecute my labours.
These explanations seemed due to the kindness with which this work has been received in France, and especially in England, where the fourth edition of a translation is about to appear, beside two others in smaller form, which I am told are in course of preparation. Owing to this, no doubt, the Journal des Débats, in an article signed M. Chasles, has announced this history of the Reformation as an English work. I set a high value on the approbation of the protestant Christians of Great Britain, the representatives of evangelical principles and doctrines in the most remote regions of the globe, and I beg to assure them that I feel it to be a most valuable encouragement to my labours. The first book of the fourth volume will be devoted (God willing) to the Reformation of England and Scotland. The cause of truth recompenses those who embrace and defend it; and so it has proved with the nations who embraced the Reformation. In the eighteenth century, at the moment when Rome was anticipating her triumph through her Jesuits and scaffolds, victory slipt through her hands. Rome, like Naples, Portugal, and Spain, fell into interminable difficulties, while at the same time two protestant kingdoms arose in Europe, and began to exercise an influence which till then had belonged to Roman Catholic states. England came forth victorious from the Spanish and French assaults, which the pope had so long stirred up against her, and the Elector of Brandenburg, in spite of the wrath of Clement XI, encircled his head with a royal crown. From that period England has extended her dominion in every quarter of the world, and Prussia has taken a new rank among continental states, while a third power also separated from Rome, viz. Russia was growing up in her immense deserts. In this way evangelical principles have exerted their influence on the countries which have received them, and by righteousness nations have been exalted. Let evangelical states be well assured that to protestantism they owe their greatness. Should they abandon the position which God has given them, or incline anew towards Rome, that moment they lose their power and glory. Rome is now striving to gain them; alternately employing flattery and threatening, she would, like Delilah, lull them asleep upon her knees … but it is to rob them of their locks, that thus their enemies may be able to put out their eyes, and bind them with fetters of iron.
Herein, too, is a great lesson for France, with which the author feels himself so intimately connected through his forefathers. Should France, like her different governments, incline anew to the papacy, our belief is, that it will prove the signal of great disasters. Every one who attaches himself to the papacy will be compromised in its downfall. France has her only prospect of strength and greatness in turning towards the gospel. May this great truth be understood by rulers and people! In our day, it is true, there is great activity in the papacy. Though attacked by an inevitable consumption, she would fain, by showy colours and feverish paroxysms, persuade others, and persuade herself, that she is still full of vigour. An attempt of this kind has been made by a theologian of Turin, in a treatise occasioned by this history, and in which it is pleasing to recognise a certain talent in presenting proofs, however feeble, with an air of candour to which we are little accustomed, and in a manner by no means offensive, notwithstanding of the sad and culpable facility with which the author, in his twelfth chapter, revives accusations against the Reformers, the falsehood of which has been completely demonstrated, and is generally acknowledged.
We will give an example, referring to matters contained in the present volume. James le Vasseur, doctor of Sorbonne, and canon and dean of the church of Noyon, wrote Annals of the Church of Noyon, (1633,) in which he is at a loss for epithets against our Reformer, and only consoles himself by the thought that Saint Eloi gave Calvin the mortal blow, (p. 1164). After saying that the Reformer in early life held benefices in the Church of Noyon, the canon in proof of this quotes a declaration of James Desmay, also a doctor of theology, in his “Life of Calvin the heresiarch,” who, after a very careful examination of every thing relating to the Reformer, says, “I have been unable to discover anything else in the same registers.” (Annales de Noyon, p. 1162). Then the devout historian of the Church of Noyon, after pouring out all his wrath on Calvin and all the members of his family, without mentioning a single act of the Reformer at variance with morality, but contenting himself with simply observing, that to call him heresiarch is to charge him with the sum of all crimes (ib.) adds a XCVI chapter, entitled, “Of another John Cauvin, chaplain Vicar of the same church of Noyon, not a heretic,” in which he says, “Another John Cauvin presented himself and was admitted to our choir at a vicarial chapel, but was shortly after dismissed for his incontinence, punishment having been repeatedly inflicted to no purpose. He was vicar for the diocese, and the belief of our old people is, that he served the cure of Trachy-le-Val in this diocese in the capacity of vicar, and then died a good catholic. He was, nevertheless, beaten with rods when in custody, as Desmay writes in his little book, pp. 39, 40, and yet he was a priest not subject to such discipline. He has, therefore, fallen into a blunder, taking this man for another vicar, also chaplain, named Baldwin le Jeune, doubly young in name and in manners, who had not then entered the priesthood or taken any holy orders. The conclusion of the capitulary is as follows:—…
Quod Balduinus, le Jeune capellanus vicarialis, … pro scandalis commissis, ordinarunt prœfati domini ipsum cædi virgis, quia puer et nondum in sacris constitutus. I thought it my duty (continues the dean of Noyon) to add this chapter to the history of the first Calvin, ad diluendam homonymiam, (to guard against the similarity of names,) lest the one should be taken for the other, the catholic for the heretic.” Thus speaks the canon and dean of Noyon, pp. 1170, 1171. Now what is done by Doctor Magnin and the writers of the papacy whom he quotes? They announce quite gravely that Calvin was banished from his native town for bad conduct; that being convicted of a horrible crime, he would have been condemned to be publicly burnt had not the burning been commuted, at the prayer of the bishop, into scourging and branding with a hot iron, etc. (La Papauté, p. 109.) Thus, in spite of all the pains which the dean of Noyon took to add a chapter for fear the one should be taken for the other, the catholic for the heretic, the writers of the papacy uniformly attribute to the Reformer the misdeeds of his namesake. The thought uppermost with the canon of Noyon was the fair fame of this John Calvin who died a good catholic, and he trembled lest he should be charged with the heresy of Calvin. Accordingly he draws the distinction between them very clearly, giving the heresies to the one, and the incontinence to the other. But the result is the very opposite of what he anticipated. It is not “the heresy of Calvin” that has brought opprobrium on John Cauvin, but the incontinence and chastisement of John Cauvin are brought forward for the purpose of throwing opprobrium on the Reformer. And such is the way in which history is written!—such, we will not say the bad faith, but the levity and ignorance of the apologists of the papacy! These blunders occur in the writings of men otherwise respectable, and who ought to have nothing in common with the hateful name of calumniator. The present volume gives a true account of the early life of Calvin.
M. Audin, as a sequel to his History of Luther, has recently published a History of Calvin, written under the influence of deplorable prejudice, and in which it is difficult to recognise the Reformers and the Reformation.
Perhaps, on another occasion, we shall make some addition to what we have said in our first book on the origin of the papacy. It were out of place to do it here.
I will only remark in general, that the human and natural causes which so well explain its origin are precisely those to which the Papacy appeals in order to demonstrate its divine institution. Thus Christian antiquity declares, that the universal episcopate was committed to all the bishops, so that the bishops of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, Ephesus, Rome, Carthage, Lyons, Arles, Milan, Hippo, Cesarea, etc., took an interest in whatever occurred throughout the Christian world. Shortly after Rome appropriated to herself this duty, which was incumbent on all, and arguing as if it were her concern only, converts it into a demonstration of her primacy.
We give another example. The Christian churches established in the great towns of the empire sent missionaries to the countries to which they stood related. This was done first of all by Jerusalem, then by Antioch, Alexandria, Ephesus, and at length by Rome; and Rome forthwith concluded, from what she did after others and less than others, that she was entitled to set herself above all others. These examples will suffice.
Let us only observe further, that in the West Rome alone enjoyed the honour which in the East was shared by Corinth, Philippi, Thessalonica, Ephesus, Antioch, and in a far higher degree by Jerusalem,—the honour of having had one or more apostles among her first teachers. Hence the Latin churches must naturally have had a certain degree of respect for Rome. But never would the eastern Christians, though they honoured her as the church of the political metropolis of the empire, acknowledge in her any ecclesiastical superiority. The celebrated general Council of Chalcedon assigned to Constantinople, previously the obscure Byzantium, the same privileges (
If this History has been subjected to criticism from the Romish party, it has also been subjected to it in a literary point of view. Individuals for whom I entertain great respect appear to attach more importance to a political or literary history of the Reformation, than to an exposition which points out its spiritual principles and moving springs. I can understand this manner of viewing the subject, but I cannot adopt it. In my opinion, the essentials of the Reformation are its doctrines and inward life. Any work in which these do not occupy the first place, may be brilliant, but will not be faithfully and candidly historical. It will resemble a philosopher, who, wishing to describe man, should with great accuracy and graphic beauty explain every thing that relates to his body, but should give only a subordinate place to the divine inmate, the soul.
There are many defects, doubtless, in the feeble work of which I here present a new fragment to the Christian public, but the greatest defect I see in it is, that it does not breathe still more of the spirit of the Reformation. The more I succeed in calling attention to what manifests the glory of Christ, the more faithful I am to history. I willingly adopt as my law those words which a historian of the sixteenth century, still more celebrated as a warrior than a writer, after giving a part of the history of Protestantism, of which I do not purpose to treat, addresses to those who should think of completing his task,—“I give them the law which I take to myself, and it is, that while seeking the honour of this precious instrument, their principal aim should be the glory of the arm which prepared, employed, and wielded it at pleasure. For all the praises given to princes are unseasonable and misplaced, if they have not for their aim and foundation that of the living God, to whom belong honour and dominion for ever and ever.”