But such preachers did not appear. Convinced of his insufficiency, and continually repeating that true ministers, like Zwingle and Farel, were wanted in that city; finding that many of the Genevans desired to be liberated not only from the vexations of Savoy, the shuffling of the bishop, and the doctrines of the pope, but also from the laws of morality; struck with the evils he saw ready to burst upon Geneva, and which the Gospel alone could avert,—this simple-minded, pious, and sensitive man returned heartbroken to Berne. Had this disappointment any effect upon his health? We cannot say; but he died not long after, in the month of November, 'as a christian ought to die,' it was said. It was found after his departure that his exertions had not been useless, and that some Genevans at least had profited by his teaching: among their number were counted Besançon Hugues and Baudichon de la Maison-Neuve. Some astonishment may be felt at seeing these two names together, for they are those of the chiefs of two opposite parties; but there is nothing improbable about it, for Hugues must have been frequently brought into contact with Ab Hofen, and it is not impossible that he listened to his religious conversation. Hugues was a serious man; he was, moreover, a statesman, and must have desired to know something about the religious opinions which seemed at that time likely to be adopted by the whole confederation; but his policy consisted in maintaining the rights of the bishop-prince on one side, and those of the citizens on the other; as for his religion, he was a catholic, and we do not see that he changed in either of those relations. What he might have been, if he had been living at the time when the Reformation was carried through, no one can say. De la Maison-Neuve, on the contrary, was a decided huguenot, and certainly needed the Gospel to moderate the ardour of his character. William de la Mouille, the bishop's chamberlain and confidant, appears to have been the person who profited most by the teaching of the layman of Berne.
=SACK OF ROME.=
While the Gospel was entering Geneva, desolation was entering Rome. It is a singular circumstance, the meeting of these two cities in history: one so powerful and glorious, the other so small and obscure. That, however, is capable of explanation: the great things of the world have always come from great cities and great nations; but the great things of God have usually small beginnings. Conquerors must have treasures and armies; but evangelical christianity, which undertakes to change man, nations, and the whole human race, has need of the strength of God, and God affects little things. In the first century, he chose Jerusalem; in the middle ages, the Waldensian valleys; in the sixteenth century, Wittemberg and Geneva. 'God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty.'[727]
In the month of May (1527) a rumour of startling importance suddenly spread through the world: 'Rome has just been destroyed,' said the people, 'and there is no more pope.' The troops of Charles V. had taken and sacked the pontifical city, and if the pope was still alive, he was in concealment and almost in prison. The servants of the Church, who were terrified at first, soon recovered their breath, and directly their alarm was dissipated, avarice and covetousness took its place. In the presence of the ruins of that ancient city, its friends thought only of dividing its spoils. The Bishop of Geneva, in particular, found himself surrounded by petitioners, who sought to be collated to the benefices hitherto held by clergymen resident in Rome. 'They have all perished,' he was told; 'their benefices are vacant: give them to us.' The bishop granted everything; and he even conferred on himself (Bonivard tells us) the priory of St. Jean-lez-Genève, which belonged to a cardinal. Seldom had so many deaths made so many people happy.[728]
The sack of Rome had more important results for Geneva and the protestant nations. When they saw the ruin of that city, it appeared to them that the papacy had fallen with it. The huguenots never grew tired of listening to the wonderful news and of commenting upon it. Struck with the example set them by Charles V., they thought to themselves that 'if the emperor had set aside the bishop and prince of Rome, they might well abandon the prince and bishop of Geneva.' Their right to do so was far clearer. The pope-king had at least been elected at Rome, and in conformity with ancient custom; while the bishop-prince had not been elected at Geneva and by Genevans, in accordance with the ancient constitutions, but by a foreign and unlawful jurisdiction. The huguenots promised even to be more moderate than his catholic majesty. Finally, the acts which impelled them to turn Pierre de la Baume out of the city, were far more vexatious in their eyes than those which had induced Charles to expel Clement VII. from Rome. 'Are we not much more oppressed by ecclesiastical tyranny,' they said, 'than by secular tyranny? Are we not forced to pay, always to pay, and is it not our money that makes the bishop's pot boil?'[729] Further, the shameful conduct of many of the ecclesiastics seemed to them a sufficient motive for putting an end to their rule.
A scandal which occurred just at this time increased the desire felt by certain huguenots to withdraw themselves from the government of the monks and priests. On the 10th of May, certain inhabitants of St. Leger appeared before the council. For some time past their sleep had been disturbed by noises and shouting, in which the cordeliers, jacobins, and other friars were concerned; and they desired to put an end to it. 'Some disorderly women have settled in our quarter,' they told the council, 'and certain monks frequent their houses.'[730] ... 'If you observe the monks going there at night-time,' replied the council, 'give information to the syndics and the captain-general. The watch will immediately go and take them.' The citizens withdrew half satisfied with the answer, but fully determined to call the watch as soon as the disorder was renewed.
=UNION OF FAITH AND MORALITY.=
These scandals—an acknowledged thing at Rome—greatly exasperated the citizens of Geneva, and made the better disposed long for a reformation of faith and morals. They said that soldiers use their arms as their officers command them: that the monks and priests (they should have said all christians) ought also to use their lives as their chief orders them; and that if they make a contrary use of them, they enlist under the standard of vice and avow themselves its soldiers. The worthy citizens of Geneva could not make that separation between religion and morality, of which the greater part of the clergy set the example. In proportion as the Reformation made progress in the world, the opposition increased against a piety which consisted only in certain formulas, ceremonies, and practices, but was deprived of its true substance—living faith, sanctification, morality, and christian works. Christianity, by the separation which Rome had made between doctrines and morals, had become like one of those spoilt and useless tools that are thrown aside because they can no longer serve in the operations for which they were made. The reformers, by calling for a living, holy, active faith, were again to make christianity in modern times a powerful engine of light and morality, of liberty and life.
[712] Acts i. 15; vi. 5; xv.
[713] See above, vol. i. p. 371.