This braggart priest, who pretended to support the refugees, was living upon them, extorting their money, wine, and other things. 'Our master,' said one of them to Farel, 'behaves very theologically: he uses wine magisterially, and even Sorbonically.' The reputation of certain doctors of the Sorbonne was established on that point. 'He has women to make his bed,' they added, 'to pull off his stockings, and even for other familiarities.'[525] The wretched man imagined that, coming into a country which rejected the law of the pope, he could throw off the law of God. Farel, assured of the truth of these reports, visited this vain and impure priest, spoke to him of his dissolute life, reminded him of the judgment of the Lord, and entreated him to change his conduct. Farel spoke with so much authority, that all who were present were struck with it. The Sorbonne doctor was confounded: he hid his face in his hands, and did not open his mouth. From that time he behaved more prudently, and did nothing (openly, at least) that could be charged against him. He had his reasons for not quarrelling with the reformers.
Jacques Bernard, who had but recently thrown off the cowl, was not so clear-sighted as Farel; Caroli tried, therefore, to throw dust into his eyes. He hinted that, as a doctor of the Sorbonne of Paris, celebrated by former struggles with the most illustrious doctors, he was well qualified to be appointed arbiter in the disputation, and invited to pronounce authoritatively the final judgment.[526] Thus, becoming umpire between Geneva and Rome, he already fancied himself the most important person of Christendom. The simple-minded Bernard, circumvented by the artifices of the wily Frenchman, consented to make the strange proposition to Farel.—'No,' at once answered the reformer; 'it is to God and to Holy Scripture that we must pay supreme honor. We do not want men as judges of our controversy: the Lord is the only judge, who will decide authoritatively by the Scriptures. That presumptuous man would only seek his own glorification in the dispute.' The magistrates supported this opinion.
=THE DEBATE PROCLAIMED.=
In fact, the council, finding itself between two confessions—one coming, and one departing—regarded itself as mediator, and wished to see which was right or wrong; then, if there were cause, to do as certain good kings of Israel and Judah had done—'extirpate the idolatry of their people.'[527] Placed at the head of the republic, the magistracy did not understand that religious matters, so important at that period, were not within its jurisdiction; and even when the question was decided somewhat later, when the firm Calvin was established at Geneva, the State continued to hold under its jurisdiction all matters which are considered in this day as belonging to the Church. The council, therefore, nominated eight commissioners, empowered to regulate the discussion, and chose them from among the most respected leaders of the people: four belonged to the catholic party,[528] and four to the reformed opinions;[529] all of them had been syndics. The council, moreover, named four secretaries, belonging to the two parties, and instructed them to draw up the minutes. The discussion was proclaimed by sound of trumpet, and it was published everywhere, that the disputation would be entirely free. Then, fearing lest the enemy should take advantage of the opportunity to attack Geneva, the syndics bade the captain-general 'keep careful watch and ward at the gates, towers, and ramparts, and prevent any disturbance taking place in the city.'[530]
[509] 'Justificationem a peccatis in solo Christo quærendam.'—Theses Genev.
[510] Calvin.
[511] Registres du Conseil du 23 Avril 1535.—Chron. MSC. de Roset.
[512] Froment, Gestes de Genève, pp. 137, 138.
[513] Froment, Gestes de Genève, p. 138. Jeanne de Jussie, Commencement de l'Hérésie dans Genève, p. 112.
[514] Registres du Conseil des 25 et 26 Mai 1535.