THE GENERAL COUNCIL.
But Kunz had spared no pains that this hope might be disappointed. It appears that Pierre Vandel, one of the leaders of the party hostile to the reformers, had been at Berne. Kunz had possession of the fourteen articles proposed by Calvin and approved at Zurich, which doubtless had been intrusted to him because the conduct of the business was especially placed in his hands. Some expressions made use of in them had seemed likely to irritate the people of Geneva. Kunz had placed the articles in the hands of Vandel without the knowledge of the council.[701] Vandel was a man of good family, and one of the most violent opponents of the reformers. ‘I believe,’ said Bonivard, ‘that he was possessed with a demon while yet in his mother’s womb; as is said of St. John with regard to the Holy Spirit. He was not so tall as a spindle when he committed homicide, not with his own hand, but through malice. He and another man killed likewise the bastard son of a canon. He was a great rake, a glutton and a drunkard, talking and acting rashly in his drunken fits. His father, a highly respectable man, had said a hundred times, “Pierre! Pierre! he will never be worth anything; and would God that immediately after his baptism he had been dashed against a wall, for he will bring disgrace on our house.” He was very vainglorious, dressed himself like a nobleman, and was fond of bragging (usait de braveries); for this reason his companions called him Bobereau.’[702] Vandel was very proud of possessing the fourteen articles; and when he met on his way anyone who took an interest in the exile of the reformers, and who asked him what was likely to happen to them, he answered boastfully, according to his wont, but without entering further into details, ‘I have in my pocket a poison which will be the death of them.’[703] The ambassadors of Berne were themselves the bearers of these articles, but they had been instructed not to read them to the people except in the presence of Calvin and Farel, that they might have the opportunity of at once setting aside the mischievous inferences which would be drawn from them.[704] Vandel was at his post in the general council. Hardly had the deputies of Berne gone out, when he rose, drew the paper from his pocket, and began to read the articles of Zurich,[705] as an important piece of evidence which must cause the rejection of the demand of Berne. When he had read the document he began to comment on it, putting forward ill-natured interpretations, and fastening especially on three points fitted to excite hatred against the two reformers.[706] ‘See,’ said he, ‘how, in speaking of the Church of Geneva, they dare to speak of our Church, as if it were their property. See how, in speaking of the lords of Berne, they call them simply the Bernese, without the honorary formula,[707] thus with the utmost arrogance putting contempt on princes themselves. See how they aspire to tyranny, for what else is excommunication but a tyrannical domination?’ The first two charges were baseless and almost childish; and as to excommunication, Calvin remarks that the general council of Geneva had allowed it, July 29, 1537, as ‘a holy and salutary proceeding among the faithful;’ and now they were horrified at the very word. The question was constantly arising for discussion whether the Church is not, like any other society, a union of persons possessing certain common characteristics, aiming at a certain object and under certain conditions, a communion of persons united by a like Christian faith,[708] or whether it is a receptacle for everything (un tout y va); which of all definitions would be by far the most opposed to the word of its founder.
PIERRE VANDEL.
It had been arranged between Vandel and his friends that, when he read or commented on the articles, they should support him with their acclamations, in order to inflame the minds of those present.[709] This plan succeeded. Cries of displeasure, furious and redoubled, were soon heard; one might have thought that the harmless articles were a statement of the blackest conspiracy. The irritation displayed by these partisans infected the whole assembly. It is well known how easily the crowd passes from any mood to its opposite. The lungs of a few passionate men played the part of bellows in setting all hearts on fire.[710] A spark was enough to kindle a conflagration. The flames spread from place to place; nothing stood against them, at least in appearance; and presently the assembly was in a blaze. ‘Better die,’ they shouted, ‘than hear them give us an account of the motives which have actuated them!’[711]
As soon as order was partially restored, the first syndic, Richardet, a hot-tempered man, as we know, put to the vote the demand made by the ambassadors of Berne; or rather, taking a less regular but more artful course, proposed the rejection of the demand. ‘Let all those,’ he said, ‘who wish that Farel, Calvin, and Courault should not enter the town, hold up their hands.’ The secretary of the council said that almost all hands were held up. This secretary was Ruffi, who had been elected in the place of Claude Rozet on the very day of the banishment of the reformers. His partiality was manifest in the fact that he wrote at the same time that the fourteen articles contained some untruths; untruths which the passionate Vandel himself had not been able to detect. It was a piece of gratuitous falsehood, and imputations of that kind do not inspire much confidence in anything that Ruffi might report. After the voting, the first syndic requested that those who wished the preachers to be readmitted to the town and to be heard should hold up their hands. ‘A few were raised,’ said Michel Rozet, ‘to signify that they wished for the ministers.’ The secretary named two or three of them, amongst others Chautemps, in whose house Olivétan, a kinsman of Calvin, had lived; but he added, ‘and certain others, few in number.’ Timid men, in the presence of the storm which threatened to break out, thought it prudent to be silent; some courage was required to face it. In fact, at the mere sight of these few hands raised, a transport of spite and wrath broke out; they could not endure an act of independence, which was at the same time, with many there, an act of respect for the reformers and the Reformation. The rage was so great, says Rozet, that the first two were compelled to fly. Many pursued them; some drew their swords; others, ‘glancing at them fiercely,’ cried out, Kill them! kill them! ‘The majority of votes,’ say the Registers, ‘decided that the preachers should not again be admitted into the town.’ The people of Geneva thus adopted a resolution which, if they had not repented of it, would have prevented light going forth from that city, and would have thrown an obstacle in the way of its greatness.[712]
Thus was the matter decided. Alea jacta est. The powerful party which, in their contest with the pope, the bishop, and the princes of Savoy, had taken for their flag liberty and the truth, and had transformed Geneva into an evangelical republic, had quarrelled after their victory, as very commonly happens, and those who did not wish for the Gospel had remained conquerors. But the citizens, few in number, who had made their voice heard in the general council, were not the only ones who longed for a Christian republic. This minority gradually increased, or rather dared to show itself. It continued united, fervent, determined, active; and to it ultimately the victory was to be given.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE BANISHED MINISTERS AND THEIR SUCCESSORS.
(End of 1538.)
THE REFORMERS SET OUT TO BERNE.
The reformers set out on their journey to Berne. Calvin at length breathed freely, but not without sadness; for while he felt himself free, as if standing on an invigorating height, he looked on Geneva sunk in the flats. It was in fulfilment of a sacred duty that he had made a last effort. He had not, succeeded. ‘It is evident now from the experiment that we have just made,’ said he, ‘that it was no mere groundless fear that influenced us when, although pressed (at Zurich) by the authority of the Church, we could, nevertheless, only with great reluctance consent to reënter that labyrinth. Now we have got clear of it. We have complied with the desire of all pious men, although with no result, except perhaps to render the evil twofold or threefold worse than it was before.[713] Satan exulted at Geneva and in the whole of France on occasion of our first banishment; but this refusal to receive us has added not a little to his presumption and to that of his members. It is incredible with what recklessness and insolence wicked men now give themselves up to all manner of vice; with what effrontery they insult the servants of Christ; with what violence they make a mock at the Gospel. This is a calamity which to us is very painful indeed....’ Afterwards, addressing Bullinger and all the ministers of Zurich, he said to them, ‘Entreat the Lord with us, dearly beloved brethren, with earnest prayer, that very soon he may arise.’[714] It is possible that the reports which reached Calvin may have been a little exaggerated and that his own phrases may be a little sharp; but there is no doubt that the condition of Geneva was at this time extremely critical. ‘There was nothing but confusion,’ says Rozet; ‘the citizens abandoned themselves to licentiousness, dancing, gaming, and drinking. The finger was pointed at those who mourned over these things; they were men marked and hated. No preaching could be fruitful in the midst of such confusion.’[715] The syndic Gautier, a man who was above all a champion of government, and who censured Calvin for not acknowledging that the very foundation of every society is subordination and obedience, duties to the civil magistrate which are as obligatory on pastors as on other men, after examining whether Calvin’s complaints were just, pronounced the following sentence: ‘Calvin was right so far as he had reference to the licentious lives of his adversaries, and to their love for libertinism and independence; but he was certainly mistaken if he considered them as enemies of God for wishing to observe the four principal festivals, and to introduce the use of unleavened bread.’[716] This is likewise our own opinion.