History of the Reformation in Europe in the Time of Calvin, Vol. 6 (of 8)

by J. H. Merle d'Aubigné

If the rule of faith were Christian, the rule of morals must be pure. At the beginning of the year 1537, Calvin, doubtless in conjunction with Farel, prepared a memoir on the subject of order in the Church. On January 15 Farel stated the fact to the council; and the next day the articles ‘presented by Master Guillaume Farel and the other preachers’ were read before the Two Hundred.[457] The ministers said,[458]—‘Considering what trouble and confusion prevailed in our city before the Gospel was received by common consent, it has been found impossible to bring everything into good order at once. But now that it hath pleased the Lord to establish his rule here somewhat more perfectly, we have thought it good and profitable to confer on these matters; and we have decided to lay before you these articles.’

There was no ground of objection to this introduction.

‘It would be desirable,’ continued Calvin and his friends, ‘that the holy supper of Jesus Christ should be celebrated every Sunday at the least, since we are made, in it, partakers of the body, the blood, the life, the spirit, and all the benefits of Jesus Christ, and because it is an admonition to us to live as Christians in brotherly unity. It was not instituted for commemoration two or three times in a year, but for frequent observance. Such was the practice of the ancient Church, until the abomination of masses was introduced, the effect of which was the entire abolition of the Lord’s supper. However, as we foresee that by reason of the infirmity of men, there might be some danger of that sacred mystery falling into contempt through so frequent a celebration, we have judged it well that the holy supper should be observed once a month.’

It was natural that such good Christians as these reformers should desire frequent communion. But the lesser council was of opinion that, for the majority, the supper would be more solemn and more beneficial if it were less frequent. It was therefore resolved to propose to the Council of the Two Hundred that it should be celebrated not more than four times in the year.[459] The reading of the memoir of the pastors was continued.

‘But the main point is that the supper, which was instituted for the purpose of uniting Christians in one spirit with their head and with each other, should not be defiled and contaminated by any persons whose evil life shows plainly that they do not belong to Jesus Christ. We must not associate, says St. Paul, with those who are notoriously profligate, covetous, idolatrous, railers, drunkards, or thieves. Care must therefore be taken that only those come to the supper who are approved members of Jesus Christ. To this end, our Lord established in his Church the correction and discipline of excommunication. This discipline existed in the Church until wicked bishops, or rather say brigands assuming the title of bishops, converted it to an instrument of tyranny, and abused it for the gratification of their own evil lusts, to such a degree that, at the present day, excommunication is one of the most cursed things to be seen in the realm of the pope. It has therefore seemed to us expedient that this discipline should be restored in the Church, according to the rule laid down in Scripture.

EXCOMMUNICATION.

‘Choose ye therefore certain persons of good report, belonging to all quarters of the city, who may have an eye on each man’s life, in order that, if they discover open vice in any one, the latter may be exhorted by one of the ministers in a brotherly way to amend his life. If he will not listen to the exhortation, then let the minister report to the assembly what he has done for the reclamation of the sinner. If he still persist in evil, then the time will be come to excommunicate him; that is, to treat him as cast out of the society of Christians. Should there be any who only laugh at your excommunication, it will be for you to consider whether, in the long run, that contempt for God and his Gospel is to be suffered.’ After thus insisting on a moral life, the reformers required that the confession of faith which they had presented should be put in force. ‘It is much to be suspected,’ said the ministers, ‘if it be not even plainly apparent, that there are many of the inhabitants of this city who have not by any means submitted to the Gospel, but still cherish in their hearts all manner of superstitions. It would be a highly expedient course to begin in the first place to ascertain who are willing to avow themselves of the Church of Jesus Christ, and who are not. If those who are in agreement with us in respect to the faith are to be excommunicated solely because of their vices, much more ought those to be excommunicated who are wholly opposed to us in religion; for there is no division greater than that which is made by the faith. As yet it has not been ascertained what doctrine each man holds; but this is the real beginning of a church (le droit commencement d’une Église). The remedy which has occurred to us is that all the inhabitants of this city should be bound to make confession and give a reason for their faith. And you, Gentlemen of the Council, make you confession in your council, and thus, by example show what each man will have to do.’

We have said that before Calvin’s arrival at Geneva, rules of discipline were in existence and in force. There is here however something new, as is evident from the language of the pastors. It is excommunication. This is a point of great importance, for it was on this subject that violent conflicts soon after began in Geneva. It does not however appear, from the official records, that the articles met with any opposition in the council. Surely a Christian life and a Christian faith ought to characterize a Christian society. If profligates and drunkards ought not to be admitted to what the world calls good society, much more, they thought, ought they to be excluded from a religious society. Moreover, they were laymen of good report who were to watch over moral order, and even those laymen were appointed by other laymen, members themselves of the council. This fact made a great difference between the Romish discipline and that which the reformers desired. In this case there was no suggestion of a reign of clericalism; and this doubtless contributed to the adoption of the rules. Calvin was convinced that morality ought to distinguish the reformed Church from the deformed (l’église réformée de l’église déformée). Was it not dissolute living, both on the part of the laity, and still more on the part of the monks and the priests, which had called forth in the Church the sharpest rebukes? It was not possible to purify the faith without purifying the life. That would have been a flagrant contradiction. If the Reformation made light of morality, it would destroy itself as Rome had done. With regard to doctrine, no one supposed that the reformed Church could hold in its bosom either Roman Catholics or pantheists who believed neither in God nor in the immortality of the soul. Why then should it tolerate impure persons or robbers? All this is true: but nevertheless there is something in the system that does not work smoothly. Calvin was right, and he was wrong too. We shall have to say wherein lay his truth and wherein his error.

The articles presented to the senate dealt also with the spiritual songs of the Church. If only the minister speak, worship remains cold: but the singing ‘has power to raise our hearts to God,’ said Calvin, ‘and to stimulate us to exalt his name.’ He urged the education of children, ‘in order to correct the wonderful rudeness and ignorance in which they were left through the negligence of their parents, and which is not by any means allowable in the Church of God.’ Then he treated of the order of marriage, ‘a subject involved in much confusion by the pope, who undertook to establish degrees at his own pleasure.’ Calvin closed his articles with an eloquent exhortation to the council. ‘Take not these admonitions,’ said he, ‘as coming from us, but from Him who gives them in his Word. And should any one allege the difficulty of putting them in practice, let it not trouble you; for we must cherish the hope that whenever we are willing to do what God has commanded, His goodness will prosper our enterprise and bring it to a good end, as you yourselves have found by experience to this day.’