LXVII.—To Farel.
Results of the Diet of Ratisbon—conferences of the theologians—original sin—free-will—justification—impossibility of agreement in the sacrament of the Supper.
Ratisbon, 11th May 1541.
Though I find my prolonged stay here to be irksome, yet never shall I regret having come. Do you think me to be not in a sound state of mind when I say so? I am quite conscious of what I am saying; and that I do not speak unreasonably you shall understand when we meet. For the present, you can pick up a few crumbs, as much as you can, by way of narrative. Our friends in the commission have come to agreement on the doctrine of original sin without any difficulty; a discussion followed on that of free-will, which was drawn together out of the writings of Augustine; they departed in neither of these points from ourselves. The debate in controversy was more keen upon the doctrine of justification. At length a formula was drawn up, which, on receiving certain corrections, was accepted on both sides. You will be astonished, I am sure, that our opponents have yielded so much, when you read the extracted copy, as it stood when the last correction was made upon it, which you will find enclosed in the letter. Our friends have thus retained also the substance of the true doctrine, so that nothing can be comprehended within it which is not to be found in our writings; you will desire, I know, a more distinct explication and statement of the doctrine, and, in that respect, you shall find me in complete agreement with yourself. However, if you consider with what kind of men we have to agree upon this doctrine, you will acknowledge that much has been accomplished. Next came the subject of the Church: as to the definition they agreed in opinion; on the question of the power of the Church they began to differ. When at length they could not anyhow be reconciled, it seemed best to omit that article. With regard to the sacraments, there was some jarring of opinion; but when those of our side conceded to them their ceremonies as things indifferent, they advanced then to the consideration of the sacrament of the Supper. There stood the impassable rock which barred the way to farther progress. Transubstantiation, reposition, circumgestation, and other superstitious forms of worship, were utterly rejected. This our opponents would by no means allow. My colleague,[271] who is full of enthusiasm in the desire for agreement, began to murmur, and to become indignant, because such unseasonable questions were entertained. Melanchthon rather tended to the opposite opinion, that so, the gangrene being brought to a height, he might cut off all hope of pacification. Our friends having consulted, they called us together. We were requested, each in succession, to state our opinions; it was the unanimous voice of all, that transubstantiation was a mere fiction or figment, the reposition of the consecrated wafer a piece of superstition, that the adoration of the wafer was idolatrous, or at the least dangerous, since it had no authority from the word of God. I had also to explain in Latin what were my sentiments. Although I had not understood any one of the others, deliberately, without fear of offence, I condemned that peculiar local presence; the act of adoration I declared to be altogether insufferable. Believe me, in matters of this kind, boldness is absolutely necessary for strengthening and confirming others. Do you, therefore, earnestly supplicate the Lord that he may uphold us with that spirit of fortitude. A document in writing was then drawn up by Philip, which, when it was presented to Granvelle, was rejected with harsh expressions, because those three commissioners had made us aware of them. When such things happen, at the very threshold, you may conceive how much difficulty remains in regard to private masses, the sacrifice of the mass, and the cup in the communion. What if it should come to a consideration of the open confession of the spiritual presence? How much disturbance would be ready to burst forth out of it! Your letters, by the quill merchant, were delivered to me a month after they were written; I shall be surprised if, in the course of a day or two, others do not make their appearance. The safety of the brethren has been recommended to me to attend to it as I ought, but we stick as yet at that obstruction which you are aware of. Maurus,[272] who was sent about that business, is actively engaged in untying that knot. Greater hope than usual breaks forth: for the Landgrave begins to perceive some failure in the quarter from which he expected most; therefore he will incline to that which we propose. If that shall so fall out, they will, I doubt not, have a particular consideration of the brethren; and Maury will do his utmost, as he is a pious and right-hearted man. Believe me, he has hitherto been faithful in attending to that which he undertook. Nothing more, however, has been obtained, than that they might have permission to return home with impunity, provided they abjured in presence of the bishop. N. is most troublesome to us; may the Lord either take him away or amend him. Greet all the brethren in the most friendly manner. May the Lord Jesus keep you. Philip and Bucer salute you. When we dined with the Landgrave the day before yesterday, kindly mention was made of you.
[Calvin's Lat. Corresp. Opera, tom. ix. p. 17.]
LXVIII.—To Farel.
Efforts of Bucer and of Melanchthon to effect a connection between the two Churches—formula of concord—feeling of Calvin on the subject.
12th May 1541.
The messenger left a day later than I supposed. This day has brought forth somewhat for us. Granvelle, when he had cut off all hope on the part of our friends by his reply, after he heard of Eck's apoplexy, since, perhaps, he saw that the forward importunity of that personage put a stop to the progress toward agreement, requested (Pistorius also being left out) the four remaining theologians to consult together of themselves without any presiding arbiters. So far as I could understand, if we could be content with only a half Christ we might easily come to understand one another. Philip and Bucer have drawn up ambiguous and insincere formulas concerning transubstantiation, to try whether they could satisfy the opposite party by yielding nothing. I could not agree to this device, although they have, as they conceive, reasonable grounds for doing so, for they hope that in a short time it would so happen that they would begin to see more clearly if the matter of doctrine shall be left an open question for the present; therefore they rather wish to skip over it, and do not dread that equivocation in matters of conscience, than which nothing can possibly be more hurtful. I can promise, however, both to yourself and to all the pious, that both are animated with the best intentions, and have no other object in view than promoting the kingdom of Christ. Nor can you desire anything on the part of either of them which they do not faithfully and steadily perform, except that in their method of proceeding they accommodate themselves too much to the time. But I cannot well endure to see that Bucer so loads himself with the hatred of many on account of it. He is conscious of his own good intentions, and, on this account, is more careless than is desirable. But we ought not to be so content with the integrity of our own conscience as to have no consideration or regard of our brethren. But these are things which I deplore in private to yourself, my dear Farel; see, therefore, that you keep them to yourself. One thing alone, as usually happens in the midst of evils, I am thankful for, that there is no one who is fighting now more earnestly against the wafer god than Brentz,[273] for so he calls it. I will not write more at present, in order that you may the more eagerly desire my arrival among you, that I may stuff your ears full of these stories. Adieu, my very dear brother. Freithus, Musculus, Brentz, greet you; indeed, almost all do so. Eck, as they say, is getting better. The world does not deserve to be yet delivered from that bête.[274] There has lately occurred a circumstance which I must not omit to mention. Maurus has an attendant, who was for some time a servant with Louis[275] and myself at Basle, a decent, honest young man, trustworthy and modest. About five years ago, when he was but yet a boy, without the knowledge of his father, he promised in his cups to marry a young woman. His father having been informed of the affair had remonstrated with the son upon the subject. The youth told him that he had been imposed upon. The case not having been fully gone into, not being well understood, and still less well weighed and maturely considered, the judges of your Consistory have pronounced, under the direction of Marcourt, that the marriage ought to be held good. The young man, that he might avoid this connection, left his country. He has now received the intelligence of the death of his father; but his relations advise him, at the same time, to take the young woman to wife; and Mirabeau has also advised him to the same purpose. I have probed him to the uttermost, and almost worn him out by my entreaties, yet he is so averse to it that I cannot prevail on myself to urge him any farther; and all the while he acknowledges that the girl is an honest woman, only he affirms positively that he never had any inclination to marry her. Because I wish him well, I would like if it can be brought about to have the affair settled by friendly agreement, and a mutual understanding between the parties. This will also be for the advantage of the girl herself. I have written to Mirabeau about the business. On my account, however, I do not wish you to do anything except what you shall judge just and right in the circumstances. Nor would I do more myself if the case were referred to my decision.