Skip to main content

Full text of "A History Of The Reformation II"

See other formats 


3L70,  &      L75  v* 
Keep  Your  Card  in  This  Pocket; 

Books  will  be  issued  only  on  presentation  of  proper 
library  r  ' 

Unless  labeled  otherwise,  books  may  be  retained 
for  four  weeks.  Borrowers  finding  books  marked,  de- 
faoed  or  mutilated  are  expected  to  report  same  at 
library  desk;  otherwise  the  last  borrower  will  be  held , 
responsible  for  all  imperfections  discovered. 

The  card  holder  is  responsible  for  all  books  drawn 
on  this  card. 

Penalty  for  over-due  books  2c  a  day  plus  cost  of 
notices. 

Lost  cards  and  change  of  residence  must  be  re- 
ported promptly. 


Public  Library 

Kansas  City,  Mo. 


Keep  Your  Card  in  This  Pocket 


IKRKOWITf  WtmOMt  00. »  K,  0**  M0» 


The  International 

Theological  Library 


EDITORS'  PREFACE 

THEOLOGY  has  made  great  and  rapid  advances 
in  recent  years.  New  lines  of  investigation  have 
been  opened  up,  fresh  light  has  been  cast  upon 
many  subjects  of  the  deepest  interest,  and  the  historical 
method  has  been  applied  with  important  results.  This 
has  prepared  the  way  for  a  Library  of  Theological! 
Science,  and  has  created  the  demand  for  it.  It  has  also 
made  it  at  once  opportune  and  practicable  now  to  se- 
cure the  services  of  specialists  in  the  different  depart- 
ments of  Theology,  and  to  associate  them  in  an  enter* 
prise  which  will  furnish  a  record  of  Theological 
inquiry  up  to  date. 

This  Library  is  designed  to  cover  the  whole  field  of 
Christian  Theology.  Each  volume  is  to  be  complete 
in  itself,  while,  at  the  same  time,  it  will  form  part  of  a 
carefully  planned  whole.  One  of  the  Editors  is  to  pre- 
pare a  volume  of  Theological  Encyclopaedia  which  will 
give  the  history  and  literature  of  each  department,  as 
well  as  of  Theology  as  a  whole. 


-"  I&YER-NATIGN-AL-  -THEOLOGICAL    LIBRARY 


The  LTbrary  is  "iritencfed  to  forrr  a  series  of  Text- 
Books  for  Stiicfehls  of  Theology. 

The  Authors,  therefore,  aim  at  conciseness  and  com- 
pactness of  statement.  At  the  same  time,  they  have  in 
view  that  large  and  increasing  class  of  students,  in  other 
departments  of  inquiry,  who  desire  to  have  a  systematic 
and  thorough  exposition  of  Theological  Science.  Tech- 
nical matters  will  therefore  be  thrown  into  the  form  of 
notes,  and  the  text  will  be  made  as  readable  and  attract- 
ive as  possible. 

The  Library  is  international  and  interconfessional.  It 
will  be  conducted  in  a  catholic  spirit,  and  in  the 
interests  of  Theology  as  a  science. 

Its  aim  will  be  to  give  full  and  impartial  statements 
both  of  the  results  of  Theological  Science  and  of  the 
questions  which  are  still  at  issue  in  the  different 
departments. 

The  Authors  will  be  scholars  of  recognized  reputation 
in  the  several  branches  of  study  assigned  to  them.  They 
will  be  associated  with  each  other  and  with  the  Editors 
in  the  effort  to  provide  a  series  of  volumes  which  may 
adequately  represent  the  present  condition  of  investi- 
gation, and  indicate  the  way  for  further  progress. 

CHARLES  A.  BRKJOS 
STEWART  D.  F.  SALMOND 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  "THEOLOGICAL  .LIBRARY 


ARRANGEMENT  OF  VOLUMES  AND  .AUTHORS 

THEOLOGICAL  ENCYCLOPAEDIA.  By  CHAIU-E3  "-A%  BRIGGS,  Dp., 
D.Litt.,  Professor  of  Theological  Encyclopaedia  and  Symbolics,  Union 
Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 

AN  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LITERATURE  OF  THE  OLD  TESTA- 
MENT. By  S.  R.  DRIVER,  D.D.,  D.Litt.,  Regius  Professor  of 'Hebrew 
and  Canon  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  [Revised  and  Enlarged  Edition. 

CANON  AND  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  By  FRANCIS 
CRAWFORD  BURKITT,  M.A.,  Norrisian  Professor  of  Divinity,  University 
of  Cambridge. 

OLD  TESTAMENT  HISTORY.  By  HENRY  PRESERVED  SMITH,  D.D., 
sometime  Professor  of  Biblical  History,  Amherst  College,  Mass. 

\N~ow  Ready. 

CONTEMPORARY     HISTORY     OF    THE     OLD     TESTAMENT.      By 

FRANCIS  BROWN,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  D.Litt.,  Professor  of  Hebrew,  Union 
Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 

THEOLOGY  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  By  A.  B.  DAVIDSON, 
D.D.,  LL.D.,  sometime  Proiessor  of  Hebrew,  New  College,  Edinburgh. 

[AWv  Ready, 

AN  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  LITERATURE  OF  THE  NEWTESTA^ 
MENT.  liy  Rev.  JAMES  MOFKATT,  B.D.,  Minister  United  Free  Church^ 
Dundonald,  Scotland. 

CANON  AND  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  By  CASPAR  RKNlfi 
GUKUORY,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis  in  the 
University  of  Leipzig 

THE  LIFE  OF  CHRIST.  IJy  Wn.LlAM  SANDAY,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Lady 
Margaret  Prolussor  ot  I  Uvinity  and  Canon  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford. 

A   HISTORY    OF   CHRISTIANITY    IN    THE    APOSTOLIC    AGE.      By 

ARTHUR  C  MC<JIKKKRT,  D.  I).,  Piofessor  of  Chuicli  History,  Union  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  Now  York.  [Arcw  Ready. 

CONTEMPORARY     HISTORY     OF    THE     NEW    TESTAMENT.      By 

FRANK  C.  PORTKR,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Biblical  Theology,  Yale  Univeisity, 
New  Haven,  Conn. 

THEOLOGY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  TSy  CiKORGE  B.  fiTBVKNS, 
I).  1).,  sometime  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology,  Yale  University,  New 
Haven,  Conn.  [Arow  JReady. 

BIBLICAL  ARCHAEOLOGY.  By  O.  IJurilANAN  GRAY,  IXIX,  Trofessor 
of  Hebrew,  Mansfield  College,  Oxford. 

'THE  ANCIENT  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  Hy  UoitKRT  RAINY,  D.D., 
LL.U,,  sometime  Principul  of  Now  rolle^e,  Edinburgh.  \jh*t>w  Ready. 

THE  EARLY  LATIN  CHURCH.  By  t'HARLKS  BlGti,  D.D.,  Regius  Pro- 
fessor of  Church  History,  University  of  Oxford, 


L;  THEOLOGICAL    LIBRARY 


THE  LATER  LATIN  CHURCH.  By  E.  W.  WATSON,  M.A.,  Professor 
of  Church  Histor/,;Ivjiig's  College,  London. 

THEGREEK  AND  ORTENTAL  CHURCHES.  By  W.  F."  ADENEY,D.D., 
Principal  of  Independent  College,  Manchester. 

THE  REFORMATION.  By  T.  M.  LINDSAY,  D.D.,  Principal  of  the  United 
Free  College,  Glasgow.  [2  vols.  Now  Ready. 

SYMBOLICS.  By  CHARLES  A.  BRIGGS,  D.D.,  D.Litt.,  Professor  of 
Theological  Encyclopaedia  and  Symbolics,  Union  Theological  Seminary, 
New  York. 

HISTORY  OF  CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE.  By  G.  P.  FISKKR,  D.D., 
LL.D.,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  Yale  University,  New  Haven, 
Conn.  [Revised  and  Enlarged  Edition. 

CHRISTIAN  INSTITUTIONS.  P>y  A.  V.  G.  ALLEN,  P.P.,  Professor  of 
Ecclesiastical  History,  Protestant  Episcopal  Divinity  School,  Cambridge, 
Mass.  '  [Now  Ready. 

PHILOSOPHY  OF  RELIGION.  P»y  RoiiERT  FLINT,  D.D.,  LL.T),,  some- 
time  Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  University  ot  Edinburgh. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  RELIGIONS.    By  GEORGE  F.  MOORE,  D.I).,  LL.D,, 

Professor  in  Harvard  University. 

APOLOGETICS.  By  A.  B.  BRUCE,  D.D.,  sometime  Professor  of  New 
Testament  Exegesis,  Free  Church  College,  Glasgow. 

\Rmisfdtittd  F.nfargrd  Kdition. 

THE  DOCTRINE  OFGOD.  By  WILLIAM  N.  CLARKE,  D.I).,  Professor 
of  Systematic  Theology,  Hamilton  Theological  Seminary. 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  MAN.  By  WlUJAM  P.  PATICRSON,  D.D.,  Professor 
of  Divinity,  University  of  Edinburgh. 

THE  DOCTRINE  OFCHRIST.  ByH.  R.  MACKINTOSH,  Ph.D.,  Professor 
of  Systematic  Theology,  New  College,  Edinburgh. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE  OF  SALVATION.  By  GKOROK  B.  STE- 
VENS, D.D.,  sometime  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology,  Yule  University. 

\Ntrw  Ready. 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  LIFE.  By  WILLIAM  ADAMS 
BROWN,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology,  Union  Theological 
Seminary,  New  York. 

CHRISTIAN  ETHICS.  By  NEWMAN  SMYTH,  D.D.,  Pastor  of  Congrega- 
tional Church,  New  Haven.  [Revised  and  jKnlargftt  Edition. 

THE   CHRISTIAN    PASTOR    AND  THE  WORKING   CHURCH.      By 

WASHINGTON  GLADDEN,  D.D.,  Pastor  of  Congregational  Church,  Columbus, 
Ohio.  [Mw  Ready. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  PREACHER.  [Anther  to  fa  announced  later. 

RABBINICAL  LITERATURE.  By  S.  SciIKC'llTER,  M.A.,  President  of 
the  Jewish  Theological  Seminary,  New  York  City, 


<Ibe  International  TCbeolo^lcal  Xibrar\>. 


EDITED  BY 

CHARLES  A.   BRIGGS,  D.D., 

Professor  of  TJteological  Encyclopaedia  and  SymooKcs,  Union.  Theological 
Seminary,  New  York; 


THE  LATE  STEWART  D.  F.  SALMOND,  D.D., 

Principal^  and  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology  and  New  Testament  Exegesis^ 
United  Free  Church  College,  Aberdeen. 


HISTORY. OF    THE    REFORMATION. 

BY  THOMAS  M.  LINDSAY, 
D.D.,  LL.D. 


INTERNATIONAL  THEOLOGICAL   UERARY 

A  HISTORY 


OP 


THE    REFORMATION 


BY 


THOMAS  M.  LINDSAY,  D.D,  LLD. 

IMUXCIPAL,   THK   UNITED  VBBB  CHUBCH 
GLASGOW 


II 


THE  REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND,  PRANCE 

THE  NETHERLANDS  SCOTLAND  AND  ENGLAND 

THE  ANATtAFTTRT  AND  tiOCINfAN  MOVEMENTS 

TILE  CO  UNTKR-  REFORM  A  TION 


WITH   MAP  OP1  TIIM  HHVORMATION  AN1> 
COUNTBU-HEFORMATION  (1520-1580). 


NEW  YORK 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

1007 


PREFACE. 


IN  this  volume  I  have  endeavoured  to  fulfil  the  promise 
made  in  the  former  one  to  describe  the  [Reformed  Churches, 
the  Anabaptist  and  Socinian  movements  and  the  Counter- 
reformation  in  the  sixteenth  century. 

It  has  been  based  on  a  careful  study  of  contemporary 
sources  of  information,  and  no  important  fact  has  been 
recorded  for  which  there  is  not  contemporary  evidence. 
Full  use  has  been  made  of  work  done  by  predecessors  in 
the  same  field.  The  sources  and  the  later  books  consulted 
have  been  named  at  the  beginning  of  each  chapter ;  but 
special  reference  is  due  to  the  writings  of  Professor  Pollard 
on  the  reigns  of  Henry  vin.  and  Edward  VL,  and  to  those 
of  MM.  Lemonier  and  Mariejol  for  the  history  of 
Protestantism  in  France.  The  sources  consulted  are, 
for  the  most  part,  printed  in  Calendars  of  State  Papers 
issued  by  the  various  Governments  of  Europe,  or  in  the 
correspondence  of  prominent  men  and  women  of  the  six- 
teenth century,  edited  and  published  for  Historical  and 
Archaeological  Societies ;  but  tho  Calendar  of  State  Papers, 
Domestic,  relating  to  the  reigns  of  Edward  vi.,  Mary, 
and  Elizabeth,  is  little  more  than  a  brief  account  of 
the  contents  of  the  documents,  and  has  to  be  supple- 
mented by  reference  to  the  original  documents  in  the 
Record  Office, 

The  field  covered  in  this  volume  is  so  extensive  that 

vli 


Vlll  PREFACE 

the  accounts  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  Eeformation 
in  the  various  countries  included  had  to  be  very  much 
condensed.  I  have  purposely  given  a  larger  space  to  the 
beginnings  of  each  movement,  believing  them  to  be  less 
known  and  more  deserving  of  study.  One  omission  must 
be  noted.  Nothing  has  been  said  directly  about  the 
Reformed  Churches  in  Bohemia,  Hungary,  and  the 
neighbouring  lands.  It  would  have  been  easy  to  devote 
a  few  pages  to  the  subject ;  but  such  a  brief  description 
would  have  been  misleading.  The  rise,  continuance,  and 
decline  of  these  Churches  are  so  inseparably  connected 
with  the  peculiar  social  and  political  conditions  of  the 
countries,  that  no  adequate  or  informing  account  of  them 
could  be  given  without  largely  exceeding  the  limits  of 
space  at  my  disposal. 

After  the  volume  had  been  fully  printed,  and  addition 
or  alteration  was  impossible,  two  important  documents 
bearing  on  subjects  discussed  came  into  iny  hands  too 
late  for  references  in  the  text. 

1  have  found  that  the  Library  of  the  Technical  Collogo 
in  Glasgow  contains  a  copy,  probably  unique,  of  the  famous 
Hymn-book  of  the  brethren  published  at  Ulm  in  1588. 
It  is  entitled:  JSin  hulmtfi  nen  Gemmjlmfih  darinneu 
Jtcffriflffen  die  Kirclicnordnuny  und  Gewntf  die  ziir 
AVem  ttnd  fiulncck  in  Jtelwni,  von  dcr  (JhriMwhe.n 
seliafft  den  Piewmlm,  die,  Mshvrofur  Unclwwlmi  und 
f/e./ialtcn,  ffC'bratteJit  'itnd  fey  It  eh  Gntt  ZWH,  JKhwn  f/ 
werdm,  (Jcdruokt  m  Uhu  boy  I  Funs  Varnior.  An, 
MDXXXVrn.  I  know  of  a  copy  of  mu«h  lalur  (Into  in 
Niirnborg;  Imt  of  no  ]x^rfec»l  copy  of  this  oarly  iinpr<^ssion. 
It  is  sunUu<nit  to  say  that  the  book  confirms  what  I  havo 
said  of  the  character  of  tho  religion  of  tho  ttn\thwti. 

Tlien  in  Doceinlx^v  1906,  Sofior  ItenriqiiOH  pxib- 
lishod  at  Lisbon  the  auth(»ntic»,  rc*<',onlH  of  the  trial  of 


PREFACE  IX 

George  Buchanan,  and  two  fellow  professors  in  the 
Coimbra  College  before  the  Inquisition.  These  records 
show  that  the  prosecution  had  not  been  instigated  by  the 
Jesuits,  as  was  generally  conjectured,  but  was  due  to  the 
malice  of  a  former  Principal  of  the  College.  The  state- 
ment made  on  p.  556  has  therefore  to  be  corrected. 

The  kindness  of  the  publishers  has  provided  an 
historical  map,  which  I  trust  will  be  found  useful.  It 
gives,  I  think  for  the  first  time,  a  representation  to 
the  eye  of  the  wide  extent  of  the  Anabaptist  movement. 
The  red  bars  denote  districts  where  contemporary  docu- 
ments attest  the  existence  of  Anabaptist  communities. 
At  least  four  maps,  representing  successive  periods,  would 
be  needed  to  show  with  exactness  the  shifting  boundaries 
of  the  various  confessions  ;  one  map  can  only  give  the 
general  results.  - 

My  thanks  are  again  due  to  my  colleague,  Dr.  Denney, 
and  to  another  friend,  for  the  care  they  have  taken  in 
revising  the  proof  sheets,  and  for  many  valuable 


THOMAS  J\l.  LINDSAY. 
January  f  1907. 


CONTENTS 

BOOK  III. 

THE  REFORMED  CHURCHES. 

CHAPTER  I. 
INTRODUCTION. 

PAQB 

§  1.  The  limitations  of  the  Peace  of  Augsburg     ....  1 

§  2.  The  Reformation  outside  Germany       .....  5 

§  3.  The  Reformed  type  of  Doctrine 6 

§  4.  The  Reformed  ideal  of  Ecclesiastical  Government         .        .  7 

§  5.  The  influence  of  Humanism  on  the  Reformed  Churches       .  9 

§  6.  What  the  Reformed  Churches  owed  to  Luther      ...  13 

§  7.  National  Characteristics  as  they  affected  the  Reformation    .  18 

CHAPTER  II. 
*THK  REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND  UKDBR  ZWINGLL 

81.  The  political  condition  of  Switzerland 21 

§2.  Zwingli's  youth  and  education 24 

§  3.  Xwingli  at  Glarus  and  at  Bmsiedelu 27 

§  4,  Zwingli  in  Zurich 29 

§  5.  The  Public  Disputations 33 

§  6.  The  Reformation  outside  Zurich 38 

In  Basel — Oecolampadius  and  William  Farel  38 

Tn  Born— The  Tm  Them 40 

In  Appenzell  and  other  Cantons 46 

Tke  Christian  CivicLeague  (Protestant),   Tlw  Christian  Union 

(Romanist) 48 

§  7.  The  Sacramental  Controversy 5sJ 


il  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  III. 
THE  BEFOBMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN. 

PACK 

1.  Geneva 61 

±  The  Reformation  in  Western  Switzerland  CG 
Farel  and  his  band  of  evangelists .        .    '    .        .        .        .71 

3.  Farel  in  Geneva "74 

Bern,  Freibourg,  and  Geneva 77 

The  Public  Disputation  and  the  Theses  Evangelises    .        .  85 

4.  Calvin  :  Youth  and  education 9:2 

(Jhristiance  heligionis  Imtitutio 99 

5.  Calvin  with  Farel  in  Geneva 102 

Articuli  de  regimine  ecclesice — Discipline  in  the  Church         .  105 
The  theologians  of  Eastern  Switzerland  and  excommunica- 
tion          110 

Calvin  and  Farel  banished  from  Geneva       ....  T20 
Calvin  recalled  to  Geneva  —Les  ordonnanccs  wdwmstiqu™  de 

Vtiglise  de  Gentve 128 

What  Calvin  did  for  Geneva         ,        .       .        .        *        .131 


.       CHAPTER  IV, 
THE  REFORMATION  IN  FBANOJJ. 

1.  Marguerite  d'Angoule.me  and  the  "group  of  Meaux  " .        .  ift(> 

2.  Attempts  to  repress  the  movement  for  lie form    .        .        .  M4 

3.  Change  in  the  character  of  the  movement  for  Keform         *  151 

4.  Calvin  and  his  influence  in  France 1 53 

6.  Persecution  under  Henry  n 'J  (» I 

6.  The  organisation  of  the  French  Protestant  Church    • .        .  KM 

7.  Reaction  against  persecution       ......  100 

8.  The  higher  aristocracy  won  for  the.  Hufonuation  in  France  1*71 

9.  France  ruled  by  the  Guisew.        .        .        •     ,  •        •        •  1ft* 

10.  Oatlierine  de'  Medici  become**  Regent .        »        .        .        .178 

11.  The  Conference  at  Poiasy 180 

12.  The  massacre  at  Vaasy J89 

J3.  The  beghniing  of  the  Warn  of  1^1i«if«i        .        ,        ,        .101 

14.  Tho  massacre  of  Fit.  Bartholomew U)H 

i  15.  The  Huguenot  renifciiiinco  after  the  lUttHHuci't'        *        ,        .  SMX) 

16.  The  beginnings  of  the  Leugtte     .        «        .        .        ,        m  $805 

17.  The  League  bocomcw  disloyal 5J07 

18.  The  day  of  Barricades      ' ail 

19.  The  King  takes  refuge  with  the,  Hugueuottt        .        .        .2" 


CONTENTS  Xiii 

PAGE 

f  20.  The  Declaration  of  Henry  iv 217 

i  21.  Henry  iv.  becomes  a  Eonian  Catholic  .        .        .        „        .219 
i  22.  The  Edict  of  Nantes ."    221 


CHAPTEE  V.     **" 
THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS. 

§  1.  The  political  situation 224 

§  2.  The  beginnings  of  the  Keformation 228 

§  3.  The  Anabaptists  in  the  Netherlands 234 

§  4.  Philip  of  Spain  and  the  Netherlands 240 

§  5.  William  of  Orange /254 

CHAPTEE  VI. 
THE  REFORMATION  IN  SCOTLAND. 

Preparation  for  the  Eeformation 274 

Lollard y  in  Scotland 27$ 

Lutheran  writings  in  Scotland 279 

The  Beginnings  of  the  Keformation 282 

George  Wishart 284 

John  Knox,  early  work  in  Scotland 285 

Knox  in  England,  in  Switzerland,  and  at  JbYankfurt    .        .        ,  28(5 

The  "  Band  subscrived  by  the  Lords.5'    "  The  Congregation  "      .  289 

Knox's  final  return  to  Scotland 293 

Knox  and  Cecil.     The  English  alliance        .....  294 

The  Scots  Confession  of  Faith 303 

The  First  Book  of  Discipline,  or  the  Polirifi  and  Discipline  of  th*> 

Chwrch.     The  Book  of  Common  Order      „        .        .        *  '     .  30 1 

Return  of  Queen  Mary  to  Scotland      ..**..  309 


BOOK  IV. 
THE  REFORMATION  IN  ENGLAND. 

CHAPTEE  J. 
THK  OnuucH  OF  HJTCNAY  VIIL 

Influences  in  England  making  for  the  Reformation.    Lollard  y, 

Hatred  of  the  Clergy,  Humanfom,  Luther     .        .        .        .    3 1C 


XIV  CONTENTS 

PAQH 

The  marriage  of  Henry  and  Catharine  of  Aragon,  and  the  doubts 

entertained  of  its  validity 322 

The  Revolt  of  England  from  Roman  jurisdiction         .        .        .  325 

The  Ten  Articles  and  the  Injunctions 333 

The  Bishops'  Book,  and  its  teaching       .        *        .        ...         •  336 

The  English  Bible 337 

Projected  alliance  with  the  German  Protestants  ....  340 

The  visitation  and  dissolution  of  monasteries       ....  343 

The  Site  Articles  and  the  King's  Book 347 

CHAPTER  II. 
THE  REFORMATION  UNDER  EDWARD  vi. 

The  Injunctions  and  the  Articles  of  Inquiry 351 

The  condition  of  the  English  Clergy 363 

The  First  Prayer-Book  of  King  Edward  VI. 356 

Continental  Reformers  in  England 358 

The  Second  Prayer-Book  of  King  Edward  VI.         .        .        .        .361 

Beginnings  of  the  controversy  about  Vestments  ....  364 

CHAPTER  III. 
THE  REACTION  UNDER  MART. 

The  beginnings  of  Queen  Mary's  reign 368 

The  restoration  of  England  to  the  papal  obedience      .        .        .3*71 

The  Injunctions  and  the  Visitation 37«1 

The  revival  of  heresy  laws  and  the  persecutions  ....  375 

The  martyrdom  of  Cranmer 378 


CHAPTER  IV. 
THK  SETTLEMENT  UNDRR  EL 


Elizabeth  resolves  to  be  a  Protestant.     The  political  «iti;ation         385 
The  Act  of  Supremacy  and  the  Act  of  Uniformity         .        . 


The  Elizabethan  Prayer-Book 

The  Act  of  Uniformity  and  the  Rubric  about  Ornamente 

The  dealings  with  recalcitrant  clergymen    , 

The  Thirty-Nine  Articles 

How  Discipline  was  regulated 

The  character  of  the  KK/abethan  settlement        ,        , 


300 

40% 
408 
41  1 
417 
418 


CONTENTS  XV 

BOOK  V. 

ANABAPTISM  AND  SOCIKEANISM. 

CHAPTER  I. 
REVIVAL  OP  MEDIEVAL  ANTI-ECCLESIASTICAL  MOVEMENTS. 

I'AffB 

Mediaeval  Nonconformists 421 

The  Anti-Trinitarians 424 

CHAPTER  II. 
ANABAPTISM. 

The  medisevel  roots  of  Anabaptism 430 

Anabaptism  organisation 434 

Varieties  of  teaching  among  the  Anabaptists       ....  437 

Anabaptists  object  to  a  State  Church 442 

The  Anabaptists  in  Switzerland.    Their  persecution  .        »        .  445 

Anabaptist  hymnology 449 

The  Kingdom  of  God  in  Minister 451 

Bernhard  Rothmann  and  his  work  in  Minister    ....  452 

Dutch  Anabaptists  in  Minister 459 

Polygamy  in  Munster 463 

CHAPTER  III. 

SOCmiANISM. 

Lelio  and  Fausto  Sozzini 470 

Socmianiem  took  its  rise  from  a  criticism  of  Doctrines       ,        .  473 

Socinianisin  and  the  Scoto-Pelagian  theology      ....  474 

The  doctrines  of  God,  the  Work  of  Christ  and  the  Church  .       .  477 


BOOK  VI. 

THE  COUNTER-BEFOKMATION. 
CHAPTER  I. 

THE  NBOKBSITT  ov  A  REFORMATION  OF  sora  SORT  UNIVERSALLY 

ADMITTED, 

Variety  of  complaints  against  the  mediaeval  Church  .       .       .    484 
Formation  of  local  churches 487 


XVI  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  II. 
THE  SPANISH  CONCEPTION  OF  A  REFORMATION. 

PA0B 

§  1.  The  religious  condition  of  Spain 488 

§  2.  The  reformation  under  Ximenes 490 

S  3.  The  Spaniards  and  Luther 493 

§  4.  Pope  Adrian  vi.  and  the  Spanish  Reformation     .        .        .  49ti 

CHAPTER  IIL 

ITALIAN  LIBERAL  ROMAN  CATHOLICS  AND  THEIR  CONCEPTION  OF  A 
REFORMATION. 

§  1.  The  religious  condition  of  Italy 501 

§  2.  Italian  Roman  Catholic  Reformers 504 

§  3.  Cardinals  Oontarmi  and  Caraffa 513 

§  4.  The  Conference  at  Regensburg 51!) 

CHAPTER  IV, 
IGNATIUS  LOYOLA  AND  THE  COMPANY  OF  JESUS. 

g  1.'  At  Mauresa 525 

§  2.  Ignatius  at  Paris.    Tlie  ecclesiastical  situation  at  Par  in       ,  533 

8  3.  The  FSpvritnal  Kccrdm 538 

8  4.  Ignatitis  in  Italy 540 

ft  5.  The  tiocietij  of  Jesus 540 

CHAPTER  V. 
THB  COUNCIL  OF  TRKNT. 

§  1.  The  assembling  of  the  Council 56-1 

§  2.  Procedure  at  the  Council      ...„,,«.  5(Jfl 

§  3.  Restatement  of  Doctrines     .        „        .        .        »        ,        ,570 

The  Doctrine  of  the  Rule  of  Faith                                        ,  572 

'  Original  Siu  and  Justification     .*,..,  575 

The  ncfcond  mooting  of  the  Council      .        *        ,        «        »  581 

The  third  meeting  of  the  Council                                *        »  587 

The  position  of  the  Pope  Htrontflhcncd         *        *        „  503 


CONTENTS  XVII 

• 

CHAPTER  VI. 
THE  INQUISITION  AND  THE  INDEX. 

PAGE 

1.  The  Inquisition  in  Spain       .......  597 

-2.  The  Inquisition  in  Italy        .......  GOO 

3.  The  Index  of  prohibited  books      ......  602 

4.  The  Society  of  Jesus  and  the  Counter-Reformation      «         r  606 


BOOK  III. 
THE  REFORMED  CHURCHES. 

CHAPTER  L 

INTRODUCTION. 
§  1.   Tlie  Limitations  of  the  Peace  of  Augsburg. 

THE  Eeligious  Peace  of  Augsburg  (1555)  secured  the  legal 
recognition  of  the  Eeformation  within  the  Holy  Roman 
Empire,  and  consequently  within  European  polity.  Hence- 
forward States,  which  declared  through  their  responsible 
rulers  that  they  meant  to  live  after  the  religion  described 
in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  were  admitted  to  the  comity  of 
nations,  and  the  Pope  was  legally  and  practically  debarred 
from  excommunicating  them,  from  placing  them  under 
interdict,  and  f rom  inviting  obedient  neighbouring  potentates 
to  conquer  and  dispossess  their  sovereigns.  The  Bishop  of 
Borne  could  no  longer,  according  to  the  recognised  custom 
of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  launch  a  Bull  against  a 
Lutheran  prince  and  expect  to  have  its  execution  enforced 
as  in  earlier  days.  The  Popes  were  naturally  slow  to  see 
this,  and  had  to  be  reminded  of  the  altered  state  of  matters 
more  than  once.1 

?'  Tho  fierce  old  Pontiff,  Paul  iv.,  declared  in  a  Bnll  (Feb.  16,  1559)  that 
th/r  more  fact  of  heresy  in  princes  deprived  them  of  all  lawful  power ;  but  lie 
named  no  one.  When  his  successor  proposed,  iu  1563,  to  excommunicate 
Kliwboth  of  England  by  name  wimply  as  a  Protestant,  he  was  taken  to  task 
Bluurply  by  tho  Emperor  Ferdinand  ;  and  the  Queen  was  finally  excommuni- 
cated in  1570  as  a  partaker  "in  tho  atrocious  mysteries  of  Calvinism,"  and  as 
sucty  outside  the  Peace  of  Augsburg. 
T** 


2  INTRODUCTION 

Of  course,  the  exalted  Eomanist  powers,  civil  and 
ecclesiastical,  never  meant  this  settlement  to  be  lasting. 
They  intrigued  secretly  among  themselves,  and  fought  openly, 
against  it.  The  final  determined  effort  to  overthrow  it 
was  that  hideous  nightmare  which  goes  by  the  name  of 
the  Thirty  Tears'  War,  mainly  caused  by  the  determination 
of  the  Jesuits  that  by  the  help  of  God  and  the  devil,  for 
that,  as  Carlyle  has  remarked,  was  the  peculiarity  of  the 
plan,  all  Germany  must  be  brought  back  to  the  obedience  of 
Holy  Stepmother  Church,  and  to  submission  to  the  Supreme 
Headship  of  the  Holy  Eoman  Empire — the  Supreme  Head- 
ship becoming  more  and  more  shadowy  as  the  years  passed. 
The  settlement  lasted,  however,  and  remains  in  general 
outline  until  the  present. 

But  the  Eeligious  Peace  of  Augsburg  did  not  end  the 
revolt  against  Eome  which  was  simmering  in  every  land 
in  Western  Europe.  It  made  no  provision  for  the  multitude 
of  believers  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  whose  princes,  for 
conscience'  sake  or  for  worldly  policy,  remained  steadfast 
to  Eome,  save  that  they  were  to  be  permitted  to  emigrate 
to  territories  where  the  rulers  were  of  the  same  faith  as 
theirs.  These  Lutherans  were  to  be  found  in  every  part 
of  Germany,  and  were  very  abundant  in  the  Duchy  of 
Austria.  The  statement  of  Faber,  the  Bishop  of  Vienna, 
that  the  only  good  Catholics  in  that  city  were  himself 
and  the  Archduke  Ferdinand,  was,  of  course,  rhetorical ; 
but  it  is  a  proof  of  the  numbers  of  the  followers  of 
Luther.1 

It  chained  irrevocably  to  the  Eomanist  creed,  by  tho 
clause  called  the  ecclesiastical  reservation,  not  merely  tho 
people,  but  the  rulers  in  tho  numerous  ecclesiastical 
principalities  scattered  all  over  Germany.  This  pro- 
vision secured  that  if  an  ecclesiastical  prince  adopted  the 
Lutheran,  faith,  he  was  to  bo  deprived  of  his  principle  \ty. 

1  In  the  Atlas  zur  KirclwngcsMcJite  by  Iletisai  and  Mulort  (Tur^ngon, 
1905),  there  is  an  attempt  to  represent  to  the  oy«  tho  presence  of  Golmiau 
Protestants  outside  the  territories  of  tho  Lutheran  princes ;  Hap  x\ 
Gaschichte  <lcr  dcutschen  Reformation  *uwl  (JegewnformMon. 


LIMITATIONS   OF   THE   PEACE   OF   AUGSBURG          3 

It  is  probable  that  this  provision  did  more  than  anything 
else  to  secure  for  the  Eomanists  the  position  they  now  have 
in  Germany.  It  was  partly  due  to  the  alarms  excited 
by  the  fact  that  Albert  of  Brandenburg,  Master  of  the 
Teutonic  Knights,  had  secularised  his  land  of  East  Prussia 
and  had  become  a  Lutheran,  and  by  the  narrow  escape  of 
the  province  of  Koln  from  following  in  the  same  path, 
under  its  reforming  archbishop,  Hermann  von  Wied. 

The  Peace  of  Augsburg  made  no  provision  for  any  Pro- 
testants other  than  those  who  accepted  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession ;  and  thousands  in  the  Palatinate  and  all  throughout 
South  Germany  preferred  another  type  of  Protestant  faith. 
It  is  probable  that,  had  Luther  lived  for  ten  or  fifteen  years 
longer,  the  great  division  between  the  Reformed  or  Calvin- 
ist  and  the  Evangelical  or  Lutheran  Churches  would  have 
been  bridged  over;  but  after  his  death  his  successors, 
intent  to  maintain,  as  they  expressed  it,  the  deposiu  of 
truth  which  Luther  had  left,  actually  ostracised  Melanchthon 
for  his  endeavour  to  heal  the  breach.  The  consequence 
was  that  the  Lutheran  Church  within  Germany  after  1555 
lost  large  districts  to  the  Reformed  Church. 

Under  Elector  Frederick  in.,  surnamed  the  Pious,  the 
territorial  Church  of  the  Palatinate  separated  from  the 
circle  of  Lutheran  Churches,  and  in  1563  the  Heidelberg 
Catechism  was  published.  This  celebrated  doctrinal  formula 
ab  once  became,  and  has  remained,  the  distinctive  creed  of 
the  various  branches  of  the  Reformed  Church  within 
Germany ;  and  its  influence  extended  even  farther. 

Bremen  followed  the  example  of  the  Palatinate  in 
1568.  Its  divines  published  a  doctrinal  Declaration  in 
1572,  and  a  more  lengthy  Consensus  JBremenensis  in  1595. 
Anhalt,  under  its  ruler  John  George  (1587-1603),  did 
away  with  the  consistorial  system  of  Church  government, 
and  abandoned  the  use  of  Luther's  Catechism.  Hesse- 
Cassel  joined  the  circle  of  German  Reformed  Churches  in 
1605.  These  examples  were  followed  in  many  smaller 
principalities,  most  of  which,  imitating  all  the  Reformed 
Churches,  published  separate  and  distinctive  confessions*  of 


4  INTRODUCTION 

farth,  which  were  nevertheless  supposed  to  contain  the  sum 
and  substance  of  the  common  Reformed  creed.1 

These  German  principalities,  rulers  and  inhabitants, 
placed  themselves  deliberately  outside  the  protection  of  the 
Eeligious  Peace  of  Augsburg.  The  fundamental  principles 
of  their  faith  were  not  very  different  from  the  Lutheran, 
but  they  were  important  enough  to  make  them  forego 
the  protection  which  the  treaty  afforded.  Setting  aside 
minor  differences  and  sentiments,  perhaps  more  powerful 
than  doctrines,  their  separation  from  neighbouring  Pro- 
testants was  based  on  their  objection  to  the  doctrine  of 
Ubigwity,  essential  to  the  Lutheran  theory  of  the  Sacrament 
of  the  Supper,  and  to  the  consistorial  system  of  ecclesi- 

1  The  fullest  account  of  these  German  Reformed  confessions  is  to  be  found 
in  Mailer's  Die  Belcenntnixschriften  der  reformirten  JCirche —  the  Emden 
Catechism  (1554),  pp.  1  and  6C6  ;  the  Heidelberg  Catechism  (1563),  pp.  1, 
682  ;  the  Nassau  Confession  of  the  Dillenburg  Synod  (1578),  liii,  720  ;  the 
Bremen  Consensus  (1595),  liv,  739  ;  the  8ta/ort  Book  (1559)  for  Baden,  liv, 
797 ;  the  Confession  of  the  General  Synod  of  Cassel,  Iv  and  817,  and  tho 
Hessian  Catechism  (1607),  822 ;  and  the  Bentheim  Confession  (1613),  833. 
All  these  German  Reformed  confessions  followed  Molanchthon  in  his 
viideavours  to  unite  the  Calvinist  and  the  Lutheran  doctrinal  positions. 

By  far  the  most  celebrated,  and  the  only  one  which  maintains  its  placo 
as  a  doctrinal  symbol  down  to  tho  present  day,  is  the  JXfidelberg  Catechiam, 
It  was  drafted  at  the  suggestion  of  the  Elector  Frederick  tho  Pious  by  two 
theologians,  Caspar  Olevianus  and  Zaeharias  Ursinus,  who  wore  able  to 
express  in  a  really  remarkable  degree  the  thoughts  of  Gorman  Protestants 
who  could  not  accept  the  hard  and  fast  Luthcramsm  of  the  opponents  of 
Melanchthon.  It  speedily  found  favour  in  many  parts  of  Germany,  although 
its  strongest  supporters  belonged  to  the  Khino  provinces.  It  was  in  uso 
both  as  a  means  of  instruction  and  as  a  doctrinal  symbol  in  most  of  tho 
German  Reformed  Churches  along  with  their  own  symbolical  bookw.  ItH 
use  spread  to  Holland  and  beyond  it.  Two  separate  translations  appuarod 
in  Scotland.  Tho  earlier  is  contained  in  (Dunlop's)  Collection  of  Confessions 
of  Faith.  .  .  .  of  public  authority  in  the  Church  of  {Scotland,  under  tho  tithi, 
A  Catechism  of  the  Cliristian  Religion,  composed  Inj  %ach&ry  Ursin,  approved 
ly  Frederick  771.  Elector  Palatine,  the  Jteformcd  Church  in  the  JPatalimte, 
and  ty  other  Reformed  Churches  in  Germany  ;  and  tauyht  in  their  schools 
and  churches:  examined  and  approved,  without  my  alteration,  ty  the  ty/md 
ofDort,  and  appointed  to  be  taught  in  the  reformed  churches  and  schools  in 
the  Netherlands :  translated  and  printed  Anno  tSQl  by  pMic  cnti/utrity  for 
the  use  of  Scotland,  with  the  arguments  and  use  of  the  several  doctrines  therein 
contained,  by  Jeremias  Bastingius ;  sometimes  printed  with  the  Jftook  of 
Common  Order  and  Psalm  Book. 


THE    REFORMATION   OUTSIDE    GERMANY  5 

astical  government.  They  repudiated  the  two  portions  of 
the  Lutheran  system  which  were  derived  professedly  from 
the  mediaeval  Church,  and  insisted  on  basing  their  exposi- 
tion of  doctrine  and  their  scheme  of  ecclesiastical  govern- 
ment more  directly  on  the  Word  of  God.  They  had  come 
in  contact  with  another  reformation  movement,  had 
recognised  its  sturdier  principles,  and  had  become  so 
enamoured  of  them  that  they  felt  compelled  to  leave  the 
Lutheran  Church  for  the  Eeforrned. 

Still  confining  ourselves  to  Germany,  it  is  to  be  noticed 
that  the  Augsburg  Confession  ostentatiously  and  over  and 
over  again  separated  those  who  accepted  it  from  protesters 
against  the  mediaeval  Church,  who  were  called  Anabaptists. 
It  repudiated  views  supposed  to  be  held  by  them  on 
Baptism,  the  Holy  Scripture,  the  possibility  of  a  life  of 
sinless  perfection,  and  the  relation  of  Christian  men  to  the 
magistracy.  In  some  of  the  truces  arranged  between  the 
Emperor  and  the  evangelical  princes, — truces  which  antici- 
pated the  religious  Peace  of  Augsburg, — attempts  were 
made  to  induce  Lutherans  and  Eomanists  to  unite  in  sup- 
pressing those  sectaries.  It  is  needless  to  say  that  they 
were  not  included  in  the  settlement  in  1555.  Yet  they 
had  spread  all  over  Germany,  endured  with  constancy 
bloody  persecutions,  and  from  them  have  come  the  large 
and  influential  Baptist  Churches  in  Europe  and  America. 
From  beginning  to  end  they  were  outside  the  Lutheran 
Reformation. 


§  2.   The  Reformation  outside  Germany. 

When  we  go  beyond  Germany  and  survey  the  other 
countries  of  Western  Europe,  it  is  abundantly  evident  that 
the  story  of  the  Lutheran  movement  from  its  beginning 
down  to  its  successful  issue  in  the  Religious  Peace  of 
Augsburg  is  only  a  small  part  of  the  history  of  the  Re- 
formation, franco,  Great  Britain,  the  Netherlands, 
Bohemia,  Hungary,  ovon  Italy,  Spain,  and  Poland,  throbbed 
with  the  religious  revival  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  its 


6  INTRODUCTION 

manifestations  in  these  lands  differed  in  many  respects 
from  that  which  belonged  to  Germany.  All  shared 
with  Germany  the  common  experiences,  intellectual  and 
religious,  political  and  economic,  of  that  period  of  transition 
which  is  called  the  Renaissance  in  the  wider  sense  of  the 
word  —  the  transition  from  mediaeval  to  modern  life.1  They 
had  all  come  to  the  parting  of  the  ways.  They  had  all 
emerged  from  Medievalism,  and  all  saw  the  wider  outlook 
which  was  the  heritage  of  the  time.  All  felt  the 
same  longing  to  shake  themselves  clear  of  the  incubus  of 
clericalism  which  weighed  heavily  on  their  national  life, 
whether  religious  or  political.  Each  land  went  forward, 
marching  by  its  own  path  marked  out  for  it  by  its  past 
history,  intellectual,  religious,  and  civil.  The  movements 
in  these  various  countries  towards  a  freer  and  more  real 
religious  life  cannot  be  described  in  the  same  general  terms  ; 
but  if  Italy  and  Spain  be  excepted,  their  attempts  at  a 
national  reformation  had  one  thing  in  common  which 
definitely  separated  them  from  the  Lutheran  movement. 

§  3.   The  Reformed  type  of  Doctrine. 

If  the  type  of  doctrine  professed  by  the  Protestants 
in  those  countries  be  considered  (confessedly  a  partial,  one- 
sided, and  imperfect  standard),  it  may  be  said  that  they  all 
refused  to  accept  some  of  the  distinctive  Lutheran  dogmatic 
conclusions,  and  that  they  all  departed  more  widely  from 
some  of  the  conceptions  of  the  Mediaeval  Church.  Their 
national  confessions  in  their  final  forms  borrowed  more 
from  Zurich  and  Geneva  than  from  Wittenberg,  and  they 
all  belong  to  the  Eeformed  as  distinguished  from  theLutheran 
or  Evangelical  circle  of  creeds.2  It  was  perhaps  natural 


1  Compare  vol.  i.  pt.  i. 

3  The  most  complete  collection  of  those  Eeformed  creeds  is  given  in 
Miiller,  Die  Bekenntnisschriften  der  reformirten  Kirclie  (Leipzig,  1903). 
The  most  important  are  the  following  (the  figures  within  brackets  give  the 
pages  in  Muller)  :  — 

SWITZERLAND.  —  Zwingli's  Theses  of  1523  (xvi,  1);  First  Helvetic  Qonfeif- 
sion  of  1536  (xxvi,  101)  ;  Geneva  Confession  of  1536  (xxvi,  111)  ;  Geneva 


REFORMED  IDEAL  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL  GOVERNMENT      7 

that  differences  in  the  ritual  and  theory  of  the  Holy 
Supper,  the  very  apex  and  crown  of  Christian  Public 
Worship,  should  be  to  the  general  eye  the  visible  cleavage 
between  rival  forms  of  Christianity.  In  the  earlier  stages 
of  the  Eeformation  movement,  the  great  popular  distinction 
between  the  Romanists  and  Protestants  was  that  the  one 
refused  and  the  other  admitted  the  laity  to  partake  of  the 
Cup  of  Communion;  and  later,  within  an  orthodox  Pro- 
testantism, the  thought  of  ubiquity  was  the  dividing  line. 
The  Lutherans  asserted  and  the  Eef  ormed  denied  or  ignored 
the  doctrine;  and  those  confessions  took  the  Eeformed 
view. 

§  4c,   The  Reformed  ideal  of  Ecclesiastical  Government. 

This  similarity  of  published  creed  was  the  one  positive 
bond  which  united  all  those  Churches ;  but  it  may  also  be 
said  that  all  of  them,  with  the  doubtful  exception  of  the 
Church  of  England,1  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
consistorial  system  of  the  Lutheran  Churches,  and  that 
most  of  them  accepted  in  theory  at  least  Calvin's  concep- 
tion of  ecclesiastical  government.  They  strove  to  get 
away  from  the  mediaeval  ideas  of  ecclesiastical  rule,  and  to 
return  to  the  principles  which  they  believed  to  be  laid 
down  for  them  in  the  New  Testament,  illustrated  by  the 
conduct  of  the  Church  of  the  early  centuries.  The  Church, 

Catechism  of  1545  [(xxviii,  117)  translated  in  (Dunlop's)  Confessions,  etc.,  ii, 
139]. 

EKGLAND. — Edwardine  Forty-two  Articles  of  1553,  Thirty-eight  Articles 
of  1563,  Thirty-mile  Articles  of  1571  (xlii,  505) ;  Zambeth  Articles  of  1595 
(xliv,  525)  ;  Irish  Articles  of  1615  (xliv,  526). 

SCOTLAND. — Scottish  Confession  of  1560,  National  Covenant  of  1581 
[(xxxv,  249),  (Dunlop's)  Confessions,  etc.,  ii.  pp.  21  and  103]. 

FRANCE. — Confessio  Gfallicana  of  1559  (xxxii,  221). 

NETHERLANDS.— Confessio  Belgica  of  1561  (xxxiv,  233) ;  Netherlands 
Confession  of  1566  (xxxv,  935)  j  Frisian  Confession  of  1528  (xxi,  930). 

HTTNGARY. — Hungarian  Confession  of  1562  (xxviii,  376). 

BOHEMIA. — Bohemian  Confession  of  1609  (xxxix,  453). 

1  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  which  grew 
out  of  the  Elizabethan  settlement  of  religion  in  England  borrowed  not  a  few 
characteristics  from  the  Lutheran  consistorial  courts. 


8  INTRODUCTION' 

according  to  Calvin,  was  a  theocratic  democracy,  and  the 
ultimate  source  of  authority  lay  in  the  membership  of  the 
Christian  community,  inspired  by  the  Presence  of  Christ 
promised  to  all  His  people.  But  in  the  sixteenth  century 
this  conception  was  confronted  and  largely  qualified  in 
practice,  by  the  dread  that  it  might  lead  to  a  return  to  the 
clerical  tutelage  of  the  mediaeval  Church  from  which  they 
had  just  escaped.  Presbyter  might  become  priest  writ 
large ;  and  the  leaders  of  the  Eeformation  in  many  lands 
could  see,  as  Zwingli  did  in  Zurich  and  Cranmer  in 
England,  that  the  civil  authorities  might  well  represent 
the  Christian  democracy.  Even  Calvin  in  Geneva  had  to 
content  himself  with  ecclesiastical  ordinances  which  left 
the  Church  completely  under  the  control  of  les  tr&s  Jwnnorbs 
seigneurs  syndicques  et  conseil  de  Gen&ve ;  and  the  Scottish 
Church  in  1572  had  to  recognise  that  the  King  was  the 
"Supreme  Governor  of  this  realm  as  well  in  things 
temporal  as  in  the  conservation  and  purgation  of  religion." 
The  nations  and  principalities  in  Western  Europe  which 
had  adopted  and  supported  the  Eeformation  believed  that 
manifold  abuses  had  arisen  in  the  past,  directly  and 
indirectly,  through  the  exemption  of  the  Church  and  its 
possessions  from  secular  control,  and  they  were  determined  • 
not  to  permit  the  possibility  of  a  return  to  such  a  state  of 
things.  The  scholarship  of  the  Eenaissance  had  discovered 
the  true  text  of  the  old  Eoman  Civil  Code,  and  one  of 
the  features  of  that  time  of  transition — perhaps  its  most 
important  and  far-reaching  feature,  for  law  enters  into 
every  relation  of  human  life — was  the  substitution  of  civil 
law  based  on  the  Codes  of  Justinian  and  Theodosius,  for 
canon  law  based  on  the  Decretum  of  Gratian.  These 
old  Eoman  codes  taught  the  lawyers  and  statesmen  of  the 
sixteenth  century  to  look  upon  the  Church  as  a  depart- 
ment of  the  State;  and  the  thought  that  the  Christian 
community  had  an  independent  life  of  its  own,  and  that 
its  guidance  and  discipline  ought  to  be  in  the  hands  of 
office-bearers  chosen  by  its  membership,  was  everywhere 
confronted,  modified,  largely  overthrown  by  the  imperious 


THE   IXFLUEXCE   OF   HUMANISM!  9 

claim  of  the  civilian  lawyers.  Ecclesiastical  leaders  within 
the  Reformed  Churches  might  strive  as  they  liked  to  draw 
the  line  between  the  possessions  of  the  Church,  which  they 
willingly  placed  under  the  control  of  civil  law,  and  its 
discipline  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals,  which  they 
declared  to  be  the  inalienable  possession  of  the  Church ; 
but,  as  a  rule,  the  State  refused  to  perceive  the  distinction, 
and  insisted  in  maintaining  full  control  over  the  ecclesi- 
astical jurisdiction.  Hence  it  came  about  that  in  every 
land  where  the  secular  authorities  were  favourable  to  the 
Reformation,  the  Church  became  more  or  less  subject  to 
the  State ;  and  this  resulted  in  a  large  variety  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal organisations  in  communities  all  belonging  to  the  Re- 
formed Church.  While  it  may  be  said  with  perfect  truth 
that  the  churchly  ideal  in  the  minds  of  the  leaders  in  most 
of  the  Reformed  Churches  was  to  restore  the  theocratic 
democracy  of  the  early  centuries,  and  that  this  was  a 
strong  point  of  contrast  between  them  and  Luther,  who 
insisted  that  the  jus  episcopate  belonged  to  the  civil 
magistrate,  in  practice  the  secular  authorities  in  Switzerland, 
the  Netherlands,  the  Palatinate,  etc.,  kept  almost  as  tight  a 
hold  on  the  Reformed  national  Churches  as  did  the  Lutheran 
princes  and  municipalities.  In  one  land  only,  France,  the 
ecclesiastical  ideal  of  Calvin  had  full  liberty  to  embody 
itself  in  a  constitution,  and  that  only  because  the  French 
Reformed  Church  struggled  into  existence  under  the  civil 
rule  of  a  Romanist  State,  and,  like  the  Christian  Church 
of  the  early  centuries,  maintained  itself  in  spite  of  the 
opposition  of  the  secular  authorities  which  persecuted  it. 

§  5.  The  Influence  of  Humanism  on  the  Reformed  Churches. 

The  portion  of  the  Reformation  which  lay  outside  the 
Peace  of  Augsburg  had  another  characteristic  which  dis- 
tinguished it  from  the  Lutheran  Reformation  included 
within  the  treaty — it  owed  much  more  to  Humanism. 
Erasmus  and  what  he  represented  had  a  greater  share  in 
its  birth  and  early  progress,  and  his  influence  appeared 


10  INTRODUCTION 

amidst  the  most  dissimilar  surroundings.  Henry  vni.  and 
Zwingli  seem  to  stand  at  opposite  poles ;  yet  the  English 
autocrat  and  the  Swiss  democrat  were  alike  in  this,  that 
they  owed  much  to  Erasmus,  and  that  the  reformations 
which  they  respectively  led  were  largely  prompted  by  the 
impulse  of  Humanism.  One  has  only  to  compare  the 
Bishops'  Book  and  the  King's  Book  of  the  Henrican  period 
in  England  with  the  many  statements  Erasmus  has  made 
ahout  the  kind  of  reformation  he  desired  to  see,  to  recognise 
that  they  were  meant  to  serve  for  a  reformation  in  life 
and  morals  which  would  leave  untouched  the  fundamental 
doctrinal  system  of  the  mediaeval  Church  and  its  organisa- 
tion in  accordance  with  the  principles  laid  down  by  the 
great  Humanist.  The  Bible,  the  Apostles',  Nicene,  and 
Athanasian  Creeds,  with  the  doctrinal  decisions  of  the  first 
four  (Ecumenical  Councils,  were  recognised  as  the  standards 
of  orthodoxy  in  the  Ten  Articles ;  and  the  Scholastic  Theo- 
logy, so  derided  by  Erasmus,  was  contemptuously  ignored. 
The  accompanying  Injunctions  set  little  store  by  pilgrimages, 
relics,  and  indulgences,  and  the  other  superstitions  of  the 
popular  religious  life  which  the  great  Humanist  had  treated 
sarcastically.  The  two  books  alluded  to  above  are  full 
of  instructions  for  leading  a  wholesome  life.  The  whole 
programme  of  reformation  is  laid  down  on  lines  borrowed 
from  Erasmus. 

Zwingli  was  under  the  influence  of  Humanism  from 
his  boyhood.  His  young  intellect  was  fed  on  the  master- 
pieces of  classical  antiquity — Cicero,  Homer,  and  Pindar. 
His  favourite  teacher  was  Thomas  Wyttenbach,  who  was 
half  a  Eeformer  and  half  a  pure  follower  of  Erasmus.  No 
man  influenced  him  more  than  the  learned  Dutchman.  It 
was  his  guidance  and  not  the  example  of  Luther  which 
made  him  study  the  Scriptures  and  the  theologians  of  the 
early  Church,  such  as  Origen,  Jerome,  and  Chrysostom. 
The  influence  and  example  of  Erasmus  can  be  seen  even 
in  his  attempts  to  create  a  rational  theory  of  the  Holy 
Supper.  His  reformation,  in  its  beginning  more  especially, 
was -much  more  an  intellectual  than  a  religious  movement. 


THE  INFLUENCE   OF   HUMANISM  11 

It  aimed  at  a  clearer  understanding  of  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
at  the  purgation  of  the  popular  religious  life  from  idolatry 
and  superstition,  and  at  a  clearly  reasoned  out  scheme  of 
intellectual  belief.  The  deeper  religious  impulse  which 
drove  Luther,  step  by  step,  in  his  path  of  revolt  from  the 
mediaeval  Church  was  lacking  in  Zwingli.  He  owed  little 
to  Wittenberg,  much  to  Rotterdam.  It  was  this  con- 
nection with  Erasmus  that  created  the  sympathy  between 
Zwingli  and  such  early  Dutch  Reformers  as  Christopher 
Hoen,  and  made  the  Swiss  Reformer  a  power  in  the 
earlier  stages  of  the  Reformation  in  the  Netherlands. 

The  beginnings  of  the  Reformation  movement  in  Trance, 
Italy,  and  Spain  were  even  more  closely  allied  to 
Humanism. 

If  the  preparation  for  reformation  to  be  found  in  the 
work  and  teaching  of  mediaeval  evangelical  nonconformists 
like  the  Picards  be  set  aside,  the  beginnings  of  the  Re- 
formation in  France  must  be  traced  to  the  small  group 
of  Christian  Humanists  who  surrounded  Marguerite 
d'Angoul£me  and  Bri<jonnet  the  Bishop  of  Meaux. 
Marguerite  herself  and  Jacques  Lefevre  d'Etaples,  the 
real  leader  of  the  group  of  scholars  and  preachers,  found 
solace  for  soul  troubles  in  the  Christian  Platonism  to 
which  so  many  of  the  Humanists  north  and  south  of  the 
Alps  had  given  themselves.  The  aim  of  the  little  circle 
of  enthusiasts  was  a  reformation  of  the  Church  and  of 
society  on  the  lines  laid  down  by  Erasmus.  They  looked 
to  reform  without  "  tumult,"  to  a  reformation  of  the  Church 
by  the  Church  and  within  the  Church,  brought  about  by 
a  study  of  the  Scriptures,  and  especially  of  the  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul,  by  individual  Christians  weaning  themselves 
from  the  world  while  they  remained  in  society,  and  by 
slowly  leavening  the  people  with  the  enlightenment  which 
the  New ,  Learning  was  sure  to  bring.  They  cared  little 
for  theology,  much  for  intimacy  with  Christ;  little  for 
external  changes  in  institutions,  much  for  personal  piety. 
Their  efforts  had  little  visible  effect,  and  their  via  media 
between  the  stubborn  defenders  of  Scholasticism  on  the 


12  INTRODUCTION 

one  land  and  more  thorough  Eeformers  on  the  other,  was 
found  to  be  an  impossible  path  to  persevere  in;  but  it 
must  not  be  forgotten  that  they  did  much  to  prepare 
France  for  the  Reformation  movement  which  they  really 
inaugurated;  nor  that  William  Farel,  the  precursor  of 
Calvin  himself  in  Geneva,  belonged  to  the  "group  of 
Meatix." 

If  Humanism  influenced  the  "  group  of  Meaux,"  who 
were  the  advance  guard  of  the  French  Reformation,  it 
manifested  itself  no  less  powerfully  in  the  training  of 
Calvin,  who  in  1536  unconsciously  became  the  leader  of 
the  movement.  He  was  one  of  the  earliest  and  most 
enthusiastic  students  of  the  band  of  "royal  lecturers" 
appointed  by  Francis  I.  to  give  France  the  benefits  of  the 
New  Learning.  He  had  intimate  personal  relations  with 
Bude  and  Cop,  who  were  allied  to  the  "  group  of  Meaux," 
and  were  leaders  among  the  Humanists  in  the  University. 
His  earliest  book,  a  Commentary  on  the  Be  dementia  of 
Seneca,  shows  how  wide  and  minute  was  his  knowledge  of 
the  Greek  and  Latin  classical  authors.  Like  Erasmus, 
he  does  not  seem  to  have  been  much  influenced  by  the 
mystical  combination  of  Platonism  and  Christianity  which 
entranced  the  Christian  Humanists  of  Italy  and  filled  the 
minds  of  the  "  group  of  Meaux " ;  and  like  him  he  broke 
through  the  narrow  circle  of  elegant  trifling  within  which 
most  of  the  Italian  scholars  were  confined,  and  used  the 
New  Learning  for  modern  purposes.  Humanism  taught 
him  to  think  imperially  in  the  best  fashion  of  ancient 
Rome,  to  see  that  great  moral  ideas  ought  to  rule  in  the 
government  of  men.  It  filled  him  with  a  generous 
indignation  at  the  evils  which  flowed  from  an  abuse  of 
absolute  and  arbitrary  power.  The  young  scholar  (he 
was  only  three-and-twenty)  attacked  the  governmental 
abuses  of  the  times  with  a  boldness  which  revived  the  best 
traditions  of  Roman  statesmanship.  He  denounced  venal 
judges  who  made  "justice  a  public  merchandise."  He 
declared  that  princes  who  slew  their  people  or  subjected 
them  to  wholesale  persecution  were  not  legitimate  rulers, 


WHAT    REFORMED   CHURCHES    OWED   TO   LUTHER       13 

but  brigands,  and  that  brigands  were  the  enemies  of  the 
whole  human  race.  At  a  time  when  persecution  was 
prevalent  everywhere,  the  Commentary  of  the  young 
Humanist  pleaded  for  tolerance  in  language  as  lofty  as 
Milton  employed  in  his  Areopagitica.  He  was  not  blind 
to  the  defects  of  the  stoical  morality  displayed  in  the 
book  he  commented  upon.  He  contrasted  the  stoical 
indifference  with  Christian  sympathy,  and  stoical  in- 
dividualism with  the  thought  of  Christian  society;  but 
he  seized  upon  and  made  his  own  the  loftier  moral  ideas 
in  Stoicism,  and  applied  them  to  public  life.  Luther  was 
great,  none  greater,  in  holding  up  the  liberty  of  the 
Christian  man ;  but  there  he  halted,  or  advanced  beyond 
it  with  very  faltering  step.  Humanism  taught  Calvin 
the  claims  and  the  duties  of  the  Christian  society;  he 
proclaimed  them  aloud,  and  his  thoughts  spread  through- 
out that  portion  of  the  Eeformation  which  followed  his 
leadership  and  accepted  his  principles.  The  Holy 
Scriptures,  St.  Augustine,  and  the  imperial  ethics  of  the 
old  Roman  Stoicism  coming  through  Humanism,  were  a 
trinity  of  influence  on  all  the  Eeformed  Churches. 

The  Eeformation  in  Spain  and  Italy  was  only  a  brief 
episode;  but  in  its  shortlived  existence  in  these  lands, 
Humanism  was  one  of  the  greatest  forces  supporting  it 
and  giving  it  strength.  In  both  countries  the  young  life 
was  quenched  in  the  blood  of  martyrs.  So  quickly  did 
it  pass,  that  it  seems  surprising  to  learn  that  Erasmus 
confidently  expected  that  Spain  would  be  the  land  to 
accomplish  the  Eeformation  without  "  tumult "  which  he  so 
long  looked  forward  to  and  expected ;  that  the  Scriptures 
were  read  throughout  the  Spanish  peninsula,  and  that 
women  vied  with  men  in  knowledge  of  their  contents, 
during  the  earlier  part  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

§  6,   What  the  Reformed  Churches  owed  to  Luther. 

There  was,  then,  a  Eeformation  movement  which  in 
its  earliest  beginnings  and  in  its  final  outcome  was  quite 


14  INTRODUCTION 

distinct  from  that  under  the  leadership  of  Luther ;  but  it 
would  be  erroneous  to  say  that  it  was  altogether  outside 
Luther's  influence,  and  that  it  owed  little  or  nothing  to 
the  great  German  [Reformer.  It  is  vain  to  speculate  on 
what  might  have  been,  or  to  ask  whether  the  undoubted 
movements  making  for  reformation  in  lands  outside 
Germany  would  have  come  to  fruition  had  not  Luther's 
trumpet-call  sounded  over  Europe.  It  is  enough  to 
state  what  did  actually  occur.  If  it  cannot  be  said  that 
the  beginnings  of  the  Keformation  in  every  land  came 
from  Luther,  it  can  scarcely  be  denied  that  he  gave  to  his 
contemporaries  the  inspiration  of  courage  and  of  assured 
conviction.  He  delivered  men  from  the  fear  of  priest- 
craft; he  taught  men,  in  a  way  that  no  other  did, 
that  redemption  was  not  a  secret  science  practised  by  the 
priests  within  an  institution  called  the  Church ;  that  all 
believers  had  the  privilege  of  direct  access  to  the  very 
presence  of  God ;  and  that  the  very  thought  of  a  priest- 
hood who  alone  could  mediate  between  God  and  man  was 
both  superfluous  and  irreconcilable  with  the  truest  instincts 
of  the  Christian  religion.  His  teaching  had  a  sounding 
board  of  dramatic  environment  which  compelled  men  to 
listen,  to  attend,  to  be  impressed,  to  understand,  and  to 
follow. 

He  had  been  and  was  a  deeply  pious  man,  with  the 
piety  of  the  type  most  esteemed  by  his  contemporaries, 
and  therefore  easily  understood  and  sympathised  with  by 
the  common  man.  His  piety  had  driven  him  into  the 
convent,  as  then  seemed  both  natural  and  necessary. 
Inside  the  monastery  he  had  lived  the  life  of  a  "young 
saint " — so  his  fellow  monks  believed,  when,  in  the  fashion 
of  the  day  and  of  their  class,  they  boasted  that  they  had 
among  them  one  destined  to  revive  again  the  best  type 
of  mediaeval  saintship.  No  coarse,  vulgar  sins  of  the  flesh, 
common  enough  at  the  time  and  easily  condoned,  smirched 
his  young  life.  When  he  attained  to  peace  in  believing, 
he  had  no  doubt  of  his  vocation ;  no  sxtdden  wrench  tore* 
him  away  from  the  approved  religious  life  of  his  time ;  no 


WHAT    REFORMED   CHURCHES   OWED   TO   LUTHER      15 

intellectual  doubt  separated  him  from  the  beliefs  of  his 
Church.  His  very  imperviousness  to  the  intellectual 
liberalising  tendencies  of  Humanism  made  him  all  the 
more  fit  to  be  a  trusted  religious  leader.  He  went 
forward  step  by  step  with  such  a  slow,  sure  foot-tread 
that  the  common  man  could  see  and  follow.  "When  he 
did  come  forward  as  a  Eeformer  he  did  not  run  amuck  at 
things  in  general.  He  felt  compelled  to  attack  the  one 
portion  of  the  popular  religious  life  of  the  times  which 
all  men  who  gave  the  slightest  thought  to  religion  felt  to 
be  a  gross  abuse.  The  way  he  dealt  with  it  revealed  that 
he  was  the  great  religious  genius  of  his  age — an  age  which 
was  imperatively  if  confusedly  calling  for  reform  within 
the  sphere  of  religion. 

If  to  be  original  means  simply  to  be  the  first  to  see 
and  make  known  a  single  truth  or  a  fresh  aspect  of  a 
truth,  it  is  possible  to  contest  the  claim  of  Luther  to  be 
an  original  thinker.  It  would  not  be  difficult  to  point 
out  anticipations  of  almost  every  separate  truth  which 
he  taught  to  his  generation.  To  take  two  only — 
"Wessel  had  denounced  indulgences  in  language  so  similar 
to  Luther's,  that,  when  the  Eeformer  read  it  long  after  the 
publication  of  the  Theses,  he  could  say  that  people  might 
well  imagine  that  he  had  simply  borrowed  from  the  old 
Dutch  theologian ;  and  Lefevre  d'Etaples  had  taught  the 
doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  before  it  had  flashed  on 
Luther's  soul  with  all  the  force  of  a  revelation.  Eut  if 
originality  be  the  gift  to  seize,  to  combine  into  one 
organic  whole,  separate  isolated  truths,  to  see  their  bearing 
upon  the  practical  religious  life  of  all  men,  educated  and 
ignorant,  to  use  the  new  light  to  strip  the  common 
religious  life  of  all  paralysing  excrescences,  to  simplify 
it  and  to  make  it  clear  that  the  sum  and  essence  of 
Christianity  is  "unwavering  trust  of  the  heart  in  Him 
who  has  given  Himself  to  us  in  Christ  Jesus  as  our 
Father,  personal  assurance  of  faith  because  Christ  with 
His  work  undertakes  our  cause,"  and  to  do  all  this  with 
the  tenderest  sympathy  for  every  true  dumb  religious 


16  INTRODUCTION 

instinct  which  had  made  men  wander  away  from  the 
simplicity  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  then  Luther  stands 
alone  in  his  day  and  generation,  unapproachable  by  any 
other. 

Hence  it  was  that  to  the  common  people  in  every  land 
in  Europe  up  till  about  1540,  when  Calvin's  individuality 
began  to  make  itself  felt,  Luther  represented  the  Eeforma- 
tion ;  and  all  who  accepted  the  new  teaching  were  known 
as  Lutherans,  whether  in  England,  the  Low  Countries, 
Prance,  or  Trench  speaking  Switzerland.1 

Ecclesiastical  historians  of  the  Reformed  Church 
from  the  sixteenth  century  downward  have  often  been 
inclined  to  share*  Luther's  supremacy  with  ZwingLL 
The  Swiss  Eeformer  was  gifted  with  many  qualities 
which-  Luther  lacked.  He  stood  in  freer  relation 
to  the  doctrines  and  practices  of  the  mediaeval  Church, 
and  his  scheme  of  theology  was  perhaps  wider  and 
truer  than  Luther's.  He  had  a  keener  intellectual  insight, 
and  was  quicker  to  discern  the  true  doctrinal  tendencies 
of  their  common  religious  verities.  But  the  way  in  which 
he  regarded  indulgences,  and  his  manner  of  protesting 
against  them,  showed  his  great  inferiority  to  Luther  as  a 
religious  guide. 

*  Oh  the  folly  of  it ! "  said  Zwingli  with  his  master 
Erasmus, — "  the  crass,  unmitigated  stupidity  of  it  all ! "  and 
they  scorned  it,  and  laughed  at  it,  and  attacked  it  with  the 
light  keen  shafts  of  raillery  and  derisive  wit.  "  Oh  the 
pity  of  it ! "  said  Luther ;  and  he  turned  men  travelling  by 
the  wrong  road  on  their  quest  for  pardon  (a  real  quest 
for  them)  into  the  right  path.  Zwingli  never  seemed 
to  see  that  under  the  purchase  of  indulgences,  the  tramp- 
ing on  pilgrimages  from  shrine  to  shrine,  the  kissing, 
reverencing,  and  adoring  of  relics,  there  was  a  real 

1  "William  Farel,  a  devoted  Zwinglian,  was  called  a  "  Lutheran  preacher  M 
by  the  authorities  of  Freiburg  (Herminjard,  Correspondence,  ii.  205tt.)»  and 
the  teaching  of  himself  and  his  colleagues  was  denounced  as  the  "  Lutheran 
heresy."  This  was  the  popular  view.  Educated  and  reforming  Frenchmen 
like  Lefevre  discriminated:  they  had  no  great  liking  for  Luther,  and 
admired  Zwlugli  (ibid.  i.  209 ft.). 


WHAT    REFORMED    CHURCHES   OWED   TO   LUTHER       17 

inarticulate  cry  for  pardon  of  sins  felt  if  not  vividly 
repented  of.  Luther  knew  it,  and  sympathised  with  it. 
He  was  a  man  of  the  people,  not  merely  because  he  was  a 
peasant's  son  and  had  studied  at  a  burgher  University,  but 
because  he  had  shared  the  religion  of  the  common  people. 
He  had  felt  with  them  that  the  repeated  visits  of  the 
plague,  the  new  mysterious  diseases,  the  dread  of  the 
Turks,  were  punishments  sent  by  God  because  of  the  sins 
of  the  generation.  He  had  gone  through  it  all ;  plunged 
more  deeply  in  the  terror,  writhed  more  hopelessly  under 
the  wrath  of  God,  wandered  farther  on  the  wrong  path  in 
his  quest  for  pardon,  and  at  last  had  seen  the  "Beatific 
Vision."  The  deepest  and  truest  sympathy  with  fellow- 
men  and  the  vision  of  God  are  needed  to  make  a  Eeformer 
of  the  first  rank,  and  Luther  had  both  as  no  other  man  had, 
during  the  first  quarter  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

So  men  listened  to  him  all  over  Europe  wherever 
there  had  been  a  stirring  of  the  heart  for  reformation, 
and  it  would  be  hard  to  say  where  there  had  been  none. 
Czechs,  Hungarians,  and  Poles  in  the  east ;  Spaniards, 
Englishmen,  Frenchmen,  Dutch,  and  Scots  in  the  west; 
Swedes  in  the  north,  and  Italians  in  the  south — all 
welcomed,  and  read,  and  were  moved  by  what  Luther 
wrote.  First  the  Theses,  then  sermons  and  tracts,  then 
the  trumpet  call  To  the  Nobility  of  the  German  Nation 
and  the  Prceludium  to  the  Babylonian  Captivity  of  the 
Church  of  Christ,  and,  above  all,  his  booklet  On  the 
Liberty  of  a  Christian  Man.  As  men  read,  what  had 
been  only  a  hopeful  but  troubled  dream  of  the  night 
became  a  vision  in  the  light  of  day.  They  heard  pro- 
claimed aloud  in  clear  unfaltering  speech  what  they 
had  scarcely  dared  to  whisper  to  themselves.  Fond  and 
devout  imaginations  became  religious  certainties.  They 
risked  all  to  get  possession  of  the  sayings  of  this  "  man  of 
God."  Cautious,  dour  Scotch  burghers  ventured  ship  and 
cargo  for  the  sake  of  the  little  quarto  tracts  hid  in  the 
bales  of  cloth  which  came  to  the  ports  of  Dundee  and 
Leith.  Oxford  and  Cambridge  students  passed  them 


18  INTRODUCTION 

from  hand  to  hand  in  spite  of  Wolsey's  proclamations  and 
Warham's  precautions.  Luther's  writings  were  eagerly 
studied  in  Paris  by  town  and  University  as  early  as  May 
15 19.1  Spanish  merchants  hought  Luther's  books  at  the 
Frankfurt  Fair,  spent  some  of  their  hard  won  profits  in 
getting  them  translated  and  printed  in  Spanish,  and 
carried  them  over  the  Pyrenees  on  their  pack  mules. 
Under  the  influence  of  these  writings  the  Reformation  took 
shape,  was  something  more  than  the  devout  imagination 
of  a  few  pious  thinkers,  and  became  an  endeavour  to  give 
expression  to  common  religious  certainties  in  change  of 
creed,  institutions,  and  worship.  Thus  Luther  helped  the 
Eeformation  in  every  land.  The  actual  beginnings  in 
England,  France,  the  Netherlands,  and  elsewhere  had  come 
into  existence  years  before  Luther  had  become  known ;  it 
is  possible  that  the  movements  might  have  come  to  fruition 
apart  from  his  efforts ;  but  the  influence  of  his  writings  was 
like  that  of  the  sun  when  it  quickens  and  makes  the  seed 
sprout  that  has  been  "  happed  "  in  a  tilled  and  sown  field. 

§  7.  National  Characteristics. 

It  was  not  that  the  Reformation  in  any  of  these 
countries  was  to  become  Lutheran  in  the  end,  or  had  a 
Lutheran  stage  of  development.  The  number  of  genuine 
Lutherans  outside  Germany  and  Scandinavia  was  very 
smalL  Here  and  there  a  stray  one  was  to  be  found,  like 
Dr.  Barnes  in  England  or  Louis  Berquin  in  France.  One 
of  the  deepest  principles  of  the  great  [Reformer's  teaching 
itself  checked  the  idea  of  a  purely  Lutheran  Eeformation 

1  Peter  Tschudi,  writing  to  Beatus  Ehenanus  from  Paris  (May  17th,  1519) 
says:  "Reliqui,  quod  equidem  literis  dignum  censeam,  nil  superesl,  quam 
M.  Lutheri  opera  ab  universa  eruditorurn  oohorte  obviis  ulnis  excipi,  etiam 
iis  qui  minimum  sapiunt  plausibilia "  (Herminjard,  Correspondence  des 
Reformateurs  dans  les  pays  de  langue  franqaise,  2nd  ed.  i.  46).  In  Nov. 
1520,  Glareanus  wrote  to  Zwingli  that  Paris  was  excited  over  the  Leipzig 
Disputation  ;  and  Bulaeus  shows  that  twenty  copies  «F  a  pamphlet,  entitled 
Disputatio  inter  egregios  viros  et  doctores  Joa.  Eclcium  et  M.  Zutherum, 
arrived  in  Paris  on  Jan.  20th,  1520  (ibid.  62,  63  w.)« 


NATIONAL   CHARACTERISTICS  19 

which  would  embrace  the  whole  Reformation  Church. 
He  taught  that  the  practical  exercise  of  faith  ought  to 
manifest  itself  within  the  great  institutions  of  human 
life  which  have  their  origin  in  God — in  marriage,  the 
family,  the  calling,  and  the  State,  in  the  ordinary  life  we 
lead  with  its  environment.  Nations  have  their  character 
and  characteristics  as  well  as  individual  men,  and  they 
mould  in  natural  ways  the  expression  in  creed  and 
institution  of  the  religious  certainties  shared  by  all  The 
Reformation  in  England  was  based  on  the  same  spiritual 
facts  and  forces  which  were  at  work  in  France,  Germany, 
and  the  Netherlands,  but  each  land  had  its  own  ways  of 
embodying  them.  It  is  interesting  to  note  how  national 
habits,  memories,  and  even  prejudices  compelled  the  external 
embodiment  to  take  very  varying  shapes,  and  force  the 
historian  to  describe  the  Reformation  in  each  country  as 
something  by  itself. 

The  new  spiritual  life  in  England  took  a  shape 
distinctly  marked  out  for  it  by  the  almost  forgotten 
reformatory  movement  under  Wiclif  which  had  been 
native  to  the  soil.  Scotland  might  have  been  expected 
to  follow  the  lead  of  England,  and  bring  her  ecclesiastical 
reconstruction  into  harmony  with  that  of  her  new  and 
powerful  ally.  The  English  alliance  was  the  great 
political  fact  of  the  Scottish  Reformation,  and  leading 
statesmen  in  both  countries  desired  the  still  nearer 
approach  which  conformity  in  the  organisation  of  the 
Churches  could  not  fail  to  foster.  But  the  memory  of  the 
old  French  alliance  was  too  strong  for  Cecil  and  Lethington, 
and  Scotland  took  her  methods  of  Church  government  from 
France  (not  from  Geneva),  and  drifted  farther  and  farther 
away  from  the  model  of  the  English  settlement.  The 
fifteenth  century  War  of  the  Public  Weal  repeated  itself  in 
the  Wars  of  Religion  in  France ;  and  in  the  Edict  of  Nantes 
the  Reformed  Church  was  offered  and  accepted  guarantees 
for  her  independence  such  as  a  feudal  prince  might  have 
demanded.  The  old  political  local  independence  which  had 
characterised  the  Low  Countries  in  the  later  Middle  Ages 


20  INTRODUCTION 

reasserted  itself  in  the  ecclesiastical  arrangements  of  the 
Netherlands.  The  civic  republics  of  Switzerland  demanded 
and  received  an  ecclesiastical  form  of  government  which 
suited  the  needs  of  their  social  and  political  life. 

Yet  amidst  all  this  diversity  there  was  the  prevailing 
sense  of  an  underlying  unity,  and  the  knowledge  that  each 
national  Church  was  part  of  the  Catholic  Church  Eeformed 
was  keener  than  among  the  Lutheran  Churches.  Protest- 
ant England  in  the  time  of  Edward  vi.  welcomed  and  sup- 
ported refugees  banished  by  the  Augsburg  Interim  from 
Strassburg.  Frankfurt  received  and  provided  for  families 
who  fled  from  the  Marian  persecutions  in  England. 
Geneva  became  a  city  of  refuge  for  oppressed  Protestants 
from  every  land,  and  these  strangers  frequently  added  quite 
a  third  to  her  population  The  feeling  of  fraternity  was 
maintained,  as  in  the  days  of  the  early  Church,  by  constant 
interchange  of  letters  and  messengers,  and  correspondence 
gave  a  sense  of  unity  which  it  was  impossible  to  embody 
in  external  political  organisation.  The  sense  of  a  common- 
danger  was  also  a  wonderful  bond  of  kinship ;  and  the 
feeling  that  Philip  of  Spain  was  always  plotting  their 
destruction,  softened  inter-ecclesiastical  jealousies.  The 
same  sort  of  events  occurred  in  all  the  Churches  at  almost 
the  same  times.  The  Colloquy  of  Westminster  (1559)  was 
separated  from  the  Colloquy  of  Poissy  (1561)  by  an 
interval  of  two  years  only,  and  the  same  questions  were 
discussed  at  both.  Queen  Elizabeth  openly  declared  her- 
self a  Protestant  by  partaking  of  the  communion  in  both 
"kinds"  at  Easter,  1559  ;  and  on  the  same  day  Antoino  de 
Bourbon,  King  of  Navarre,  made  the  same  profession  in  the 
same  way  at  Pau  in  the  south  of  France.  Mary  of  Guise 
resolved  that  the  same  festival  should  see  the  Scots  united 
under  the  old  faith,  and  thus  started  the  overt  rebellion 
which  ended  in  Scotland  becoming  a  Protestant  nation. 

The  course  of  the  Keforrnation  in  each  country  must  bo 
described  separately,  and  yet  it  is  the  one  story  with 
differences  due  to  the  accidents  of  national  temperaments, 
memories,  and  political  institutions. 


CHAPTER  IL 

THE  REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND   UNDER 
ZWINGLL 

§  1.  T/ie  political  Condition  of  Switzerland.1 

SWITZERLAND  in  the  sixteenth  century  was  like  no  other 
country  in  Europe.  It  was  as  divided  as  Germany  or  Italy, 
and  yet  it  had  a  unity  which  they  could  not  boast.  It  was 
a  confederation  or  little  republic  of  communes  and  towns  of 
the  primitive  Teutonic  type,  in  which  the  executive  power 
was  vested  in  the  community.  The  various  cantons  were 
all  independent,  but  they  were  banded  together  in  a  com- 
mon league,  and  they  had  a  federal  flag — a  white  cross  on 
a  red  ground,  which  bore  the  motto,  "  Each  for  all,  and  all , 
for  each." 

The  separate  members  of  the  Federation  had  come  into 
existence  in  a  great  variety  of  ways,  and  all  retained  the 
distinctive  marks  of  their  earlier  history.  The  beginnings 
go  back  to  the  thirteenth  century,  when  the  three  Forest 
cantons,  Schwyz,  Uri,  and  Unterwalden,  having  freed  them- 
selves from  the  dominion  of  their  feudal  lords,  formed 
themselves  into  a  Perpetual  League  (1291),  in  which  they 
pledged  themselves  to  help  each  other  to  maintain  the 
liberty  they  had  won.  After  the  battle  of  Morgarten  they 
renewed  the  League  at  Brunnen  (1315),  promising  again  to 
aid  each,  other  against  all  usurping  lords.  Hapsburg,  the 
'cradle  of  the  Imperial  House  of  Austria,  lies  on  the  south- 

,*  A.  Eilliet,  Les  Origines  de  la,  Confederation  Suisse:  Histoire  et  Lfyende 
(Geneva,  1869);  J.  Dierauer,  Geschichte  der  schweizertsehen  Mdgenossen- 
sekaft  (Gotha,  1890). 

21 


22  THE  'REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

east  bank  of  the  river  Aare,  and  the  dread  of  this  great 
feudal  family  strengthened  the  bonds  of  the  League ;  while 
the  victories  of  the  independent  peasants  over  the  House  of 
Austria,  and  later  over  the  Duke  of  Burgundy,  increased  its 
reputation.  The  three  cantons  grew  to  be  thirteen — 
Schwyz,  "On,  TJnterwalden,  Luzern,  Zurich,  Bern,  Glarus, 
Zug,  Freiburg,  Basel,  Schaffhausen,  Solothurn,  and 
Appenzell.  Other  districts,  without  becoming  members  of 
the  League,  sought  its  protection,  such  as  the  Valais  and  the 
town  and  country  under  the  Abbey  of  St.  Gallen.  Other 
leagues  were  formed  on  its  model  among  the  peasantry  of 
the  Bhsetian  Alps — in  1396  the  League  of  ike  House  of 
G-od  (Lia  da,  Ca'  De) — at  the  head  of  which  was  the 
Church  at  Ohur;  in  1424  the  Grautunden  (Lia  Grischa 
or  Gfray  League) ;  in  1436  the  League  of  the  Ten  Jurisdic- 
tions (Lia  della  deseh  jDretturas).  These  three  united  in 
1471  to  make  the  Three  Perpetual  Leagues  of  Rhcetia. 
They  were  in  close  alliance  with  the  Swiss  cantons  from 
the  fifteenth  century,  but  did  not  become  actual  members  of 
the  Swiss  Confederacy  until  1803.  The  Confederacy  also 
made  some  conquests,  and  the  districts  conquered  were 
generally  governed  on  forms  of  mutual  agreement  between 
several  cantons — a  complicated  system  which  led  to  many 
bickerings,  and  intensified  the  quarrels  which  religion  gave 
rise  to  in  the  sixteenth  century. 

Each  of  these  thirteen  cantons  preserved  its  own  inde- 
pendence and  its  own  mode  of  government.  Their  political 
organisation  was  very  varied,  and  dependent  to  a  large 
extent  on  their  past  history.  The  Forest  cantons  were 
communes  of  peasant  proprietors,  dwelling  in  inaccessible 
valleys,  and  their  Diet  was  an  assembly  of  all  the  male 
heads  of  families.  Zurich  was  a  manufacturing  and  com- 
mercial town  which  had  grown  up  under  the  protection  of 
an  old  ecclesiastical  settlement  whose  foundation  went  back 
to  an  age  beyond  that  of  Charles  the  Great.  Bern  was 
originally  a  hamlet,  nestling  under  the  fortified  keep  of  an 
old  feudal  family.  In  Zurich  the  nobles  made  one  of  the 
"  guilds  "  of  the  town,  and  the  constitution  was  thoroughly 


THE   POLITICAL    CONDITION    OF   SWITZERLAND      23 

democratic.  Bern,  on  the  other  hand,  was  an  aristocratic 
republic.  But  in  all,  the  power  in  the  last  resort  belonged 
to  the  people,  who  were  all  freemen  with  full  rights  of 
citizenship. 

The  Swiss  had  little  experience  of  episcopal  government. 
Their  relations  with  the  Papacy  had  been  entirely  political 
or  commercial,  the  main  article  of  commerce  being  soldiers 
to  form  the  Pope's  bodyguard,  and  infantry  for  his  Italian 
wars,  and  the  business  had  been  transacted  through  Legates. 
Most  of  the  territory  of  Switzerland  was  ecclesiastically 
divided  between  the  archiepiscopal  provinces  of  Mainz  and 
Besancjon,  and  the  river  Aare  was  the  boundary  between 
them.  The  division  went  back  to  the  beginning  of  Christi- 
anity in  the  land.  The  part  of  Switzerland  which  lay  to- 
wards France  had  been  Christianised  by  Eoman  or  Gallic 
missionaries  ;  while  the  rest,  which  sloped  towards  Germany, 
had  been  won  to  Christianity  by  Irish  preachers!  Basel 
and  Lausanne  figure  as  bishoprics  under  Besan<jon ;  while 
Constance,  a  bishopric  under  Mainz,  asserted  episcopal  rights 
over  Zurich  and  the  neighbourhood.  The  rugged,  mountain- 
ous part  of  the  country  was  vaguely  claimed  for  the  pro- 
vince of  Mainz  without  being  definitely  assigned  to  any 
diocese.  This  contributed  to  make  the  Swiss  people  singu- 
larly independent  in  all  ecclesiastical  matters,  and  taught 
them  to  manage  their  Church  affairs  for  themselves.  , 

Even  in  Zurich,  which  acknowledged  the  ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Constance,  the  Council 
insisted  on  its  right  of  supervising  Church  properties,  and 
convents  were  under  State  inspection. 

In  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  intercourse 
with  their  neighbours  was  changing  the  old  simple  manners 
of  the  Swiss.  Their  repeated  victories  over  Charles  the 
Bold  of  Burgundy  had  led  to  the  belief  that  the  Swiss 
infantry  was  the  best  in  Europe,  and  nations  at  war  with 
each  other  were  eager  to  hire  Swiss  troops.  The  custom 
had  gradually  grown  up  among  the  Swiss  cantons  of 
hiring  out  soldiers  to  those  who  paid  best  for  them.  These 
mercenaries,  demoralised  by  making  merchandise  of  their 


24  THE   REFORM ATION   DST  SWITZERLAND 

lives  in  quarrels  not  their  own,  and  by  spending  their  pay 
in  riotous  living  when  they  returned  to  their  native 
valleys,  were  corrupting  the  population  of  the  Confederacy. 
The  system  was  demoralising  in  another  way.  The  two 
great  Powers  that  trafficked  in  Swiss  infantry  were 
France  and  the  Papacy ;  and  the  Trench  king  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  Pope  on  the  other,  not  merely  kept  per- 
manent agents  in  the  various  Swiss  cantons,  but  gave 
pensions  to  leading  citizens  to  induce  them  to  persuade 
the  canton  to  which  they  belonged  to  hire  soldiers  to  the 
one  side  or  the  other.  Zwingli,  in  his  earlier  days, 
believed  that  the  Papacy  was  the  only  Power  with  which 
the  Swiss  ought  to  ally  themselves,  and  received  a  papal 
pension  for  many  years. 

§  2.  ZwingU's  Youth  and  Education* 

Huldreich  (Ulrich)  Zwingli,  the  Eeformer  of  Switzer- 
land, was  born  on  January  1st,  1484  (fifty-two  days  after 
Luther),  in  the  hamlet  of  Wildhaus  (or  Wildenhaus), 
lying  in  the  upper  part  of  the  Toggenburg  valley,  raised 
so  high  above  sea-level  (3600  feet)  that  fruits  refuse  to 
ripen.  It  lies  so  exactly  on  the  central  watershed  of 

1  SOTTKCES  :  0.  Myconius,  "  Vita  Huldrici  Zwinglii  "  (in  Neander's  Vitce 
Quatuor  Reformatorum,  Berlin,  1841) ;  H.  Bullinger,  Reformationsgescliichte 
(Frauenfeld,  1838-40);  Johann  Salat,  Chronik  der  schweizeriscken  Reforma- 
tion von  deren  Anfangen  "bis  1584  (vol.  i.  of  Archiv  fur  schwefaerisclie 
Heformationsgeschichte,  Solotlmra,  1868) ;  Kessler,  SatiboM  (ed.  by  Egli, 
St.  Gall,  1902);  Strickler,  Actensamrnlung  zur  schweizerischen  JZeformations- 
geschithte  in  den  Jaliren  1521-3%  (Zurich.,  1877-84) ;  Egli,  Actensammlung 
zur  Geschicfite  der  Zuricher  Reformation,  1519-88  (Zurich,  1879) ;  W.  Gisi, 
Adenstiicke  mr  Schweizergeschichte  der  Jahre  15%l-28  (vol.  xv.  of  Archiv 
fur  die  schweizer.  Geschichte),  pp.  285-318  ;  Herrainjard,  Correspondence  de$ 
jRgformateurs  dans  lespwys  de  langue  franqaise  (Geneva,  166-93) ;  StUholin 
JBriefe  a/us  der  Reformatio'nszeit  (Basel,  1887). 

LATER  BOOKS  :  Stahelin,  Huldreich  Zwingli :  sein  Leben  imd  Wirkcn 
nach  den  Quellen  dargestellt,  2  vols.  (Basel,  1895-97) ;  Mdrikofer,  Ulrich 
JZwingU  nach  den  urkundlichen  Quellen,  2  vols.  (Leipzig,  1867-69) ;  ft.  M. 
Jackson,  Euldreich  Zwingli,  1484-1681  (New  York,  1901);  Cwnbridye 
Modern  History,  n.  x.  (Cambridge,  1903) ;  Kuchat,  ffistoire  de  la,  2t<ff<jrma- 
tion  de  la  Suisse,  ed.  by  Vulliemin,  7  vols,  (Paris,  1835-38). 


ZWINGLl's   YOUTH    AND    EDUCATION  25 

Europe,  that  the  rain  which  falls  on  the  one  side  of  the  ridge 
of  the  red-tiled  church  roof  goes  into  a  streamlet  which 
feeds  the  Danube,  and  that  which  falls  on  the  other  finds 
its  way  to  the  Rhine.  He  came  third  in  a  large  family  of 
eight  sons  and  two  daughters.  His  father,  also  called 
Huldreich,  was  the  headman  of  the  commune,  and  his 
uncle,  Bartholomew  Zwingli,  was  the  parish  priest.  His 
education  was  superintended  by  Bartholomew,  who  became 
Dean  of  Wesen  in  1487,  and  took  the  small  Huldreich 
with  him  to  his  new  sphere  of  work.  The  boy  was  sent 
to  the  school  in  Wesen,  where  he  made  rapid  progress. 
Bartholomew  Zwingli  was  somewhat  of  a  scholar  himself. 
"When  he  discovered  that  his  nephew  was  a  precocious  boy, 
he  determined  to  give  him  as  good  an  education  as  was 
possible,  and  sent  him  to  Basel  (Klein-Basel,  on  the  east 
bank  of  the  Ehine)  to  a  famous  school  taught,  by  the  gentle 
scholar,  Gregory  Buenzli  (1494-98). 

In  four  years  the  lad  had  outgrown  the  teacher's  powers 
of  instruction,  and  young  Zwingli  was  sent  to  Bern  to  a 
school  taught  by  the  Humanist  Heinrich  Wolflru  (Lupulus), 
who  was  half  a  follower  of  Erasmus  and  half  a  Eeformer. 
He  was  passionately  fond  of  music,  and  lodged  in  one 
of  the  Dominican  convents  in  the  town  which  was  famed 
for  the  care  bestowed  on  musical  education.  Zwingli  was 
so  carried  away  by  his  zeal  for  the  study,  that  he  had  some 
thoughts  of  becoming  a  monk  merely  to  gratify  his 
inusical  tastes.  His  family,  who  had  no  desire  to  see  him 
enter  a  monastery,  removed  him  from  Bern  and  sent  him 
to  the  University  of  Vienna,  where  he  spent  two  years 
(1500-1502).  There  he  had  for  friends  and  fellow- 
students,  Joachim  von  Watt *  (Vadianus),  Heinrich  Loriti 2 

1  Joachim  de  Watt,  a  native  of  St.  Gallen  (b.  1484,  December  SO)  was 
a  distinguished  scholar.     He  became  successively  physician,  member  of 
council,  and  burgomaster  in  his  native  town,  and  did  much  to  establish 
the  Reformation  ;  he  was  a  well-known  author,  and  wrote  several  theological 
works. 

2  Heinrich  Loriti  was  the  most  distinguished  of  all  the  Swiss  Humanists. 
He  studied  successively  at  Bern,  Vienna,  and  Koln,  and  attained  the  barren 
honour  of  being  made  Court-poet  to  the  Emperor  Maximilian.     At  Base], 


26  THE   REFORMATION   IN  SWITZERLAND 

of  Glarus  (Glareanus),  Johann  Heigerlin1  of  Leutkirch 
(Faber),  and  Johann  Meyer  of  Eck,  the  most  notable  of 
all  Luther's  opponents.  In  1502  he  returned  to  Switzer- 
land and  matriculated  in  the  University  of  Basel.  He 
became  B.A.  in  1504  and  M.A.  in  1506,  and  in  the  same 
year  became  parish  priest  of  Glarus. 

The  childhood  and  youth  of  Zwingli  form  a  striking 
contrast  to  Luther's  early  years.  He  enjoyed  the  rude 
plenty  of  a  well-to-do  Swiss  farmhouse,  and  led  a  joyous 
young  life.  He  has  told  us  how  the  family  gathered  in 
the  stube  in  the  long  winter  evenings,  and  how  his  grand- 
mother kept  the  children  entranced  with  her  tales  from 
the  Bible  and  her  wonderful  stories  of  the  saints.  The 
family  were  all  musical,  and  they  sang  patriotic  folk-songs, 
recording  in  rude  verse  the  glories  of  Morgarten,  Sempadh, 
and  the  victories  over  the  tyrant  of  Burgundy.  "  When  I 
was  a  child,"  says  Zwingli,  "if  anyone  said  a  word 
against  our  Fatherland,  it  put  my  back  up  at  once."  He 
was  trained  to  be  a  patriot.  "From  boyhood  I  have 
shown  so  great,  eager,  and  sincere  a  love  for  our  honour- 
able Confederacy  that  I  trained  myself  diligently  in  every 
act  and  discipline  to  this  end."  His  uncle  Bartholomew  was 
an  admirer  of  the  New  Learning,  and  the  boy  was  nurtured 
in  everything  that  went  to  make  a  Humanist,  with  all  its 
virtues  and  failings.  He  was  educated,  one  might  almost 
say,  in  the  art  of  enjoying  the  present  without  discriminat- 
ing much  between  what  was  good  and  evil  in  surrounding 
society.  He  was  trained  to  take  life  as  it  came.  No 

where  lie  first  settled,  lie  kept  a  boarding  school  for  boys  who  wished  to 
study  the  classics,  and  in  1517  he  transferred  himself  and  about  twenty 
young  Switzers,  his  pupils,  to  Paris.  He  modelled  his  school,  he  was 
pleased  to  think,  on  the  lines  of  the  Roman  Republic,  was  Consul  hiiusolt, 
had  a  Senate,  a  praetor,  and  meetings  of  Oomitia.  He  remained  a  fast 
friend  of  Zwingli. 

1  Johann  Heigerlin  (Faber)  remained  a  steadfast  Romanist.  He  became 
vicar-general  to  the  Bishop  of  Constance,  and  as  such  was  an  antagonist  of 
Zwingli.  He  ended  his  days  as  Bishop  of  Vienna.  Ho  wiote  much 
against  Luther,  and  was  known  as  the  "  hammer  of  the  Lutherans."  Along 
with  Eck  and  Cochleeus,  he  was  the  distinguished  champion  of  thu  Romanist 
cause  in  Germany. 


AT   GLARTJS    AND    EINSIEDELX  27 

great  sense  of  sin  troubled  his  youthful  years.  He  never 
shuddered  at  the  wrathful  face  of  Jesus,  the  Judge, 
gazing  at  him  from  blazoned  church  window.  If  he  was 
once  tempted  for  a  moment  to  become  a  monk,  it  was  in 
order  to  enjoy  musical  society,  not  to  quench  the  sin  that 
was  burning  him  within,  and  to  win  the  pardon  of  an 
angry  God.  He  took  his  ecclesiastical  calling  in  a  careless, 
professional  way.  He  belonged  to  a  family  connected 
on  both  sides  with  the  clergy,  and  he  followed  the  family 
arrangement.  Until  far  on  in  life  the  question  of  per- 
sonal piety  did  not  seem  to  trouble  him  much,  and  he 
never  belonged,  like  Luther  and  Calvin,  to  the  type  of 
men  who  are  the  leaders  in  a  revival  of  personal  religion. 
He  became  a  Reformer  because  he  was  a  Humanist,  with 
a  liking  for  Augustinian  theology;  and  his  was  such  a 
frank,  honest  nature  that  he  could  not  see  cheats  and 
shams  done  in  the  name  of  religion  without  denouncing  them. 
To  the  end  of  his  days  he  was  led  mure  by  his  intellect 
than  by  the  promptings  of  the  heart,  and  in  his  earlier  years 
he  was  able  to  combine  a  deep  sense  of  responsibility  about 
most  things  with  a  careless  laxity  of  moral  life. 

§  3.  At  Grlarus  and  Einsiedeln. 

At  Grlarus  he  was  able  to  follow  his  Humanist  studies, 
guided  by  the  influences  which  had  surrounded  him  during 
his  last  year  at  Basel.  Among  these  his  friendship  with 
Thomas  Wyttenbach  was  the  most  lasting.  Wyttenbach 
taught  him,  he  tells  us,  to  see  the  evils  and  abuses  of 
indulgences,  the  supreme  authority  of  the  Bible,  that 
the  death  of  Christ  was  the  sole  price  of  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  that  faith  is  the  key  which  unlocks  to  the  soul 
the  treasury  of  remission.  All  these  thoughts  he  had 
grasped  intellectually,  and  made  much  of  them  in  his 
sermons.  He  prized  preaching  highly,  and  resolved  to 
cultivate  the  gift  by  training  himself  on  the  models  of 
antiquity.  He  studied  the  Scriptures,  joyfully  welcomed 
the  new  Greek  Testament  of  Erasmus,  published  by  Froben 


28  THE    REFORMATION   IN    SWITZERLAND 

of  Basel  in  1516,  when  he  was  at  Einsiedeln,  and  copied 
out  from  it  the  whole  of  the  Pauline  Epistles.  On  the 
wide  margins  of  his  MS.  he  wrote  annotations  from 
Erasmus,  Origen,  Chrysostom,  Ambrose,  and  Jerome.  It 
was  his  constant  companion. 

At  Glarus  he  was  personally  introduced  to  the  system 
of  mercenary  war  and  of  pensions  in  which  Switzerland 
had  engaged.  He  went  to  Italy  twice  as  regimental 
chaplain  with  the  *  Glarus  contingent,  and  was  present 
at  the  fight  at  Novara  (1513),  and  on  the  fatal  day  at 
Marignano  (1515). 

His  experiences  in  these  campaigns  convinced  Mm  of 
the  harm  in  this  system  of  hiring  out  the  Swiss  to  fight 
in  others*  quarrels ;  and  when  he  became  convinced  of  the 
evils  attending  it,  he  denounced  the  practice.  His  out- 
spoken language  displeased  many  of  his  most  influential 
parishioners,  especially  those  who  were  partisans  of  the 
French,  and  Zwingli  resolved  to  seek  some  other  sphere 
of  work. 

The  post  of  people's  priest  at  Einsiedeln,  the  famous 
monastery  and  pilgrimage  resort,  was  offered  to  him  and 
accepted  (April  14th,  1516).  He  retained  his  official  con- 
nection with  Glarus,  and  employed  a  curate  to  do  bis 
parish  work.  His  fame  as  a  preacher  grew.  His  friends 
desired  to  see  him  in  a  larger  sphere,  ajad  through  their 
exertions  he  was  appointed  to  be  people's  priest  in  the 
Minster  at  Zurich.  An  objection  had  been  made  to  his 
selection  on  the  ground  that  he  had  disgracefully 
wronged  the  daughter  of  a  citizen  of  Einsiedeln ;  and  his 
letter  of  vindication,  while  it  exonerates  him  from  the 
particular  charge  brought  against  him,  shows  that  he  was 
by  no  means  clear  of  the  laxity  in  private  morals  which 
characterised  the  Swiss  clergy  of  the  time.  The  stipend 
attached  to  his  office  in  the  Great  Minster  was  very  small, 
and  on  this  ground  Zwingli  felt  himself  justified,  un- 
warrantably, in  retaining  his  papal  pension.1 

1  Por  details  about  Zwingli's  papal  pension,  cf.  S.  M.  Jackson,  Iluldreivh 
Zwingli,  p.  114. 


ZWINGLI   IN   ZURICH  29 

§  4.  Zwingli  in  Zurich,. 

Zurich,  when  ZwingK  went  to  it,  was  an  imperial  city. 
It  had  grown  up  around  the  Great  Minster  and  the 
Minster  of  Our  Lady  (the  Little  Minster),  and  had  de- 
veloped into  a  trading  and  manufacturing  centre.  Its 
citizens,  probably  owing  to  the  ecclesiastical  origin  of  the 
town,  had  long  engaged  in  quarrels  with  the  clergy,  and 
had  generally  been  successful.  They  took  advantage  of  the 
rivalries  between  the  heads  of  the  two  Minsters  and  the 
Emperor's  bailiff  to  assert  their  independence,  and  had 
passed  laws  subordinating  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  to 
the  secular  rule.  The  taxes  were  levied  on  ecclesiastical  as 
well  as  on  secular  property ;  all  the  convents  were  under 
civic  control,  and  liable  to  State  inspection.  The  popes, 
anxious  to  keep  on  good  terms  with  the  Swiss  who  furnished 
soldiers  for  their  wars,  had  expressly  permitted  in  Zurich 
what  they  would  not  have  allowed  elsewhere. 

The  town  was  ruled  by  a  Council  or  Senate  composed 
of  the  Masters  of  the  thirteen  "  gilds  "  (twelve  trades'  gilds 
and  one  gild  representing  the  patriciate).  The  Burgomaster, 
with  large  powers,  presided.  A  great  Council  of  212 
members  was  called  together  on  special  occasions. 

The  city  of  Zurich,  with  its  thoroughly  democratic 
constitution,  was  a  very  fitting  sphere  for  a  man  like 
Zwingli.  He  had  made  a  name  for  himself  by  this  time. 
He  had  become  a  powerful  preacher,  able  to  stir  and  move 
the  people  by  his  eloquence ;  he  was  in  intimate  relations 
with  the  more  distinguished  German  Humanists,  introduced 
to  them  by  his  friend  Heinrich  Loriti  of  Glarus  (known 
as  Glareanus).  He  had  already  become  the  centre  of  an 
admiring  circle  of  young  men  of  liberal  views.  His  place 
as  people's  preacher  gave  to  a  man  of  his  popular  gifts  a 
commanding ,  position  in  the  most  democratic  town  in 
Switzerland,  where  civic  and  European  politics  were  eagerly 
discussed.  He  went  there  in  December  1519, 

His  work  as  a  Reformer  began  almost  at  once. 
Bernardin  Samson  or  Sanson,  a  seller  of  indulgences  for 


30  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

Switzerland,  came  to  Zurich  to  push  his  trade.  Zwingli 
had  already  encountered  him  at  Einsiedeln,  and,  prompted 
by  the  Bishop  of  Constance  and  his  vicar-general,  John 
Faber,  both  of  whom  disliked  the  indulgences,  had  preached 
against  him.  He  now  persuaded  the  Council  of  Zurich  to 
forbid  Samson's  stay  in  the  town. 

The  papal  treatment  of  the  Swiss  Eeformer  was  very 
different  from  what  had  been  meted  out  to  Luther. 
Samson  received  orders  from  Some  to  give  no  trouble  to 
the  Zurichers,  and  to  leave  the  city  rather  than  quarrel 
with  them.  The  difference,  no  doubt,  arose  from  the 
desire  of  the  Curia  to  do  nothing  to  hinder  the  supply  of 
Swiss  soldiers  for  the  papal  wars ;  but  it  was  also  justified 
by  the  contrast  in  the  treatment  of  the  subject  by  the 
two  Reformers.  Luther  struck  at  a  great  moral  abuse, 
and  his  strokes  cut  deeply  into  the  whole  round  of 
mediaeval  religious  life,  with  its  doctrine  of  a  special  priest- 
hood ;  he  made  men  see  the  profanity  of  any  claim  made 
by  men  to  pardon  sin,  or  to  interfere  between  their  fellow- 
men  and  God.  Zwingli  took  the  whole  matter  more 
lightly.  His  position  was  that  of  Erasmus  and  the 
Humanists.  He  could  laugh  at  and  ridicule  the  whole 
proceeding,  and  thought  most  of  the  way  in  which  men 
allowed  themselves  to  be  gulled  and  duped  by  clever 
knaves.  He  never  touched  the  deep  practical  religious 
question  which  Luther  raised,  and  which  made  his  chal- 
lenge to  the  Papacy  reverberate  over  "Western  Europe. 

From  the  outset  Zwingli  became  a  prominent  figure 
in  Zurich.  He  announced  to  the  astonished  Chapter  of  the 
Great  Minster,  to  whom  he  owed  his  appointment,  that  he 
meant  to  give  a  series  of  continuous  expositions  of  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Matthew ;  that  he  would  not  follow  the 
scholastic  interpretation  of  passages  in  the  Gospel,  but 
would  endeavour  to  make  Scripture  its  own  interpreter. 
The  populace  crowded  to  hear  sermons  of  this  new  kind. 
In  order  to  reach  the  country  people,  Zwingli  preached  in 
the  market-place  on  the  Fridays,  and  his  fame  spread 
throughout  the  villages.  The  Franciscans,  Dominicans, 


ZWINGLI   IN   ZURICH  31 

and  Augustinian  Eremites  tried  to  arouse  opposition,  but 
unsuccessfully.  In  his  sermons  he  denounced  sins 
suggested  in  the  passages  expounded,  and  found  occasion 
to  deny  the  doctrines  of  Purgatory  and  the  Intercession  of 
Saints. 

His  strongest  attack  on  the  existing  ecclesiastical  system 
was  made  in  a  sermon  on  tithes,  which,  to  the  distress  of 
the  Provost  of  the  Minster,  he  declared  to  be  merely 
voluntary  offerings.  (He  had  been  reading  Hus'  book 
On  the  Church.)  He  must  have  carried  most  of  the 
Chapter  with  him  in  his  schemes  for  improvement,  for  in 
June  1520  the  Breviary  used  in  the  Minster  was  revised 
by  Zwingli  and  stripped  of  some  blemishes.  In  the  follow- 
ing year  (March  1521),  some  of  the  Zurichers  who  were 
known  to  be  among  Zwinglfs  warmest  admirers,  the 
printer  Froschauer  among  them,  asserted  their  convictions 
by  eating  flesh  meat  publicly  in  Lent.  The  affair  made  a 
great  sensation,  and  the  Eeformers  were  brought  before  the 
Council  of  the  city.  They  justified  themselves  by  declaring 
that  they  had  only  followed  the  teaching  of  Zwingli,  who 
had  shown  them  that  nothing  was  binding  on  the  con- 
sciences of  Christians  which  was  not  commanded  in  the 
Scriptures.  Zwingli  at  once  undertook  their  defence,  and 
published  his  sermon,  Selection  or  Liberty  concerning  Foods  ; 
an  offence  and  scandal ;  whether  there  is  any  Authority  for 
forbidding  Meat  at  certain  times  (April  16th,  1522).  He 
declared  that  in  such  matters  the  responsibility  rests  with 
the  individual,  who  may  use  his  freedom  provided  he  avoids 
a  public  scandal. 

The  matter  was  felt  to  be  serious,  and  the  Council,  after 
full  debate,  passed  an  ordinance  which  was  meant  to  be  a 
compromise.  It  was  to  the  effect  that  although  the  New- 
Testament  makes  no  rule  on  the  subject,  fasting  in  Lent  is 
a  very  ancient  custom,  and  must  not  be  set  aside  until  dealt 
with  by  authority,  and  that  the  priests  of  the  three  parishes 
of  Zurich  were  to  dissuade  the  people  from  all  violation  of 
the  ordinance. 

The  Bishop  of  Constance  thereupon  interfered,  and  sent 


32  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

a  Commission,  consisting  of  his  suffragan  and  two  others,  to 
investigate  and  report.  They  met  the  Small  Council,  and 
in  a  long  address  insisted  that  the  Church  had  authority 
in  such  matters,  and  that  the  usages  it  commanded  must  be 
obeyed.  Zwingli  appeared  before  the  Great  Council,  and,  in 
spite  of  the  efforts  of  the  Commission  to  keep  him  silent, 
argued  in  defence  of  liberty  of  conscience.  In  the  end  the 
Council  resolved  to  abide  by  its  compromise,  but  asked  the 
Bishop  of  Constance  to  hold  a  Synod  of  his  clergy  and 
come  to  a  resolution  upon  the  matter  which  would  be  in 
accordance  with  the  law  of  Christ.  This  resolution  of  the 
Council  really  set  aside  the  episcopal  authority,  and  was  a 
revolt  against  the  Eoman  Church. 

Political  affairs  favoured  the  rebellion.  At  the  Swiss 
Diet  held  at  Luzern  (May  1521),  the  cantons,  in  spite  of 
the  vehement  remonstrances  of  Zurich,  made  a  treaty  with 
France,  and  allowed  the  French  king  to  recruit  a  force  of 
16,000  Swiss  mercenaries.  Zurich,  true  to  its  protest, 
refused  to  allow  recruiting  within  its  lands.  Its  citizens 
chafed  at  the  loss  of  money  and  the  separation  from,  the 
other  cantons,  and  Zwingli  became  very  unpopular.  He 
had  now  made  up  his  mind  that  the  whole  system  of 
pensions  and  mercenary  service  was  wrong,  and  had 
resigned  his  own  papal  pension.  Just  then  the  Pope 
asked  Zurich,  which  supplied  him  with  half  of  his  body- 
guard, for  a  force  of  soldiers  to  be  used  in  defence  of  his 
States,  promising  that  they  would  not  be  used  to  fight  the 
French,  among  whose  troops  were  many  Swiss  mercenaries 
from  other  cantons.  The  Council  refused.  Nevertheless, 
six  thousand  Zurichers  set  out  to  join  the  papal  army. 
The  Council  recalled  them,  and  after  some  adventures,  in 
one  of  which  they  narrowly  escaped  fighting  with  the  Swiss 
mercenaries  in  the  service  of  France,  they  returned  home. 
This  expedition,  which  brought  neither  money  nor  honour 
to  the  Zurichers,  turned  the  tide  of  popular  feeling,  and  the 
Council  forbade  all  foreign  service.  "When  the  long  con- 
nection between  Zurich  and  the  Papacy  is  considered,  this 
decree  was  virtually  a  breach  between  the  city  and  the 


THE   PUBLIC   DISPUTATIONS  33 

Pope.  It  made  the  path  of  the  Reformation  much  easier 
(Jan.  1522),  and  Zwingli's  open  break  with  the  Papacy 
was  only  a  matter  of  time. 

It  came  with  the  publication  of  the  Archeteles  (August 
1522),  a  book  hastily  written,  like  all  Zwingli's  works, 
which  contained  a  defence  of  all  that  he  had  clone, 
and  a  programme,  ecclesiastical  and  political,  for  the  future. 
The  book  increased  the  zeal  of  Zwingli's  opponents.  His 
sermons  were  often  interrupted  by  monks  and  others 
instigated  by  them.  The  burgomaster  was  compelled  to 
interfere  in  order  to  maintain  the  peace  of  the  town.  He 
issued  an  order  on  his  own  authority,  without  any  appeal 
to  the  Bishop  of  Constance,  that  the  pure  Word  of  God 
was  to  be  preached.  At  an  assembly  of  the  country 
clergy  of  the  canton,  the  same  decision  was  reached ;  and 
town  and  clergy  were  ready  to  move  along  the  path  of 
reformation.  Shortly  before  this  (July  2nd),  Zwingli 
and  ten  other  priests  petitioned  the  bishop  to  permit  his 
clergy  to  contract  legal  marriages.  The  document  had  no 
practical  effect,  save  to  show  the  gradual  advance  of  ideas 
It  disclosed  the  condition  of  things  that  sacerdotal  celibacy 
had  produced  in  Switzerland. 

§  5.  The  Public  Disputations. 

In  these  circumstances,  the  Great  Council,  now  definitely 
on  Zwingli's  side,  resolved  to  hold  a  Public  Disputation 
to  settle  the  controversies  in  religion ;  and  Zwingli  drafted 
sixty-seven  theses  to  be  discussed.  These  articles  contain 
a  summary  of  his  doctrinal  teaching.  They  insist  that  the 
Word  of  God,  the  only  rule  of  faith,  is  to  be  received  upon 
its  own  authority  and  not  on  that  of  the  Church.  They 
are  very  full  of  Christ,  the  only  Saviour,  the  true  Son  of 
God,  who  has  redeemed  us  from  eternal  death  and  re- 
conciled us  to  God.  They  attack  the  Primacy  of  the 
Pope,  the  Mass,  the  Invocation  of  the  Saints,  the  thought 
that  men  can  acquire  merit  by  their  good  works,  Fasts, 
Pilgrimages,  and  Purgatory.  Of  sacerdotal  celibacy  he 


34  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

says,  "/  know  of  no  greater  nor  graver  scandal  than  that 
which  forbids  lawful  marriage  to  priests,  and  yet  permits 
them  on  payment  of  money  to  have  concubines  and  harlots. 
Fie  for  shame ! " 1  The  theses  consist  of  single  short 
sentences. 

The  Disputation,  the  first  of  the  four  which  marked 
the  stages  of  the  legal  Reformation  in  Zurich,  was  held  in 
the  Town  Hall  of  the  city  on  January  29th,  1523.  More 
than  six  hundred  representative  men  gathered  to  hear  it. 
All  the  clergy  of  the  canton  were  present ;  Faber  watched 
the  proceedings  on  behalf  of  the  Bishop  of  Constance; 
many  distinguished  divines  from  other  parts  of  Switzerland 
were  present.  Faber  seems  to  have  contented  himself 
with  asking  that  the  Disputation  should  be  delayed  until 
a  General  Council  should  meet,  and  Zwingli  replied  that 
competent  scholars  who  were  good  Christians  were  as  able 
as  a  Council  to  decide  what  was  the  meaning  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  The  result  of  the  Disputation  was  that  the 
burgomaster  declared  that  Zwingli  had  justified  his  teach- 
ing, and  that  he  was  no  heretic.  The  canton  of  Zurich 
practically  adopted  Zwingli's  views,  and  the  Eeforiner  was 
encouraged  to  proceed  further. 

His  course  of  conduct  was  eminently  prudent.  He 
invariably  took  pains  to  educate  the  people  up  to  further 
changes  by  explaining  them  carefully  in  sermons,  and  by 
publishing  and  circulating  these  discourses.  He  considered 
that  it  was  his  duty  to  teach,  but  that  it  belonged  to  the 
civic  authorities  to  make  the  changes;  and  he  himself 
made  none  until  they  were  authorised.  He  had  very 
strong  views  against  the  use  of  images  in  churches,  and 
had  preached  vigorously  against  their  presence.  Sonic 
of  his  more  ardent  hearers  began  to  deface  the  statxtes 
and-  pictures.  The  Great  Council  accordingly  took  the 
whole  question  into  consideration,  and  decided  that  a 

1  Cf.  Schaff,  Creeds  of  the  Evangelical  Protestant  Churches  (London, 
1877),  p.  197  ;  Niemeyer,  Collectio  Gonfessionum  in  ecdesiis  reformats, 
puUicatarMft,  (Leipzig,  1840),  p.  3;  Muller,  Die  Bekenntnisschriftm  der 
rtformierten  Kirche :  Zwinglis  Theses  von  158$t  Art.  49,  p.  5. 


THE   PUBLIC   DISPUTATIONS  35 

second  Public  Disputation  should  be  held,  at  which  the 
matter  might  be  publicly  discussed.  This  discussion 
(October  1523)  lasted  for  two  days.  More  than  eight 
hundred  persons  were  present,  of  whom  three  hundred  and 
fifty  were  clergy.  On  the  first  day,  Zwingli  set  forth  his 
views  on  the  presence  of  images  in  churches,  and  wished 
their  use  forbidden.  The  Council  decided  that  the  statues 
and  pictures  should  be  removed  from  the  churches,  but 
without  disturbance ;  the  rioters  were  to  be  pardoned,  but 
their  leader  was  to  be  banished  from  the  city  for  two  years. 
The  second  day's  subject  of  conference  was  the  Mass. 
Zwingli  pled  that  the  Mass  was  not  a  sacrifice,  but  a 
memorial  of  the  death  of  our  Lord,  and  urged  that  the 
abuses  surrounding  the  simple  Christian  rite  should  be 
swept  away.  The  presence  of  Anabaptists  at  this  conference, 
and  their  expressions  in  debate,  warned  the  magistrates 
that  they  must  proceed  cautiously,  and  they  contented 
themselves  with  appointing  a  commission  of  eight — two 
from  the  Council  and  six  clergymen — to  inquire  and 
report.  Meanwhile  the  clergy  were  to  be  informed  how 
to  act,  and  the  letter  of  instruction  was  to  be  written  by 
Zwingli.  The  authorities  also  deputed  preachers  to  go  to 
the  outlying  parts  of  the  canton  and  explain  the  whole 
matter  carefully  to  the  people. 

The  letter  which  Zwingli  addressed  to  the  clergy  of 
Zurich  canton  is  a  brief  statement  of  Reformation  principles. 
It  is  sometimes  called  the  Instruction.  Zwingli  entitles  it, 
A.  firief  Christian  Introduction  which  tlie  Honourable  Council 
of  the  city  of  Zurich  has  sent  to  the  pastors  and  preachers 
living  in  its  cities,  lands,  and  wherever  its  authority  extends, 
so  that  they  may  henceforth  in  unison  announce  and  preach 
the  gospel.1  It  describes  sin,  the  law,  God's  way  of 
salvation,  and  then  goes  on  to  speak  of  images.  ZwiDgli's 
argument  is  that  the  presence  of  statues  and  pictures  in 
churches  has  led  to  idolatry,  and  that  they  ought  to  be 
removed.  The  concluding  section  discusses  the  Mass. 

1  Muller,  Die  JBekenntnisschriften  der  reformitrten  Kirche  (Leipzig,  1903), 
pp.  xviii  and  7.     The  Instruction  is  a  lengthy  document. 


36  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

BT^re  the  author  states  very  briefly  what  he  elaborated 
afterwards,  that  the  main  thought  in  the  Eucharist  is  not 
the  repetition  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  but  its  faithful 
remembrance,  and  that  the  Eomish  doctrine  and  ceremony 
of  the  Mass  has  been  so  corrupted  to  superstitious  uses 
that  it  ought  to  be  thoroughly  reformed. 

This  letter  had  a  marked  effect.  The  village  priests 
everywhere  refused  to  say  Mass  according  to  the  old  ritual. 
But  there  was  a  section  of  the  people,  including  members 
of  the  chapter  of  the  Minster,  who  shrunk  from  changes 
in  this  central  part  of  Christian  worship.  In  deference 
to  their  feelings,  the  Council  resolved  that  the  Holy  Supper 
should  be  meanwhile  dispensed  according  to  both  the 
Reformed  and  the  mediaeval  rite ;  in  the  one  celebration  the 
cup  was  given  to  the  laity,  and  in  the  other  it  was  with- 
held. No  change  was  made  in  the  liturgy.  Then  came 
a  third  conference,  and  a  fourth;  and  at  last  the  Mass 
was  abolished.  On  April  13th,  1525,  the  first  Evangelical 
communion  service  took  place  in  the  Great  Minster,  and 
the  mediaeval  worship  was  at  an  end.  Other  changes  had 
been  made.  The  monasteries  had  been  secularised,  and 
the  monks  who  did  not  wish  to  leave  their  calling  were 
all  gathered  together  in  the  Franciscan  convent.  An 
amicable  arrangement  was  come  to  about  other  ecclesiastical 
foundations,  and  the  money  thus  secured  was  mainly 
devoted  to  education. 

From  1522,  Zwingli  had  been  living  in  "clerical" 
marriage  with  Anna  Eeinhard,  the  widow  of  a  wealthy 
Zurich  burgher.  She  was  called  his  wife  by  his  friends, 
although  no  legal  marriage  ceremony  had  been  performed. 
It  is  perhaps  difficult  for  us  to  judge  the  man  and  the 
times.  The  so-called  "  clerical "  marriages  were  universal 
in  Switzerland.  Man  and  woman  took  each  other  for 
husband  and  wife,  and  were  faithful.  There  was  no 
public  ceremony.  All  questions  of  marriage,  divorce, 
succession,  and  so  forth,  were  then  adjudicated  in  the 
ecclesiastical  and  not  -in  the  civil  courts ;  and  as  the  Canon 
Law  had  insisted  that  no  clergyman  could  marry,  all 


THE   PUBLIC   DISPUTATIONS  37 

such  "  clerical "  marriages  were  simple  concubinage  in  the 
eye  of  the  law,  and  the  children  were  illegitimate.  The 
offence  against  the  TOW  of  chastity  was  condoned  by  a  fine 
paid  to  the  bishop.  As  early  as  1523,  William  Boubli,  a 
Zurich  priest,  went  through  a  public  form  of  marriage, 
and  his  example  was  followed  by  others ;  but  it  may  be 
questioned  whether  these  marriages  were  recognised  to  be 
legal  until  Zurich  passed  its  own  laws  about  matrimonial 
cases  in  1525. 

Luther  in  his  pure-hearted  and  solemnly  sympathetic 
way  had  referred  to  these  clerical  marriages  in  his  Address 
to  the  Christian  Nobility  of  the  German  Nation  (1520). 

"  We  see,"  he  says,  "  how  the  priesthood  is  fallen,  and  how 
many  a  poor  priest  is  encumbered  with  a  woman  and  children, 
and  burdened  in  his  conscience,  and  no  man  does  anything 
to  help  him,  though  he  might  very  well  be  helped.  ...  I 
will  not  conceal  my  honest  counsel,  nor  withhold  comfort 
from  that  unhappy  crowd,* who  now  live  in  trouble  with  wife 
and  children,  and  remain  in  shame,  with  a  heavy  conscience, 
hearing  their  wife  called  a  priest's  harlot  and  the  children 
bastards.  ...  I  say  that  these  two  (who  are  minded  in 
their  hearts  to  live  together  always  in  conjugal  fidelity)  are 
surely  married  before  G-od." 

He  had  never  succumbed  to  the  temptations  of  the 
flesh,  and  had  kept  his  body  and  soul  pure ;  and  for  that 
very  reason  he  could  sympathise  with  and  help  by  his 
sympathy  those  who  had  fallen.  Zwingli,  on  the  other 
hand,  had  deliberately  contracted  this  illicit  alliance  after 
he  had  committed  himself  to  the  work  of  a  Eeformer.  The 
action  remains  a  permanent  blot  on  his  character,  and  places 
him  on  a  different  level  from  Luther  and  from  Calvin.  It 
has  been  already  noted  that  Zwingli  had  always  an  intel- 
lectual rather  than  a  spiritual  appreciation  of  the  need  of 
reformation, — that  he  was  much  more  of  a  Humanist  than 
either  Luther  or  Calvin, — but  what  is  remarkable  is  that 
we  have  distinct  evidence  that  the  need  of  personal  piety 
had  impressed  itself  on  him  during  these  years,  and  that  he 
passed  through  a  religious  crisis,  slight  compared  with  that 


38  THE   REFORMATION   IN  SWITZERLAND 

of  Luther,  but  real  so  far  as  it  went.  He  fell  ill  of  the 
plague  (Sept.-Nov.  1519),  and  the  vision  of  death  and 
recovery  drew  from  him  some  hymns  of  resignation  and 
thanksgiving.1  The  death  of  his  brother  Andrew  (Nov. 
1520)  seems  to  have  been  the  real  turning-point  in  his 
inward  spiritual  experience,  and  his  letters  and  writings . 
are  evidence  of  its  reality  and  permanence.  Perhaps  the 
judgment  which  a  contemporary  and  friend,  Ma&rtin  Bucer, 
passed  ought  to  content  us  : 

"  When  I  read  your  letter  to  Capito,  that  you  had  made 
public  announcement  of  your  marriage,  I  was  almost  beside 
myself  in  my  satisfaction.  For  it  was  the  one  thing  I  desired 
for  you.  ...  I  never  believed  you  were  unmarried  after 
the  time  when  you  indicated  to  the  Bishop  of  Constance  in 
that  tract  that  you  desired  this  gift.  But  as  I  considered 
the  fact  that  you  were  thought  to  be  a  fornicator  by  some, 
and  by  others  held  to  have  little  faith  in  Christ,  I  could  not 
understand  why  you  concealed  it  so  long,  and  that  the  fact 
was  not  declared  openly,  and  with  candour  and  diligence. 
I  could  not  doubt  that  you  were  led  into  this  course  by 
considerations  which  could  not  be  put  aside  by  a  conscien- 
tious man.  However  that  may  be,  I  triumph  in  the  fact 
that  now  you  have  come  up  in  all  things  to  the  apostolic 
definition."2 

The  Eeformation  was  spreading  beyond  Zurich.  Evan- 
gelical preachers  had  arisen  in  many  of  the  other  cantons, 
and  were  gaining  adherents. 

§  6.   The  Eeformation  outside  Zurich. 

Basel,  the  seat  of  a  famous  university  and  a  centre  of 
German  Humanism,  contained  many  scholars  who  had  come 
under  the  influence  of  Thomas  Wyttenbach,  Zwingli's 
teacher.  Wolfgang  Fabricius  Capito,  a  disciple  of  Erasmus, 
a  learned  student  of  the  Scriptures,  had  begun  as  early  as 

1  Literal  translations  of  these  hymns  are  given  in  Professor  Macauley 
Jackson's  Huldreich  Zwingli,  the  Reformer  of  German  Switzerland  (New 
York  and  London,  1903),  pp.  133,  134. 

3  Stahelin,  JSriefe  aus  der  JKeformationszeit,  pp.  15-19. 


THE   REFORMATION   OUTSIDE   ZURIC4H  39 

1512  to  show  how  the  ceremonies  and  many  of  the  usages 
of  the  Church  had  no  authority  from  the  Bible.  He 
worked  in  Basel  from  1512  to  1520.  Johannes 
Oecolampadius  (Hussgen  or  Heusgen),  who  had  been  one 
of  Luther's  supporters  in  1521,  came  to  Basel  in  1522 
as  Lecturer  on  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  the  University. 
His  lectures  and  his  sermons  to  the  townspeople  caused 
such  a  movement  that  the  bishop  forbade  their  delivery. 
The  citizens  asked  for  a  Public  Disputation.  Two  held 
in  the  month  of  December  1524 — the  one  conducted  by  a 
priest  of  the  name  of  Stor  against  clerical  celibacy,  and  the 
other  led  by  William  Farel1 — raised  the  courage  of  the 


1  "William  Farel  -was  born  in  1489  at  a  village  near  Gap  in  the  mountain- 
ous south-east  corner  of  Dauphine,  on  the  "border  of  Provence*  He  belonged 
to  a  noble  family,  and  was  devout  from  his  earliest  years.  He  describes 
a  pilgrimage  which  he  made  as  a  child  in  his  book  Du  may  usage  de  la, 
croix  de  J6sus-Christ  (pp.  223/.J.  All  through  his  adventurous  life  he  pre- 
served his  rare  uprightness  of  character,  his  fervent  devotion,  and  his  indig- 
nation at  wrong-doing  of  all  kinds.  He  persuaded  his  parents  to  allow  him 
to  go  to  Paris  for  education,  and  reached  the  capital  about  1509.  He  probably 
spent  twelve  years  there,  partly  as  student  and  partly  as  professor  in  the 
college  Le  Moine.  There  he  became  the  friend  and  devoted  disciple  of 
Jacques  Lefevre  d'Etaples,  and  this  friendship  carried  him  safely  through 
several  religious  crises  in  his  life.  He  followed  Lefevre  to  Meaux,  and  was 
one  of  the  celebrated  "  group  "  there.  When  persecution  and  the  timidity 
or  scruples  of  the  bishop  caused  the  dispersion  of  these  preachers,  Farel  went 
back  to  Dauphine"  and  attempted  to  preach  the  Gospel  in  Gap,  He  was  not 
allowed  parce  q^il  n'estoit  ne  moine  ne  prestre,  and  was  banished  from  the 
district  by  bishop  and  people.  He  next  tried  to  preach  in  Guyenne,  where 
he  was  equally  unsuccessful.  Thinking  that  there  was  no  place  in  France 
open  to  him,  he  took  himself  to  Basel.  There  he  asked  the  University  to 
allow  him  to  hold  a  public  disputation  on  certain  articles  which  he  sent  to 
them.  The  authorities  refused.  He  then  addressed  himself  to  the  Council 
of  the  city,  who  permitted  the  discussion.  The  thirteen  articles  or  Theses 
defended  by  Farel  are  given  in  Herminjard,  Correspondence  des  XUformateurs 
dans  lespays  de  langrue  frcm$aise  (i.  194,  195).  He  gathered  a  little  church 
of  French  refugees  at  Basel  (the  ecclesiola  of  his  correspondence),  but  was  too 
much  the  ardent  and  impetuous  pioneer  to  remain  quietly  among  them.  By 
the  end  of  July  1324  he  was  preaching  at  Montbeliard,  some  miles  to  the 
south  of  Belfort,  and  the  riots  which  ensued  caused  Oecolampadius  to  beseech 
him  to  temper  his  courage  with  discretion  (Herminjard,  Gorresjtondance,  etc., 
i.  255).  He  went  thence  to  Strassburg  (April  1525),  to  Bern,  attempted 
to  preach  in  jSTeuchatel,  and  fmslly  (middle  of  November  1526)  opened  a 
school  at  Aigle,  an  outlying  dependency  of  Bern,  hoping  to  get  opportunity 


40  THE   REFORMATION   IN"  SWITZERLAND 

Evangelical  party.  In  February  1525  the  Council  of  the 
town  installed  Oecolanipadius  as  the  preacher  in  St. 
Martin's  Church,  and  authorised  him  to  make  such  changes 
as  the  Word  of  God  demanded.  This  was  the  beginning. 
Oecolampadius  became  a  firm  friend  of  Zwingli's,  and  they 
worked  together. 

In  Bern  also  the  Reformation  made  progress.  Berthold 
Haller1and  Sebastian  Meyer2  preached  the  Gospel  with 
courage  for  several  years,  and  were  upheld  by  the  painter 
Mcolaus  Manuel,  who  had  great  influence  with  the  citizens. 
The  Council  decided  to  permit  freedom  in  preaching,  if  in 
accordance  with  the  Word  of  God;  but  they  refused  to 
permit  innovations  in  worship  or  ceremonies  ;  and  they 
forbade  the  introduction  of  heretical  books  into  the  town. 
The  numbers  of  the  Evangelical  party  increased  rapidly, 
and  in  the  beginning  of  1527  they  had  a  majority  in 
both  the  great  and  the  small  Councils.  It  was  then 
decided  to  have  a  Public  Disputation. 

The  occasion  was  one  of  the  most  momentous  in  the 
history  of  the  Eeformation  in  Switzerland.  Hitherto 
Zurich  had  stood  alone;  if  Bern  joined,  the  two  most 

to  carry  on  Ms  evangelistic  work.  He  was  soon  discovered,  and  attempts 
were  made  to  prevent  his  preaching ;  "but  the  authorities  of  Bern  insisted 
that  he  should  be  unmolested.  In  the  beginning  of  1527  he  was  actively 
engaged  at  the  great  Disputation  in  Bern.  That  same  year  he  was  made 
pastor  of  Aigle  and  put  in  possession  of  the  parsonage  and  the  stipend ;  hut 
such  work  was  too  tame  for  him.  He  made  long  preaching  tours  ;  \ve  find 
him  at  Lausanne,  Morat,  Orbe,  and  other  places,  always  protected  by  the 
authorities  of  Bern.  He  began  his  work  in  Geneva  in  1532. 

1  Berthold  Haller  was  born  at  Aldingen  (1492) ;  studied  at  Eothweil  and 
Pforzheim,  where  he  made  the  acquaintance  of  Melanohthou.     He  became 
a  Bachelor  of  Theology  of  the  University  of  Kbln  ;  taught  for  some  time  at 
Rothweil,  and  then  at  Bern  (1513-1518).     He  was  elected  people's  priest  ill 
the  great  church  there  in  1521.     His  sympathetic  character  and  his  great 
eloquence  made  him  a  power  in  the  city  ;  but  his  discouragements  were  so 
many  and  so  great  that  he  was  often  on  the  point  of  leaving.    Zwingli 
encouraged  him  to  remain  and  persevere. 

2  Sebastian  Meyer  was  a  priest  from  Elsass  who  had  been  preaching  in 
Bern  since  1518  against  the  abuses  of  the  Boman  Church.     The  notorious 
conduct  of  the  Dominicans  in  Bern  (1507-9),  and  the  action  of  Samson,  the 
Indulgence-seller,  in  1518,  had  made  the  Bernese  ready  to  listen  to  attacks 
against  Home. 


THE   REFORMATION    OUTSIDE   ZURICH  41 

powerful  cantons  in  Switzerland  would  be  able  to  hold 
their  own.  There  was  need  for  union.  The  Forest  cantons 
had  been  uttering  threats,  and  Zwingli's  life  was  not 
secure.  Bern  was  fully  alive  to  the  importance  of  the 
proposed  discussion,  and  was  resolved  to  make  it  as  impos- 
ing as  possible,  and  that  the  disputants  on  both  sides 
should  receive  fair  play  and  feel  themselves  in  perfect 
freedom  and  safety.  They  sent  special  invitations  to  the 
four  bishops  whose  dioceses  entered  their  territories — the 
Bishops  of  Constance,  Basel,  Valais,  and  Lausanne;  and 
they  did  their  best  to  assemble  a  sufficient  number  of 
learned  Eomanist  theologians.1  They  promised  not  only 
safe-conducts,  but  the  escort  of  a  herald  to  and  from  the 
canton.2  It  soon  became  evident,  however,  that  the 
Eomanist  partisans  had  no  great  desire  to  come  to  the 
Disputation.  None  of  the  bishops  invited  appears  to 
have  even  thought  of  being  present  save  the  Bishop  of 
Lausanne,  and  he  found  reasons  for  declining.3  The  Dispu- 
tation was  viewed  with  anxiety  by  the  Eomanist  partisans, 
and  in  a  letter  sent  from,  Speyer  (December  28th)  the 
Emperor  Charles  v.  strongly  remonstrated  with  the 
magistrates  of  Bern.*  The  Bernese  were  not  to  be 
intimidated.  They  issued  their  invitations,  and  made 
every  arrangement  to  give  £clat  to  the  great  Disputation.5 
Berthold  Haller,  with  the  help  of  Zwingli,  had  drafted 

1  Herminjard,  Correspondence  des  jReformateurs  dans  les  pays  de  tongue 
franqa/ise  (2nd  ed.),  ii.  55. 

2  Ibid.  ii.  94,  95.  *  Ibid.  ii.  61,  74,  89,  94,  96. 
4  Rucliat,  Histoire  de  la  Reformation  de  la  Suisse,  i.  368. 

B  The  invitation  began  :  "  Nous  1'Advoyer,  le  petit  et  le  grand  Conseil  de 
la  cite!  de  Berne,  a  tous  et  a  chascun,  spirituelz  et  seculiers,  prelatz,  abbes, 
preVostz,  doyens,  chanoynes,  cure's,  sacrestains,  vicaires  prescheurs  de  la 
Parolle  de  Dieu,  et  a  tous  prebstres,  s6culiers  ou  re*guliers,  et  a  tous  Noz 
advoyers,  chastellains,  pre>ostz,  lieutenans,  et  tous  autres  officiers  et  k  tous 
Noz  chers,  fe*aulx  et  ayme*s  subjectz,  et  &  tous  manans  et  habitans  de  Nostre 
domaine  et  se*gnorie  aux  quelz  les  presentes  letres  viendront, — Salut,  grace 
et  be"nivolance  ! 

"  S9avoir  faisons,  corabien  que  Nous  ayons  fait  beaucoup  d'ordonuance  et 
mandemens  publiques,  pour  la  dissension  de  nostre  commune  foy  Chrestienne, 
a  ce  meuz  et  espoirans,  que  cela  profiteroit  a  la  jiaix  et  concorde  Chrestienne, 
comme  chose  tres  utilc,"  etc.  ;  Herminjard,  ii.  54. 


42  THE   REFORMATION   IN  SWITZERLAIS'D 

ten  Theses,  which  weie  to  be  defended  by  himself  and  his 
colleague,  Francis  Kolb ;  Zwingli  had  translated  them 
into  Latin  and  Farel  into  French  for  the  benefit  of 
strangers;  and  they  were  sent  out  with  the  invitations. 
They  were — (I)  The  Holy  Catholic  Church,  of  which 
Christ  is  the  only  Head,  is  born  of  the  Word  of  God, 
abides  therein,  and  does  not  hear  the  voice  of  a  stranger.1 
(2)  The  Church  of  Christ  makes  no  law  nor  statute  apart 
from  the  Word  of  God,  and  consequently  those  human 
ordinances  which  are  called  the  commandments  of  the 
Church  do  not  bind  our  consciences  unless  they  are 
founded  on  the  Word  of  God  and  agreeable  thereto.  (3) 
Christ  is  our  wisdom,  righteousness,  redemption,  and  price 
for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world;  and  all  who  think 
they  can  win  salvation  in  any  other  way,  or  have  other 
satisfaction  for  their  sins3  renounce  Christ.  (4)  It  is 
impossible  to  prove  from  Scripture  that  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ  are  corporeally  present  in  the  bread  of 
the  Holy  Supper.  (5)  The  Mass,  in  which  Christ  is 
offered  to  God  the  Father  for  the  sins  of  the  living  and 
the  dead,  is  contrary  to  the  Holy  Scripture,  is  a  gross 
affront  to  the  Passion  and  Death  of  Christ,  and  is  there- 
fore an  abomination  before  God.  (6)  Since  Christ  alone 
died  for  us,  and  since  He  is  the  only  mediator  and  inter- 
cessor between  God  and  believers,  He  only  ought  to  be 
invoked ;  and  all  other  mediators  and  advocates  ought  to 
be  i  ejected,  since  they  have  no  warrant  in  the  Holy 
Scripture  of  the  Bible.  (7)  There  is  no  trace  of  Purgatory 
after  death  in  the  Bible ;  and  therefore  all  services  for  the 
dead,  such  as  vigils,  Masses,  and  the  like,  are  vain  things. 
(8)  To  make  pictures  and  adore  them  is  contrary  to  the 
Old  and  New  Testament,  and  they  ought  to  be  destroyed 
where  there  is  the  chance  that  they  may  be  adored.  (9) 
Marriage  is  not  forbidden  to  any  estate  by  the  Holy 
Scripture,  but  wantonness  and  fornication  are  forbidden  to 
everyone  in  whatever  estate  he  may  be.  (10)  The 

1  Cf.    Scots  Confession  of  1560,   Art.   xix. :     "  The  trew  Kirk  quhi]k 
ilwaies  li cares  and  obcyis  the  voice  of  her  awin  Spouse  and  Pastor." 


THE    REFORMATION   OUTSIDE   ZURICH  43 

fornicator  is  truly  excommunicated  by  the  Holy  Scripture, 
and  therefore  wantonness  and  fornication  are  much  more 
scandalous  among  the  clergy  than  in  the  other  estate. 

These  Theses  represent  in  succinct  fashion  the  preaching 
in  the  Eeformed  Church  in  Switzerland,  and  the  fourth 
states  in  its  earliest  form  what  grew  to  be  the  Zwinglian 
doctrine  of  the  Holy  Supper.1 

The  Council  of  Bern  had  sent  invitations  to  be  present 
to  the  leading  preachers  in  the  Evangelical  cities  of  Germany 
and  Switzerland.  Bucer  and  Capito  came  from  Strassburg, 
Jacob  Ausburger  from  Muhlhausen,  Ambrose  Blaarer 
from  Constance,  Sebastian  Wagner,2  surnamed  Hofmeister 
(GEeonomus),  from  Schaffhausen,  Oecolampadius  from 
Basel,  and  many  others.3  Zwinglfs  arrival  was  eagerly 
expected.  The  Zurichers  were  resolved  not  to  trust  their 
leader  away  from  the  city  without  a  strong  guard,  and 
sent  him  to  Bern  with  an  escort  of  three  hundred  men-at- 
arms.  A  great  crowd  of  citizens  and  strangers  filled  the 
arcades  which  line  both  sides  of  the  main  street,  and 
every  window  in  the  many-storied  houses  had  its  sight- 
seers to  watch  the  Zurichers  tramping  up  from  gate  to 
cathedral  with  their  pastor  safe  in  the  centre  of  the 
troop. 

Eomanist  theologians  did  not  muster  in  anything  like 
the  same  strength.  The  men  of  the  four  Forest  cantons 
stood  sullenly  aloof;  the  authorities  in  French-speaking 
Switzerland  had  no  liking  for  the  Disputation,  and  the 
strongly  Eomanist  canton  of  Freiburg  did  its  best  to 
prevent  the  theologians  of  Neuch&tel,  Morat,  and  Grandson 
from  appearing  at  Bern;  but  in  spite  of  the  hindrances 

1  The  Theses,  in  the  original  German,  are  printed  by  Miiller,  Belcennt- 
nisschriften  der  reformierten  KircJie  (Leipzig,  1903),  pp.  xviii,  30  ;  and  in 
French  by  Herminjard  in  Corfes^xmda^ce  des  JZtformateurs  dans  les.  pays 
de  languefrati^aise  (2nd  ed.),  ii.  59,  60. 

3  Sebastian  Wagner  was  born  at  Schaffhausen  in  1476.  He  studied  at 
Paris  under  Lascaris,  taught  theology  in  the  Franciscan  monastery  at  Zurich, 
then  at  Constance.  He  adopted  the  Reformation,  and,  returning  to  his  native 
town,  became  its  reformer. 

3  Herminjard,  Correspmdance  des  JRdfor/nateiirs,  etc.  ii.  95  «, 


44  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

placed  in  their  way  no  less  than  three  hundred  and  fifty 
ecclesiastics  gathered  to  the  Disputation.  The  conference 
was  opened  on  January  15th  (le  dimenche  aprte  la  feste  de 
la  circuncisiori),1  and  was  continued  in  German  till  the 
24th;  on  the  25th  a  second  discussion,  lasting  two  days, 
was  begun,  for  the  benefit  of  strangers,  in  Latin.  «  When 
la  Dispute  des  Welches  (strangers)  was  opened,  a  stranger 
doctor  (of  Paris)  came  forward  along  with  some  priests 
speaking  the  same  language  as  himself.  He  attacked  the 
Ten  Theses,  and  William  Farel,  preacher  at  Aigle,  answered 
him."  2  The  more  distinguished  Romanist  theologians  who 
were  present  seem  to  have  refrained  from  taking  part  in 
the  discussion.  The  Bishop  of  Lausanne  defended  their 
silence  on  the  grounds  that  they  objected  to  discuss  such 
weighty  matters  in  the  vulgar  tongue ;  that  no  opportunity 
was  given  to  them  to  speak  in  Latin ;  and  that  when  the 
Emperor  had  interdicted  the  Disputation  they  were  told 
by  the  authorities  of  Bern  that  they  might  leave  the  city  if 
it  so  pleased  them.3 

The  result  of  the  Disputation  was  that  the  authorities 
and  citizens  of  Bern  were  confirmed  in  their  resolve  to 
adopt  the  Eeformation.  The  Disputation  ended  on  the 
26th  of  January  (1528),  and  on  the  7th  of  February 
the  Mass  was  declared  to  be  abolished,  and  a  sermon  took 
its  place ;  images  were  removed  from  the  churches ;  the 
monasteries  were  secularised,  and  the  funds  were  used 
partly  for  education  and  partly  to  make  up  for  the  French 
and  papal  pensions,  which  were  now  definitely  renounced, 
and  declared  to  be  illegal. 

The  two  sermons  which  Zwingli  preached  in  the 
cathedral  during  the  Disputation  made  a  powerful  impres- 
sion on  the  people  of  Bern.  It  was  after  one  of  them 
that  M.  de  Watteville,  the  Advoyer  or  President  of  the 
Eepublic,  declared  himself  to  be  convinced  of  the  truth  of 
the  Evangelical  faith,  and  with  his  whole  family  accepted 
the  Eeformation.  His  eldest  son,  a  clergyman  whose 

1  Herminjard,  Correspondance  des  Rtformateurs,  etc.  ii.  55. 

2  Ibid.  ii.  99  n.  B  Md.  ii.  98  ». 


THE    REFORMATION    OUTSIDE    ZURICH  45 

family  interest  had  procured  for  him  no  less  than  thirteen 
benefices,  and  who,  it  was  commonly  supposed,  would  be 
the  next  Bishop  of  Lausanne,  renounced  them  all  to  live 
the  life  of  a  simple  country  gentleman.1 

The  republic  of  Bern  for  long  regarded  the  Ten  Theses 
as  the  charter  of  its  religious  faith.  Not  content  with 
declaring  the  Eeformation  legally  established  within  the 
city,  the  authorities  of  Bern  sent  despatches  or  delegates 
to  all  the  cities  and  lands  under  their  control,  inform- 
ing them  of  what  they  had  done,  and  inviting  them  to 
follow  their  example.  They  insisted  that  preachers  of 
the  Gospel  must  be  at  liberty  to  deliver  their  message 
without  interruption  throughout  all  their  territories. 
They  promised  that  they  would  maintain  the  liberty  of 
both  cults  until  means  had  been  taken  to  find  out  which 
the  majority  of  the  inhabitants  preferred,  and  that  the 
decision  would  be  taken  by  vote  in  presence  of  com- 
missioners  sent  down  from  Bern.2  When  the  majority  of 

1  Nicholas  de  Watteville,  born  in  1492,  was  canon  of  St.  Vincent  in 
Bern,  protonotary  apostolic,  prior  of  Montpreveyres,  and  provost  of  Lausanne. 
He  visited  Rome  in  1517,  and  there  received  the  Abbey  of  Montheron  ;  and 
the  year  following  he  was  made  a  papal  chamberlain  to  Pope  Leo  x.    He 
gave  up  all  his  benefices  on  December  1st,    and  soon  afterwards  married 
Clara  May,  a  nun  who  had  left  the  convent  of  Konigsfcld.     He  was  always 
a  great  admirer  of  William  Fare],   and  often  interfered  to  protect  the 
impetuous    Reformer  from    the  consequences  of  his   own  rashness.     His 
younger  brother,  J.  J,  de  Watteville,  became  Advoyer  or  President  of  Bern, 
and  was  a  notable  figure  in  the  history  of  the  Reformation  in  Switzerland. 
The  family  of  de  Watteville  is  still  represented  among  the  citizens  of  Bern. 

2  As  early  as  June  15th,  1523,   the  Council  of  Bern  had  issued  an 
ordinance  for  the  preachers  throughout  their  territories,  which  enjoined 
them  to  preach  publicly  and  without  dissimulation  the  Holy  Gospel  and 
the  doctrine  of  God,  and  to  say  nothing  which  they  could  not  establish  by 
true  and  Holy  Scripture;   to  leave  entirely  alone  all  other  doctrines  and 
discussions  contrary   to  the    Gospel,    and    in    particular   the    distinctive 
doctrines  of  Luther.     Later  (May  21st,  1526),  at  a  conference  held  between 
members  of  the  Council  of  Bern,  deputies  from  the  Bernese  communes,  and 
delegates  from  the  seven  Roman  Catholic  cantons,  it  was  agreed  to  permit  no 
innovation  in  matters  of  religion.    This  agreement  was  not  maintained  long  ; 
and  the  Bernese  went  back  to  their  ordinance  of  June  1523.     It  seems  to 
have  been  practically  interpreted  to  mean  that  preachers  might  attack  the 
power  of  the  Pope,  and  the  doctrines  of  Purgatory  and  the  Invocation  of 
Saints,  but  that  they  were  not  to  &iy  anything  against  the  current  doctrine 


46  THE    REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

the  parishioners  accepted  the  Beformation,  the  new 
doctrinal  standard  was  the  Ten  Theses,  and  the  Council  of 
Bern  sent  directions  for  the  method  of  dispensing  the 
Sacraments  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  for  the 
solemnisation  of  marriages.  The  whole  of  the  German- 
speaking  portion  of  the  canton  proper  and  its  dependences 
seem  to  have  accepted  the  Eef ormation  at  once.  Bern,  had, 
besides,  some  French-speaking  districts  under  its  own 
exclusive  control,  and  others  over  which  it  ruled  along  with 
Freiburg.  The  progress  of  the  new  doctrines  was  slower 
in  these  district,  but  it  may  be  said  that  they  had  all 
embraced  the  Reformation  before  the  end  of  1530.  The 
history  of  the  Reformation  in  French-speaking  Switzerland 
belongs,  however,  to  the  next  chapter,  and  the  efforts  of 
Bern  to  evangelise  its  subjects  in  these  districts  will  be 
described  there. 

Not  content  with  this,  the  Council  of  Bern  constituted 
itself  the  patron  and  protector  of  persecuted  Protestants 
outside  their  own  lands,  and  the  evangelisation  of  western 
Switzerland  owed  almost  everything  to  its  fostering  care.1 

Thus  Bern  in  the  west  and  Zurich  in  the  east  stood 
forth  side  by  side  pledged  to  the  Reformation. 

The  cantonal  authorities  of  Appenzell  had  declared,  as 
early  as  1524,  that  Gospel  preaching  was  to  have  free 
course  within  their  territories.  Thomas  Wyttenbach  had 
been  people's  priest  in  Biel  from  1507,  and  had  leavened 
the  town  with  his  Evangelical  preaching.  In  1524  he 
courageously  married.  The  ecclesiastical  authorities  were 
strong  enough  to  get  him  deposed ;  but  a  year  or  two  later 
the  citizens  compelled  the  canLonal  Council  to  permit  the 
free  preaching  of  the  Gospel.  Sebastian  Hofmeistcr 
preached  in  Schaffhausen,  and  induced  its  people  to  declare 

of  the  sacraments.  Of.  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Bern,  quoted  in  Hermin- 
jard,  Correspondence  des  R6f<ynnaUurs  dans  Us  pays  de  lomgue  frangaise, 
(Geneva,  1878),  i.  434  n.,  ii.  23  n.,  also  20. 

1  Herminjard,  Crore&pohdance,  etc.,  ii.  123,  138,  199,  225,  etc.  In  Sept. 
1530,  Bern  wrote  to  the  Bishop  of  Basel,  who  had  imprisoned  Henri  Pourcellet, 
one  of  Farel's  preachers  :  "  Nous  ne1  pouvons  d'ailleurs  pas  toldrer  que  ceux 
qui  partagent  notre  foi  chre'tienne  soient  trait&s  d'une  tulle  maniere,"  p.  277. 


THE   REFORMATION   OUTSIDE   ZURICH  47 

for  the  Eeformation.  St.  Gallen  was  evangelised  by  the 
Humanist  Joachim  von  Watt  (Vadianus),  and  by  John 
Kessler,  who  had  studied  at  Wittenberg.  In  German 
Switzerland  only  Luzern  and  the  Forest  cantons  remained 
completely  and  immovably  attached  to  the  Eoman  Church, 
and  refused  to  tolerate  any  Evangelical  preaching  within 
their  borders.  The  Swiss  Confederacy  was  divided  ecclesi- 
astically into  two  opposite  camps. 

The  strong  religious  differences  could  not  but  affect  the 
political  cohesion  of  the  Swiss  Confederacy,  linked  together 
as  it  was  by  ties  comparatively  slight.  The  wonder  is  that 
they  did  not  altogether  destroy  it. 

As  early  as  1522,  the  Bishop  of  Constance  had  asked 
the  Swiss  Federal  Diet  at  their  meeting  at  Baden  to  pro- 
hibit the  preaching  of  the  Eeformation  doctrines  within  the 
Federation ;  and  the  next  year  the  Diet,  which  met  again 
at  Baden  (Sept.  1523),  issued  a  declaration  that  all  who 
practised  religious  innovations  were  worthy  of  punishment. 
The  deputies  from  Luzern  were  especially  active  in  inducing 
the  Diet  to  pass  this  resolution.  The  attempt  to  use  the 
Federation  for  the  purpose  of  religious  persecution,  therefore, 
first  came  from  the  Eomanist  side.  Nor  did  they  content 
themselves  with  declarations  in  the  Diet.  The  Eomanist 
canton  of  Unterwalden,  being  informed  that  some  of  the 
peasants  in  the  Bernese  Oberland  had  complained  that  the 
Eeformation  had  been  forced  upon  them,  crossed  the 
Bernese  frontier  and  committed  an  act  of  war.  Bern 
smarted  under  the  insult. 

These  endeavours  on  the  part  of  his  opponents  led 
Zwingli  to  meditate  on  plans  for  leaguing  together  for  the 
purposes  of  mutual  defence  all  who  had  accepted  the 
Eeformation.  His  plans  from  the  first  went  beyond  the 
Swiss  Confederacy. 

The  imperial  city  of  Constance,  the  seat  of  the  diocese 
which  claimed  ecclesiastical  authority  over  Zurich,  had 
been  mightily  moved  by  the  preaching  of  Ambrose  Blaarer, 
and  had  come  over  to  the  Protestant  faith.  The  bishop 
retired  to  Meersburg  and  his  chapter  to  Ueberlingen. 


48  THE    REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

The  city  feared  the  attack  of  Austria,  and  craved  protection 
from  the  Swiss  Protestants.  Its  alliance  was  valuable  to 
them,  for,  along  with  Lindau,  it  commanded  the  whole  Lake 
of  Constance.  Zurich  thereupon  asked  that  Constance  be 
admitted  within  the  Swiss  Federation.  This  was  refused 
by  the  Federal  Diet  (Nov.  1527).  Zurich  then  entered 
into  a  Christian  Civic  League  (das  christliche  JBiirgerrecht) 
with  Constance, — a  league  based  on  their  common  religious 
beliefs, — promising  to  defend  each  other  if  attacked.  The 
example  once  set  was  soon  followed,  and  the  two  following 
years  saw  the  League  increasing  rapidly.  Bern  joined  in 
June  1528,  St.  G-allen  in  Nov.  1528,  Biel  in  January, 
Miihlhausen  in  February,  Basel  in  March,  and  Schaffhausen 
in  October,  1529.  Strassburg  was  admitted  in  January 
1530.  Even  Hesse  and  Wiirtemburg  wished  to  join. 
Bern  and  Zurich  came  to  an  agreement  that  Evangelical 
preaching  must  be -allowed  in  the  Common  Lands,  and  that 
no  one  was  to  be  punished  for  his  religious  opinions. 

The  combination  looked  so  threatening  and  contained 
such  possibilities  that  Ferdinand  of  Austria  proposed  a 
counter-league  among  the  Eomanist  cantons;  and  a 
Christian  Union,  in  which  Luzern,  Zug,  Schwyz,  ITri,  and 
Unterwalden  allied  themselves  with  the  Duchy  of  Austria, 
was  founded  in  1529,  having  for  its  professed  objects  the 
preservation  of  the  mediseval  religion,  with  some  reforms 
carried  out  under  the  guidance  of  the  ecclesiastical  authori- 
ties. The  Confederates  pledged  themselves  to  secure  for 
each  other  the  right  to  punish  heretics.  This  League  had 
also  its  possibilities  of  extension.  It  was  thought  that 
Bavaria  and  Salzburg  might  join.  The  canton  of  the 
Valais  had  already  leagued  itself  with  Savoy  against  Gene vii, 
and  brought  its  ally  within  the  Christian  Union.  The 
very  formation  of  the  Leagues  threatened  war,  and  occa- 
sions of  hostilities  were  not  lacking.  Austria  was  eager 
to  attack  Constance,  and  Bern  longed  to  punish  Unterwaldeix 
for  its  unprovoked  invasion  of  Bernese  territory.  The  con- 
dition and  protection  of  the  Evangelical  population  in  the 
Common  Lands  and  in  the  Free  Bailiwicks  demanded 


THE    REFORMATION    OUTSIDE   ZURICH  49 

settlement,  more  especially  as  the  Romanist  cantons  had 
promised  to  support  each  other  in  asserting  their  right  to 
punish  heretics.  War  seemed  to  be  inevitable.  Schaff- 
hausen,  Appenzell,  and  the  Graubiinden  endeavoured  to 
mediate ;  but  as  neither  Zurich  nor  Bern  would  listen  to 
any  proposals  which  did  not  include  the  right  of  free 
preaching,  their  efforts  were  in  vain.  The  situation, 
difficult  enough,  was  made  worse  by  the  action  of  the 
canton  of  Schwyz,  which,  having  caught  a  Zurich  pastor 
named  Kaiser  on  its  territory,  had  him  condemned  and 
burnt  as  a  heretic.  This  was  the  signal  for  war.  It  was 
agreed  that  the  Zurichers  should  att'iak  the  Eomanist 
cantons,  while  Bern  defended  the  Common  Lands,  and,  if 
need  be,  the  territory  of  her  sister  canton.  The  plan  of 
campaign  was  drafted  by  Zwingli  himself,  who  also  laid 
down  the  conditions  of  peace.  His  proposals  were,  that 
the  Forest  cantons  must  allow  the  free  preaching  of  the 
Gospel  within  their  lands ;  that  they  were  to  forswear 
pensions  from  any  external  Power,  and  that  all  who 
received  them  should  be  punished  both  corporeally  and  by 
fine ;  that  the  alliance  with  Austria  should  be  given  up ; 
and  that  a  war  indemnity  should  be  paid  to  Zurich  and  to 
Bern.  While  the  armies  were  facing  each  other  the 
Zurichers  received  a  strong  appeal  from  Hans  Oebli,  the 
Landarnmann  of  Glarus,  to  listen  to  the  proposals  of  the 
enemy.  The  common  soldiers  disliked  the  internecine 
strife.  They  looked  upon  each  other  as  brothers,  and  the 
outposts  of  both  armies  were  fraternising.  In  these  cir- 
cumstances the  Zurich  army  (for  it  was  the  Swiss  custom 
that  the  armies  on  the  field  concluded  treaties)  accepted  the 
terms  of  peace  offered  by  their  opponents.  The  treaty  is 
known  as  the  First  Peace  of  Kappel  (June  1529).  It  pro- 
vided that  the  alliance  between  Austria  and  the  Eomanist 
cantons  should  be  dissolved,  and  the  treaties  "  pierced  and 
slit "  (the  parchments  were  actually  cut  in  pieces  by  the 
dagger  in  sight  of  all) ;  that  in  the  Common  Lands  no  one 
was  to  be  persecuted  for  his  religious  opinions ;  that  the 
'majority  should  decide  whether  the  old  faith  was  to  be 


50  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

retained  or  not,  and  that  bailiffs  of  moderate  opinions 
should  be  sent  to  rule  them ;  that  neither  party  should 
attack  the  other  because  of  religion  ;  that  a  war  indemnity 
should  be  paid  by  the  Eomanist  cantons  to  Zurich  and 
Bern  (the  amount  was  fixed  at  2500  Sonnenkronen) ;  and 
that  the  abolition  of  foreign  pensions  and  mercenary  service 
should  be  recommended  to  Luzern  and  the  Forest  cantons. 
The  treaty  contained  the  seeds  of  future  war;  for  the 
Zurichers  believed  that  they  had  secured  the  right  of  free 
preaching  within  the  Eomanist  cantons,  while  these  cantons 
believed  that  they  had  been  left  to  regulate  their  own 
internal  economy  as  they  pleased.  Zwingli  would  have 
preferred  a  settlement  after  war,  and  the  future  justified 
his  apprehensions. 

Three  months  after  the  First  Peace  of  Kappel,  Zwingli 
was  summoned  to  the  Marburg  Colloquy,  and  the  Eeforma- 
tion  in  Switzerland  became  inevitably  connected  with  the 
wider  sphere  of  Gerjman  ecclesiastical  politics.  It  may  be 
weU,  however,  to  reserve  this  until  later,  and  finish  the 
internal  history  of  the  Swiss  movement. 

The  First  Peace  of  Kappel  was  only  a  truce,  and 
left  both  parties  irritated  with  each  other.  The  friction 
was  increased  when  the  Protestants  discovered  that  the 
Eomanist  cantons  would  not  admit  free  preaching  within 
their  territories.  They  also  shrewdly  suspected  that, 
despite  the  tearing  and  burning  of  the  documents,  the 
understanding  with  Austria  was  still  maintained.  An 
event  occurred  which  seemed  to  justify  their  suspicions. 
An  Italian  condottiere,  Giovanni  Giacomo  de'  Medici,  had 
seized  and  held  (1525-31)  the  strong  position  called  this 
Eocco  di  Musso  on  the  Lake  of  Como,  and  from  this 
stronghold  he  dominated  the  whole  lake.  This  ruffian 
had  murdered  Martin  Paul  and  his  son,  envoys  from  the 
Graubunden  to  Milan,  and  had  crossed  the  lake  and 
harried  the  fertile  valley  of  the  Adda,  known  as 
the  Val  Tellina,  which  was  then  within  the  territories 
of  the  Graubiinden  (Grisons).  The  Swiss  Confederacy 
were  bound  to  defend  their  neighbours ;  but  when  appeal 


THE   REFORMATION    OUTSIDE   ZURICH  5] 

was  made,  the  Romanist  cantons  refused,  and  the  hand 
of  Austria  was  seen  behind  the  refusal.  Besides,  at  the 
Federal  Diets  the  Eomanist  cantons  had  refused  to  listen 
to  any  complaints  of  persecutions  for  religion  within 
their  lands.  At  a  meeting  between  Zurich  and  her  allies, 
it  was  resolved  that  the  Eomanist  cantons  should  be 
compelled  to  abolish  the  system  of  foreign  pensions,  and 
permit  free  preaching  within  their  territories.  Zurich 
was  for  open  war,  but  the  advice  of  Bern  prevailed.  It 
was  resolved  that  if  the  Eomanist  cantons  would  not 
agree  to  these  proposals,  Zurich  and  her  allies  should 
prevent  wine,  wheat,  salt,  and  iron  from  passing  through 
their  territories  to  the  Forest  cantons.  The  result  was 
that  the  Forest  cantons  declared  war,  invaded  Zurich 
while  that  canton  was  unprepared,  fought  and  won  the 
battle  of  Kappel,  at  which  Zwingli  was  slain.  He  had 
accompanied  the  little  army  of  Zurich  as  its  chaplain. 
The  victory  of  the  Romanists  produced  a  Second  Peace  of 
Kappel  which  reversed  the  conditions  of  the  first.  War 
indemnities  were  exacted  from  most  of  the  Protestant 
cantons.  It  was  settled  that  each  canton  was  to  be 
left  free  to  manage  its  own  religious  affairs ;  that  the 
Christian  Civic  League  was  to  be  dissolved ;  and  a  number 
of  particular  provisions  were  made  which  practically 
secured  the  rights  of  Eomanist  without  corresponding 
advantages  to  Protestant  minorities.  The  territories  of 
Zuiich  were  left  untouched,  but  the  city  was  compelled 
by  the  charter  of  Kappel  to  grant  rights  to  her  rural 
districts.  She  bound  herself  to  consult  them  in  all 
important  matters,  and  particularly  not  to  make  war  or 
peace  without  their  consent. 

As  a  result  of  this  ruinous  defeat,  and  of  the  death  of 
Zwingli  which  accompanied  it,  Zurich  lost  her  place  as 
the  leading  Protestant  canton,  and  the  guidance  of  the 
Reformation  movement  fell  more  and  more  into  the  hands 
of  Geneva,  which  was  an  ally  but  not  a  member  of  the 
Confederation.  Another  and  more  important  permanent 
result  of  this  Second  Peace  of  Kappel  was  that  it  was 


52  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

seen  in  Switzerland  as  in  Germany  that  while  the 
Keformation  could  not  be  destroyed,  it  could  not  win  for 
itself  the  whole  country,  and  that  Eoman  Catholics  and 
Protestants  must  divide  the  cantons  and  endeavour  to 
live  peaceably  side  by  side. 

The  history  of  the  Keformation  in  Switzerland  after  the 
death  of  Zwingli  is  so  linked  with  the  wider  history  of  the 
movement  in  Germany  and  in  Geneva,  that  it  can  scarcely 
be  spoken  about  separately.  It  is  also  intimately  related 
to  the  differences  which  separated  Zwingli  from  Luther 
in  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

§  7.  The  Sacramental  Controversy?- 

In  the  Bern  Disputation  of  1528,  the  fourth  thesis 
said  "it  cannot  be  proved  from  the  Scripture  that  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  substantially  and  cor- 
poreally received  in  the  Eucharist,"2  and  the  statement 
became  a  distinctive  watchword  of  the  early  Swiss 
Reformation.  This  thesis,  a  negative  one,  was  perhaps 
the  earliest  official  statement  of  a  bold  attempt  to  get 
rid  of  the  priestly  miracle  in  the  Mass,  which  was  the 
strongest  theoretical  and  practical  obstacle  to  the  acceptance 
of  the  fundamental  Protestant  thought  of  the  spiritual 
priesthood  of  all  believers.  The  question  had  been  seriously 
exercising  the  attention  of  all  the  leading  theologians  of 
the  Reformation,  and  this  very  trenchant  way  of  dismissing 
it  had  suggested  itself  simultaneously  to  theologians  in 
the  Low  Countries,  in  the  district  of  the  Upper  Rhino, 

1  SOURCES  :  E.  F.  K.  Muller,  Die.  Bekenntovteschriften  der  reformierten 
JClrcTie  (Leipzig,  1903),  pp.   1-100 ;  Hospinian,  Historic  tfacramcntaria, 
2  vols.  (Geneva,  1681). 

LATER  BOOKS  :  Ebrard,  Das  Doynw,  vom  heiligen  Abendmahl  und  seine 
OescJiichte  (Frankfurt  a  M.  1845-46),  vol.  ii.  ;  Schweizor,  Die yrotestcmti&clien 
Cewtraldogmen  in  Hirer  JEntwiGhelung  innerhalb  der  reformierten,  Kirclie, 
(Zurich,  1854-56);  Hundeshagen,  Die  Konflihte  dcs  Zwinglianisimw, 
Lutherthu'nis,  wnd  Calvinistnus  in  den  'JBcrnische'n,  Lwidkirchen  35$®- 
1558,  nach  meist  unyedrucJcten  Quetten  dargestelt  (Betn,  1842) ;  compare  also 
vol.  i.  352  ff. 

2  Muller,  Die  Bekcnntnissdiriftcn  des  rcforinierten  Kirchc,  p.  30, 


THE   SACRAMENTAL  CONTROVERSY  53 

and  in  many  of  the  imperial  cities.  It  had  been  pro- 
claimed in  all  its  naked  simplicity  by  Andrew  Bodenstein 
of  Carlsladt,  the  theologian  of  the  German  democracy: 
but  it  was  Zwingli  who  worked  at  the  subject  care- 
fully, and  who  had  produced  a  reasonable  if  somewhat 
defective  theory  based  on  a  rather  shallow  exegesis,  in 
which  the  words  of  our  Lord,  tC  This  is  My  Body,"  were 
declared  to  mean  nothing  but  "  This  signifies  My  Body." 
Luther,  always  disposed  to  think  harshly  of  anything  that 
came  from  Carlstadt,  inclined  to  exaggerate  his  influence 
with  the  German  Protestant  democracy,  believing  with  his 
whole  heart  that  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Holy  Supper 
the  elements  Bread  and  Wine  were  more  than  the  bare 
signs  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord,  was  vehemently 
moved  to  find  such  views  concerning  a  central  doctrine 
of  Christianity  spreading  through  his  beloved  Germany. 
He  never  paused  to  ask  whether  the  opinions  he  saw 
adopted  with  eagerness  in  most  of  the  imperial  cities 
were  really  different  from  those  of  Carlstadt  (for  that  is 
one  of  the  sad  facts  in  this  deplorable  controversy).  He 
simply  denounced  them,  and  stormed  against  Zwingli, 
whose  name  was  spread  abroad  as  their  author  and 
propagator.  Nlirnberg  was  almost  the  only  great  city 
that  remained  faithful  to  him.  It  was  the  only  city 
also  which  was  governed  by  the  ancient  patriciate,  and 
in  which  the  democracy  had  little  or  no  power.  When 
van  Hoen  and  Karl  Stadt  in  the  Netherlands,  Hedio  at 
Mainz,  Conrad  Sam  at  Ulm,  when  the  preachers  of 
Augsburg,  Strassburg,  Frankfurt,  Eeutlingen,  and  other 
cities  accepted  and  taught  Zwingli's  doctrine  of  tho 
Eucharist,  Luther  and  his  immediate  circle  saw  a  great 
deal  more  than  a  simple  division  in  doctrine.  It  was 
something  more  than  the  meaning  of  the  Holy  Supper  or 
the  exegesis  of  a  difficult  text  which  rent  Protestantism 
in  two,  and  made  Luther  and  Zwingli  appear  as  the 
leaders  of  opposing  parties  in  a  movement  where  union 
was  a  supreme  necessity  after  the  decision  at  Speyer  in 
1529.  The  theological  question  was  couiphcatwl  by 


54  THE   REFORMATION   IN  SWITZERLAND 

social  and  political  ideas,  which,  if  not  acknowledged 
openly,  were  at  least  in  the  minds  of  the  leaders  who 
took  sides  in  the  dispute.  On  the  one  side  were  men 
whom  Luther  held  to  be  in  part  responsible  for  the 
Peasants'  War,  who  were  the  acknowledged  leaders  of 
that  democracy  which  he  had  learnt  to  distrust  if  not  to 
fear,  who  still  wished  to  link  the  Eeformation  to  vast 
political  schemes,  all  of  which  tended  to  weaken  the 
imperial  power  by  means  of  French  and  other  alliances, 
and  who  only  added  to  their  other  iniquities  a  theological 
theory  which,  he  honestly  believed,  would  take  away  from 
believers  their  comforting  assurance  of  union  with  their 
Lord  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Holy  Supper. 

The  real  theological  difference  after  all  did  not 
amount  to  so  much  as  is  generally  said.  Zwingli's 
doctrine  of  the  Holy  Supper  was  not  the  crude  theory 
of  Carlstadt ;  and  Luther  might  have  seen  this  if  he  had 
only  fairly  examined  it.  The  opposed  views  were,  in  fact, 
complementary,  and  the  pronounced  ideas  of  each  were 
implicitly,  though  not  expressly,  held  by  the  other.  Luther 
and  Zwingli  approached  the  subject  from  two  different 
points  of  view,  and  in  debate  they  neither  understood  nor 
were  exactly  facing  each  other. 

The  whole  Christian  Church,  during  all  the  centuries, 

has  found  three  great  ideas  embodied  in  the  Sacrament  of 

the  Holy  Supper,  and  all  three  have  express  reference  to 

•  the  death  of  the  Saviour  on  the  Cross  for  His  people. 

The    thoughts    are    Proclamation,    Commemoration,    and 

Participauon    or  Communion.     In   the  Supper,  believers 

proclaim  the  death  and  what  it  means ;  they  commemorate 

the  Sacrifice;  and   they  partake   in   or   have    communion 

with  the  crucified  Christ,  who  is  also  the  Eisen  Saviour. 

The  rnediajval  Church  had  insisted  that  this  sacramental 

union  with  Christ  was  in  the  hands  of  the  priesthood  to 

give    or    to    withhold.     Duly  ordained   priests,  and  they 

alone,  could  bring  the   worshippers  into  such  a  relation 

with  Christ  as  would  make  the  Sacramental  participation 

a  wssible  thing;   and  out  of  this  claim  had   grown  the 


THE   SACRAMENTAL   CONTROVERSY  55 

mediaeval  theory  of  Transubstantiation.  It  had  also 
divided  the  Sacrament  of  the  Supper  into  two  distinct 
rites  (the  phrase  is  not  too  strong) — the  Mass  and  the 
Eucharist — the  one  connecting  itself  instinctively  with  the 
commemoration  and  the  other  with  the  participation. 

Protestants  united  in  denying  the  special  priestly 
miracle  needed  to  bring  Christ  and  His  people  together  in 
the  Sacrament;  but  it  is  easy  to  see  that  they  might 
approach  the  subject  by  the  two  separate  paths  of  Mass 
or  Eucharist.  Zwingli  took  the  one  road  and  Luther 
happened  on  the  other. 

Zwingli  believed  that  the  mediaeval  Church  had  dis- 
placed the  scriptural  thought  of  commemoration,  and  put 
the  non-scriptural  idea  of  repetition  in  its  place.  Tor  the 
mediaeval  priest  claimed  that  in  virtue  of  the  miraculous 
power  given  in  ordination,  he  could  really  change  the 
bread  and  wine  into  the  actual  physical  Body  of  Jesus,  and, 
when  this  was  done,  that  he  could  reproduce  over  again 
the  agony  of  the  Cross  by  crushing  it  with  his  teeth.  This 
idea  seemed  to  Zwingli  to  be  utterly  profane ;  it  dishonoured 
the  One  great  Sacrifice ;  it  was  unscriptural ;  it  depended 
on  a  priestly  gift  of  working  a  miracle  which  did  not  exist. 
Then  he  believed  that  the  sixth  chapter  of  St.  John's 
Gospel  forbade  all  thought  that  spiritual  benefits  could 
come  from  a  mere  partaking  with  the  mouth.  It  was  the 
atonement  worked  out  by  Christ's  death  that  was  appropri- 
ated and  commemorated  in  the  Holy  Supper;  and  the 
atonement  is  always  received  by  faith.  Thus1  the  two 
principal  thoughts  in  the  theory  of  Zwingli  are,  that  the 
mediaeval  doctrine  must  be  purified  by  changing  the  idea 
of  repetition  of  the  death  of  Christ  for  commemoration  of 
that  death,  and  the  thought  of  manducating  with  the  teeth 
for  that  of  faith  which  is  the  faculty  by  which  spiritual 
benefits  are  received.  But  Zwingli  believed  that  a  living 
faith  always  brought  with  it  the  presence  of  Christ,  for 
there  can  be  no  true  faith  without  actual  spiritual  contact 
witli  the  Saviour.  Therefore  Zwingli  held  that  there  was 
a  Ecal  Presence  of  Christ  in  the  Holy  Supper;  but  a 


56  THE   REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND 

spiritual  presence  brought  by  the  faith  of  the  believing 
communicant  and  not  by  the  elements  of  Bread  and  Wine, 
which  were  only  the  signs  representing  a  Body  which  was 
corporeally  absent.  The  defect  of  this  theory  is  that  it 
does  not  make  the  Presence  of  Christ  in  the  Sacrament  in 
any  way  depend  on  the  ordinance ;  there  is  no  sacramental 
presence  other  than  what  there  is  in  any  act  of  faith.  It 
was  not  until  Zwingli  had  elaborated  his  theory  that  he 
sought  for  and  found  an  explanation  of  the  words  of  our 
Lord,  and  taught  that  This  is  My  Body,  must  mean  This 
signifies  My  Body.  His  theory  was  entirely  different  from 
that  of  Carlstadt,  with  which  Luther  always  identified  it. 

Luther  approached  the  whole  subject  by  a  different 
path.  What  repelled  "Him  in  the  mediaeval  docrine  of  the 
Holy  Supper  was  the  way  in  which  he  believed  it  to 
trample  on  the  spiritual  priesthood  of  all  believers.  He 
protested  against  Transubstantiation  and  private  Masses, 
because  they  were  the  most  flagrant  instances  of  that 
contempt.  When  he  first  preached  on  the  subject  (1519) 
it  was  to  demand  the  "  cup "  for  the  laity,  and  he  makes 
use  of  an  expression  in  his  sermon  which  reveals  how  his 
thoughts  were  tending.  He  says  that  in  the  Sacrament  of 
the  Holy  Supper  "  the  communicant  is  so  united  to  Christ 
and  His  saints,  that  Christ's  life  and  sufferings  and  the  lives 
and  sufferings  of  the  saints  become  his."  No  one  held  more 
strongly  than  Luther  that  the  Atonement  was  made  by 
our  Lord,  and  by  Him  alone.  Therefore  he  cannot  be 
thinking  of  the  Atonement  when  he  speaks  of  union  with 
the  lives  and  the  sufferings  of  the  saints.  He  believes 
that  the  main  thing  in  the  Sacrament  is  that  it  gives  sucli 
a  companionship  with  Jesus  as  His  disciples  and  saints  have 
had.  There  was,  of  course,  a  reference  to  the  death  of 
Christ  and  to  the  Atonement,  for  apart  from  that  death 
no  companionship  is  possible ;  but  the  reference  is  indirect, 
and  through  the  thought  of  the  fellowship.  In  the  Sacra- 
ment we  touch  Christ  as  His  disciples  might  have  touched 
Him  when  He  lived  on  earth,  and  as  His  glorified  saints 
touch  Him  now.  This  reference,  therefore,  clearly  shows 


THE    SAUKAAiJ£VfAJL,    CONTROVERSY  57 

that  Luther  saw  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Supper  the 
presence  of  the  glorified  Body  of  our  Lord,  and  that  the 
primary  use  of  the  Sacrament  was  to  bring  the  com- 
municant into  contact  with  that  glorified  Body.  This 
required  a  presence  (and  Luther  thought  a  presence 
extended  in  space)  of  the  glorified  Body  of  Christ  in  the 
Sacrament  in  order  that  the  communicant  might  be 
in  actual  contact  with  it.  But  communion  with  the  laving 
Christ  implies  the  appropriation  of  the  death  of  Christ,  and 
of  the  Atonement  won  by  His  death.  Thus  the  reference 
to  the  Crucified  Christ  which  Zwingli  reaches  directly, 
Luther  attains  indirectly ;  and  the  reference  to  the  Living 
Eisen  Christ  which  Zwingli  reaches  indirectly,  Luther 
attains  directly.  Luther  avoided  the  need  of  a  priestly 
miracle  to  bring  the  Body  extended  in  space  into  immediate 
connection  with  the  elements  Bread  and  Wine,  by  intro- 
ducing a  scholastic  theory  of  what  is  meant  by  presence 
in  Space.  A  body  may  be  present  in  Space,  said  the 
Schoolmen,  in  two  ways :  it  may  be  present  in  such  a  way 
that  it  excludes  from  the  space  it  occupies  any  other  body, 
or  it  may  be  present  occupying  the  same  space  with 
another  body.  The  Glorified  Body  of  Christ  can  be  present 
in  the  latter  manner.  It  was  so  when  our  Lord  after  His 
Resurrection  appeared  suddenly  among  His  disciples  in  a 
room  when  the  doors  were  shut ;  for  then  at  some  moment 
of  time  it  must  have  occupied  the  same  space  as  a  portion 
of  the  walls  or  of  the  door.  Christ's  glorified  Body  can 
therefore  be  naturally  in  the  elements  without  any  special 
miracle,  for  it  is  ubiquitous.  It  is  in  the  table  at  which 
I  write,  said  Luther ;  in  the  stone  which  I  hurl  through 
the  air.  It  is  in  the  elements  in  the  Holy  Supper  in  a 
perfectly  natural  way,  and  needs  no  priestly  miracle  to 
bring  it  there.  This  natural  presence  of  the  Body  of 
Christ  in  the  elements  in  the  Supper  is  changed  into  a 
Sacramental  Presence  by  the  promise  of  God,  which  is 
attached  to  the  reverent  and  believing  partaking  of  the 
Holy  Supper. 

These  were  the  two  theories  which  ostensibly  divided 


58  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SWITZERLAND 

the  Protestants  in  1529  into  two  parties,  the  one  of  which 
was  led  by  Zwiugli  and  the  other  by  Luther.  They  were 
not  so  antagonistic  that  they  could  not  be  reconciled.  Each 
theologian  held  implicitly  what  the  other  declared  explicitly. 
Zwiagli  placed  the  relation  to  the  Death  of  Christ  in  the 
foreground,  but  implicitly  admitted  the  relation  to  the 
Risen  Christ — going  back  to  the  view  held  in  the  Early 
Church.  Luther  put  fellowship  with  the  Risen  Christ  in 
the  foreground,  but  admitted  the  reference  to  the  Crucified 
Christ — accepting  the  mediaeval  way  of  looking  at  the 
matter.  The  one  had  recourse  to  a  very  shallow  exegesis 
to  help  him,  and  the  other  to  a  scholastic  theory  of  space ; 
and  naturally,  but  unfortunately,  when  controversy  arose, 
the  disputant  attacked  the  weakest  part  of  his  opponent's 
theory — Luther,  Zwingli's  exegesis ;  and  Zwingli,  Luther's 
scholastic  theory  of  spatial  presence. 

The  attempt  to  bring  about  an  understanding  between 
Luther  and  Zwingli,  made  by  Philip  of  Hesse,  the  confidant 
of  Zwingli,  and  in  sympathy  with  the  Swiss  Keforrner's 
schemes  of  political  combination,  has  already  been 
mentioned,  and  its  failure  related.1  It  need  not  be  dis- 
cussed again.  But  for  the  history  of  the  Eeformation  in 
Switzerland  it  is  necessary  to  say  something  about  the 
further  progress  of  this  Sacramental  controversy,  Calvin 
gradually  won  over  the  Swiss  Protestants  to  his  views  ;  and 
Ms  theory,  which  at  one  time  seemed  about  to  unite  the 
divided  Protestants,  must  be  alluded  to. 

Calvin  began  his  study  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacra- 
isent  of  the  Holy  Supper  independently  of  both  Luther 
and  Zwingli.  His  position  as  the  theologian  of  Switzer- 
land, and  his  friendship  with  his  colleague  William  Farel, 
who  was  a  Zwinglian,  made  him  adapt  his  theory  to 
Zwinglian  language ;  but  he  borrowed  nothing  from  the 
Eeformer  of  Zurich.  He  was  quite  willing  to  accept 
Zwingli's  exegesis  so  far  as  the  words  went ;  but  he  gave 
another  and  altogether  different  meaning  to  Zwingli's 
phrase,  This  signifies  My  Body.  He  was  willing  to  call 
1  Cf.  vol.  L  352  fif. 


THE   SACRAMENTAL   CONTROVERSY  59 

fche  "  elements  "  signs  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord ; 
but  while  Zwingli  called  them  signs  which  represent  (signa 
representatives)  what  was  absent,  Calvin  insisted  on  calling 
them  signs  which  exhibit  (signa  exhibitiva)  what  was  present 
— a  distinction  which  is  continually  forgotten  in  describing 
his  relation  to  the  theories  of  Zwingli,  and  one  which 
enabled  him  to  ^convince  Luther  that  he  held  that  there 
was  a  Eeal  Presence  of  Christ's  Body  in  the  Sacrament  of 
the  Holy  Supper.  To  describe  minutely  Calvin's  doctrine 
of  the  Holy  Supper  would  require  more  space  than  can  be 
given  here,  and  a  brief  statement  of  the  central  thoughts  is 
alone  possible*  His  aim  in  common  with  all  the  Eeformers 
was  to  construct  a  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Supper 
which  would  be  at  once  scriptural,  free  from  superstition 
and  from  the  crass  materialist  associations  which  had 
gathered  round  the  theory  of  transubstantiation,  and  which 
would  clearly  conserve  the  great  Eeformation  proclamation 
of  the  spiritual  priesthood  of  all  believers.  He  went  back 
to  the  mediaeval  idea  of  transubstantiation,  and  asked 
whether  it  gave  a  true  conception  of  what  was  meant  by 
substance.  He  decided  that  it  did  not,  and  believed  that 
the  root  thought  in  substance  was  not  dimensions  in  space, 
but  power.  The  substance  of  a  body  consists  in  its  power, 
active,  and  passive,  and  the  presence  of  the  substance  of  any- 
thing consists  in  the  immediate  application  of  that  power.1 
When  Luther  and  Zwingli  had  spoken  of  the  substance  of 
the  Body  of  Christ,  they  had  always  in  their  mind  the 
thought  of  something  extended  in  space;  and  the  one 
affirmed  while  the  other  denied  that  this  Body  of  Christ, 
something  extended  in  space,  could  be  and  was  present  in 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Supper.  Calvin's  conception  of 
substance  enabled  him  to  say  that  wherever  anything  acts 
there  it  is.  He  denied  the  crude  "  substantial "  presence 
which  Luther  insisted  on ;  and  in  this  he  sided  with 
Zwingli.  But  he  affirmed  a  real  because  active  presence, 
and  in  this  he  sided  with  Luther. 

Calvin's     view     had     been     accepted     definitely     by 
1  Leibnitz,  PCHS&S  de  Leibnitz,  2nd  ed.  (Paris,  1803)  p.  106. 


60  THE  REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND 

Melanchthon,  and  somewhat  indefinitely  by  Luther. 
The  imperial  cities,  led  by  Strassburg,  which  was  under 
the  influence  of  Bueer,  who  had  thought  out  for  himself 
a  doctrine  not  unlike  that  of  Calvin,  had  been  included  in 
the  Wittenberg  Concord  (May  1536);  but  Luther  would 
have  nothing  to  do  with  the  Swiss.  As  it  was  vain  to 
hope  that  Switzerland  would  be  included  in  any  Lutheran 
alliance,  Calvin  set  himself  to  produce  dogmatic  harmony 
in  Switzerland.  In  conjunction  with  Bullinger,  Zwingli's 
son-in-law  and  successor  in  Zurich,  he  drafted  the  Consensus 
of  Zurich  (Consensus  Tigurinus)  in  1549.1  The  document 
is  Calvinist  in  theology  and  largely  Zwinglian  in  language. 
It  was  accepted  with  some  difficulty  in  Basel  and  in  Bern, 
and  heartily  in  Biel,  Schaffhausen,  Miihlhausen,  and  St. 
Gallen.  It  ended  dogmatic  disputes  in  Protestant  Switzer- 
land, which  was  thus  united  under  the  one  creed. 

This  does  not  mean  any  increase  of  Protestantism  within 
Switzerland.  The  Komanist  cantons  drew  more  closely 
together.  Cardinal  Carlo  Borromeo  of  Milan  took  a  deep 
interest  in  the  counter-Eeformation  in  Switzerland.  He 
introduced  the  Jesuits  into  Luzern  and  the  Forest  cantons, 
and  after  his  death  these  cantons  formed  a  league  which 
included  Luzern,  Uri,  Schwyz,  Zug,  Unterwalden,  Freiburg, 
and  Solothurn  (1586).  This  League  (the  Borromean  League) 
pledged  its  members  to  maintain  the  Eoman  Cfatholic 
faith.  The  lines  of  demarcation  between  Protestant  and 
Eomanist  cantons  in  Switzerland  practically  survive  to 
the  present  day. 

1  Mailer,  Die  Bekenntnisschriften  der  reformierten  JKirchc,  p,  159. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA   UNDER  CALVIN.1 
§  1.  Geneva. 

GENEVA,  which  was  to  be  the  citadel  of  the  Eeformed 
faith  in  Europe,  had  a  history  which  prepared  it  for  the 
part  it  was  destined  to  play. 

The  ancient  constitution  of  the  town,  solemnly  pro- 
mulgated in  1387,  recognised  three  different  authorities 
within  its  walls :  the  Bishop,  who  was  the  sovereign  or 
"  Prince "  of  the  city ;  the  Count,  who  had  possession  of 
the  citadel ;  and  the  Free  Burghers.  The  first  act  of  the 

1  SOTTKCES  :  M&noires  et  documents  publics  par  la  Soci&e'  d'histoire  et 
d'archceologie  de  Geneve  (especially  vols.  ii.  v.  ix.  xv.  xx.) ;  Froment,  Les 
Actes  et  gestes  marveill&ux  de  la  cite*  de  Geneve  (ed.  of  1854  by  G.  Revillod) ; 
La  Sceur  Jeanne  de  Jussie,  Le  levain  du  Calvinisme  (ed.  of  1865) ;  G.  Far  el, 
Lettres  certaines  tfaucuns  grandz  troubles  et  tumultes  advenuz  a  Geneve,  avec 
la  disputation  faicte  Van  153 Jf.  (Basel,  1588) ;  Eegistres  du  Conseil  de  Geneve 
(known  to  me  only  through  the  extracts  given  by  Herminjard,  Doumergue, 
and  others) ;  Herminjard,  Correspondence  des  Itdformateurs  dans  les  pay*  de 
langue  frangaise,  9  vols.  (Geneva,  etc.,  vols.  i.  ii.  in  a  2nd  edition,  1878, 
vols.  iii.-ix.  1870-97) ;  Calvin,  Opera,  omnia,  vols.  xxix.-lxxxvii.  of  the 
Corpus  JReformatorum  (Brunswick  and  Berlin,  1869-97) ;  Bonnet,  Lettres 
frangaises  de  Jean  Calvin  (Paris,  1854) ;  Beza,  Vita  Calwni  (vol.  xlix.  of  the 
Corpus  JRefor?natorum) ;  Eilliet,  Le  premier  cattchisme  de  Calvin  (Paris, 
1878). 

LATER  WORKS  :  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  les  hommes  et  les  chases  de 
son  temps  (only  three  vols.  published,  Lausanne,  1899, 1902, 1905)  ?  Bungener, 
Jean  Calvin,  savie,  son  auvre  et  ses  ecrits  (Paris,  1862-63);  Kampschulte, 
Jokann  Calvin,  seine  Kirche  und  eeinA  Stadt  in  Genf  (Leipzig,  1869-99) ; 
A.  Koget,  Histoire  du  peuple  de  Geneve  depuis  la  Itefomnejusqu'&  I'escalade 
(Geneva,  1870-83) ;  Dunant,  Les  relations  politiques  de  Geneve  avec  Eerne  et 
les  Suisses  de  1586-64  (Geneva,  1894) ;  Ruehat,  Histoire  de  la  RefomnaMm 
de  la,  jSuisse,  ed.  by  Vulliemin  (Paris  and  Lausanne,  1835-38). 

61 


62      THE   REFORMATION   IN  GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

Bishop  on  his  nomination  was  to  go  to  the  Church  of  St. 
Peter  and  swear  on  the  Missal  that  he  would  maintain  the 
civic  rights.  The  House  of  Savoy  had  succeeded  to  the 
countship  of  Geneva,  and  they  were  represented  within 
the  town  by  a  viceroy,  who  was  called  the  Count  or 
Vidomne.  He  was  the  supreme  justiciary.  The  citizens 
were  democratically  organised.  They  met  once  a  year  in  a 
recognised  civic  assembly  to  elect  four  Syndics  to  be  their 
rulers  and  representatives.  It  was  the  Syndics  who  in 
their  official  capacity  heard  the  oaths  of  the  Bishop  and  of 
the  Vidomne  to  uphold  the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  town. 
They  kept  order  within  the  walls  from  sunrise  to  sunset. 

These  three  separate  authorities  were  frequently  in 
conflict,  and  in  the  triangular  duel  the  citizens  and  the 
Bishop  were  generally  in  alliance  against  the  House  of 
Savoy  and  its  viceroy.  The  consequence  was  that  few 
mediaeval  cities  under  ecclesiastical  rule  were  more  loyal 
than  Geneva  was  to  its  Bishop,  so  long  as  he  respected  the 
people's  rights  and  stood  by  them  against  their  feudal  lords 
when  they  attempted  oppression. 

In  the  years  succeeding  1444  the  hereditary  loyalty 
to  their  bishops  had  to  stand  severe  tests.  Count 
Amadeus  vm  of  Savoy,  one  of  the  most  remarkable  men 
of  the  fifteenth  century, — he  ascended  the  papal  throne 
and  resigned  the  Pontificate  to  become  a  hermit, — used 
his  pontifical  power  to  possess  himself  of  the  bishopric. 
From  that  date  onwards  the  Bishop  of  Geneva  was  almost 
always  a  member  of  the  House  of  Savoy,  and  the  rights 
of  the  citizens  were  for  the  most  •  part  disregarded.  The 
bishopric  became  an  appanage  of  Savoy,  and  boys  (one  of 
ten  years  of  age,  another  of  seventeen)  and  bastards  ruled 
from  the  episcopal  chair. 

After  long  endurance  a  party  formed  itself  among  the 
townspeople  vowed  to  restore  the  old  rights  of  the  city. 
•They  called  themselves,  or  were  named  by  others,  the 
JEidguenots  (Hidgenosseri) ;  while  the  partisans  of  the  Bishop 
and  of  the  House  of  Savoy  were  termed  Mamelukes,  because, 
it  was  said,  they  had  forsaken  Christianity. 


GENEVA  63 

In  their  difficulties  the  Genevans  turned  to  the  Swiss 
cantons  nearest  them  and  asked  to  be  allied  with  Freiburg 
and  Bern.  Freiburg  consented,  and  an  alliance  was  made 
in  1519  ;  but  Bern,  an  aristocratic  republic,  was  unwilling 
to  meddle  in  the  struggle  of  a  democracy  in  a  town  outside 
the  Swiss  Confederacy.  The  citizens  of  Bern,  more 
sympathetic  than  their  rulers,  compelled  them  to  make 
alliance  with  Geneva  in  1526, — very  half-heartedly  on 
the  part  of  the  Bernese  Council. 

The  Swiss  cantons,  Bern  especially,  could  not  in  their 
own  interest  see  the  patriotic  party  in  Geneva  wholly 
crushed,  and  the  "gate  of  Western  Switzerland"  left 
completely  in  possession  of  the  House  of  Savoy.  There- 
fore, when  the  Bishop  assembled  an  army  for  the  purpose 
of  effectually  crushing  all  opposition  within  the  town, 
Bern  and  Freiburg  collected  their  forces  and  routed  the 
troops  of  Savoy.  But  the  allies,  instead  of  using  to  the 
full  the  advantage  they  had  gained,  were  content  with  a 
compromise  by  which  the  Bishop  remained  the  lord  of 
Geneva,  while  the  rights  of  the  Vidomne  were  greatly 
curtailed,  and  the  privileges  of  the  townsmen  were  to  be 
respected  (Oct.  19th,  1530). 

From  this  date  onwards  Geneva  was  governed  by 
what  was  called  le  Petit  Conseil,  and  was  generally  spoken 
of  as  the  Council ;  then  a  Council  of  Two  Hundred,  framed 
on  the  model  of  those  of  Freiburg  and  Bern ;  lastly,  by  the 
Conseil  General,  or  assembly  of  the  citizens.  All  important 
transactions  were  first  submitted  to  and  deliberated  on  by 
the  Petit  Conseil,  which  handed  them  on  with  their  opinion 
of  what  ought  to  be  done  to  the  Council  of  the  Two 
Hundred.  ITo  change  of  situation — fof  example,  the 
adoption  of  the  Eeformation — was  finally  adopted  until 
submitted  to  the  General  Council  of  all  the  burghers. 

It  is  possible  that  had  there  seemed  to  be  any  immediate 
prospects  that  Geneva  would  join  the  Eeformation, 
Bern  would  have  aided  the  patriots  more  effectually. 
Bern  was  the  great  Protestant  Power  in  Western  Switzer- 
land, Its  uniform  policy,  since  1528,  had  been  to 


64     THE   REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

constitute  itself  the  protector  of  towns  and  districts  where 
a  majority  of  the  inhabitants  were  anxious  to  take  the 
side  of  the  Eeformation  and  were  hindered  by  their  over- 
lords. It  made  alliances  with  the  towns  in  the  territories 
of  the  Bishop  of  Basel,  and  enabled  them  to  assert  their 
independence.  In  May  (23rd)  1532  it  warned  the  Duke 
of  Savoy  that  if  he  thought  of  persecuting  the  inhabitants 
of  Payerne  because  of  their  religion,  it  would  make  their 
cause  its  own,  and  declared  that  its  alliance  with  the  town 
was  much  more  ancient  than  any  existing  between  Bern 
and  the  Duke.1  But  the  case  of  Geneva  was  different. 
Signs,  indeed,  were  not  lacking  that  many  of  the  people 
were  inclined  to  the  Eeformation.2  It  is  more  than  prob- 
able that  some  of  the  members  of  the  Councils  were 
longing  for  a  religious  reform  But  however  much  in 
earnest  the  reformers  might  be,  they  were  in  a  minority, 
and  it  was  no  part  of  the  policy  of  Bern  to  interfere 
without  due  call  in  the  internal  administration  of  the 
city ;  still  less  to  see  the  rise  of  a  strong  and  independent 
Eoman  Catholic  city-republic  on  its  own  western  border. 

Suddenly,  in  the  middle  of  1532,  Geneva  was  thrown 
into  a  state  of  violent  religious  commotion.  Pope  Clement 
vii.  had  published  an  Indulgence  within  the  city  on  the 
usual  conditions.  On  the  morning  of  June  9th,  the 
citizens  found  posted  up  on  all  the  doors  of  the  churches 
great  printed  placards,  announcing  that  "plenary  pardon 
would  be  granted  to  every  one  for  all  their  sins  on  the 
one  condition  of  repentance,  and  a  living  faith  in  the 

1Euchat,  Sistoire  de  la  Reformation  de  la  Suisse  (Paris,  1835-38), 
iii.  138. 

2  We  read  of  Luther's  books  being  read  in  Geneva  as  early  as  May  1521, 
and  that  their  effect  was  to  give  several  of  the  people  heart  to  care  little  for 
the  threats  of  the  Pope ;  in  1522,  Cornelius  Agrippa,  writing  to  Oapito 
(June  17th),  and  Haller,  writing  to  Zwingli  (July  8th),  speak  of  Francis 
Lambert  (vir  probus  et  dttigcns  minister  Verbi  D&i\  who  had  preached  in 
Geneva,  Lausanne,  Freiburg,  and  Bern  ;  and  in  1527,  Hofen,  secretary  to 
the  Council  of  Bern,  writing  to  Zwingli  (Jan.  15th),  thinks  that  Geneva 
could  be  won  for  the  Reformation,— he  had  noticed  that  the  people  no  longer 
cared  much  for  Indulgences  or  for  the  Mass  (Herminjard,  Corrtspwidancc,  etc. 
i.  101-3,  318  «.,  ii.  9  f.,  10  t*.  ;  cf.  6). 


GENEVA  65 

promises  of  Jesus  Christ."  The  city  was  moved  to  its 
depths.  Priests  rushed  to  tear  the  placards  down. 
"  Lutherans  "  interfered.  Tumults  ensued ;  and  one  of  the 
canons  of  the  cathedral,  Pierre  Werly,  was  wounded  in  the 
arm.1 

The  Komanists,  both  inside  and  outside  the  town, 
were  inclined  to  believe  that  the  affair  meant  more  than 
it  really  did.  Freiburg  had  been  very  suspicious  of  the 
influence  of  the  great  Protestant  canton  of  Bern,  perhaps 
not  without  reason.  In  March  (7th)  1532,  the  deputies 
of  Geneva  had  been  blamed  by  the  inhabitants  of  Freiburg 
for  being  inclined  to  Lutheranism,  and  it  is  more  than 
likely  that  the  Evangelicals  of  Geneva  had  some  private 
dealings  with  the  Council  of  Bern,  and  had  been  told  that 
the  times  were  not  ripe  for  any  open  action  on  the  part 
of  the  Protestant  canton.  The  affair  of  the  placards, 
witnessing  as  it  did  the  increased  strength  of  the 
Evangelical  party,  reawakened  suspicions  and  intensified 
alarms.  A  deputy  from  Freiburg  appeared  before  the 
Council  of  Geneva,  complaining  of  the  placards,2  and  of 
the  distribution  of  heretical  literature  in  the  city  of  Geneva 
(June  24th).  The  Papal  Nuncio  wrote  from  Chambery 
(July  8th),  asking  if  it  were  true,  as  was  publicly  re- 
ported, that  the  Lutheran  heresy  was  openly  professed  and 
taught  in  the  houses,  churches,  and  even  in  the  schools 
of  Geneva.8  The  letter  of  the  Nuncio  was  dismissed 
with  a  careless  answer ;  but  Freiburg  had  to  be  contented. 

1  J.  A.  Gautier,  ffistoire  de  Geneve  (Geneva,  1896),  ii.  349.     The  nun, 
Sceur  Jeanne  de  Jussie,  in  her  Levain  du  Calvini&nie  (p.  46),  says  "  AU  niois 
de  Juin,  dimanche  matin,  le  9,  certain  nombre  de  mauvais  gardens  plau- 
terent  grands  placards  en  impression   par  toutes  les  portes  des  eglises  de 
Geneve,  esquels  estoient  contenus  les  principaux  poinets  de  la  secte  perverse 
luthe'rienne  " ;  and  another  contemporary  chronicler  says  that  the  placards 
promised  a  "  grand  pardon  ge'ne'ral  de  Jesus  Christ"  (Herminjard,  Correspond- 
ance,  etc.  ii.  42272,.}. 

2  Their  letter  said  that  it  was  reported  that  "  nonnullos  ex  Gebennensibus 
apposuisse  certas  cedulas  inductorias  ad  novam  legem,  contra  auctoritateru 
episcopalem,  et  quod  habent  libros  et  promulgant ;  quod  est  contra  volun- 
tatem  D.  Friburgensium  "  (Ibid.  ii.  421  ti.). 

3  Ibid.  ii.  424. 

5** 


66      THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

Two  extracts  from  the  Eegister  of  the  Council  quoted  by 
Herminjard  show  their  anxiety  to  satisfy  Freiburg  and 
yet  bear  evidence  of  a  very  moderate  zeal  for  the  Eomanist 
religion.  They  decided  (June  29th)  that  no  schoolmaster 
was  to  be  allowed  to  preach  in  the  town  unless  specially 
licensed  by  the  vicar  or  the  Syndics ;  and  (June  30th)  they 
resolved  to  request  the  vicar  to  see  that  the  Gospel  and  the 
Epistle  of  the  day  were  read  "  truthfully  without  being 
mixed  up  with  fables  and  other  inventions  of  men  " ;  they 
added  that  they  meant  to  live  as  their  fathers,  without  any 
innovations.1 

The  excitement  had  not  died  down  when  Farel  arrived 
in  the  city  in  the  autumn  of  1532.  He  preached  quietly 
in  houses ;  but  his  coming  was  known,  and  led  to  some 
tumults.  He  and  his  companions,  Saunier  and  Olivetan, 
were  seized  and  sent  out  of  the  city.  The  Eeformation 
had  begun,  and,  in  spite  of  many  hindrances,  was  destined 
to  be  successful. 

§  2.  The  Reformation  in  Western  Switzerland. 

The  conversion  of  Geneva  to  the  Eeformed  faith  was 
the  crown  of  a  work  which  had  been  promoted  by  the 
canton  of  Bern  ever  since  its  Council  had  decided,  in 
1528,  to  adopt  the  Eeformation.  Bern  itself  belonged  to 
German-speaking  Switzerland,  but  it  had  extensive  posses- 
sions in  the  French-speaking  districts.  It  was  the  only 
State  strong  enough  to  confront  the  Dukes  of  Savoy,  and 
was  looked  upon  as  a  natural  protector  against  that  House 
and  other  feudal  principalities.  Its  position  may  be  seen 
in  its  relations  to  the  Pays  de  Vaud.  The  Pays  de 
Vaud  consisted  of  a  confederacy  of  towns  and  small  feudal 
estates  owning  fealty  to  the  House  of  Savoy.  The  nobles, 
the  towns,  and  in  some  instances  the  clergy,  sent  deputies 
to  a  Diet  which  met  at  Moudon  under  the  presidency  of 
the  "  governor  and  bailli  de  Vaud,"  who  represented  the 
Duke  of  Savoy.  A  large  portion  of  the  country  had 
1  Herminjard,  Correspondanw,  ii.  425  n* 


THE   REFORMATION   EST   WESTERN   SWITZERLAND      67 

broken  away  from  Savoy  at  different  periods  during  the 
fifteenth  century.  Lausanne  and  eight  other  smaller 
towns  and  districts  formed  the  patrimony  of  the  Prince- 
Bishop  of  Lausanne.  The  cantons  of  Freiburg  and  Bei  n 
ruled  jointly'over  Orbe,  Grandson,  and  Morat.  Bern  had 
become  the  sole  ruler  over  what  were  called  the  four 
commanderies  of  Aigle,  Ormonts,  Ollon,  and  Bex.  These 
four  commanderies  were  outlying  portions  of  Bern,  and 
were  entirely  under  the  rule  of  its  Council.  "When  Bern 
had  accepted  the  Information,  it  naturally  wished  its  de- 
pendencies to  follow  its  example ;  and  its  policy  was 
always  directed  to  induce  other  portions  of  the  Pays  de 
Vaud  to  become  Protestant  also.  Farel,  the  Apostle  of 
French-speaking  Switzerland,  might  almost  be  called  an 
agent  of  the  Council  of  Bern. 

Its  method  of  work  may  be  best  seen  by  taking  the 
examples  of  Aigle  and  Lausanne,  the  one  its  own  posses- 
sion and  the  other  belonging  to  the  Prince-Bishop,  who 
was  its  political  ruler. 

William  Farel,  once  a  member  of  the  "group  of 
Meaux,"  whom  we  have  already  seen  active  at  the 
Disputation  in  Bern  in  the  beginning  of  1528,  had  settled 
at  Aigle  in  1526,  probably  by  the  middle  of  November.1 
He  did  so,  he  says  in  his  memoir  to  the  Council  of  Bern — 

"With  the  intention  of  opening  a  school  to  instruct  the 
youth  in  virtue  and  learning,  and  in  order  to  procure  foi 
myself  the  necessities  of  life.  Eeceived  at  once  with 
brotherly  good- will  by  some  of  the  burghers  of  the  place, 
I  was  asked  by  them  to  preach  the  Word  of  God  before 
the  Governor,  who  was  then  at  Bern,  had  returned.  I 
acceded  to  their  request.  But  as  soon  as  the  Governor 
returned  I  asked  his  permission  to  keep  the  school,  and  by 
acquaintances  also  asked  him  to  permit  me  to  preach.  The 
Governor  acceded  to  their  request,  but  011  condition  that  I 
preached  nothing  but  the  pure  simple  clear  Word  of  God 
according  to  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  without  any 
addition  contrary  to  the  Word,  and  without  attacking  the 
Holy  Sacraments.  ...  I  promised  to  conform  myself  to  the 

1  Of.  p.  59,  n. 


68      THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA    UNDER    CALVIN 

will  of  the  Governor,  and  declared  myself  ready  to  submit 
to  any  punishment  he  pleased  to  inllict  upon  me  if  I  dis- 
obeyed his  orders  or  acted  in  any  way  recognised  to  be 
contrary  to  the  Word  of  God/' * 

This  was  the  beginning  of  a  work  which  gradually  spread 
over  French-speaking  Switzerland. 

The  Bishop  of  Sion,  within  whose  diocese  Aigle  was 
situated,  published  an  order  forbidding  all  wandering 
preachers  who  had  not  his  episcopal  licence  from  preaching 
within  the  confines  of  his  diocese ;  and  this  appears  to 
have  been  used  against  Fare!  Some  representation  must 
have  been  made  to  the  Council  of  Bern,  who  indignantly 
declared  that  no  one  was  permitted  to  publish  citations, 
excommunications,  interdicts,  ne  autres  fanfares  within  their 
territories;  but  at  the  same  time  ordered  Farel  to  cease 
preaching,  because  he  had  never  been  ordained  a  priest 
(February  22nd,  1527).2  The  interdict  did  not  last  very 
long ;  for  a  minute  of  Council  (March  8th)  says,  "  Farel 
is  permitted  to  preach  at  Aigle  until  the  Coadjutor  sends 
another  capable  priest."8  Troubles  arose  from  priests 
and  monks,  but  upon  the  whole  the  Council  of  Bern 
supported  him;  and  Haller  and  others  wrote  fiom  Bern 
privately,  beseeching  him  to  persevere.4  He  remained,  and 
the  number  of  those  who  accepted  the  Evangelical  faith 
under  his  ministry  increased  gradually  until  they  appear 
to  have  been  the  majority  of  the  people.5  He  confessed 
himself  that  what  hindered  him  most  was  his  denunciation 
of  the  prevailing  immoralities.  At  the  Disputation  in 
Bern,  Farel  was  recognised  to  be  one  of  the  ablest 
theologians  present,  and  to  have  contributed  in  no  small 
degree  to  the  success  of  the  conference.  The  Council 

1  Her min jard,  Correspwida,ncet  etc.  ii.  22  f.  Farel  preached  his  iirst 
sermon  at  Aigle  on  Friday,  Nov.  30th,  1526 

s  Ibid.  ii.  14,  15. 

*  Ibid.  ii.  15  n. 

4  Ibid.  ii.  31  n. 

6  Farcl  seems  to  have  asked  his  converts  to  submit  to  baptism ;  they 
were  baptized  in  the  presence  of  the  congregation  on  making  a  solemn  and 
public  profession  of  their  faith. — Ibid.  48  n. 


THE    REFORMATION    IN    WESTERN   SWITZERLAND      69 

of  Bern  saw  In  him  the  instrument  best  fitted  for  the 
evangelisation  of  their  French-speaking  population.  He 
returned  to  Aigle  under  the  protection  of  the  Council, 
who  sent  a  herald  with  him  to  ensure  that  he  should  be 
treated  with  all  respect,  and  gave  him  besides  an  "  open 
letter,"  ordering  their  officials  to  render  him  all  assistance 
everywhere  within  their  four  commanderies.1  He  was 
recognised  to  be  the  evangelist  of  the  Council  of  Bern. 
This  did  not  prevent  occasional  disturbances,  riots  pro- 
moted by  priests  and  monks,  who  set  the  bells  a-ringing 
to  drown  the  preacher's  voice,  and  sometimes  procured 
men  to  beat  drums  at  the  doors  of  the  churches  in  which 
he  was  preaching.  His  success,  however,  was  so  great,  that 
when  the  commissioners  of  Bern  visited  their  four 
commanderies  they  found  that  three  of  them  were  ready 
by  a  majority  of  votes  to  adopt  the  Eeformation  (March 
2nd,  1528).  The  adoption  of  the  Eeformation  was 
signified  by  the  removal  of  altars  and  images,  and  by  the 
abolition  of  the  Mass. 

In  the  parishes  where  a  majority  of  the  people 
declared  for  the  Eeformation,  the  Council  of  Bern  issued 
instructions  about  the  order  of  public  worship  and  other 
ecclesiastical  rites.  Thus  we  find  them  intimating  to 
their  Governor  at  Aigle  that  they  expected  the  people 
to  observe  the  same  form  of  Baptism,  of  the  Table  of  the 
Lord,  and  of  the  celebration  of  marriage,  as  was  in  use  at 
Bern  (April  25th,  1528).2  The  Bern  Liturgy,  obligatory 
in  all  the  German-speaking  districts  of  the  canton,  was 
not  imposed  on  the  Eomance  Churches  until  1552.  Then, 
in  July  (1528),  the  Governor  is  informed  that — 

"  My  Lords  have  resolved  to  allow  to  the  preachers  Farel 
and  Simon  'pour  leur  pr^beude'  two  hundred  florins  of 
Savoy  annually,  and  a  house  with  a  court,  and  a  kitchen 
garden.  But  if  they  prefer  to  have  the  old  revenues  of  the 
parish  cures  .  .  .  my  Lords  are  willing.  If,  on  the 
contrary,  they  take  the  two  hundred  florins,  you  are  to 

1  Herminjard,  Correspondence,  etc.  ii.  105  n. 

2  Ibid.  ii.  130,  131. 


70      THE    REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA    UNDER   CALVIN 

sell  the  ecclesiastical  goods,  and  you  are  to  collect  the 
hundredths  and  the  tithes,  and  out  of  all  you  are  to  pay 
the  two  hundred  florins  annually." * 

The  pastors  preferred  to  take  the  place  of  the  Komanist 
incumbents,  and  there  is  accordingly  another  minute  sent 
to  the  Castellan,  syndic,  and  parishioners  of  Aigle,  ordering 
Farel  to  be  placed  in  possession  of  the  ecclesiastical  posses- 
sions of  the  parish,  "  seeing  that  it  is  reasonable  that  the 
pastor  should  have  his  portion  of  the  fruits  of  the  sheep."  2 

The  history  of  Aigle  was  repeated  over  and  over  again 
in  other  parts  of  western  Switzerland.  In  the  bailiwicks 
which  Bern  and  Freiburg  ruled  jointly,  Bern  insisted  on 
freedom  of  preaching,  and  on  the  right  of  the  people  to 
choose  whether  they  would  remain  Eomanists  or  become 
Protestants.  Commissioners  from  the  two  cantons  pre- 
sided when  the  votes  were  given. 

Farel  was  too  valuable  to  be  left  as  pastor  of  a  small 
district  like  Aigle.  We  find  him  making  wide  preaching 
tours,  always  protected  by  Bern  when  protection  was 
possible.  It  was  the  rooted  belief  of  the  Protestants  that 
a  public  Disputation  on  matters  of  religion  in  presence  of 
the  people;  the  speakers  using  the  language  understood  by 
the  crowd,  always  resulted  in  spreading  the  Reformation ; 
and  Bern  continually  tried  to  get  such  conferences  in 
towns  where  the  authorities  were  Komanist.  Their  first 
interference  in  the  ecclesiastical  affairs  of  Lausanne  was  of 
this  kind.  *  It  seems  that  some  of  the  priests  of  Lausanne 
had  accused  Farel  of  being  a  heretic ;  whereupon  the 
Council  of  Bern  demanded,  that  Farel  should  be  heard 
before  the  Bishop  of  Lausanne's  tribunal,  in  order  to  prove 
that  he  was  no  heretic.  Tli£  claim  led  to  a  long  corre- 
spondence. The  Bishop  continually  refused;  while  the 
Council  and  citizens  seemed  inclined  to  grant  the  request. 
Farel  could  not  get  a  hearing  before  the  episcopal  tribunal, 
but  he  visited  the  town,  and  on  the  second  occasion  was 
permitted  by  the  Council  to  preach  to  the  people.  This 
occurred  again  and  again;  and  the  result  was  that  the 

1  Hetmiiijard,  Corresjiondancc,  etc.  ii.  131  n.  a  Ibid.  ii.  137. 


THE   REFORMATION   IN   WESTERN   SWITZERLAND      7 1 

town  became  Protestant  and  disowned  the  authority  of  the 
Bishop.  Bern  assisted  the  inhabitants  to  drive  the  Bishop 
away,  and  to  become  a  free  municipality  and  Protestant. 

Gradually  Farel  had  become  the  leader  of  an  organised 
band  of  missioners,  who  devoted  themselves  to  the  evangeli- 
sation of  western  or  French-speaking  Switzerland.1  They 
had  been  carefully  selected — young  men  for  the  most 
part  well  educated,  of  unbounded  courage,  willing  to  face 
all  the  risks  of  their  dangerous  work,  daunted  by  no  threat 
or  peril,  taking  their  lives  in  their  hand.  They  were  the 
forerunners  of  the  young  preachers,  teachers,  and  colpor- 
teurs whom  Calvin  trained  later  in  Geneva  and  sent  forth 
by  the  hundred  to  evangelise  France  and  the  Low 
Countries.  They  were  all  picked  men,  No  one  was 
admitted  to  the  little  band  without  being  well  wained  of 
the  hazardous  work  before  him,  and  some  who  were  ready 
to  take  all  the  risks  were  rejected  because  the  leader  was 
not  sure  that  they  had  the  necessary  powers  of  endurance.2 
These  preachers  were  under  the  protection  of  the  canton 
of  Bern,  whose  authorities  were  resolute  to  maintain  the 
freedom  to  preach  the  Word  of  God  ;  but  they  continually 
went  where  the  Bernese  had  no  power  to  assist  them ;  nor 
could  the  protection  of  that  powerful  canton  aid  them  in 
sudden  emergencies  when  bitter  Eomanist  partisans,  in- 
furiated by  the  invectives  with  which  the  preachers  lashed 
the  ^abuses  of  the  Eoman  religion,  or  wrathful  at  their  very 
presence,  stirred  up  the  mob  against  them.  When  their 
correspondence  and  that  of  their  opponents — a  corre- 
spondence collected  and  carefully  edited  by  M.  Herminjai  d 
— is  read,  it  can  be  seen  that  they  could  always  count  on 
a  certain  amount  of  sympathy  from  the  people  of  the 
towns  and  villages  where  they  preached,  but  that  the 

1  M.    Herrainjard  gives   a  list  of   their  names — Claud  de  Glantinis, 

Alexandra  le  Bel,  Thomas  ,  lleinl   Pourcellet,  Jean  Bosset,  Antoine 

Froment,   Antoine  Marcourt,  Eymer  Beynon,   Pierre  Marmoud,  Hugues 
Turtaz,  and  perhaps  Jean  Holard,  Pierre  Siinonin  or  Symonier,    Claude 
Bigothier,  Jean  de  Be*ly,  Jean  Fathon. 

2  Of.  letter  of  Farel  to  Fortunat  Andronieus,  in  Herminjard,  Correspond- 

etc.  ii.  307. 


72      THE   REFORM ATION  IN   GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

authorities  were  for  the  most  part  hostile.  If  Bern  insisted 
on  their  protection,  Freiburg  was  as  active  in  opposing 
them,  and  lost  no  opportunity  of  urging  the  local  authori- 
ties to  harass  them  in  every  way,  to  silence  their  preaching, 
and  if  possible  to  expel  them  from  their  territories. 

Such  men  had  the  defects  of  their  qualities.  Their 
zeal  often  outran  their  discretion.  When  Farel  and 
Froment,  the  most  daring  and  devoted  of  his  band,  were 
preaching  at  a  village  in  the  vale  of  Vallingin,  a  priest 
began  to  chant  the  Mass  beside  them.  As  the  priest 
elevated  the  Host,  Froment  seized  it  and,  turning  towards 
the  people,  said,  "  This  is  not  the  God  to  adore ;  He  is  in 
the  Heaven  in  the  glory  of  the  Father,  not  in  the  hands 
of  the  priests  as  you  believe,  and  as  they  teach."  There 
was  a  riot,  of  course,  but  the  preachers  escaped..  Next 
day,  however,  as  they  were  passing  a  solitary  place,  they 
were  assailed  by  a  crowd  of  men  and  women,  stoned  and 
beaten  with  clubs,  then  hurried  away  to  a  neighbouring 
castle  whose  chatelaine  had  instigated  the  attack.  There 
they  were  thrust  violently  into  the  chapel,  and  the  crowd 
tried  to  make  Farel  prostrate  himself  before  an  image  of 
the  Blessed  Virgin.  He  resisted,  admonishing  them  to 
adore  the  one  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth,  not  dumb  images 
without  sense  or  power.  The  crowd  beat  him  to  the 
effusion  of  blood,  and  the  two  preachers  were  dragged  to  a 
vault,  where  they  were  imprisoned  until  rescued  by  the 
authorities  of  Neuch&tel.1 

These  preachers  were  all  Frenchmen  or  French-Swiss. 
They  had  the  hot  Celtic  blood  in  their  veins,  and  their 
hearers  were  their  kith  and  kin — prompt  to  act,  impetxi- 
ous  when  their  passions  were  stirred.  Scenes  occurred  At 
their  preaching  which  we  seldom  hear  of  among  slower 
Germans,  who  generally  waited  until  their  authorities  led. 
In  western  Switzerland  the  audiences  were  eager  to  get 
rid  of  the  idolatries  denounced.  At  Grandson,  the  people 
rushed  to  the  church  of  the  Cordeliers,  and  tore  down  the 
altars  and  images,  while  the  crosses,  altars,  and  images 

i  TTOTirriniftrd.  Gorresr)otidanc&,  etc.  ii.  270  n. 


THE   REFORMATION   IN   WESTERN   SWITZERLAND      73 

of  the  parish  church  were  also  destroyed.1  Similar  tumults 
took  place  at  Orbe ;  and  the  authorities  at  Bern,  who  desired 
to  see  liberty  for  both  Protestants  and  Eomanists,  had 
occasion  to  rebuke  the  zealous  preachers. 

But  the  dangers  which  the  missioners  ran  were  not 
always  of  their  own  provoking.  Sometimes  a  crowd  of 
women  invaded  the  churches  in  which  they  preached,  in- 
terrupted the  services  with  shoutings,  hustled  and  beat  the 
preachers ;  sometimes  when  they  addressed  the  people  in 
the  market-place  the  preachers  and  their  audience  were 
assailed  with  showers  of  stones ;  sometimes  Farel  and  his 
companions  were  laid  wait  for  and  maltreated.2  M.  de 
Watteville,  sent  down  by  the  authorities  of  Bern  to  report 
on  disturbances,  wrote  to  the  Council  of  Bern  that  the 
faces  of  the  preachers  were  so  torn  that  it  looked  as  if 
they  had  been  fighting  with  cats,  and  that  on  one  occasion 
the  alarm-bell  had  been  sounded  against  them,  as  was  the 
custom  for  a  wolf -hunt.3 

No  dangers  daunted  the  missioners,  and  soon  the  whole 
of  the  outlying  districts  of  Bern,  NeucMtel,  Soleure,  and 
other  French-speaking  portions  of  Switzerland  declared  for 
the  Eeformation.  The  cantonal  authorities  frequently  sent 
down  commissioners  to  ascertain  the  wishes  of  the  people ; 
and  when  the  majority  of  the  inhabitants  voted  for  the 
Evangelical  religion,  the  church,  parsonage,  and  stipend  were 
given  to  a  Protestant  pastor.  Many  of  Farel's  missioners 
were  temporarily  settled  in  these  village  churches ;  but  they 
were  for  the  most  part  better  fitted  for  pioneer  work  than 
for  a  settled  pastorate.  In  January  (9— 14th)  1532,  a 
synod  of  these  Protestant  pastors  was  held  at  Bern  to 
deliberate  on  some  uniform  ways  of  exercising  their 
ministry  to  prevent  disorders  arising  from  individual 
caprice.  Two  hundred  and  thirty  ministers  were  present, 
and  Bucer  was  brought  from  Strassburg  to  give  them 
guidance.  His  advice  was  greatly  appreciated  and 

1  Henninjard,  Correspondance,  etc.  ii.  365  n.t  390. 

2  Ibid.  ii.  347,  372. 
*  lttd>  ii.  362  n. 


74      THE   REFORMATION   IN  GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

followed  by  the  delegates  of  the  churches  and  the  Council 
of  Bern.  The  Synod  in  the  end  issued  an  elaborate  ordin- 
ance, which  included  a  lengthy  exposition  of  doctrine l 

§  3.  Fard  in  Geneva. 

It  was  after  this  consolidation  of  the  Eeformation  in 
Bern  and  its  outlying  provinces  that  Farel  found  himself 
free  to  turn  his  attention  to  Geneva.  He  had  evidently 
been  thinking  for  months  about  the  possibility  of  evan- 
gelising the  town.  He  had  little  fear  of  the  people  them- 
selves, and  he  wrote  to  Zwingli  (Oct.  1st,  1531)  that  were 
it  not  for  the  .dread  of  Freiburg,  he  believed  that  the 
G-enevese  would  welcome  the  Gospel.2  The  affair  of  the 
"  placards  "  seems  to  have  decided  him  to  begin  his  mission 
in  the  city.  When  he  was  driven  out  he  was  far  from 
abandoning  the  enterprise.  He  turned  to  Froment,  his 
most  trusted  assistant,  and  sent  him  into  Geneva. 

Antoine  Froment,  who  has  the  honour  along  with 
Farel  of  being  the  Eeformer  of  Geneva,  was  born  at  Tries, 
near  Grenoble,  about  1510.  He  was  therefore,  like  Farel, 
a  native  of  Dauphin^.  Like  him,  also,  he  had  gone  to 
Paris  for  his  education,  and  had  become  acquainted  with 
Lefevre,  who  seems  to  have  introduced  him  to  Marguerite 
d'Angoul£me,  the  Queen  of  Navarre,3  as  he  received  from 
her  a  prebend  in  a  canonry  on  one  of  her  estates.  How 

1  The  ordinance  was  entitled,  Ordnwng  wie  sfoh  pfarrer  und  prediger  zu 
Statt  und  Land  JBern,  in  leer  und  leben,  halten  sollen,  mit  wyterem  bericht 
von  Christo,  und  den  Sacramenten,  leschlossen  im  Synodo  daselbst  versamlet 
am  9  tag  Jaaiuarij — Anno  15S2.    The  doctrinal  decisions  of  the  Synod  are 
to  be  found  in  Muller,  EeJcenntnissGhriften  der  reformierten  J&rcJie  (Leipzig, 
1903),  pp.  31  ff. 

2  Herminjard,  Correspondance,  etc.  ii.  364. 

3  Froment  married  (1529)  Marie  Dentiere,  who  had  been  abbess  of  a  con- 
vent in  Tournay,  and  had  been  expelled  for  her  Evangelical  opinions.     She 
was  a  learned  lady,   a  friend  of  the  Queen  of  Navarre,   who  sometimes 
preached,  according  to  the  nun  Jeanne  de  Jussie,  and  made  many  converts. 
She  wrote  a  piquant  epistle  to  the  Queen  of  Navarre,  exposing  the  intrigues 
which  drove  Calvin,  Farel,  and  Coraiit  from  Geneva.     A  portion  of  this 
very  rare  Epistle  is  printed  by  Herminjanl,  CovrftyKmdwiM,  etc.  v. 


FAREL   IX   GENEVA  75 

he  came  to  Switzerland  is  unknown.  Once  there  and  in- 
troduced to  Farel,  he  became  his  most  daring  and  enthusi- 
astic disciple,  and  Farel  prized  him  above  all  the  others. 
They  were  Paul  and  Timothy.  It  was  natural  that  Farel 
should  entrust  him  with  the  difficult  and  dangerous  task  of 
preaching  the  Gospel  in  Geneva. 

Farel's  seizure  and  expulsion  made  it  necessary  to 
proceed  with  caution.  Froment  entered  Geneva  (Xov.  3rd, 
1532),  and  began  his  work  by  intimating  by  public 
advertisement  (placard)  that  he  was  ready  to  teach  any 
one  who  wished  to  learn  to  read  and  write  the  French 
language,  and  that  he  would  charge  no  fees  if  his  pupils 
were  not  able  to  profit  by  his  instructions.  Scholars 
came.1  He  managed  to  mingle  Evangelical  instruction 
with  his  lessons, — "  every  day  one  or  two  sermons  from  the 
Holy  Scripture,"  he  says, — and  soon  made  many  converts, 
especially  among  the  wives  of  influential  citizens.  Towards 
the  end  of  1532,  the  monks  of  one  of  the  convents  in 
Geneva  had  brought  to  the  city  a  Dominican,  Christopher 
Bocquet,  to  be  their  Advent  preacher.  His  sermons  seem 
to  have  been  largely  Evangelical,  and  had  the  effect  of  in- 
ducing many  of  the  citizens  to  attend  Froment's  discourses 
in  the  hall  where  he  kept  his  school.2  This  provoked 
threats  on  the  part  of  the  Romanists,  and  strongly  worded 
sermons  from  the  priests  and  Romanist  orators.  One 
citizen,  convicted  of  having  spoken  disrespectfully  of  the 
Mass,  was  banished,  and  forbidden  to  return  on  pain  of 
death.  On  this  the  Evangelicals  of  the  town  appealed  to 
Bern.  Their  letter  was  promptly  answered  by  a  demand 
on  the  part  of  the  Council  of  that  canton  that  the  Evan- 
gelicals must  be  left  in  peace,  and  if  attacked  publicly 
must  be  allowed  to  answer  in  as  public  a  fashion.3  When 
their  letter  was  read  in  the  Council  of  Geneva,  it  provoked 

1  Froment,  Les  Actes  et  gestes  marveilleux  de  la  tite  de  Gen&ve  (ed.  of 
1854  by  G.  Bevillod),  pp.  9  and  12-15. 

2  The  authorities  of  Freiburg  in  a  letter  to  Geneva  actually  called  this 
Dominican  monk  a  "  Lutheran  preacher"  ;  cf.  their  letter  given  in  Hermin- 
jard,  Gorrespondancet  iii.  16 f. 

9  Ibid.  iii.  38 /. 


76      TEE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA    UNDER   CALVIN 

some  protests  from  the  more  ardently  Romanist  members, 
and  the  priests  stirred  up  part  of  the  population  to  riotous 
proceedings,  in  which  the  lives  of  the  Evangelicals  were 
threatened.  The  Syndics  and  Council  had  difficulty  in 
preventing  conflicts  in  the  streets.  They  published  a 
decree  (March  30th,  1533),  in  which  they  practically  pro- 
claimed liberty  of  conscience,  but  forbade  all  insulting 
expressions,  all  attacks  on  the  Sacraments  or  on  the 
ecclesiastical  fasts  and  ceremonies,  and  again  ordered 
preachers  to  say  nothing  which  could  not  be  proved  from 
Holy  Scripture.1 

The  numbers  of  the  Evangelicals  increased  daily ;  they 
became  bolder,  and  on  the  1  Oth  of  April  they  met  in  a  garden, 
under  the  presidency  of  Gu^rin  Muete,  a  hosier,  for  the 
celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  This  became  known  to 
the  Romanists,  and  there  was  a  renewal  of  the  threats 
against  the  Evangelicals,  which  came  to  a  head  in  the  riot 
of  the  5th  of  May — a  riot  which  had  important  conse- 
quences.2 It  seems  that  while  several  citizens,  known  to 
belong  to  the  Evangelical  party,  were  walking  in  the  square 
before  the  Cathedral  of  St.  Peter,  they  were  attacked  by  a 
band  of  armed  priests,  and  three  of  them  were  severely 
wounded.  The  leader  of  the  band,  a  turbulent  priest  named 
Pierre  Werly,  who  belonged -to  an  old  family  of  Freiburg, 
and  was  a  canon  in.  the  cathedral,  followed  by  five  or  six 
others,  rushed  down  to  the  broad  street  Molard,  with  loud 
shouts.  Werly  was  armed  with  one  of  the  huge  Swiss 
swords.  He  and  his  companions  attacked  the  Evangelicals ; 
there  was  a  sharp,  short  fight ;  several  persons  were  wounded 
severely,  and  Werly,  "  the  captain  of  tjie  priests,"  was  slain.3 
The  affair  made  a  great  noise.  The  Eomanists  at  once  pro- 
claimed Werly  a  martyr,  and  honoured  him  with  a  pompous 
funeral.  Freiburg  insisted  that  all  the  Evangelicals  who 

1  The  text  of  the  decree  is  given  in  Herminjard,  iii.  41  n. 

2  Jeanne  de  Jussie,  Ze  Levadn  du  Calvimsme,  p.  53  ;  Froment,  Actes  et 
Oestes,  etc.  48-51. 

8  For  the  affair  of  Werly,  see  the  letter  of  the  Evangelicals  of  Geneva  tu 
the  Council  of  Bern,  given  in  Herminjard,  Correspondance,  etc,,  and  the 


FAREL  IN   GENEVA  77 

happened  to  be  in  the  Molard  should  be  arrested ;  and  it 
was  said  that  preparations  were  being  made  for  a  massacre 
of  all  the  followers  of  the  Reformation.  In  their  extremity 
they  again  appealed  to  Bern,  whose  authorities  again  inter- 
fered for  their  protection. 

During  these  troublesome  times  the  position  of  the 
Council  of  Geneva  was  one  of  great  difficulty.  The  Prince- 
Bishop  of  Geneva,  Pierre  de  la  Baume,  was  still  nominally 
sovereign,  secular  as  well  as  ecclesiastical  ruler.  His 
secular  powers  had  been  greatly  curtailed,  how  much  it  is 
difficult  to  say,  but  certainly  to  the  extent  that  the  criminal 
administration  of  the  city  and  the  territory  subject  to  it  was 
in  the  hands  of  the  Council  and  Syndics.  Freiburg,  one  of 
the  two  protecting  cantons,  insisted  that  all  the  ecclesi- 
astical authority  was  still  in  the  hands  of  the  Bishop,  to  be 
administered  in  his  absence  by  his  vicar.1  The  Councils, 
although  they  had  passed  decrees  (June  30th,  1532,  and 
March  30th,  1533)  which  had  distinctly  to  do  with  ecclesi- 
astical matters,  acknowledged  for  the  most  part  that  the 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  did  not  belong  to  them.  But  the 
whole  of  the  inhabitants  were  not  contented  with  this 
diminution  of  the  episcopal  authority.  Turbulent  priests 
and  the  yet  more  violent  canons,2  the  great  body  of  monks 
and  nuns,  wished,  and  intrigued  for  the  restoration  of  the 
rule  of  the  Bishop  and  of  the  House  of  Savoy.  The  begin- 
nings of  a  movement  for  Eeformation  had  increased  the 
difficulties  of  the  Council ;  it  brought  a  third  party  into 
the  town.  The  Evangelicals  were  all  strongly  opposed  to 
the  rule  of  the  Bishop  and  Savoy,  and  they  were  fast  grow- 
ing in  strength ;  a  powerful  minority  of  Eoman  Catholics 

1  After  the  defeat  of  his  party  by  the  combined  efforts  of  Freiburg  and 
Bern,  the  Bishop  had  quitted  Geneva  on  August  1st,  1527  ;  he  returned  there 
on  July  1st,  1533,  but  left  again  after  a  fortnight's  residence  (July  14th, 
1533),  disgusted,  he  said,  at  an  act  of  iconoclasm. 

2  The  priests  of  Geneva  were  notoriously  turbulent.    We  read  of  at  least 
five  riots  which  they  headed.     The  canons  were  worse.    Pierre  Werly  had 
attempted  the  assassination  of  Farel  on  October  3rd,  1532  ( Jeanne  de  Jussie, 
Le  LevaindtA  Calvinisme,  p.  50) ;  he  had  taken  an  active  part  in  the  riots 
caused  by  the  placards  in  1532. 


78      THE   REFOEMATION  IN   GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

were  no  less  strongly  in  favour  of  a  return  to  the  old  con- 
dition. The  majority  of  the  Eoman  Catholic  citizens, 
opposed  to  the  Bishop  as  a  secular  ruler,  had  no  desire 
for  the  triumph  of  the  Eeformation.  As  time  went  on,  it 
was  seen  that  these  moderate  Eomanists  had  to  choose 
between  a  return  of  the  old  disorderly  rule  of  the  Bishop, 
or  to  acquiesce  in  the  ecclesiastical  as  well  as  the  secular 
superiority  of  the  Council,  pressed  by  the  Protestant  canton 
of  Bern.  The  Savoyard  party  evidently  believed  that  their 
hatred  of  the  Eeformation  would  be  stronger  than  their 
dislike  to  the  Savoyard  and  episcopal  rule — a  mistaken 
belief,  as  events  were  to  show. 

The  policy  of  Bern,  wherever  its  influence  prevailed  in 
western  Switzerland,  was  exerted  to  secure  toleration  for  all 
Evangelicals,  and  to  procure,  if  possible,  a  public  discussion 
on  matters  of  religion  between  the  Eomanists  and  leading 
Eef  ormers.  They  pressed  this  over  and  over  again  on  their 
allies  of  Geneva.  As  early  as  April  1533,  they  had  in- 
sisted that  a  monk  who  had  offered  to  refute  Farel  should 
be  kept  to  his  word,  and  that  the  Council  of  Geneva  should 
arrange  for  a  Public  Disputation.1  Towards  the  close  of 
tlie  year  an  event  occurred  which  gave  them  a  pretext  for 
decisive  interference. 

Guy  Furbiti,  a  renowned  Eoman  Catholic  preacher,  a 
learned  theologian,  a  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne,  had  been 
brought  to  Geneva  to  be  Advent  preacher.  He  used  the 
occasion  to  denounce  vigorously  the  doctrines  of  the  Evan- 
gelicals, supporting  his  statements,  as  he  afterwards  confessed, 
not  from  Scripture,  but  from  the  Decretals  and  from  the 
writings  of  Thomas  Aquinas.  He  ended  his  sermon  (Dec. 
2nd)  with  the  words :  "  Where  are  those  fine  preachers  of 
the  fireside,  who  say  the  opposite  ?  If  they  showed  them- 
selves here  one  could  speak  to  them.  Ha !  ha !  they  are 
well  to  hide  themselves  in  corners  to  deceive  poor  women 
and  others  who  know  nothing." 

After  the  sermon,  either  in  church  or  in  the  square 
before  the  cathedral,  Froment  cried  to  the  crowd,  "  Hear 
1  Herininjard,  Corresyondance,  etc.  iiL  38. 


FAREL  IN  GENEVA  79 

me!  I  am  ready  to  give  my  life,  and  my  body  to  be 
burned,  to  maintain  that  what  that  man  has  said  is  nothing 
but  falsehood  and  the  words  of  Antichrist."  There  was  a 
great  commotion.  Some  shouted,  "  To  the  fire  with  him  ! 
to  the  fire  ! "  and  tried  to  seize  form.  The  chronicler  nun, 
Jeanne  de  Jussie,  proud  of  her  sex,  relates  that "  les  femmes 
comme  enragees  sortirent  apres,  de  grande  furie,  luy  jettant 
force  pierres." x  He  escaped  from  them.  But  Alexandre 
Canus  was  banished,  and  forbidden  to  return  under  pain  of 
death ;  and  Froment  was  hunted  from  house  to  house,  until 
he  found  a  hiding-place  in  a  hay-loft.  -Furbiti  had  per- 
mitted himself  to  attack  with  strong  invectives  the  authori- 
ties of  Bern,  and  the  Evangelicals  of  Geneva  in  their  appeal 
for  protection  sent  extracts  from  the  sermons.2  Bern  had 
at  last  the  opportunity  for  which  its  Council  had  long 
waited. 

They  wrote  a  dignified  letter  (Dec.  17th,  1533)  to  the 
Council  of  Geneva,  in  which  they  complained  that  the 
Genevese,  their  allies,  had  hitherto  paid  little  attention  to 
their  requests  for  a  favourable  treatment  of  the  Evangelicals ; 
that  they  had  expelled  from  the  town  "nostre  serviteur 
maistre  Guillaume  Parel "  ;  not  content  with  that,  they  had 
recently  misused  their  "  servants "  Proment  and  Alexandre 
for  protesting  against  the  sermons  of  a  Jacobin  monk 
(Furbiti)  who  "  preached  only  lies,  errors,  and  blasphemies 
against  God,  the  faith,  and  ourselves,  wounding  our  honour, 
calling  us  Jews,  Turks,  and  dogs";  that  the  banishment 
of  Alexandre  and  the  hunting  of  Froment  touched  them 
(the  Council  of  Bern),  and  that  they  would  not  suffer  it* 

1  Le  Zevain  du  Calvinisme,  pp.  74,  75, 247  (where  Canus  is  called  Alexander 
de  Molendino).    Froment,  who  had  been  compelled  to  quit  Geneva,  had  re- 
turned to  the  town  along  with  Alexandre  Canus  immediately  after  the 
departure  of  the  Bishop  on  the  14th  of  July  1533. 

2  Furbiti  permitted  himself  to  use  strong  language.    Even  the  Romanist 
chronicler,  the  nun  Jeanne  de  Jussie,  records  that  Furbiti  "touched  to  the 
quick  the  Lutheran  dogs,"  and  said  that  "all  those  who  belonged  to  that 
cxirsed  sect  were  licentious,  gluttons,  lascivious,  ambitious,  homicides,  and 
bandits,  who  loved  nothing  but  sensuality,  and  lived  as  the  brutes,  reveren- 
cing neither  God  nor  their  siiperiors  "  (Le  Levain  du  Calvinisms,  p.  79). 


80   THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

They  demanded  the  immediate  arrest  of  the  "caffurd"1 
(Furbiti) ;  and  they  said  they  were  about  to  send  an 
embassy  to  Geneva  to  vindicate  publicly  the  honour  of  God 
and  their  own.2 

As  the  Council  of  Bern  meant  to  enforce  a  Public 
Disputation,  they  sent  Farel  to  Geneva.  He  reached  the 
city  on  the  evening  of  December  20th. 

The  letter  was  read  to  the  Council  of  Geneva  upon  Dec. 
21st,  and  they  at  once  gave  orders  to  the  vicar  to  prevent 
Furbiti  leaving  the  town.  But  the  vicar,  who  had  resolved 
to  try  his  strength  against  Bern,  refused,  and  actually 
published  two  mandates  (Dec.  31st,  1533,  and  Jan.  1st, 
1534)  denouncing  the  Genevese  Syndics,  forbidding  any  of 
the  citizens  to  read  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  ordering  all 
copies  of  translations  of  the  Bible,  whether  in  German  or  in 
French,  to  be  seized  and  burnt.3  The  dispute  between 
Syndics  and  vicar  was  signalised  by  riots  promoted  by  the 
extreme  Komanist  party.  The  Council,  anxious  not  to  pro- 
ceed to  extremities,  contented  themselves  with  placing  a 
guard  to  watch  Furbiti ;  and  the  monk  was  attended  con- 
tinually, even  when  he  went  to  and  from  the  church,  by  a 
guard  of  three  halberdiers. 

The  Bernese  embassy  arrived  on  the  4th  of  January, 
and  had  prolonged  audience  of  the  Council  of  Geneva  on 
the  5th  and  7th.  They  insisted  on  a  fair  treatment  for 
the  Evangelical  party,  which  meant  freedom  of  conscience 
and  the  right  of  public  worship,  and  they  demanded  that 
Furbiti  should  be  compelled  to  justify  his  charges  against 
the  Evangelicals  in  the  presence  of  learned  men  who  could 
speak  for  the  Council  of  Bern.  The  Genevan  authorities 
had  no  wish  to  break  irrevocably  with  their  Bishop,  nor  to 
coerce  the  ecclesiastical  authorities;  they  pleaded  that 
Furbiti  w$s  not  under  their  jurisdiction,  and  they  referred 

1  Caffard  need  not  be  taken  to  mean  hypocrite :  ifc  was  commonly  used  to 
denote  a  mendicant  friar. 

2  The  letter  is  given  in  Herminjard,  Correqpondance,  etc.  iii.  119/. 

3  The  MS.  chronicle  of  Michel  Roset  is  the  source  for  the  statement  about 
the  order  to  burn  translations  of  the  Scripture. 


FAREL   IN   GENEVA  81 

the  Bernese  deputies  to  the  Bishop  or  his  vicar.  "We 
have  been  ordered  to  apply  to  you,"  said  the  deputies  from 
Bern.  "Your  answer  makes  us  see  that  you  seek  delay, 
and  that  you  are  not  treating  us  fairly  ;  that  you  think  little 
of  the  honour  of  the  Council  of  Bern.  Here  is  the  treaty 
of  alliance  (they  produced  the  document),  and  we  are  about 
to  tear  off  the  seals."  This  was  the  formal  way  among  the 
Swiss  of  cancelling  a  treaty.  The  Councillors  of  Geneva 
then  proposed  that  they  should  compel  the  monk  to 
appear  before  them  and  the  deputies  of  Bern,  when 
explanations  might  be  demanded  from  him.  The  deputies 
accepted  the  offer,  but  on  condition  that  there  should  be 
a  conference  between  the  monk  (Furbiti)  and  theologians 
sent  from  Bern  (Farel  and  Yiret).  Next  day  Furbiti  was 
taken  from  the  episcopal  palace  and  placed  in  the  town's 
prison  (Jan.  8th),  and  on  the  morrow  ( Jan.  9th)  he  was 
brought  before  the  Council.  There  he  refused  to  plead 
before  secular  judges.  The  Council  of  Geneva  tried  in  vain 
to  induce  the  vicar  to  nominate  an  ecclesiastical  delegate 
who  was  to  sit  in  the  Council  and  be  present  at  the  confer- 
ence. Their  negotiations  with  the  vicar,  carried  on  for 
some  days,  were  in  vain.  Then  they  attempted  to  induce 
the  Bernese  to  depart  from  their  conditions.  The  Council 
of  Bern  was  immovable.  It  insisted  on  the  immediate 
payment  by  the  Genevese  of  the  debt  due  to  Bern  for  the 
war  of  deliverance  and  for  the  punishment  of  Furbiti  (Jan. 
25th,  1534).  Driven  to  the  wall,  the  Council  of  Geneva 
resolved  to  override  the  ecclesiastical  authority  of  the 
Bishop  and  his  vicar.  Furbiti  was  compelled  to  appear 
before  the  Council  and  the  deputies  of  Bern,  and  to  answer 
to  Farel  and  Yiret  on  Jan.  27th  and  Feb.  3rd  (1534). 
On  the  afternoon  of  the  latter  day  the  partisans  of  the 
Bishop  got  up  another  riot,  in  which  one  of  them  poniarded 
an  Evangelical,  Nicolas  Bergier.  This  riot  seems  to  have 
exhausted  the  patience  of  the  peaceable  citizens  of  Geneva, 
whether  Eomanists  or  Evangelicals.  A  band  of  about  five 
hundred  assembled  armed  before  the  Town  Hall,  informed 
the  Council  that  they  would  no  longer  tolerate  riots  caused 
6** 


82   THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

by  turbulent  priests,  and  that  they  were  ready  to  support 
civic  authority  and  put  down  lawlessness  with  a  strong 
hand.  The  Council  thereupon  acted  energetically.  That 
night  the  murderer,  Claude  Pennet,  who  had  hid  himself  in 
the  belfry  of  the  cathedral,  was  dragged  from  his  place  of 
concealment,  tried  next  day,  and  hanged  on  the  day  fol- 
lowing (Feb.  5th).  The  houses  of  the  principal  rioters 
were  searched,  and  letters  discovered  proving  a  plot 
to  seize  the  town  and  deliver  it  into  the  hands  of  the 
Bishop.  Pierre  de  la  Baume  had  gone  the  length  of 
nnminfl.i-.ing  a  member  of  the  Council  of  Freiburg,  M. 
Pavillard,  to  act  as  his  deputy  in  secular  affairs,  and  ordering 
him  to  massacre  the  Evangelicals  within  the  city. 

When  the  excitement  had  somewhat  died  down,  the 
deputies  of  Bern  pressed  for  a  renewal  of  the  proceedings 
against  Furbiti.  The  monk  was  again  brought  before  the 
Council,  and  confronted  by  Farel  and  Viret.  He  was 
forced  to  confess  that  he  could  not  prove  his  assertions 
from  the  Holy  Scriptures,  but  had  based  them  on  the 
Decretals  and  the  writings  of  Thomas  Aquinas,  admitting 
that  he  had  transgressed  the  regulations  of  the  Council  of 
Geneva.  He  promised  that,  if  allowed  to  preach  on  the 
following  Sunday  (Feb.  15th),  he  would  make  public  re- 
paration to  the  Council  of  Bern.  When  Sunday  came  he 
refused  to  keep  his  promise,  and  -was  sent  back  to  prison.1 

Meanwhile  the  Evangelical  community  in  Geneva  was 
growing,  and  taking  organised  form.  One  of  the  most 
prominent  of  the  Genevan  Evangelicals,  Jean  Baudichon  de 
la  Maisonneuve,  prepared  a  hall  by  removing  a  partition 
between  two  rooms  in  his  magnificent  house,  situated  in 
that  part  of  the  city  which  was  the  cradle  of  the  Beforma- 

1  Furbiti  was  released  in  April  1536  at  the  request  of  Francis  I.  of  France 
He  was  exchanged  for  Antoine  Saunter,  a  Swiss  Evangelical  in  prison  in 
France.  Such  exchanges  were  not  uncommon  between  the  Protestant 
cantons  and  France. — Herminjard,  Correspondence,  etc.  iii.  396/. 

A  full  account  of  the  conferences  between  Farel  and  Furbiti  is  given  in 
Lettres  certaines  d'aucuns  gmndz  troubles  et  famulies  nuz  &  Geneve, 
avec  la  disputation  faicte  Van  1534,  etc.  (Basel,  1583),  The  booklet  is  very 
rare. 


FAREL   IN   GENEVA  83 

tion  in  Geneva.  There  Farel,  Viret,  and  Froment  preached 
to  three  or  four  hundred  persons ;  and  there  the  first- 
baptism  according  to  the  Reformed  rite  was  celebrated  in 
Geneva  (Feb.  22nd,  1533).  The  audiences  soon  increased 
beyond  the  capacity  of  the  hall,  and  the  Evangelicals,  pro- 
tected by  the  presence  of  the  Bernese  deputies,  took  posses- 
sion of  the  large  audience  hall  or  church  of  the  Convent 
of  the  Cordeliers  in  the  same  street  (March  1st).  The 
deputies  from  Bern  frequently  asked  the  Council  of  Geneva 
to  grant  the  use  of  one  of  the  churches  of  the  town  for  the 
Evangelicals,  but  were  continually  answered  that  the 
Council  had  not  the  power,  but  that  they  would  not  object 
if  the  Evangelicals  found  a  suitable  place.  This  indirect 
authorisation  enabled  them  to  meet  in  the  convent  church, 
which  held  between  four  and  five  thousand  people,  and 
which  was  frequently  filled.  Thus  the  little  band  increased. 
Farel  preached  for  the  first  time  in  St.  Peter's  on  the  8th 
of  August  1535.  Services  were  held  in  other  houses 
also.1 

The  Bishop  of  Geneva,  foiled  in  his  attempt  to  regain 
possession  of  the  town  by  well-planned  riots,  united  him- 
self with  the  Duke  of  Savoy  to  conquer  the  city  by  force 
of  arms.  Their  combined  forces  advanced  against  Geneva ; 
they  overran  the  country,  seized  and  pillaged  the  country 
houses  of  the  citizens,  and  subjected  the  town  itself  to  a 

1  Adjoining  the  house  of  Baudichon,  with  one  building  between  them,  was 
a  large  mansion  occupied  by  the  Seigneur  de  Thorens,  a  strong  partisan  of 
the  Reformation.  He  was  a  Savoyard,  expelled  fiom  his  country  because  of 
his  religious  principles.  He  acquired  citizenship  in  Bern.  The  Bernese,  on 
the  eve  of  their  embassy,  which  reached  Geneva  on  Jan.  4th,  had  bought  this 
house,  and  placed  M.  de  Thorens  therein,  intending  it  to  be  a  place  where 
the  Evangelicals  could  meet  in  safety  under  the  protection  of  Bern.  It  is  prob- 
able that  in  time  of  special  danger  the  Evangelicals  met  there  for  public 
worship.  When  the  Council  of  Freiburg  objected  to  Farel's  preaching,  the 
Council  of  Geneva  replied  that  the  services  were  held  in  the  house  of  the 
deputies  of  Bern.  Cf.  Herminjard,  Correspondence,  etc.  ix.  459/.,  489 /.  ; 
Jeanne  de  Jussie,  Le  Levain  du  Calvinisme,  pp.  91,106,  107  (where  the  poor 
nun  describes  the  various  ceremonies  of  the  Reformed  cult  with  all  the  venom 
and  coarseness  of  sixteenth  century  Romanism) ;  Baum,  Proces  de  Saudichon 
de  la  Maisonnewve  accuse"  tfh4re*sie  a,  Lyon,  J.534-  (Geneva,  1873),  pp.  110, 
111 ;  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  ii.  126/.,  iii.  196-98. 


84      THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

close  investment.  The  war  -was  a  grievous  matter  for  the 
city,  but  it  furthered  the  Reformation.  The  Bishop  had 
leagued  himself  with  the  old  enemy  of  Geneva ;  the  priests, 
the  monks,  the  nuns  were  eager  for  his  success ;  he  com- 
pelled patriotic  Eoman  Catholics  to  choose  between  their 
religion  and  their  country.  It  was  also  a  means  of  dis- 
playing the  heroism  of  the  Protestant  pastors.  Farel  and 
Froment  were  high-spirited  Frenchmen,  who  scoffed  at 
any  danger  lying  in  the  path  of  duty.  They  had  braved  a 
thousand  perils  in  their  missionary  work.  Viret  was  not 
less  courageous.  The  three  worked  on  the  fortifications  with 
the  citizens  ;  they  shared  the  watches  of  the  defenders ; 
they  encouraged  the  citizens  by  word  and  deed.  The 
Genevese  were  prepared  for  any  sacrifices  to  preserve  their 
liberties.  Four  faubourgs,  which  formed  a  second  town 
almost  as  large  as  the  first,  were  ordered  to  be  demolished 
to  strengthen  the  defence.  The  city  was  reduced  to  great 
straits,  and  the  citizens  of  Bern  seemed  to  be  deaf  to 
their  cries  for  help. 

Bern  was  doing  its  best  by  embassies  to  assist  them  ; 
but  it  dared  not  attack  the  Pays  de  Vaud  when  Freiburg, 
angry  at  the  process  of  the  Eeformation,  threatened  a 
counter  attack  After  the  siege  was  raised,  the  strongholds 
in  the  surrounding  country  remained  in  the  possession  of 
the  enemy,  and  the  people  belonging  to  Geneva  were 
liable  to  be  pillaged  and  maltreated. 

Within  the  city  the  number  of  Evangelicals  increased 
week  by  week.  Then  came  a  sensational  event  which 
brought  about  the  ruin  of  the  Eoman  Catholic  party.  A 
woman,  Antoina  Vax,  cook  in  the  house  of  Claude  Bernard, 
with  whom  the  three  pastors  dwelt,  attempted  to  poison 
Viret,  Farel,  and  Froment.1  The  confession  of  the  prisoner, 

1  The  poison  was  placed  in  some  spinach,  soup,  and  the  popular  story  was 
that  Farel  escaped  because  he  did  not  like  the  food  ;  that  Froment  had 
seated  himself  at  tahle  to  take  his  share,  when  news  was  brought  to  him 
that  his  wife  and  children  had  arrived  at  Geneva— he  rose  from  the  table  at 
once  to  go  to  meet  them,  and  left  the  soup  untasted..  Poor  Viret  was  the 
only  one  who  took  his  share,  and  became  very  ill  immediately  afterwards. 
The  prisoner's  confession,  lately  exhumed  from  the  Geneva  archives,  tells 


FAREL   IX    GENEVA  85 

combined  with  other  circumstances,  created  the  impression 
among  the  members  of  Council  and  the  people  of  Geneva 
that  the  priests  of  the  town  had  instigated  the  attempt,  and 
a  strong  feeling  in  favour  of  the  Protestant  pastors  swept 
over  the  city.  The  Council  at  once  provided  lodging  for 
Viret  and  Farel  in  the  Convent  of  the  Cordeliers.  When 
the  guardian  of  that  convent  asked  leave  to  hold  public 
discussions  on  religious  questions  in  the  great  church  belong- 
ing to  the  convent,  it  was  at  once  granted. 

The  Council  itself  made  arrangements  for  the  public 
Disputation.  Five  Theses  foangdiques  were  drafted  by  the 
Protestant  pastors,  and  the  Council  invited  discussion  upon 
them  from  all  and  sundry.1  Invitations  were  sent  to  the 
canons  of  the  cathedral,  and  to  all  the  priests  and  monks 
of  Geneva;  safe-conducts  were  promised  to  all  foreign 
theologians  who  desired  to  take  part ; 2  a  special  attempt 
was  made  to  induce  a  renowned  Paris  Eoman  Catholic 
champion,  Pierre  Cornu,  a  theologian  trained  afe  the 
Sorbonne,  who  happened  to  be  at  Grenoble,  to  defend  the 
Eomanist  position  by  attacking  the  Theses.  The  Theses 
themselves  were  posted  up  in  Geneva  as  early  as  the  1st  of 
May  (1535),  and  copies  were  sent  to  all  the  priests  and 
convents^  within  the  territories  of  the  Genevans.3 

The  Disputation  was  fixed  to  open  on  the  30th  of  May. 
The  Council  nominated  eight  commissioners,  half  of  whom 
were  Eoman  Catholics,  to  maintain  order,  and  four  secre- 
taries to  keep  minutes  of  the  proceedings.4  Efforts  were 
made  to  induce  Eoman  Catholic  theologians  of  repute  for 
their  learning  to  attend  and  attack  the  Theses.  But  the 
Bishop  of  Geneva  had  forbidden  the  Disputation,  and  the 

another  tale.  The  woman  said  that  she  stuffed  a  small  bone  with  the 
poison,  and  placed  it  in  Viret's  bowl ;  but  was  afraid  to  do  the  same  to 
Farel's  because  his  soup  was  too  clear.  Of.  extracts  quoted  in  Doumergue's 
Jean  Calvin,  etc.  ii.  133,  134  n. 

1  The  Theses  are  given  in  Kuchat,  JTistoire  de  la  Reformation  de  laSuisse, 
iii.  357. 

2  Herminjard,  Oorrespondance,  etc.  iii.  294,  295  n» 

3  Le  Zevain  du  Calirini&ne,  p.  118. 

4  Herminjard,  Oorrespondance,  etc.  iii.  294rt* 


86      THE  REFORMATION   IN  GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

Council  were  unable  to  prevail  on  any  stranger  to  appear. 
When  the  opening  day  arrived,  and  the  Council,  commis- 
sioners, and  secretaries  were  solemnly  seated  in  their  places 
in  the  great  hall  of  the  convent,  no  Komanist  defender  of 
the  faith  appeared  to  impugn  the  Evangelical  Theses.  Farel 
and  Viret  nevertheless  expounded  and  defended.  The  Dis- 
putation continued  at  intervals  during  four  weeks,  till  the 
24th  of  June,  Eomanist  champions  accepted  the  Eefor- 
mers'  challenge — Jean  Chapuis,  prior  of  the  Dominican 
convent  at  Plainpalais,  near  Geneva,  and  Jean  Cachi, 
confessor  to  the  Sisters  of  St.  Clara  in  the  city.  But  they 
were  no  match  for  men  like  FareL  Chapuis  himself 
apologised  for  the  absence  of  the  Genevan  priests  and 
monks,  by  saying  that  even  in  his  convent  there  was  a  lack 
of  learned  men.  The  weakness  of  the  Eomanist  defence 
made  a  great  impression  on  the  people  of  Geneva.  They 
went  about  saying  to  each  other,  "  If  all  Christian  princes 
permitted  a  free  discussion  like  our  MM.  of  Geneva,  the 
affair  would  soon  be  settled  without  burnings,  or  slaughter, 
or  murders ;  but  the  Pope  and  his  followers,  the  cardinals 
and  the  bishops  and  the  priests,  know  well  that  if  free 
discussion  is  permitted  all  is  lost  for  them.  So  all  these 
powers  forbid  any  discussion  or  conversation  save  by  fire 
and  by  sword."  They  knew  that  all  throughout  Eomance 
Switzerland  the  Eeformers,  whether  in  a  minority  or  in  a 
majority,  were  eager  for  a  public  discussion. 

When  the  Disputation  was  ended,  Farel  urged  the 
Council  to  declare  themselves  on  the  side  of  the  Beforma- 
tion  ;  but  they  hesitated  until  popular  tumults  forced  their 
hand.  On  July  23rd,  Farel  preached  in  the  Church  of 
the  Madeleine.  The  Council  made  mild  remonstrances. 
Then  he  preached  in  the  Church  of  St.  Gervais.  Lastly, 
on  the  8th  of  August,  the  people  forced  him  to  preach  in 
the  Cathedral,  St.  Peter's  (Aug.  8th).  In  the  afternoon 
the  priests  were  at  vespers  as  usuaL  As  they  chanted  the 
Psalm — 

"Their  idols  are  silver  and  gold, 
The  work  of  men's  hand?. 


FAREL   IN   GENEVA  87 

They  have  mouths,  but  they  speak  not: 
Eyes  have  they,  but  they  see  not ; 
They  have  ears,  but  they  hear  not; 
Noses  have  they,  but  they  smell  not ; 
They  have  hands,  but  they  handle  not; 
Feefe  have  they,  but  they  walk  not ; 
Neither  speak  they  through  their  throat," 

someone  in  the  throng  shouted,  "  You  curse,  as  you  chant, 
all  who  make  graven  images  and  trust  in  them.  Why  do 
you  let  them  remain  here?"  It  was  the  signal  for  a 
tumult.  The  crowd  rushed  to  throw  to  the  ground  and 
break  in  pieces  the  statues  of  the  saints ;  and  the  children 
pushing  among  the  crowd  picked  up  the  fragments,  and 
rushing  to  the  doors,  said,  "  We  have  the  gods  of  the  priests, 
would  you  like  some  ?  " l  Next  day  the  riots  were  renewed 
in  the  parish  and  convent  churches,  and  the  images  of  the 
saints  were  defaced  or  destroyed. 

The  Council  met  on  the  9th,  and  summoned  Farel 
before  them.  The  minutes  state  that  he  made  an  oratio 
magna,  ending  with  the  declaration  that  he  and  his  fellow- 
preachers  were  willing  to  submit  to  death  if  it  could  be 
shown  that  they  taught  anything  contrary  to  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  Then,  falling  on  his  knees,  he  poured  forth  one 
of  those  wonderful  prayers  which  more  than  anything  else 
exhibited  the  exalted  enthusiasm  of  the  great  missionary. 
The  religious  question  was  discussed  next  day  in  the  Council 
of  the  Two  Hundred,  when  it  was  resolved  to  abolish  the 
Mass  provisionally,  to  summon  the  monks  before  the  Council, 
and  to  ask  them  to  give  their  reasons  for  maintaining  the  Mass 
and  the  worship  of  the  saints.  The  two  Councils  resolved 
to  inform  the  people  of  Bern  about  what  they  had  done,2 

It  is  evident  that  the  two  Councils  had  been  hurried 
by  the  iconoclastic  zeal  of  the  people  along  a  path  they 

1  Froment,  Actes  et  gestes,  etc.  pp.  144-146  :  "Nous  avous  les  dieux  des 
Prebstres,  en.  voulle"s  vous  ?  et  les  iectoynt  apres  cielx  "  (p.  145). 

2  The  minute  is  given  in  Hermiujard,  Corre8pondance>  etc.  iii.  424 ;  and 
the  letter  of  the  two  Councils  -written  for  the  information  of  the  Councils  of 
Bern  at  p.  332. 


88   THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

had  meant  to  tread  in  a  much  more  leisurely  fashion.  The 
political  position  was  full  of  uncertainties.  Their  enemies 
were  still  in  the  field  against  them.  Bern  seemed  to  be 
unable  to  assist  them.  They  were  ready  to  welcome  the 
intervention  of  France.  It  was  the  fear  of  increasing  their 
external  troubles  rather  than  any  zeal  for  the  Eoman 
Catholic  faith  that  had  prevented  the  Council  from  espous- 
ing the  Reformation  immediately  after  the  public  Disputa- 
tion. "  If  we  abolish  the  Mass,  image  worship,  and  every- 
thing popish,  for  one  enemy  we  have  now  we  are  sure  to 
have  an  hundred,"  was  their  thought.1  _• 

The  official  representatives  of  the  Eoman  Catholic 
religion  did  not  appear  to  advantage  at  this  crisis  of  their 
fate.  They  were  in  no  haste  to  defend  their  worship 
before  the  Council.  When  they  at  last  appeared  (Nov. 
29th,  1535),  the  monks  in  the  forenoon  and  the  secular 
clergy  in  the  afternoon,  there  was  a  careless  indifference  in 
their  answers.  The  Council  seem  to  have  referred  them  to 
FareTs  summary  of  the  matters  discussed  in  the  public 
Disputation  which  began  on  the  30th  of  May,  and  to  have 
asked  them  what  they  had  to  say  against  its  conclusions 
and  in  favour  of  the  Mass  and  of  the  adoration  of  the 
saints.2  The  monks  one  after  another  (twelve  of  them 
appeared  before  the  Council)  answered  monotonously  that 
they  were  unlearned  people,  who  lived  as  they  had  been 
taught  by  their  fathers,  and  did  not  inquire  further.  The 
secular  clergy,  by  their  spokesman  Eoletus  de  Pane,  said 
that  they  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  Disputation  and  what 
had  been  said  there ;  that  they  had  no  desire  to  listen  to 
more  addresses  from  Farel ;  and  that  they  meant  to  live  as 
their  predecessors.3  This  was  the  end.  The  two  deputa- 

1  Proment,  Actes  et  gestes,  etc.  pp.  142-144. 

2  The  fullest  contemporary  account  of  these  matters  is  to  be  found  in  Un 
opuscule  Mdit  de  Farel ;  Le  ^Resume  des  actes  de  la  Dispute  de  JRiv$  de  1 535 > 
published  in  the  22nd  vol.  of  the  Memoires  et  Documents  publics  par  la  SoGtete" 
tflftstoire  et  Arckceologie  de  Geneve.     It  has  been  reprinted  separately. 

3  The  words  used  by  the  spokesman  of  the  secular  clergy,  among  whom 
were  the  canons  of  the  cathedral,  were :   "sua  non  esse  mstinere  talw,  cum 
nee  sint  sufficientes  nee  sctant." 


FAREL   INT     GENEVA  89 

tions  of  monks  and  seculars  were  informed  by  the  Council 
that  they  must  cease  saying  Mass  until  further  orders  were 
given.  The  Reformation  was  legally  established  in  Geneva, 
and  the  city  stood  forth  with  Bern  as  altogether  Protestant.1 

The  dark  clouds  on  the  political  horizon  were  rising. 
France  seemed  about  to  interfere  in  favour  of  Geneva,  and 
the  fear  of  France  in  possession  of  the  "gate  of  western 
Switzerland"  was  stronger  than  reluctance  to  permit 
Geneva  to  become  a  Protestant  city.  The  Council  of 
Freiburg  promised  to  allow  the  Bernese  army  to  march 
through  their  territory.  Bern  renounced  its  alliance  with 
Savoy  on  November  29th,  1535.  War  was  declared  on 
January  16th.  The  army  of  Bern  left  its  territories, 
gathering  reinforcements  as  it  went;  for  towns  like 
Neuville,  NeucMtel,  Lausanne,  Payerne — oppressed  Pro- 
testant communities  in  Romance  Switzerland — felt  that  the 
hour  of  their  liberation  was  at  hand,  and  their  armed 
burghers  were  eager  to  strike  one  good  stroke  at  their 
oppressors  under  the  leadership  of  the  proud  republic. 
There  was  little  fighting.  The  greater  part  of  the  Pays  de 
Vaud  was  conquered  without  striking  a  blow,  and  the  army 
of  the  Duke  of  Savoy  and  the  Bishop  of  Geneva  was  dis- 
persed without  a  battle.  A  few  sieges  were  needed  to 
complete  the  victory.  The  great  republic,  after  its  fashion, 
had  waited  till  the  opportune  moment,  and  then  struck 
once  and  for  all  Its  decisive  victory  brought  deliverance 
not  only  to  Geneva,  but  to  Lausanne  and  many  other  Pro- 
testant municipalities  in  Romance  Switzerland  (Aug.  7th, 
1536).  The  democracy  of  Geneva  was  served  heir  to  the 
seignorial  rights  of  the  Bishop,  and  to  the  sovereign  rights 
of  the  Duke  of  Savoy  over  city  and  lands.  Geneva  became 
an  independent  republic  under  the  protectorate  of  Bern,  and 
to  some  extent  dependent  on  that  canton. 

In  the  month  of  December  1535,  the  Syndics  and 
Council  of  Geneva  had  adopted  the  legend  on  the  coat  of 
arms  of  the  town,  Post  tenebras  lux — a  device  which,  became 

1  The  minute  of  Council  is  quoted  in  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  etc,  ii* 
147,  148. 


90      THE   REFORMATION   IK   GENEVA   UNDER   CALYIN 

very  famous,  and  appeared  on  its  coinage.  The  resolution 
of  the  Council  of  the  Two  Hundred  to  abolish  the  Mass 
and  saint  worship  was  officially  confirmed  by  the  citizens 
assembled,  "  as  was  the  custom,  by  sound  of  bell  and  of 
trumpet"  (May  21st,  1536). 

Geneva  had  gained  much.  It  had  won  political  inde- 
pendence, for  which  it  had  been  fighting  for  thirty  years, 
modified  by  its  relations  to  Bern,1  but  greater  than  it  had 
ever  before  enjoyed.  The  Eeformed  religion  had  been 
established,  although  the  fact  remained  that  the  Eomanist 
partisans  had  still  a  good  deal  of  hidden  strength.  But 
much  was  still  to  be  done  to  make  the  town  the  citadel  of 
the  Eeformation  which  it  was  to  become.  Its  past  history 
had  demoralised  its  people.  The  rule  of  dissolute  bishops 
and  the  example  of  a  turbulent  and  immoral  clergy  had 
poisoned  the  morals  of  the  city.2  The  liberty  won  might 
easily  degenerate  into  licence,  and  ominous  signs  were  not 
lacking  that  this  was  about  to  take  place.  "  It  is  impos- 
sible to  deny,"  says  Kampschulte,  the  Eoman  Catholic 
biographer  of  Calvin,  "  that  disorder  and  demoralisation  had 
become  threatening  in  Geneva ;  it  would  have  been  almost 
a  miracle  had  it  not  been  so/'  Farel  did  what  he  could. 
He  founded  schools.  He  organised  the  hospitals.  He 
strove  to  kindle  moral  life  in  the  people  of  his  adopted 
city.  But  his  talents  and  his  character  fitted  him  much 
more  for  pioneer  work  than  for  the  task  which  now  lay 
before  him. 

1  For  these  relations,  of.  Durrant,  Les  JRelations  jpolitigrues  de  Gen&ve  cwec 
Seme  et  les  Swisses,  de  15S6  a  JL564  (1894). 

2  The  devout  Romanist,  Soeur  Jeanne  de  Jussie,  testifies,  with  mediaeval 
frankness,  to  the  dissolute  lives  of  the  Romish  clergy :  "  II  est  Men  vray  que 
les  Prelate  ct  gens  oVlfiglise  pour  ce  temps  ne  gardoient  jpas  lien  leurs  vceus  et 
estat,  mais  gaudissoient  dissolument  des  Hens  de  Vfiglise  tenant  femmes  en 
lubridte  et  adultere,  et  quasi  tout  le  peuple  estoit  infect  de  cest  abominable  et 
detestable  p6ch6  ;  dont  est  a  scavoir  que  lespecMzdumonde  abondoiententoutes 
sortes  de  geiis,  qui  indtoient  I'ire  de  Dieu  a  y  mettre  so,  punition  divine " 
(Le  Levam  du  Calvinisme,  p.  35  ;  cf.  minutes  of  the  Council  of  Geneva  at 
p.  241).     Even  the  nuns  of  Geneva,  with  the  exception  of  the  nuns  of  St. 
Clara,  to  whom  Jeanne  de  Jussie  belonged,  were  notorious  for  their  conduct  j 
cf.  Herminjard,  Correspondance,  etc.  v.  349  n. 


FAREL  IN   GENEVA  91 

Farel  was  a  chivalrous  Frenchman,  born  among  the 
mountains  of  Dauphine,  whose  courage,  amounting  to  reck- 
less daring,  won  for  him  the  passionate  admiration  of 
soldiers  like  Wildermuth,1  and  made  him  volunteer  to  lead 
any  forlorn  hope  however  desperate.  He  was  sympathetic 
to  soft-heartedness,  yet  utterly  unable  to  restrain  his  tongue ; 
in  danger  of  his  life  one  week  because  of  his  violent  lan- 
guage, and  the  next  almost  adored,  by  those  who  would 
have  slain  him,  for  the  reckless  way  in  which  he  nursed  the 
sick  and  dying  during  a  visitation  of  the  plague.  He  was 
the  brilliant  partisan  leader,  seeing  only  what  lay  before 
his  eyes;  incapable  of  self-restraint ;  a  learned  theologian, 
yet  careless  in  his  expression  of  doctrine,  and  continually 
liable  to  misapprehension.  No  one  was  better  fitted  to 
attack  the  enemy's  strongholds,  few  less  able  to  hold  them 
when  once  possessed.  He  saw,  without  the  faintest  trace 
of  jealousy — the  man  was  too  noble — others  building  on 
the  foundations  he  had  laid.  It  is  almost  pathetic  to  see 
that  none  of  the  Romance  Swiss  churches  whose  Apostle  he 
had  been,  cared  to  retain  him  as  their  permanent  leader. 
In  the  closing  years  of  his  life  he  went  back  to  his  beloved 
France,  and  ended  as  he  had  begun,  a  pioneer  evangelist  in 
Lyons,  Metz,  and  elsewhere, — a  leader  of  forlorn  hopes, 
carrying  within  him  a  perpetual  spring  and  the  effervescing 
recklessness  of  youth.  He  had  early  seen  that  the  pioneer 
life  which  he  led  was  best  lived  without  wife  or  children, 
and  he  remained  unmarried  until  his  sixty-ninth  year. 
Then  he  met  with  a  poor  widow  who  had  lost  husband  and 
property  for  religion's  sake  in  Eouen,  and  had  barely  escaped 
with  life.  He  married  her  because  in  no  other  way  could 
he  find  for  her  a  home  and  protection. 

Geneva  needed  a  man  of  altogether  different  mould  of 
character  to  do  the  work  that  was  now  necessary.  When 
Farel's  anxieties  and  vexations  were  at  their  height,  he 

1  Of.  Wilcleramth's  letter  to  the  Council  of  the  Two  Hundred  in 
Bern,  telling  that  Farel  was  in  prison  at  Pay  erne:  "Would  that  I  had 
twenty  Bernese  with  me,  and  with  the  help  of  God  we  would  not  have  per 
mitted  what  has  happened  "  (Herminjard,  Correspondance,  etc.  ii.  344). 


92      THE   REFORMATION   IN  GENEVA   UNDER  CALYIN 

learned  almost  by  accident  that  a  distinguished  young 
French  scholar,  journeying  from  Ferrara  to  Basel,  driven 
out  of  his  direct  course  by  war,  had  arrived  in  Geneva,  and 
was  staying  for  a  night  in  the  town.  This  was  Calvin. 

§  4.   Cahin :    Youth  and  Education. 

Jean  Cauvin  (latinised  into  Calvinus)  was  born  at 
Noyon  in  Picardy  on  the  10th  of  July  1509.  He  was 
the  second  son  in  a  family  of  four  sons  and  two  daughters. 
His  father,  Gerard  Cauvin,  was  a  highly  esteemed  lawyer, 
the  confidential  legal  adviser  of  the  nobility  and  higher 
clergy  of  the  district.  His  mother,  Jeanne  La  France,  a 
very  beautiful  woman,  was  noted  for  her  devout  piety  and 
her  motherly  affection.  Calvin,  who  says  little  about  his 
childhood,  relates  how  he  was  once  taken  by  his  mother  on 
the  festival  of  St.  Anna  to  see  a  relic  of  the  saint  preserved 
in  the  Abbey  of  Ourscamp,  near  Noyon,  and  that  he  re- 
members kissing  "  part  of  the  body  of  St.  Anna,  the  mother 
of  the  Virgin  Mary." l 

The  Cauvins  belonged  to  what  we  should  call  the  upper 
middle  class  in  social  standing,  and  the  young  Jean  entered 
the  house  of  the  noble  family  of  de  Montmor  to  share  the 
education  of  the  children,  his  father  paying  for  all  his 
expenses.  The  young  de  Montmors  were  sent  to  College 
in  Paris,  and  Jean  Cauvin,  then  fourteen  years  of  age,  went 
with  them.  This  early  social  training  never  left  Calvin, 
who  was  always  the  reserved,  polished  French  gentleman 
— a  striking  contrast  to  his  great  predecessor  Luther. 

Calvin  was  a  Picard,  and  the  characteristics  of  the 
province  were  seen  in  its  greatest  son.  The  Picards  were 
always  independent,  frequently  strongly  anti-clerical,  com- 
bining in  a  singular  way  fervent  enthusiasm  and  a  cold 
tenacity  of  purpose.  No  province  in  France  had  produced 
so  many  sympathisers  with  Wiclif  and  Hus,  and  "  Picards  " 
was  a  term  met  with  as  frequently  on  the  books  of 
Inquisitors  as  "  Wiclifites,"  "  Hussites,"  or  «  Waldenses  " — 

1  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  etc.  i.  42. 


CALVIN  :    YOUTH   AND    EDUCATION  93 

all  the  names  denoting  dissenters  from  the  mediaeval 
Church  who  accepted  all  the  articles  of  the  Apostles'  Creed 
but  were  strongly  anti-clerical.  These  "  brethren  "  lingered 
in  all  the  countries  of  Western  Europe  until  the  sixteenth 
century,  and  their  influence  made  itself  felt  in  the 
beginnings  of  the  stirrings  for  reform. 

Gerard  Cauvin  had  early  seen  that  his  second  son, 
Jean,  was  de  ton  esprit,  d'une  prompte  naturelle  &  concevoir, 
et  inventif  en  I'estude  des  lettres  humaines?-  and  this  induced 
him  to  give  the  boy  as  good  an  education  as  he  could,  and 
to  destine  him  for  the  study  of  theology.  His  legal  con- 
nection with  the  higher  clergy  of  Xoyon  enabled  him,  in 
the  fashion  of  the  day,  to  procure  for  his  son  more  than 
one  benefice.  The  boy  was  tonsured,  a  portion  of  the 
revenue  was  used  to  pay  for  a  curate  who  did  the  work, 
and  the  rest  went  to  provide  for  the  lad's  education. 

Young  Calvin  went  with  the  three  sons  of  the  de 
Montmor  family  to  the  College  de  la  Marche  in  Paris.  It 
was  not  a  famous  one,  but  when  Calvin  studied  there  in 
the  lowest  class  he  had  as  his  professor  Mathurin  Cordier, 
the  ablest  teacher  of  his  generation.2  His  aim  was  to  give 
his  pupils  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  French  and  Latin 
languages — a  foundation  on  which  they  might  afterwards 
build  for  themselves.  He  had  a  singularly  sweet  disposi- 
tion, and  a  very  open  mind.  He  was  brought  to  know  the 
Gospel  by  Eobert  Estienne,  and  in  1536  his  name  was 
inscribed,  along  with '  those  of  Courat  and  Clement  Marot, 
on  the  list  of  the  principal  heretics  in  Paris.  Calvin  was 
not  permitted  to  remain  long  under  this  esteemed  teacher. 
The  atmosphere  was  probably  judged  to  be  too  liberal  for 
one  who  was  destined  to  study  theology.  He  was  trans- 
ferred to  the  more  celebrated  College  de  Montaigu.  Calvin 
was  again  fortunate  in  his  principal  teachers.  He  became 

1  Dotiinergue,  Jean  Calvin,  etc.  i.  35. 

2  Cordier,  Corderius,  Cordery,  was  a  well-known  name  in  Scottish  parish 
schools  a  century  ago,  where  his  exercises  were  used  in  almost  every  Latin 
class.    He  became  a  convert  of  the  Reformed  faith,  and  did  his  best  to  spread 
Evangelical  doctrines  by  means  of  the  sentences  to  be  turned  into  Latin.     He 
followed  his  great  pupil  to  Geneva,  and  died  there  in  his  eighty-eighth  year. 


94      THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

the  pupil  of  Xoel  Beda  and  of  Pierre  Temp^te,  who  taught 
him  the  art  of  formal  disputation. 

Gallon  had  come  to  Paris  in  his  fourteenth  year,  and 
left  it  when  he  was  nineteen — the  years  when  a  lad 
"becomes  a  man,  and  his  character  is  definitely  formed.  If 
we  are  to  judge  by  his  own  future  references,  no  one  had 
more  formative  influence  over  him  than  Mathurin  Oordier 
— short  as  had  been  the  period  of  their  familiar  inter- 
course. Calvin  had  shown  a  singularly  acute  mind,  and 
proved  himself  to  be  a  scholar  who  invariably  surpassed 
his  fellow  students.  He  was  always  surrounded  by 
attached  friends — the  three  brothers  de  Montmor,  the 
younger  members  of  the  famous  family  of  Cop,  and  many 
others.  These  student  friends  were  devoted  to  him  all  his 
life.  Many  of  them  settled  with  him  at  Geneva. 

Calvin  left  the  College  de  Montaigu  in  1528.  Some- 
time during  the  same  year  another  celebrated  pupil  entered 
it.  This  was  Ignatius  Loyola.  Whether  the  two  great 
leaders  attended  College  together,  whether  they  ever  met, 
it  is  impossible  to  say — the  dates  are  not  precise  enough. 

"Perhaps  they  crossed  each  other  in  some  street  of 
Mount  Sainte-Genevi&ve :  the  young  Frenchman  of  eighteen 
on  horseback  as  usual,  and  tbe  Spaniard  of  six  and  thirty 
on  foot,  his  purse  furnished  with  some  pieces  of  gold  he 
owed  to  charity,  shoving  before  him  an  ass  burdened  with 
his  books,  and  carrying  in  his  pocket  a  manuscript,  entitled 
Hxercitia  Spiritualia,"  x 

Calvin  left  Paris  because  his  father  had  now  resolved 
that  his  son  should  be  a  lawyer  and  not  a  theologian. 
Gerard  Cauvin  had  quarrelled  with  the  ecclesiastics  of 
Noyon,  and  had  even  been  excommunicated.  He  refused 
to  render  his  accounts  in  two  executry  cases,  and  had 
remained  obstinate.  Why  he  was  so,  it  is  impossible  to 
say.  His  children  had  no  difficulty  in  arranging  matters 
after  his  death.  The  quarrel  ended  the  hopes  of  the  father 
to  provide  well  for  his  son  in  the  Church,  and  he  ordered 

1  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  etc.  i.  126. 


CALVIN  :   YOUTH    AND    EDUCATION  95 

him  to  quit  Paris  for  the  great  law  school  at  Orleans.  It 
is  by  no  means  improbable  that  the  father's  decision  wa.s 
very  welcome  to  the  son.  Beze  tells  us  that  Calvin  had 
already  got  some  idea  of  the  true  religion,  had  begun  to 
study  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  to  separate  himself  from 
the  ceremonies  of  the  Church ; * — perhaps  his  friendship 
with  Pierre  Eobert  Olivetan,  a  relation,  a  native  of  Xoyon, 
and  the  translator  of  the  Bible  into  French,  had  brought 
this  about.  The  young  man  went  to  Orleans  in  the  early 
part  of  1528  and  remained  there  for  a  year,  then  went  on 
to  Bourges,  in  order  to  attend  the  lectures  of  the  famous 
publicist,  Andre  Alciat,  who  was  destined  to  be  as  great  a 
reformer  of  the  study  of  law  as  Calvin  was  of  the  study 
of  theology.  In  Orleans  with  its  Humanism,  and  in 
Bourges  with  its  incipient  Protestantism,  Calvin  was  placed 
in  a  position  favourable  for  the  growth  of  ideas  which  had 
already  taken  root  in  his  mind.  At  Bourges  he  studied 
Greek  under  Wolmar,  a  Lutheran  in  all  but  the  name,  and 
dedicated  to  him  long  afterwards  his  Commentary  on  the 
Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  He  seems  to  have  lived 
in  the  house  of  Wolmar;  another  inmate  was  Theodore 
de  Beze,  the  future  leader  of  the  Protestants  of  France, 
then  a  boy  of  twelve. 

The  death  of  his  father  (May  26th,  1531)  left  Calvin 
his  own  master.  He  had  obeyed  the  paternal  wishes  when 
he  studied  for  the  Church  in  Paris;  he  had  obediently 
transferred  himself  to  the  study  of  law ;  he  now  resolved 
to  follow  the  bent  of  his  own  mind,  and,  dedicating  himself 
to  study,  to  become  a  man  of  letters.  He  returned  to 
Paris  and  entered  the  College  Fortet,  meaning  to  attend 
the  lectures  of  the  Humanist  professors  whom  Francis  L, 
under  the  guidance  of  Bud4  and  Cop,  was  attracting  to  his 
capital.  These  "royal  lecturers "  and  their  courses  of 
instruction  were  looked  on  with  great  suspicion  by  the 
Sorbonne,  and  Calvin's  conduct  in  placing  himself  under 
their  instruction  showed  that  he  had  already  emancipated 
himself  from  that  strict  devotion  to  the  "  superstitions  of 

.)  xlix.  p.  121. 


96   THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

the  Papacy  "  to  which  he  tells  us  that  he  was  obstinately 
attached  in  his  boyhood.  He  soon  became  more  than  the 
pupil  of  Bude,  Cop,  and  other  Humanists.  He  was  a  friend, 
admitted  within  the  family  circle.  He  studied  Greek  with 
Pierre  Danes  and  Hebrew  under  Vatable.  In  due  time 
(April  1532),  when  barely  twenty-three  years  of  age,  he 
published  at  his  own  expense  his  first  book,  a  learned 
commentary  on  the  two  books  of  Seneca's  De  dementia. 

The  book  is  usually  referred  to  as  an  example  of 
precocious  erudition.  The  author  shows  that  he  knew  as 
minutely  as  extensively  the  whole  round  of  classical 
literature  accessible  to  his  times.  He  quotes,  and  that 
aptly,  from  fifty- five  separate  Latin  authors — from  thirty- 
three  separate  works  of  Cicero,  from  all  the  works  of 
Horace  and  Ovid,  from  five  comedies  of  Terence,  and 
from  all  the  works  of  Virgil.  He  quotes  from  twenty-two 
separate  Greek  authors — from  five  or  six  of  the  principal 
writings  of  Aristotle,  and  from  four  of  the  writings  of 
Plato  and  of  Plutarch.  Calvin  does  not  quote  Plautus,  but 
his  use  of  the  phrase  remoram  facere  makes  it  likely  that 
he  was  well  acquainted  with  that  writer  also.1  The  future 
theologian  was  also  acquainted  with  many  of  the  Fathers 
— with  Augustine,  Lactantius,  Jerome,  Synesius,  and 
Cyprian.  Erasmus  had  published  an  edition  of  Seneca,  and 
had  advised  scholars  to  write  commentaries,  and  young 
Calvin  followed  the  advice  of  the  Prince  of  Humanists. 
Did  he  imitate  him  in  more?  Did  Calvin  also  disdain 
to  use  the  New  Learning  merely  to  display  scholarship, 
did  he  mean  to  put  it  to  modern  uses  ?  Francis  I.  was 
busy  with  one  of  his  sporadic  persecutions  of  the 
Huguenots  when  the  book  was  published,  and  learned 
conjectures  have  been  made  whether  the  two  facts  had  any 
designed  connection — An  exhortation  addressed  to  an 
emperor  to  exercise  clemency,  and  a  king  engaging  in 
persecuting  his  subjects.  Two  things  seem  to  show  that 

1 1  owe  this  inference  to  my  brother,  Professor  Lindsay  of  St.  Andrews ; 
he  adds  that  Plautus  was  greatly  studied  in  the  time  of  Calvin's  youth  in 
France. 


CALVIN:  YOUTH  AND  EDUCATION  97 

Calvin  meant  his  book  to  be  a  protest  against  the  persecu- 
tion of  the  French  Protestants.  His  preface  is  a  daring 
attack  on  the  abuses  which  were  connected  with  the 
administration  of  justice  in  the  public  courts,  and  he  says 
distinctly  that  he  hopes  the  Commentary  will  be  of  service 
to  the  public.1 

It  seems  evident  from  Calvin's  correspondence  that  he 
had  joined  the  small  band  of  Protestants  in  Paris,  and 
that  he  was  intimate  with  Grerard  Roussel,  the  Evangelical 
preacher,2  the  friend  of  Marguerite  of  Navarre,  of  Lefevre, 
of  Farel,  and  a  member  of  the  "  group  of  Meaux."  The 
question  occurs,  When  did  his  conversion  take  place? 
This  has  been  keenly  debated ; 3  but  the  arguments  concern 
words  more  than  facts,  and  arise  from  the  various  meanings 
attached  to  the  word  "  conversion "  rather  than  from  the 
difficulty  of  determining  the  time.  Calvin,  who  very  rarely 
reveals  the  secrets  of  his  own  soul,  tells  in  his  preface  to 
his  Commentary  on  tTie  Psalms,  that  God  drew  him  from  his 
obstinate  attachment  to  the  superstitions  of  the  Papacy 
by  a  "  sudden  conversion,"  and  that  this  took  place  after 
he  had  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  law  in  obedience 
to  the  wishes  of  his  father.  It  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  such  a  sudden  and  complete  vision  of  divine  gracious- 
ness  as  Luther  received  in  the  convent  at  Erfurt.  But  it 

1  Cf.  his  letter  to  Francis  Daniel,  where  lie  speaks  about  the  publication 
of  the  Commentary  ;  says  that  he  has  issued  it  at  his  own  expense  ;  that  some 
of  the  Paris  lecturers,  to  help  its  sale,  had  made  it  a  book  on  which  they 
lectured,  and  hopes  quod  pullico  etiam  bono  forte  cessurum  sit  (Herminjard, 
Correspondence,  etc.  ii.  417). 

2  In  a  letter  to  Francis  Daniel,  of  date  Oct.  27th,  1553,  Calvin  calls 
Gerard  "  our  Friend  "  ;  and  in  another,  written  about  the  end  of  the  sanie 
month,  he  describes  with  a  minuteness  of  detail  impossible  for  anyone  who 
was  not  in  the  inner  circle,  the  comedy  acted  by  the  students  of  the  College 
of  Navarre,  which  was  a  satire  directed  against  Marguerite,  the  Queen  of 
Kavarre,   and  Gerard  Roussel,  and  the  affair  of  the  connection  of  the 
University  of  Paris  and  the    Queen's   poem,  entitled  U  Miroir  de  Vdme 
jj&heresse ;  cf.  Herminjard,  Coi*respondance,  etc.  iii.  1 03-11. 

3  Lang,   Die  Bekehrung  Johannes  Calvins  (1897) ;    Doumergue,    Jean 
Calvin,  etc.  i.  344  jf.  ;  Miiller,  "  Calvins  Bekehrung  "  (Nackrichten  der  Gott. 
Gel.  for  1905,  pp.  206^.) ;  "Wernle,  "  Nocli  einmal  die  Bekehrung  Calvins" 
(Zeitschriftfur  KirclwngeseliicUe,  xxvii.  S4ff.  (1906)). 


98      THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA    UNDER   CALVIN 

was  a  beginning.  He  received  then  some  taste  of  true 
piety  (aliquo  verce  pietatis  gusto).  He  was  abashed  to  find, 
he  goes  on  to  relate,  that  barely  a  year  afterwards,  those 
who  had  a  desire  to  learn  what  pure  doctrine  was 
gradually  ranged  themselves  around  him  to  learn  from 
him  who  knew  so  little  (me  noritium  adhuc  et  tironem). 
This  was  perhaps  at  Orleans,  but  it  may  have  been  at 
Bourges.  When  he  returned  to  Paris  to  betake  himself 
to  Humanist  studies,  he  was  a  Protestant,  convinced 
intellectually  as  well  as  drawn  by  the  pleadings  of 
the  heart.  He  joined  the  little  band  who  had  gathered 
round  Estienne  de  la  Forge,  who  met  secretly  in  the 
house  of  that  pious  merchant,  and  listened  to  the 
addresses  of  Gerard  Roussel.  He  was  frequently  called 
upon  to  expound  the  Scriptures  in  the  little  society; 
and  a  tradition,  which  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt,  declares 
that  he  invariably  concluded  his  discourse  with  the  words, 
"  If  God  be  for  us,  who  can  be  against  us  ? " 

He  was  suddenly  compelled  to  flee  from  Paris.  The 
theologians  of  the  Sorbonne  were  vehemently  opposed  to  the 
<c  royal  lecturers  "  who  represented  the  Humanism  favoured 
by  Margaret,  the  sister  of  Francis,  and  Queen  of  Navarre. 
In  their  wrath  they  had  dared  to  attack  Margaret's  famous 
book,  Miroir  de  I'dme  pfoJieresse,  and  had  in  consequence 
displeased  the  Court.  Nicolas  Cop,  the  friend  of  Calvin, 
professor  in  the  College  of  Sainte  Barbe,  was  Eector  of  the 
University  (1533).  He  assembled  the  four  faculties,  and 
the  faculty  of  medicine  disowned  the  proceedings  of  the 
theologians.  It  was  the  custom  for  the  Eector  to  deliver 
an  address  before  the  University  yearly  during  his  term 
of  office,  and  Cop  asked  his  friend  Calvin  to  compose  the 
oration.1  Calvin  made  use  of  the  occasion  to  write  on 
"  Christian  Philosophy,"  taking  for  his  motto,  "Blessed  are 

1  For  the  history  of  this  Discourse  written  by  Calvin  and  pronounced  by 
Cop,  see  E.  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin  ;  Les  Tiommes  et  les  choses  de  sen  temps 
(Lausanne,  1899),  i.  831 /. ;  A.  Lang,  Die  Bekehrung  J.  Calvins  (Leipzig, 
1897),  p.  46,^.  For  accounts  of  the  attempts  to  arrest  Nicolas  Cop  and 
Calvin,  see  the  letter  of  Francis  I.  to  the  Parlement  of  Paris  in  Henninjard, 
Correspondence,  etc.  iii.  114-118,  and  the  editor's  notes,  also  j>.  4]  8, 


CALVIN  :  YOUTH  AND  EDUCATION        99 

lhe  poor  in  spirit  "  (ilatt.  v.  3 ).  The  discourse  was  an 
eloquent  defence  of  Evangelical  truth,  in  which  the  author 
borrowed  from  Erasmus  and  from  Luther,  besides  adding 
characteristic  ideas  of  his  own.  The  wrath  of  the 
3orbonne  may  be  imagined.  Two  monks  were  employed 
to  accuse  the  author  of  heresy  before  Parle?ne?it,  which 
responded  willingly.  It  called  the  attention  of  the  King 
to  papal  Bulls  against  the  Lutheran  heresy.  Meanwhile 
people  discovered  that  Calvin  was  the  real  author,  and  he 
had  to  flee  from  Paris.  After  wanderings  throughout 
France  he  found  refuge  in  Basel  (1535). 

It  was  there  that  he  finished  his  Christiance  Religionis 
Institutio9  which  had  for  its  preface  •  the  celebrated  letter 
iddressed  to  Francis  I.  King  of  France.  The  book  was 
bhe  strongest  weapon  Protestantism  had  yet  forged 
against  the  Papacy,  and  the  letter  "  a  bold  proclamation, 
solemnly  made  by  a  young  man  of  six-and-twenty,  who, 
more  or  less  unconsciously,  assumed  the  command  of 
Protestantism  against  its  enemies,  calumniators,  and 
persecutors/'  News  had  reached  Basel  that  Francis, 
who  was  seeking  the  alliance  of  the  German  Lutheran 
Princes,  and  was  posing  as  protector  of  the  G-erman 
Protestants,  had  resolved  to  purge  his  kingdom  of  the  so- 
called  heresy,  and  was  persecuting  his  Protestant  subjects. 
This  double-dealing  gave  vigour  to  Calvin's  pen.  He 
says  in  his  preface  that  he  wrote  the  book  with  two 
distinct  purposes.  He  >  meant  it  to  prepare  and  qualify 
students  of  theology  for  reading  the  divine  Word,  that 
they  may  have  an  easy  introduction  to  it,  and  be  able  to 
proceed  in  it  without ,  obstruction.  He  also  meant  it  to  be 
a  vindication  of  the  teaching  of  the  Eeformers  against  the 
calumnies  of  their  enemies,  who  had  urged  the  King  of 
France  to  persecute  them  and  drive  them  from  France, 
His  dedication  was :  To  His  Most  Gracious  Majesty,  Francis, 
King  of  France  and  liis  sovereign,  John  Calvin  wisheth 
peace  and  salvation  in  GhrisL  Among  other  things  he  said  : 

"  I  exhibit  my  confession  to  you  that  you  riiay  know-  the 
nature  of  that,  doctrine  which  is  -  the  object  of-  such 


100  THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

unbounded  rage  to  those  madmen  who  are  now  disturbing 
your  kingdom  with  fire  and  sword*  For  I  shall  not  be 
afraid  to  acknowledge  that  this  treatise  contains  a  summary 
of  that  very  doctrine  which,  according  to  their  clamours, 
deserves  to  be  punished  with  imprisonment,  banishment, 
proscription,  and  flames,  and  to  be  exterminated  from  the 
face  of  the  earth." 

He  meant  to  state  in  calm  precise  fashion  what 
Protestants  believed ;  and  he  made  the  statement  in  such 
a  way  as  to  challenge  comparison  between  those  beliefs 
and  the  teaching  of  the  mediaeval  Church.  He  took 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  the  venerable  symbol  of  Western 
Christendom,  and  proceeded  to  show  that  when  tested  by 
this  standard  the  Protestants  were  truer  Catholics  than 
the  Eomanists.  He  took  this  Apostles'  Creed,  which  had 
been  recited  or  sung  in  the  public  worship  of  the  Church 
of  the  West  from  the  earliest  times,  which  differed  from 
other  creeds  in  this,  that  it  owed  its  authority  to  no 
Council,  but  sprang  directly  from  the  heart  of  the  Church, 
and  he  made  it  the  basis  of  his  Institutio.  For  the 
Institutw  is  an  expansion  and  exposition  of  the  Apostles9 
Creed,  and  of  the  four  sentences  which  it  explains.  Its 
basis  is:  /  believe  in  God  the  Father;  and  in  His  Son 
Jesus  Christ ;  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  in  the  Holy 
Catholic  Church.  The  Institutw  is  divided  into  four  parts, 
each  part  expounding  one  of  these  fundamental  sentences. 
The  first  part  describes  God,  the  Creator,  or,  as  the  Creed 
says :  "  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of  heaven  and 
earth  " ;  the  second,  God  the  Son,  the  Eedeemer  and  His 
^Redemption;  the  third,  God  the  Holy  Ghost  and  His 
Means  of  Grace;  the  fourth,  the  Holy  Catholic  Church, 
its  nature  and  marks. 

This  division  and  arrangement,  based  on  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  means  that  Calvin  did  not  think  he  was  expounding 
a  new  theology  or  had  joined  a  new  Church.  The 
theology  of  the  Eefonnation  was  the  old  teaching  of  the 
Church  of  Christ,  and  the  doctrinal  beliefs  of  the 
Reformers  were  those  views  of  truth  which  were  founded 


CALVIN  :    YOUTH   AND   EDUCATION  101 

on  the  Word  of  God,  and  which  had  been  known,  or  at 
least  felt,  by  pious  people  all  down  the  generations  from 
the  earliest  centuries.  He  and  his  fellow  Reformers 
believed  and  taught  the  old  theology  of  the  earliest  creeds, 
made  plain  and  freed  from  the  superstitions  which 
mediaeval  theologians  had  borrowed  from  pagan  philosophy 
and  practices. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Iiistitutio  was  published  in 
March  1536,  in  Latin.  It  was  shorter  and  in  many 
ways  inferior  to  the  carefully  revised  editions  of  1530 
and  1559.  In  the  later  editions  the  arrangement  of 
topics  was  somewhat  altered;  but  the  fundamental 
doctrine  remains  unchanged;  the  author  was  not  a  man 
to  publish  a  treatise  on  theology  without  carefully  weighing 
all  that  had  to  be  said.  In  1541,  Calvin  printed  a  French 
edition,  which  he  had  translated  himself  "  for  the  benefit 
of  his  countrymen."  ' 

After  finishing  his  Institutio  (the  MS.  was  completed 
in  August  1535,  and  the  printing  in  March  1536),  Calvin, 
under  the  assumed  name  of  Charles  d'Espeville,  set  forth  on 
a  short  visit  to  Italy  with  a  companion,  Louis  du  Tillet, 
who  called  himself  Louis  de  Haulmont.  He  intended  to 
visit  Benee,  Duchess  of  Ferrara,  daughter  of  Louis  XTL  of 
France,  known  for  her  piety  and  her  inclination  to  the" 
Eeformed  faith.  He  also  wished  to  see  something  of  Italy. 
After  a  short  sojourn  he  was  returning  to  Strassburg,  with 
the  intention  of  settling  there  and  devoting  himself  to  a 
life  of  quiet  study,  when  he  was  accidentally  compelled  to 
visit  Geneva,  and  his  whole  plan  of  life  was  changed.  The 
story  can  best  be  told  in  his  own  words.  He  says  in  the 
preface  to  his  Commentary  on  the  Psalms: 

"As  the  most  direct  route  to  Strassburg,  to  which  I  then 
intended  to  retire,  was  blocked  by  the  wars,  I  had  resolved 
to  pass  quickly  by  Geneva,  without  staying  longer  than  a 
single  night  in  that  city.  ...  A  person  (Louis  du  Tillet) 
who  has  now  returned  to  the  Papists  discovered  me  and 
made  me  known  to  others.  Upon  this  Farel,  who  burned 
with  an  extraordinary  zeal  to  advance  the  Gospel,  immedi- 


102  THE  REFORMATION'  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

ately  strained  every  nerve  to  detain  me.  After  having 
learnt  that  my  heart  was  set  upon  devoting  myself  to 
private  studies,  for  which  I  wished  to  keep  myself  free 
from  other  pursuits,  and  finding  that  he  gained  nothing  by 
entreaties,  he  proceeded  to  utter  an  imprecation,  that  God 
would  curse  my  retirement  and  the  tranquillity  of  the 
studies  which  I  sought,  if  I  should  withdraw  and  refuse 
assistance  when  the  necessity  was  so  urgent.  By  this  im- 
precation I  was  so  stricken  with  terror  that  I  desisted  from 
the  journey  which  I  had  undertaken." 


§  5.   Calvin  ivith  Farel  in  Geneva, 

Calvin  was  twenty-seven  years  of  age  and  Farel 
twenty  years  older  when  they  began  to  work  together  in 
Geneva;  and,,  notwithstanding  the  disparity  in  age  and 
utter  dissimilarity  of  character,  the  two  men  became 
strongly  attached  to  each  other.  "  We  had  one  heart  and 
one  soul,"  Calvin  says.  Farel  introduced  him  to  the  lead- 
ing citizens,  who  were  not  much  impressed  by  the  reserved, 
frail  young  foreigner  whose  services  their  pastor  was  so 
anxious  to  secure.  They  did  not  even  ask  his  name.  The 
minute  of  the  Council  (Sept.  5th,  1536),  giving  him  em- 
ployment and  promising  him  support,  runs:  "Master 
William  Farel  stated  the  need  for  the  lecture  begun  by 
this  Frenchman  in  St.  Peter's/' 1  Calvin  had  declined  the 
pastorate;  but  he  had  agreed  to  act  as  "professor  in 
sacred  learning  to  the  Church  in  Geneva  (Sacrarum  litera- 
rum  in  eccle&ia  ffenevensi  professor)"  His  power  was  of 
that  quiet  kind  that  is  scarcely  felt  till  it  has  gripped  and 
holds. 

He  began  his  work  by  giving  lectures  daily  in  St. 
Peter's  on  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  They  were  soon  felt 
to  be  both  powerful  and  attractive.  Calvin  soon  made  a 
strong  impression  on  the  people  of  the  city.  An  occasion 

1  "Magister  Gulielnras  Farellus  proponit  sicuti  sit  necessaria  ilia  lectura 
quain  initiavit  ille  Gcdlus  in  Sancto  retro.  Supplicat  advideri  de  illo 
retinendo  et  sihi  alimentando.  Super  quo  fuit  advisum  quod  advideatur 
de  ipsum  substinendo  "  (Ilerminjard,  C'orreqwndanu,  etc.  iv.  87  ra.). 


CALVIN  WITH  FAREL  IN  GENEVA       103 

arose  which  revealed  him  in  a  way  that  his  friends  had 
never  before  known.  Bern  had  conquered  the  greater  part 
of  the  Pays  de  Vaud  in  the  late  war.  Its  Council  was 
determined  to  instruct  the  people  of  its  newly  acquired 
territory  in  Evangelical  principles  by  means  of  a  public 
Disputation,  to  be  held  at  Lausanne  during  the  first  week 
of  October.1  The  three  hundred  and  thirty-seven  priests 
of  the  newly  conquered  lands,  the  inmates  of  the  thirteen 
abbeys  and  convents,  of  the  twenty-five  priories,  of  the  two 
chapters  of  canons,  were  invited  to  come  to  Lausanne  to 
refute  if  they  could  the  ten  Evangelical  Theses  arranged  by 
Farel  and  Viret.2  The  Council  of  Bern  pledged  itself 
that  there  would  be  the  utmost  freedom  of  debate,  not 
only  for  its  own  subjects,  but  "  for  all  comers,  to  whatever 
land  they  belonged/'  Farel  insisted  on  this  freedom  in  his 
own  trenchant  way:  "You  may  speak  here  as  boldly  as 
you  please ;  our  arguments  are  neither  faggot,  fire,  nor 
sword,  prison  nor  torture ;  public  executioners  are  not  our 
doctors  of  divinity.  .  .  .  Truth  is  strong  enough  to  out- 
weigh falsehood ;  if  you  have  it,  bring  it  forward."  The 
Komanists  were  by  no  means  eager  to  accept  the  challenge. 
Out  of  the  three  hundred  and  thirty-seven  priests  invited, 
only  one  hundred  and  seventy-four  appeared,  and  of  these 
only  four  attempted  to  take  part  Two  who  had  promised 
to  discuss  did  not  show  themselves.  Only  ten  of  the  forty 
religious  houses  sent  representatives,  and  only  one  of  them 
ventured  to  meet  the  Evangelicals  in  argument.3  As  at 
Bern  in  1528,  as  at  Geneva  in  May  1535,  so  here  at 
Lausanne  in  October  1536,  the  Komanists  showed  them- 
selves unable  to  meet  their  opponents,  and  the  policy  of 

1  Por  the  Disputation  at  Lausanne,    see  Hermlnjard,  Correspondance, 
etc.  iv.  86  /.  (Letter  from  Calvin  to  F.  Daniel,  Oct.  13th,  1536) ;  Corpus 
Eeformatorum,  xxxviL   p.   876  f.  ;  Buchat,  Histoire  de  la  JR^formxtwn  de 
la  Suisse,  vol.  iv.  ;  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  ii.  214 f. 

2  The  ten  Theses  are  printed  in  the   Corpus  J^ormatorwn,   xxxvii. 
701. 

s  Their  names  were  Jean  Mimard,  regent  of  the  school  in  Vevey ;  Jacques 
Drogy,  vicar  of  Morges  ;  Jean  Michod,  dean  of  Vevey ;  Jean  Berilly,  vicar 
of  Prevessin  ;  and  a  Douiiuican  monk,  de  Monbouson. 


104  THE   REFORMATION  IN   GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

Bern  in  insisting  on  public  Disputations  was  abundantly 
justified 

Farel  and  Yiret  were  the  Protestant  champions.  Farel 
preached  the  opening  sermon  in  the  cathedral  on  Oct.  1st,  and 
closed  the  conference  by  another  sermon  on  Oct.  8th.  The 
discussion  began  on  the  Monday,  when  the  huge  cathedral 
was  thronged  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  and  of  the  sur- 
rounding villages.  In  the  middle  of  the  church  a  space 
was  reserved  for  the  disputants.  There  sat  the  four  secre- 
taries, the  two  presidents,  and  five  commissioners  repre- 
senting Us  Princes  Chretiens  Messieurs  de  JBerne,  distinguished 
by  their  black  doublets  and  shoulder-knots  faced  with  red, 
and  by  their  broad-brimmed  hats  ornamented  with  great 
bunches  of  feathers, — hats  kept  stiffly  on  heads  as  befiting 
the  representatives  of  such  potent  lords. 

Calvin  had  not  meant  to  speak ;  Farel  and  Viret  were 
the  orators ;  he  was  only  there  in  attendance.  But  on  the 
Thursday,  when  the  question  of  the  Eeal  Presence  was  dis- 
cussed, one  of  the  Eomanists  read  a  carefully  prepared 
paper,  in  the  course  of  which  he  said  that  the  Protestants 
despised  and  neglected  the  ancient  Fathers,  fearing  their 
authority,  which  was  against  their  views.  Then  Calvin 
rose.  He  began  with  the  sarcastic  remark  that  the 
people  who  reverenced  the  Fathers  might  spend  some 
little  time  in  turning  over  their  pages  before  they  spoke 
about  them.  He  quoted  from  one  Father  after  another, — 
"  Cyprian,  discussing  the  subject  now  under  review  in  the 
third  epistle  of  his  second  book  of  Epistles,  says  .  .  . 
Tertullian,  refuting  the  error  of  Marcion,  says  .  .  .  The 
author  of  some  imperfect  commentaries  on  St.  Matthew, 
which  some  have  attributed  to  St.  John  Chrysostom,  in  the 
llth  homily  about  the  middle,  says  .  .  .  St.  Augustine,  in 
his  23rd  Epistle,  near  the  end,  says  .  .  .  Augustine,  in  one 
of  his  homilies  on  St.  John's  Gospel,  the  8th  or  the  9th,  I 
am  not  sure  at  this  moment  which,  says  • .  .  " ; x  and  so  on. 
He  knew  the  ancient  Fathers  as  no  one  else  in  the  century. 
He  had  not  taken  their  opinions  second-hand  from  Peter 

1  Corpus  JReformatorum,  xxxvii.  879-81. 


CALVIN  WITH  FAREL  IX  GENEVA      105 

of  Lombardy's  Sententice  as  did  most  of  the  Schoolmen  and 
contemporary  Romanist  theologians.  It  was  the  first  time 
that  he  displayed,  almost  accidentally,  his  marvellous  pat- 
ristic knowledge, — a  knowledge  for  which  llelanchthon 
could  never  sufficiently  admire  him. 

But  in  Geneva  the  need  of  the  hour  was  organisation 
and  familiar  instruction,  and  Calvin  set  himself  to  work  at 
once.  He  has  told  us  how  he  felt.  "  "When  I  came  first 
to  this  church,"  he  said,  "  there  was  almost  nothing.  Ser- 
mons were  preached ; l  the  idols  had  been  sought  out  and 
burned,  but  there  was  no  other  reformation;  everything 
was  in  disorder."  2  In  the  second  week  of  January  he  had 
prepared  a  draft  of  the  reforms  he  wished  introduced.  It 
was  presented  to  the  Small  Council  by  Farel ;  the  members 
had  considered  it,  and  were  able  to  transmit  it  with  their 
opinion  to  the  Council  of  the  Two  Hundred  on  January 
15th,  1537.  It  forms  the  basis  of  all  Calvin's  ecclesi- 
astical work  in  Geneva,  and  deserves  study. 

The  memorandum  treats  of  four  things,  and  four  only 
— the  Holy  Supper  of  our  Lord  {la  Saincte  Cene  de  Nostre 
Seigneur),  singing  in  public  worship,  the  religious  instruc- 
tion of  children,  and  marriage. 

In  every  rightly  ordered  church,  it  is  said,  the  Holy 
Supper  ought  to  be  celebrated  frequently,  and  well 
attended.  It  ought  to  be  dispensed  every  Lord's  Day 
at  least ; 3  such  was  the  practice  in  the  Apostolic  Church, 
and  ought  to  be  ours ;  the  celebration  is  a  great  comfort 
to  all  believers,  for  in  it  they  are  made  partakers  of  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Jesus,  of  His  death,  of  His  life,  of  His 

1  Wherever  Farel  went  he  had  instituted  what  was  called  the  "congre- 
gation "  :  once  a  week  in  church,  members  of  the  audience  were  invited  to 
ask  questions,  which  the  preacher  answered.     These  "  congregations  "  were 
an  institution  all  over  Romance  Switzerland.     The  custom  prevailed  in 
Geneva  when  Calvin  came  there,  and  it  was  continued. 

2  Bonnet,  Jdettresfrangaises  de  Calvin,  ii.  574. 

5  "II  seroyt  Men  a  de'sirer  que  la  communication  de  la  Saincte  Cene  de 
J&ucrist  fust  tous  les  dimenches  pour  le  moms  en  usage,  quant  I'Sglise  est 
assemblee  en  multitude"  (Corpus  Reformatorum,  xxxviii.  i.  7);  of.  the  first 
edition  of  the  Xiistitutio  (1536)  :  "Singulis,  ad  minimum,  hebdomadibus 
proponenda  erat  christiauorum  ccetui  meusa  Domini  " 


106     THE   REFORMATION  IN   GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

Spirit,  and  of  all  His  benefits.  But  the  present  weakness 
of  the  people  makes  it  undesirable  to  introduce  so 
sweeping  a  change,  and  therefore  it  is  proposed  that  the 
Holy  Supper  be  celebrated  once  each  month  "  in  one  of 
the  three  places  where  sermons  are  now  delivered — in  the 
churches  of  St.  Peter,  St.  Gervais,  and  de  Kive."  The 
celebration,  however,  ought  to  be  for  the  whole  Church  of 
Geneva,  and  not  simply  for  those  living  in  the  quarters 
of  the  town  where  these  churches  are.  Thus  every  one 
will  have  the  opportunity  of  monthly  communion.  But 
if  unworthy  partakers  approach  the  Table  of  the  Lord, 
the  Holy  Supper  will  be  soiled  and  contaminated.  To 
prevent  this,  the  Lord  has  placed  the  discipline  de 
V excommunication  within  His  Church  in  order  to  maintain 
its  purity,  and  this  ought  to  be  used.  Perhaps  the  best 
way  of  exercising  it  is  to  appoint  men  of  known  worth, 
dwelling  in  different  quarters  of  the  town,  who  ought  to 
be  trusted  to  watch  and  report  to  the  ministers  all  in  their 
neighbourhood  who  despise  Christ  Jesus  by  living  in  open 
sin.  The  ministers  ought  to  warn  all  such  persons  not 
to  come  to  the  Holy  Supper,  and  the  discipline  of  ex- 
communication only  begins  when  such  warnings  are 
unheeded. 

Congregational  singing  of  Psalms  ought  to  be  part  of 
the  public  worship  of  the  Church  of  Christ;  for  Psalms 
sung  in  this  way  are  really  public  prayers,  and  when  they 
are  sung  hearts  are  moved  and  worshippers  are  incited  to 
form  similar  prayers  for  themselves,  and  to  render  to  God 
the  lite  praises  with  the  same  loving  loyalty.  But  as  all 
this  is  unusual,  and  the  people  need  to  be  trained,  it  may 
be  well  to  select  children,  to  teach  them  to  sing  in  a  clear 
and  distinct  fashion  in  the  congregation,  and  if  the  people 
listen  with  all  attention  and  follow  "  with  the  heart-  what 
is  sung  by  the  mouth,"  they  will,  "  little  by  little,  become 
accustomed  to  sing  together  "  as  a  congregation.1 

1  Calvin  says  :  "Vest  tine  chose  lien  expedients  a  V tftificcdwn,  de  I'esglise, 
de  chanteraulcungspseavm.es  en  forme  fforwysons  publicqs."  The  transla- 
tions of  the  Psalms  by  Clement  Marot,  which  were  afterwards  used  in  the 


CALVIN  WITH  FAREL  IN  GENEVA      107 

It  is  most  important  for  the  due  preservation  of 
purity  of  doctrine  that  children  from  their  youth  should 
be  instructed  how  to  give  a  reason  for  their  faith,  and 
therefore  some  simple  catechism  or  confession  of  faith 
oughfc  to  be  prepared  and  taught  to  the  children.  At 
"  certain  seasons  of  the  year "  the  children  ought  to  be 
brought  before  the  pastors,  who  should  examine  them  and 
expound  the  teachings  of  the  catechism. 

The  ordinance  of  marriage  has  been  disfigured  by  the 
evil  and  unscriptural  laws  of  the  Papacy,  and  it  were  well 
that  the  whole  matter  be  carefully  thought  over  and  some 
simple  rules  laid  down  agreeable  to  the  "Word  of  God. 

This  memorandum,  for  it  is  scarcely  more,  was 
dignified  with  the  name  of  the  Articles  (Articuli  de 
reyimine  eccUswi).  It  was  generally  approved  by  the 
Small  Council  and  the  Council  of  Two  Hundred,  who  made, 
besides,  the  definite  regulations  that  the  Holy  Supper 
should  be  celebrated  four  times  in  the  year,  and  that 
announcements  of  marriages  should  be  made  for  three 
successive  Sundays  before  celebration.  But  it  is  very 
doubtful  whether  the  Council  went  beyond  this  general 
approval,  or  that  they  gave  definite  and  deliberate 
consent  to  Calvin's  proposals  about  "  the  discipline  of 
excommunication." 

These  Articles  were  superseded  by  the  famous 
Ordonnances  ecclfeiastiques  de  I'figlise  de  Gen&ve,  adopted  on 
Nov.  20th,  1541  ;  but  as  they  are  the  first  instance  in 
which  Calvin  publicly  presented  his  special  ideas  about 
ecclesiastical  government,  it  may  be  well  to  describe  what 
these  were.  To  understand  them  aright,  to  see  the  new 
thing  which  Calvin  tried  to  introduce  into  the  Church  life 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  it  is  necessary  to  distinguish 
between  two  things  which  it  must  be  confessed  were 

Church  of  Geneva,  were  not  published  till  1541,  and  the  pseauvies  may  have 
been  religious  canticles  such  as  were  used  in  the  Reformed  Church  of 
Neuchatel  from  1533  ;  but  it  ought  to  be  jemembered  that  translations  of 
the  Psalms  of  David  did  exist  in  France  before  Marot's ;  cf.  Herminjard, 
Corresrpondanee,  iv.  163  w. 


108     THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

practically  entangled  with  each  other  in  these  days — the 
attempt  to  regulate  the  private  life  by  laws  municipal 
or  national,  and  the  endeavour  to  preserve  the  solemnity 
and  purity  of  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Supper. 

When  historians,  ecclesiastical  or  other,  charge  Calvin 
with  attempting  the  former,  they  forget  that  there  was 
no  need  for  him  to  do  so.  Geneva,  like  every  other 
mediaeval  town,  had  its  laws  which  interfered  with  private 
life  at  every  turn,  and  that  in  a  way  which  to  our 
modern  minds  seems  the  grossest  tyranny,  but  which 
was  then  a  commonplace  of  city  life.  Every  mediaeval 
town  had  its  laws  against  extravagance  in  dress,  in  eating 
and  in  drinking,  against  cursing  and  swearing,  against 
gaming,  dances,  and  masquerades.  They  prescribed  the 
number  of  guests  to  be  invited  to  weddings,  and  dinners, 
and  dances;  when  the  pipers  were  to  play,  when  they 
were  to  leave  off,  and  what  they  were  to  be  paid.  It 
must  be  confessed  that  when  one  turns  over  the  pages 
of  town  chronicles,  or  reads  such  a  book  as  Baader's 
Nurnberffer  Polizeiordnungy  the  thought  cannot  help  arising 
that  the  Civic  Fathers,  like  some  modern  law-makers,  were 
content  to  place  stringent  regulations  on  the  statute-book, 
and  then,  exhausted  by  their  moral  endeavour,  had  no 
energy  left  to  put  them  into  practice.  But  every  now 
and  then  a  righteous  fit  seized  them,  and  maid-servants 
were  summoned  before  the  Council  for  wearing  silk  aprons, 
or  fathers  for  giving  too  luxurious  wedding  feasts,  or 
citizens  for  working  on  a  Church  festival,  or  a  mother 
for  adorning  her  daughter  too  gaily  for  her  marriage. 
The  citizens  of  every  mediaeval  town  lived  under  a 
municipal  discipline  which  we  would  pronounce  to  be 
vexatious  and  despotic.  Every  instance  quoted  by  modern 
historians  to  prove,  as  they  think,  Calvin's  despotic  inter- 
ference with  the  details  of  private  life,  can  be  paralleled 
by  references  to  the  police-books  of  mediaeval  towns  in  the 
fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries.  To  make  them  ground  of 
accusation  against  Calvin  is  simply  to  plead  ignorance  of 
the  whole  municipal  police  of  the  later  Middle  Ages.  To 


CALVIN   WITH    FAREL    IX    GENEVA  109 

say  that  Calvin  acquiesced  in  or  approved  of  such  legisla- 
tion is  simply  to  show  that  he  belonged  to  the  sixteenth 
century.  When  towns  adopted  the  Eeformation,  the  spirit 
of  civic  legislation  did  not  change,  but  some  old  regulations 
were  allowed  to  lapse,  and  fresh  ones  suggested  by  the  new 
ideas  took  their  place.  There  was  nothing  novel  in  the 
law  which  Bern  made  for  the  Pays  de  Vaud  in  1536 
(Dec.  24th),  prohibiting  dancing  with  the  exception  of 
"  trois  danses  honetes "  at  weddings ;  but  it  was  a  new 
regulation  which  prescribed  that  parents  must  bring  their 
daughters  to  the  marriage  altar  "le  chief z  convert."  It 
was  not  a  new  thing  when  Basel  in  1530  appointed  three 
honourable  men  (one  from  the  Council  and  two  from  the 
commonalty)  to  watch  over  the  morals  of  the  inhabitants 
of  each  parish,  and  report  to  the  Council  It  was  new, 
but  quite  in  the  line  of  medieval  civic  legislation,  when 
Bern  forbade  scandalous  persons  from  approaching  the 
Lord's  Table  (1532). 

Calvin's  thought  moved  on  another  plane.  He  was 
distinguished  among  the  Eeformers  for  his  zeal  to  restore 
again  the  conditions  which  had  ruled  in  the  Church  of  the 
first  three  centuries.  This  had  been  a  favourite  idea  with 
Lefevre,1  who  had  taught  it  to  Farel,  Gerard  Eoussel,  and 
the  other  members  of  the  "group  of  Meaux."  Calvin 
may  have  received  it  from  Eoussel ;  but  there  is  no  need 
to  suppose  that  it  did  not  come  to  him  quite  indepen- 
dently. He  had  studied  the  Fathers  of  the  first  three 

lr'Et  comment  ne  souhaiterions-nous  pas  voir  notre  siecle  ramene*  a 
1'image  de  cette  eglise  primitive,  puisqu'alors  Christ  recevait  un  plus  pur 
hommage,  et  que  1'eclat  de  son  nom  etait  plus  au  loin  repandu?  .  .  . 
Puisse  cette  extension  de  la  foi,  puisse  cette  purete  du  culte,  aujonrd'hui 
que  reparait  la  lumiere  de  I'lSvangile,  nous  etre  aussi  accorde*es  par  celui 
qui  est  beni  au-dessus  de  toutes  choses !  Aujourd'hui,  je  le  repete,  que 
reparait  la  lumiere,  de  r£vangile,  qui  se  repand  enfin  de  nouveau  dans  le 
monde,  et  y  eclaire  de  ses  divins  rayons  un  grand  nombre  d'esprits ;  de  telle 
sorte  que,  sans  pader  de  bien  d'autres  avantages,  depuis  le  temps  de 
Constantino,  oil  V^glise  primitive  pen  b,  peu  degeneree  perdit  tout  a  fait 
son  caracter,  il  n'y  a  eu  dans  aucune  antre  epoque  plus  de  connaissance 
des  langues.  .  .  ."—Lefevre  d'£taples,  aux  Lecteurs  chr&iens  de  Meaux 
(Hermiujard,  Gorrespondance,  etc.  i.  93). 


110     THE   REFORMATION   IN    GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

centuries  more  diligently  than  any  of  his  contemporaries. 
He  recognised  as  none  of  them  did  that  the  Holy  Supper 
of  the  Lord  was  the  centre  of  the  religious  life  of  the 
Church,  and  the  apex  and  crown  of  her  worship.  He  saw 
how  careful  the  Church  of  the  first  three  centuries  had  heen 
to  protect  the  sacredness  of  the  simple  yet  profound  rite ; 
and  that  it  had  done  so  by  preventing  the  approach  of  all 
unworthy  communicants.  Discipline  was  the  nerve  of  the 
early  Church,  and  excommunication  was  the  nerve  of  dis- 
cipline ;  and  Calvin  wished  to  introduce  both.  Moreover,  he 
knew  that  in  the  early  Church  it  belonged  to  the  membership 
and  to  the  ministry  to  exercise  discipline  and  to  pronounce 
excommunication.  He  desired  to  reintroduce  all  these  dis- 
tinctive features  of  the  Church  of  the  first  three  centuries 
— weekly  communion,  discipline  and  excommunication 
exercised  by  the  pastorate  and  the  members.  He  re- 
cognised that  when  the  people  had  been  accustomed  to 
come  to  the  Lord's  Table  only  once  or  twice  in  the  year, 
it  was  impossible  to  introduce  weekly  communion  all  at 
once.  But  he  insisted  that  the  warnings  of  St.  Paul 
about  unworthy  communicants  were  so  weighty  that 
notorious  sinners  ought  to  be  prevented  from  approaching 
the  Holy  Supper,  and  that  the  obstinately  impenitent 
should  be  excommunicated.  This  and  this  alone  was  the 
distinctive  thing  about  Calvin's  proposals;  this  was  the 
new  conception  which  he  introduced. 

Calvin's  mistake  was  that,  while  he  believed  that  the 
membership  and  the  pastorate  should  exercise  discipline 
and  excommunication,  he  also  insisted  that  the  secular 
power  should  enforce  the  censures  of  the  Church.  His 
ideas  worked  well  in  the  French  Church,  a  Church  "  under 
the  cross,"  and  in  the  same  position  as  the  Church  of  the 
early  centuries.  But  the  conception  that  the  secular  power 
ought  to  support  with  civil  pains  and  penalties  the  dis- 
ciplinary decisions  of  ecclesiastical  Courts,  must  have  pro- 
duced a  tyranny  not  unlike  what  had  existed  in  the  mediaeval 
Church.  Calvin's  ideas,  however,  were  never  accepted 
save  nominally  in  any  of  the  Swiss  Churches — not  even 


CALVIN  WITH  FAKEL  IX  GENEVA      111 

in  Geneva.  The  very  thought  of  excommunication  in  the 
hands  of  the  Church  was  eminently  distasteful  to  the 
Protestants  of  the  sixteenth  century ;  they  had  suffered  too 
much  from  it  as  exercised  by  the  Eoman  Catholic  Church. 
Xor  did  it  agree  with  the  conceptions  which  the  magis- 
trates of  the  Swiss  republics  had  of  their  own  dignity,  that 
they  should  be  the  servants  of  the  ministry  to  carry  out 
their  sentences.1  The  leading  Eeformers  in  German  Swit- 
zerland almost  universally  held  that  excommunication,  if  it 
ever  ought  to  be  practised,  should  be  in  the  hands  of  the 
civil  authorities. 

Zwingli  did  not  think  that  the  Church  should  exercise 
the  right  of  excommunication.  He  declared  that  the 
example  of  the  first  three  centuries  was  not  to  be  followed, 
because  in  these  days  the  "  Church  could  have  no  assistance 
from  the  Emperors,  who  were  pagans  " ;  whereas  in  Zurich 
there  was  a  Christian  magistracy,  who  could  relieve  the 
Church  of  what  must  be  in  any  case  a  disagreeable  duty. 
His  successor,  Bullinger,  the  principal  adviser  of  the  divines 
of  the  English  Eeformation,  went  further.  Writing  to  Leo 
Jud  (15  3  2),  he  declares  that  excommunication  ought  not  to 
belong  to  the  Church,  and  that  he  doubts  whether  it  should 
be  exercised  even  by  the  secular  authorities ;  and  in  a  letter 
to  a  Komance  pastor  (Nov.  24th,  1543)  he  expounds  his 
views  about  excommunication,  and  states  how  he  differs  from 
his  optimos  fratres  Gallos  (Viret,  Farel,  and  Calvin).2  The 
German  Swiss  Eeformers  took  the  one  side,  and  the  French 
Swiss  Eeformers  took  the  other ;  and  the  latter  were  all  men 
who  had  learned  to  reverence  the  usages  of  the  Church  of 
the  first  three  centuries,  and  desired  to  see  its  methods  of 
ecclesiastical  discipline  restored. 

The  people  invariably  sided  with  the  German-speaking 

1  The  prevailing  idea  was  that  the  Evangelical  pastors  were  the  servants 
of  the  community,  and  therefore  of  the  Councils  which  represented  it.    J.  J. 
Watteville,  the  celebrated  Advoyer  or  President  of  Bern,  and  a  strong  and 
generous  supporter  of  the  Reformation,  was  accustomed  to  say  :  "Nothing 
prevents  me  dismissing  a  servant  when  he  displeases  me ;  why  should  not  a 
town  send  its  pastor  away  if  it  likes  ? "  (Herminjard,  Correspondance,  vii.  354  n. ). 

2  Herminjard,  Correspondance,  etc.  ix.  116. 


112     THE    REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA    UNDER   CALVIN 

Keformers.1  Calvin  managed,  with  great  difficulty,  to  intro- 
duce excommunication  into  Geneva  after  his  returm  from 
exile,  but  not  in  a  way  conformable  to  his  ideas.  Farel 
could  not  get  it  introduced  into  Neuch^tel.  He  believed, 
founding  on  the  New  Testament,2  that  the  membership  of 
each  parish  had  the  right  to  exclude  from  the  Holy  Supper 
sinners  who  had  resisted  all  admonitions.  But  the  Council 
and  community  of  JSTeucMtel  would  not  tolerate  the 
"practice  and  usage  of  Excommunication,"  and  did  not 
allow  it  to  appear  in  their  ecclesiastical  ordinances  of 
1542  or  of  1553.  Oecolampadius  induced  the  Council  of 
Basel  to  permit  excommunication,  and  to  inscribe  the  names 
of  the  excommunicate  on  placards  fixed  on  the  doors  of  the 
churches.  Zwingli  remonstrated  vigorously,  and  the  practice 
was  abandoned.  Bern  was  willing  to  warn  open  sinners 
from  approaching  the  Lord's  Table,  but  would  not  hear  of 
excommunication,  and  declared  roundly  that  "ministers, 
who  were  sinners  themselves,  being  of  flesh  and  blood, 
should  not  attempt  to  penetrate  into  the  individual  con- 
sciences, whose  secrets  were  known  to  God  alone."  Viret 
tried  to  introduce  a  discipline  eccUsia^stigue  into  the  Pays  de 
Vaud,  but  was  unable  to  induce  magistrates  or  people  to 
accept  it.  The  young  Protestant  Churches  of  Switzerland, 
with  the  very  doubtful  exception  of  Geneva  after  1541, 
refused  to  allow  the  introduction  of  the  disciplinary  usages 
of  the  primitive  Church.  They  had  no  objection  to  dis- 
cipline, however  searching  and  vexatious,  provided  it  was 
simply  an  application  of  the  old  municipal  legislation,  to 
which  they  had  for  generations  been  accustomed,  to  the 
higher  moral  requirements  of  religion.8  It  was  univers- 

1  Herminjard,   Correspondance,   etc.   viii.   280,   281,   ix.    117,  vi.   183 ; 
Ruchat,  Histoire  de  laltefwrmatwnde  la  Suisse,  ii.  520 /. ;  Farel,  Summaire, 
edition  of  1867,  pp.  78^. 

2  Matt,  xviii.  15-17. 

3  The  action  of  the  people  of  the  four  parishes  which  made  the  district 
of  Thiez  illustrates  a  condition  of  mind  not  easily  sympathised  with  by  us, 
and  it  shows  what  the  commonalty  of  the  sixteenth  century  thought  of  the 
powers  of  the  Councils  which  ruled  their  city  republics.      The  district 
belonged  to  Geneva,  and  was  under  the  rule  of  the  Council  of  that  city. 


CALVIN   WITH   FAREL   IX   GENEVA  113 

ally  recognised  that  the  standard  of  moral  living  all  over 
French  Switzerland  was  very  low,  and  that  stringent 
measures  were  required  to  improve  it.  Xo  exception 
was  taken  to  the  severe  reprimand  which  the  Council  of 
Bern  addressed  to  the  subject  Council  of  Lausanne  for  their 
failure  to  correct  the  evil  habits  of  the  people  of  that  old 
episcopal  town ; l  but  such  discipline  had  to  be  exercised 
in  the  old  mediaeval  way  through  the  magistrates,  ajid  not 
in  any  new-fangled  fashion  borrowed  from  the  primitive 
Church.  So  far  as  Switzerland  was  concerned,  Calvin's  en- 
treaties to  model  their  ecclesiastical  life  on  what  he  believed 
with  Lefevre  to  be  the  golden  period  of  the  Church's  history, 
fell  on  heedless  ears.  One  must  go  to  the  French  Church, 
and  in  a  lesser  degree  to  the  Church  of  Knox  in  Scotland, 
to  see  Calvin's  ideas  put  in  practice  ;  it  is  vain  to  look  for 
this  in  Switzerland, 

The  Catechism  for  children  was  published  in  1537,  and 
was  meant,  according  to  the  author,  to  give  expression  to  a 
simple  piety,  rather  than  to  exhibit  a  profound  knowledge  of 

The  inhabitants  had  been  permitted  to  retain  the  Romanist  religion.  They 
were,  nevertheless,  excommunicated  by  their  Bishop  for  clinging  to  Geneva 
with  loyalty.  They  were  honest  Roman  Catholics  ;  they  conld  not  bear  the 
thonght  of  living  under  excommunication,  and  longed  for  absolution ;  the 
Bishop  -would  not  grant  it ;  so  the  people  applied  to  the  Council  of  Geneva  to 
absolve  them,  which  the  Council  did  by  a  minute  which  runs  as  follows : 
**  (April  4th,  1535)  Sur  ce  qu'est  propos£  par  nostre  chastelain  de  Thiez,  que 
ceux  de  Thiez  font  doubte  soy  presenter  en  1'esglise  a  ces  Pasques  prochaines 
(April  16th),  a  cause  d'aucunes  lettres  d'excommuniement  qui  sont  este 
contre  aucuns  exe"cute*es,  par  quoi  volentier  ils  desirent  avoir  remede  de  ab- 
solution. ,  .  .  Est  este"  r&olu  que  Ton  escrive  une  patente  aux  vicaires  du 
diet  mandement  (district),  que  nous  les  tenons  pour  absols."  This  was 
enough.  The  people  went  cheerfully  to  their  Easter  services  (Herminjard, 
Correspondence,  etc.  iv.  26^.)- 

1  Cf.  the  letter  of  the  Council  of  Bern  to  the  Council  of  Lausanne :  "  (July 
1541) :  Concernant  minas  contra  ministrmn  Verbi,  lasciviam  vitae  civium, 
bacchanalia,  ebrietates,  commessationes,  contemptum  Evangelii,  rythmos 
impudicos,  etc.,  ceux:  de  Lausanne  sont  vertement  reprimande*s.  On  leur 
remontre  leur  negligence  a  ch&tier  les  vices.  II  leur  est  ordonne"  de  punir, 
dans  le  terme  d'un  mois,  les  bacchantes  et  aussi  celui  qui  a  menac6  le  predicant 
et  1'a  interpelle"  dans  la  rue.  II  est  egalement  ordonne  aux  ambassadeurs  qui 
seront  envoyes  pour  les  appels,  de  faire  de  sdveres  remonstrances  devant  le 
Conseil  et  les  Bourgeois,  et  de  les  menacer  en  les  exhortant  a  s'amender" 
(Herminjard,  Correspondance,  vii.  145). 


114     THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA  UNDER   CALVIN 

religious  truth.  But,  as  Calvin  himself  felt  later,  it  was  too 
theological  for  children,  and  was  superseded  by  a  second 
Catechism,  published  immediately  after  his  return  to 
Geneva  in  1541.  The  first  Catechism  was  entitled  Instruc- 
tion and  Confession  of  Faith  for  the  use  of  the  Church  of 
Geneva.  It  expounded  successively  the  Ten  Commandments, 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  the  Sacraments. 
The  duties  of  the  pastorate  and  of  the  magistracy  were 
stated  in  appendices.1 

The  Confession  of  Faith  had  for  its  full  title,  Confession 
de  la  Foij  laquelle  tons  lourgois  ct  habitans  de  Gen&ve  et 
subjects  du  pays  doyuent  jurer  de  garder  et  tenir  extraicte  de 
I' Instruction  dont  on  use  en  I'&ghse  de  la  dicte  xille?  It 
reproduced  the  contents  of  the  Instruction,  and  was,  like 
it,  a  condensed  summary  of  the  Institutio. 

This  Confession  has  often  been  attributed  to  Farel,  but 
there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  came  from  the  pen  of 
Calvin.3  It  was  submitted  to  the  Council  and  approved 
by  them,  and  they  agreed  that  the  people  should  be  asked 
to  swear  to  maintain  it,  the  various  divisions  of  the 
districts  of  the  town  appearing  for  the  purpose  before  the 
secretary  of  the  Council.  The  proposal  was  then  sent 
down  to  the  Council  of  the  Two  Hundred,  where  it  was 
assented  to,  but  not  without  opposition.  The  minutes 
show  that  some  members  remained  faithful  to  the  Eomanist 
faith.  They  said  that  they  ought  not  to  be  compelled 
to  take  an  oath  which  was  against  their  conscience. 
Others  who  professed  themselves  Protestants  asserted  that 
to  swear  to  a  Confession  took  from  them  their  liberty. 

1  This  first  Catechism  has  been  repnblished  and  edited  under  the  title, 
Le  CatecFuismefranqais  de  Calvin,  publteen  1537,  r6imprim$  pour  la  premiere 
fois  tfapres  un  exemplaire  nouveUement  retrouvt  et  suwi  de  la  plus  ancienne 
Confession  de  foi  de  I'^glise  de  Geneve,  awe  deux  notices,  Z'une  historigue, 
Vautre  UbliograpMque,  par  Albert  Eilliet  et  Theophile  Dufour,  1878.  The 
curious  bibliographical  history  of  the  book  is  given  in  Doumergue,  Jean 
Calvin,  ii.  p.  230  ;  and  at  greater  length  in  the  preface  to  the  reprint* 

2MuUer,  I)ieJ5e^enntnissc7iriflenderreformierUnK'irc7ie,  p.  111. 

3  The  question  is  carefully  discussed  by  Eilliet  in  his  Le  CateMsme 
franqais  de  Calvin,  and  by  Doumergue,  Jean  CaMn,  etc.  ii.  237-39. 


CALVIN  WITH  FAREL  IN  GENEVA       115 

"  We  do  not  wish  to  be  constrained,"  they  said,  '•  but  to 
live  in  our  liberty."  But  in  the  end  it  was  resolved  to*  do 
as  the  Council  had  recommended.  So  day  by  day  the 
dizenniersy  or  captains  or  the  divisions  of  the  town,  brought 
their  people  to  the  cathedral,  where  the  secretary  stood  in 
the  pulpit  to  receive  the  oath.  The  magistrates  set  the 
example,  and  the  people  were  sworn  in  batches,  raising 
their  hands  and  taking  the  oath.  But  there  were  mal- 
contents who  stayed  away,  and  there  were  beginnings  of 
trouble  which  was  to  increase.  Deputies  from  Bern, 
unmindful  of  the  fact  that  their  city  had  sworn  in  the 
same  way  to  their  creed,  encouraged  the  dissentients  by 
saying  that  no  one  could  take  such  an  oath  without 
perjuring  himself;  and  this  opinion  strengthened  the 
opposition.  But  the  Council  of  Bern  disowned  its  deputies,1 
and  refused  any  countenance  to  the  malcontents,  and  the 
trouble  passed.  All  Geneva  was  sworn  to  maintain  the 
Confession. 

Meanwhile  the  ministers  of  Geneva  had  been  urging 
decision  about  the  question  of  discipline  and  excommunica- 
tion ;  and  the  murmurs  against  them  grew  stronger.  The 
Council  was  believed  to  be  too  responsive  to  the  pleadings 
of  the  pastors,  and  a  stormy  meeting  of  the  General 
Council  (Nov.  25th)  revealed  the  smouldering  discontent. 
On  the  4th  of  January  (1538)  the  Councils  of  Geneva 
rejected  entirely  the  proposals  to  institute  a  discipline 
which  would  protect  the  profanation  of  the  Lord's  Table, 
by  resolving  that  the  Holy  Supper  was  to  be  refused  to 
no  person  seeking  to  partake.  On  the  3rd  of  February, 
at  the  annual  election  of  magistrates,  four  Syndics  were 
chosen  who  were  known  to  be  the  most  resolute  opponents 
of  Calvin  and  of  FareL  The  new  Council  did  not  at 
first  show  itself  hostile  to  the  preachers :  their  earliest 
ininntes  are  rather  deferential.  But  a  large  part  of  the 
citizens  were  violently  opposed  to  the  preachers;  the 

1  The  letter  from  Bern  (dated  Nov.  28th)  was  read  to  the  recalcitrants, 
who  gave  way  and  accepted  tlie  Confession  on  Jan.  4th,  1538  (Herminjard, 
Correspondance,  iv.  340  n.). 


116  THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

Syndics  were  their  enemies :  collision  was  bound  to  come 
sooner  or  later. 

It  was  at  this  stage  that  a  proposal  from  Bern  brought 
matters  to  a  crisis. 

The  city  contained  many  inhabitants  who  had  been 
somewhat  unwillingly  dragged  along  the  path  of  Eeforma- 
tion.  Those  who  clung  to  the  old  faith  were  reinforced 
by  others  who  had  supported  the  Eeformatiou  simply  as  a 
means  of  freeing  the  city  from  the  rule  of  the  Prince 
Bishop,  and  who  had  no  sympathy  with  the  religious 
movement.  The  city  had  long  been  divided  into  two 
parties*  and  the  old  differences  reappeared  as  soon  as  the 
city  declared  itself  Protestant.  The  malcontents  took 
advantage  of  everything  that  could  assist  them  to  stay  the 
tide  of  Reformation  and  hamper  the  work  of  the  ministers. 
They  patronised  the  Anabaptists  when  they  appeared  in 
Geneva ;  they  supported  the  accusation  brought  against 
Farel  and  Calvin  by  Pierre  Caroli,  that  they  were  Arians 
because  they  refused  to  use  the  Athanasian  Creed ;  above 
all,  they  declared  that  they  stood  for  liberty,  and  called 
themselves  Libertines.  When  Bern  interfered,  they 
hastened  to  support  its  ecclesiastical  suggestions. 

Bern  had  never  been  contented  with  the  position  in 
which  it  stood  to  Geneva  after  its  conquest  of  the  Pays  de 
VaucL  When  the  war  was  ended,  or  rather  before  it  was 
finished,  and  while  the  Bernese  army  of  deliverance  was 
occupying  the  town,  the  accompanying  deputies  of  Bern 
had  claimed  for  their  city  the  rights  over  Geneva  previously 
exercised  by  the  Prince  Bishop  and  the  Vidomne  or  re- 
presentative of  the  Duke  of  Savoy,  whom  their  army  had 
conquered.  They  claimed  to  be  the  overlords  of  G-eneva, 
as  they  succeeded  in  making  themselves  masters  of  Lausanne 
and  the  Pays  de  Vaud.  The  people  of  Geneva  resisted  the 
demand.  They  declared,  Froment  tells  us,  that  they  had 
not  struggled  and  fought  for  more  than  thirty  years  to 
assert  their  liberties,  in  order  to  make  themselves  the 
vassals  of  their  allies  or  of  anyone  in  the  wide  world.1 
1  Actes  ct  gestcs  manwlleux,  p,  215/. 


CALVIN    WITH    FAREL   IN    GENEVA  117 

Bern  threatened  to  renounce  alliance;  but  Geneva  stood 
firm  ;  there  was  always  France  to  appeal  to  for  aid.  *  In 
the  end  Bern  had  to  be  content  with  much  less  than  it 
had  demanded. 

Geneva  became  an  independent  republic,  served  heir 
to  all  the  signorial  rights  of  the  Prince  Bishop  and  to  all 
his  revenues,  successor  also  to  all  the  justiciary  rights  of 
the  Yidomne  or  representative  of  the  House  of  Savoy.  It 
gained  complete  sovereignty  within  the  city;  it  also 
retained  the  same  sovereignty  over  the  districts  (mande- 
ments)  of  Penney,  Jussy,  and  Thiez  which  had  belonged  to 
the  Prince  Bishop.  On  the  other  side,  Bern  received  the 
district  of  Gaillard;  Geneva  bound  itself  to  make  no 
alliance  nor  conclude  any  treaty  without  the  consent  of 
Bern;  and  to  admit  the  Bernese  at  all  times  into  their 
city.  The  lordship  over  one  or  two  outlying  districts 
was  divided — Geneva  being  recognised  as  sovereign,  and 
having  the  revenues,  and  Bern  keeping  the  right  to  judge 
appeals,  etc. 

It  seemed  to  be  the  policy  of  Bern  to  create  a  strong 
State  by  bringing  under  its  strict  control  the  greater 
portion  of  Romance  Switzerland.  Her  subject  territories, 
Lausanne,  a  large  part  of  the  Pays  de  Vaud,  Gex,  Chablais, 
Orbe,  etc.,  surrounded  Geneva  on  almost  every  side.  If 
only  Geneva  were  reduced  to  the  condition  of  the  other 
Prince  Bishopric,  Lausanne,  Bern's  dream  of  rule  would  be 
realised.  The  Eeformed  Church  was  a  means  of  solidifying 
these  conquests.  Over  all  Romance  territories  subject 
to  Bern  the  Bernese  ecclesiastical  arrangements  were  to 
rule.  Her  Council  was  invariably  the  last  court  of  appeal. 
Her  consistory  was  reproduced  in  all  these  Trench- 
speaking  local  Churches.  Her  religious  usages  and 
ceremonies  spread  all  over  this  Romance  Switzerland. 
The  Church  in  Geneva  was  independent.  Might  it  not 
be  brought  into  nearer  conformity,  and  might  not 
conformity  in  ecclesiastical  matters  lead  to  the  political 
incorporation  which  Bern  so  ardently  desired?  The 
evangelist  of  almost  all  these  Romance  Protestant 


118     THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA    UNDER   CALVIN 

Churches  had  been  FareL  Their  ecclesiastical  usages 
had  grown  up  under  his  guidance.  It  would  conduce  to 
harmony  in  the  attempt  to  introduce  uniformity  with 
Bern  if  the  Church  of  Geneva  joined.  Such  was  the 
external  political  situation  to  be  kept  in  view  in  consider- 
ing the  causes  which  led  to  the  banishment  of  Calvin 
from  Geneva. 

In  pursuance  of  its  scheme  of  ecclesiastical  conformity, 
the  Council  of  Bern  summoned  a  Synod,  representing  most 
of  the  Evangelical  Churches  in  western  Switzerland,  and 
laid  its  proposals  before  them.  No  detailed  account 
of  the  proceedings  has  been  preserved  There  were 
probably  some  dissentients,  of  whom  Farel  was  most 
likely  one,  who  pled  that  the  Bomance  Churches  might  be 
left  to  preserve  their  own  usages.  But  the  general  result  was 
that  Bern  resolved  to  summon  another  Synod,  representing 
the  Romance  Churches,  to  meet  at  Lausanne  (March  30th, 
1538).  They  asked  (March  5th)  the  Council  of  Geneva 
to  permit  the  attendance  of  Farel  and  Calvin.1  The  letter 
reached  Geneva  on  March  llth,  and  on  that  day  the 
Genevan  magistrates,  unsolicited  by  Bern  and  without 
consulting  their  ministers,  resolved  to  introduce  the  Bernese 
ceremonies  into  the  Genevan  Church.  Next  day  they 
sent  the  letter  of  Bern  to  Farel  and  Calvin,  and  at  the 
same  time  warned  the  preachers  that  they  would  not  be 
allowed  to  criticise  the  proceedings  of  the  Council  in  the 
pulpit.  Neither  Farel  nor  Calvin  made  any  remonstrance. 
They  declared  that  they  were  willing  to  go  to  Lausanne, 
asked  the  Council  if  they  had  any  orders  to  give,  and 
said  that  they  were  ready  to  obey  them;  and  this 
although  a  second  letter  (March  20th)  had  come  frop* 
Bern  saying  that  if  the  Genevan  preachers  would  not 
accept  the  Bern  proposals,  they  would  not  be  permitted 
bo  attend  the  Synod. 

Farel  and  Calvin  accordingly  went  to  the  Synod  at 
Lausanne,  and  were  parties  to  the  decision  arrived  at,  which 

1  Herminjard,  Correspondence,  etc.  iv.  403,  404,  407 ;  Doumergue,  Jean 
etc.  ii.  278. 


CALVIN   WITH   FAREL   IN   GENEVA  119 

was  to  accept  the  usages  of  Bern — that  all  baptisms 
should  be  celebrated  at  stone  fonts  placed  at  the  entrance 
of  the  churches ;  that  unleavened  bread  should  be  used  at 
the  Holy  Supper ;  and  that  four  religious  festivals  should 
be  observed  annually,  Christmas,  Xew  Year's  Day,  the 
Annunciation,  and  the  Day  of  Ascension — with  the  stipula- 
tion that  Bern  should  warn  its  officials  not  to  be  too  hard 
on  poor  persons  for  working  on  these  festival  days.1 

When  the  Council  of  Bern  had  got  its  ecclesiastical 
proposals  duly  adopted  by  the  representatives  of  the 
various  Churches  interested,  its  Council  wrote  (April  loth) 
to  the  Council  and  to  the  •ministers  of  Geneva  asking 
them  to  confer  together  and  arrange  that  the  Church  of 
Geneva  should  adopt  these  usages — the  magistrates  of 
Bern  having  evidently  no  knowledge  of  the  hasty  resolu- 
tion of  the  Genevan  Council  already  mentioned.  The 
letter  was  discussed  at  a  meeting  of  Council  (April  19th, 
1538),  and  several  minutes,  all  relating  to  ecclesiastical 
matters,  were  passed.  It  was  needless  to  come  to  any 
resolution  about  the  Bern  usages ;  they  had  been  adopted 
already.  The  lettea:  from  Bern  was  to  be  shown  to  Farel 
and  Calvin,  and  the  preachers  were  to  be  asked  and  were 
to  answer,  yea  or  nay,  would  they  at  once  introduce  the 
Bern  ceremonies?  The  preachers  said  that  the  usages 
could  not  be  introduced  at  once.  The  third  Genevan 
preacher,  filie  Coraut,  had  spoken  disrespectfully  of  the 
Council  in  the  city,  and  was  forbidden  to  preach,  upon 
threat  of  imprisonment,  until  he  had  been  examined 
about  his  words.2  Lastly,  it  was  resolved  that  the  Holy 
Supper  should  be  celebrated  at  once  according  to  the  Bern 
rites;  and  that  if  Farel  and  Calvin  refused,  the  Council 
was  to  engage  other  preachers  who  would  obey  their 
orders.3 

1  Henninjard,  Correspondanee,  etc.  iv.  413. 

2  On  April  8th  it  -was  reported  that  Coraut  had  said  in  a  sermon  that 
Geneva  was  a  realm  of  tipplers,  and  that  the  town  was  governed  by  drunkards 
(from  all  accounts  a  true  statement   of  fact,  but  scarcely  suitable  for  a 
sermon),  and  had  be«n  brought  before  the  Council  in-  consequence. 

5  Herminjard,  Correppondance,  etc.  iv.  413-16,  420-22. 


120     THE   REFORMATION   IN  GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

Coraut,  the  blind  preacher,  preached  as  usual  (.April 
20th).  He  was  at  once  arrested  and  imprisoned  In  the 
afternoon,  Farel  and  Calvin,  accompanied  by  several  of  the 
most  eminent  citizens  of  Geneva,  appeared  before  the 
Council  to  protest  against  Coraut's  imprisonment,  and  to 
demand  his  release — Farel  speaking  with  his  usual  daring 
vehemence,  and  reminding  the  magistrates  that  but  for  his 
work  in  the  city  they  would  not  be  in  the  position  they 
occupied.  The  request  was  refused,  and  the  Council  took 
advantage  of  the  presence  of  the  preachers  to  ask  them 
whether  they  would  at  once  introduce  the  Bern  usages. 
They  replied  that  they  had  no  objection  to  the  ceremonies, 
and  would  be  glad  to  use  them  in  worship  provided  they 
were  properly  adopted,1  but  not  on  a  simple  order  from  the 
Council.  Farel  and  Calvin  were  then  forbidden  to  preach. 
Next  day  the  two  pastors  preached  as  usual — Calvin  in 
St.  Peter's  and  Farel  in  St.  G-ervaise.  The  Council  met 
to  consider  this  act  of  disobedience.  Some  were  for  sending 
the  preachers  to  prison  at  once;  but  it  was  resolved  to 
summon  the  Council  of  the  Two  Hundred  on  the  morrow 
(April  22nd)  and  the  General  Council  on  the  24th.  The 
letters  of  Bern  (March  5th,  March  20th,  April  15th)  were 
read,  and  the  Two  Hundred  resolved  that  they  would  "  live 
according  to  the  ceremonies  of  Bern."  What  then  was  to 
be  done  with  Calvin  and  Farel  ?  Were  they  to  be  sent  to 
the  town's  prison  ?  No !  Better  to  wait  till  the  Council 
secured  other  preachers  (it  had  been  trying  to  do  so  and 
had  failed),  and  then  dismiss  them.  The  General  Council 
then  met ; 2  resolved  to  "  live  according  to  the  ceremonies 
of  Bern,"  and  to  banish  the  three  preachers  from  the 
town,  giving  them  three  days  to  collect  their  effects.3 

» 

1  Calvin  says  that  he  wished  the  matter  to  be  regulaily  brought  before 
the  people  and  discussed  :  '*  Concio  etiam  a  nobis  habeatur  de  cerem'omarttm 
ttbertate,   deinde    ad  conformitafem  populwn  adhortemur,  proponitis  ejus 
raMombus.      Demum  liberum  ecclesice  judicium  permittatur."      Cf.    the 
memorandum  presented  to  the  Synod   of  Zurich  by  Calvin  and    Farel, 
ibid.  v.  3  ;  Corpus  Reformatorum,  xxxviii.  ii.  191. 

2  Herminjard,  Correspondence,  etc.  iv.  423,  425,  426,  427,  v.  3,  24. 

3  It  is  worth  mentioning  that  while  the  three  letters  from  Bern  were 


CALVJX    WITH    FAREL   IN   GENEVA  121 

Calvin  and  Farel  were  sent  into  exile,  an«l  the  magistrate?* 
made  haste  to  seize  the  furniture  which  had  been  given 
them  when  they  were  settled  as  preachers. 

Calvin  long  remembered  the  threats  and  dangers  of 
these  April  days  and  nights.  He  was  insulted  in  the 
streets.  Bullies  threatened  to  "  throw  him  into  the  Ehone." 
Crowds  of  the  baser  sort  gathered  round  his  house. 
They  sang  ribald  and  obscene  songs  under  his  windows. 
They  fired  shots  at  night,  more  than  fifty  one  night, 
before  his  door — "more  than  enough  to  astonish  a  poor 
scholar,  timid  as  I  am,  and  as  I  confess  I  have  always 
been." I  It  was  the  memory  of  these  days  that  made  him 
loathe  the  very  thought  of  returning  to  Geneva. 

The  two  Eeformers,  Calvin  and  Farel,  left  the  town  at 
once,  determined  to  lay  their  case  before  the  Council  of 
Bern,  and  also  before  the  Synod  of  Swiss  Churches  which 
was  about  to  meet  at  Zurich  (April  28th,  1538).  The 
Councillors  of  Bern  were  both  shocked  and  scandalised  at 
the  treatment  the  preachers  had  received  from  the  Council 
of  Geneva,  and  felt  it  all  the  more  that  their  proposal  of 
conformity  had  served  as  the  occasion.  They  wrote  at 
once  to  Geneva  (April  27th),  begging  the  Council  to  undo 
what  they  had  done ;  to  remember  that  their  proposal  for 
uniformity  had  never  been  meant  to  serve  as  occasion 
for  compulsion  in  matters  which  were  after  all  indifferent.2 
Bern  might  be  masterful,  but  it  was  almost  always  courteous. 
The  secular  authority  might  be  the  motive  force  in  all 
ecclesiastical  matters,  but  it  was  to  be  exercised  through  the 

brought  before  the  Council  of  the  Two  Hundred,  the  decisions  of  the 
Lausanne  Synod  were  produced  at  the  General  Council.  Did  the  Council 
•wish  to  give  their  decision  a  semblance  of  ecclesiastical  authority  ? 

1  Bonnet,  Les  Lettres  frangaises  de  CaMn,  ii.  575,  576. 

2  "A  ceste  cause,  vous  instantement,  tres-acertes  et  en  fraternelle  affec- 
tion prions,  admonestons  et  reque*rons  que  ...  la  rigueur  que  tene"s  aux  dits 
Farel  et  Calvin.  admode*rer,  pour  Tamour  de  nous  et  pour  e*viter  scandale, 
contemplans  que  ce  qu'avons  a  vous  et  a  eulx  escript  pour  la  conformity  des 
ce"rimonies  de  TEsglise, ,  est  proce"de  de   bonne  affection  et  par  mode  de 
requeste,  et  non  pas  pour  vous,  ne  eulx,  constraindre  a  ces  choses,  que  sont 
indifferentes  en  TEsglise,  comme  le  pain  de  la  Cene  et  aultres  "  (Hermnjard, 
Correspondance,  etc.  iv.  428). 


122     THE   REFORMATION   IN   GENEVA   UNDER    CALVIN 

machinery  of  the  Church.  The  authorities  of  Bern  had 
been  careful  to  establish  an  ecclesiastical  Court,  the  Con- 
sistory, of  two  pastors  and  three  Councillors,  who  dealt 
with  all  ecclesiastical  details.  It  encouraged  the  meeting 
of  Synods  all  over  its  territories.  Its  proposals  for  uni- 
formity had  been  addressed  to  both  the  pastors  and  the 
Council  of  Geneva,  and  had  spoken  of  mutual  consulta- 
tion. They  had  no  desire  to  seem  even  remotely  responsible 
for  the  bludgeoning  of  the  Genevan  ministers.  The 
Council  of  Geneva  answered  with  a  mixture  of  servility  and 
veiled  insolence1  (April  30th),  Nothing  could  be  made  of 
them. 

Prom  Bern,  Farel  and  Calvin  went  to  Zurich,  and  there 
addressed  a  memorandum  to  a  Synod,  which  included 
representatives  from  Zurich,  Bern,  Basel,  Schaffhausen,  St. 
Gallen,  Miihlhausen,  Biel  (Bienne),  and  the  two  banished 
ministers  from  Geneva.  It  was  one  of  those  General 
Assemblies  which  in  Calvin's  eyes  represented  the  Church 
Catholic,  to  which  all  particular  Churches  owed  deference, 
if  not  simple  obedience.  The  Genevan  pastors  presented 
their  statement  with  a  proud  humility.  They  were  willing 
to  accept  the  ceremonies  of  Bern,  matters  in  themselves 
indifferent,  but  which  might  be  useful  in  the  sense  of 
showing  the  harmony  prevailing  among  the  Eeformed 
Churches ;  but  they  must  be  received  by  the  Church  of 
Geneva,  and  not  imposed  upon  it  by  the  mere  fiat  of 
the  secular  authority.  They  were  quite  willing  to 
expound  them  to  the  people  of  Geneva  and  recommend 
them.  But  if  they  were  to  return  to  Geneva,  they  must 
be  allowed  to  defend  themselves  against  their  calumniators  ; 
and  their  programme  for  the  organisation  of  the  Church 
of  Geneva,  which  had  already  been  accepted  but  had  not 
been  put  in  practice  (January  16th,  153 7),2  must  be 
introduced.  It  consisted  of  the  following : — the  establish- 
ment of  an  ecclesiastical  discipline,  that  the  Holy 

1  For  the  letter  of  Bern  to  Geneva,  and  the  answer  of  Geneva,  cf. 
Herminjard,  Carrespwidance,  etc.  iv.  427-430. 

2  Ibid.  iv.  165  n. 


CALVIN   WITH    FAREL    IN    GENEVA  123 

Supper  might  not  be  profaned ;  the  division  of  the  city 
into  parishes,  that  each  minister  might  be  acquainted  with 
his  own  flock ;  an  increase  in  the  number  of  ministers  for 
the  town ;  regular  ordination  of  pastors  by  the  laying  on 
of  hands ;  more  frequent  celebration  of  the  Holy  Supper, 
according  to  the  practice  of  the  primitive  Church.1  They 
confessed  that  perhaps  they  had  been  too  severe;  on 
this  personal  matter  they  were  willing  to  be  guided.2  They 
listened  with  humility  to  the  exhortations  of  some  of  the 
members  of  the  Synod,  who  prayed  them  to  use  more 
gentleness  in  dealing  with  an  undisciplined  people.  But 
on  the  question  of  principle  and  on  the  rights  of  the 
Church  set  over  against  the  State,  they  were  firm.  It 
was  probably  the  first  time  that  the  Erastians  of  eastern 
Switzerland  had  listened  to  such  High  Church  doctrine ; 
but  they  accepted  it  and  made  it  their  own  for  the  time 
being  at  least  The  Synod  decided  to  write  to  the  Council 
of  Geneva  and  ask  them  to  have  patience  with  their 
preachers  and  receive  them  back  again ;  and  they  asked 
the  deputies  from  Bern  to  charge  themselves  with  the 
affair,  and  do  their  best  to  see  Farel  and  Calvin  reinstated 
in  Geneva. 

The  deputies  of  Bern  accepted  the  commission,  and  the 
Geneva  pastors  went  back  to  Bern  to  await  the  arrival  of  the 
Bern  deputies  from  Zurich.  They  waited,  full  of  anxiety, 
for  nearly  fourteen  days.  Then  the  Bern  Council  were 
ready  to  fulfil  the  request  of  the  Synod.3  Deputies  were 
appointed,  and,  accompanied  by  Farel  and  Calvin,  set  out 

1  The  memoir  presented  to  the  Synod  of  Zurich  has  been  printed  by 
Henninjard,  Correspondance,  etc.  v.  3-6,  and  in  the  Corpus  Reformatorum, 
xxxviii.  ii.  190-192.  The  conclusion  prays  Bern  to  drive  from  their  territory 
ribald  and  obscene  songs  and  catches,  that  the  people  of  Geneva  may  not 
cite  their  example  as  an  excuse. 

a  ""Wir  Kabent  ouch  durch  Etlich  unsere  vorordneten  uffs  ernstlichest 
mit  ihnen  reden  lassen  sich  etlicher  ungeschigier  scherpffe  zemaassen  und 
sich  by  disem  unerbuwenem  volgk  Cristenlicher  sennffmiitigkeit  zu 
beflyssen"  (Corpus  JReformatorwm,  xxxviii.  ii.  193). 

3  The  minute  of  the  Council  of  Bern  says :  "  The  Genevans  had  refused 
to  receive  Calvin  and  Farel.  If  my  lords  need  preachers,  they  will  keep 
them  in  mind"  (Herminjard,  Correspontfance,  v.  20  w.)» 


124  THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

for  Geneva.  The  two  pastors  waited  on  the  frontier  at 
Xoyon  or  at  Genthod  while  the  deputies  of  Bern  went  on 
to  Geneva.  They  had  an  audience  of  the  Council  (May 
23rd),  were  told  that  the  Council  could  not  revoke  what 
all  three  Councils  had  voted.  The  Council  of  the  Two 
Hundred  refused  to  recall  the  pastors.  The  Council 
General  (May  26th)  by  a  unanimous  vote  repeated  the 
sentence  of  exile,  and  forbade  the  three  pastors  (Farel, 
Calvin,  and  Coraut)  to  set  foot  on  Genevan  territory. 

Driven  from  Geneva,  Calvin  would  fain  have  betaken 
himself  to  a  quiet  student  life;  but  he  was  too  well  known  and 
too  much  valued  to  be  left  in  the  obscurity  he  longed  for. 
Strassburg  claimed  him  to  minister  to  the  French  refugees 
who  had  settled  within  its  protecting  walls.  He  was 
invited  to  attend  the  Protestant  conference  at  Frankfurt ; 
he  was  present  at  the  union  conferences  at  Hagenau,  at 
Worms,  and  at  Eegensburg.  There  he  met  the  more 
celebrated  German  Protestant  divines,  who  welcomed  him 
as  they  had  done  no  one  else  from  Switzerland.  Calvin 
put  himself  right  with  them  theologically  by  signing  at 
once  and  without  solicitation  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
and  aided  thereby  the  feeling  of  union  among  all  Pro- 
testants. He  kindled  in  the  breast  of  Melanchthon  one 
of  those  romantic  friendships  which  the  frail  Frenchman, 
with  the  pallid  face,  black  hair,  and  piercing  eyes,  seemed 
to  evoke  so  easily.  Luther  himself  appreciated  his 
theology  even  on  his  jealously  guarded  theory  of  the 
Sacrament  of  the  Holy  Supper. 

Meanwhile  things  were  not  going  well  in  Geneva.  Out- 
wardly, there  was  not  much  difference.  Pastors  ministered 
in  the  churches  of  the  town,  and  the  ordinary  and  ecclesias- 
tical life  went  on  as  usual.  The  magistrates  enforced  the 
Articles ;  they  condemned  the  Anabaptists,  the  Papists,  all 
infringements  of  the  sumptuary  and  disciplinary  laws  of  the 
town.  They  compelled  every  householder  to  go  to  church. 
Still  the  old  life  seemed  to  be  gone.  The  Council  and  the 
Syndics  treated  the  new  pastors  as  their  servants,  com- 
pelled them  to  render  strict  obedience  to  all  their  decisions 


CALVIN   WITH    FAREL   IN   GENEVA  125 

in  ecclesiastical  matters,  and  considered  religion  as  a 
political  affair.  It  is  undoubted  that  the  morals  of  the 
town  became  worse, — so  bad  that  the  pastors  of  Bern  wrote 
a  letter  of  expostulation  to  the  pastors  in  Geneva,1 — and 
the  Lord's  Supper  seems  to  have  been  neglected.  The 
contests  between  parties  within  the  city  became  almost 
scandalous,  and  the  independent  existence  of  Geneva  was 
threatened.2 

At  the  elections  the  Syndics  failed  to  secure  their  re- 
election. Men  of  more  moderate  views  were  chosen,  and 
from  this  date  (Feb.  1539)  the  idea  began  to  be  mooted 
that  Geneva  must  ask  Calvin  to  return.  Private  overtures  - 
were  made  to  him,  but  he  refused.  Then  came  letters  from 
the  Council,  begging  him  to  come  back  and  state  his  terms. 
He  kept  silence.  Lausanne  and  Neueh&tel  joined  their 
entreaties  to  those  of  Geneva.  Calvin  was  not  to  be  per- 
suaded. His  private  letters  reveal  his  whole  mind.  He 
shuddered  at  returning  to  the  turbulent  city.  He  was  not 
sure  that  he  was  fit  to  take  charge  of  the  Church  in  Geneva. 
He  was  in  peace  at  Strassburg,  minister  to  a  congregation 
of  his  own  countrymen ;  and  the  pastoral  tie  once  formed 
was  not  to  be  lightly  broken ;  yet  there  was  an  undercurrent 
drawing  him  to  the  place  where  he  first  began  the  ministry 
of  the  Word.  At  length  he  wrote  to  the  Council  of 
Geneva,  putting  all  his  difficulties  and  his  longings  before 
them — neither  accepting  nor  refusing.  His  immediate 
duty  called  him  to  the  conference  at  Worms. 

The  people  of  Geneva  were  not  discouraged.  On  the 
19th  October,  the  Council  of  the  Two  Hundred  placed  on 
their  register  a  declaration  that  every  means  must  be  taken 
to  secure  the  services  of  "  Maystre  Johan  Calvinus,"  and  on 
the  22nd  a  worthy  burgher  and  member  of  the  Council  of 
the  Two  Hundred,  Louis  Duf our,  was  despatched  to  Strass- 
burg with  a  letter  from  both  the  civic  Councils,  begging 
Calvin  to  return  to  his  "  old  place  "  (prestine  plache),  "  seeing 

1  Hermlnjard,    Correspondance,    etc.    y.    139 ;    Corpus 
xxxviii.  iu  181.* 

2  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  etc.  ii. 


126  THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

our  people  desire  you  greatly/1  and  promising  that  they 
would  do  what  they  could  to  content  him.1  Dufour  got  to 
Strassburg  only  to  find  that  Calvin  had  gone  to  Worms. 
He  presented  his  letters  to  the  Council  of  the  town,  who 
sent  them  on  by  an  express  Deques  celeri  cursu)  2  to  Calvin 
(Nov.  6th,  1540).  Far  from  being  uplifted  at  the  genuine 
desire  to  receive  him  back  again  to  Geneva,  Calvin  was 
terribly  distressed.  He  took  counsel  with  his  friends  at 
Worms,  and  could  scarcely  place  the  case  before  them  for 
his  sobs.3  The  intolerable  pain  he  had  at  the  thought  of 
going  back  to  Geneva  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  idea  that 
Bucer  might  after  all  be  right  when  he  declared  that 
Calvin's  duty  to  the  Church  Universal  clearly  pointed  to 
his  return,4  overmastered  him  completely.  His  friends,  re- 
specting his  sufferings,  advised  him  to  postpone  all  decision 
until  again  in  Strassburg.  Others  who  were  not  near  him 
kept  urging  him.  Farel  thundered  at  him  (consternd  par  tes 
foudres)?  The  pastors  of  Zurich  wrote  (April  5th  1541) : 

"You  know  that  Geneva  lies  on  the  confines  of  France,  of 
Italy,  and  of  Germany,  and  that  there  is  great  hope  that  the 
Gospel  may  spread  from  it  to  the  neighbouring  cities,  and 
thus  enlarge  the  ramparts  (Us  boulevards)  of  the  kingdom 
of  Christ. — You  know  that  the  Apostle  selected  metropolitan 
cities  for  his  preaching  centres,  that  the  Gospel  might  be 
spread  throughout  the  surrounding  towns."  6 

Calvin  was  overcome.  He  consented  to  return  to 
Geneva,  and  entered  the  city  still  suffering  from  his  repug- 
nance to  undertake  work  he  was  not  at  all  sure  that  he 
was  fitted  to  do.  Historians  speak  of  a  triumphal  entry. 
There  may  have  been,  though  nothing  could  have  been 
more  distasteful  to  Calvin  at  any  time,  and  eminently  so 

1  Megistres  dw  Cons&il,  xxxiv.  f.,  483,  485,  490  (quoted  in  Dotunergue, 
Jewn  Calvm,  ii.  700). 

2  Herminjard,  Correspondence  des  Iteformateurs  dans  les  pays  de  langue 
framqaise  (Geneva,  1866-93),  vi.  365. 

8  Corpus  JReforr/iatorum,  xxxix.  (xi.)  114. 

*lMd.  p.  54.  «JW&  p.  170; 

6  Herminjard,  Correspondance,  etc.  vii.  77. 


CALVIX   WITH    FAREL  IN   GENEVA  127 

on  this  occasion,  with  the  feelings  he  had  Contemporary 
documents  are  silent.  There  is  only  the  minute  of  the 
Council,  as  formal  as  minutes  usually  are,  relating  that 
"  Maystre  Johan  Calvin,  ministre  evangelique,"  is  again  in 
charge  of  the  Church  in  Geneva  (Sept.  13th,  1541).1 

Calvin  was  in  Geneva  for  the  second  time,  dragged  there 
both  times  unwillingly,  his  dream  of  a  quiet  scholar's  life 
completely  shattered.  The  work  that  lay  before  him  proved 
to  be  almost  as  hard  as  he  had  foreseen  it  would  be.  The 
common  idea  that  from  this  second  entry  Calvin  was  master 
within  the  city,  is  quite  erroneous.  Fourteen  years  were 
spent  in  a  hard  struggle  (1541-55);  and  if  the  remain- 
ing nine  years  of  his  life  can  be  called  his  period  of  triumph 
over  opponents  (1555—64),  it  must  be  remembered  that 
he  was  never  able  to  see  his  ideas  of  an  ecclesiastical  organi- 
sation wholly  carried  out  in  the  city  of  his  adoption.  One 
must  go  to  the  Protestant  Church  of  France  to  see  Calvin's 
idea  completely  realised.2 

On  the  day  of  his  entry  into  Geneva  (Sept.  13th, 
1541)  the  Council  resolved  that  a  Constitution  should  be 
given  to  the  Church  of  the  city,  and  a  committee  was  formed, 
consisting  of  Calvin,  his  colleagues  in  the  ministry,  and  six 
members  of  the  Council,  to  prepare  the  draft.  The  work  was 
completed  in  twenty  days,  and  ready  for  presentation.  On 
September  16th,  however,  it  had  been  resolved  that  the 
draft  when  prepared  should  be  submitted  for  revision  to 
the  Smaller  Council,  to  the  Council  of  Sixty,  and  finally  to 
the  Council  of  Two  Hundred.  The  old  opposition  at  once 
manifested  itself  within  these  Councils.  There  seem  to 
have  been  alterations,  and  at  the  last  moment  Calvin  thought 
that  the  Constitution  would  be  made  worthless  for  the  pur- 
pose of  discipline  and  orderly  ecclesiastical  rule.  In  the  end, 
however,  the  drafted  ordinances  were  adopted  unanimously 
by  the  Council  of  Two  Hundred  without  serious  alteration. 

1  Itegistres  du  Conseil,  xxxv.  f.,  324  (quoted  in  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin, 
etc.  ii.  710). 

2  For  the  wonderful  influence  of  Calvin  on  the  French  Reformation  and 
its  causes,  cf.  below,  pp.  153  ff. 


128      THE   REFORMATION    IN    GENEVA   UNDER   CALVIN 

The  result  was  the  famous  Ecclesiastical  Ordinances  of 
Geneva  in  their  first  form.  They  did  not  assume  their 
final  form  until  1561.1 

When  these  Ordinances  of  1541  are  compared  with  the 
principles  of  ecclesiastical  government  laid  down  in  the 
Institutio,  with  the  Articles  of  1537,  and  with  the 
Ordinances  of  1561,  it  can  be  seen  that  Calvin  must  have 
sacrificed  a  great  deal  in  order  to  content  the  magistrates  of 
Geneva. 

He  had  contended  for  the  self-government  of  the  Church, 
especially  in  matters  of  discipline ;  the  principle  runs  all 
through  the  chapters  of  the  fourth  book  of  the  Institutio. 
The  Ordinances  give  a  certain  show  of  autonomy,  and  yet  the 
whole  authority  really  rests  with  the  Councils.  The  dis- 
cipline was  exercised  by  the  Consistory  or  session  of  Elders 
(Anciens) ;  but  this  Consistory  was  chosen  by  the  Smaller 
Council  on  the  advice  of  the  ministers,  and  was  to  include 
two  members  of  the  Smaller  Council,  four  from  the  Council 
of  Si£ty>  and  six  from  the  Council  of  Two  Hundred,  and 
when  they  had  been  chosen  they  were  to  be  presented  to 
the  Council  of  Two  Hundred  for  approval.  When  the  Con- 
sistory met,  one  of  the  four  Syndics  sat  as  president,  hold- 
ing his  baton,  the  insignia  of  his  magisterial  office,  in  his 
hand,  which,  as  the  revised  Ordinances  of  1561  very  truly 
said,  "  had  more  the  appearance  of  civil  authority  than  of 
spiritual  rule."  The  revised  Ordinances  forbade  the  presi- 
dent to  carry  his  baton  when  he  presided  in  The  Consistory,  in 
order  to  render  obedience  to  the  distinction  which  is  "  clearly 
shown  in  Holy  Scripture  to  exist  between  the  magistrate's 
sword  and  authority  and  the  superintendence  which  ought 
to  be  in  the  Church  "  ;  but  the  obedience  to  Holy  Scripture 
does  not  seem  to  have  gone  further  than  laying  aside  the 
baton  for  the  time.  It  appears  also  that  the  rule  of  con- 
sulting the  ministers  in  the  appointments  made  to  the 
Consistory  was  not  unfrequently  omitted,  and  that  it  was 

1  Articles  of  1537  in  tlie  Corpus  JRqformatorum,  xxxviii.  i.  (x.  i.)  5-14  ; 
Ordinances  of  1541;  ibid.  pp.  15-30;  Ordinances  of  1561;  ibid.  pp. 
91-124 ;  Institution,  iv.  cc.  i.-xii. 


CALVIN"  WITH  FAREL  IN*  GENEVA       129 

to  all  intents  and  purposes  simply  a  committee  of  the 
Councils,  and  anything  but  submissive  to  the  pastors.1  The 
Consistory  had  no  power  to  inliict  civil  punishments  on 
delinquents.  It  could  only  admonish  and  warn.  When  it 
deemed  that  chastisements  were  necessary,  it  had  to  report 
to  the  Council,  who  sentenced.  This  was  also  done  in  order 
to  maintain  the  separation  between  the  civil  and  ecclesias- 
tical power :  but,  in  fact,  it  was  a  committee  of  the  Council 
that  reported  to  the  Council,  and  the  distinction  was  really 
illusory.  This  state  of  matters  was  quite  repugnant  to 
Calvin's  cherished  idea,  not  only  as  laid  down  in  the 
Institution,  but  as  seen  at  work  in  the  Constitution  of  the 
French  Protestant  Church,  which  was  mainly  his  authorship. 
"The  magnificent,  noble,  and  honourable  Lords"  of  the 
Council  (such  was  their  title)  of  this  small  town  of  13,000 
inhabitants  deferred  in  words  to  the  teachings  of  Calvin  about 
the  distinction  between  the  civil  and  the  spiritual  powers,  but 
in  fact  they  retained  the  whole  power  of  rule  or  discipline 
in  their  own  hands ;  and  we  ought  to  see  in  the  disciplinary 
powers  and  punishments  of  the  Consistory  of  Geneva,  not 
an  exhibition  of  the  working  of  a  Church  organised  on  the 
principles  of  Calvin,  but  the  ordinary  procedure  of  the 
Town  Council  of  a  mediaeval  city.  Their  petty  punishments 
and  their  minute  interference  with  private  life  are  only 
special  instances  of  what  was  common  to  all  municipal 
rule  in  the  sixteenth  century. 

Through  that  century  we  find  a  protest  against  the 
mediaeval  intrusion  of  the  ecclesiastical  power  into 
the  realm  of  civil  authority,  with  the  inevitable  re- 
action which  made  the  ecclesiastical  a  mere  department 
of  national  or  civic  administration.  Zurich  under  Zwingli, 
although  it  is  usually  taken  as  the  extreme  type  of  this 
Erastian  policy,  as  it  came  to  be  called  later,  went  no 
further  than  Bern,  Strassburg,  or  other  places.  The 
Council  of  Geneva  had  legal  precedent  when  they 
insisted  that  the  supreme  ecclesiastical  power  belonged 
bo  them.  The  city  had  been  an  ecclesiastical  principality, 
1  Corpus  Reformcdorum,  xxxviii  i.  121,  122. 


130  THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

ruled  in  civil  as  well  as  in  ecclesiastical  things  by  its 
Bishop,  and  the  Council  were  legally  the  inheritors  of  the 
Bishop's  authority.  This  meant,  among  other  things,  that 
the  old  laws  against  heresy,  unless  specially  repealed, 
remained  on  the  Statute  Book,  and  errors  in  doctrine 
were  reckoned  to  be  of  the  nature  of  treasonable 
things;  and  this  made  heresies,  or  variations  in  religious 
opinion  from  what  the  Statute  Book  had  declared  to 
be  the  official  view  of  truth,  liable  to  civil  pains  and 
penalties. 

"  Castellio's  doubts  as  to  the  canonicity  of  the  Song  of 
Songs  and  as  to  the  received  interpretation  of  Christ's 
descent  into  Hades,  Bolsec's  criticism  of  predestination, 
Qryet's  suspected  scepticism  and  possession  of  infidel  books, 
Servetus3  rationalism  and  anti-Trinitarian  creed,  were  all 
opinions  judged  to  be  criminal.  .  .  .  The  heretic  may  be  a 
man  of  irreproachable  character ;  but  if  heresy  be  treason 
against  the  State,'* * 

he  was  a  criminal,  and  had  to  be  punished  for  the 
crime  on  the  Statute  Book.  To  say  that  Calvin  burnt 
Servetus,  as  is  continually  done,  is  to  make  one  man  re- 
sponsible for  a  state  of  things  which  had  lasted  in  western 
Europe  ever  since  the  Emperor  Theodosius  declared  that 
all  men  were  out  of  law  who  did  not  accept  the  Nicene 
Creed  in  the  form  issued  by  Damasus  of  Rome.  On  the 
other  hand,  to  release  Calvin  from  his  share  in  that  tragedy 
and  crime  by  denying  that  he  sat  among  the  judges  of  the 
heretic,  or  to  allege  that  Servetus  was  slain  because  he 
conspired  against  the  liberties  of  the  city,  is  equally  un- 
reasonable. Calvin  certainly  believed  that  the  execution 
of  the  anti-Trinitarian  was  right.  The  Protestants  of 
Prance  and  of  Switzerland  in  1903  (Nov.  1st)  erected 
what  they  called  a  monument  expiatoire  to  the  victim 
of  sixteenth  century  religious  persecution,  and  placed 
on  it  an  inscription  in  which  they  acknowledged  their 
debt  to  the  great  Eeformer,  and  at  the  same  time 

1  Cambridge  Modern  History ',  ii.  375. 


CALVIN   WITH   FAKEL    IN   GENEVA  131 

condemned  Ms  error,  —  surely  the  right  attitude  to 
assume.1 

Calvin  did  three  things  for  Geneva,  all  of  which  went 
far  beyond  its  walls.  He  gave  its  Church  a  trained  and 
tested  ministry,  its  homes  an  educated  people  who  could 
give  a  reason  for  their  faith,  and  to  the  whole  city  an 
heroic  soul  which  enabled  the  little  town  to  stand  forth  as 
the  Citadel  and  City  of  Refuge  for  the  oppressed  Protestants 
of  Europe. 

The  earlier  preachers  of  the  Reformed  faith  had  been 
stray  scholars,  converted  priests  and  monks,  pious  artisans, 
and  such  like.  They  were  for  the  most  part  heroic  men 
who  did  their  work  nobly.  But  some  of  them  had  no  real 
vocation  for  the  position  into  which  they  had  thrust  them- 
selves. They  had  been  prompted  by  such  ignoble  motives 
as  discontent  with  their  condition,  the  desire  to  marry  or 
to  make  legitimate  irregular  connections,2  or  dislike  to  all 
authority  and  wholesome  restraints.  They  had  brought 
neither  change  of  heart  nor  of  conduct  into  their  new 
surroundings,  and  had  become  a  source  of  danger  and 
scandal  to  the  small  Protestant  communities. 

The  first  part  of  the  Ordinances  was  meant  to  put  an 
end  to  such  a  condition  of  things,  and  aimed  at  giving  the 
Reformed  Church  a  ministry  more  efficient  than  the  old 
priesthood,  without  claiming  any  specially  priestly  character. 

1  On  the  one  side  of  tlie  stone  is  inscribed : 

Le  xxvii  Octobre  MDLIII 
Mourut  sur  le  bueher  a  Champel 

MICHEL  SEKVET 
de  Villeneuve  d'Aragon,  n^  le  xxix  Septembre  MDXL 

and  on  the  other : 

Fils  respectueux  et  reconnaissants  de  Calvin  notre  grand  r&brmateur, 
mais  condamnant  nne  erreur  qui  frit  celle  de  son  siecle  et  ferme- 
ment  attaches  a  la  liberte*  de  conscience  selon  les  vrais  pxincipes  de 
la  Reformation  et  de  l:£vangile,  nous  avons  elev&  ce  monument 
expiatoire.    Le  xxvii  Octobre  MCMIII. 

2  Like  Jacques  Bernard,  the  Franciscan  monk,  who  was  one  of  the  pastors 
in  Geneva  after  the  banishment  of  Calvin  and  Farel,  who,  "cum  esset  inter 
Evangelii  exordia,  hostiliter  repugnavit,  donee  Christum  aliquando  in  uxoris 
forma  conteinplatus  est." 


132  THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

The  ministers  were  to  be  men  who  believed  that  they  were 
called  by  the  voice  of  God  speaking  to  the  individual  soul, 
and  this  belief  in  a  divine  vocation  was  to  be  tested  and 
tried  in  a  threefold  way — by  a  searching  examination,  by 
a  call  from  their  fellow-men  in  the  Church,  and  by  a  solemn 
institution  to  office. 

The  examination,  which  is  expressly  stated  to  be  the 
most  important,  was  conducted  by  those  who  were  already 
in  the  office  of  the  ministry.  It  concerned,  first,  the 
knowledge  which  the  candidate  had  of  Holy  Scripture,  and 
of  his  ability  to  make  use  of  it  for  the  edification  of  the 
people ;  and,  second,  his  walk  and  conversation  in  so  far 
as  they  witnessed  to  his  power  to  be  an  example  as  well  as 
a  teacher.  The  candidate  was  then  presented  to  the  Smaller 
Council.  He  was  next  required  to  preach  before  the 
people,  who  were  invited  to  say  whether  his  ministrations 
were  likely  to  be  for  edification.  These  three  tests  passed, 
he  was  then  to  be  solemnly  set  apart  by  the  laying  on  of 
the  hands  of  ministers,  according  to  the  usage  of  the  ancient 
Church.  His  examination  and  testing  did  not  end  with 
his  ordination.  All  the  ministers  of  the  city  were  com- 
manded to  meet  once  a  week  for  the  discussion  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  at  these  meetings  it  was  the  duty  of  every 
one,  even  the  least  important,  to  bring  forward  any  cause 
of  complaint  he  believed  to  exist  against  any  of  his  brethren, 
whether  of  doctrine,  or  of  morals,  or  of  inefficient  discharge 
of  the  duties  entrusted  to  his  care.  The  pastors  who 
worked  in  the  villages  were  ordered  to  attend  as  often  as 
they  could,  and  none  of  them  were  permitted  to  be  absent 
beyond  one  month.  If  the  meeting  of  ministers  failed  to 
agree  on  any  matter  brought  before  them,  they  were 
enjoined  to  call  in  the  Elders  to  assist  them ;  and  a  final 
appeal  was  always  allowed  to  the  Signory,  or  civil  authority. 
The  same  rigid  supervision  was  extended  to  the  whole 
people,  and  in  the  visitations  for  this  purpose  Elders  were 
always  associated  with  ministers.1  Every  member  of  the 

1  Corpus  Reforinatorum,  xxxviii.  i.  (x.  i.)  17-20,  45-48,  55-58,  93-99 
116-118.  ' 


CALVIX   WITH    FAREL    IX    GENEVA  133 

little  republic,  surrounded  by  so  roany  and  powerful 
enemies  was  meant  to  be  a  soldier  trained  for  spiritual  a=? 
for  temporal  warfare.  Calvin  added  a  spiritual  side  to 
the  military  training  which  pre>erved  the  independence  of 
the  little  mediaeval  city  republics. 

He  was  unwearied  in  his  exertions  to  make  Geneva 
an  enlightened  town.  His  educational  policy  adopted  by 
the  Councils  was  stated  in  a  series  of  famous  regulations 
for  the  management  of  the  schools  and  College  of  the  city.1 
He  sought  out  and  presented  to  the  Council  the  most 
noted  scholars  he  could  attract  to  Geneva.  Mathurin 
Cordier,  the  ablest  preceptor  that  France  had  produced  in  his 
generation ;  Beza,  its  most  illustrious  Humanist ;  Castellio 
and  Saunier,  were  all  teachers  in  the  city.  The  fame  of 
its  schools  attracted  almost  as  many  as  persecution  drove 
to  take  refuge  within  its  walls.  The  religious  instruction 
of  the  young  was  carefully  attended  to.  Calvin's  earlier 
Catechism  was  revised,  and  made  more  suitable  for  the 
young;  and  the  children  were  so  well  grounded  that  it 
became  a  common  saying  that  a  boy  of  Geneva  could  give 
an  answer  for  his  faith  as  ably  as  a  "doctor  of  the 
Sorbonne."  But  what  Geneva  excelled  in  was  its  training 
for  the  ministry  and  other  learned  professions.  Men  with 
the  passion  of  learning  in  their  blood  came  from  all  lands 
— from  Italy,  Spain,  England,  Scotland,  even  from  Eussia, 
and,  above  all,  from  France.  Pastors  educated  in  Geneva, 
taught  by  the  most  distinguished  scholars  of  the  day,  who 
had  gained  the  art  of  ruling  others  in  having  learned  how 
to  command  themselves,  went  forth  from  its  schools  to 
become  the  ministers  of  the  struggling  Protestants  in  the 
Netherlands,  in  England,  in  Scotland,  in  the  Ehine 
Provinces,  and,  above  all,  in  France.  They  were  wise,  in- 
defatigable, fearless,  ready  to  give  their  lives  for  their  work, 
extorting  praise  from  unwilling  mouths,  as  modest,  saintly, 
"  with  the  name  of  Jesus  ever  on  their  lips  "  and  His  Spirit 
in  their  hearts.  What  they  did  for  France  and  other 
countries  must  be  told  elsewhere. 

1  Corpus  Jteformatorum,  xxxviii.  i.  (x.  i  )  65-90. 


134  THE  REFORMATION  IN  GENEVA  UNDER  CALVIN 

The  once  disorderly  city,  a  prey  to  its  own  internal 
factions,  became  the  citadel  of  the  Reformation,  defying 
the  threats  of  Romanist  France  and  Savoy,  and  opening  its 
gates  to  the  persecuted  of  all  lands.  It  continued  to  be 
so  for  generations,  and  the  victims  of  the  dragonnades  of 
Louis  xiv.  received  the  welcome  and  protection  accorded 
to  the  sufferers  under  the  Valois  in  the  sixteenth  century. 
What  it  did  for  them  may  he  best  told  in  the  words  of  a 
refugee : 

"  On  the  next  day,  a  Sunday,  we  reached  a  small  village 
on  a  hill  about  a  league  from  Geneva,  from  which  we 
could  see  that  city  with  a  joy  which  could  only  be  compared 
to  the  gladness  with  which  the  Israelites  beheld  the  ^  Land 
of  Canaan.  It  was  midday  when  we  reached  the  village, 
and  so  great  was  our  eagerness  to  be  as  soon  as  possible 
within  the  city  which  we  looked  on  as  our  Jerusalem,  that 
we  did  not  wish  to  stay  even  for  food.  But  our  conductor 
informed  us  that  on  the  Sunday  the  gates  of  Geneva  were 
never  opened  until  after  divine  service,  that  is,  until  after 
four  o'clock.  We  had  therefore  to  remain  in  the  village 
until  about  that  hour,  when  we  mounted  our  horses  again. 
When  we  drew  near  to  the  town  we  saw  a  large  number  of 
people  coming  out.  Our  guide  was  surprised,  and  the 
more  so  when,  arriving  at  the  Plain-Palais,  a  quarter  of  a 
league  from  the  town,  we  saw  coming  to  meet  us,  three 
carriages  escorted  by  halberdiers  and  followed  by  an  immense 
crowd  of  people  of  both  sexes  and  of  every  age.  As  soon  as 
we  were  seen,  a  servant  of  the  Magistracy  approached  us 
and  prayed  us  to  dismount  to  salute  respectfully  'Their 
Excellencies  of  Geneva/  who  had  come  to  meet  us  and  to 
bid  us  welcome.  We  obeyed.  The  three  carnages  having 
drawn  near,  there  alighted  from  each  a  magistrate  and  a 
minister,  who  embraced  us  with  tears  of  joy  and  with 
praises  of  our  constancy  and  endurance  far  greater  than  we 
merited.  .  .  .  Their  Excellencies  then  permitted  the  people 
to  approach,  and  there  followed  a  spectacle  more  touching 
than  imagination  could  picture.  Several  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Geneva  had  relatives  suffering  in  the  French  galleys 
(from  which  we  had  been  delivered),  and  these  good  people 
did  not  know  whether  any  of  them  might  be  among  our 
company.  So  one  heard  a  confused  noise,  *  My  son  so  and 
so,  my  husband,  my  brother,  are  you  there  ? '  One  can 


CALVIN    WITH    FAREL   IN   GENEVA  135 

imagine  what  embraeings  welcomed  any  of  our  troop  who 
could  answer.  All  this  crowd  of  people  threw  itself  on  our 
necks  with  inexpressible  transports  of  joy,  praising  and 
magnifying  the  Lord  for  the  manifestation  "of  His  grace  in 
our  favour;  and  when  Their  Excellencies  asked  us  to  get 
on  horseback  again  to  enter  the  city,  we  were  scarcely  able 
to  obey,  so  impossible  did  it  seem  to  detach  ourselves  from 
the  arms  of  these  pious  and  zealous  brethren,  who  seemed 
afraid  to  lose  sight  of  us.  At  last  we  remounted  and 
followed  Their  Excellencies,  who  conducted  us  into  the 
city  as  in  triumph.  A  magnificent  building  had  been 
erected  in  Geneva  to  lodge  citizens  who  had  fallen  into 
poverty.  It  had  just  been  finished  and  furnished,  and  no 
one  had  yet  lived  in  it.  Their  Excellencies  thought  it 
could  have  no  better  dedication  than  to  serve  as  our 
habitation.  They  conducted  us  there,  and  we  were  soon  on 
foot  in  a  spacious  court.  The  crowd  of  people  rushed  in 
after  us.  Those  who  had  found  relatives  in  our  company 
begged  Their  Excellencies  to  permit  them  to  take  them  to 
their  houses — a  request  willingly  granted.  M.  Bosquet, 
one  of  us,  had  a  mother  and  two  sisters  in  Geneva,  and 
they  had  come  to  claim  him.  As  he  was  my  intimate 
friend,  he  begged  Their  Excellencies  to  permit  him  to  take 
me  along  with  him,  and  they  willingly  granted  his  request. 
Fired  by  this  example,  all  the  burghers,  men  and  women, 
asked  Their  Excellencies  to  allow  them  the  same  favour  of 
lodging  these  dear  brethren  in  their  own  houses.  Their 
Excellencies  having  permitted  some  to  do  this,  a  holy 
jealousy  took  possession  of  the  others,  who  lamented  and 
bewailed  themselves,  saying  that  they  could  not  be  looked 
on  as  good  and  loyal  citizens  if  they  were  refused  the  same 
favour ;  so  Their  'Excellencies  had  to  give  way,  and  not  one 
of  us  was  left  in  the  Maison  Fran<jaise,  for  so  they  had 
called  the  magnificent  building/' 1 

The  narrative  is  that  of  a  Protestant  condemned  to 
the  galleys  under  Louis  xrv. ;  but  it  may  serve  as  a 
picture  of  how  Geneva  acted  in  the  sixteenth  century 
when  the  small  city  of  13,000  souls  received  and  pro- 
tected nearly  6000  refugees  driven  from  many  different 
lands  for  their  religion. 

1  M4moires  d*un  protesfant  condamn6  OMSK  galeres  de  France  pour  cause  de 
religion,  Merits  par  lui-m£me  (1757,  repub.  1865),  pp.  404-407. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  REFORMATION   IN  FRANCE.1 
§  1.  Marguerite  d'Angouleme  and  the  "group  of  Meausc" 

PERHAPS  no  one  so  thoroughly  represents  the  sentiments 
which  inspired  the  beginnings  of  the  movement  for  Eeforma- 
tion  in.  France  as  Marguerite  d'Angouleme,2  the  sister  of 

1  SOTJBCES  :  Theodore  de  Beze  (Beza),  Histoire  EccUsiastique  des  tylises 
reformtes  au  Royauvne  de  France  (ed.  by  G.  Baum  and  E.  Cunitz,  Paris, 
1883-89) ;  J.  Crespin,  Histoire  des  martyrs  persecutes  et  mis  a  mart  pour  la 
write  (ed.  by  Benoist,  Toulouse,  1885-87) ;  Herminjard,  Correspondance  des 
Iteformateurs  dans  les  pays  de  langue  fratigaise,  9  vols.  (Geneva,  1878-91) ; 
Calvin's  Letters,  Corpus  Heformatorum,  vols.  xxxvni.  ii.-XLvm.  (Bruns- 
wick, 1872,  etc.);  Bonnet,  Lettresde  Jean  Calvin,  2  vols.  (Paris,  1854). 

LATEB  BOOKS  :  E.  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  3  vols.  (published  Lausanne, 
1899-1905) ;  H.  M.  Baird,  History  of  the  Rise  of  the  Huguenots  (London, 
1880),  and  Theodore  Beza  (New  York,  1899)  j  Lavisse,  Histoire  de  France, 
v.  i.  pp.  339  ff.  ;  ii.  183  ff. ;  vi.  i.  ii.  ;  Hamilton,  "Paris  under  the  Valois 
Kings  "  (JSng.  Hist.  Review,  1886,  pp.  260-70). 

2  Marguerite  was  born  at  Angouleme  on  April  llth,  1492  ;  married  the 
feeble  Duke  of  Alencon  in  1509  ;  was  a  widow  in  1525  ;  married  Henri 
d'Albret,  King  of  Navarre,  in  1527 ;  died  in  1549.    Her  only  child  was 
Jeanne  d'Albret,  the  heroic  mother  of  Henry  of  Navarre,  who  became 
Henri  iv.  of  France.     When  she  was  the  Duchess  of  Alen9on,  her  court  at 
Bourges  was  a  centre  for  the  Humanists  and  Reformers  of  France ;  when 
she  became  the  Queen  of  Navarre,  her  castle  at  Ne*rac  was  a  haven  for  all 
persecuted  Protestants.    The  literature  about  Marguerite  is  very  extensive : 
it  is  perhaps  sufficient  to  mention — Ge*nin,  Lettresde  Marguerite  d' Angouttvie, 
r&ine  de  Navarre  (published  by  the  ScoUte  de  V Histoire  de  France,  1841-42) ; 
Les  idees  religieuses  de  Marguerite  de  Navarre,  d'aupres  son  ceuvre  pottique  ; 
A.  Lefranc,  Les  demieres  patsies  de  Marguerite  de  Navarre  (Paris,  1896) ; 
Becker,  "  Marguerite  de  Navarre,  duchesse  d'Alen9on  et  Guillaume  Bri9onnet, 
eVeViue  de  Meaux,  d'aprfe  leur  correspondance  manuscrite,  1521-24  "  (in  the 
Bulletin  de  la  Societt  de  I' Histoire  du  Protestantisme  franfaise,  xlix.  (Paris, 
18DO) ;  Darmesteter,  Margaret  of  AngouUme,  Queen  of  Nwwrre  (London, 

136 


MARGUERITE   AND   THE    %%  GROUP    OF   MEACX        137 

King  Francis  r.  A  study  of  her  letters  and  of  her 
writings — the  latter  Leing  for  the  most  part  in  verse — is 
almost  essential  for  a  true  knowledge  of  the  aspirations  of 
the  noblest  minds  of  her  generation.  Xot  that  she 
possessed  creative  energy  or  was  herself  a  thinker  of  any 
originality,  but  her  soul,  like  some  clear  sensitive  mirror, 
received  and  reflected  the  most  tremulous  throb  of  the 
intellectual  and  religious  movements  around  her.  She 
had,  like  many  ladies  of  that  age,  devoted  herself  to  the 
Xew  Learning.  She  had  mastered  Latin,  Italian,  and 
Spanish  in  her  girlhood,  and  later  she  acquired  Greek  and 
even  Hebrew,  in  order  to  study  the  Scriptures  in  their 
original  tongues.  In  her  the  French  Eenaissance  of  the  end 
of  the  fifteenth  was  prolonged  throughout  the  first  half  of 
the  sixteenth  century.  She  was  all  sentiment  and  affection, 
full  of  that  gentle  courage  which  soft  feminine  enthusiasm 
gives,  and  to  her  brother  and  more  masculine  mother 
(Louise  of  Savoy)1  she  was  a  being  to  be  protected 
against  the  consequences  of  her  own  tender  daring. 
Contemporary  writers  of  all  parties,  save  the  more  bitter 
defenders  of  the  prevalent  Scholastic  Theology,  have 
something  good  to  say  about  the  pure,  bright,  ecstatic 
Queen  of  Navarre.  One  calls  her  the  "violet  in  the 
royal  garden,"  and  says  that  she  unconsciously  gathered 
around  her  all  the  better  spirits  in  Prance,  as  the  wild 
thyme  attracts  the  bees. 

Marsiglio  Ficino  had  taught  her  to  drink  from  the 
well  of  Christian  Platonism;2  and  this  mysticism,  which 
had  little  to  do  with  dogma,  which  allied  itself  naturally 
with  the  poetical  sides  of  philosophy  and  morals  which 
suggested  great  if  indefinite  thoughts  about  God, — le  Tout, 
le  Seul  Nfoessaire,  la  jSeule  £onU> — the  human  soul  and  the 

1886) ;  Lavisse,  Jffistoire  de  Fraiice,  v.  i.  ;  Henninjard,  Correspondence,  etc., 
vol.  i.,  which,  contains  sixteen  letters  written  by  her,  and  twelve  addressed 
to  her. 

1  Louise  de  Savoie,  Journal,   1476-1522    (in   Micliaud  et  Poujoulat, 
Collection,  etc.  v.}. 

2  Lefranc,  "Marguerite  de  Navarre  et  le  platonisme  de  la  Renaissance" 
(vols.  Iviii.  lix.  Bibliotheque  de  V&ole  des  Chartes,  1897-98). 


138       THE  REFORMATION  IN  FRANCE 

intimate  union  between  the  two,  was  perhaps  the  abiding 
part  of  her  ever-enlarging  religious  experience.  Nicholas 
of  Cusa,  who  tried  to  combine  the  old  Scholastic  with  the 
new  thoughts  of  the  Eenaissance,  taught  her  much  which 
she  never  unlearnt.  She  studied  the  Holy  Scriptures 
carefully  for  herself,  and  was  never  weary  of  discussing 
with  others  the  meaning  of  passages  which  seemed  to  be 
difficult.  She  listened  eagerly  to  the  preaching  of  Lefevre 
and  Eoussel,  and  carried  on  a  long  private  correspondence 
with  Bri^onnet,  being  passionately  desirous,  she  said,  to 
learn  "  the  way  of  salvation." 1  Both  Luther  and  Calvin 
made  a  strong  impression  upon  her,  but  their  schemes  of 
theology  never  attracted  nor  subjugated  her  intelligence. 
Her  sympathies  were  drawn  forth  by  their  disdain  of 
Scholastic  Theology,  by  their  denial  of  the  supernatural 
powers  of  the  priesthood,  by  their  proclamation  of  the 
power  and  of  the  love  of  God,  and  by  their  conception 
that  faith  unites  man  with  God — by  all  in  their  teaching 
which  would  assimilate  with  the  Christian  mysticism  to 
which  she  had  given  herself  with  all  her  soul.  When 
her  religious  poems  are  studied,  it  will  be  found  that  she 
dwells  on  the  infinite  power  of  God,  the  mystical  absorp- 
tion of  the  human  life  within  the  divine,  and  praises  pas- 
sionately self-sacrifice  and  disdain  of  all  earthly  pleasures. 
She  extols  the  Lord  as  the  one  and  only  Saviour  and 
Intercessor.  She  contrasts,  as  Luther  was  accustomed  to 
do,  the  Law  which  searches,  tries,  and  punishes,  with  the 
Gospel  which  pardons  the  sinner  for  the  sake  of  Christ 
and  of  the  work  which  He  finished  on  the  Cross.  She 
looks  forward  with  eager  hope  to  a  world  redeemed  and 
regenerated  through  the  Evangel  of  Jesus  Christ.  She 
insists  on  justification  by  faith,  on  the  impossibility  of 
salvation  by  works,  on  predestination  in  the  sense  of 
absolute  dependence-  on  God  in  the  last  resort.  Works 
are  good,  but  no  one  is  saved  by  works ;  salvation  comes 
by  grace,  and  "  is  the  gift  of  the  Most  High  God."  She 
calls  the  Virgin  the  most  blessed  among  women,  because 

1  Herminjard,  Correspondence,  etc.  i.  67. 


MARGUERITE  AND  THE  **  GROUP  OF  MEAUX"  139 

she  had  been  chosen  to  be  the  mother  of  the  "  Sovereign 
Saviour,"  but  refused  her  any  higher  place;  and  in  her 
devotions  she  introduced  an  invocation  of  Our  Lord 
instead  of  the  Sahe  Begina.  This  way  of  thinking  about 
the  Blessed  Virgin,  combined  with  her  indifierence  to  the 
Saints  and  to  the  Mass,  and  her  undisguised  contempt 
for  the  more  superstitious  ecclesiastical  ceremonies,  were 
the  chief  reasons  for  the  strong  attacks  made  on  Marguerite 
by  the  Faculty  of  Theology  (the  Sorbonne)  of  Paris. 
She  cannot  be  called  a  Protestant,  but  she  had  broken 
completely  with  mediaeval  modes  of  religious  life  and 
thought. 

Marguerite's  letters  contain  such  graphic  glimpses,  that 
it  is  possible  to  see  her  daily  life,  whether  at  Bourges, 
where  she  held  her  Court  as  the  Duchess  of  Alen§on,  or  at 
Nerae,  where  she  dwelt  as  the  Queen  of  Navarre.  Every 
hour  was  occupied,  and  was  lived  in  the  midst  of  company. 
Her  Contes  and  her  poetry  were  for  the  most  part  written 
in  her  litter  when  she  was  travelling  from  one  place  to 
another.  Her  "  Household  "  was  large  even  for  the  times. 
No  less  than  one  hundred  and  two  persons — ladies,  secre- 
taries, almoners,  physicians,  etc. — made  her  Court;  and 
frequently  many  visitors  also  were  present  The  whole 
Household,"  with  the  visitors,  met  together  every  forenoon 
in  one  of  the  halls  of  the  Palace,  a  room  "  well-paved  and 
hung  with  tapestry/'  and  there  the  Princess  commonly 
proposed  some  text  of  Scripture  for  discussion.  It  was 
generally  a  passage  which  seemed  obscure  to  Marguerite ; 
for  example,  "The  meek  shall  inherit  the  earth."  All 
were  invited  to  make  suggestions  about  its  meaning.  The 
hostess  was  learned,  and  no  one  scrupled  to  quote  the 
Scriptures  in  their  original  languages,  or  to  adduce  the 
opinions  of  such  earlier  Fathers  as  Augustine,  Jerome, 
Chrysostom,  or  the  Gregories.  If  it  surprises  us  to  find 
one  or  other  of  the  twenty  valets  de  chambre,  who  were 
not  menials  and  were  privileged  to  be  present,  familiar 
with  theology,  and  able  to  quote  Greek  and  even  Hebrew, 
it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  Marguerite's  valets  de  chamlre 


140       THE  REFORMATION  IS  FRANCE 

included  distinguished  Humanists  and  Reformers,  to  whom 
she  extended  the  protective  privilege  of  being  enrolled  in 
her  "  Household."  When  the  weather  permitted,  the  whole 
company  went  for  a  stroll  in  the  park  after  the  discussion, 
and  then  seated  themselves  near  a  "  pleasant  fountain  "  on 
the  turf,  "so  soft  and  delicate  that  they  needed  neither 
carpet  nor  cushions." l  There  one  of  the  ladies-in-waiting 
(thirty  dames  or  demoiselles  belonged  to  the  "  Household  ") 
read  aloud  a  tale  from  the  Heptameron,  not  forgetting  the 
improving  conversation  which  concludes  each  story.  This 
gave  rise  to  an  animated  talk,  after  which  they  returned  to 
the  Palace.  In  the  evening  the  "  Household  "  assembled 
again  in  a  hall,  fitted  as  a  simple  theatre,  to  witness  one  of 
the  Comedies  or  Pastorals  which  the  Queen  delighted  to 
write,  and  in  which,  through  a  medium  as  strange  as  the 
Contes,  she  inculcated  her  mystical  Christianity,  and  gave 
expression  to  her  longings  for  a  reformation  in  the  Church 
and  society.  Her  Court  was  the  precursor  of  the  salons 
which  in  a  later  age  exercised  such  a  powerful  influence  on 
French  political,  literary,  and  social  life. 

Marguerite  is  chiefly  remembered  as  the  author  of  the 
Heptameron,  which  modern  sentiment  cannot  help  regarding 
as  a  collection  of  scandalous,  not  to  say  licentious,  tales. 
The  incongruity,  as  it  appears  to  us,  of  making  such  tales 
the  vehicle  of  moral  and  even  of  evangelical  instruction, 
causes  us  frequently  to  forget  the  conversations  which 
follow  the  stories — conversations  which  generally  inculcate 
moral  truths,  and  sometimes  wander  round  the  evangelical 
thought  that  man's  salvation  and  all  the  fruits  of  holy 
living  rest  on  the  finished  work  of  Christ,  the  only 
Saviour.  "  Voilh,  Mesdames,  comme  la  foy  du  Ion  Oomte  ne 
fut  vaincue  par  signes  ne  par  miracles  exUrieurs,  sackant  tr&s 
tien  gue  nous  njavons  gu'un  Sauveur,  leguel  en  disant  Con- 
summatum  est,  a  monstrt  qidl  ne  laissoit  point  &  un  autre 
successeur  pour  faire  noire  salut" 2  So  different  was  the 
sentiment  of  the  sixteenth  from  that  of  the  twentieth 

1  JBfeptameron,  Preface. 
slbit,  Nouvelle  xxxiii. 


MARGUERITE  AND  THE  "GROUP  OF  MEAUX  "  141 

century,  that  Jeanne  d'Albret,  puritan  as  she  undoubtedly 
was,  took  pains  that  a  scrupulously  exact  edition  of  her 
mother's  Contcs  should  be  printed  and  published,  for  all  to 
read  and  profit  by. 

The  Reformers  with  whom  ilarguerite  was  chiefly 
associated  were  called  the  "  group  of  Meaux."  G-uillaume 
Briconnet,1  Bishop  of  Meaux,  who  earnestly  desired  reform 
but  dreaded  revolution,  had  gathered  round  him  a  band  of 
scholars  whose  idea  was  a  reformation  of  the  Church  by  the 
Church,  in  the  Church,  and  with  the  Church.  They  were 
the  heirs  of  the  aspirations  of  the  great  conciliar  leaders  of 
the  fifteenth  century,  such  as  Gerson,  deeply  religious  men, 
who  longed  for  a  genuine  revival  of  faith  and  love.  They 
hoped  to  reconcile  the  great  truths  of  Christian  dogma  with 
the  New  Learning,  and  at  once  to  enlarge  the  sphere  of 
Christian  intelligence,  and  to  impregnate  Humanism  with 
Christian  morality. 

The  man  who  inspired  the  movement  and  defined  its 
aims — "  to  preach  Christ  from  the  sources  " — was  Jacques 
Lefevre  d'Etaples  (Stapulensis).2  He  had  been  a  distin- 
guished Humanist,  and  in  1507  had  resolved  to  consecrate 
his  learning  to  a  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  The  first 
fruit  of  this  resolve  was  a  new  Latin  translation  of  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul  (1512),  in  which  a  revised  version  of 
the  Vulgate  was  published  along  with  the  traditional  text. 
In  his  notes  he  anticipated  two  of  Luther's  ideas — that 
works  have  no  merit  apart  from  the  grace  of  God,  and 
that  while  there  is  a  Eeal  Presence  of  Christ  in  the 
Sacrament  of  the  Supper,  there  is  no  transubstantiation. 
The  Eeformers  of  Meaux  believed  that  the  Holy  Scriptures 

1  Briconnet  belonged  to  an  illustrious  family.     He  was  born  in  1470, 
destined  for  the  Church,  was  Archdeacon  of  Bheinas,  Bishop  of  Lodeve  in 
'1504,  1507  got  the  rich  Abbey  of  St.  Germain-des-Pres  at  Paris,  and  became 
Bishop  of  Meaux  in  1516.     He  at  once  began  to  reform  his  diocese  ;  compelled 
his  cures  to  reside  in  their  parishes  ;  divided  the  diocese  into  thirty-two  dis- 
tricts, and  sent  to  each  of  them  a  preacher  for  part  of  the  year. 

2  Of.  K.  H.  Graf,  "Jacobus  Faber  Stapulensis,"  in  the  Zeitschrift  fur  die 
historische  theologie  for  1852,  1-86  ;  Doumergue,  Jean  Calvin,  i.  79-112  5 
HermiDJard,  Correspondence^  i.  3  n. 


142  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

should  be  in  the  hands  of  the  Christian  people,  and  Lef&vre 
took  Jean  de  Kely's  version  of  the  Bible, — itself  a  revision 
of  an  old  thirteenth  century  French  translation, — revised 
it,  published  the  Gospels  in  June  1523,  and  the  whole 
of  the  New  Testament  before  the  end  of  the  year.  The 
Old  Testament  followed  in  1525.  The  book  was  eagerly 
welcomed  by  Marguerite,  and  became  widely  known  and 
read  throughout  France.  The  Princess  was  able  to  write 
to  Brigonnet  that  her  brother  and  mother  were  interested 
in  the  spread  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  in  the  hope  of  a 
reform  of  the  Church.1 

Neither  Lef  evre  nor  Brigonnet  was  the  man  to  lead  a 
Eeformation.  The  Bishop  was  timid,  and  feared  the 
"  tumult " ;  and  Lef&vre,  like  Marguerite,  was  a  Christian 
mystic,2  with  all  the  mystic's  dislike  to  change  in  outward 
and  fixed  institutions.  More  radical  ideas  were  entering 
France  from  without.  The  name  of  Luther  was  known  as 
early  as  1518,  and  by  1520,  contemporary  letters  tell  us 
that  his  books  were  selling  by  the  hundred,  and  that  all 
thinking  men  were  studying  his  opinions.3  The  ideas  of 
Zwingli  were  also  known,  and  appeared  more  acceptable  to 
the  advanced  thinkers  in  France.  Some  members  of  the 
group  of  Meaux  began  to  reconsider  their  position.  The 
Pope's  Bull  excommunicating  Luther  in  1520,  the  result 
of  the  Diet  of  Worms  in  1521,  and  the  declaration  of  the 
Faculty  of  Theology  of  the  University  of  Paris  (the 
Sorbonne)  against  the  opinions  of  Luther,  and  their  vindica- 
tion of  the  authority  of  Aristotle  and  Scholastic  Theology 
made  it  apparent  that  even  modest  reforms  would  not  be 
tolerated  by  the  Church  as  it  then  existed.  The  Parlement 

1  Henninjard,  Correspondanee,  i.  78,  84,  85  n. 

2  It  does  not  seem  to  be  generally  known  that  Lefevre  travelled  to  Germany 
in  search  of  manuscripts  of  some  of  the  earlier  mystical  writers,  and  that  he 
published  in  1513  the  first  printed  edition  of  Hildegard  of  Bingen's  Liber 
Quoscimas  (Peltzer,  Deutsche  MysWc  uvuL  deutsche  Eumt  (Strassburg,  1899), 
p.  35),  under  the  title  Ziber  trvum  virorum  et  trium  spirituattum  wrginum 
(Paris,  1513). 

8  Herminjard,   Correspmdance,  i.   37  n.,   47,  48  n.9   63  and  ».,   64, 
etc. 


MARGUERITE   AND   THE    "GROUP   OF   MEAUX "    143 

of  Paris  (August  1521)  ordered  Luther's  books  to  be  given 
up.1 

Lefevre  did  not  falter.  He  remained  what  he  had 
been — a  man  on  the  threshold  of  a  new  era  who  refused 
to  enter  it.  One  of  his  fellow-preachers  retracted  his 
opinions,  and  began  to  write  against  his  leader.  The 
young  and  fiery  Guillaume  Farel  boldly  adopted  the  views 
of  the  Swiss  Keformers.  Briconnet  temporised.  He  forbade 
the  preaching  of  Lutheran  doctrine  within  his  diocese, 
and  the  circulation  of  the  Eeforiner's  writings ;  but  he 
continued  to  protect  Lef&vre,  and  remained  true  to  his 
teaching.2 

The  energetic  action  of  the  Sorbonne  and  of  the  Park- 
merit  of  Paris  showed  the  obstacles  which  lay  in  the  path 
of  a  peaceful  Eeformation.  The  library  of  Louis  de  Berquin 
was  seized  and  condemned  (June  16th,  1523),  and  several 
of  his  books 'burnt  in  front  of  Notre  Dame  by  the  order  of 
ParUment  (August  8th).  Berquin  himself  was  saved  by 
the  interposition  of  the  King.3  In  March  1525,  Jean 
Leclerc,  a  wool-carder,  was  whipt  and  branded  in  Paris ; 
and  six  months  later  was  burnt  at  Metz  for  alleged  out- 
rages on  objects  of  reverence.  The  Government  had  to 
come  to  some  decision  about  the  religious  question. 

Marguerite  could  write  that  her  mother  and  her 
brother  were  "  more  than  ever  well  disposed  towards  the 
reformation  of  the  Church " ; 4  but  neither  of  them  had 
her  strong  religious  sentiment,  and  policy  rather  than  con- 
viction invariably  swayed  their  action.  The  Eeformation 
promoted  by  Lef&vre  and  believed  in  by  Marguerite  was 
at  once  too  moderate  and  too  exacting  for  Francis  I.  It 
could  never  be  a  basis  for  an  alliance  with  the  growing 
Protestantism  of  Germany,  and  it  demanded  a  purity  of 
individual  life  ill-suited  either  with  the  personal  habits  of 

1  Journal  cTun  Bourgeois  de  Paris  sous  le  regne  de  Francois  1. 1615-1536 
(Paris,  1854),  p.  104. 

3  Hermrnjard,  Correspondance,  i.  153  jfi 
9  Journal  d'un  Bourgeois,  etc.  p.  169. 

4  Herminjard,  Correspondaiice,  i.  84,  105  ;  cf.  85  n* 


144  THE   REFORMATION   IX   FRANCE 

the  King  or  with  the  manners  of  the  French  Court.  It  is 
therefore  not  to  be  wondered  that  the  policy  of  the 
Government  of  Francis  i.  wavered  between  a  negligent  pro- 
tection and  a  stern  repression  of  the  French  Eeformers. 

§  2.  Attempts  to  repress  t7ie  Movement  for  Reform. 

The  years  1523-26  were  full  of  troubles  for  France. 
The  Italian  war  had  been  unsuccessful.  Provence  had 
been  invaded.  Francis  L  had  been  totally  defeated  and 
taken  prisoner  at  Pa  via.  Dangers  of  various  kinds  within 
France  had  also  confronted  the  Government.  Bands  of 
marauders — les  aventuriers1 — had  pillaged  numerous  dis- 
tricts ;  and  so  many  conflagrations  had  taken  place  that 
people  believed  they  were  caused  by  emissaries  of  the 
public  enemies  of  France.  Louise  of  Savoy,  the  Queen- 
Mother,  and  Eegent  during  her  son's  captivity  in  Madrid, 
had  found  it  necessary  to  conciliate  the  formidable  powers 
of  the  Parlement  of  Paris  and  of  the  Sorbonne.  Measures 
were  taken  to  suppress  the  printing  of  Lutheran  and  heret- 
ical books,  and  the  Parlement  appointed  a  commission  to 
discover,  try,  and  punish  heretics.  The  result  was  a  some- 
what ineffective  persecution.2  The  preachers  of  Meaux  had 
to  take  refuge  in  Strassburg,  and  Lef&vre's  translation  of 
the  Scriptures  was  publicly  burnt. 

When  the  King  returned  from  his  imprisonment  at 
Madrid  (March  1525),  he  seemed  to  take  the  side  of  the 
Eeformers.  The  Meaux  preachers  came  back  to  France, 
and  Lef&vre  himself  was  made  the  tutor  to  the  King's 
youngest  son.  In  1528-29  the  great  French  Council  of 
Sens  met  to  consider  the  state  of  the  Church.  It  reaffirmed 
most  of  the  mediaeval  positions,  and,  in  opposition  to  the 
teachings  of  Protestants,  declared  the  unity,  infallibility, 
and  visibility  of  the  Church,  the  authority  of  Councils, 

1  The  depredations  of  those  bands  of  brigands  are  frequently  referred  to 
in  the  Journal  d'un  bourgeois  de  Paris,  pp.  119,  159,  166,  176,  185,  201, 
249,  257,  402,  196. 

3  Cf.  Journal  &un  Bourgeois,  etc.  p.  276. 


ATTEMPTS  TO  REPRESS  THE  MOVEMENT    145 

the  right  of  the  Church  to  make  canonical  regulations,  fasts, 
the  celibacy  of  priests,  the  seven  sacraments,  the  Mass, 
purgatory,  the  veneration  of  saints,  the  worship  of  images, 
and  the  Scholastic  doctrines  of  free  will  and  faith  and 
works.  It  called  on  civil  rulers  to  execute  the  censures 
of  the  Church  on  heretics  and  schismatics.  It  also 
published  a  series  of  reforms  necessary — most  of  which 
were  already  contained  in  the  canon  law. 

While  the  Council  was  sitting,  the  Eomanists  of  France 
were  startled  with  the  news  that  a  statue  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin  had  been  beheaded  and  otherwise  mutilated.  It 
was  the  first  manifestation  of  the  revolutionary  spirit  of 
the  Reformation  in  France.  The  King  was  furious.  He 
caused  a  new  statue  to  be  made  in  silver,  and  gave  his 
sanction  to  the  renewal  of  the  persecutions  (May  31st, 
1528).  Four  years  later  his  policy  altered.  He  desired 
alliances  with  the  English  and  German  Protestants ;  one 
of  the  Eeformers  of  Meaux  preached  in  the  Louvre  during 
Lent  (1533),  and  some  doctors  of  the  Sorbonne,  who 
accused  the  King  and  Queen  of  Navarre  of  heresy,  were 
banished  from  Paris.  In  spite  of  the  ferment  caused  by 
the  Evangelical  address  of  Nicolas  Cop,  and  the  flight  of 
Cop  and  of  Calvin,  the  real  author  of  the  address,  the  King 
still  seemed  to  favour  reform.  Evangelical  sermons  were 
again  preached  in  the  Louvre,  and  the  King  spoke  of  a 
conference  on  the  state  of  religion  within  France. 

The  affair  of  the  Placards  caused  another  storm.  On 
the  morning  of  Oct.  18th,  1534,  the  citizens  of  Paris  found 
that  broadsides  or  placards,  attacking  in  very  strong  lan- 
guage the  ceremony  of  the  Mass,  had  been  affixed  to  the 
walls  of  the  principal  streets.  TheBeplacards  affirmed  that 
the  sacrifice  of  Christ  upon  the  Cross  was  perfect  and 
unique,  and  therefore  could  never  be  repeated ;  that  it  was 
sheer  idolatry  to  say  that  the  corporeal  presence  of  Christ 
was  enclosed  within  the  wafer,  "  a  man  of  twenty  or  thirty 
years  in  a  morsel  of  paste  " ;  that  transubstantiation  was  a 
gross  error;  that  the  Mass  had  been  perverted  from  its 
true  meaning,  which  is  to  be  a  memorial  of  the  sacrifice 
10** 


146  THE   REFORMATION  IN   FRANCE 

and  death  of  our  Lord ;  and  that  the  solemn  ceremony  had 
become  a  time  "  of  bell-ringings,  shoutings,  singing,  waving 
of  lamps  and  swinging  of  incense  pots,  after  the  fashion 
of  sorcerers."  The  violence  of  language  was  extieme. 
"  The  Pope  and  all  his  vermin  of  cardinals,  of  bishops,  of 
priests,  of  monks  and  other  hypocrites,  sayers  of  the  Mass, 
and  all  those  who  consent  thereto,"  were  liars  and  blas- 
phemers. The  author  of  this  broadside  was  a  certain 
Antoine  Marcourt,  who  had  fled  from  France  and  taken 
refuge  in  NeucMteL  The  audacity  of  the  men  who  had 
posted  the  placards  in  Paris  and  in  other  towns, — Orleans, 
Blois,  Amboise, — and  had  even  fixed  one  on  the  door  of 
the  King's  bedchamber,  helped  to  rouse  the  Eomanists  to 
frenzy.  The  Parlement  and  the  University  demanded 
loudly  that  extreme  measures  should  be  taken  to  crush  the 
heretics;1  and  everywhere  expiatory  processions  were 
formed  to  protest  against  the  sacrilege.  The  King  himself 
and  the  great  nobles  of  the  Court  took  part  in  one  in 
January,2  and  during  that  month  more  than  thirty-five 
Lutherans  were  arrested,  tried,  and  burnt.  Several  well- 
known  Frenchmen  (seventy-three  at  least),  among  them 
Clement  Marot  and  Mathurin  Cordier,  fled  the  country,  and 
their  possessions  were  -confiscated. 

After  this  outburst  of  persecution  the  King's  policy 
again  changed.  He  was  once  more  anxious  for  an  alliance 
with  the  Protestants  of  Germany.  An  amnesty  was  pro- 
claimed for  all  save  the  "  Sacramentarians,"  Le.  the  followers 
of  Zwingli.  A  few  of  the  exiled  Frenchmen  returned, 
among  them  Clement  Marot.  The  Chancellor  of  .France, 
Antoine  du  Bourg,  went  the  length  of  inviting  the  German 
theologians  to  come  to  France  for  the  purpose  of  sharing  in 
a  religious  conference,  and  adhered  to  his  proposal  in  spite 

1  Journal  d'un  Bourgeois,  etc.:  "Fut  sonne"  par  deux  trompettes  et  crie* 
au  Palays  sur  la  pierre  de  marbre,  que  s*il  y  avoit  personne  cui  sceut 
enseigner  celuy  ou  cenlx  qui  avoient  fische*  les  dictz  placars,  en  r&  elant  en 
certitude,  il  leur  seroit  donne  cent  escus  par  la  cour"  (p.  442). 

2  Ibid.  pp.  442-444.    The  Dauphin,  the  Dukes  of  Orleans  and  An^oul^me, 
and  a  young  German,  Prince  de  Venddme,  carried  the  four  batons  supporting 
"un  beau  ciel "  over  the  Host. 


ATTEMPTS   TO    REPRESS    THE    MOVEMENT         147 

of  the  protests  of  the  Sorbonne.  But  nothing  came  of 
it.  The  German  Protestant  theologians  refused  to  risk 
themselves  on  French  soil;  and  the  exiled  Frenchmen 
mistrusted  the  King  and  his  Chancellor.  The  amnesty, 
however,  deserves  remark,  because  it  called  forth  the  letter 
of  Calvin  to  Francis  I.  which  forms  the  "  dedication "  or 
preface  to  his  Christian  Institution, 

The  work  of  repression  was  resumed  with  increased 
severity.  Eoyal  edicts  and  mandates  urging  the  extirpa- 
tion of  heresy  followed  each  other  in  rapid  succession — 
Edict  to  the  Parlement  of  Toulouse  (Dec.  16th,  1538), 
to  the  Parlements  of  Toulouse,  Bordeaux,  and  Eouen  (June 
24th,  1539);  a  general  edict  issued  from  Fontainebleau 
(June  1st,  1540);  an  edict  to  the  Parlement  of  Toulouse 
(Aug.  29th,  1542);  mandate  to  the  Parlements  of  Paris, 
Bordeaux,  Dijon,  Grenoble,  and  Eouen  (Aug.  30th,  1542). 
The  general  Edict  of  Fontainebleau  was  one  of  exceptional 
severity.  It  was  intended  to  introduce  a  more  summary 
procedure  in  heresy  trials,  and  enjoined  officials  to  proceed 
against  all  persons  tainted  with  heresy,  even  against 
ecclesiastics  or  those  who  had  the  "  benefit  of  clergy  " ;  the 
right  of  appeal  was  denied  to  those  suspected ;  negligent 
judges  were  threatened  with  the  King's  displeasure ;  and  the 
ecclesiastical  courts  were  urged  to  show  greater  zeal,  and  to 
take  advantage  of  the  powers  given  to  the  civil  courts. 
" Every  loyal  subject/'  the  edict  said,  "must  denounce 
heretics,  and  employ  all  means  to  root  them  out,  just  as  all 
men  are  bound  to  run  to  help  to  extinguish  a  public  confla- 
gration." This  edict,  slightly  modified  by  the  Parlement 
of  Paris  (July  1543)  by  enlarging  the  powers  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical courts,  remained  in  force  in  France  for  the  nine 
following  years.  Yet  in  spite  of  its  thoroughness,  succeeding 
edicts  and  mandats  declare  that  heresy  was  making  rapid 
progress  in  France. 

The  Sorbonne  and  the  Parlements  (especially  those  of 
Paris  and  Aix)  urged  on  the  persecution  of  the  "  Lutherans." 
The  former  drafted  a  series  of  twenty-five  articles  (a  refuta- 
tion of  the  1541  edition  of  Calvin's  Institution),  which  were 


148  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

meant  to  assert  concisely  the  dogma  of  the  Church,  and  to 
deny  whatever  the  Reformers  taught  prejudicial  to  the 
doctrines  and  practices  of  the  mediaeval  Church.  These 
articles  were  approved  by  the  King  and  his  Privy  Council, 
who  ordered  them  to  be  published  throughout  the  whole 
kingdom,  and  gave  instructions  to  deal  with  all  who 
preached  or  taught  anything  contrary  or  repugnant  to 
them.  This  ordinance  was  at  once  registered  by  the  Parle- 
ment  of  Paris.  Thus  all  the  powers  of  the  realm  committed 
themselves  to  a  struggle  to  extirpate  the  Eeformed  teaching, 
and  were  armed  with  a  test  which  was  at  once  clear  and 
comprehensive.  Not  content  with  this,  the  Sorbonne  began 
a  list  of  prohibited  books  (1542-43) — a  list  containing  the 
works  of  Calvin,  Luther,  Melanchthon,  Clement  Marot,  and 
the  translations  of  scripture  edited  by  Eobert  Estienne, 
and  the  Parlement  issued  a  severe  ordinance  against  all  Pro- 
testant propaganda  by  means  of  printing  or  the  selling  of 
books  (July  1542). 

These  various  ordinances  for  the  extirpation  of  heresy 
were  applied  promptly  and  rigorously,  and  the  fires  of 
persecution  were  soon  kindled  all  over  France.  The  place 
Maubert  was  the  scene  of  the  martyrdoms  in  Paris. 
There  were  no  great  auto-da-f6s,  but  continual  mention  is 
made  of  burning  two  or  three  martyrs  at  once.  Two 
acts  of  persecution  cast  a  dark  stain  on  the  last  years  of 
Francis  I. — the  slaughter  of  the  Waldenses  of  the  Durance 
in  1545,  and  the  martyrdom  of  the  "fourteen  of  Meaux." 

A  portion  of  Provence,  skirting  the  Durance  where 
that  river  is  about  to  flow  into  the  Ehone,  had  been 
almost  depopulated  in  the  fourteenth  century,  and  the  land- 
owners had  invited  peasants  from  the  Alps  to  settle  within 
their  territories.  The  incomers  were  Waldenses;  their 
religion  was  guaranteed  protection,  and  their  industry  and 
thrift  soon  covered  the  desolate  region  with  fertile  farms. 
When  the  Reformation  movement  had  established  itself  in 
Germany  and  Switzerland,  these  villagers  were  greatly  in- 
terested. They  drew  up  a  brief  statement  of  what  they 
believed,  and  sent  it  to  the  leading  Eeformers,  accompanied 


ATTEMPTS   TO    REPRESS   THE   MOVEMENT         149 

by  a  number  of  questions  on  matters  of  religion.  They  re- 
ceived long  answers  from  Bucer  and  from  Oecolauipadius, 
and,  having  met  in  conference  (Sept.  1532)  at  Angrogne  in 
Piedmont,  they  drafted  a  simple  confession  of  faith  based 
on  the  replies  of  the  Reformers  to  their  questions.  It  was 
natural  that  they  should  view  the  progress  of  the  Reforma- 
tion within  France  with  interest,  and  that  they  should  con- 
tribute 500  crowns  to  defray  the  expense  of  printing  anew 
translation  of  the  Scriptures  into  Trench  by  Robert  Olivetan. 
Freedom  to  practise  their  religion  had  been  granted  for  two 
centuries  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  thirty  Waldensian  villages, 
and  they  conceived  that  in  exhibiting  their  sympathy  with 
French  Protestantism  they  were  acting  within  their  ancient 
rights.  Jean  de  Roma,  Inquisitor  for  Provence,  thought 
otherwise.  In  1532  he  began  to  exhort  the  villagers  to 
abjure  their  opinions ;  and,  finding  his  entreaties  without 
effect,  he  set  on  foot  a  severe  persecution.  The  Waldenses 
appealed  to  the  King,  who  sent  a  commission  to  inquire  into 
the  matter,  with  the  result  that  Jean  de  Roma  was  com- 
pelled to  flee  the  country. 

The  persecution  was  renewed  in  1 5  3  5  by  the  Archbishop 
and  Parlement  of  Aix,  who  cited  seventeen  of  the  people  of 
Merindol,  one  of  the  villages,  before  them  on  a  charge  of 
heresy.  When  they  failed  to  appear,  the  Parlement  pub- 
lished (Nov.  18th,  1540)  the  celebrated  Arret  de  Merindol, 
which  sentenced  the  seventeen  to  be  burnt  at  the  stake. 
The  Waldenses  again  appealed  to  the  King,  who  pardoned 
the  seventeen  on  the  condition  that  they  should  abjure  their 
heresy  within  three  months  (Feb.  8th,  1541).  There  was 
a  second  appeal  to  the  King,  who  again  protected  the 
Waldenses;  but  during  the  later  months  of  1541  the  Parle- 
ment of  Aix  sent  to  His  Majesty  the  false  information  that 
the  people  of  Merindol  were  in  open  insurrection,  and 
were  threatening  to  sack  the  town  of  Marseilles.  Upon 
this,  Francis,  urged  thereto  by  Cardinal  de  Tournon,  recalled 
his  protection,  and  ordered  all  the  Waldenses  to  be  exter- 
minated (Jan,  1st,  1545).  An  army  was  stealthily 
organised,  and  during  seven  weeks  of  slaughter,  amid  all 


150  THE    REFORM ATION   IN   FRANCE 

the  accompaniments  of  treachery  and  brutality,  twenty-two 
of  the  thirty  Waldensian  villages  were  utterly  destroyed, 
between  three  and  four  thousand  men  and  women  were 
slain,  and  seven  hundred  men  sent  to  the  galleys.  Those 
who  escaped  took  refuge  in  Switzerland.1 

The  persecution  at  Meaux  (1546)  was  more  limited  in 
extent,  but  was  accompanied  by  such  tortures  that  it  formed 
a  fitting  introduction  to  the  severities  of  the  reign  of 
Henri  n. 

The  Reformed  at  Meaux  had  organised  themselves  into 
a  congregation  modelled  on  that  of  the  French  refugees  in 
Strassburg.  They  had  chosen  Pierre  Leclerc  to  be  their 
pastor,  and  one  of  their  number,  Etienne  Mangin,  gave  his 
house  for  the  meetings  of  the  congregation.  The  authorities 
heard  of  the  meetings,  and  on  Sept.  8th,  1546,  a  sudden 
visit  was  made  to  the  house,  and  sixty-one  persons  were 
arrested  and  brought  before  the  Parlement  of  Paris.  Their 
special  crime  was  that  they  had  engaged  in  the  celebration 
of  the  Lord's  Supper.  The  sentence  of  the  Court  declared 
that  the  Bishop  of  Meaux  had  shown  culpable  negligence 
in  permitting  such  meetings ;  that  the  evidence  indicated 
that  there  were  numbers  of  "  Lutherans "  and  heretics  in 
Meaux  besides  those  brought  before  it,  and  that  all  such 
were  to  be  sought  out ;  that  all  books  in  the  town  which 
concerned  the  Christian  religion  were  to  be  deposited  in  the 
record-office  within  eight  days ;  that  special  sermons  were 
to  be  delivered  and  expiatory  processions  organised ;  and 
that  the  house  of  fitienne  Mangin  was  to  be  razed  to  the 
ground,  and  a  chapel  in  honour  of  the  Holy  Sacrament 
erected  on  the  site.  It  condemned  fourteen  of  the  accused  to 
be  burnt  alive,  after  having  suffered  the  severest  tortures 
which  the  law  permitted ;  five  to  be  hung  up  by  the  armpits 
to  witness  the  execution,  and  then  to  be  scourged  and  im- 
prisoned ;  others  to  witness  the  execution  with  cords  round 
their  necks  and  with  their  heads  bare,  to  ask  pardon  for  their 
crime,  to  take  part  in  an  expiatory  procession,  and  to  listen 

1  Bidletim,  de  la  Soci&4  de  TUistoire  du  Protestantismefranqais  for  1858, 
pp. 


CHANGE  IX  CHARACTER  OF  THE  MOVEMENT   151 

to  a  sermon  on  the  adoration  due  to  the  Body  of  Christ 
present  in  the  Holy  Sacrament.  A  few,  mostly  women, 
were  acquitted.1 

Francis  I.  died  in  March  1547.  The  persistent  perse- 
cution which  had  marked  the  later  years  of  his  reign  had 
done  little  or  nothing  to  quench  the  growing  Protestantism 
of  France.  It  had  only  succeeded  in  driving  it  beneath 
the  surface. 

Henry  II.  never  indulged  in  the  vacillating  policy  of  his 
father.  From  the  beginning  of  his  reign  he  set  himself 
resolutely  to  combat  the  Reformation.  His  favourite 
councillors — his  all-powerful  mistress,  Diane  of  Poitiers ;  his 
chief  Minister,  the  Constable  Montmorency,  in  high  repute 
for  his  skill  in  the  arts  of  war  and  of  government ;  the 
Guises,  a  great  family,  originally  belonging  to  Lorraine,  who 
had  risen  to  power  in  France — were  all  strong  supporters 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion,  and  resolute  to  destroy  the 
growing  Protestantism  of  France.  The  declared  policy  of 
the  King  was  to  slay  the  Eef  ormation  by  attacking  it  through 
every  form  of  legal  suppression  that  could  be  devised. 

§  3.  Change  in  the  Character  of  the  Movement  for  Reform. 

The  task  was  harder  than  it  had  been  during  the  reign 
of  Francis.  In  spite  of  the  persecutions,  the  adherents  of 
the  new  faith  had  gone  on  increasing  in  a  wonderful  way. 
Many  of  the  priests  and  monks  had  been  converted  to  Evan- 
gelical doctrines.  They  taught  them  secretly  and  openly ; 
and  they  could  expose  in  a  telling  way  the  corruptions  of 
the  Church,  having  known  them  from  the  inside.  School- 
masters, if  one  may  judge  from  the  arrSts  of  the  Parlement$> 
were  continually  blamed  for  dissuading  their  pupils  from 
going  to  Mass,  and  for  corrupting  the  youth  by  instructing 
them  in  the  "false  and  pernicious  doctrines  of  Geneva/* 
Many  Colleges  were  named  as  seed-beds  of  the  Reformation 
— Angers,  Bourges,  Fontenay,  La  Rochelle,  Loudun,  Niort, 
Nimes,  and  Poitiers.  The  theatre  itself  became  an  agent 
1  H.  M.  Bower,  The  Fourteen  ofMectMx  (London,  1894). 


152  THE   REFORMATION  IN  FRANCE 

for  reform  when  the  corruptions  of  the  Church  and  the 
morals  of  the  clergy  were  attacked  in  popular  plays.  The 
refugees  in  Strassburg,  Geneva,  and  Lausanne  spared  no 
pains  to  send  the  Evangelical  doctrines  to  their  countrymen. 
Ardent  young  Frenchmen,  trained  abroad,  took  their  lives 
in  their  hand,  and  crept  quietly  through  the  length  and 
breadth  of  France.  They  met  converts  and  inquirers  in 
solitary  suburbs,  in  cellars  of  houses,  on  highways,  and  by 
the  rivers.  The  records  of  the  ecclesiastical  police  enable 
us  to  trace  the  spread  of  the  Eeformation  along  the  great 
roads  and  waterways  of  France.  The  missioners  changed 
their  names  frequently  to  elude  observation.  Some,  with 
a  daring  beyond  their  fellows,  did  not  hesitate  to  visit  the 
towns  and  preach  almost  openly  to  the  people.  The  propa- 
ganda carried  on  by  colporteurs  was  scarcely  less  successful. 
These  were  usually  young  men  trained  at  Geneva  or  Strass- 
burg. They  carried  their  books  in  a  pack  on  their  backs, 
and  hawked  them  in  village  and  town,  describing  their  con- 
tents, and  making  little  sermons  for  the  listeners.  Among 
the  notices  of  seizures  we  find  such  titles  as  the  following : 
— Les  Collogues  of  Erasmus,  La  Fontaine  de  Vie  (a  selection 
of  scriptural  passages  translated  into  French),  the  Livre  de 
vraye  et  parfaicte  oraison  (a  translation  of  extracts  from 
Luther's  writings),  the  Cinquante-deuxpsaumes,  the  GaUchisme 
de  Gfen&ve,  Pri&res  eccldsiastiques  avec  la  mani&re  d'administrer 
le$  sacrements,  an  Alphabet  chrttien,  and  an  Instruction 
chretienne  pour  le$  petits  en/ants.  No  edicts  against  printing 
books  which  had  not  been  submitted  to  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities  were  able  to  put  an  end  to  this  secret 
colportage. 

In  these  several  ways  the  Evangelical  faith  was  spread 
abroad,  and  before  the  death  of  Francis  there  was  not  a 
district  in  France  with  the  single  exception  of  Brittany 
which  had  not  its  secret  Protestants,  while  many  parts  of 
the  country  swarmed  with  them. 


CALVIN    AND   HIS   INFLUENCE   IN    FRANCE        153 


§  4.   Cahin  and  his  Influence  in  France. 

The  Eeformation  in  France  had  been  rapidly  changing 
its  character  since  1536,  the  year  in  which  Lefevre  died, 
and  in  which  Calvin's  Christian  I-nstitution  was  published. 
It  was  no  longer  a  Christian  mysticism  supplemented  by  a 
careful  study  of  the  Scriptures ;  it  had  advanced  beyond 
the  stage  of  individual  followers  of  Luther  or  Zwingli ;  it 
had  become  united,  presenting  a  solid  phalanx  to  its  foes ;  it 
had  rallied  round  a  manifesto  which  was  at  once  a  com- 
pleted scheme  of  doctrine,  a  prescribed  mode  of  worship,  and 
a  code  of  morals ;  it  had  found  a  leader  who  was  both  a 
master  and  a  commander-in-chief.  The  publication  of  the 
Christian  Institution  had  effected  this.  The  young  man 
whom  the  Town  Council  of  Geneva  could  speak  of  as  "  a 
certain  Frenchman  "  (G-allus  guidam)  soon  took  a  foremost 
place  among  the  leaders  of  the  whole  Eeformation  move- 
ment, and  moulded  in  his  plastic  hands  the  Eeformation 
in  France. 

Calvin's  early  life  and  his  work  in  Geneva  have 
already  been  described;  but  his  special  influence  on 
France  must  not  pass  unnoticed.1  He  had  an  extra- 
ordinary power  over  his  co-religionists  in  his  native  land.2 
He  was  a  Frenchman — one  of  themselves ;  no  foreigner 
speaking  an  unfamiliar  tongue ;  no  enemy  of  the  Fatherland 
to  follow  whom  might  seem  to  be  unpatriotic.  It  is  true 
that  his  fixed  abode  lay  beyond  the  eo&fines  of  France ; 
but  distance,  which  gave  him  freedom  of  action,  made  him 

1  Cf.  above,  pp.  92  ff.     What  follows  on  Calvin's  influence  on  the  Refor- 
mation in  France  has  been  borrowed  largely  from  M.  Henri  Lemonnier, 
Histrirede  France,  etc.  (Paris,  1903-4)  Y.  i.  pp.  381-383,  ii.  pp.  183-187,  etc. ; 
only  a  Frenchman  can  describe  it  and  him  sympathetically. 

2  The  Venetian  Ambassador  at  the  Cornet  of  France,  writing  in  1561  to 
the  Doge,  says,  "Your  Serenity  will  hardly  believe  the  influence  and  the 
great  power  which  the  principal  minister  of  Geneva,  by  name  Calvin,  a 
Frenchman  and  a  native  of  Picardy,  possesses  in  this  kingdom.    He  is  a 
man  of  extraordinary  authority,  who  by  his  mode  of  life,  his  doctrines  and 
his  writings,  rises  superior  to  all  the  rest"  (Calendar  of  State  Pcytert, 

^  1558-80>  p.  323). 


154       THE  REFORMATION  IN  FRANCE 

the  more  esteemed.  He  was  the  apostle  who  wrote  "  to 
all  that  be  in  France,  beloved  of  God,  called  to  be 
saints." 

While  still  a  student,  Calvin  had  shown  that  he 
possessed,  besides  a  marvellous  memory,  an  acute  and  pene- 
trating intellect,  with  a  great  faculty  for  assimilating  ideas 
and  modes  of  thought ;  but  he  lacked  what  may  be  called 
artistic  imagination,1  and  neither  poetry  nor  art  seemed  to 
strike  any  responsive  chord  in  his  soul  His  conduct  was 
always  straightforward,  irreproachable,  and  dignified ;  he  was 
by  education  and  breeding,  if  not  by  descent,  the  polished 
Trench  gentleman,  and  was  most  at  home  with  men  and 
women  of  noble  birth.  His  character  was  serious,  with 
little  playfulness,  little  vivacity,  but  with  a  wonderful 
power  of  sympathy.  He  was  reserved,  somewhat  shy, 
slow  to  make  intimate  friends,  but  once  made  the  friend- 
ships lasted  for  life.  At  all  periods  of  age,  boy,  student, 
man  of  letters,  leader  of  a  great  party,  he  seems  to  have 
been  a  centre  of  attraction  and  of  deferential  trust.  The 
effect  of  this  mysterious  charm  was  felt  by  others  besides 
those  of  his  own  age.  His  professor,  Mathurin  Cordier, 
became  his  devoted  disciple.  Melanchthon  wished  that 
he  might  die  with  his  head  on  Calvin's  breast.  Luther, 
in  spite  of  his  suspicion  of  everything  that  came  from 
Switzerland,  was  won  to  love  and  trust  him.  And  Knox, 
the  most  rugged  and  independent  of  men,  acknowledged 
Calvin  as  his  master,  consulted  him  in  every  doubt  and 
difficulty,  and  on  all  occasions  save  one  meekly  followed 
his  counsels.  He  loved  children,  and  had  them  at  his 
house  for  Christmas  trees;  but  (and  this  is  character- 
istically French)  always  addressed  them  with  ceremonious 

1  Calvin  did  not  lack  imagination.  The  sanctified  imagination  has  never 
made  grander  or  loftier  flight  than  in  the  thought  of  the  Purpose  of  G-oA 
moving  slowly  down  through  the  Ages,  making  for  redemption  and  for  the 
establishment  of  the  Kingdom,  which  is  the  master-idea  in  the  Christian 
Institution.  It  was  de  Beze  (Beza),  not  Calvin,  who  was  the  father  of 
the  seventeenth  century  doctrine  of  predestination,  —  a  conception  which 
differed  from  Calvin's  as  widely  as  the  skeleton  differs  from  the  man 
instinct  with  life  and  action. 


CALVIN    AND   HIS    INFLUENCE   IN    FRANCE        155 

politeness,  as  if  they  were  grown  men  and  women  deserving 
as  much  consideratisn  as  himself.  It  was  this  trait  that 
captivated  de  Beze  when  he  was  a  boy  of  twelve. 

Calvin  was  a  democrat  intellectually  and  by  silent 
principle.  This  appears  almost  everywhere  in  his  private 
writings,  and  was  noted  by  such  a  keen  observer  as 
Tavannes.  It  was  never  more  unconsciously  displayed 
than  in  the  preface  or  dedication  of  the  Christian 
Institution, 

"This  preface,  instead  of  pleading  with  the  King  on 
behalf  of  the  Eeformation,  places  the  movement  right  before 
him,  and  makes  him  see  it.  Its  tone  throughout  firm  and 
dignified,  calm  and  stately  when  Calvin  addresses  Francis 
i.  directly,  more  bitter  and  sarcastic  when  he  is  speaking 
of  theologians,  la  pensfo  et  la  forme  du  style  toutes  wbrantes 
du  ton  liblique,  the  very  simplicity  and  perfect  frankness 
of  the  address,  give  the  impression  of  one  who  is  speaking 
on  equal  terms  with  his  peer.  All  suggest  the  Christian 
democrat  without  a  trace  of  the  revolutionary." l 

The  source  of  his  power — logic  impregnated  by  the 
passion  of  conviction — is  so  peculiarly  French  that  perhaps 
only  his  countrymen  can  fully  understand  and  appreciate  it, 
and  they  have  not  been  slow  to  do  so. 

All  these  characteristic  traits  appealed  to  them.  His 
passion  for  equality,  as  strong  as  the  Apostle  Paul's,  com- 
pelled him  to  take  Ms  followers  into  his  confidence,  to 
make  them  apprehend  what  he  knew  to  the  innermost 
thoughts  of  his  heart.  It  forced  him  to  exhibit  the 
reasons  for  his  faith  to  all  who  cared  to  know  them,  to 
arrange  them  in  a  logical  order  which  would  appeal  to 
their  understanding,  and  his  passion  of  conviction  assured 
him  and  them  that  what  he  taught  was  the  very  truth  of 
God.  Then  he  was  a  very  great  writer,2  one  of  the  founders 

1  Henri  Lemonnier,  Histoire  de  France,  etc.  (Paris,  1903)  Y.  i.  383. 

2  "  Calvin  fat  un  tres  grand  6crivain.     Je  dirais  m&ne  qne  ce  fut  le  plus 
grand  e"crivain  do,  16e  siecle  si  j'estimais  plus  qne  je  ne  faisle$£y£eproprement 
dit.  .  .  .  Encore  est-il  qu'il  me  faut  bien  reconnaltre  quele  style  de  Calvin 
est  de  tous  les  styles  du  16e  siecle  celui  qui  a  le  plus  de  style.  .  .  .  Eeste 


156        THE  REFORMATION  IN  FRANCE 

of  modern  French  prose,  the  most  exquisite  literary  medium 
that  exists,  a  man  made  to  arrest  the  attention  of  the 
people.  He  wrote  all  his  important  works  in  French  for 
his  countrymen,  as  well  as  in  Latin  for  the  learned  world. 
His  language  and  style  were  fresh,  clear,  and  simple ;  with- 
out affected  elegance  or  pedantic  display  of  erudition ;  full  of 
vigour  and  verve ;  here,  caustic  wit  which  attracted ;  there, 
eloquence  which  spoke  to  the  hearts  of  his  readers  because 
it  throbbed  with  burning  passion  and  strong  emotion. 

It  is  unlikely  that  all  his  disciples  in  France  appreciated 
his  doctrinal  system  in  its  details.  The  Christian  Institution 
appealed  to  them  as  the  strongest  protest  yet  made  against 
the  abuses  and  scandals  of  the  Eoman  Church,  as  contain- 
ing a  code  of  duties  owed  to  God  and  man,  as  exhibiting 
an  ideal  of  life  pure  and  lofty,  as  promising  everlasting 
blessedness  for  the  called  and  chosen  and  faithful.  "  It 
satisfied  at  one  and  the  same  time  the  intellects  which 
demanded  logical  proof  and  the  souls  which  had  need  of 
enthusiasm/' 

It  has  been  remarked  that  Calvin's  theology  was  less 
original  and  effective  than  his  legislation  or  policy.1  The 
statement  seems  to  overlook  the  peculiar  service  which  was 
rendered  to  the  Reformation  movement  by  the  Institution. 
The  Reformation  was  a  rebellion  against  the  external 
authority  of  the  mediaeval  Church ;  but  every  revolt,  even 
that  against  the  most  flagrant  abuses  and  the  most  corrupt 
rule,  carries  in  it  seeds  of  evil  which  must  be  slain  if  any 
real  progress  is  to  be  made.  For  it  instinctively  tends  to 
sweep  away  all  restraints — those  that  are  good  and 
necessary  as  well  as  those  that  are  bad  and  harmful. 
The  leaders  of  every  movement  for  reform  have  a  harder 

qu'il  parle  1'admirable  prose,  si  claire,  limpide  et  facile,  du  15e  sifccle,  avec 
ce  quelque  chose  de  plus  ferine,  de  plus  nourri  et  de  plus  viril  que  I'&fcude  des 
classiques  donne  a  ceux  qui  ne  poussent  pas  jusqu'a  1'imitation  servile  et  a 
Padmirature  des  menus  jolis  details.  Reste  qu'il  parle  la  langue  du  15e  siecle 
avee  quelques  qualit£s  dej'a  du  I7e.  C'est  pre*cise"ment  ce  qu'il  a  fait,  etil 
est  un.  des  bons,  sinon  des  sublimes,  fondateurs  de  la  prose  fran9aise"  (Emile 
Faguet,  Seizieme  Siede :  &udes  Littruires,  pp.  188-89,  Paris,  1898). 
1  Cambridge  Jlfrdern  History,  ii.  366. 


CALVES'  AND  HIS  INFLUENCE  IX  FRANCE    157 

battle  to  fight  against  the  revolutionaries  in  their  following 
than  against  their  avowed  opponents.  At  the  root  of  the 
Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century  lay  an  appeal  from 
man  to  God — from  the  priest,  granting  or  withholding 
absolution  in  the  confessional,  to  God  making  the  sinner, 
who  turns  from  his  sins  and  has  faith  in  the  person  and 
work  of  Christ,  know  in  his  heart  that  he  is  pardoned  :  from 
the  decision  of  Popes  and  Councils  to  the  decrees  of  God 
revealed  in  His  Holy  "Word.  This  appeal  was  in  the 
nature  of  the  case  from  the  seen  to  the  unseen,  and  therein 
lay  the  difficulty;  for  unless  this  unseen  could  be  made 
visible  to  the  eye  of  the  intelligence  to  such  a  degree  that 
the  restraining  authority  which  it  possessed  could  impress 
itself  on  the  will,  there  was  risk  of  its  proving  to  be  no 
restraining  authority  whatsoever,  and  of  men  fancying  that 
they  had  been  left  to  be  a  law  unto  themselves.  What  the 
Christian  Institution  did  for  the  sixteenth  century  was  to 
make  the  unseen  government  and  authority  of  God,  to  which 
all  must  bow,  as  visible  to  the  intellectual  eye  of  faith  as 
the  mechanism  of  the  mediaeval  Church  had  been  to  the 
eye  of  sense.  It  proclaimed  that  the  basis  of  all  Christian 
faith  was  the  Word  of  God  revealed  in  the  Holy  Scriptures ; 
it  taught  the  absolute  dependence  of  all  things  on  God 
Himself  immediately  and  directly;  it  declared  that  the 
sin  of  man  was  such  that,  apart  from  the  working  of  the 
free  grace  of  God,  there  could  be  neither  pardon  nor 
amendment,  nor  salvation ;  and  it  wove  all  these  thoughts 
into  a  logical  unity  which  revealed  to  the  intellectual  eye 
of  its  generation  the  "  House  of  God  not  made  with  hands, 
eternal  in  the  heavens."  Men  as  they  gazed  saw  that 
they  were  in  the  immediate  presence  of  the  authority  of 
God  Himself,  directly  responsible  to  Him ;  that  they  could 
test  "the  Pope's  House"  by  this  divine  archetype:  that 
it  was  their  duty  to  reform  all  human  institutions, 
ecclesiastical  or  political,  in  order  to  bring  them  into 
harmony  with  the%  divine  vision.  It  made  men  know  that 
to  separate  themselves  from  the  visible  mediaeval  Church 
was  neither  to  step  outside  the  sphere  of  the  purpose  of 


158  THE   REFORMATION   IN    FRANCE 

God  making  for  their  redemption,  nor  to  free  themselves 
from  the  duties  which  God  requires  of  man. 

The  work  which  Calvin  did  for  his  co-religionists  in 
France  was  immense.  He  carried  on  a  constant  corre- 
spondence with  them ;  he  sustained  their  courage ;  he  gave 
their  faith  a  sublime  exaltation.  When  he  heard  of  a 
French  Romanist  who  had  begun  to  hesitate,  he  wrote  to 
him  combining  persuasion  with  instruction.  He  pleaded 
the  cause  of  the  Eeformation  with  its  nominal  supporters. 
He  encouraged  the  weak  He  sent  letters  to  the  persecuted. 
He  forwarded  short  theological  treatises  to  assist  those 
who  had  got  into  controversies  concerning  their  faith.  He 
advised  the  organisation  of  congregations.  He  recommended 
energetic  pastors.  He  warned  slothful  ministers. 

"  We  must  not  think/*  he  says,  "  that  our  work  is  con- 
fined within  such  narrow  limits  that  our  task  is  ended  when 
we  have  preached  sermons  ...  it  is  our  part  to  maintain 
a  vigilant  oversight  of  those  committed  to  our  care,  and 
take  the  greatest  pains  to  guard  from  evil  those  whose 
blood  will  one  day  be  demanded  from  us  if  they  are  lost 
through  our  negligence/* * 

He  answered  question  after  question  about  the  difficulty 
of  reconciling  the  demands  of  the  Christian  life  with  what 
was  required  by  the  world  around — a  matter  which  pressed 
hard  on  the  consciences  of  men  and  women  who  belonged 
to  a  religious  minority  in  a  great  Roman  Catholic  kingdom. 
He  was  no  casuist.  He  wrote  to  Madame  de  Cany,  the 
sister  of  the  Duchess  d'fitampes,  that  "no  one,  great  or 
small,  ought  to  believe  themselves  exempt  from  suffering 
for  the  sake  of  our  sovereign  King."  He  was  listened  to 
with  reverence ;  for  he  was  not  a  counsellor  who  advised 
others  to  do  what  he  was  not  prepared  to  do  himself. 
He  could  say,  "  Be  ye  followers  of  me,  as  I  am  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  Frenchmen  and  Frenchwomen  knew 
that  the  master  whom  they  obeyed,  the  director  they  con- 
sulted, to  whom  they  whispered  the  secrets  of  their  souls^ 
1  La  Cattchismefranfais,  p.  132.  Opera,,  v.  319. 


CALVIN    AND   HIS    INFLUENCE   IN    FRANCE         159 

lived  the  hardest  and  most  ascetic  life  of  any  man  In 
Europe, — scarcely  eating,  drinking,  or  sleeping;  that  his 
frail  body  was  kept  alive  by  the  energy  of  his  indomitable 
soul. 

Frenchmen  of  varying  schools  of  thought  have  not 
been  slow  to  recognise  the  secret  of  the  power  of  their  great 
countryman.  Jules  Michelet  says : 

Among  the  martyrs,  with  whom  Calvin  constantly 
conversed  in  spirit,  he  became  a  martyr  himself ;  he  lived 
and  felt  like  a  man  before  whom  the  whole  earth  disappears, 
and  who  tunes  his  last  Psalm  his  whole  eye  fixed  upon  the 
eye  of  Grod,  because  he  knows  that  on  the  following  morning 
he  may  have  to  ascend  the  pyre." 

Ernest  Kenan  is  no  less  emphatic : 

"  It  is  surprising  that  a  man  who  appears  to  us  in  his  life 
and  writings  so  unsympathetic  should  have  been  the  centre 
of  an  immense  movement  in  his  generation,  and  that  this 
harsh  and  severe  tone  should  have  exercised  so  great  an 
influence  on  the  minds  of  his  contemporaries.  How  was  it, 
for  example,  that  one  of  the  most  distinguished  women  of 
her  time,  Een^e  of  France,  in  her  Court  at  Ferrara,  sur- 
rounded by  the  flower  of  European  wits,  was  captivated  by 
that  stern  master,  and  by  him  drawn  into  a  course  that 
must  have  been  so  thickly  strewn  with  thorns  ?  Tfiis  kind 
of  austere  seduction  is  exercised  only  by  those  who  work 
with  real  conviction.  Lacking  that  vivid,  deep,  sympathetic 
ardour  which  was  one  of  the  secrets  of  Luther's  success, 
lacking  the  charm,  the  perilous,  languishing  tenderness  of 
Francis  de  Sales,  Calvin  succeeded,  in  an  age  and  in  a 
country  which  called  for  a  reaction  towards  Christianity, 
simply  because  he  was  the  most  Christian  man  of  his 
generation? 

Thus  it  was  that  all  those  in  France  who  felt  the  need 
of  intimate  fellowship  with  God,  all  to  whom  a  religion, 
which  was  at  once  inflexible  in  matters  of  moral  living  and 
which  appealed  to  their  reasoning  faculties,  was  a  necessity, 
hailed  the  Christian  Institution  as  the  clearest  manifesto 
of  their  faith,  and  grouped  themselves  round  the  young 
author  (Calvin  was  barely  twenty-six  when  he  wrote  it)  as 


160  THE    REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

their  leader.  Those  also  who  suffered  under  the  pressure 
of  a  despotic  government,  and  felt  the  evils  of  a  society 
constituted  to  uphold  the  privileges  of  an  aristocracy, 
learnt  that  in  a  neighbouring  country  there  was  a  city 
which  had  placed  itself  under  the  rule  of  the  Word  of 
God ;  where  everyone  joined  in  a  common  worship  attractive 
from  its  severe  simplicity ;  where  the  morals,  public  and 
private,  were  pure;  where  the  believers  selected  their 
pastors  and  the  people  their  rulers;  where  there  were 
neither  masters  nor  subjects;  where  the  ministers  of 
religion  lived  the  lives  of  simple  laymen,  and  were  dis- 
tinguished from  them  only  by  the  exercise  of  their  sacred 
service.  They  indulged  in  the  dream  that  all  France 
might  be  fashioned  after  the  model  of  Geneva. 

Many  a  Frenchman  who  was  dissatisfied  with  the 
condition  of  things  in  France,  but  had  come  to  no  personal 
decision  to  leave  the  mediaeval  Church,  could  not  help 
contrasting  what  he  saw  around  him  with  the  life  and 
aspiration  of  those  "  of  the  religion," *  as  the  French 
Protestants  began  to  be  called.  They  saw  themselves 
confronted  by  a  religion  full  of  mysteries  inaccessible  to 
reason,  expressing  itself  even  in  public  worship  in  a 
language  unintelligible  to  most  of  the  worshippers,  full  of 
pomp,  of  luxury,  of  ceremonies  whose  symbolical  meaning 
had  been  forgotten.  They  saw  a  clergy  commonplace  and 
ignorant,  or  aristocratic  and  indifferent ;  a  nobility  greedy 
and  restless ;  a  Court  whose  luxurious  display  and  scandals 
were  notorious;  royal  mistresses  and  faithless  husbands 
and  wives.  Almost  everywhere  we  find  a  growing  tendency 
to  contrast  the  purity  of  Protestantism  and  the  corruption 
of  Eoman  Catholicism.  It  found  outcome  in  the  famous 
scene  in  the  Parlement  of  Paris  (1559),  when  Antoine 
de  Bourg,  son  of  a  former  Chancellor,  advocated 
the  total  suspension  of  the  persecution  against  those 
"who  were  called  heretics,"  and  enforced  his  opinion  by 
contrasting  the  blasphemies  and  scandals  of  the  Court 

1  The  term  was  adopted  from   the  edicts,  "ladite  religion  pr^tendue 
r^forme'e,"  with  the  qxiah Tying  adjectives  left  out. 


PERSECUTION    CXDER    HEXRY   II.  161 

with  the  morality  and  the  purity  of  the  lives  of  those  who 
were  being  sent  to  the  stake, — a  speech  for  which  he  after- 
wards lost  his  life.1 

It  was  this  growing  united  Protestantism  which  Henry 
n.  and  his  advisers  had  determined  to  crush  by  the  auction 
of  the  legislative  authority. 

§  5.  Persecution  under  Henry  II? 

The  repressive  legal  measures  introduced  by  Francis  L 
were  retained,  and  a  new  law  against  blasphemy  (pre- 
pared, no  doubt,  during  the  last  days  of  Francis)  was 
published  five  days  after  the  King's  death  (April  5th, 
1547).  But  more  was  believed  to  be  necessary.  So  a 
series  of  edicts,  culminating  in  the  Edict  of  Chateau- 
briand, were  published,  which  aimed  at  uniting  all 

1  Henri  Lemonnier,  Histoire  de  France,  etc.  (Paris,  1903)  T.  ii.  187. 

2  SOURCES  in  addition  to  those  mentioned  on  p.  136  :  Lettres  inedites  de 
Diane  de  Poitiers,  publiees  avec  une  introduction  et  dcs  notes  par  G.  Guiffrey 
(Paris,  1866) ;  M&moires  de  Gaspard  de  Saulx-Taxannes,  1530-73  (published 
in  the  Collection  of  Michaud  and  Poujoulat,  YiiL)  ;  Jf&moires  de  Francois  de 
Guise  (in  the  same  collection,   vi.)  ;  Lettres  de   Catherine  de  Mtdicis  and 
Papiers  d?J&tat  du  Cardinal  de  Granxelle  (in  the  Collection  des  Documents 
in&lits  de  I* Histoire  de  Prance')  ;  Lettres  d'Antoine  de  Bourbon  et  de  Jeanne 
tfAlbret  (in  the  publications  of  the   Socie^U  de  V Histoire  de  France} ;  Les 
(Euwes  completes  de  Pierre  de  Bourdeille^  Seigneur  de  Brantdme  (edit,  by 
L.  Lalanne  for  the  8ocidt6  de  V Histoire  de  France,  important  for  the  persons 
and  morals  of  the  times) ;  C.  Weiss,  La  Chambre  ardente^  etude  sur  la  liberte 
de  Conscience  en  France,  sous  Francois  I.  et  Henri  II.  1540-50  (Paris,  1889). 
Layard,  Dispatches  of  Michele  Suriano  and  Mar'antonio  Barbaro,  Venetian 
Ambassadors  at  the    Court    of   France    (Lymington,    1891,   pnb.    by  the 
Huguenot  Society  of  London}.     Teulet,  ^lotions  politiq'ue  de  la  France  et  de 
VEspagne  avec  I'&osse  (Paris,  1862)  ;  and  Papiers  d£tat  relatifs  a  V Histoire 
de  FJUcosse  (Bannatyne  Club,  Paris,  1851)  ;  Correspondance  du  Cardinal  dc 
Granvelle  (Brussels,  1877-96) ;  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Venetian,  1558-SQ 
(London,  1890,  etc.) 

LATER  BOOKS  in  addition  to  those  mentioned  on  p.  136  :  A.  de  Ruble, 
Le  Traite  de  Cateau-Cambresis  (Paris,  1889) ;  A.  W.  Whitehead,  Gaspard 
Coligny>  Admiral  of  France  (London.  1905) ;  the  Bulletin  historigue  ef 
litt&raire  de  Fhistoire  du  protestantisine  frangais,  edited  by  Weiss,  is  a 
mine  of  information  on  all  matters  connected  with  the  Reformation  in 
France.  A.  de  Ruble,  Antoine  de  Bourbon  et  Jeanne  ffAlbret  (Paris,  1881-82), 
and  Le  Collegia  de  Poissy  (Paris,  1889) ;  F.  Decrue,  Anne  de  Montmorency 
(Paris,  1885-89). 

II** 


162  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

the  forces    of   the    kingdom    to   extirpate    the    Eeformed 

faith. 

On  October  8th,  1547,  a  second  criminal  court  was 
added  to  the  Parfawni  of  Paris,  to  deal  solely  with  cases 
of  heresy.  This  was  the  famous  Chamlre  Ardente.  It 
was  ordered  to  sit  continuously,  even  during  the  ordinary 
Parliamentary  vacancies  in  August  and  September;  and 
its  first  session  lasted  from  Dec.  1547  to  Jan.  1550,  dur- 
ing which  time  it  must  have  passed  more  than  five  hundred 
judgments.  The  clergy  felt  that  this  special  court  took 
from  them  one  of  their  privileges,  the  right  of  trying  all 
cases  of  heresy.  They  petitioned  against  it.  A  com- 
promise was  arranged  (Edict  of  Xov.  19th,  1549),  by 
which  all  cases  of  simple  heresy  (cos  communs)  were  to 
be  sent  to  the  ecclesiastical  courts,  while  cases  of  heresy 
accompanied  by  public  scandal  (cos  primlfyits)  were  to  be 
judged  in  the  civil  courts.  In  practice  it  usually  happened 
that  all  eases  of  heresy  went  first  before  the  ecclesiastical 
courts  and,  after  judgment  there,  those  which  were  believed 
to  be  attended  by  public  scandal  (the  largest  number) 
were  sent  on  to  the  civil  courts.  These  measures  were  not 
thought  sufficient,  and  the  Edict  of  Chateaubriand  (June 
27th,  1551)  codified  and  extended  all  the  various  legal 
measures  taken  for  the  defence  of  the  Eoman  Catholic 
faith. 

The  edict  was  lengthy,  and  began  with  a  long  preamble, 
which  declared  that  in  spite  of  all  measures  of  repression, 
heresy  was  increasing ;  that  it  was  a  pestilence  "  so  contagious 
that  it  had  infected  most  of  the  inhabitants,  men,  women,  and 
even  little  children,  in  many  of  the  towns  and  districts  of  the 
kingdom,"  and  asked  every  loyal  subject  to  aid  the  Govern- 
ment in  extirpating  the  plague.  It  provided  that,  as  before, 
all  cases  of  simple  heresy  should  be  judged  in  the  ecclesi- 
astical courts,  and  that  heresy  accompanied  with  public 
scandal  should  be  sent  to  the  civil  courts  of  the  Parlements. 
It  issued  stringent  regulations  about  the  publication  and 
sale  of  books ;  forbidding  the  introduction  into  France  of 
volumes  from  Protestant  countries ;  forbidding  the  printing 


PERSECUTION  UNDER  HENRY  II.       163 

of  books  which  had  not  passed  the  censor  of  the  Faculty 
of  Theology,  and  all  books  published  anonymously ;  and 
ordering  an  examination  of  all  printing  houses  and  book- 
shops twice  in  the  year.  Private  persons  who  did  not 
inform  against  heretics  were  liable  to  be  considered 
heretics  themselves,  and  punished  as  such ;  and  when  they 
did  denounce  them  they  were  to  receive  one-third  of 
the  possessions  of  the  persons  condemned.  Parents  were 
charged  "  by  the  pity,  love,  and  charity  which  they  owed 
to  their  children/'  not  to  engage  any  teachers  who  might 
be  "  suspect " ;  no  one  was  permitted  to  teach  in  school  or 
college  who  was  not  certified  to  be  orthodox  ;  and  masters 
were  made  responsible  for  their  servants.  Intercourse 
with  those  who  had  taken  refuge  in  Geneva  was  prohibited, 
and  the  goods  of  the  refugees  were  confiscated.  All 
Catholics,  and  more  especially  persons  of  rank  and  in 
authority,  were  required  to  give  the  earnest  example  of 
attending  carefully  to  outward  observances  of  religion,  and 
in  particular  to  kneel  in  adoration  of  the  Host. 

The  edict  was  registered  on  Sept.  3rd,  1551,  and 
immediately  put  in  force.  Six  years  later,  the  King  had 
to  confess  that  its  stringent  provisions  had  failed  to  arrest 
the  spread  of  the  Protestant  faith.  He  proposed  to 
establish  the  Inquisition  in  France,  moved  thereto  by  the 
Cardinal  of  Lorraine  and  Pope  Paul  rv. ;  and  was  prevented 
only  by  the  strenuous  opposition  of  his  farlement.1  He 
had  to  content  himself  with  issuing  the  Edict  of  Compiegne 
(1557),  which,  while  nominally  leaving  trials  for  heresy 
in  the  hands  of  the  ecclesiastical  courts,  practically  handed 

1  The  Partements  were  tlie  highest  judicial  courts  in  France.  By  far  the 
most  important  was  the  Parlemmt  of  Paris,  \vhose  jurisdiction  extended  over 
Pieardie,  Champagne,  PIle-de-France,  TOrleanais,  Maine,  Touraine,  Anjou, 
Poitou,  Aunis,  Bern,  La  Bourbonnais,  Auvergne,  and  La  Marche — 
almost  the  half  of  France.  The  other  Parlem&vts  in  the  time  of  Henry  n. 
were  those  of  Normandy,  Brittany,  Burgundy,  Dauphine,  Provence, 
Languedoc,  Guyenne,  and,  np  to  1 559,  Chambery  and  Turin.  The  ParZeinente 
are  frequently  mentioned  under  the  names  of  the  towns  in  which  they 
met ;  thus  the  Parlevnent  of  Normandy  is  called  the  ParZement  of  Rouen  ; 
that  of  Provence,  the  Parlemeivt  of  Aix  ;  that  of  Languedoc,  the  Parlement 
of  Toulouse. 


Ifi4  THE   REFORMATION    IN    FRANCE 

them  over  to  the  civil  courts,  where  the  judges  were  not 
allowed  to  inflict  any  lesser  punishment  than  death.  They 
were  permitted  to  increase  the  penalty  by  inflicting  torture, 
or  to  mitigate  it  by  strangling  the  victims  before  burning 
them. 

Armed  with  this  legislation,  the  work  of  hunting  out 
the  Reformed  was  strenuously  carried  on.  Certain  prisons 
were  specially  reserved  for  the  Protestant  martyrs — the 
Conciergerie,  which  was  part  of  the  building  of  the  Palace, 
and  the  Grand  Chtitelet,  which  faced  it  on  the  opposite 
bank  of  the  Seine.  They  soon  overflowed,  and  suspects 
were  confined  in  the  Bastille,  in  the  Petit  Chatelefc,  and 
in  episcopal  prisons.  The  cells  of  the  Conciergerie  were 
below  the  level  of  the  river,  and  water  oozed  from  the 
walls;  the  Grand  Chatelet  was  noted  for  its  terrible 
dungeons,  so  small  that  the  prisoner  could  neither  stand 
upright  nor  lie  at  full  length  on  the  floor.  Diseases 
decimated  the  victims:  the  plague  slew  sixty  who  were 
waiting  for  trial  in  the  Grand  CMtelet  in  1547.  Pew 
were  acquitted;  almost  all,  once  arrested,  suffered  death 
and  torture.1 

§  6.  TJie  Organisation  of  the  French  Protestant  Church. 

It  was  during  these  years  of  terrible  persecution,  that 
the  Protestant  Church  of  France  organised  itself — feeling 
the  need  for  unity  the  better  to  sustain  the  conflict  in 
which  it  was  engaged,  and  to  assist  its  weaker  members. 
Calvin  was  unwearied  in  urging  on  this  work  of  organisa- 
tion. With  the  fire  of  a  prophet  and  the  foresight  of  a 

1  Weiss,  La  Chambre  ardente,  tirade  sur  la,  liberU  de  conscience  en  France, 
sous  Frangois  I.  et  Henri  II.,  1540-50  (Paris,  1889),  is  very  valuable  from 
the  collection  of  documents  which  it  contains.  Crespin's  Histoire  des 
martyrs,  etc.,  -when  tested  by  the  official  documents  now  accessible,  has  been 
foiind  to  be  almost  invariably  correct,  and  without  exaggeration.  Weiss, 
"Une  Semaine  de  la  Chambre  ardente"  (1-8  Oct.  1549),  in  the  Bulletin 
Mstorique  et  litttraire  de  la,  socUte  de  Fhistoire.  du  protestantisms  frangais  for 
1899  ;  and  Des  cinq  escoliers  sortis  de  Lausanne  "brulez  a  Jsyon  (Geneva, 
1878). 


ORGANISATION  OF  FRENCH  PROTESTANT  CHURCH  165 

statesman  he  insisted  on  the  necessity  of  unity  during  the 
storm  and  strain  of  a  time  of  persecution.  He  bad 
already  shown  what  form  the  ecclesiastical  organisation 
ought  to  take.1  He  proposed  to  revive  the  simple  three- 
fold ministry  of  the  Church  of  the  early  centuries — a 
congregation  ruled  by  a  bishop  or  pastor,  a  session  of 
elders,  and  a  body  of  deacons.  This  was  adopted  by  the 
French  Protestants.  A  group  of  believers,  a  minister, 
a  "  consistory "  of  elders  and  deacons,  regular  preaching, 
and  the  sacraments  duly  administered,  made  a  Church 
properly  constituted.  The  minister  was  the  chief;  he 
preached;  he  administered  the  sacraments;  he  presided 
at  the  "  consistory."  The  "  consistory  "  was  composed  of 
elders  charged  with  the  spiritual  oversight  of  the  com- 
munity, and  of  deacons  who  looked  after  the  poor  and 
the  sick.  The  elders  and  the  deacons  were  chosen  by 
the  members  of  the  congregation;  and  the  minister  by 
the  elders  and  the  deacons.  An  organised  Church  did 
not  come  into  existence  all  at  once  as  a  rule,  and  a 
distinction  was  drawn  between  an  fylise  plantde,  and  an 
fylise  dressfa  The  former  was  in  an  embryonic  state,  with 
a  pastor,  it  might  be,  but  no  consistory ;  or  it  might  be 
only  a  group  of  people  who  welcomed  the  occasional 
services  of  a  wandering  missioner,  or  held  simple  services 
without  any  definite  leader. 

The  year  1555  may  be  taken  as  the  date  when 
French  Protestantism  began  to  organise  Churches.  It  is 
true  that  a  few  had  been  established  earlier — at  Meaux 
in  1546  and  at  Nimes  in  1547,  but  the  congregations 
had  been  dispersed  by  persecution.  Before  1555  the 
Protestants  of  France  had  been  for  the  most  part  solitary 
Bible  students,  or  little  companies  meeting  together  for 
common  worship  without  any  organisation. 

Paris  set  the  example.  A  small  company  of  believers 
had  been  accustomed  to  meet  in  the  lodging  of  the  Sieur 
de  la  Ferriere,  near  the  Pr^-aux-Clercs.  The  birth  of  a 
child  hastened  matters.  The  father  explained  that  he 

1  IwtiMo  Christiana  Eeligionist  iv.  iii.  iv. 


166       THE  REFORMATION  IN  FRANCE 

could  not  go  outside  France  to  seek  a  pure  baptism,  anl 
that  his  conscience  would  not  permit  his  child  to  be 
baptized  according  to  the  rites  of  the  Roman  Church. 
After  prayer  the  company  resolved  to  constitute  them- 
selves into  a  Church.  Jean  le  Ma<;on  was  called  to  be 
the  minister  or  pastor ;  elders  and  deacons  were  chosen ; 
and  the  organisation  was  complete.1  It  seemed  as  if  all 
Protestant  France  had  been  waiting  for  the  signal,  and 
organised  Churches  sprang  up  everywhere. 

Crespin  names  thirteen  Churches,  completely  organised 
in  the  manner  of  the  Church  of  Paris,  founded  between 
1555  and  1557 — Meaux,  Poitiers,  Angers,  les  lies  de 
Saintonge,  Agen,  Bourges,  Issoudun,  Aubigny,  Blois,  Tours, 
Lyon,  Orleans,  and  Eouen.  He  adds  that  there  were 
others.  Documentary  evidence  now  available  enables  us 
to  give  thirty-six  more,  all  dressdes,  or  completely  organised, 
with  a  consistory  or  kirk-session,  before  1560.  One 
hundred  and  twenty  pastors  were  sent  to  France  from 
Geneva  before  1567.  The  history  of  these  congregations 
during  the  reign  of  Henry  n.  was  full  of  tragic  and 
dramatic  incidents.2  They  existed  in  the  inidst  of  a 
population  which  was  for  the  most  part  fanatically 
Eomanist,  easily  excited  by  priests  and  monks,  who  poured 
forth  violent  addresses  from  the  pulpits  of  neighbouring 
churches.  Law-courts,  whether  in  the  capital  or  in  the 
provinces,  the  public  officials,  all  loyal  subjects  of  the 
King,  were  invited,  commanded  by  the  Edict  of  Chateau- 
briand, to  ferret  out  and  hunt  down  those  suspected  of 
Protestant  sympathies.  To  fail  to  make  a  reverence  when 
passing  a  crucifix,  to  speak  unguardedly  against  an  eccle- 
siastical ceremony,  to  exhibit  the  slightest  sympathy  for 
a  Protestant  martyr,  to  be  found  in  possession  of  a 
book  printed  in  Geneva,  was  sufficient  to  provoke  a 

1  Athanase  Coquerel  fils.  Pr&is  de  fJvistoire  de  I'tgttse  rtformte  de  Paris 
(Paris,  1862} — valuable  for  the  numerous  official  documents  in  the 
appendix. 

fl  Antoine  de  Chandieu,  Htstoire  des  persecutions  et  martyrs  de  V6glis&  de 
Paris,  depute  fan  1537  (Lyons,  1563). 


OEGANISATIOX    OF    FRENCH    PROTESTANT   CHURCH     167 

Denunciation,  an  arrest,  a  trial  which  must  end  in  torture 
and  death.  Protestants  were  compelled  to  worship  in 
cellars,  to  creep  stealthily  to  their  united  devotions ;  like 
the  early  Christians  during  the  persecutions  under  Decius  or 
Diocletian,  they  had  to  meet  at  midnight ;  and  these  mid- 
night assemblies  gave  rise  to  the  same  infamous  reports 
about  their  character  which  the  Jews  spread  abroad 
regarding  the  secret  meetings  of  the  Christians  of  the 
first  three  centuries.1  Every  now  and  then  they 
were  discovered,  as  in  the  incident  of  the  Rue  Saint- 
Jacques  in  Paris,  and  wholesale  arrests  and  martyrdoms 
followed. 

The  organisation  of  the  faithful  into  Churches  had 
done  much  for  French  Protestantism  in  bestowing  upon 
them  the  power  which  association  gives ;  but  more  was 
needed  to  weld  them  into  one.  In  1558,  doctrinal  differ- 
ences arose  in  the  congregation  at  Poitiers.  The  Church 
in  Paris  was  appealed  to,  and  its  minister,  Antoine  de 
Chandieu,  went  to  Poitiers  to  assist  at  the  celebration  of 
the  Holy  Supper,  and  to  heal  the  dispute.  There,  it  is 
said,  the  idea  of  a  Confession  of  .Faith  for  the  whole 
Church  was  suggested.  Calvin  was  consulted,  but  did 
not  approve.  Notwithstanding,  on  May  25th,  1559,  a 
number  of  ministers  and  elders,  coming  from  all  parts  of 
France,  and  representing,  according  to  a  contemporary 
document  whose  authority  is  somewhat  doubtful,  sixty-six 
Churches,2  met  in  Paris  for  conference.  •  Three  days  were 
spent  in  deliberations,  under  the  presidency  of  Morel,  one 
of  the  Parisian  ministers.  This  was  the  First  National 
Synod  of  the  French  Protestant  Church.  It  compiled  a 
Confession  of  Faith  and  a  Book  of  Discipline.  • 

1  QSuvres  complies  de  Pierre  de  jBowrdettle,  Seigneur  de  Erantfane,  edited 
by  L.  Lalanne  for  the  Sori&6  de  FHistoire  de  France  (11  vols.,  Paris,  1864- 
82),  ix.  161-62. 

2  It  is  more  probable  that  only  twelve  Churches  were  represented — Paris, 
Saint-L6,    Rouen,    Dieppe,    Angers,    Orleans,    Tours,    Poitiers,    Saiutes, 
Marennes,    Chatellerault,    and    Saint-Jean-d'Angely.      H.   Dieterlen,    La 
Synode  gevUraZe  de  Paris,  1559  (Kontanban,  1873) :  this  was  published  as  a 
thesis  for  the  Theological  Faculty  (Protestant)  of  Montauban. 


168  THE    REFORMATION    IX    FRANCE 

The  Confession  of  Faith1  (Confession  dc  Fol  faite  £>tn 
commun  vccurd  par  Ics  Francois,  qtti  desircnt  rivre  selon  la 
puntt  dc  Vtmnyile  de  notre  Seigntur  Jt'sus  Christ)  consists 
of  forty  articles.  It  was  revised  more  than  once  by 
subsequent  Synods,  but  may  stiU  be  called  the  Confession 
of  the  French  Protestant  Church.  It  was  hased  on  a 
short  Confession  drafted  by  Calvin  in  1557,  and  embodied 
in  a  letter  to  the  King  on  behalf  of  his  persecuted 
subjects.  "  It  seemed  useful,"  one  of  the  members  of  the 
Synod  wrote  to  Calvin,  uto  add  some  articles  to  your 
Confession,  and  to  modify  it  slightly  on  some  points." 
Probably  out  of  deference  to  Calvin's  objection  to  a  creed 
for  the  whole  Church,  it  was  resolved  to  keep  it  secret  for 
some  time-  The  resolution  was  in  vain.  The  Confession 
was  in  print,  and  known  before  the  end  of  1559. 

The  Book  of  Discipline  (Discipline  ecclesiastique  des 
fylises  rtfonntes  de  France)  regulated  the  organisation  and 
the  discipline  of  the  Churches.  It  was  that  kind  of 
ecclesiastical  polity  which  has  become  known  as 
Presbyterian,  but  which  might  be  better  called  Conciliar. 
A  council  called  the  Consistory,  consisting  of  the  minister 
or  ministers,  elders,  and  deacons,  ruled  the  congregation. 
Congregations  were  formed  into  groups,  over  which  was 
the  Colloquy,  composed  of  representatives  from  the 
Consisturies ;  over  the  Colloquies  were  the  Provincial 
Synods]  and  over  all  the  General  or  National  Synod. 
Eules  were  laid  down  about  how  discipline  was  to  be 
exercised.  It  was  stated  clearly  that  no  Church  could 
claim  a  primacy  over  the  others.  All  ministers  were 
required  to  sign  the  Confession  of  Faith,  and  to  acknow- 
ledge and  submit  to  the  ecclesiastical  discipline.2 

1  The  Confession  wiU  be  found  in  Schaff,  The  Creeds  of  the  Evangelical 
Protestant  Churches  (London,  1877),  pp.  356  ff.  ;  Muller,  Die  JBek&nntnis- 
sckriften  der  reformierten  Mrche  (1903),  p.  221  ;  the  various  texts  are 
discussed  at  p.  xxxiii. 

s  The  Consistories  sometimes  condescended  to  details.  In  the  calmer 
days  after  tlie  Edict  of  Kantes,  the  pastor  and  Consistory  of  Montauban 
thought  that  the  arrangement  of  Madame  de  Mornay's  hair  was  trap 
mondaine :  Madame  argued  with  them  in  a  spirited  way  ;  cf.  Menioires  de 


REACTION    AGAINST    PERSECUTION  169 

It  is  interesting  to  see  how  in  a  country  whose  civil 
rule  was  becoming  gradually  more  absolutist,  this  "  Church 
under  the  Cross"  framed  for  itself  a  government  which 
reconciled,  more  thoroughly  perhaps  than  has  ever  been 
done  since,  the  two  principles  of  popular  rights  and 
supreme  central  control.  Its  constitution  has  spread  to 
Holland,  Scotland,  and  to  the  great  American  Churches. 
Their  ecclesiastical  polity  came  much  more  from  Paris 
than  from  Geneva. 

§  7.  Reaction  against  Persecution. 

An  attentive  study  of  the  sources  of  the  history  of  the 
period  shows  that  the  excessive  severity  of  King  and 
Court  towards  Protestants  Lad  excited  a  fairly  wide- 
spread reaction  in  favour  of  the  persecuted,  and  had 
also  impelled  the  King  to  action  which  was  felt  by  many 
to  be  unconstitutional.  This  sympathy  with  the  persecuted 
and  repugnance  to  the  arbitrary  exercise  of  Idngship  did 
much  to  mould  the  Huguenot  movement  which  lay  in  the 
immediate  future. 

The  protests  against  the  institution  of  the  Chambre 
Ardente,  the  refusal  of  the  farlement  of  Paris  to  register 
the  edict  establishing  the  Inquisition  in  France,  and  the 
hesitancy  to  put  in  execution  extraordinary  powers  bestowed 
on  French  Cardinals  for  the  punishing  of  heretics  by  the 
Bull  of  Pope  Paul  iv.  (Feb.  26th,  1557),  may  all  be  ascribed 
to  the  jealousy  with  which  the  Courts,  ecclesiastical  and 
civil,  viewed  any  interference  with  their  privileged  jurisdic- 
tion. But  the  Edict  of  Chateaubriand  (1551),  with  its 
articles  declaring  the  unwillingness  or  negligence  shown  by 
public  officials  in  finding  out  and  punishing  heretics,  making 
provisions  against  this,  and  ordaining  that  none  but  persona 
of  well-known  orthodoxy  were  to  be  appointed  magistrates 
(Arts.  23,  28,  24),  confessed  that  there  were  many  even 
among  those  in  office  who  disliked  the  policy  of  persecution, 

Madame  du  Plesste-Mornay  (SoeUM  de  THistoire  de  France,  Paris,  1868-69). 
i.  270-810. 


170  THE    REFORMATION    IN   FRANCE 

Contemporary  official  documents  confirm  this  unwillingness. 
We  hear  of  municipal  magistrates  intervening  to  protect 
their  Protestant  fellow-citizens  from  punishment  in  the 
ecclesiastical  courts;  of  town's  police  conniving  at  the 
escape  of  heretics;  of  a  procurator  at  law  who  was 
suspended  from  office  for  a  year  for  such  connivance ; 1  and 
of  civil  courts  who  could  not  be  persuaded  to  pass  sentences 
except  merely  nominal  ones. 

The  growing  discontent  at  the  severe  treatment  of  the 
persecuted  Protestants  made  itself  manifest,  even  within 
the  Parlement  of  Paris,  so  long  notorious  for  its  persecuting 
zeaL  This  became  evident  when  the  criminal  court  of  the 
Parlement  (la  Tournelle,  1559)  commuted  a  sentence  of 
death  passed  on  three  Protestants  into  one  of  banishment. 
The  violent  Romanists  protested  against  this,  and  demanded 
a  meeting  of  the  whole  Parlement  to  fix  its  mode  of 
judicial  action.  At  this  meeting  some  of  the  members 
— Antoine  Fum^e,  du  Faur,  Viole,  and  Antoine  du  Bourg 
(the  son  of  a  Chancellor  in  the  days  of  Francis  I.) — spoke 
strongly  on  behalf  of  the  Protestants.  They  pleaded  that 
a  space  of  six  months  after  trial  should  be  given  to  the 
accused  to  reconsider  their  position,  and  that,  if  they 
resolve  to  stand  fast  in  the  faith,  they  should  be  allowed  to 
withdraw  from  the  kingdom.  Their  boldness  encouraged 
others.  The  Cardinal  Lorraine  and  the  Constable 
Montmorency  dreaded  the  consequences  of  prolonged 
discussion,  and  communicated  their  fears  to  the  King. 
Henry,  accompanied  by  the  Cardinals  of  Lorraine  and  of: 
Guise,  the  Constable,  and  Francis,  Duke  de  Guise,  entered 
the  hall  where  Parlement  sat,  and  ordered  the  discussion 
to  be  continued  in  his  presence.  The  minority  were 
not  intimidated.  Du  Faur  and  Viole  demanded  a  total 
cessation  of  the  persecution  pending  the  summoning  of  a 
Council.  Du  Bourg  went  further.  He  contrasted  the 
pure  lives  and  earnest  piety  of  the  persecuted  with  the 
scandals  which  disgraced  the  Boman  Church  and  the  Court. 
"  It  is  no  light  matter,"  he  said,  "  to  condemn  to  the  stake 

1  Bulletin  de  la  socitte  de  Vliist.  duprotestantismefranfa'is,  1854,  p,  24. 


HIGHER   ARISTOCRACY    WOX    FOR    REFORMATION       171 

men  who  invoke  the  name  of  Jesus  in  the  midst  of  the 
ftaxnes."  The  King  was  furious.  He  ordered  the  arrest 
of  du  Bourg  and  du  Fanr  on  the  spot,  and  shortly  after- 
wards Fumee  and  La  Porte  were  also  sent  to  the  Bastile. 
This  arbitrary  seizure  of  members  of  the  Parlement  of  Paris 
may  be  said  to  mark  the  time  when  the  Protestants  of 
France  began  to  assume  the  form  of  a  political  as  well  as 
i>f  a  religious  party.  At  this  anxious  juncture  Henry  IL 
met  his  death,  on  June  30th,  by  the  accidental  thrust  of  a 
lance  at  a  tournament  held  in  honour  of  the  approaching 
marriage  of  his  daughter  Elizabeth  with  Philip  of  Spain. 
He  lingered  till  July  10th,  1559. 

§  8.   The  higher  Aristocracy  won  for  the  Reformation. 

When  the  lists  of  Protestants  who  suffered  for  their 
faith  in  France  or  who  were  compelled  to  take  refuge  in 
Geneva  and  other  Protestant  towns  are  examined  and 
analysed,  as  they  have  been  by  French  archaeologists,  it  is 
found  that  the  great  number  of  martyrs  and  refugees  were 
artisans,  tradesmen,  farmers,  and  the  like.1  A  few  names 
of  "  notables " — a  general,  a  member  of  the  Parlement  of 
Toulouse,  a  "  gentleman  n  of  Limousin — are  found  among 
the  martyrs,  and  a  much  larger  proportion  among  the 
fugitives.  The  names  of  members  of  noble  houses  of 
France  are  conspicuous  by  their  absence.  This  does  not 
necessarily  mean  that  the  new  teaching  had  not  found 
acceptance  among  men  and  women  in  the  upper  classes  of 
French  society.  The  noble  of  the  sixteenth  century,  so 
long  as  he  remained  within  his  own  territory  and  in  his 
chateau,  was  almost  independent.  He  was  not  subject  t<-» 
the  provincial  tribunals.  Protestantism  had  been  spreading 
among  such.  We  hear  of  several  high-born  ladies  present 
in  the  congregation  of  three  or  four  hundred  Protestants 
who  were  surrounded  in  a  large  housje  in  the  Eue  St. 
Jacques  (Sept.  4th,  1558),  and  who  were  released.  Benee, 

1  Hauser,  "  La  RSforme  et  les  classes  populaires  en  France  an  xvie  siecle  " 
in  the  JSemie  tfhist.  mod.  et  cowtemp.  L  (1899-1900). 


172  THE   REFORMATION    IN   FRANCE 

daughter  of  Louis  XIL,  Duchess  of  Ferrara,  had  declared 
herself  a  Protestant,  and  had  been  visited  by  Calvin  as 
early  as  1535.1  Francis  d'Andelot,  the  youngest  of  the 
three  Chatillons,  became  a  convert  during  his  imprisonment} 
at  Melun  (1551-56).  His  more  celebrated  brother,  Gasparcl 
de  Coligny,  the  Admiral  of  France,  became  a  Protestant 
during  his  imprisonment  after  the  fall  of  St  Quentin 
(1558)J*  Be  Beze  (Beza)  tells  us  that  as  early  as  1555, 
Antoine  de  Bourbon,  titular  King  of  Navarre  in  right  of 
his  wife  Jeanne  d'Albret,  and  next  in  succession  to  King 
Henri  ir.  and  his  sons,  had  the  new  faith  preached  in  the 
chapel  at  Xerae,  and  that  he  asked  a  minister  to  be  sent 
to  him  from  Geneva.  His  brother  Louis,  Prince  of  Conde, 
also  declared  himself  on  the  Protestant  side.  The  wives 
of  the  brothers  Bourbon,  Jeanne  d'Albret  and  El&more  de 
Eoye,  were  more  determined  and  consistent  Protestants 
than  their  husbands.  The  two  brothers  were  among  those 
present  at  the  assemblies  in  the  Pre-aux-Clercs,  where  for 
five  successive  evenings  (May  13-17)  more  than  five 
thousand  persons  met  to  sing  Clement  Marot's  Psalms.3 
Calvin  wrote  energetically  to  all  these  great  nobles,  urging 
them  to  declare  openly  on  the  side  of  the  Gospel,  and 

xThe  best  book  on  Bene*e  is  Bodocanchi,  Itenee  de  Irance,  duchesse  de 
F&nure  (1896). 

*For  the  Chatillon  brothers,  see  Whitehead,  Gfaspard  de  Coligny, 
Admiral  of  France  (London,  1905). 

3  The  singing  of  Clement  Marof  s  version  of  the  Psalms  was  not  dis- 
tinctively Protestant.  The  first  edition  of  the  translation,  including  thirty 
Psalms,  appeared  in  Paris  in  1541  and  in  Geneva  in  1542.  The  Geneva 
edition  had  an  appendix,  entitled  La  maniere  ffadministrer  2es  sacrem#nt& 
selon  la  coutume  de  tt&glise  awA&ivn&  et  eomme  on  V 'observe  a  Geneve,  and  was 
undoubtedly  a  Protestant  book ;  but  the  Paris  edition  contained  instead 
rhymed  versions  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  of  the  Apostles*  Creed,  and  of  the 
angel's  salutation  to  the  Yirgin.  The  book  was  a  great  favourite  with 
Francis  I.,  who  is  said  to  have  sung  some  of  the  Psalms  on  his  deathbed.  It 
was  very  popular  at  the  Court  of  Henri  n.,  where  it  became  fashionable  for 
the  courtiers  to  select  a  favourite  Psalm,  which  the  King  permitted  them 
to  call  "their  own."  Hemi's  "own  "was  Ps.  xlii.,  Commeun  cerf  alUre 
orame  apres  Feau  courante.  He  was  a  great  huntsman.  Catherine  de 
Medici's  was  Ps.  vi.  The  Psalm-singing  at  the  Pre*-aux-Clercs,  however, 
was  regarded  as  a  manifestation  against  the  Court,  and  d'Andelot  was  im- 
prisoned for  his  persistent  attendance. 


FRAXCE    RULED   BY   THE   GUISES  173 

protect  their  brethren  in   the  faith  less  able  to  defend 
themselves. 

§  9.  France  ruled  by  the  Guises.1 

The  successor  of  Henry  n.  was  his  son  Francis  IL,  who 
was  fifteen  years  of  age,  and  therefore  entitled  by  French 
law  to  rule  in  his  own  name.  He  was  a  youth  feeble  in 
^mind  and  in  body,  and  devotedly  attached  to  his  young  and 
accomplished  wife,  Mary  Queen  of  Scots.  She  believed 
naturally  that  her  husband  could  not  do  better  than 
entrust  the  government  of  the  kingdom  to  her  uncles, 
Charles  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  and  Francis  the  Duke  de 
Guise.  The  Cardinal  had  been  Henry  n/s  most  trusted 
Minister;  and  his  brother  was  esteemed  to  be  the  best 
soldier  in  France.  When  the  Parlement  of  Paris,  according 
to  ancient  custom,  came  to  congratulate  the  King  on  his 
succession,  and  to  ask  to  whom  they  were  to  apply  in 
affairs  of  State,  they  were  told  by  the  King  that  they  were 
to  obey  the  Cardinal  and  the  Duke  "as  himself."  The 
Constable  de  Montmorency  and  the  favourite,  Diane  de 
Poitiers,  were  sent  from  the  Court,  and  the  Queen-Mother, 
Catherine  de*  Medici,  that  "  shopkeeper's  daughter,"  as  the 
young  Queen  called  'her,  found  herself  as  devoid  of  influ- 
ence as  she  had  been  during  the  lifetime  of  her  husband. 

The  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  had  been  the  chief  adviser  of 
that  policy  of  extirpating  the  Protestants  to  which  the  late 
King  had  devoted  himself,  and  it  was  soon  apparent  that 

1  The  family  of  Guise,  who  played  such  a  leading  part  in  French  history 
from  the  reign  of  Henry  n.  on  to  the  downfall  of  the  League,  became  French 
in  the  person  of  Claude,  the  fifth  son  of  Rene,  Duke  of  Lorraine,  who 
inherited  the  lands  of  his  father  which  were  situated  in  France.  Francis  I. 
had  loaded  him  with  honours  and  lands.  The  family  had  always  been 
devoted  to  the  Papacy,  and  had  profited  by  their  devotion.  The  brother  of 
Claude,  Jean,  had  been  made  a  Cardinal  when  he  was  twenty,  and  had 
accumulated  in  his  own  person  an  immense  number  of  benefices.  These 
descended  to  his  nephews,  Charles,  who  was  first  Cardinal  of  Guise  and  then 
Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  and  Louis,  who  was  Cardinal  of  Guise.  The  accumu- 
lated benefices  enjoyed  by  Charles  amounted  to  over  300,000  livres.  Tht 
Guises  did  not  serve  the  Roman  Church  for  nothing. 


174  THE    REFORMATION    IN    FRANCE 

it  would  be  continued  by  the  new  government  The  pio- 
cess  against  Antoine  du  Bourg  and  his  fellow -members  of 
the  Parkmeni  of  Paris  who  had  dared  to  remonstrate 
against  the  persecution,  was  pushed  forward  with  all  speed. 
They  were  condemned  to  the  &uke,  and  the  only  mitigation 
of  sentence  was  that  Du  Bourg  was  to  be  strangled  before 
he  was  burnt.  His  fate  provoked  much  sympathy.  As 
he  was  led  to  the  place  of  execution  the  crowd  pleaded 
with  him  to  recant.  His  resolute,  dignified  bearing  made 
a  great  impression ;  and  his  dying  speech,  according  to  one 
eye-witness,  "  did  more  harm  to  the  Roman  Church  than  a 
hundred  ministers  could  have  done,"  and,  according  to 
another,  "  made  more  converts  among  the  French  students 
than  all  the  books  of  Calvin."  The  persecutions  of  Pro- 
testants of  lower  rank  increased  rather  than  diminished. 
Police  made  descents  on  the  houses  in  the  Eue  de  Marais- 
Saint-Gerniain  and  neighbouring  streets.1  Spies  were  hired 
to  insinuate  themselves  into  the  confidence  of  the  suspected 
for  the  purpose  of  denouncing  them.  The  Parlement  of 
Paris  instituted  four  separate  criminal  courts  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  trying  heretics  brought  before  them.  The 
prisons  were  no  sooner  filled  than  they  were  emptied  by 
sentences  which  sent  the  condemned  to  the  galleys  or  to 
death.  The  government  incited  to  persecution  by  new 
declarations  and  edicts.  It  declared  that  houses  in  which 
conventicles  were  held  were  to  be  razed  to  the  ground 
(Sept  4th,  1559);  that  all  who  organised  unlawful 
assemblies  were  to  be  punished  by  death  (Nov.  9th,  1559)  ; 
that  nobles  who  had  justiciary  courts  were  to  act  according 
to  law  in  the  matter  of  heresy,  or  to  be  deprived  of  their 
justiciary  rights  (Feb.  1560).  In  spite  of  all  this  stern 

1  The  street  Marais-Saint-Germain  was  caHedpetite  Geneve,  because  it  was 
supposed  to  be  largely  inhabited  by  Protestants.  It  was  selected  because 
of  its  remoteness  from  tbe  centre  of  Paris,  and  because  it  was  partly  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Abbey  of  Saint-Germain-des-Pre"s  and  of  the  "Univer- 
sity— two  corporations  excessively  jealous  of  the  infringements  of  their  rights 
of  police.  0£  Athanase  Cocquerel  fils,  "  Histoire  d'une  rue  de  Paris,"  in  the 
Bulletin  kfetorique  et  littfraire  de  la  sovttti  de  I'histoire  du  protestantism* 
franc's  for  1866,  pp.  185,  208. 


FRANCE   RULED   BY   THE   GUISES  175 

repression,  the  numbers  of  the  Protestants  increased,  and 
Calvin  could  declare  that  there  were  at  least  300,000  in 
France. 

The  character  of  Protestantism  in  France  had  been 
changing.  In  the  earlier  years  of  the  persecution  they 
had  submitted  meekly  without  thought  of  revolt,  resigned 
to  their  fate,  rejoicing  to  suffer  in  the  cause  of  Christ 
But  under  this  rule  of  the  Cruises  the  question  of  resistance 
was  discussed.  It  could  be  said  that  revolt  did  not  mean 
revenge  for  injuries  done  to  themselves.  A  foreign  family 
had  overawed  their  King  and  imposed  themselves  on 
Franca  The  Princes  of  the  Blood,  Antoine  de  Bourbon 
and  his  brother  Louis  de  Conde,  in  whose  veins  ran  the 
blood  of  Saint  Louis,  who  were  the  natural  leaders  of  the 
people,  were  flouted  by  the  Guises.  The  inviolability  of 
Parlemerd  had  been  attacked  in  the  execution  of  Antoine 
du  Bourg,  and  the  justiciary  rights  of  great  nobles  were 
threatened  simply  in  order  to  extirpate  "those  of  the 
religion."  They  believed  that  France  was  full  of  men  who 
had  no  good  will  to  the  tyranny  of  the  "foreigners." 
They  consulted  their  brethren  in  exile,  and  Calvin  himself, 
on  the  lawfulness  and  expediency  of  an  armed  insurrection. 
The  refugees  favoured  the  plan.  Calvin  denounced  it. 
"  If  one  drop  of  blood  is  shed  in  such  a  revolt,  rivers  will 
flow ;  it  is  better  that  we  all  perish  than  cause  such  a  scandal 
to  the  cause  of  Christ  and  TTis  Evangel"  Some  of  the 
Protestants  were  not  to  be  convinced.  They  only  needed 
a  leader.  Their  natural  head  was  the  King  of  Navarre  ; 
but  Antoine  de  Bourbon  was  too  unstable.  -  Louis  de 
Cond£,  his  brother,  was  sounded.1  It  is  said  that  he 
promised  to  come  forward  if  the  enterprise  was  confined 
to  the  seizure  of  the  Guises,  and  if  it  was  successful 
in  effecting  this.  A  Protestant  gentleman,  Godefroy  de 
Barry,  Seigneur  de  la  Kenaudie,  became  temporary  leader. 

*  Les  Memoires  du  prince  de  Cande*  (The  Hague,  1743);  Dae  d'Anmale, 
J&istoire  des  Princes  de  Conde  pendant  les  &vime  et  semi1™  siedes,  i.  57 
(Paris,  1868-64  ;  Eng.  trans.,  London,  1S72) ;  Armstrong,  The  French 
Wars  of  Setigion  (London,  1892). 


176  THE   REFORMATION   IN    FRANCE 

He  had  wrongs  to  avenge.  He  had  been  condemned  by 
the  Parlemtnt  of  Dijon  (Burgundy),  had  escaped  to 
Geneva,  and  had  been  converted  there ;  his  brother-in-law, 
Gaspard  de  Heu,  of  Metz,  had  been  strangled  by  the  Guises 
in  the  castle  of  Vincennes  without  form  of  trial*  A 
number  of  gentlemen  and  nobles  promised  their  assistance. 
The  conspirators  swore  to  undertake  nothing  against  the 
King;  the  enterprise  was  limited  to  the  arrest  of  the 
Guises.  Xews  of  the  project  began  to  leak  out.  Every 
information  went  to  show  that  the  Guises  were  the  objects 
of  attack.  The  Court  was  moved  from  Blois  to  Amboise, 
which  was  a  fortified  city,  llore  precise  information  filtered 
to  headquarters.  The  Duke  of  Guise  captured  some  small 
bands  of  conspirators,  and  de  la  Eenaudie  himself  was  slain 
in  a  skirmish.  The  Guises  took  summary  vengeance.  Their 
prisoners  were  often  slaughtered  when  caught;  or  were 
tied  hand  and  foot  and  thrown  into  the  Loire.  Others 
were  hurried  through  a  form  of  trial.  So  many  gallows 
were  needed  that  there  was  not  wood  enough,  and  the 
prisoners  were  hung  from  the  doors  and  battlements  of  the 
eastle  of  Amboise.  The  young  King  and  Queen,  with 
their  ladies,  walked  out  after  dinner  to  feast  their  eyes  on 
'the  dead  bodiea 

Even  before  the  Conspiracy  of  Amboise  had  run  its 
length,  members  of  the  Court  had  begun  to  protest  against 
the  religious  policy  of  the  Guises.  Catherine  de'  Medici 
had  talked  the  matter  over  with  the  Admiral  Coligny,  had 
been  told  by  him  that  the  religious  persecutions  were  at 
the  bottom  of  the  troubles  in  the  kingdom,  and  had  listened 
to  his  proposal  that  all  such  should  be  suspended  until  the 
meeting  of  a  Council.  The  result  was  that  government 
decided  to  pardon  those  accused  of  heresy  if  they  would 
promise  for  the  future  to  live  as  good  Catholics.  The 
brutalities  of  the  methods  by  which  the  sharers  in  the 
foolishly  planned  and  feebly  executed  Conspiracy  of 
Amboise  were  punished  increased  the  state  of  disorder  in 
the  kingdom,  and  the  hatred  against  the  G-uises  found 
vent  in  an  Epistle  sent  to  the  Tiger  of  France,  in  which  the 


FRANCE    RULED    BY   THE   GUISES  177 

Duke  is  addressed  as  a  "  mad  tiger,  a  venomous  viper,  a 
sepulchre  of  abominations." 

Catherine  de'  Medici  deemed  the  opportunity  favour- 
able for  exercising  her  influence.  She  contrived  to  get 
Michel  de  THopital  appointed  as  Chancellor,  knowing  that 
he  was  opposed  to  the  sanguinary  policy  pursued.  He  was 
able  to  inspire  the  Edict  of  Eomorantin  (May  18th,  1560), 
which  made  the  Bishops  judges  of  the  crime  of  heresy, 
imposed  penalties  on  false  accusers,  and  left  the  punish- 
ment to  be  bestowed  on  attendance  at  conventicles  in  the 
hands  of  the  presidents  of  the  tribunals.  Then,  with  the 
help  of  the  Chancellor,  Catherine  managed  to  get  an 
Assembly  of  the  Notables  summoned  to  meet  at  Fountaine- 
bleau.  There,  many  of  the  members  advocated  a  cessation 
of  the  religious  persecution.  One  Archbishop,  Marillac  of 
Yienne,  and  the  Bishops  of  Orleans  and  Valence,  asserted 
boldly  that  the  religious  disorders  were  really  caused  by 
the  scandals  in  the  Church ;  spoke  against  severe  repression 
until  a  Council,  national  or  general,  had  been  held ;  and 
hinted  that  the  services  of  the  Guises  were  not  indispens- 
able. At  the  beginning  of  the  second  session  Coligny  spoke. 
He  had  the  courage  to  make  himself  the  representative  of 
the  Huguenots,  as  the  Protestants  now  began  to  be  nick- 
named. He  attacked  boldly  the  religious  policy  of  the 
Guises,  charged  them  with  standing  between  the  King  and 
loyal  subjects,  and  declared  that  the  persecuted  were 
Christians  who  asked  for  nothing  but  to  be  allowed  to 
worship  God  as  the  Gospel  taught  them.  He  presented  a 
petition  to  the  King  from  the  Protestants  asserting  their 
loyalty,  begging  that  the  persecution  should  cease,  and 
asking  that  "  temples  "  might  be  assigned  for  their  worship. 
The  petition  was  unsigned,  but  Goligny  declared  that  fifty 
thousand  names  could  be  obtained  in  Normandy  alone. 
The  Duke  of  Guise  spoke  with  great  violence,  but  the 
more  politic  Cardinal  induced  him  to  agree  with  the  other 
members  to  call  a  meeting  of  the  States  General  of 
France,  to  be  held  on  the  10th  of  December  1560. 

Shortly  after  the  Notables  had  dispersed,  word  came 

12** 


L78  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FBANCE 

of  another  conspiracy,  in  which  not  only  the  Bourbon 
Princes,  but  also  the  Constable  Montmorency  were  said  to 
be  implicated.  Disturbances  broke  out  in  Provence  and 
Itanphine.  The  Guises  went  back  to  their  old  policy  of 
violence.  The  Zing  of  Xavarre  and  the  Prince  of 
Conde  were  summoned  by  the  King  to  appear  before  him 
to  justify  themselves.  Although  well  warned  of  what 
might  happen,  they  obeyed  the  summons,  and  presented 
themselves  unattended  by  armed  men.  Conde  was  seized 
and  imprisoned.  He  was  condemned  to  death,  and  his 
execution  was  fixed  for  the  1  Oth  of  December.  The  King 
of  Xavarre  was  left  at  liberty,  but  was  closely  watched ; 
and  more  than  one  attempt  was  made  to  assassinate  him. 
It  was  vaguely  believed  that  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  had 
resolved  to  get  rid  of  all  the  leaders  of  the  Huguenots  by 
death  or  imprisonment. 

While  these  terrifying  suggestions  were  being  whispered, 
the  young  Sing  fell  ill,  and  died  suddenly.  This  ended  the 
rule"  of  the  Guises,  and  the  French  Protestants  breathed 
freely  again. 

"  Did  you  ever  read  or  hear,"  said  Calvin  in  a  letter 
to  Sturm,  "  of  anything  more  opportune  than  the  death  of 
the  King  ?  The  evils  had  reached  an  extremity  for  which 
there  was  no  remedy,  when  suddenly  God  shows  Himself 
from  heaven.  He  who  pierced  the  eye  of  the  father  has 
now  stricken  the  ear  of  the  son." 

§  10.  Catherine  de'  Medici  becomes  Regent. 

In  the  confusion  which  resulted,  Catherine  recognised 
that  at  last  the  time  had  come  when  she  could  gratify  the 
one  strong  passion  which  possessed  her — the  passion  to 
govern.  Charles  ix.  was  a  boy  of  ten.  A  Eegent  was 
essential  Anfcoine  de  Bourbon,  as  the  first  Prince  of  the 
Blood,  might  have  claimed  the  position ;  but  Catherine  first 
terrified  him  with  what  might  be  the  fate  of  Cond£,  and 
then,  proposed  that  the  Constable  Montmorency  and  himself 
should  be  her  principal  advisers.  The  facile  Antoine 


CATHERINE   BE'   MEDICI   BECOMES   REGENT      179 

accepted  the  situation :  the  Constable  was  recalled  to  the 
Court ;  Louis  de  Conde  was  released  from  prison.  His 
imprisonment  had  made  a  deep  impression  all  over  France. 
The  Protestants  believed  that  he  had  suffered  for  their  sakes. 
Hymns  of  prayer  had  been  sung  during  his  captivity,  and 
songs  of  thanksgiving  greeted  his  release.1 

a  Le  pauvre  Ohrestien,  qui  endure 

Prison,  pour  verite ; 
Le  Prince,  en  captivite  dure 

Sans  Pavoir  merite 
Au  plus  fort  de  lears  peines  entendent 

Tes  ceuvres  tons  parfaits, 
Et  gloire  et  louange  te  rendent 

De  tes  merveilleuz  f  aits." 

This  was  sung  all  over  France  during  Conde's  imprison- 
ment ;  after  his  release  the  tone  varied : 

"  Resjouissez  TOILS  en  Dieu 
Fideles  de  chacun  lieu ; 

Car  Dieu  pour  nous  a  mande  (envoye} 
Le  bon  prince  de  Conde ; 

Et  VOTIS  nobles  protestans 
Princes,  seigneurs  attestans ; 

Car  Dieu  pour  nous  a  mande 
Le  bon  prince  de  Conde/' 

Catherine  de'  Medici  was  forty-one  years  of  age  when 
she  became  the  Regent  of  France.2  Her  life  had  been  hard. 
Born  in  1519,  the  niece  of  Pope  Clement  vn.,  she  was 
married  to  Henry  of  France  in  1534.  She  had  been  a 
neglected  wife  all  the  days  of  her  married  life.  For  ten 
years  she  had  been  childless,8  and  her  sonnets  breathe  the  * 

1  Le  Gha-nsonnier  Hugtienot  du  %vie  siede  (Paris,  1871),  pp.  204,  245. 

2  Buehot,  Catherine  de  MtSdicis  (Paris,  1899) ;  Edith  Sichel,  Catherine 
dt?  Medici  and  the  French  Reformation  (London,  1905). 

3  Catherine's  children  were — "Francis  II.,  1544-60  ;  Elizabeth  (married 
to  Philip  II.  of  Spain  in  1559),  1545-68  ;  Claude  (m.  to  Charles  ni.,  Duke  of 
Lorraine  (1558),  1547-75  ;  Louis,  Duke  of  Orleans,  1548-50 ;  Charles  IX., 
1550-74  ;  Henri  in.  (first  Duke  of  Orleans,  then  Duke  of  Anjou),  1551-89  ; 
Francis  (Duke  of  Alencon,  then  Duke  of  Anjou),  1554-84  ;  Marguerite 


180  THE  REFORMATION  IN   FRANCE 

prayer  of  Eachel — Give  me  children,  or  else  I  die.  During 
Henry's  absence  with  the  army  in  1552,  he  had  grudgingly 
appointed  her  Kegent,  and  she  had  shown  both  ability  and 
patience  in  acquiring  a  knowledge  of  all  the  details  of 
government.  After  the  defeat  of  Saint-Quentin  she  for 
once  earned  her  husband's  gratitude  and  praise  by  the  way 
in  which  she  had  promptly  persuaded  the  Parliament  to 
grant  a  subsidy  of  300,000  livres.  These  incidents  were 
her  sole  apprenticeship  in  the  art  of  ruling.  She  had  always 
been  a  great  eater,  walker,  and  rider.1  Her  protruding  eyes 
and  her  bulging  forehead  recalled  the  features  of  her  grand- 
uncle,  Pope  Leo  X.  She  had  the  taste  of  her  family  for  art 
and  display.  Her  strongest  intellectual  force  was  a  robust, 
hard,  and  narrow  common  sense  which  was  responsible  both 
for  her  success  and  for  her  failures.  She  can  scarcely  be 
called  immoral;  it  seemed  rather  that  she  was  utterly 
destitute  of  any  moral  sense  whatsoever. 

The  difficulties  which  confronted  the  Kegent  were  great, 
both  at  home  and  abroad.  The  question  of  questions  was 
the  treatment  to  be  given  to  her  Protestant  subjects.  She 
seems  from  the  first  to  have  been  in  favour  of  a  measure 
of  toleration ;  but  the  fanatically  Roman  Catholic  party 
was  vigorous  in  France,  especially  in  Paris,  and  was  ably 
led  by  the  Guises;  and  Philip  of  Spain  had  made  the 
suppression  of  the  Reformation  a  matter  of  international 
policy. 

Meanwhile  Catherine  had  to  face  the  States  General, 
summoned  by  the  late  King  in  August  1560.  While  the 
Guises  were  still  in  power,  strict  orders  had  been  given  to 
see  that  none  but  ardent  Romanists  should  be  elected ;  but 
the  excitement  of  the  times  could  not  be  restrained  by  any 
management.  It  was  nearly  half  a  century  since  a  King 
of  France  had  invited  a  declaration  of  the  opinions  of  his 

(married  Henri  iv.),  1552-1615  ;  and  twins  who  died  in  the  year  of  their 
birth,  Victoria  and  Jeanne,  b.  1556. 

1  Some  say  that  Catherine  either  invented  or  made  fashionable  the 
modern  ladies'  side-saddle  ;  during  the  Middle  Ages  ladies  rode  astride,  or  on 
pillion,  or  seated  sideways  on  horseback  with  their  feet  on  a  board  which 
was  suspended  from  the  front  and  rear  of  the  saddle. 


CATHERINE   DE*    MEDICI    BECOMES    REGENT       181 

subjects ;  the  last  meeting  of  the  States  Geneial  had  been 
in  1484.1  Catherine  watched  the  elections,  and  the  expres- 
sion of  sentiments  which  they  called  forth.  She  saw  that 
the  Protestants  were  active.  Calvinist  ministers  traversed 
the  West  and  the  South  almost  unhindered,  encouraging  the 
people  to  assert  their  liberties.  They  were  even  permitted 
to  address  some  of  the  assemblies  met  to  elect  represent- 
atives. A  minister,  Charles  Dalbiac,  expounded  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith  to  the  meeting  of  the  nobles  at  Angers,  and 
showed  how  the  Eomaii  Church  had  enslaved  and  changed 
the  whole  of  the  Christian  faith  and  practice.  In  other 
places  it  was  said  that  Antoine  de  Bourbon  had  no  right  to 
allow  Catherine  to  assume  the  Eegency,  and  that  he  ought 
to  be  forced  to  take  his  proper  place.  The  air  seemed  full 
of  menaces  against  the  Regent  and  in  favour  of  the  Princes 
of  the  Blood.  Catherine  hastened  to  place  the  Xing  of 
Navarre  in  a  position  of  greater  dignity.  She  shared  the 
Eegency  nominally  with  the  premier  Prince  of  the  Blood, 
who  was  Lieutenant-General  of  France.  If  Antoine  had 
been  a  man  of  resolution,  he  might  have  insisted  on  a  large 
share  in  the  government  of  the  country,  but  his  easy,  care- 
less disposition  made  him  plastic  in  the  hands  of  Catherine, 
and  she  could  write  to  her  daughter  that  he  was  very 
obedient,  and  issued  no  order  without  her  permission. 

The  Estates  met  at  Orleans  on  the  13th  of  December. 
The  opening  speech  by  the  Chancellor,  Michel  d'Hopital, 
showed  that  the  Eegent  and  her  councillors  were  at  least 
inclined  to  a  policy  of  tolerance.  The  three  orders  (Clergy, 
Nobles,  and  Third  Estate),  he  said,  had  been  summoned  to 
find  remedies,  for  the  divisions  which  existed  within  the 
kingdom ;  and  these,  he  believed,  were  due  to  religion.  He 
could  not  help  recognising  that  religious  beliefs,  good  or 
bad,  tended  to  excite  burning  passions.  He  could  not  avoid 
seeing  that  a  common  religion  was  a  stricter  bond  of  unity 
than  belonging  to  the  same  race  or  living  under  the  same 
laws.  Might  they  not  all  wait  for  the  decision  of  a  .General 
Council?  Might  they  not  cease  to  use  the  irritating 
1  G.  Picot,  Htstoire  des  tftate  G&itraux,  ii.  (Paris,  1872). 


182  THE   REFORMATION   IN    FRANCE 

epithets  of  Lutherans,  Huguenots,  Pa/isi^  and  remember 
that  they  were  all  good  Christians.  The  spokesmen  oi'  the 
three  orders  were  heard  at  the  second  sitting.  Dr.  Quiitin, 
one  of  the  Eegents  of  the  University  of  Paris,  voiced  the 
Clergy.  He  enlarged  against  the  proposals  which  were  to  be 
brought  forward  by  the  other  two  orders  to  despoil  the 
revenues  of  the  Church,  to  attempt  its  reform  by  the  civil 
power,  and  to  grant  toleration  and  even  liberty  of  worship 
to  heretics,  Coligny  begged  the  Eegent  to  note  that 
Quintin  had  called  subjects  of  the  King  heretics,  and  the 
spokesman  of  the  Clergy  apologised.  Jacques  de  Silly, 
Baron  de  Kochefort,  and  Jean  Lange,  an  advocate  of 
Bordeaux,  who  spoke  for  the  Xobles  and  for  the  Third 
Estate,  declaimed  against  the  abuses  of  ecclesiastical  courts, 
and  the  avarice  and  ignorance  of  the  clergy. 

At  the  sitting  on  Jan.  1st,  1561,  each  of  the  three 
Estates  presented  a  written  list  of  grievances  (cahiers). 
That  of  the  Third  Estate  was  a  memorable  and  important 
document  in  three  hundred  and  fifty-four  articles,  and 
reveals,  as  no  other  paper  of  the  time  does,  the  evils  result- 
ing from  absolutist  and  aristocratic  government  in  France. 
It  asked  for  complete  toleration  in  matters  of  religion,  for 
a  Reformation  of  the  Church  in  the  sense  of  giving  a  large 
extension  of  power  to  the  laity,  for  uniformity  in  judicial 
procedure,  for  the  abolition  or  curtailment  of  powers  in 
signorial  courts,  for  quinquennial  meetings  of  the  Estates 
General,  and  demanded  that  the  day  and  place  of  the  next 
meeting  should  be  fixed  before  the  end  of  the  present  sitting. 
The  Nobles  were  divided  on  the  question  of  toleration,  and 
presented  three  separate  papers.  In  the  first,  which  came 
from  central  France,  stern  repression  of  the  Protestant  faith 
was  demanded ;  in  the  second,  coming  from  the  nobles  of 
fche  Western  provinces,  complete  toleration  was  claimed ; 
in  the  third  it  was  asked  that  both  parties  should  be  made 
to  keep  the  peace,  and  that  only  preachers  and  pastors  be 
punished.  The  list  presented  by  the  Clergy,  like  those  of 
the  other  two  orders,  insisted  upon  the  reform  of  the  Church ; 
but  it  took  the  line  of  urging  the  abolition  of  the  Cojicordat, 


CATHERINE   BE'   MEDICI   BECOMES   REGENT      183 

and  a  return  to  the  provisions  of  the  Pragmatic  Sanction 
of  Bourges. 

The  Government  answered  these  lists  of  grievances 
presented  by  an  edict  and  an  ordinance.  In  the  edict 
(Jan.  28th,  1561)  the  King  ordered  that  all  prosecutions 
for  religion  should  cease,  and  that  all  prisoners  should  be 
released,  with  an  admonition  "  to  live  in  a  catholic  manner  " 
for  the  future.  The  ordinance  (dated  Jan.  31st,  but  not 
completed  till  the  following  August),  known  as  the  Ordi- 
nance of  OrUans,  was  a  very  elaborate  document.  It 
touched  upon  almost  all  questions  brought  forward  in  the 
lists  of  grievances,  and  enacted  various  reforms,  both  civil 
and  ecclesiastic — all  of  which  were  for  the  most  part 
evaded  in  practice.  The  Estates  were  adjourned  until  the 
1st  of  May. 

The  Huguenots  had  gained  a  suspension  of  persecution, 
if  not  toleration,  by  the  edict  of  Jan.  28th,  and  the  dis- 
position of  the  Government  made  them  hope  for  still 
further  assistance.  Eefugees  came  back  in  great  numbers 
from  Switzerland,  Germany,  England,  and  even  from  Italy. 
The  number  of  Protestant  congregations  increased,  and 
Geneva  provided  the  pastors.  The  edict  did  not  give 
liberty  of  worship,  but  the  Protestants  acted  as  if  it  did. 
This  roused  the  wrath  of  the  more  fanatically  disposed  por- 
tion of  the  Roman  Catholic  population.  Priests  and 
monks  fanned  the  flames  of  sectarian  bitterness.  The 
Government  was  denounced,  and  anti-Protestant  riots  dis- 
turbed the  country.  When  the  Huguenots  of  Paris  at- 
tempted to  revive  the  psalm-singings  in  the  Pre-aux-Glercs, 
they  were  mobbed,  and  beaten  with  sticks  by  the  populace. 
This  led  to  reprisals  in  those  parts  of  the  country  where 
the  Huguenots  were  in  a  majority.  In  some  towns  the 
churches  were  invaded,  the  images  torn  down,  and  the 
relics  burnt.  The  leaders  strove  to  restrain  their  fol- 
lowers.1 Calvin  wrote  energetically  from  Geneva  against 
the  lawlessness : 

1  Jeanne  d'AJbret  wrote  remonstrating  strongly  ;  cf.  Lettres  tfAntoine  d* 
Bourbon  et  de  Jeanne  d'Albret,  pp.  238 /. 


184  THE   REFORMATION  IN   FRANCE 

"God  has  never  enjoined  on  any  one  to  destroy  idols, 
save  on  every  man  in  his  own  house  or  on  those  placed  in 
authority  in  public  places.  .  „  .  Obedience  is  better  than 
sacrifice :  we  must  look  to  what  it  is  lawful  for  us  to  do, 
and  must  keep  ourselves  within  bounds." 

At  the  Court  at  Fontainebleau,  Benee,  Duchess  of 
Ferrara,  and  the  Princess  of  Conde  were  permitted  by  the 
Regent  to  have  worship  in  their  rooms  after  the  Eeformed 
rite;  and  Coligny  had  in  his  household  a  minister  from 
Geneva,  Jean  Kaymond  Merlin,  to  whose  sermons  outsiders 
were  not  only  admitted  but  invited.  These  things  gave 
great  offence  to  the  Constable  Montmorency,  who  was  a 
strong  Bomanist.  He  was  still  more  displeased  when 
Monluc,  Bishop  of  Valence,  preached  in  the  State  apart- 
ments before  the  boy  King  and  the  Queen  Mother.  He 
thought  it  was  undignified  for  a  Bishop  to  preach,  and  he 
believed  that  Monluc's  sermons  contained  something  very 
like  Lutheran  theology.  He  invited  the  Duke  of  Guise 
and  Saint-Andre,  both  old  enemies,  to  supper  (April  16th, 
1561),  and  the  three  pleged  themselves  to  save  the 
Bomanism  of  France.  This  union  was  afterwards  known 
as  the  Triumvirate. 

Meanwhile  religious  disturbances  were  increasing. 
The  Huguenots  demanded  the  right  to  have  "temples" 
granted  to  them  or  built  at  their  own  expense;  and  in 
many  places  they  openly  gathered  for  public  worship  and 
for  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  They  frequently 
met  armed  to  protect  themselves  from  attack.  The 
Government  at  length  interfered,  and  by  an  edict  (July 
1561)  prohibited,  under  penalty  of  confiscation  of  property, 
all  conventicles,  public  or  private,  whether  the  worshippers 
were  armed  or  unarmed,  where  sermons  were  made  and 
the  sacraments  celebrated  in  any  other  fashion  than  that 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  The  edict  declared,  on  the  other 
hand,  that  magistrates  were  not  to  be  too  zealous ;  persons 
who  laid  false  information  were  to  be  severely  punished ; 
and  all  attacks  on  houses  were  forbidden.  It  was  evidently 
meant  to  conciliate  both  parties,  Coligny  did  not  discon- 


CATHERINE    DB'    MEDICI    BECOMES    REGENT        185 

tinue  the  services  in  his  apartment^  and  wrote  to  hi^  co- 
religionist? that  they  had  nothing  to  fear  so  long  as  they 
worshipped  in  private  houses.  Jeanne  cTAlhret  declared 
herself  openly  a  Protestant :  and  as  she  travelled  from 
Xerac  to  Fontainebleau  she  restored  to  the  Huguenot? 
churches  which  the  magistrates  had  taken  from  them  in 
obedience  to  the  edict  of  July. 

The  prorogued  meeting  of  the  States  General  did  not 
assemble  until  the  1st  of  August,  and  even  then  representa- 
tives of  two  orders  only  were  present.  An  ecclesiastical 
synod  was  sitting  at  Poissy  (opened  July  28th),  and  the 
clerical  representatives  were  there.  It  was  the  27th 
of  August  before  the  three  orders  met  together  in 
presence  of  the  King  and  the  members  of  his  Council 
at  Saint-Germain.  The  meeting  had  been  called  for 
the  purpose  of  discussing  the  question  of  national 
finance ;  but  it  was  impossible  to  ignore  the  religious 
question. 

In  their  cahiers,  both  the  Nobles  and  the  Third  Estate 
advocated  complete  toleration  and  the  summoning  a 
National  Council.  The  financial  proposals  of  the  Third 
Estate  were  thoroughgoing.  After  a  statement  of  the 
national  indebtedness,  and  a  representation  that  taxation 
had  reached  its  utmost  limits,  they  proposed  that  money 
should  be  obtained  from  the  superfluity  of  ecclesiastical 
wealth.  In  their  cahier  of  Jan.  1st,  the  Third  Estate  had 
sketched  a  civil  constitution  for  the  French  Church ;  they 
now  went  further,  and  proposed  that  all  ecclesiastical 
revenues  should  be  nationalised,  and  that  the  clergy  should 
be  paid  by  the  State.  They  calculated  that  a  surplus  of 
seventy-two  million  livres  would  result,  and  proposed  that 
forty-two  millions  should  be  set  aside  to  liquidate  the 
national  debt. 

This  bold  proposal  was  impracticable  in  the  condition 
of  the  kingdom.  The  Parlemertf  of  Paris  regarded  it  as 
a  revolutionary  attack  on  the  rights  of  property,  and  it 
alienated  them  for  ever  from  the  Reformation  movement ; 
but  it  enabled  the  Government  to  wring  from  the  alarmed 


186  THE    REFORMATION   IN    FRANCE 

Churchmen  a  subsidy  of  sixteen  million  lines,  to  be  paid 
in  sis  annual  instalments* 

§11.   The  Conference  at  Poissy. 

It  was  scarcely  possible,  in  view  of  the  Pope  and 
Philip  of  Spain,  to  assemble  a  National  Council,  but  the 
Government  had  already  conceived  the  idea  of  a  meeting  of 
theologians,  which  would  be  such  an  assembly  in  all  but 
the  name.  They  had  invited  representatives  of  the  Pro- 
testant ministers  (July  25th)  to  attend  the  synod  of  the 
clergy  sitting  at  Poissy.  The  invitation  had  been  accepted, 
and  the  Government  intended  to  give  an  air  of  unusual 
solemnity  to  the  meeting.  The  King,  surrounded  by  his 
mother,  his  brothers,  and  the  Princes  of  the  Blood,  presided 
as  at  a  sitting  of  the  States  General.  The  Chancellor,  in 
the  King's  name,  opened  the  session  with  a  remarkable 
speech,  in  which  he  set  forth  the  advantages  to  be  gained 
from  religious  union.  He  addressed  the  assembled  bishops 
and  Roman  Catholic  theologians,  assuring  them  that  they 
ought  to  have  no  scruples  in  meeting  the  Protestant 
divines.  The  latter  were  not  heretics  like  the  old  Mani- 
cheans  or  Arians.  They  accepted  the  Scriptures  as  the 
Rule  of  Faith,  the  Apostles'  Creed,  the  four  principal 
Councils  and  their  Creeds  (the  symbols  of  Nicea,  Constan- 
tinople, and  Chalcedon).  The  main  difference  between 
them  was  that  the  Protestants  wished  the  Church  to  be 
reformed  according  to  the  primitive  pattern.  They  had 
given  proof  of  their  sincerity  by  being  content  to  die  for 
their  faith. 

The  Reformers  were  represented  by  twelve  ministers, 
among  whom  were  Morel  of  Paris;  Nicolas  des  Gallars, 
minister  of  the  French  Protestant  Church  in  London,  and 
by  twenty  kymen.  Their  leader  was  Theodore  de  B&ze 
(Beza),  a  man  of  noble  birth,  celebrated  as  a  Humanist,  a 
brilliant  writer  and  controversialist,  whom  Calvin,  at  the 
request  of  Antoine  de  Bourbon,  Catherine  de'  Medici,  and 
Coligny,  had  commissioned  to  represent  him.  De  Bfcze 


THE   CONFERENCE   AT    POIS&Y  187 

was  privately  presented  to  the  King  and  the  Itesrent  by 
the  Kincr  of  Xavarre  and  by  the  Prince  de  Ondo,  and  his 
learning,  presence,  and  stately  courtesy  made  a  great  im- 
pression upon  the  Court.  He  had  been  born  in  the  same 
year  as  the  Regent  (1519),  and  had  thrown  away  very 
brilliant  prospects  to  become  a  minister  of  the  Reformed 
Church. 

The  meeting  was  held  in  the  refectory  of  the  nuns  of 
Poissy.1  The  King  and  his  suite  were  placed  at  ore  end 
of  the  hall,  and  the  Eomanist  bishops  and  theologians  were 
arranged  by  the  walls  on  the  two  sides.  After  the  Chan- 
cellor had  finished  his  speech,  the  representatives  of  the 
Protestants  were  introduced  by  the  Duke  of  Guise,  in 
command  of  an  escort  of  the  King's  archers.  They  were 
placed  in  front  of  a  barrier  which  separated  them  from  the 
Eomanist  divines.  "There  come  the  dogs  of  Geneva," 
said  the  Cardinal  of  Tournon  as  they  entered  the  halL 

The  speech  of  de  Beze,  delivered  on  the  first  day  (Sept. 
7th)  of  the  Colloquy,  as  it  came  to  be  called,  made  a  great 
impression.  He  expounded  with  clearness  of  thought  and 
precision  of  language  the  creed  of  his  Church,  showing 
where  it  agreed  and  where  it  differed  from  that  of  the 
Eoman  Catholic.  The  gravity  and  the  charm  of  his 
eloquence  compelled  attention,  and  it  was  not  until  he 
began  to  criticise  with  frank  severity  the  doctrine  of  tran- 
substantiation  that  he  provoked  murmurs  of  dissent.  The 
speech  must  have  disappointed  Catherine.  It  had  made 
no  attempt  to  attenuate  the  differences  between  the  two 
confessions,  and  held  out  no  hopes  of  a  reunion  of  the 
Churches. 

The  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  was  charged  to  reply  on  be- 
half of  the  Eoman  Catholic  party  (Sept.  1 6th).  His  speech 
was  that  of  a  strong  partisan,  and  dealt  principally  with 
the  two  points  of  the  authority  of  the  Church  in  matters 
of  faith  and  usage,  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament  of 

1I'or  the  Colloquy  of  Poissy,  cf.  Ruble,  "Le  Colloqtte  de  Poissy"  (in 
M&noires  de  la  Soci&6  de  fhistoire  de  Paris  et  de  Vile  de  France),  vol.  xvt, 
Paris,  1889) ;  Klipffel,  Le  colloque  de  Poissy  (Paris  and  Mete,  1867). 


188        THE  REFORMATION  IK  FRANCE 

the  Holy  Supper.  There  was  no  attempt  at  concilia- 
tion. 

Three  days  after  (Sept.  1  Dth),  Cardinal  Ippolito  d'Estc 
arrived  at  Saint-Germain,  accompanied  by  a  numerous  suite, 
among  whom  was  Laynez,  the  General  of  the  Society  r,f 
Jesus.  He  had  beerTsent  by  the  Pope,  legate  a  laterc,  to 
end,  if  possible,  the  conference  at  Poissy,  and  to  secure  the 
goodwill  of  the  French  Government  for  the  promulgation  of 
the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  He  so  far  prevailed  that 
the  last  two  sittings  of  the  conference  (Sept.  24th,  26th) 
were  with  closed  doors,  and  were  scenes  of  perpetual  recri- 
minations. Laynez  distinguished  himself  by  his  vitupera- 
tive violence.  The  Protestant  ministers  were  "wolves," 
"foxes,"  " serpents,"  "assassins."  Catherine  persevered. 
She  arranged  a  conference  between  five  of  the  more  liberal 
Roman  Catholic  clergy  and  five  Protestant  ministers.  It 
met  (Sept.  3  Oth,  Oct.  1st),  and  managed  to  draft  a  formula 
about  the  Holy  Supper  which  was  at  once  rejected  by  the 
Bishops  of  the  French  Church  (Oct.  9th). 

Out  of  this  Colloquy  of  Poissy  came  the  edict  of  January 
17th,  1562,  which  provided  that  Protestants  were  to  sur- 
render all  the  churches  and  ecclesiastical  buildings  they 
had  seized,  and  prohibited  them  from  meeting  for  public 
worship,  whether  within  a  building  or  not,  inside  the  walls 
of  any  town.  On  the  other  hand,  they  were  to  have  the 
right  to  assemble  for  public  worship  anywhere  outside 
walled  towns,  and  meetings  in  private  houses  within  the 
walls  were  not  prohibited.  Thus  the  Protestants  of  France 
secured  legal  recognition  for  the  first  time,  and  enjoyed  the 
right  to  worship  according  to  their  conscience.  They  were 
not  satisfied — they  could  scarcely  be,  so  long  as  they  were 
kept  outside  the  walls ;  but  their  leaders  insisted  on  their 
accepting  the  edict  as  a  reasonable  compromise.  "  If  the 
liberty  promised  us  in  the  edict  lasts,"  Calvin  wrote,  "  the 
Papacy  will  fall  to  the  ground  of  itself/'  Within  one  year 
the  Huguenots  of  France  found  themselves  freed  from  per- 
secution, and  in  the  enjoyment  of  a  measured  liberty  of 
public  worship.  It  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  they 


THE   MASSACRE   OF    VASSY  189 

owed  this  to  Catherine  «le'  Medici.  She  was  a  child  of  the 
Renaissance, and  wiis  naturally  on  the  side  of  free  thought; 
and  she  was,  besides,  at  this  time  persuaded  that  the  Hugue- 
nots had  the  future  on  their  side.  In  the  coming  struggle 
they  regarded  this  edict  as  their  charter,  and  frequently 
demanded  its  restitution  and  enforcement. 

Catherine  de'  Medici  had  shown  both  courage  and  con- 
stancy in  her  attempts  at  conciliation.  To  the  remon- 
strances of  Philip  of  Spain  she  had  replied  that  she  meant 
to  be  master  in  her  own  house ;  and  when  the  Constable 
de  Montmorency  had  threatened  fco  leave  the  Court,  he  had 
been  told  that  he  might  do  as  he  pleased.  But  she  was 
soon  to  be  convinced  that  she  had  overestimated  the  strength 
of  the  Protestants,  and  that  she  could  never  count  on  the 
consistent  support  of  their  nominal  leader,  the  vain  and 
vacillating  Antoine  de  Bourbon.  Had  Jeanne  d'Albret 
been  in  her  husband's  place,  things  might  have  been 
different 

The  edict  of  January  17th,  1562,  had  exasperated 
the  Eomanists  without  satisfying  the  mass  of  the 
Protestants.  The  marked  increase  in  the  numbers  of 
Protestant  congregations,  and  their  not  very  strict  observ- 
ance of  the  limitations  of  the  edict,  had  given  rise  to 
disturbances  in  many  parts  of  the  country.  Everything 
seemed  to  tend  towards  civil  war.  The  spark  which 
kindled  the  conflagration  was  the  Massacre  of  Vassy.1 

tt    ;'  . 

§  12.   The  Massacre  of  Vassy. 

The  Duke  of  Guise,  travelling  from  Joinville  to  Paris, 
accompanied  by  his  brother,  the  Cardinal  of  Guise,  his 
children  and  his  wife,  and  escorted  by  a  large  armed  retinue, 
halted  at  Vassy  (March  1st,  1562).  It  was  a  Sunday,  and 
the  Duke  wished  to  hear  Mass.  Scarcely  a  gunshot  from 
the  church  was  a  barn  where  the  Protestants  (in  defiance 
of  the  edict,  for  Yassy  was  a  walled  town)  were  holding  a 

1Lavisse,  "Le  Massacre,  fait  &  Vassy"  in  Gtrandes  Sctoes  Jiistoriques  du 
xme  stedt  (Paris,  1886). 


190  THE    REFORMATION"   IN   FRANf'E 

service.  The  congregation,  barely  a  year  old,  was  numer  jus 
and  zealous.  It  was  an  eyesore  to  Antoinette  de  Bourbon, 
the  mother  of  the  Guises,  who  lived  in  the  neighbouring 
chateau  of  Joinville,  and  saw  her  dependants  attracted  by 
the  preaching  at  Vassy.  The  Duke  was  exasperated  at 
seeing  men  whom  he  counted  his  subjects  defying  him  in 
his  presence.  He  sent  some  of  Ms  retainers  to  order  the 
worshippers  to  quit  the  place.  They  were  received  by 
cries  of  "  Papists  2  idolaters  I "  When  they  attempted  to 
force  an  entrance,  stones  began  to  fly,  and  the  Duke  was 
struck  The  barn  was  rushed,  the  worshippers  fusilladed, 
and  before  the  Duke  gave  orders  to  cease  firing,  sixty-three 
of  the  six  or  seven  hundred  Protestants  were  slain,  and 
over  a  hundred  wounded. 

The  news  of  the  massacre  spread  fast;  and  while  it 
exasperated  the  Huguenots,  the  Eomanists  hailed  it  as  a 
victory.  The  Constable  de  Montmoreney  and  the  Marshal 
Saint  Andr£  went  out  to  meet  the  Duke,  and  the  Guises 
entered  Paris  in  triumph,  escorted  by  more  than  three 
thousand  armed  men.  The  Protestants  began  arming 
themselves,  and  crowded  to  Paris  to  place  themselves  under 
the  orders  of  the  Prince  of  Conde.  It  was  feared  that  the 
two  factions  would  fight  in  the  streets. 

The  Regent  with  the  Bang  retired  to  Fontainebleau. 
She  was  afraid  of  the  Triumvirs  (Montmoreney,  the  Duke 
of  Guise,  and  Marshal  Saint- Andr£),  and  she  invited  the 
Prince  de  Cond£  to  protect  her  and  her  children.  Cond£ 
lost  this  opportunity  of  placing  himself  and  his  co-religion- 
ists in  the  position  of  being  the  support  of  the  throne. 
The  Triumvirate,  with  Antoine  de  Bourbon,  who  now  seemed 
to  be  their  obedient  servant,  marched  on  Fontainebleau, 
and  compelled  the  King  and  the  Queen  Mother  to  return 
to  Paris.  Catherine  believed  that  the  Protestants  had 
abandoned  her,  and  turned  to  the  Eomanists. 

The  example  of  massacre  given  at  Vassy  was  followed 
in  many  places  where  the  Eomanists  were  in  a  majority. 
In  Paris,  Sens,  Eouen,  and  elsewhere,  the  Protestant  places 
of  worship  were  attacked,  and  many  of  the  worshippers 


THE   BEGINNING   OF   THE    WARS   OF    RELIGION      191 

slain.  At  Toulouse,  the  Protestants  shut  themselves  up  in 
the  Capitol,  and  were  besieged  by  the  Eomanists.  They 
at  last  surrendered,  trusting  to  a  promise  that  they  would 
be  allowed  to  leave  the  town  in  safety.  The  promise  was 
not  kept,  and  three  thousand  men,  women,  and  children 
were  slain  in  cold  blood.  This  slaughter,  in  violation  of 
oath,  was  celebrated  by  the  Boman  Catholics  of  Toulouse 
in  centenary  festivals,  which  were  held  in  1662,  in  1762, 
and  would  have  been  celebrated  in  1862  had  the  Govern- 
ment of  Jf apoleon  m.  not  interfered  to  forbid  it. 

These  massacres  provoked  reprisals.  The  Huguenots 
broke  into  the  Eomanist  churches,  tore  down  the  images, 
defaced  the  altars,  and  destroyed  the  relics. 

§  13.   The  Beginning  of  the  Wars  of  Religion. 

Gradually  the  parties  faced  each  other  with  the  Duke 
of  Guise  and  the  Constable  Montmorency  at  the  head  of 
the  Eomanists,  and  the  Prince  of  Conde  and  Admiral 
Coligny  at  the  head  of  the  Huguenots.  France  became 
the  scene  of  a  civil  conflict,  where  religious  fanaticism 
added  its  cruelties  to  the  ordinary  barbarities  of  warfare. 

The  Venetian  Ambassador,  writing  home  to  the  chiefs 
of  his  State,  was  of  opinion  that  this  first  war  of  religion 
prevented  France  from  becoming  Protestant,  The  cruelties 
of  the  Eomanists  had  disgusted  a  large  number  of  French- 
men, who,  though  they  had  no  great  sympathy  for  the  Pro- 
testant faith,  would  have  gladly  allied  themselves  with  a 
policy  of  toleration.  The  Huguenot  chiefs  themselves  saw 
that  the  desecration  of  churches  did  not  serve  the  cause 
they  had  at  heart.  Calvin  and  de  B&ze  wrote,  energetically 
urging  their  followers  to  refrain  from  attacks  on  churches, 
images,  and  relics.  But  it  was  all  to  no  purpose.  At 
Orleans,  Coligny  and  Gonde  heard  that  their  men  were 
assaulting  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  They  hastened 
there,  and  Cond6  saw  a  Huguenot  soldier  on  the  roof  of  the 
church  about  to  east  an  image  to  the  ground.  Seizing  an 
arquebus,  he  pointed  it  at  the  man,  and  ordered  him  to 


192  THE    REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

desist  and  come  down.  The  soldier  did  not  stop  his  work 
for  an  instant.  "  Sire/'  he  said,  "  have  patience  with  me 
until  I  destroy  this  idol,  and  then  let  me  die  if  it  be  your 
pleasure."  When  men  were  content  to  die  rather  than 
refrain  from  iconoclasm,  it  was  in  vain  to  expect  to  check 
it.  Somehow  the  slaughter  of  men  made  less  impression 
than  the  sack  of  churches,  and  moderate  men  came  to  the 
opinion  that  if  the  Huguenots  prevailed,  they  would  be  as 
intolerant  as  the  Eomanists  had  been.  The  rising  tide  of 
sympathy  for  the  persecuted  Protestants  was  checked  by 
these  deeds  of  violence. 

The  progress  of  the  war  was  upon  the  whole  unfavour- 
able to  the  Huguenots,  and  in  the  beginning  of  1553  both 
parties  were  exhausted.  The  Constable  Montmorency  had 
been  captured  by  the  Huguenots,  and  the  Prince  de  Conde 
by  the  Eomanists.  The  Duke  of  Guise  was  shot  from 
behind  by  a  Huguenot,  and  died  six  days  later  (Feb.  24th, 
1563).  The  Marshal  Saint-Andr<5  and  Antoine  de  Bourbon 
had  both  died  during  the  course  of  the  war.  Catherine  de' 
Medici  was  everywhere  recognised  as  the  head  of  the 
Eomanist  party.  She  no  longer  needed  the  Protestants  to 
counterbalance  the  Guises  and  the  Constable.  She  could 
now  pursue  her  own  policy. 

From  this  time  forward  she  was  decidedly  hostile  to 
the  Huguenots.  She  had  learned  the  resources  and 
popularity  of  the  Eomanists.  But  she  disliked  fighting, 
and  the  religious  war  was  ruining  France.  Her 
idea  was  that  it  would  be  necessary  to  tolerate  the 
Protestants,  but  impossible  to  grant  them  common 
rights  with  the  Eomanists.  She  applied  herself  to 
win  over  the  Prince  de  Condd,  who  was  tired  of  hi* 
captivity.  Negotiations  were  opened.  Catherine,  the 
Constable,  CondcS,  and  d'Andelot  met  at  Orleans;  and, 
after  discussion,  terms  were  agreed  upon  (March  7th),  and 
the  Edict  of  Amboise  incorporating  them  was  publinhed 
(March  18th,  1563). 

Oond(S  had  asked  for  the  restitution  of  the  edict  of 
Jan.  1 7th,  15GI,  oudthe  strict  enforcement  of  itn  tennH, 


THE   BEGINNING    OF   THE    WARS    OF    RELIGION       193 

This  was  refused.  The  terms  of  the  new  edict  were  as 
favourable  for  men  of  good  birth,  but  not  for  others. 
Cond6  had  to  undergo  the  reproaches  of  Coligny,  that  he 
had  secured  rights  for  himself  but  had  betrayed  his 
poorer  brethren  in  the  faith ;  and  that  he  had  destroyed 
by  his  signature  more  churches  than  the  united  forces  of 
Komanism  had  done  in  ten  years.  Calvin  spoke  of  him 
as  a  poor  Prince  who  had  betrayed  God  for  his  own 
vanity. 

The  truce,  for  it  was  no  more  than  a  truce,  concluded 
by  the  Edict  of  Amboise  lasted  nearly  five  years.  It 
was  broken  by  the  Huguenots,  who  were  suspicious  that 
Catherine  was  plotting  with  the  Duke  of  Alva  against  them. 
Alva  was  engaged  in  a  merciless  attempt  to  exterminate 
the  Protestants  of  the  Low  Countries,  and  Catherine  had 
been  at  pains  to  provide  provisions  for  his  troops.  The 
Protestant  leaders  came  to  the  desperate  conclusion  to 
imitate  the  Triumvirate  in  15(J1,  and  seize  upon  the 
King's  person.  They  failed,  and  their  attempt  began  the 
Second  War  of  Eeligion.  The  indecisive  battle  of  Saint- 
Denis  was  fought  on  Nov.  10th,  1567,  and  the  Constable 
Montmorency  fell  in  the  fight.  Both  parties  were  almost 
exhausted,  and  the  terms  of  peace  were  the  same  as  those 
in  the  Edict  of  Amboise. 

The  close  of  this  Second  War  of  Eeligion  saw  a 
determined  attempt,  mainly  directed  by  the  Jesuits,  to 
inspire  the  masses  of  France  with  enthusiasm  for  the 
Eoman  Catholic  Church.  Eloquent  preachers  traversed 
the  land,  who  insisted  on  the  antiquity  of  the  Eoman  and 
the  novelty  of  the  Protestant  faith.  Brotherhoods  were 
formed,  and  enrolled  men  of  all  sorts  and  conditions  of 
life  sworn  to  bear  arms  against  every  kind  of  heresy.  Out- 
rages and  assassinations  of  Protestants  were  common;  and 
the  Government  appeared  indifferent  It  was,  however,  the 
events  in  the  Low  Countries  which  again  alarmed  the 
Protestants.  The  Duke  of  Alva,  who  had  begun  Ms  rule 
there  with  an  appearance  of  gentleness,  had  suddenly 
seized  and  executed  the  Counts  Kgmont  and  Horn.  He 
'3** 


194  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

had  appointed  a  commission  to  judge  the  leaders  and 
accomplices  in  the  earlier  rising — a  commission  which 
from  its  deeds  gained  for  itself  the  name  of  the  Tribunal 
of  Blood.  Huguenot  soldiers  hastened  to  enrol  themselves 
in  the  levies  which  the  Prince  of  Orange  was  raising  for 
the  deliverance  of  his  countrymen.  But  the  Huguenot 
leaders  had  other  thoughts.  Was  Catherine  meaning  to 
treat  them  as  Alva  had  treated  Egmont  and  Horn  ?  They 
found  that  they  were  watched.  The  suspicion  and 
suspense  became  intolerable  Coligny  and  Cond4  resolved 
to  take  refuge  in  La  Eochelle.  As  they  passed  through 
the  country  they  were  joined  by  numbers  of  Huguenots, 
and  soon  became  a  small  army.  Their  followers  were 
eager  to  avenge  the  murders  committed  on  those  of  their 
faith,  and  pillage  and  worse  marked  the  track  of  the 
army,  Cond4  and  the  Admiral  punished  some  of  their 
marauding  followers  by  death ;  and  this,  says  the  chronicler, 
"  made  the  violence  of  the  soldier  more  secret  if  not  more 
rare." 

D'Andelot  had  collected  his  Normans  and  Bretons. 
Jeanne  d'Albret  had  roused  her  Gascons  and  the  Pro- 
veiwjals,  and  appeared  with  her  son,  Henry  of  Navarre,  a 
boy  of  fifteen,  at  the  head  of  her  troops.  She  published 
a  manifesto  to  justify  her  in  taking  up  arms.  In  the 
camp  at  La  Eochelle  she  was  the  soul  of  the  party,  fired 
their  passions,  and  sustained  their  courage.1 

In  the  war  which  followed,  the  Huguenots  were 
unfortunate.  At  the  battle  of  Jarnac,  Condd's  cavalry 
was  broken  by  a  charge  on  their  flank  made  by  the 
German  mercenaries  under  Tavannes.  He  fought  till  ho 
was  surrounded  and  dismounted.  After  he  had  surrendered 
he  was  brutally  shot  in  cold  blood.  The  HuguenotB  8<><m 
rallied  at  Cognac,  where  the  Queen  of  Navarro  joined 

1  Lettre*  d'Antoine  fa  JBourton  et  de  Jetwne  &Allwt  (Paris,  1877),  pp. 
305  ff.  (Letter  to  Catherine  de*  Medici)  j  pp.  322 /*  (lettarH  to  ProtofitantH 
outside  La  Roehclle),  In  her  letter  to  Catherine  Joanne  dornandH  for  the 
Protestants  liberty  of  worship  and  all  the  rights  and  privilege!*  of 
ordinary  citizens :  if  these  aro  not  granted  there  muftt  be  war* 


THE    BEGINNING   OF   THE   WARS    OF    RELIGION       195 

them.  She  presented  her  son  and  her  nephew,  young 
Henry  of  Cond^,  to  the  troops,  and  was  received  with 
acclamations.  Young  Henry  of  Navarre  was  proclaimed 
head  of  the  party,  and  his  cousin,  Henry  of  Cond£,  a 
boy  of  the  same  age,  was  associated  with  him.  The  war 
went  on.  The  Battle  of  Moncontour  ended  in  the  most 
disastrous  defeat  the  Huguenots  had  ever  sustained. 
Catherine  de'  Medici  thought  that  she  had  them  at  her 
mercy,  and  proposed  terms  of  submission  which  would 
have  left  them  liberty  of  conscience  but  denied  the  right 
to  worship.  The  heroic  Queen  of  Navarre  declared  that 
the  names  of  Jeanne  and  Henry  would  never  appear  on  a 
treaty  containing  these  conditions ;  and  Coligny,  like  his 
contemporary,  William  the  Silent,  was  never  more 
dangerous  than  after  a  defeat.  The  Huguenots  announced 
themselves  ready  to  fight  to  the  last ;  and  Catherine,  to 
her  astonishment,  saw  them  stronger  than  ever.  An 
armistice  was  arranged,  and  the  Edict  of  Saint-Germain 
(Aug.  8th,  1570)  published  the  terms  of  peace.  It  was 
more  favourable  to  the  Huguenots  than  any  earlier  one. 
They  were  guaranteed  freedom  of  conscience  throughout 
the  whole  kingdom.  They  had  the  liberty  of  public 
worship  in  all  places  where  it  had  been  practised  before 
the  war,  in  the  suburbs  of  at  least  two  towns  in  every 
government,  and  in  the  residences  of  the  great  nobles. 
Four  strongly  fortified  towns — La  Itochelle,  Montauban, 
Cognac,  and  La  CharittS — were  to  be  held  by  them  as 
pledges  for  at  least  two  years.  The  King  withdrew 
himself  from  the  Spanish  alliance  and  the  international 
policy  of  the  suppression  of  the  Protestants.  William 
of  Orange  and  Ludovic  of  Nassau  were  declared  to  be  his 
friends,  m  spite  of  the  fact  that  they  were  the  rebel 
subjects  of  Philip  of,  Spain  and  had  assisted  the  Huguenots 
in  the  late  war. 

After  the  peace  of  Saint-Germain,  Coligny,  now  the 
only  great  leader  left  to  the  Huguenots,  lived  far  from 
the  Court  at  La  Eochelle,  acting  as  the  guardian  of  the 
two  young  Bourbon  Princes,  Henry  of  Navarre  and  Henry 


196  THE    REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

of  Conde.  He  occupied  himself  in  securing  for  the 
Reformed  the  advantages  they  had  won  in  the  recent 
treaty  of  peace. 

Catherine  de'  Medici  had  begun  to  think  of  strengthen- 
ing herself  at  home  and  abroad  by  matrimonial  alliances. 
She  wished  one  of  her  sons,  whether  the  Duke  of  Anjou 
or  the  Duke  of  Alengon  it  mattered  little  to  her,  to  marry 
Elizabeth  of  England,  and  her  daughter  Marguerite  to 
espouse  the  young  King  of  Navarre.  Both  designs 
meant  that  the  Huguenots  must  be  conciliated.  They 
were  in  no  hurry  to  respond  to  her  advances.  Both 
Coligny  and  Jeanne  d'Albret  kept  themselves  at  a  distance 
from  the  Court.  Suddenly  the  young  King,  Charles  ix., 
seemed  to  awaken  to  his  royal  position.  He  had  been 
hitherto  entirely  submissive  to  his  mother,  expending  his 
energies  now  in  hunting,  now  in  lock-making ;  but,  if  one 
can  judge  from  what  awakened  him,  cherishing  a  sullen 
grudge  against  Philip  of  Spain  and  his  pretensions  to  guide 
the  policy  of  Eoman  Catholic  Europe. 

Pope  Pius  v.  had  made  Cosmo  de'  Medici,  the  ruler  of 
Florence,  a  Grand  Duke,  and  Philip  of  Spain  and 
Maximilian  of  Austria  had  protested.  Cosmo  sent  an 
agent  to  win  the  German  Protestants  to  side  with  him 
against  Maximilian,  and  to  engage  the  Dutch  Protestants 
to  make  trouble  in  the  Netherlands.  Charles  saw  the 
opportunity  of  gratifying  his  grudge,  and  entered  eagerly 
into  the  scheme.  His  wishes  did  not  for  the  time  interfere 
with  his  mother's  plans*  If  her  marriage  ideas  were  to 
succeed,  she  must  break  with  Spain.  Coligny  saw  the 
advantages  which  might  come  to  his  fellow-believers  in 
the  Netherlands — help  in  money  from  Italy  and  with 
troops  from  Trance.  He  resolved  to  make  his  peace  with 
Catherine,  respond  to  her  advances,  and  betake  Mmsolf  to 
Court.  He  was  graciously  received,  for  Catherine  wished 
to  make  use  of  him ;  was  made  a  member  of  the  Council, 
received  a  gift  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  livros, 
and,  although  a  heretic,  was  put  into  possession  of  an 
Abbey  whose  revenues  amounted  to  twenty  thousand  livres 


THE   BEGINNING    OF    THE   WARS    OF    RELIGION       197 

year.  The  Protestant  chiefs  were  respectfully  listened 
to  when  they  stated  grievances,  and  these  were  promptly 
put  right,  even  at  the  risk  of  exasperating  the  Romanists. 
The  somewhat  unwilling  consent  of  Jeanne  d'Albret  was 
won  to  the  marriage  of  her  son  with  Marguerite,  and  she 
herself  came  to  Paris  to  settle  the  terms  of  contract. 
There  she  was  seized  with  pleurisy,  and  died — an  irreparable 
loss  to  the  Protestant  cause.  Catherine's  home  policy  had 
been  successful. 

But  Elizabeth  of  England  was  not  to  be  enticed  either 
into  a  French  marriage  or  a  stable  French  alliance,  and 
Catherine  de'  Medici  saw  that  her  son's  scheme  might  lead 
to  France  being  left  to  confront  Spain  alone ;  and  the  Spain 
of  the  sixteenth  century  played  the  part  of  Eussia  in  the 
end  of  the  nineteenth — fascinating  the  statesmen  of  the  clay 
with  its  gloomy,  mysterious,  incalculable  power.  She  felt 
that  she  must  detach  Charles  at  whatever  cost  from  his 
scheme  of  flouting  Philip  by  giving  assistance  to  the 
Protestants  of  the  Low  Countries.  Coligny  was  in  her 
way — recognised  to  be  the  greatest  statesman  in  France, 
enthusiastically  bent  on  sending  French  help  to  his 
struggling  co-religionists,  and  encouraging  Charles  IX. 
Coligny  must  be  removed.  Tho  Guises  were  at  deadly 
feud  with  him,  and  would  be  useful  in  putting  him  out  of 
the  way.  The  Ambassador  of  Florence  reported  signifi- 
cantly conferences  between  Catherine  and  the  Duchess  de 
Nemours,  the  mother  of  the  Guises  (July  23rd,  1572). 
The  Queen  had  secret  interviews  with  Maureval,  a 
professional  bravo,  who  drew  a  pension  as  "tueur 
du  Roy." 

Nothing  could  be  done  until  Henry,  now,  King  of 
Navarre  by  his  mother's  death,  was  safely  married  to 
Marguerite.  The  wedding  took  place  on  August  18th, 
1572.  On  Friday  (Aug.  22nd),  between,  ten  and  eleven 
o'clock,  Coligny  left  tho  Louvre  to  return  to  his  lodging. 
The  assassin  was  stationed  in  a  house  belonging  to  a 
retainer  of  the  Guises,  at  a  grated  window  concealed  by  a 
curtain.  The  Admiral  VWH  walking  slowly,  reading  a  letter. 


198         .         THE   REFORMATION   EST   FRANCE 

\ 

Suddenly  a  shot  carried  away  the  index  finger  of  his  right, 
hand  and  wounded  his  left  arm.  He  calmly  pointed  to  the 
window  from  whence  the  shot  had  come ;  and  some  of  his 
suite  rushed  to  the  house,  but  found  nothing  but  a  smoking 
arquebus.  The  news  reached  the  King  when  he  was  play- 
ing tennis.  He  became  pallid,  threw  down  his  racquet, 
and  went  to  his  rooms. 

Catherine  closeted  herself  with  the  Duke  of  Anjou  to  > 
discuss  a  situation  which  was  fraught  with  terror.1 

§  14.   The  Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew. 

Paris  was  full  of  Huguenot  gentlemen,  drawn  from  all 
parts  of  the  country  for  the  wedding  of  their  young  chief 
with  the  Princess  Marguerite.  They  rushed  to  the  house 
in  which  Coligny  lay.  The  young  King  of  Navarre  and 
his  cousin,  Henry  de  Cond<§,  went  to  the  King  to  demand 
justice,  which  Charles  promised  would  be  promptly  rendered. 
Coligny  asked  to  see  the  King,  who  proposed  to  go  at  once. 
Catherine  feared  to  leave  the  two  alone,  and  accompanied 
him,  attended  by  a  number  of  her  most  trusty  adherents. 
Even  the  Duke  of  Guise  was  there.  The  King  by 
Coligny's  bedside  swore  again  with  a  great  oath  that  ho 
would  avenge  the  outrage  in  a  way  that  it  would  never 
be  forgotten.  A  commission  was  appointed  to  inquire  into 
the  affair,  and  they  promptly  discovered  that  retainers 
of  the  Guises  were  implicated.  If  the  investigations  were 
pursued  in  the  King's  temper,  Guise  would  probably  seek 
to  save  himself  by  revealing  Catherine's  share  in  the 
attempted  assassination.  She  became  more  and  more  a 
prey  to  terror.  The  Huguenots  grow  more  and  ixioro 
violent.  At  last  Catherine,  whether  on  her  own  initiative 
or  prompted  by  others  will  never  be  known,  believed  that 
she  could  only  save  herself  by  a  prompt  and  thorough 

1  For  the  attempted  assassination  of  Coliguy,  of.  "Whiteheatl,  Gasparddo 
CoUgwy*  -Admiral  of  France  (London,  1005),  pp.  268.^  ;  JtiitttMncfal'Matofoe 
du  ProtestwrUisme  ffiansais,  xxxvi,  105  ;  Bull*  in  <U  la  8<&UU  de  VUsMre  d* 
Paris,  eto.  xiv.  38. 


THE   MASSACRE   OF   ST.    BARTHOLOMEW  199 

massacre  of  the  Huguenots,  gathered  in  unusual  numbers 
in  Paris.1 

She  summoned  a  council  (Aug.  23rd),  at  which  were 
present,  so  far  as  is  known,  the  Duke  of  Anjou,  her 
favourite  son,  afterwards  Henry  in.,  Marshal  Tavannes, 
Nevers,  Nemours  (the  stepfather  of  the  Guises),  Birago 
(Chancellor),  the  Count  de  Betz,  and  the  Chevalier 
d'Angoul&ne — four  of  them  Italians.  They  were  un- 
animous in  advising  an  instant  massacre.  Tavannes  and 
Nevers,  it  is  said,  pled  for  and  obtained  the  lives  of  the 
two  young  Bourbons,  the  King  of  Navarre  and  the  Prince 
de  Cond&  The  Count  de  Eetz,  who  was  a  favourite  with 
Charles,  was  engaged  to  win  the  King's  consent  by  appeal- 
ing to  his  fears,  and  by  telling  him  that  his  mother  and 
brother  were  as  deeply  implicated  as  Guise. 

Night  had  come  down  before  the  final  resolution  was 
taken;  but  the  fanatical  and  bloodthirsty  mob  of  Paris 
might  be  depended  upon.  At  the  last  moment,  Tavannes 
(the  son)  tells  us  in  his  Memoirs,  Catherine  wished  to  draw 
back,  but  the  others  kept  her  firm.  The  Duke  of  Guise 
undertook  to  slay  Coligny.  The  Admiral  was  run  through 
with  a  pike,  and  the  body  tossed  out  of  the  window  into 
the  courtyard  where  Guise  was  waiting.  At  the  Louvre 
the  young  Bourbon  Princes  were  arrested,  taken  to  the 
King,  and  given  their  choice  between  death  and  the  Mass. 
The  other  Huguenot  gentlemen  who  were  in  the  Louvre 
were  slain.  In  the  morning  the  staircases,  halls,  and  anti- 
chambers  of  the  Palace  were  deeply  stained  with  blood. 
When  the  murders  had  been  done  in  the  Louvre,  the  troops 
divided  into  parties  and  went  to  seek  other  victims. 
Almost  all  the  Huguenot  gentlemen  on  the  north  side  of 

1  For  the  Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  of.  Bommrdot,  Eegistres  des 
DtlMratiw*  dwBweau  de  fa  Ville  de  Paris  (1568-1678),  vii  (Paris,  1893) ; 
Mmoires  de  Madame  du  Plessis-Momay,  publ.  by  the  Sotitti  de  I'histoire  de 
la  France  (1868) ;  M4movre$  et  Corretyondcmce  de  Du  Plews-Mornay  (1824), 
ii.  5  Bordier,  8aint  Barthtilewy  et  la  critique  moderne ;  Whitehead,  Cfa$« 
pard  de  Qoligny,  Admiral  qf  France  (London,  1905),  pp,  268 jf.  ;  Froudo, 
History  of  England  (London,  1887),  ix.-x.  j  Mariejol,  HfoMn  de  France,  etc., 

vi.  i  my. 


200  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

the  river  were  slain,  and  all  in  the  Quartier  Latin.  But 
some  who  lodged  on  the  south  side  (among  them 
Montgomery,  and  Jean  de  Ferri^res,  the  Vidame  de 
Ohartres)  escaped. 

Orders  were  sent  to  complete  the  massacre  in  the 
provinces.  At  Orleans  the  slaughter  lasted  five  days,  and 
Protestants  were  slain  in  numbers  at  Meaux,  Troyes,  Kouen, 
Lyons,  Toulouse,  Bordeaux,  and  in  many  other  places.  The 
total  number  of  victims  has  been  variously  estimated. 
Sully,  the  Prime  Minister  of  Henry  iv.,  who  had  good  means 
of  knowing,  says  that  seventy  thousand  perished.  Several 
thousands  were  slain  in  Paris  alone. 

The  news  was  variously  received  by  Eoman  Catholic 
Europe.  The  German  Eoinanists,  including  the  Emperor, 
were  not  slow  to  express  their  disapprobation.  But  Borne 
was  illuminated  in  honour  of  the  event,  a  medal  was  struck 
to  commemorate  the  Hugonotorum  Strages,1  and  Cardinal 
Orsini  was  sent  to  convey  to  the  King  and  Queen  Mother 
the  congratulations  of  the  Pope  and  the  College  of 
Cardinals.  Philip  of  Spain  was  delighted,  and  is  said  to 
have  laughed  outright  for  the  first  and  last  time  in  his  life. 
He  congratulated  the  son  on  having  such  a  mother,  and 
the  mother  on  having  such  a  son. 

Catherine  herself  believed  that  the  massacre  had  ended 
all  her  troubles.  The  Huguenots  had  been  annihilated,  she 
thought ;  and  it  is  reported  'that  when  she  saw  Henry  of 
Navarre  bowing  to  the  altar  she  burst  out  into  a  shrill  laugh. 

§  15.   The  Huguenot  resistance  after  the  Massacre. 

Catherine's  difficulties  were  not  ended.  It  was  not 
so  easy  to  exterminate  tho  Huguenots.  Most  of  the 

*  The  existence  of  thi«  modal  has  been  unblushinpjly  denied  by  «omc 
Eoman  Catholic  controversialists.  It  is  described  and  figured  in  tho  Jesuit 
Bouaui's  Numisniata  Pontiflcwn  (Rome,  1689),  i.  836.  Two  commwnorativo 
medals  wore  struck  in  Franco,  and  on  the  rovorwo  of  ono  of  thorn  OharloH  IX. 
is  represented  a«  HorculoM  with  a  <slnb  in  tho  one  hand  and  a  torch  iu  tho 
other  slaying  tba  seven-head od  Hydra.  They  arc  figured  in  tho  ftttlfatin  de 
Id  8oci4t4  de  CMtftiitrn  dn  FrtttfttfaMttifffltM  Frfwgafa  for  1856,  pp.  180,  140. 


HUGUENOT   RESISTANCE   AFTER   THE   MASSACRE      201 

leaders  had  perished,  but  the  people  remained,  cowed  for  a 
time  undoubtedly,  but  soon  to  regain  their  courage.  The 
Protestants  held  the  strongholds  of  La  Eochelle  and 
Sancerre,  the  one  on  the  coast  and  the  other  in  central 
France.  The  artisans  and  the  small  shopkeepers  insisted 
that  there  should  be  no  surrender.  The  sailors  of  La 
Eochelle  fraternised  with  the  Sea  Beggars  of  Brill,  and 
waged  an  implacable  sea-war  against  the  ships  of  Spain. 
Nimes  and  Montauban  closed  their  gates  against  the 
soldiers  of  the  King.  Milhaud,  Aubenas,  Privas,  Mirabel, 
Anduze,  Sommi&res,  and  other  towns  of  the  Viverais  and 
of  the  Cevennes  became  cities  of  refuge.  All  over  France, 
the  Huguenots,  although  they  had  lost  their  leaders,  kept 
together,  armed  themselves,  communicated  with  each  other, 
maintained  their  religious  services  —  though  compelled 
generally  to  meet  at  night. 

The  attempt  to  capture  these  Protestant  strongholds 
made  the  Fourth  Eeligious  War.  La  Eochelle  was  invested, 
beat  back  many  assaults,  was  blockaded  and  endured  famine, 
and  in  the  end  compelled  its  enemies  to  retire  from  its 
walls.  Sancerre  was  less  fortunate.  After  the  failure  of 
an  attempt  to  take  it  by  assault,  La  Chfttre,  the  general 
of  the  besieging  army,  blockaded  the  town  in  the  closest 
fashion.  The  .  citizens  endured  all  the  utmost  horrors  of 
famine.  Five  hundred  adults  and  all  the  children  under 
twelve  years  of  age  died  of  hunger.  "  Why  weep,"  said  a 
boy  of  ten,  "  to  see  me  die  of  hunger  ?  I  do  not  ask  bread, 
mother:  I  know  that  you  have  none.  Since  God  wills 
that  I  die,  thus  we  must  accept  it  cheerfully.  Was  not 
that  good  man  Lazarus  hungry  ?  Have  I  not  so  read  in 
the  Bible  ? "  The  survivors  surrendered ;  their  lives  were 
spared ;  and  on  payment  of  a  ransom  of  forty  thousand 
livres  the  town  was  not  pillaged. 

The  war  ended  with  the  peace  of  Eochelle  (July  1573), 
when  liberty  of  conscience  was  accorded  to  all,  but  the  right 
of  public  worship  was  permitted  only  to  Eochelle,  Nimes, 
Montauban,  and  in  the  houses  of  some  of  the  principal 
Protestant  nobles.  These  terms  were  hard  iij.  comparison 


202  THE   REFORMATION   IN  FRANCE 

with  the  rights  which  had  been  won  before  the  Massacre 
of  Saint  Bartholomew ;  but  the  Huguenots  had  reason  for 
rejoicing.  Their  cause  was  still  alive.  Neither  war,  nor 
massacre,  nor  frauds  innumerable  had  made  any  impression 
on  the  great  mass  of  the  French  Protestants. 

The  peace  declared  by  the  treaty  of  La  Eochelle  did 
not  last  long,  and  indeed  was  never  universal.  The  Pro- 
testants of  the  South  used  it  to  prepare  for  a  renewal  of 
conflict.  They  remained  under  arms,  perfecting  their 
military  organisation.  -They  divided  the  districts  which 
they  controlled  into  regular  governments,  presided  over  by 
councils  whose  members  were  elected  and  were  the  military 
leaders  of  a  Protestant  nation  for  the  time  being  separate 
from  the  kingdom  of  France.  They  imposed  taxes  on 
Eomanists  and  Protestants,  and  confiscated  the  ecclesiastical 
revenues.  They  were  able  to  stock  their  strongholds  with 
provisions  and  munitions  of  war,  and  maintain  a  force  of 
twenty  thousand  men  ready  for  offensive  action. 

Their  councils  at  Mmes  and  Montauban  formulated  the 
conditions  under  which  they  would  submit  to  the  French 
Government,  Nimes  sent  a  deputation  to  the  King  fur- 
nished with  a  series  of  written  articles,  in  which  they 
demanded  the  free  exercise  of  their  religion  in  every  part 
of  France,  the  maintenance  at  royal  expense  of  Huguenot 
garrisons  in  all  the  strongholds  held  by  them,  and  the 
cession  of  two  strong  posts  to  be  cities  of  refuge  in  each  of 
the  provinces  of  France.  The  demands  of  the  council  of 
Montauban  went  further.  They  added  that  the  King 
must  condemn  the  Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  execute 
justice  on  those  who  had  perpetrated  it,  reverse  the  sen- 
tences passed  on  all  the  victims,  approve  of  the  Huguenot 
resistance,  and  declare  that  he  praised  la  Mngutt&re  et 
admirable  lonU  do  Dieu  wjho  had  still  preserved  hi**  Pro- 
testant 'Subjects.  They  required  also  that  the  rights  of  the 
Protestant  minority  in  France  should  be  guaranteed  by 
the  Protestant  States  of  Europe — by  the  German  Protest- 
ant Princes,  by  Switzerland,  England,  and  Scotland,  They 
dated  their  document  significantly  August  24th — the 


HUGUENOT   RESISTANCE   AFTER  THE   MASSACRE      203 

anniversary  of    the    Massacre  of    St.  Bartholomew.     The 
deputies  refused  to  discuss  these  terms ;  they  simply  pre-  • 
sented  them.     The  King  might    accept  them;   he  might 
refuse  them.     They  were  not  to  be  modified. 

Catherine  was  both  furious  and  confounded  at  the 
audacity  of  these  "  rascals "  (ces  misdrdbles),  as  she  called 
them.  She  declared  that  Cond^,  if  he  had  been  at  the 
head  of  twenty  thousand  cavalry  and  fifty  thousand 
infantry,  would  never  have  asked  for  the  half  of  what  these 
articles  demanded.  The  Queen  Mother  found  herself  face 
to  face  with  men  on  whom  she  might  practise  all  her  arts 
in  vain,  very  different  from  the  debonnaire  Huguenot  princes 
whom  she  had  been  able  to  cajole  with  feminine  graces 
and  enervate  with  her  "  Flying  Squadron."  These  farmers, 
citizens,  artisans  knew  her  and  her  Court,  and  called  things 
by  rude  names.  She  herself  was  a  "  murderess/'  and  her 
'*  Flying  Squadron  "  were  "  fallen  women/'  She  had  cleared 
away  the  Huguenot  aristocracy  to  find  herself  in  presence 
of  the  Protestant  democracy. 

The  worst  of  it  was  that  she  dared  not  allow  the 
King  to  give  them  a  decided  answer.  A  new  force  had 
been  rising  in  Finance  since  Saint  Bartholomew's  Day — the 
Politicoes,1  as  they  were  called.  They  put  France  above 
religious  parties,  and  were  weary  of  the  perpetual  blood- 
shed ;  they  said  that  "  a  man  does  not  cease  to  be  a  citizen 
because  he  is  excommunicated  " ;  they  declared  that  "  with 
the  men  they  had  lost  in  the  religious  wars  they  could 
have  driven  Spain  out  of  the  Low  Countries."  They 
chafed  under  the  rule  of  "foreigners,"  of  the  Queen  Mother 
and  her  Italians,  of  the  Guises  and  their  Jesuits.  They 
were  prepared  to  unite  with  the  Huguenots  in  order  to 
give  France  peace.  They  only  required  leaders  who  could 
represent  the  two  sides 'of  the  coalition.  If  the  Duke  of 
AlenQon,  the  youngest  brother  of  the  King,  and  Henry  of 
Navarre  could  escape  from  the  Court  and  raise  their  stand- 
ards together,  they  were  prepared  to  join  them. 

Charles  IX.  died  on  Whitsunday  1574   of  a   disease 

*  La  Fcrrifcro,  Oatherim  dc  Mtdicis  et  Us  PoUliquM  (Paris,  1804). 


204  THE    REFORMATION   IN    FRANCE 

which  the  tainted  blood  of  the  Valois  and  the  Medicis 
induced.  The  memories  of  Saint  Bartholomew  also 
hastened  his  death.  Private  memoirs  of  courtiers  tell  us 
that  in  his  last  weeks  of  fever  he  had  frightful  dreams  by 
day  and  by  night.  He  saw  himself  surrounded  by  dead 
bodies ;  hideous  faces  covered  with  blood  thrust  themselves 
forward  towards  his.  The  crime  had  not  been  so  much 
his  as  his  mother's,  but  he  had  something  of  a  conscience, 
and  felt  its  burden.  "  Et  ma  M&re  "  was  his  last  word — 
an  appeal  to  his  mother,  whom  he  feared  more  than  his 
God. 

On  Charles'  death,  Henry,  Duke  of  Anjou,  succeeded  as 
Henry  in.1  He  was  in  Poland — king  of  that  distracted 
country.  He  abandoned  his  crown,  evaded  his  subjects, 
and  reached  France  in  September  1574.  His  advent  did 
not  change  matters  much.  Catherine  still  ruled  in  reality. 
The  war  went  on  with  varying  success  in  different  parts  of 
France.  But  the  Duke  of  Anjou  (the  Duke  of  Alenjon 
took  this  title  on  his  brother's  accession)  succeeded  in 
escaping  from  Court  (Sept.  15th,  1575),  and  the  King  of 
Navarre  also  managed  to  elude  his  guardians  (Feb.  3rd, 
1576).  Anjou  joined  the  Prince  of  Conde,  who  was  at  the 
head  of  a  mixed  force  of  Huguenots  and  Politiques.  Homy 
of  Navarre  went  into  Poitou  and  remained  there.  His 
first  act  was  to  attend  the  Protestant  worship,  and  im- 
mediately afterwards  he  renounced  his  forced  adhesion  to 
Eomanism.  He  did  not  join  any  of  the  parties  in  the 
field,  but  sent  on  his  own  demands  to  bo  forwarded  to  the 
King  along  with  those  of  the  confederates,  adding  to  thorn 
the  request  that  the  King  should  aid  him  to  recover  the 
Spanish  part  of  Navarre  which  had  been  forcibly  annoxod 
to  Spain  by  Ferdinand  of  Aragon. 

The  escape  of  the  two  Princes  led  in  the  end  to  the 
"Peace  of  Monsieur/'  the  terms  of  which  wore  published 
in  the  Edict  of  Beaulieu  (May  6th,  1576).  Tho  right  of 

1  Pieixo  de  1'Estoile,  Journal  de  Henri  III.  (Paris,  1875-84) ;  Mioliolot 
Ifistoire  de  JFrcwce,  vols.  xi.  and  xii ;  Jackson,  The  Last  qf  the  Valoix 
(London,  1888). 


THE   BEGINNINGS    OF   THE   LEAGUE  205 

public  worship  was  given  to  Protestants  in  all  towns  and 
places  within  the  kingdom  of  Trance,  Paris  only  and  towns 
where  the  Court  was  residing  being  excepted.  Protestants 
received  eight  strongholds,  partly  as  cities  of  refuge  and 
partly  as  guarantees.  Chambers  of  Justice  "  mi-parties  " 
(composed  of  both  Protestants  and  Eoman  Catholics)  were 
established  in  each  Parliament.  The  King  actually  apolo- 
gised for  the  Massacre  of  Saint  Bartholomew,  and  declared 
that  it  had  happened  to  his  great  regret ;  and  all  sentences 
pronounced  on  the  victims  were  reversed.  This  edict  was 
much  more  favourable  to  the  Protestants  than  any  that 
had  gone  before.  Almost  all  the  Huguenots'  demands  had 
been  granted. 

§  16.   The  leginnings  of  the  League. 

Neither  the  King,  who  felt  himself  humiliated,  nor  the 
Eomanists,  who  were  indignant,  were  inclined  to  submit 
long  to  the  terms  of  peace.  Some  of  the  Eomanist  leaders 
had  long  seen  that  the  Huguenot  enthusiasm  and  their 
organisation  were  enabling  an  actual  minority  to  combat, 
on  more  than  equal  terms,  a  Eomanist  majority.  Some  of 
the  provincial  leaders  had  been  able  to  inspire  their 
followers  with  zeal,  and  to  bind  them  together  in  an  organi- 
sation by  means  of  leagues.  These  provincial  leagues 
suggested  a  universal  organisation,  which  was  fostered  by 
Henry,  Duke  of  Guise,  and  by  Catherine  de'  Medici  This 
was  the  first  form  of  that  celebrated  League  which  gave 
twenty  years'  life  to  the  civil  war  in  France.  The  Duke 
of  Guise  published  a  declaration  in  which  he  appealed  to 
all  France  to  associate  together  in  defence  of  the  Holy 
Church,  Catholic  and  Eoman,  and  of  their  King  Henry  in., 
whose  authority  and  rights  were  being  taken  from  him  by 
rebels.  All  good  Catholics  were  required  to  join  the  asso- 
ciation, and  to  furnish  arms  for  the  accomplishment  of  its 
designs.  Those  who  refused  were  to  be  accounted  enemies. 
Neutrals  were  to  be  harassed  with  "  toutes  sortes  d'offences 
et  molestes";  open  foes  were  to  be  fought  strenuously. 


206  THE  REFOEMATION  IN  FRANCE 

Paris  was  easily  won  to  the  League,  and  agents  were  sent 
abroad  throughout  France  to  enrol  recruits.  Henry  in. 
himself  was  enrolled,  and  led  the  movement. 

The  King  had  summoned  the  States  General  to  meet 
at  Blois  and  hold  their  first  session  there  on  Dec.  6th,  1576. 
The  League  had  attended  to  the  elections,  and  the  Estates 
declared  unanimously  for  unity  of  religion.  Upon  this  the 
King  announced  that  the  Edict  of  Beaulieu  had  been  ex- 
tracted from  him  by  force,  and  that  he  did  not  intend  to 
keep  it.  Two  of  the  Estates,  the  Clergy  and  the  Nobles, 
were  prepared  to  compel  unity  at  any  cost.  The  Third 
Estate  was  divided.  A  minority  wished  the  unity  brought 
about  "  by  gentle  and  pacific  ways  " ;  the  majority  asked 
for  the  immediate  and  complete  suppression  of  the  public 
worship  of  the  Protestants,  and  for  the  banishment  of  4,11 
ministers,  elders,  and  deacons. 

These  decisions  of  the  States  General  were  taken  by 
the  Huguenots  as  a  declaration  of  war,  and  they  promptly 
began  to  arm  themselves.  It  was  the  first  war  of  the 
League,  and  the  sixth  of  Religion,  It  ended  with  the 
Peace  of  Hergerac  (Sept.  15th,  1578),  in  which  the  terms 
granted  to  the  Huguenots  were  rather  worse  than  those  of 
the  Edict  of  Beaulieu.  A  seventh  war  ensued,  terminated 
by  the  Peace  of  Fleix  (Nov.  1580). 

The  Duke  of  Anjou  died  (June  10th,  1584),  and  tho 
King  had  no  son.  The  heir  to  the  throne,  according  to 
the  Salic  Law,  which  excluded  females,  was  Homy  of 
Navarre,  a  Protestant.  On  the  death  of  Anjou,  Howry  TIL 
found  himself  face  to  face  with  this  fact*  He  know  and 
felt  that  he  was  the  guardian  of  the  dynastic  rights  of  tho 
Prench  throne,  and  that  his  duty  was  to  acknowledge  Henry 
of  Navarre  as  his  successor.  He  accordingly  «ont  one  of 
his  favourites,  ftperon,  to  prevail  upon  Homy  of  Navarre 
to  become  a  Roman  Catholic  and  come  to  Court  Heary 
refused  to  do  either* 


THE   LEAGUE   BECOMES    DISLOYAL  207 

§  17.   The  League  "becomes  disloyal* 

Meanwhile  the  Romanist  nobles  were  taking  their 
measures.  Some  of  them  met  at  Nancy  towards  the 
close  of  1584  to  reconstruct  the  League.  They  resolved 
to  exclude  the  Protestant  Bourbons  from  the  throne,  and 
proclaim  the  Cardinal  Bourbon  as  the  successor  of  Henry 
in.  They  hoped  to  obtain  a  Bull  from  the  Pope 
authorising  this  selection ;  and  they  received  the  support 
of  Philip  of  Spain  in  the  Treaty  of  Joinville  (Dec.  31st, 
1584). 

Paris  did  not  wait  for  the  sanction  or  recommendation 
of  the  nobles.  A  contemporary  anonymous  pamphlet, 
which  is  the  principal  source  of  our  information,  describes 
how  four  men,  three  of  them  ecclesiastics,  met  together 
to  found  the  League  of  Paris.  They  discussed  the  names 
of  suitable  members,  and,  having  selected  a  nucleus  of 
trustworthy  associates,  they  proceeded  to  elect  a  secret 
council  of  eight  or  nine  who  were  to  direct  and 
control  everything.  The  active  work  of  recruiting  was 
superintended  by  six  associates,  of  whom  one,  the  Sieur 
de  la  Eocheblond,  was  a  member  of  the  secret  council. 
Soon  all  the  most  fanatical  elements  of  the  population 
of  Paris  belonged  to  this  secret  society,  sworn  to 
obey  blindly  the  orders  of  the  mysterious  council  who 
from  a  concealed  background  directed  everything.  The 
corporations  of  the  various  trades  were  won  to  the 
League ;  the  butchers  of  Paris,  for  example,  furnished  a 
band  of  fif  teen  hundred  resolute  and  dangerous  men.  Trusty 

1  Dialogue  d'entrc  le  Mafieuatre  et  U  Manant;  conlenant  les  raisons  de 
fours  d&ats  et  questions  en  ces  prdsens  troubles  au  royaume  de  Frame  1594  > 
this  rare  pamphlet  is  printed  in  the  Satyre  Menipge'e,  de  fa  vertu  du 
Catholioon  d'Espagne,  Batisbon  (Amsterdam),  1709,  iii,  367  jf,  Mtmoires 
de  la  Ligue,  contenamt  les  &o4nemew  les  plus  wwiwyuabfaa  depuis  1&76 
jusgu'a  lapafa  accorded  enire  le  roi  de  France  et  le  roi  d'JSspagne  en  1&Q8 
(Amsterdam,  1768) ;  Pierre  do.  I'Kstoilo,  Journal  de  Henri  JIT.  (Paris, 
1875-84),  and  Journal  du  regne  de  Hewri  XV.  (The  Hague,  174:1) ;  Robiquet, 
Paris  et  la  Ligue  (Paris,  1886)  j  Victor  de  Ohalambert,  XKtMre  de  la 
Ligue  (Paris,  1864) ;  Maury,  "La  Commune  do  Paris  de  1588 "'(in  fiev.  dcs 
&eux  Monties*  Sept  1,  1871). 


208  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

emissaries  were  sent  to  the  large  towns  of  France,  and 
secret  societies  on  the  plan  of  the  one  in  Paris  were 
formed  and  affiliated  with  the  mother-society  in  Paris, 
all  bound  to  execute  the  orders  of  the  secret  couucil  of 
the  capital.  The  Sieur  de  la  Kocheblond,  whose  brain 
had  planned  the  whole  organisation,  was  the  medium  of 
communication  with  the  Eomanist  Princes ;  and  through 
him  Henry,  Duke  of  Guise,  le  Balafr6  as  he  was  called 
from  a  scar  on  his  face,  was  placed  in  command  of  this 
new  and  formidable  instrument,  to  be  wielded  as  he 
thought  best  for  the  extirpation  of  the  Protestantism  of 
Trance. 

The  King  had  published  an  edict  forbidding  all 
armed  assemblies,  and  this  furnished  the  Leaguers  with  a 
pretext  for  sending  forth  their  manifesto :  Declaration  ties 
causes  qui  ont  meu  Monseigneur  le  Cardinal  de  Bourbon 
et  les  Pairs,  Princes,  Seigneurs,  miles  et  communautez 
catholiques  de  ce  royaume  de  France  :  De  s'opposer  &  ceitx 
qui  par  tous  moyens  s'efforcent  de  subvertir  la  religion 
catholigue  et  FJEstat  (SO  Mars  1586)-  It  was  a  skilfully 
drafted  document,  setting  forth  the  danger  to  religion  in 
the  foreground,  but  touching  on  all  the  evils  and  jealousies 
which  had  arisen  from  the  favouritism  of  Henry  in. 
Guise  at  once  began  to  enrol  troops  and  commence 
open  hostilities ;  and  almost  all  the  great  towns  of  France 
and  most  of  the  provinces  in  the  North  and  in  the  Centre 
declared  for  the  League. 

Henry  ill.  was  greatly  alarmed.  With  the  help  of  hia 
mother  he  negotiated  a  treaty  with  the  Leaguers,  in  which 
he  promised  to  revoke  all  the  earlier  Edicts  of  Toleration, 
to  prohibit  the  exercise  of  Protestant  public  wotHhip 
throughout  the  kingdom,  to  banish  the  miniHters,  and  to 
give  all  Protestants  the  choice  between  becoming  liomau 
Catholics  or  leaving  the  realm  within  six  months  (Treaty 
of  Nemours,  July  7th,  1585).  These  terms  were  embodied 
in  an  edict  dated  July  18th,  1585.  The  Pope,  SixtuB  v,, 
thereupon  published  a  Bull,  which  declared  that  the  King 
of  Navarre  and  the  Prince  of  Cond<5,  being  heretics,  were 


THE   LEAGUE   BECOMES    DISLOYAL  209 

incapable  of  succeeding  to  the  throne  of  France,  deprived 
them  of  their  estates,  and  absolved  all  their  vassals  from 
allegiance.  The  King  of  Navarre  replied  to  "Monsieur 
Sixtus,  self-styled  Pope,  saving  His  Holiness,"  and  promised 
to  avenge  the  insult  done  to  himself  and  to  the  Parlements 
of  France. 

"The  war  of  the  three  Henrys,"  from  Henry  in., 
Henry  of  Guise,  and  Henry  of  Navarre,  began  in  the  later 
months  of  1585.  It  was  in  some  respects  a  triangular 
fight;  for  although  the  King  and  the  Guises  were  both 
ostensibly  combating  the  Huguenots,  the  Leaguers,  headed 
by  Guises,  and  the  Loyalists,  were  by  no  means  whole- 
hearted allies.  It  began  unfavourably  for  the  Protestants, 
but  as  it  progressed  the  skilful  generalship  of  the  King  of 
Navarre  became  more  and  more  apparent — at  Ooutras 
(Oct.  20th,  158 7)  he  almost  annihilated  the  royalist  army. 
The  King  made  several  ineffectual  attempts  to  win  the 
Protestant  leader  to  his  side.  Navarre  would  never 
consent  to  abjure  his  faith,  and  Henry  in.  made  that  an 
absolute  condition. 

While  the  war  was  going  on  in  the  west  and  centre 
of  France,  the  League  was  strengthening  its  organisation 
and  perfecting  its  plans.  It  had  become  more  and  more 
hostile  to  Henry  ill,  and  had  become  a  secret  revolutionary 
society.  It  drafted  a  complete  programme  for  the  im- 
mediate future.  The  cities  and  districts  of  France  which 
felt  themselves  specially  threatened  by  the  •  Huguenots 
were  to  beseech  the  King  to  raise  levies  for  their  protec- 
tion. If  he  refused  or  procrastinated,  they  were  to  raise 
the  troops  themselves,  to  be  commanded  by  officers  in. 
whom  the  League  had  confidence.  They  could  then 
compel  the  King  to  place  himself  at  the  head  of  this 
army  of  the  Leaguers,  or  show  himself  to  be  their  open 
enemy  by  refusing.  If  the  King  died  childless,  the 
partisans  of  the  League  were  to  gather  at  Orleans  and 
Paris,  and  were  there  to  elect  the  Cardinal  de  Bourbon 
as  the  King  of  France.  The  Pope  and  the  King  of  Spain 
were  to  1)0  at  onco  informed,  when  it  had  been  arranged 
14** 


210  THE   KEFORMATION  IN  FRANCE 

that  His  Holiness  would  send  his  benediction,  and  that  His 
Majesty  would  assist  them  with  troops  and  supplies.  A 
new  form  of  oath  was  imposed  on  all  the  associates  of  the 
League.  They  were  to  swear  allegiance  to  the  King 
so  long  as  he  should  show  himself  to  be  a  good  Catholic 
and  refrained  from  favouring  heretics.  These  instructions 
were  sent  down  from  the  mother-society  in  Paris  to  the 
provinces,  and  the  affiliated  societies  were  recommended  to 
keep  in  constant  communication  with  Paris.  Madame  de 
Montpensier,  sister  to  the  Guises,  at  the  same  time 
directed  the  work  of  a  band  of  preachers  whose  business 
it  was  to  inflame  the  minds  of  the  people  in  the  capital 
and  the  provinces  against  the  King  and  the  Huguenots. 
She  boasted  that  she  did  more  work  for  the  cause  than 
her  brothers  were  doing  by  the  sword. 

The  Guises,  with  this  force  behind  them,  tried  to 
force  the  King  to  make  new  concessions — to  publish  the 
decisions  of  the  Council  of  Trent  in  France  (a  thing  that 
had  not  been  done);  to  establish  the  Inquisition  in 
France ;  to  order  the  execution  of  all  Huguenot  prisoners 
who  would  not  promise  to  abjure  their  religion;  and  to 
remove  from  the  armies  all  officers  of  whom  the  League 
did  not  approve.  The  mother-society  in  Paris  prepared 
for  his  refusal  by  organising  a  secret  revolutionary  govern- 
ment for  the  city.  It  was  called  "The  Sixteen,"  being 
one  for  each  of  the  sixteen  sections  of  Paris.  This 
government  was  under  the  orders  of  Guise, •  who  com- 
municated with  them  through  an  agent  of  his  called 
Mayneville.  Plot  after  plot  was  made  to  got  posaoBttiou 
of  the  King's  person ;  and  but  for  the  activity  and  informa- 
tion of  Nicholas  Poulain,  an  officer  of  police  who  managed 
to  secure  private  information,  they  would  have  boon 
successful 


THE   DAY    OP   BARRICADES  211 

§  18.   The  Day  of  Barricades* 

The  King  redoubled  his  guards,  and  ordered  four 
thousand  Swiss  troops  which  he  had  stationed  at  Lagny 
into  the  suburbs  of  Paris.  The  Parisian  Leaguers  in 
alarm  sent  for  the  Duke  of  Guise;  and  Guise,  in  spite 
of  a  prohibitive  order  from  the  King,  entered  the  city. 
When  he  was  recognised  he  was  received  with  acclamations 
by  the  Parisian  crowd.  The  Queen-Mother  induced  the 
King  to  receive  him,  which  he  did  rather  ungraciously. 
Officers  and  men  devoted  to  the  League  crowded  into 
Paris.  The  King,  having  tried  in  vain  to  prevent  the 
entry  of  all  suspected  persons,  at  last  ordered  the  Swiss 
into  Paris  (May  12th,  1588).  The  citizens  flew  to  arms, 
and  converted  Paris  into  a  stronghold.  It  was  "  the  day 
of  Barricades/'  Chains  were  stretched  across  the  streets, 
and  behind  them  were  piled  beams,  benches,  carts,  great 
barrels  filled  with  stones  or  gravel.  Houses  were  loop- 
holed  and  windows  protected.  Behind  these  defences  men 
were  stationed  with  arquebuses;  and  the  women  and 
children  were  provided  with  heaps  of  stones.  Guise  had 
remained  in  his  house,  but  his  officers  were  to  be  seen 
moving  through  the  crowds  and  directing  the  defence. 
The  Swiss  troops  found  themselves  caught  in  a  trap,  and 
helpless.  Henry  ill.  was  compelled  to  ask  Guise  to  inter- 
fere in  order  to  save  his  soldiers.  The  King  had  to 
undergo  further  humiliation.  The  citizens  proposed  to 
attack  "the  Louvre  and  seize  the  King's  person.  Guise 
had  to  be  appealed  to  again.  He  had  an  interview  with 
the  King  on  the  13th,  at  which  Henry  Hi.  was  forced  to 
agree  to  all  the  demands  of  the  League,  and  to  leave  the 
conduct  of  the  war  against  the  Huguenots  in  the  hands 
of  the  leader  of  the  League.  After  the  interview  the 
King  was  able  to  escape  secretly  from  Paris. 

The  day  of  the  "  Barricades  "  had  proved  to  Henry  in. 
that  the  League  was  master  in  his  capital.  The  meeting 

1  The  scones  on  the  Day  of  the  Barricades  are  described  in  a  con- 
temporary paper  printed  in  Satyre  Mmfypfa  (ed.  of  1700),  iii.  39 ff. 


212  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

of  the  States  General  at  Blois  (Oct.  1588)  was  to  show  him 
that  the  country  had  also  turned  against  him. 

The  elections  had  been  looked  after  by  the  Guises,  and 
had  taken  place  while  the  impression  produced  by  the 
revolt  of  Paris  was  at  its  height.  The  League  commanded 
an  immense  majority  in  all  the  three  Estates.  The 
business  before  them  was  grave.  The  finances  of  the 
kingdom  were  in  disorder ;  favouritism  had  not  been  got 
rid  of ;  and  no  one  could  trust  the  King's  word.  Above 
all,  the  religious  question  was  embittering  every  mind. 
The  Estates  met  under  the  influence  of  a  religious 
exaltation  fanned  by  the  priests.  On  the  9th  of  Oct. 
representatives  of  the  three  Estates  went  to  Mass  together. 
During  the  communion  the  assistant  clergy  chanted  the 
well-known  hymns, — Pange  linguagloi*iosi,  0  mlutaris  Hostia, 
Ave  verum  Corpus  natum, — and  the  excitement  was  immense, 
The  members  of  the  Estates  had  never  been  so  united. 

Yet  the  King  had  a  moment  of  unwonted  courage. 
He  had  resolved  to  denounce  the  League  as  the  source 
of  the  disorders  in  the  kingdom.  Ho  declared  that  ho 
would  not  allow  a  League  to  exist  within  the  realm.  Ho 
only  succeeded  in  making  the  loaders  furious.  HIH  bravado 
soon  ceased.  The  Cardinal  de  Bourbon  com] wiled  him  to 
omit  from  the  published  version  of  his  speech  the  objection- 
able expressions.  The  Estates  forced  him  to  swoar  that  he 
would  not  permit  any  religion  within  the  kingdom  but  the 
Eoman.  This  done,  he  was  received  with  orio»  of  Vive  It 
Roi,  and  was  accompanied  to  his  house  with  acclamations 
But  he  was  compelled  to  nee  the  Duke  of  GUIHO  receive  tho 
office  of  Lieutenant-General,  which  placed  tho  army  under 
his  command ;  and  he  felt  that  he  would  never  be  "  ixiiifttor 
in  his  own  house  "  until  that  man  had  been  removed  from 
his  path. 

The  news  of  the  completeness  of  the  destruction  of  the 
Armada  had  boon  filtering  through  Franco ;  the  fear  of 
Spain  was  to  some  extent  removed,  and  England  might  help 
the  King  if  ho  persisted  in  a  policy  of  tolerating  bin  Pro- 
testant Htibjeotfl.  It  is  probable  that  lie  confided  his  project 


THE    DAY    OP    BARRICADES  213 

of  getting  rid  of  Guise  to  some  of  his  more  intimate  coun- 
cillors, and  that  they  assured  him  that  it  would  be  impos- 
sible to  remove  such  a  powerful  subject  by  legal  means. 
The  Duke  and  his  brother  the  Cardinal  of  Guise  were 
summoned  to  a  meeting  of  the  Council.  They  had  scarcely 
taken  their  seats  when  they  were  asked  to  see  the  King  in 
his  private  apartments.  There  Guise  was  assassinated, 
and  the  Cardinal  arrested,  and  slain  the  next  day.1  The 
Cardinal  de  Bourbon  and  the  young  Prince  de  Joinville 
(now  Duke  of  Guise  by  his  father's  death)  were  arrested 
and  imprisoned.  Orders  were  given  to  arrest  the  Duchess 
of  Nemours  (Guise's  mother),  the  Duke  and  Duchess  of 
Elboeuf,  the  Count  de  Brissac,  and  other  prominent 
Leaguers.  The  King's  guards  invaded  the  sittings  of  the 
States  General  to  carry  out  these  orders.  The  bodies  of 
the  two  Guises  were  burnt,  and  the  ashes  thrown  into  the 
Loire. 

The  news  of  the  assassination  raised  the  wildest  rage  in 
Paris.  The  League  proclaimed  itself  a  revolutionary  society. 
The  city  organised  itself  in  its  sections.  A  council  was 
appointed  for  each  section  to  strengthen  the  hands  of  the 
"  Sixteen."  Preachers  caused  their  audiences  to  swear  that 
they  would  spend  the  last  farthing  in  their  purses  and  the 
last  drop  of  blood  in  their  bodies  to  avenge  the  slaughtered 
princes.  The  Sorbonne  in  solemn  conclave  declared  that 
the  actions  of  Henry  in.  had  absolved  his  subjects  from  their 
allegiance.  The  "  Sixteen  "  drove  from  Parlement  all  sus- 
pected persons ;  and,  thus  purged,  the  Parkwent  of  Paris 
ranged  itself  on  the  side  of  the  revolution.  The  Duke  of 
Mayenne,  the  sole  surviving-  brother  of  Henry  of  Guise,  was 
summoned  to  Paris,  An  assembly  of  the  citizens  of  the 
capital  elected  a  Council  General  of  the  Umon  of  Catholics 
to  manage  the  affairs  of  the  State  and  to  confer  with  all 
the  Catholic  towns  and  provinces  of  France.  Deputies  sent 
by  these  towns  and  provinces  were  to  be  members  of  the 
Council.  The  Duke  of  Mayenne  was  appointed  by  the 

1  Brown,  "The  Assassination  of  the  Guises  as  described  by  the  Venetian 
Ambassador"  (JZto#.  //iV/.  jfevtoi,  x.  804). 


214  THE   REFORMATION   IN    FRANCE 

Council  the  Lieutenant-General  of  the  State  and  Grown  of 
France.  The  new  Government  had  its  seal — the  Seal  of  the 
Kingdom  of  France.  The  larger  number  of  the  great  towns 
of  France  adhered  to  this  provisional  and  revolutionary 
Government. 

In  the  midst  of  these  tumults  Catherine  de'  Medici 
died  (Jan.  5th,  1589). 

§  19.   The  King  takes  refuge  with  the  Huguenots. 

The  miserable  King  had  no  resource  left  but  to  throw 
himself  upon  the  protection  of  the  Protestants.  He  hesi- 
tated at  first,  fearing  threatened  papal  excommunication. 
Henry  of  Navarre's  bearing  during  these  months  of  anxiety 
had  been  admirable.  After  the  meeting  of  the  States 
General  at  Blois,  he  had  issued  a  stirring  appeal  to  the 
nation,  pleading  for  peace — the  one  thing  needed  for  the 
distracted  and  fevered  country.  He  now  assured  the  King 
of  his  loyalty,  and  promised  that  he  would  never  deny  to 
Eoman  Catholics  that  liberty  of  conscience  and  worship 
which  he  claimed.  A  treaty  was  arranged,  and  the  King  of 
Navarre  went  to  meet  Henry  in.  at  Tours.  He  arrived  just 
in  time.  Mayenne  at  the  head  of  an  avenging  army  of 
Leaguers  had  started  as  soon  as  the  provisional  government 
had  been  established  in  Paris.  He  had  taken  by  assault 
a  suburb  of  the  town,  and  was  about  to  attack  the  city  of 
Tours  itself,  when  he  found  the  Protestant  vanguard 
guarding  the  bridge  over  the  Loire,  and  had  to  retreat. 
He  was  slowly  forced  back  towards  Paris.  The  battle  of 
Senlis,  in  which  a  much  smaller  force  of  Hngnonota  routed 
the  Duke  cVAuiuale,  who  had  been  reinforced  by  the  Parisian 
militia,  opened  the  way  to  Paris.  The  King  of  Navarro 
pressed  on.  Town  after  town  was  taken,  and  the  forces  of 
the  two  kings,  increased  by  fourteen  thousand  Swiss  and 
Germans,  were  soon  able  to  setee  the  bridge  of  Sfe  Cloud 
and  invest  the  capital  on  the  south  and  west  (July  29tli, 
1689).  An  assault  was  fixed  for  Aug.  2nd* 

Since  the  murder  of  the  Guises,  Paris  had  been  a  caldron 


THE  KING  TAKES  REFUGE  WITH  THE  HUGUENOTS     215 

of  seething  excitement.  The  whole  population,  "  avec  dou- 
leur  et  gemissements  Men  grands"  had  assisted  at  the  funeral 
service  for  "  the  Martyrs,"  and  the  baptism  of  the 
posthumous  son  of  the  slaughtered  Duke  had  been  a  civic 
ceremony.  The  Bull  "  monitory "  of  Pope  Sixtus  v., 
posted  up  in  Eome  on  May  24th,  which  directed  Henry 
m.  on  pain  of  excommunication  to 'release  the  imprisoned 
prelates  within  ten  days,  and  to  appear  either  personally 
or  by  proxy  within  sixty  days  before  the  Curia  to  answer 
for  the  murder  of  a  Prince  of  the  Church,  had  fanned  the 
excitement.  Almost  every  day  the  Parisians  saw  pro- 
cessions of  students,  of  women,  of  children,  defiling  through 
their  streets.  They  marched  from  shrine  to  shrine,  with 
naked  feet,  clad  only  in  their  shirts,  defying  the  cold  of 
winter.  Parishioners  dragged  their  priests  out  of  bed  to 
head  nocturnal  processions.  The  hatred  of  Henry  m. 
became  almost  a  madness.  The  Cordeliers  decapitated  his 
portraits.  Parish  priests  made  images  of  the  King  in  wax, 
placed  them  on  their  altars,  and  practised  on  them  magical 
incantations,  in  the  hope  of  doing  deadly  harm  to  the 
living  man.  Bands  of  children  carried  lighted  candles, 
which  they  extinguished  to  cries  of,  "  God  extinguish  thus 
the  race  of  the  Talois" 

Among  the  most  excited  members  of  this  fevered 
throng  was  a  young  Jacobin  monk,  Jacques  Clement,  by 
birth  a  peasant,  of  scanty  intelligence,  and  rough,  violent 
manners.  His  excitement  grew  with  the  perils  of  the  city. 
He  consulted  a  theologian  in  whom  he  had  confidence,  ana 
got  from  him  a  guarded  answer  that  it  might  be  lawful  to 
slay  a  tyrant.  He  prayed,  fasted,  went  through  a  course 
of  maceration  of  the  body.  He  saw  visions.  He  believed 
that  he  heard  voices,  and  that  he  received  definite  orders 
to  give  his  life  in  order  to  sky  the  King.  He  confided 
his  purpose  to  friends,  who  approved  of  it  and  helped  his 
preparations.  He  was  able  to  leave  the  city,  to  pass  through 
the  beleaguering  lines,  and  to  get  private  audience  of  the 
King.  He  presented  a  letter,  and  while  Henry  was  reading 
it  stabbed  him  in  the  lower  part  of  the  body.  The  deed 


216       THE  REFORMATION  IN  FRANCE   , 

done,  the  monk  raised  himself  to  his  full  height,  extended 
his  arms  to  form  himself  into  a  crucifix,  and  received 
without  flinching  his  deathblow  from  La  Guesle  and  other 
attendants  (Aug.  1st,  1589).1 

The  King  lingered  until  the  following  morning,  and  then 
expired,  commending  Henry  of  Navarre  to  his  companions 
as  his  legitimate  successor. 

The  news  of  the  assassination  was  received  in  Paris 
with  wild  delight.  The  Duchess  de  Nemours,  the  mother 
of  the  Guises,  and  the  Duchess  de  Montpensier,  their  sister, 
went  everywhere  in  the  streets  describing  "  the  heroic  act  of 
Jacques  Clement."  The  former  mounted  the  steps  of  the 
High  Altar  in  the  church  of  the  Cordeliers  to  proclaim  the 
news  to  the  people.  The  citizens,  high  and  low,  brought 
out  their  tables  into  the  streets,  and  they  drank,  sang,  shouted 
and  danced  in  honour  of  the  news.  They  swore  that  they 
would  never  accept  a  Protestant  king 2  and  the  Cardinal 
de  Bourbon,  still  a  prisoner,  was  proclaimed  as  Charles  x. 

At  Tours,  on  the  other  hand,  the  fact  that  the  heir  to 
the  throne  was  a  Protestant,  threw  the  Eoman  Catholic 
nobles  into  a  state  of  perplexity.  They  had  no  sympathy 
with  the  League,  but  many  felt  that  they  could  not  servo 
a  Protestant  king.  They  pressed  round  the  new  King, 
beseeching  him  to  abjure  his  faith  at  once.  Henry  refused 
to  do  what  would  humiliate  himself,  and  could  not  bo 
accepted  as  an  act  of  sincerity.  On  the  other  hand,  the 

1  Histovre  de  France  depute  les  oriyines  jusgtfb  la  devolution  (Paris, 
1904),  VI.  i.  298 /.,  by  H.  Mari6jol. 

2  They  argued:    "Je    vous  demando,  voudriez-voufl  baillor  uuo  fillo 
pudique,  honneste,  belle,  vortouse  et  modoste,  a  un  hommo  dosbaucK  ot 
abaudonne*  h  tous  vices,  sous  ombre  qu'il  vous  diroit  qu'il  s'axuonderoit,  ot 
qu'il  n'y  rotournoit  estant  mari6,  quo  voua  Iny  osterioz  vostro  ftllo  ?    Jo  oroin 
que  tout  bon  pere  do  famillo  no  «o  mottroit  on  ce  hazard,  on  foroit  un  tour 
d'homme  sans  oervclle.    Or  o'ost  VKgliHe  Catlioliquc,  ApOHtoliqua  et  Bomaino 
qui  oat  une  puoello,  belle  et  hotincsto  on  cette  Franco  qni  n'a  jamais  <m  pour 
Boy  un  toSrdtique,  mais  tous  bons  Calholiquca  ot  aHBidojB  a  Jo»us-OhriHt  «on 
espoux.    Voudriox^oxiH  clone  baillor  oottfl  Kgli«o  quo  IOH  Frau^oia  out  taut 
fidfiloment  sorvio  ot  honowfio  BOUS  lour  Hois  Oatholiqucm,  aujourd'htiy  U  pro- 
stituer  entre  los  mains  d'uu  hfotftique,  r«lapH  ot  oxoommunio  1  °— **  Dialogue 
d'entre  lo  Malicustro  et  lo  Mauatit "  (Hntyw  Jl/rw^  <>»  iii  J*87) 


THE   DECLARATION   OP   HENRY   IV.  217 

nobles  of  Champagne,  Picardy,  and  the  Isle  of  France  sent 
assurances  of  allegiance ;  the  Duke  of  Montpensier,  the 
husband  of  the  Leaguer  Duchess,  promised  his  support; 
and  the  Swiss  mercenaries  declared  that  they  would  serve 
for  two  months  without  pay. 

§  20.   The  Declaration  of  Henry  jr.1 

Thus  encouraged,  Henry  published  his  famous  declara- 
tion (Aug.  4th,  1589).  He  promised  that  the  Eoman 
Catholic  would  remain  the  religion  of  the  realm,  and  that 
he  would  attempt  no  innovations.  He  declared  that  he 
was  willing  to  be  instructed  in  its  tenets,  and  that  within 
six  months,  if  it  were  possible,  he  would  summon  a  National 
Council.  The  Eoman  Catholics  would  be  retained  in  their 
governments  and  charges ;  the  Protestants  would  keep  the 
strongholds  which  were  at  present  in  their  hands ;  but  all 
fortified  places  when  reduced  would  be  entrusted  to  Eoman 
Catholics  and  none  other.  This  declaration  was  signed 
by  two  Princes  of  the  Blood,  the  Prince  of  Conti  and  the 
Duke  of  Montpensier ;  by  three  Dukes  and  Peers,  Longue- 
ville,  Luxembourg-»Piney,  and  Eohan-Montbazon ;  by  two 
Marshals  of  France,  Biron  and  d'Aumont ;  and  by  several 
great  officers.  Notwithstanding,  the  defections  were 
serious ;  all  the  Parlemcnts  save  that  of  Bordeaux  thundered 
against  the  heretic  King ;  all  the  great  towns  save  Tours, 
Bordeaux,  Ch&lons,  Langres,  Compi£gne,  and  Olermont 
declared  for  the  League.  The  greater  part  of  the  kingdom 

1  SOURCES  :  Eecueil  des  Lettres  Missives  de  Henri  IV.  (Collection  de  2)ocu~ 
ments  vnMits,  Paris,  1848-72),  8  vols. ;  Albert,  Relazioni  degli  Ambasciatori 
Veneti  (Florence,  1860,  etc.) ;  Charles,  Due  de  Mayenne,  Corretrpondancc, 

2  vols.  (Paris,  1860) ;  SirH.  Upton,  Correspondence  (Roxburgh  Club,  London, 
1847);  DuPlessis-Mornay,  M&noires,  4  vols.  (Amsterdam,  1624-152) ;  Madame 
Du  Plessis-Mornay,  Mtmoires  sur  la   Vie  de  Du  Plessis-Mornay  (Paris, 
1868-69,  8oc.  Hist,  de  France) ;  Mare'chal  de  Bassompierre,  Journal  dema 
vie  1579-1640,  4  vols.  (Paris,  1870-77,  Soc.  Hist*  de  Prance) ;  Satvre  Menipp/e, 

3  vols.  (Batisbou  (Amsterdam),  1709) ;  Be*noit,  Eistoire  de  Vedit  de  Nantes. 

LATER.  BOOKS  :  Baird,  The  Huguenots  and  Henry  of  Navarre  (London, 
1887) ;  Jackson,  The  Mrst  of  the  Bowlons,  2  vols.  (London,  1890) ;  Lavisse, 
Hitioire  de  Wrmee,  vi.  i.  ii.  (Paris,  1904-5), 


218        THE  REFORMATION  IN  FRANCE 

was  in  revolt.  The  royalist  troops  dwindled  away.  It 
was  hopeless  to  think  of  attacking  Paris,  and  Henry  iv. 
inarched  for  Normandy  with  scarcely  seven  thousand  men. 
He  wished  to  be  on  the  sea  coast  in  hope  of  succour  from 
England. 

The  Duke  of  Mayenne  followed  him  with  an  arm,/  of 
thirty  thousand  men.  He  had  promised  to  the  Parisians 
to  throw  the  "  Bearnese  "  into  the  sea,  or  to  bring  him  in 
chains  to  Paris.  But  it  was  not  so  easy  to  catch  the 
"  Bearnese."  In  the  series  of  marches,  countermarches,  and 
skirmishes  which  is  known  as  the  battle  of  Arques,  the 
advantage  was  on  the  side  of  the  King;  and  when 
Mayenne  attempted  to  take  Dieppe  by  assault,  he  was 
badly  defeated  (Sept.  24th,  1589).  Then  followed 
inarches  and  countermarches;  the  King  now  threatening 
Paris  and  then  retreating,  until  at  last  the  royalist  troops 
and  the  Leaguers  met  at  Ivry.  The  King  had  two 
thousand  cavalry  and  eight- thousand  infantry  to  meet  eight 
thousand  cavalry  and  twelve  thousand  infantry 
(including  seventeen  hundred  Spanish  troops  sent  by  the 
Duke  of  Parma)  under  the  command  of  Mayonno.  The 
battle  resulted  in  a  surprising  and  decisive  victory  for  the 
King.  Mayenne  and  his  cousin  d'Aumale  escaped  only  by 
the  swiftness  of  their  horses  (March  14th,  1590). 

It  is  needless  to  say  much  about  the  war  or  about  the 
schemes  of  parties.  Henry  invested  Paris,  and  had  almost} 
starved  it  into  surrender,  when  it  was  rovictuallod  by  an 
army  led  from  the  Low  Countries  by  the  Duke  of  Parrna. 
Henry  took  town  after  town,  and  gradually  isolated  the  capital. 
In  1590  (May  10th)  the  old  Cardinal  Bcmrbon  (Charles 
x.)  died,  and  the  Leaguers  lost  even  the  semblance  of  a 
legitimate  king.  The  more  fanatical  members  of  the  party, 
represented  by  the  "  Sixteen "  of  Paris,  would  have  been 
content  to  place  Prance  under  tho  dominion  of  Spain 
rather  than  soe  a  heretic  king.  The  Duke  of  Mayoimo 
had  long  chorinhed  dreams  that  tho  crown  might  come  to 
him.  But  the  great  mass  of  the  influential  people  of 
France  who  had  not  yet  pvofoHsod  allegiance  to  Henry  iv» 


HENRY   IV.    BECOMES    A    ROMAN   CATHOLIC      219 

(and  many  who  had)  had  an  almost  equal  dread  of  Spanish 
domination  and  of  a  heretic  ruler. 


§  21.  Henry  JF.  'becomes  a  Roman  Catholic. 

Henry  at  last  resolved  to  conform  to  the  Roman 
Catholic  religion  as  the  only  means  of  giving  peace  to  his 
distracted  kingdom.  He  informed  the  loyalist  Archbishop 
of  Bourges  of  his  intention  to  be  instructed  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  religion  with  a  view  to  conversion.  The  Archbishop 
was  able  to  announce  this  at  the  conference  of*  Suresnes, 
and  the  news  spread  instantly  over  France.  With  his 
usual  tact,  Henry  wrote  with  his  own  hand  to  several  of 
the  parish  priests  of  Paris  announcing  his  intention,  and 
invited  them  to  meet  him  at  Mantes  to  give  him  instruc- 
tion. At  least  one  of  them  had  been  a  furious  Leaguer, 
and  was  won  to  be  an  enthusiastic  loyalist. 

The  ceremony  of  the  reception  of  Henry  iv.  into  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  took  place  at  Saint  Denis,  about 
four  and  a  half  miles  to  the  north  of  Paris.  The  scene  had 
all  the  appearance  of  some  popular  festival.  The  ancient 
church  in  which  the  Kings  of  France  had  for  generations 
been  buried,  in  which  Jeanne  d'Arc  had  hung  up  her  arms, 
was  decked  with  splendid  tapestries,  and  the  streets  leading 
to  it  festooned  with  flowers.  Multitudes  of  citizens  had 
come  from  rebel  Paris  to  swell  the  throng  and  to  shout 
Vim  le  Hoi  !  as  Henry,  escorted  by  a  brilliant  procession  of 
nobles  and  guards,  passed  slowly  to  the  church.  The 
clergy,  headed  by  the  Archbishop  of  Bourges,  met  him  at 
the  door.  The  King  dismounted,  knelt,  swore  to  live  and 
die  in  the  catholic  apostolic  and  Roman  religion,  and 
renounced  all  the  heresies  which  it  condemned.  The 
Archbishop  gave  him  absolution,  took  him  by  the  hand  and. 
led  him  into  the  church.  There,  kneeling  before  the  High 
Altar,  the  King  repeated  his  oath,  confessed,  and  communi- 
cated. France  had  now  a  Roman  Catholic  as  well  as  a 
legitimate  King.  Even  if  it  be  admitted  that  Henry  iv. 
was  not  a  innn  of  any  depth  of  religions  failing,  the  act  of 


220  THE    REFORMATION   IN    FRANCE 

abjuration  must  have  been  a  humiliation  for  the  son  of 
Jeanne  d'Albret.  He  never  was  a  man  who  wore  his  heart 
on  his  sleeve,  and  his  well-known  saying,  that  "  Paris  was 
well  worth  a  Mass,"  had  as  much  bitterness  in  it  as  gaiety. 
He  had  paled  with  suppressed  passion  at  Tours  (1539) 
when  the  Eoman  Catholic  nobles  had  urged  him  to  become 
u  Eomanist.  Had  the  success  which  followed  his  arms 
up  to  the  battle  of  Ivry  continued  unbroken,  it  is  probable 
that  the  ceremony  at  Saint  Denis  would  never  have  taken 
place.  But  Parma's  invasion  of  France,  which  compelled 
the  King  to  raise  the  siege  of  Paris,  was  the  beginning  ot! 
difficulties  which  seemed  insurmountable.  The  dissensions 
of  parties  within  the  realm,  and  the  presence  of  foreigners 
on  the  soil  of  France  (Walloon,  Spanish,  Neapolitan,  and 
Savoyard),  were  bringing  France  to  the  verge  of  dissolution. 
Henry  believed  that  there  was  only  one  way  to  end  the 
strife,  and  he  sacrificed  his  convictions  to  his  patriotism. 

With  Henry's  change  of  religion  the  condition  of  things 
changed  as  if  by  magic.  The  League  seemed  to  dissolve. 
Tenders  of  allegiance  poured  in  from  all  sides,  from  nobles, 
provinces,  and  towns.  Eheims  was  still  in  possession  of 
the  Guises,  and  the  anointing  and  crowning  took  place  at 
Chartres  (Feb.  27th,  1594).  The  manifestations  of  loyalty 
increased. 

On  the  evening  of  the  day  on  which  Henry-  had 
been  received  into  the  Boman  Catholic  Church  at  Saint 
Denis,  he  had  recklessly  ridden  up  to  the  crest  of  tho 
height  of  Montmartre  and  looked  down  on  Paris,  which  was 
still  in  the  hands  of  the  League.  The  feelings  of  the 
Parisians  were  also  changing.  The  League  was  seamed 
with  dissensions;  Mayenne  had  quarrelled  with  tho 
"Sixteen,"  and  the  partisans  of  these  fanatics  of  tho 
League  had  street  brawls  with  the  citizens  of  more  moderate 
opinions.  Parlement  took  courage  and  denounced  tho 
presence  of  Spanish  soldiers  within  the  capital.  Tho 
loyalists  opened  the  way  for  the  royal  troops,  Homy  entered 
Paris  (March  22nd),  and  inarched  to  Notre  Dtuuo,  whore 
the  clergy  chanted  the  Te  Deum,  From  tho  cathedral  ho 


THE   EDICT    OF   NANTES  221 

rode  to  the  Louvre  through  streets  thronged  with  people, 
who  pressed  up  to  his  very  stirrups  to  see  their  King,  and 
made  the  tall  houses  re-echo  with  their  loyalist  shoutings. 
Such  a  royal  entry  had  not  been  seen  for  generations,  and 
took  everyone  by  surprise.  Next  day  the  foreign  troops 
left  the  city.  The  King  watched  their  departure  from  an 
open  window  in  the  Louvre,  and  as  their  chiefs  passed  he 
called  out  gaily,  "  My  compliments  to  your  Master.  You 
need  not  come  back." 

With  the  return  of  Paris  to  fealty,  almost  all  signs 
of  disaffection  departed;  and  the  King's  proclamation  of 
amnesty  for  all  past  rebellions  completed  the  conquest  of 
his  people.  France  was  again  united  after  thirty  years  of 
civil  war. 

§  22.   The  Edict  of  Nantes 

The  union  of  all  Frenchmen  to  accept  Henry  iv.  as 
their  King  had  not  changed  the  legal  position  of  the  Pro- 
testants. The  laws  against  them  were  still  in  force ;  they 
had  nothing  but  the  King's  word  promising  protection  to 
trust  to.  The  war  with  Spain  delayed  matters,  but  when 
peace  was  made  the  time  came  for  Henry  to  fulfil  his 
pledges  to  his  former  companions.  They  had  been  chafing 
under  the  delay.  At  a  General  Assembly  held  at  Mantes 
(October  1£ 93- January  1594),  the  members  had  renewed 
their  oath  to  live  and  to  die  true  to  their  confession  of 
faith,  and  year  by  year  a  General  Assembly  met  to  discuss 
their  political  disabilities  as  well  as  to  conduct  their 
ecclesiastical  business.  They  had  divided  France  into  nine 
divisions  under  provincial  synods,  and  had  the  appearance 
to  men  of  that  century  of  a  kingdom  within  a  kingdom. 
They  demanded  equal  civic  rights  with  their  Eomau 
Catholic  fellow-subjects,  and  guarantees  for  their  protection. 
At  length,  in  1597,  four  delegates  were  appointed  with 
full  powers  to  confer  with  the  King.  Out  of  these 
negotiations  came  the  Edict  of  Nantes,  the  Charter  of 
French  Protestantism. 


222  THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

This  celebrated  edict  was  drawn  up  in  ninety -five 
more  general  articles,  which  were  signed  on  April  13th, 
and  in  fifty-six  more  particular  articles  which  were  signed 
on  May  2nd  (1598).  Two  Brevets,  dated  13th  and  30th 
of  April,  were  added,  dealing  with  the  treatment  of  Pro- 
testant ministers,  and  with  the  strongholds  given  to  the 
Protestants.  The  Articles  were  verified  and  registered 
by  Parlements]  the  Brevets  were  guaranteed  simply  by 
the  King's  word. 

The  Edict  of  Nantes  codified  and  enlarged  the  rights 
given  to  the  Protestants  of  France  by  the  Edict  of  Poitiers 
(1577),  the  Convention  of  Nerac  (1578),  the  treaty  of 
Fleix  (1580),  the  Declaration  of  Saint-Cloud  (1589),  the 
Edict  of  Mantes  (1591),  the  Articles  of  Mantes  (1593), 
and  the  Edict  of  Saint-Germain  (1594). 

It  secured  complete  liberty  of  conscience  everywhere 
within  the  realm,  to  the  extent  that  no  one  was  to  be  per- 
secuted or  molested  in  any  way  because  of  his  religion,  nor 
be  compelled  to  do  anything  contrary  to  its  tenets ;  and 
this  carried  with  it  the  right  of  private  or  secret  worship. 
The  full  and  free  right  of  public  worship  was  granted  in 
all  places  in  which  it  existed  during  the  years  1596  and 
1597,  or  where  it  had  been  granted  by  the  Edict  of  Poitiers 
interpreted  by  the  Convention  of  Ndrac  and  tho  treaty  of 
Fleix  (some  two  hundred  towns) ;  and,  in  addition,  in  two 
places  within  every  lailliage  and  sdnfohaimfa  in  tho  realm. 
It  was  also  permitted  in  the  principal  custlen  of  ProtOHtnut 
seiffneurs  hauts  justiciers  (some  three  thousand),  whether  tho 
proprietor  was  in  residence  or  not,  and  in  their  other  castl&B, 
the  proprietor  being  in  residence ;  to  noblea  who  wore  not 
Iwwte  justiciers,  provided  the  audience  did  not  consist  of  more 
than  thirty  persons  over  and  above  relations  of  tho  family. 
Even  at  the  Court  the  high  officers  of  the  Crown,  the  groat 
nobles,  all  governors  and  lieutenants-general,  and  eaptainn 
of  the  guardn,  had  the  liberty  of  worship  in  their  apart- 
ments provided  tho  doors  were  kept  nhut  and  there  was 
no  loud  flinging  of  psalma,  noise,  or  opnn  scandal. 

ProtoBtaiilH  wore  grunted  full  civil  rights  awl  protec* 


THE  EDICT   OF  NANTES  223 

tion,  entry  into  all  universities,  schools,  and  hospitals,  and 
admission  to  all  public  offices.  The  Parlement  of  Paris 
admitted  six  Protestant  councillors.  And  Protestant 
ministers  were  granted  the  exemptions  from  military 
service  and  such  charges  as  the  Eomanist  clergy  enjoyed. 
Special  Chambers  (Chambres  d'fidif)  were  established  in  the 
Parlements  to  try  cases  in  which  Protestants  were  interested. 
In  the  Parlement  of  Paris  this  Chamber  consisted  of  six 
specially  chosen  Eoman  Catholics  and  one  Protestant ;  in 
other  Parlements,  the  Chambers  were  composed  of  equal 
numbers  of  Eomanists  and  Protestants  (mi-parties).  The 
Protestants  were  permitted  to  hold  their  ecclesiastical 
assemblies — consistories,  colloquies,  and  synods,  national 
and  provincial ;  they  were  even  allowed  to  meet  to  discuss 
political  questions,  provided  they  first  secured  the  permis- 
sion of  the  King.  . 

They  remained  in  complete  control  of  two  hundred 
towns,  including  La  Eochelle,  Montauban,  and  Montpellier, 
strongholds  of  exceptional  strength.  They  were  to  retain 
these  places  until  1607,  but  the  right  was  prolonged  for 
five  years  more.  The  State  paid  the  expenses  of  the 
troops  which  garrisoned  these  Protestant  fortified  places ; 
it  paid  the  governors,  who  were  always  Protestants. 
When  it  is  remembered  that  the  royal  army  in  time  of 
peace  did  not  exceed  ten  thousand  men,  and  that  the 
Huguenots  could  raise  twenty-five  thousand  troops,  it  will 
be  seen  that  Henry  IV.  did  his  utmost  to  provide  guarantees 
against  a  return  to  a  reign  of  intolerance. 

Protected  in  this  way,  the  Huguenot  Church  of  France 
speedily  took  a  foremost  place  among  the  Protestant 
Churches  of  Europe,  Theological  colleges  were  established 
at  Sedan,  Montauban,  and  Saumur.  Learning  and  piety 
flourished,  and  French,  theology  was  always  a  counterpoise 
to  the  narrow  Eeformed  Scholastic  of  Switzerland  and  of 
Holland. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE   EEPOBMATION  IN  THE  NETHEKLANDS.1 
§  1.   The  Political  Situation. 

IT  was  not  until  1581  that  the  United  Provinces  took  rank 
as  a  Protestant  nation,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the 
Netherlands  furnished  the  first  martyrs  of  the  Reformation 
in  the  persons  of  Henry  Voes  and  John  Esch,  Augustinian 
monks,  who  were  burnt  at  Antwerp  (July  31st,  1523). 

c  As  they  were  led  to  the  stake  they  cried  with  a 
loud  voice  that  they  were  Christians  ;  and  when  they  were 
fastened  to  it,  and  the  fire  was  kindled,  they  rehearsed  the 
twelve  articles  of  the  Creed,  and  after  that  the  hymn  Te 
Deum  laudamus,  which  each  of  them  sang  verse  by  verse 
alternately  until  the  flames  deprived  them  both  of  voice 
and  life."2 

aSouBOBS  :  Brandt,  The  History  of  the  Reformation  and  other  ecclesiastical 
transactions  in  and  about  the  Low-Countries  (English  translation  in  4  vola. 
fol.,  London,  1720  :  the  original  in  Dutch  was  published  in  1671) ;  Brioger, 
Meander  und  Luther  (Gotha,  1894) ;  KalkofF,  Die  Despatches  des  nuntius 
Meander  (Halle,  1897) ;  Poullet  Plot,  Correspondence  du  Cardinal  Granvclle, 
12  vols.  (Brussels,  1878-97) ;  Weiss,  Pa/piers  d'fitat  du  Cardinal  Oramelle, 
9  vols.  (Paris,  1841-52) ;  Gachard,  Correspondance  de  Philippe  IT.  sur  ley 
affaires  des  Pays  &as,  5  vols.  (Brussels,  1848-79) ;  Correspondance  de 
Marguerite  d'Autriche  avec  Philippe  //.,  l&SJ^BS  (Brussels,  1867-87)  ; 
Correspondance  de  Gtuillaume  le  Tatiturw,  Prince  d"  Orange,  6  vola.  (Bnuwelti, 
1847-57) ;  van  Prinsterer,  Archives  ou  eorrespondance  intidite  de  la  Maison 
d' Orange- Nassau,  in  two  series,  9  and  5  vols.  (ITtreclxt,  1841-01) ;  Konou 
de  France,  Historic  des  troubles  des  Pays-Has,  $  vols.  (Brussels,  1886-92) ; 
Mmoires  anonymest  sur  les  troubles  des  Pays-£a3t  1$$$-SQ  (in  tho  Collection 
des  Mtmoires  sur  Vhistovre  de  Belgium}. 

LATBB  BOOKS  :  Armstrong,  Charles  F,  (London,  1902) ;  Motley,  The  Mist 
of  the  Dutch  Republic  (London,  1865) ;  Putnam,  William  the  Silent  (Kow 
York,  1895)  j  Harrison,  William  the  Silent  (London,  1897) ;  Cambridge 
Modern  ffistory,  m.  vi.  vii.  (Cambridge,  1904). 

a  Brandt,  The  History  of  the  HtforvwM&n,  etc.  i.  49  ;  of*  Journal  d'un 
Bourgeois  de  Fart*,  p.  185.  * 

224 


THE   POLITICAL   SITUATION  225 

The  struggle  for  religious  liberty,  combined  latterly 
with  one  for  national  independence  from  Spain,  "lasted 
therefore  for  almost  sixty  years. 

When  the  lifelong  duel  between  Charles  the  Bold  of 
Burgundy  and  Louis  XL  of  Trance  ended  with  the  death 
of  the  former  on  the  battlefield  under  the  walls  of  Nancy 
(January  4th,  1477),  Louis  was  able  to  annex  to  France  a 
large  portion  of  the  heterogeneous  possessions  of  the  Dukes 
of  Burgundy,  and  Mary  of  Burgundy  carried  the  remainder 
as  her  marriage  portion  (May  1477)  to  Maximilian  of 
Austria,  the  future  Emperor.  \  Speaking  roughly,  and  not 
quite  accurately,  those  portions  of  the  Burgundian  lands 
which  had  been  fiefs  of  France  went  to  Louis,  while  Mary 
and  Maximilian  retained  those  which  were  fiefs  of  the 
Empire.  ;  The  son  of  Maximilian  and  Mary,  Philip  the 
Handsome,  married  Juana  (August  1496),  the  second 
daughter  and  ultimate  heiress  of  Isabella  and  Ferdinand 
of  Spain,  and  their  son  was  Charles  V.,  Emperor  of  Germany 
(b.  February  24th,  1500),  who  inherited  the  Netherlands 
from  his  father  and  Spain  from  his  mother,  and  thus 
linked  the  Netherlands  to  Spain.  Philip  died  in  1506, 
leaving  Charles,  a  boy  of  six  years  of  age,  thej  ruler  of  the 
Netherlands.  His  paternal  aunt,  Margaret,  the  daughter 
of  the  Emperor  Maxiiniljan,  governed  in  the  Netherlands 
during  his  minority,  and,  owing  to  Juana's  illness  (an 
illness  ending  in  madness),  mothered  her  brother's 
children.  .Margaret's  regency  ended  in  1515,  and  the 
earlier  history  of  the  [Reformation  in  the  Netherlands 
belongs  either  to  the  period  of  the  personal  rule  of  Charles 
or  to  that  of  the  Eegents  whom  he  appointed  to  act  for 
him. 

The  land,  a  delta  of  great  rivers  liable  to  overflow 
their  banks,  or  a  coast-line  on  which  the  sea  made  con- 
tinual encroachment,  produced  a  people  hardy,  strenuous, 
and  independent.  Their  struggles  with  nature  had  braced 
their  faculties.  Municipal  life  had  struck  its  roots  deeply 
into  the  soil  of  the  Netherlands,  and  its  cities  could  vie 
with  thoso  of  Italy  in  industry  and  intelligence.  The 


226      THE   REFORMATION   IN   THE  NETHERLANDS 

southern  provinces  were  the  home  of  the  Trouvferes.1  3  an 
van-Buysbroec,  the  most  heart-searching  of  speculative 
Mystics,  had  been  a  curate  of  St.  Gudule's  in  Brussels. 
His  pupil,  Gerard  G-root,  had  founded  the  lay-community 
of  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Lot  for  the  purpose  of 
spreading  Christian  education  among  the  laity ;  and  the 
schools  and  convents  of  the  Brethren  had  spread  through 
the  Netherlands  and  central  Germany.  Thomas  &  Kempis, 
the  author  of  the  Imitatio  Christi,  had  lived  most  of  his 
long  life  of  ninety  years  in  a  small  convent  at  Zwolle, 
within  the  territories  of  Utrecht.  Men  who  have  been 
called  "  Eeformers  before  the  Keformation,"  John  Pupper 
of  Goch  and  John  Wessel,  both  belonged  to  the  Nether- 
lands. Art  flourished  there  in  the  fifteenth  century  in  the 
persons  of  Hubert  and  Jan  van  Eyck  and  of  Hans  Memling. 
The  Chambers  of  Oratory  (Eederijkers)  to  begin  with 
probably  unions  for  the  performance  of  miracle  plays  or 
moralities,  became  confraternities  not  unlike  the  societies 
of  meistersangier  in  Germany,  and  gradually  acquired  the 
character  of  literary  associations,  which  diffused  not  merely 
culture,  but  also-  habits  of  independent  thinking  among  the 
people. 

Intellectual  life  had  become  less  exuberant  in  the  end 
of  the  fifteenth  century ;  but  the  Netherlands,  nevertheless, 
produced  Alexander  Hegius,  the  greatest  educational 
reformer  of  his  time,  and  Erasmus  the  prince  of  the 
Humanists.  Nor  can  the  influence  of  the  Chambers  of 
Oratory  have  died  out,  for  they  had  a  great  effect  on 
the  Eeformation  movement.2 

When  Charles  assumed  the  government  of  the 
Netherlands,  he  found  himself  at  the  head  of  a  group 
of  duchies,  lordships,  counties,  and  municipalities  which 
had  little  appearance  of  a  compact  principality,  and  ho 
applied  himself,  like  other  princes  of  his  time  in  the  same 

1  A  collection  of  thoir  chansons  d'cmwr,  faux-partis,  pastoureJles,  and 
fMiOM®  will  be  found  iu  Scheler's  Trouv&res  Beiges  (Bruxollos,  1876). 

3  Correqp&ndancede  Philippe  ft.  sur  k$  affaires  des  Pay8-£a,9>  i.  321,  827, 
370  ;  Corres^ondance  de  WuilhtMM  te  Tacifarw,  ii,  161,  108. 


THE   POLITICAL   SITUATION  227 

situation,  to  give  them  a  unity  both  political  and  territorial. 
He  was  so  successful  that  he  was  able  to  hand  over  to  his 
son,  Philip  II.  of  Spain,  an  almost  thoroughly  organised 
State.  The  divisions  which  Charles  largely  overcame 
reappeared  to  some"  extent  in  the  revolt  against  Philip  and 
Romanism,  and  therefore  in  a  measure  concern  the  history 
of  the  Reformation.  How  Charles  made  his  scattered 
Netherland  inheritance  territorially  compact  need  not  be 
told  in  detail.  Friesland  was  secured  (1515);  the 
acquisition  of  temporal  sovereignty  over  the  ecclesiastical 
province  of  Utrecht  (1527)  united  Holland  with  Friesland; 
Gronningen  and  the  lands  ruled  by  that  turbulent  city 
placed  themselves  under  the  government  of  Charles  (1536) ; 
and  the  death  of  Charles  of  Egmont  (1538),  Count  of 
Gueldres,  completed  the  unification  of  the  northern  and 
central  districts.  The  vague  hold  which  France  kept  in 
some  of  the  southern  portions  of  the  country  was  gradually 
loosened.  Charles  failed  in  the  south-east.  The  inde- 
pendent principality  of  Lorraine  lay  between  Luxemburg 
and  Franche-Comt^,  and  the  Netherland  Government 
could  not  seize  it  by  purchase,  treaty,  or  conquest.  One 
and  the  same  system  of  law  regulated  the  rights  and  the 
duties  of  the  whole  population ;  and  all  the  provinces 
were  united  into  one  principality  by  the  reorganisation  of 
a  States  General,  which  met  almost  annually,  and  which 
had  a  real  if  vaguely  defined  power  to  regulate  the  taxa- 
tion of  the  country. 

But  although  political  and  geographical  difficulties 
might  be  more  or  less  overcome,  others  remained  which 
were  not  so  easily  disposed  of.  One  set  arose  from  the 
fact  that  the  seventeen  provinces  were  divided  by  race 
and  by  language.  The  Dutchmen  in  the  north  were  dif- 
ferent in  interests  and  in  sentiment  from  the  Flemings 
in  the  centre ;  and  both  had  little  in  common  with  the 
French-speaking  provinces  in  the  south.  The  other  was 
due  to  the  differing  boundaries  of  the  ecclesiastical  and 
civil  jurisdictions.  When  Charles  began  to  rule  in  1515; 
the  only  territorial  see  was  Arras.  Touruai,  Utrecht 


228      THE   REFORMATION   IN   THE   NETHERLANDS 

and  Cambrai  became  territorial  before  the  abdication  of 
Charles.  But  the  confusion  between  civil  and  ecclesi- 
astical jurisdiction  may  be  seen  at  a  glance  when  it  is 
remembered  that  a  great  part  of  the  Frisian  lands  were 
subject  to  the  German  Sees  of  Miinster,  Minden,  Paderborn, 
and  Osnabriick ;  and  that  no  less  than  six  bishops,  none  of 
them  belonging  to  the  Netherlands,  divided  the  ecclesiastical 
rule  over  Luxemburg.  Charles'  proposals  to  establish  six  new 
bishoprics,  plans  invariably  thwarted  by  the  Eoman  Curia, 
were  meant  to  give  the  Low  Countries  a  national  episcopate. 

§  2.  The  beginnings  of  the  Reformation 

The  people  of  the  Netherlands  had  been  singularly 
prepared  for  the  great  religious  revival  of  the  sixteenth 
century  by  the  work  of  the  Brethren  of  the  Common  Lot 
and  their  schools.  It  was  the  aim  of  Gerard  Groot,  their 
founder,  and  also  of  Florentius  Radevynszoon,  his  great 
educational  assistant,  to  see  "  that  the  root  of  study  and 
the  mirror  of  life  must,  in  the  first  place,  be  the  Gospel  of 
Chutist."  Their  pupils  were  taught  to  read  the  Bible  in 
Latin,  and  the  Brethren  contended  publicly  for  translations 
of  the  Scriptures  in  the  vulgar  tongues.  There  is  evidence 
to  show  that  the  Vulgate  was  well  known  in  the  Nether- 
lands in  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century,  and  a  trans- 
lation of  the  Bible  into  Dutch  was  published  at  Dolft  in 
14771.  Small  tracts  against  Indulgences,  founded  probably 
on  the  reasonings  of  Pupper  and  Wessel,  had  been  in 
circulation  before  Luther  had  nailed  his  Theses  to  the  door 
of  All  Saints1  church  in  Wittenberg.  Hendrik  of  Zutphcn, 
Prior  of  the  Augustinian  Eremite  convent  at  Antwerp, 
had  been  a  pupil  of  Staupita,  a  fellow  student  with  Luther, 
and  had  spread  Evangelical  teaching  not  only  among  his 
order,  but  throughout  the  town.2  It  need  bo  no  matter 

1  Van  dor  Mcerach,  Hechcrches  $ur  la  vie  et  Us  travaws  dft&  imprimeur* 
beiges  cthoZlandais,  pp.  142-144;  of.  W&\thwt2)itdtut3ch£2ttbel<iiber8fiztunye,n 
dcs  MitteMters,  p.  65*2. 

•Aloauder,  writing  to  the   Cardinal  do*  Medici  (Sept  8th,  1620), 


BEGINNINGS   OF   THE    REFORMATION  229 

for  surprise,  then,  that  Luther's  writings  were  widely 
circulated  in  the  Netherlands,  and  that  between  1513  and 
1531  no  fewer  than  twenty-five  translations  of  the  Bible 
or  of  the  New  Testament  had  appeared  in  Dutch,  Flemish, 
and  French. 

When  Aleander  was  in  the  Netherlands,  before  attend- 
ing the  Diet  of  Worms  he  secured  the  burning  of  eighty 
Lutheran  and  other  books  at  Louvain ; x  and  when  he  came 
back  ten  months  later,  he  had  regular  literary  duto-da-fds. 
On  Charles'  return  from  the  Diet  of  Worms,  he  issued  a 
proclamation  to  all  his  subjects  in  the  Netherlands  against 
Luther,  his  books  and  his  followers,  and  Aleander  made 
full  use  of  the  powers  it  gave.  Four  hundred  Lutheran 
books  were  burnt  at  Antwerp,  three  hundred  of  them 
seized  by  the  police  in  the  stalls  of  the  booksellers,  and 
one  hundred  handed  over  by  the  owners ;  three  hundred 
were  burnt  at  Ghent,  "  part  of  them  printed  here  and  part 
in  Germany,"  says  the  Legate ;  and  he  adds  that  "  many 
of  them  were  very  well  bound,  and  one  gorgeously  in 
velvet"  About  a  month  later  he  is  forced  to  confess 
that  these  burnings  had  not  made  as  much  impression 
as  he  had  hoped,  and  that  he  wishes  the  Emperor 
would  "burn  alive  half  a  dozen  Lutherans  and  con- 
fiscate their  property."  Such  a  proceeding  would  make  all 
see  him  to  be  the  really  Christian  prince  that  he  is.2 

Next  year  (1522)  Charles  established  the  Inquisition 
within  the  seventeen  provinces.  It  wag  a  distinctively 
civil  institution,  and  this  was  perhaps  due  to  the  fact 
that  there  was  little  correspondence  between  the  civil 
and  ecclesiastical  jurisdictions  in  the  Netherlands ;  but  it 
must  not  bo  forgotten  that  the  Kings  of  Spain  had  used 
the  Holy  Office  for  the  purpose  of  stamping  out  political 

attributes  the  spread  of  Lutheranism  in  the  Netherlands  to  the  teaching  of 
Erasmus  and  of  the  Prior  of  the  Augustinians  at  Antwerp. — Brieger, 
Aleomder  <wd  Luther,  2581;  Die  vervolht&ndigten  Aleander-Depeschen 
(Gotha,  18340,  p.  249. 

1  Kalkoff,  Die  Depsschon  des  nuntius  Aleander  (Halle  a  S.  1897),  p.  20. 

a  Brieger,  Aleander  und  Lvtiher  ;  Die  vervoMMigten  Alecwder- 
^  pp.  249,  252,  262. 


230      THE   REFORMATION   IN   THE  NETHERLANDS 

and  local  opposition,  and  also  that  the  civil  courts  were 
usually  more  energetic  and  more  severe  than  the  ecclesi- 
astical The  man  appointed  was  unworthy  of  any  place 
of  important  trust.  Francis  van  de  Hulst,  although  he 
had  been  the  Prince's  counsellor  in  Brabant,  was  a  man 
accused  both  of  bigamy  and  murder,  and  was  hopelessly 
devoid  of  tact.  He  quarrelled  violently  with  the  High 
Court  of  Holland  ;  and  the  Regent,  Margaret  of  Austria, 
who  had  'resumed  her  functions,  found  herself  constantly 
compromised  by  his  continual  defiance  of  local  privileges. 
He  was  a  "  wonderful  enemy  to  learning/'  says  Erasmfas. 
His  colleague,  Nicolas  van  Egmont,  a  Carmelite  monk, 
is  described  by  the  same  scholar  as  "a  madman  with 
a  sword  put  into  his  hand  who  hates  me  worse  than 
he  does  Luther/'  The  two  men  discredited  the  In- 
quisition from  its  beginning.  Erasmus  affected  to  believe 
that  the  Emperor  could  not  know  what  they  were  doing. 

The  first  victim  was  Cornelius  Graphseus,  town  clerk 
of  Antwerp,  a  poet  and  Humanist,  a  friend  of  Erasmus  ; 
and  his  offence  was  that  he  had  published  an  edition  of 
John  Pupper  of  Goch's  book,  entitled  the  Liberty  of  the 
Christian  JReligion,  with  a  preface  of  his  own.  The 
unfortunate  man  was  set  on  a  scaffold  in  Brussels,  com- 
pelled to  retract  certain  propositions  which  were  said 
to  be  contained  in.  the  preface,  and  obliged  to  throw  the 
preface  itself  into  a  fire  kindled  on  the  scaffold  for  the 
purpose.  He  was  dismissed  from  his  office,  declared 
incapable  of  receiving  any  other  employment,  compelled 
to  repeat  his  recantation  at  Antwerp,  imprisoned  for  two 
years,  and  finally  banished.1 

The  earliest  deaths  were  those  of  Henry  Voes  and 
John  Each,  who  have  already  been  mentioned.  Their 
Prior,  Hendrik  of  Zutphen,  escaped  from  the  dungeon 
in  which  he  had  been  confined,  Luthor  commemorated 
them  in  a  long  hymn,  entitled  A  New  8oiig  of  the  two 


s*  appeal  to  tho  Chancellor  of  the  Court  of  Brabant  i&  printed 
in  Hill  in  Brandt's  History  of  t?M  J&tfownatwn  .  .  *  fa  the  Low  (Jowtirfo* 
(London,  1720),  i,  42. 


BEGINNINGS    OF   THE    REFORMATION  231 

Martyrs    of   Christ    burnt  at  Srussek  ly  the    Sophists  of 
Louvain  : 

"  Der  erst  recht  wol  Johannes  heyst, 

So  reych  an  Gottes  hulden 
Seyn  Bruder  Henrch  nach.  dem  geyst, 
Eyn  rechter  Christ  on  schulden : 

Vonn  dysser  welt  gescheyden  synd, 
Sye  hand  die  kron  erworben, 

Recht  wie  die  frumen  gottes  kind 
Fur  seyn  wort  synd  gestorben, 
Sein  Marter  synd  sye  worden."1 

Charles  issued  proclamation  after  proclamation,  each 
of  increasing  severity.  It  was  forbidden  to  print  any 
books  unless  they  had  been  first  examined  and  approved 
by  the  censors  (April  1st,  1524).  "All  open  and  secret 
meetings  in  order  to  read  and  preach  the  Gospel,  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  other  spiritual  writings,"  were 
forbidden  (Sept.  25th,  1525),  as  also  to  discuss  the  Holy 
Faith,  the  Sacraments,  the  Power  of  the  Pope  and 
Councils,  "in  private  houses  and  at  meals/y  This  was 
repeated  on  March  14th,  1526,  and  on  July  17th  there 
was  issued  a  long  edict,  said  to  have  been  carefully 
drafted  by  the  Emperor  himself,  forbidding  ajl  meetings  to 
read  or  preach  about  the  Gospel  or  other  holy  writings  in 
Latin,  Flemish,  or  Walloon.  In  the  preamble  it  is  said 
that  ignorant  persons  have  begun  to  expound  Scripture, 
that  even  regular  and  secular  clergy  have  presumed  to 
teach  the  "errors  and  sinister  doctrines  of  Luther  and 
his  adherent?,"  and  that  heresies  are  increasing  in  the  land. 
Then  followed  edicts  against  unlicensed  books,  and  against 
monks  who  had  left  their  cloisters  (Jan.  28th,  1528); 
against  the  possession  of  Lutheran  books,  commanding 
them  upon  pain  of  death  to  be  delivered  up  (Oct.  14th, 
1529);  against  printing  unlicensed  books — the  penalties 
being  a  public  whipping  on  the  scaffold,  branding  with  a 
red-iron,  or  the  loss  of  an  eye  or  a  hand,  at  the  discretion 

1  "Wackernagcl,  Das  deutecke  Kirchmlied  von  der  tiltesten  Zeit  Us  an  211 
A^fang  dc$  xvil.  JaJirhwiderts,  iii.  3. 


232   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

of  the  judge  (Dec.  7th,  1530);  against  heretics  "who 
are  more  numerous  than  ever,"  against  certain  books  of 
which  a  long  list  is  given,  and  against  certain  hymns 
which  increase  the  zeal  of  the  heretics  (Sept.  22nd,  1540) ; 
against  printing  and  distributing  unlicensed  books  in  the 
Italian,  Spanish,  or  English  languages  (Dec.  18th,  1544); 
warning  all  schoolmasters  about  the  use  of  unlicensed 
books  in  their  schools,  and  giving  a  list  of  those  only 
which  are  permitted  (July  31st,  1546).  The  edict  of 
1546  was  followed  by  a  long  list  of  prohibited  books, 
among  which  are  eleven  editions  of  the  Vulgate  printed 
by  Protestant  firms,  six  editions  of  the  Bible  and  three  of 
the  New  Testament  in  Dutch,  two  editions  of  the  Bible 
in  French,  and  many  others.  Lastly,  an  edict  of  April 
29th,  1550,  confirmed  all  the  previous  edicts  against 
heresy  and  its  spread,  and  intimated  that  the  Inquisitors 
would  proceed  against  heretics  "notwithstanding  any 
privileges  to  the  contrary,  which  are  abrogated  and 
annulled  by  this  edict."  This  was  a  clear  threat  that 
the  terrible  Spanish  Inquisition  was  to  be  established  in 
the  Netherlands,  and  provoked  such  remonstrances  that  the 
edict  was  modified  twice  (Sept  25th,  Nov.  5th)  before  it 
was  finally  accepted  as  legal  within  the  seventeen  provinces. 

All  these  edicts  were  directed  against  the  Lutheran 
or  kindred  teaching.  They  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
Anabaptist  movement,  which  called  forth  a  special  and 
diiferent  set  of  edicts.  It  seems  against  all  evidence  to 
say  that  the  persecution  of  the  Lutherans  had  almost 
ceased  during  the  last  years  of  Ghaiies'  rule  in  the 
Netherlands,  and  Philip  II.  could  declare  with  almont 
perfect  truth  that  his  edicts  were  only  his  father's  rc-issucd. 

The  continuous  repetition  and  increasing  severity  of 
the  edicts  revealed  not  merely  that  persecution  did  not 
hinder  the  spread  of  the  Reformed  faith,  but  that  the 
edicts  themselves  were  found  difficult  to  enforce.  What 
Charles  would  have  done  had  he  been  able  to  govern 
the  country  himself  it  is  impoasible  to  say.  He  became 
harder  and  more  intolerant  of  differences  in  matters  of 


BEGINNINGS    OF   THE    REFORMATION  233 

doctrine  as  years  went  on,  and  in  his  latest  days  is  said  to 
have  regretted  that  -he  had  allowed  Luther  to  leave  Worms 
alive ;  and  he  might  have  dealt  with  the  Protestants  of  the 
seventeen  provinces  as  his  son  afterwards  did.  His  aunt, 
Margaret  of  Austria,  who  was  Regent  till  1530,  had  no 
desire  to  drive  matters  to  an  extremity;  and  his  sister 
Mary,  who  ruled  from  1530  till  the  abdication  of  Charles 
in  1555,  was  suspected  in  early  life  of  being  a  Lutheran 
herself.  She  never  openly  joined  the  Lutheran  Church  as 
did  her  sister  the  Queen  of  Denmark,  but  she  confessed 
her  sympathies  to  Charles,  and  gave  them  as  a  reason  for 
reluctance  to  undertake  the  regency  of  the  Netherlands. 
It  may  therefore  be  presumed  that  the  severe  edicts  were 
not  enforced  with  undue  stringency  by  either  Margaret  of 
Austria  or  by  the  widowed  Queen  of  Hungary.  There  is 
also  evidence  to  show  that  these  proclamations  denouncing 
and  menacing  the  unfortunate  Protestants  of  the  Netherlands 
were  not  looked  on  with  much  favour  by  large  sections  of 
the  population.  Officials  were  dilatory,  magistrates  were 
known  to  have  warned  suspected  persons  to  escape  before 
the  police  came  to  arrest  them ;  even  to  have  given  them 
facilities  for  escape  after  sentence  had  been  delivered. 
Passive  resistance  on  the  part  of  the  inferior  authorities 
frequently  interposed  itself  between  the  Emperor  and  the 
execution  of  his  bloodthirsty  proclamations.  Tet  the 
number  of  Protestant  martyrs  was  large,  and  women  as 
well  as  men  suffered  torture  and  death  rather  than  deny 
their  faith. 

The  edicts  against  conventicles  deterred  neither 
preachers  nor  audience.  The  earliest  missioners  were 
priests  and  monks  who  had  become  convinced  of  the  errors 
of  Eomanism.  Later,  preachers  were  trained  in  the  south 
German  cities  and  in  Geneva,  that  nursery  of  daring  agents 
of  the  Reformed  propaganda.  But  if  trained  teachers  were 
lacking,  members  of  the  congregation  took  their  place  at  the 
peril  of  their  lives.  Brandt  Delates  how  numbers  of  people 
were  accustomed  to  meet  for  service  in  a  shipwright's  yard 
at  Antwerp  to  hear  a  monk  who  had  boon  "  proclaimed  " : 


234   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

"  The  teacher,  by  some  chance  or  other,  could  not  appear, 
and  one  of  the  company  named  Nicolas,  a  person  well 
versed  in  Scripture,  thought  it  a  shame  that  such  a 
congregation,  hungering  after  the  food  of  the  Word,  should 
depart  without  a  little  spiritual  nourishment;  wherefore, 
climbing  the  mast  of  a  ship,  he  taught  the  people  according 
to  his  capacity ;  and  on  that  account,  and  for  the  sake  of 
the  reward  that  was  set  upon  the  preacher,  he  was  seized  by 
two  butchers  -and  delivered  to  the  magistrates,  who  caused 
him  to  be  put  into  a  sack  and  thrown  into  the  river,  where 
he  was  drowned."1 


§  3.  The  Anabaptists. 

The  severest  persecutions,  however,  before  the  rule  of 
Philip  II.,  were  reserved  for  those  people  who  are  called 
the  Anabaptists.2  We  find  several  edicts  directed  against 
them  solely.  In  February  1532  it  was  forbidden  to 
harbour  Anabaptists,  and  a  price  of  12  guilders  was 
offered  to  informants.  Later  in  the  same  year  ati  edict 
was  published  which  declared  "  that  all  who  had  been  re- 
baptized,  were  sorry  for  their  fault,  and,  in  token  of  thoir 
repentance,  had  gone  to  confession,  would  be  admitted  to 
mercy  for  that  time  only,  provided  they  brought  a  certificate 
from  their  confessor  within  twenty-four  days  of  the  date  of 
the  edict ;  those  who  continued  obdurate  were  to  be  treated 
with  the  utmost  rigour  of  the  laws"  (Feb.  1533).  Ana- 
baptists who  had  abjured  were  ordered  to  remain  near  their 
dwelling-places  for  the  space  of  a  year,  "  unless  those  who 
were  engaged  in  the  herring  fishery"  (June  1534).  In 
1535  the  severest  edict  against  the  sect  was  published. 

1  Brandt,  History  of  the  Reformation  in  the  Low  Countries  (London,  1720), 
p.  51. 

3  The  history  of  the  struggle  with  the  Anabaptists  of  the  Netherlands 
is  related  at  length  by  S.  Blaupot  ten  Gate  in  Geschiedenis  der  Doopge&indcn 
in  JMesland  (Leeuwarden,  1839)  j  Gmhiedenia  der  DooygevMcn  in  Gtroninym 
(Oberyasel,  1842) ;  OesckMeniss  der  Doopgezmden  in  JFMlmd  en  Oelderland 
(Amsterdam,  1847).  A  summary  of  the  history  of  the  Anabaptist*  in 
given  in  Heath's  Anabaytim  (London,  1895),  which  is  much  more  accurate 
than  the  usual  accounts. 


THE   ANABAPTISTS  235 

All  who  had  "  seduced  or  perverted  any  to  this  sect,  or 
had  rebaptized  them,"  were  to  suffer  death  by  fire;  all 
who  had  suffered  themselves  to  be  rebaptized,  or  who  had 
harboured  Anabaptists,  and  who  recanted,  were  to  be 
favoured  by  being  put  to  death  by  the  sword;  women 
were  "  only  to  be  buried  alive."  * 

To  understand  sympathetically  that  multiform  move- 
ment which  was  called  in  the  sixteenth  century  Ancibaptism, 
it  is  necessary  to  remember  that  it  was  not  created  by  the 
Eeformation,  although  it  certainly  received  an  impetus 
from  the  inspiration  of  the  age.  Its  roots  can  be  traced 
back  for  some  centuries,  and  its  pedigree  has  at  least  two 
stems  which  are  essentially  distinct,  and  were  only  occasion- 
ally combined.  The  one  stem  id  the  successions  of  the 
Brethren,  a  mediaeval,  anti-clerical  body  of  Christians  whose 
history  is  written  only  in  the  records  of  Inquisitors  of  the 
mediaeval  Church,  where  they  appear  under  a  variety  of 
names,  but  are  universally  said  to  prize  the  Scriptures 
and  to  accept  the  Apostles'  Creed.2  The  other  existed 
in  the  continuous  uprisings  of  the  poor  —  peasants  in 
rural  districts  and  the  lower  classes  in  the  towns  — 
against  the  rich,  which  were  a  feature  of  the  later  Middle 
Ages.8 

So  far  as  the  Netherlands  are  concerned,  these  popular 
outbreaks  had  been  much  more  frequent  among  the  towns' 
population  than  in  the  rural  districts.  The  city  patriciate 
ordinarily  controlled  the  magistracy;  but  when  -flagrant 
cases  of  oppression  arose,  all  the  judicial,  financial,  and 
other  functions  of  government  were  sure  to  be  swept  out 
of  their  hands  in  an  outburst  of  popular  fury.  So  much 
was  this  the  case,  that  the  real  holders  of  power  in  the 
towns  in  the  Netherlands  during  the  first  half  of  the 
sixteenth  century  were  the  artisans,  strong  in  their  trade 
organisations.  They  had  long  known  their  power,  and  had 
been  accustomed  to  exert  it.  The  blood  of  a  turbulent 

1  Of.  Letters  and  Papers,  Foreign  and  Domestic,  of  the  Reign  of  Henry 
VZIT.,  IV.  iii.  2685  (ffalket  to  Fuller). 

» Of,  below,  pp,  432/.  8  Of.  i.  96 /. 


236      THE   REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

ancestry  ran  in  their  veins — of  men  who  could  endure  for 
a  time,  but  who,  when  roused  bv  serious  oppression,  had 
been  accustomed  to  defend  themselves,  and  to  give  atroke 
for  stroke.  It  is  only  natural  to  find  among  the  artisans 
of  the  Flemish  and  Dutch  towns  a  curious  mingling  of 
sublime  self-sacrifice  for  what  they  believed  to  be  the 
truth,  of  the  mystical  exaltation  of  the  martyr  occasion- 
ally breaking  out  in  hysterical  action,  and  the  habit  of 
defending  themselves  against  almost  any  odds. 

So  far  as  is  known,  the  earliest  Anabaptist  martyrs 
were  Jan  Walen  and  two  others  belonging  to  Waterlandt. 
They  were  done  to  death  in  a  peculiarly  atrocious  way  at 
The  Hague  in  1527.  Instead  of  being  burnt  alive,  they 
were  chained  to  a  stake  at  some  distance  from  a  huge  fire, 
and  were  slowly  roasted  to  death.  This  frightful  punish- 
ment seems  to  have  been  reserved  for  the  Anabaptist 
martyrs.  It  was  repeated  at  Haarlem  in  1532,  when  a 
woman  was  drowned  and  her  husband  with  two  others 
was  roasted  alive.  Some  time  in  1530,  Jan  Volkertz 
founded  an  Anabaptist  congregation  in  Amsterdam  which 
became  so  large  as  to  attract;  the  attention  of  the 
authorities.  The  head  of  the  police  (sellout)  in  the  city  was 
ordered  to  apprehend  them.  Volkertz  delivered  himself 
up  voluntarily.  The  greater  part  of  the  accused  received 
timely  warning  from  the  sellout's  wife.  Nine  were  taken 
by  night  in  their  beds.  These  with  their  pastor  were 
carried  to  The  Hague  and  beheaded  by  express  order  of 
the  Emperor.  He  also  commanded  that  thoir  heads 
should  be  sent  to  Amsterdam,  where  they  were  set  on 
poles  in  a  circle,  the  head  of  Volkertz  boing  in  the  centre 
This  ghastly  spectacle  was  so  placed  that  it  could  bo  soon 
from  the  ships  entering  and  leaving  the  harbour.  All 
these  martyrs,  and  many  others  whose  deaths  arc  duly 
recorded,  were  followers  of  Melchior  Hoffman.  Hoffman's 
views  were  those  of  the  "  Brethren  "  of  the  lator  Middle 
Ages,  the  Old  Jfoangelicals  as  they  wore  called.  la  a 
paper  of  directions  sent  to  Emden  to  assist  in  the 
organisation  of  an  Anabaptist  congregation  there,  ho  flays : 


THE  ANABAPTISTS  237 

"God's  community  knows  no  head  but  Christ.  No 
other  can  be  endured,  for  it  is  a  brother-  and  sisterhood. 
The  teachers  have  none  who  rule  them  spiritually  but 
Christ.  Teachers  and  ministers  are  not  lords.  The  pastors 
have  no  authority  except  to  preach  God's  Word  and  punish 
sins.  A  bishop  must  be  elected  out  of  his  community. 
Where  a  pastor  has  thus  been  taken,  and  the  guidance 
committed  to  him  and  to  his  deacon,  a  community  should 
provide  properly  for  those  who  help  to  build  the  Lord's 
house.  When  teachers  are  thus  found,  there  is  no  fear 
that  the  communities  will  suffer  spiritual  hunger.  A  true 
preacher  would  willingly  see  the  whole  community  prophesy." 

But  the  persecution,  with  its  peculiar  atrocities,  had 
been  acting  in  its  usual  way  on  the  Anabaptists  of  the 
Netherlands.  They  had  been  tortured  on  the  rack,  scourged, 
imprisoned  in  dungeons,  roasted  to  death  before  slow  fires, 
and  had  seen  their  women  drowned,  buried  alive,  pressed  into 
coffins  too  small  for  their  bodies  till  their  ribs  were  broken, 
others  stamped  into  them  by  the  feet  of  the  executioners. 
It  is  to  be  wondered  at  that  those  who  stood  firm  sometimes 
gave  way  to  hysterical  excesses;  that  their  leaders  began 
to  preach  another  creed  than  that  of  passive  resistance; 
that  wild  apocalyptic  visions  were  reported  aud  believed  ? 

Melchior  Hoffman  had  been  imprisoned  in  Strassburg 
in  1533,  and* a  new  leader  arose  in  the  Netherlands — Jan 
Matthys,  a  baker  of  Haarlem.  Under  his  guidance  an 
energetic  propaganda  was  carried  on  in  the  Dutch  towns, 
and  hundreds  of  converts  were  made.  One  hundred  persons 
were  baptized  in  one  day  in  February  (1534);  before  the 
end  of  March  it  was  reported  that  two-thirds  of  the  popu- 
lation in  Monnikendam  were  Anabaptists ;  and  a  similar 
state  of  matters  existed  in  many  of  the*  larger  Dutch 
towns.  Daventer,  Zwolle,  and  Kampen  were  almost  wholly 
Anabaptist.  The  Government  made  great  exertions  to 
crush  the  movement.  Detachments  of  soldiers  were 
divided  into  bands  of  fifteen  or  twenty,  and  patrolled  the 
environs  of  the  cities,  making  midnight  visitations,  and 
haling  men  and  women  to  prison  until  the  dungeons  were 
overcrowded  with  captured  Anabaptists. 


238      THE   REFORMATION   IN   THE   NETHERLANDS 

Attempts  were  made  by  the  persecuted  to  leave  the 
country  for  some  more  hospitable  place  where  they  could 
worship  God  in  peace  in  the  way  their  consciences  directed 
them.  East  Friesland  had  once  been  a  haven,  but  was  so  no 
longer.  Miinster  offered  a  refuge.  Ships  were  chartered, 
— thirty  of  them, — and  the  persecuted  people  proposed  to 
sail  round  the  north  of  Friesland,  land  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Ems,  and  travel  to  Miinster  by  land.1  The  Emperor's  ships 
intercepted  the  little  fleet,  sank  five  of  the  vessels  with  all 
the  emigrants  on  board,  and  compelled  the  rest  to  return. 
The  leaders  found  on  board  were  decapitated,  and  their 
heads  stuck  on  poles  to  warn  others.  Hundreds  from 
the  provinces  of  Guelderland  and  Holland  attempted 
the  journey  by  land.  They  piled  their  bits  of  poor  furni- 
ture and  bundles  of  clothes  on  waggons ;  some  rode  horses, 
most  trudged  on  foot,  the  women  and  children,  let  us  hope, 
getting  an  occasional  ride  on  the  waggons.  Soldiers  were 
sent  to  intercept  them.  The  leaders  were  beheaded,  the 
men  mostly  imprisoned,  and  the  women  and  children  sent 
back  to  their  towns  and  villages. 

Then,  and  not  till  they  had  exhausted  every  method  of 
passive  resistance,  the  Anabaptists  began  to  strike  back. 
They  wished  to  seize  a  town  already  containing  a  large 
Anabaptist  population,  and  hold  it  as  a  city  of  refuge. 
Daventer,  which  was  full  of  sympathisers,  was  their  first 
aim.  The  plot  failed,  and  the  burgomaster's  son  Willom, 
one  of  the  conspirators,  was  seized,  and  with  two  com- 
panions beheaded  in  the  market-place  (Dec.  25th,  1534). 
Their  next  attempt  was  on  Leyden.  It  was  called  a  plot 

1  Several  references  to  the  Anabaptists  of  the  Low  Countries  are  to  bo 
found  in  the  Letters  and  Papers,  Foreign  and  Domestic,  of  the  Iteign  o/Xfitnry 
FI/I.  Hackett,  writing  to  Cromwell,  says  that  "divers  places  arc  afleotod 
by  this  new  sect  of  *  rebaptisement,' "  vii,  p.  180.  He  tells  about  the  Mhip- 
loads  of  emigrants  (pp.  105,  160),  and  flays  that  they  were  f»o  eympatlmcd 
with,  that  it  was  difficult  to  enlist  soldiers  to  light  against  them ;  that  tho 
Kegent  had  sent  10,000  ducats  to  help  the  Binhop  of  Mtlnster  to  crush 
them  (p.  107) ;  and  a  wild  report  was  current  that  Henry  vin.  hid  sent 
money  to  the  Anabaptists  of  MUnster  in  revenge  for  the  Pope's  refuging  his 
divorce  (p.  386). 


THE   ANABAPTISTS  239 

to  burn  the  town.  The  magistrates  got  word  of  it,  and,  by 
ordering  the  great  town-clock  to  be  stopped,  disconcerted 
the  plotters.  Fifteen  men  and  five  women  were  seized ; 
the  men  were  decapitated,  and  the  women  drowned  (Jan. 
1535).  Next  month  (Feb.  28th,  1535),  Jan  van  Geelen, 
leading  a  band  of  three  hundred  refugees  through  Friesland, 
was  overtaken  by  some  troops  of  soldiers.  The  little 
company  entrenched  themselves,  fought  bravely  for  some 
days,  until  nearly  all  were  killed.  The  survivors  were 
almost  all  captured  and  put  to  death,  the  men  by  the 
sword,  and  the  women  by  drowning.  One  hundred  soldiers 
fell  in  the  attack.  A  few  months  later  (May  1535),  an 
attempt  was  made  to  seize  Amsterdam.  It  was  headed  by 
van  Geelen,  the  only  survivor  of  the  skirmish  in  Friesland. 
He  and  his  companions  were  able  to  get  possession  of  the 
Stadthaus,  and  held  it  against  the  town's  forces  until  cannon 
were  brought  to  batter  down  their  defences. 

In  the  eai-ly  days  of  the  same  year  an  incident  occurred 
which  shows  how,  under  the  strain  of  persecution,  an  hysteri- 
cal exaltation  took  possession  of  some  of  these  poor  people. 
It  is  variously  reported.  According  to  Brandt,  seven  men 
and  five  women,  having  stript  off  their  clothes,  as  a  sign, 
they  said,  that  they  spoke  the  naked  truth,  ran  through 
the  streets  of  Amsterdam,  crying  Woe  !  Woe  !  Woe  !  The 
Wrath  of  God !  They  were  apprehended,  and  slaughtered 
in  the  usual  way.  The  woman  in  whose  house  they  had 
met  was  hanged  at  her  own  door. 

The  insurrections  were  made  the  pretext  for  still  fiercer 
persecutions.  The  Anabaptists  were  hunted  out,  tortured 
and  slain  without  any  attempt  being  made. by  the  authori- 
ties to  discriminate  between  those  who  had  and  those 
who  had  riot  been  sharers  in  any  insurrectionary  attempt. 
It  is  alleged  that  over  thirty  thousand  people  were  put  to 
death  in  the  Netherlands  during  the  reign  of  Charles  v. 
Many  of  the  victims  had  no  connection  with  Anabaptism 
whatsoever;  they  were  quiet  followers  of  Luther  or  of 
Calvin.  The  authorities  discriminated  between  them  iff 
their  proclamations,  but  not  in  the  persecution. 


240   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

§  4.  Philip  of  Spain  and  the  Netherlands. 

How  long  the  Netherlands  would  have  stood  the  con- 
tinual drain  of  money  and  the  severity  of  the  persecution 
which  the  foreign  and  religious  policy  of  Charles  enforced 
upon  them,  it  is  impossible  to  say.  The  people  of  the 
country  were  strongly  attached  to  him,  as  he  was  to  them. 
He  had  been  born  and  had  grown  from  childhood  to  manhood 
among  them.  Their  languages,  French  and  Flemish,  were 
the  only  speech  he  could  ever  use  with  ease.  He  had  been 
ruler  in  the  Netherlands  before  he  became  King  of  Spain, 
and  long  before  he  was  called  to  fill  the  imperial  throne. 
When  he  resolved  to  act  on  his  long  meditated  scheme  of 
abdicating  in  favour  of  his  son  Philip,  it  was  to  the  Nether- 
lands that  he  came.  Their  nobles  and  people  witnessed 
the  scene  with  hardly  less  emotion  than  that  which  showed 
itself  in  the  faltering  speech  of  the  Emperor. 

The  ceremony  took  place  in  the  great  Hall  of  the  palace 
in  Brussels  (Oct.  25th,  1555),  in  presence  of  the  delegates 
of  the  seventeen  provinces.  Mary,  the  widowed  Queen  of 
Hungary,  who  had  governed  the  land  for  twenty-five  years, 
witnessed  the  scene  which  was  to  end  her  rule,  Philip, 
who  was  to  ruin  the  work  of  consolidation 'patiently  planned 
and  executed  by  his  father  and  his  aunt,  was  present,  sum- 
moned from  his  uncongenial  task  of  eating'  roast  beef  and 
drinking  English  ale  in  order  to  conciliate  his  new  subjects 
across  the  Channel,  and  from  the  embarrassing  endearments 
of  his  elderly  spouse.  The  Emperor,  aged  by  toil  rather 
than  by  years,  entered  the  Hall  loaning  heavily  on  his 
favourite  page  and  trusty  counsellor,  the  youthM  William, 
Prince  of  Orange,  who  was  to  become  the  leader  of  the 
revolt  against  Philip's  rule,  and  to  create  a  new  Protestant 
State,  the  United  Provinces. 

The  new  lord  of  the  Netherlands  was  then  twenty- 
eight.  In  outward  appearance  he  was  a  German  like  his 
father,  but  in  speech  ho  was  a  Spaniard.  He  had  none  of 
his  father's  external  geniality,  and  could  never  stoop  to  win 
men  to  his  ends.  But  Philip  u.  was  much  liker  Charles  v. 


PHILIP    OF   SPAIN    AND    THE   NETHERLANDS       241 

than  many  historians  seem  willing  to  admit.  Both  had 
the  same  slow,  patient  industry — but  in  the  son  it  was 
slower;  the  same  cynical  distrust  of  all  men;  the  same 
belief  in  the  divine  selection  of  the  head  of  the  House  of 
Hapsburg  to  guide  all  things  in  State  and  Church  irrespective 
of  Popes  or  Kings — only  in  the  son  it  amounted  to  a  sort 
of  gloomy  mystical  assurance ;  the  same  callousness  to 
human  suffering,  and  the  same  utter  inability  to  comprehend 
the  force  of  strong  religious  conviction.  Philip  was  an 
inferior  edition  of  his  father,  succeeding  to  his  father's 
ideas,  pursuing  the  same  policy,  using  the  same  methods, 
but  handicapped  by  the  fact  that  he  had  not  originated  but 
had  inherited  both,  and  with  thorn  the  troubles  brought 
in  their  train. 

Philip  IL  spent  the  first  four  years  of  his  reign  in  the 
Netherlands,  and  during  that  short  period  of  personal  rule 
his  policy  had  brought  into  being  all  the  more  important 
sources  of  dissatisfaction  which  ended  in  the  revolt.  Yet 
his  policy  was  the  same,  and  his  methods  were  not  different 
from  those  of  his  father.  In  one  respect  at  least  Charles 
had  never  spared  the  Netherlands.  That  country  had  to 
pay,  as  no  other  part  of  his  vast  possessions  was  asked*  to 
do,  the  price,  of  his  foreign  policy,  and  Charles  had  wrung 
unexampled  sums  from  his  people. 

When  Philip  summoned  the  States  General  (March 
12th,  1556)  and  asked  them  for  a  very  large  grant  (Fl. 
1,300,000),  he  was  only  following  his  father's  example, 
and  on  that  occasion  was  seeking  money  to  liquidate  the 
deficit  which  his  father  had  bequeathed.  Was  it  that  the 
people  of  the  Netherlands  had  resolved  to  end  the  practice 
of  making  them  pay  for  a  foreign  policy,  which  had  hitherto 
concerned  them  little,  or  was  it  because  they  could  not 
endure  the  young  Spaniard  who  could  not  speak  to  them 
iu  their  own  language  ?  Would  Charles  have  been  refused 
as  well  as  Philip  ?  Who  can  say  ? 

When  Philip  obtained  a  Bull  from  Pope  Paul  iv.  for 
creating  a  territorial  episcopate  in  the  Netherlands,  he  was 
only  carrying  out  the  policy  which  his  father  had  sketched 
16** 


242   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

as  early  as  1522,  and  which  but  for  the  shortness  of  the 
pontificate  of  Hadrian  vi.  would  undoubtedly  have  been 
executed  in  1524  without  any  popular  opposition.  Charles' 
scheme  contemplated  six  bishoprics,  Philip's  fourteen  ;  that 
was  the  sole  difference ;  and  from  the  ecclesiastical  point  of 
view  Philip's  was  probably  the  better.  Why  then  the  bitter 
opposition  to  the  change  in  1557  ?  Most  historians  seem 
to  think  that  had  Charles  been  ruling,  there  would  have 
been  few  murmurs.  Is  that  so  certain?  The  people 
feared  the  institution  of  the  bishoprics,  because  they 
dreaded  and  hated  an  Inquisition  which  would  override 
their  local  laws,  rights,  and  privileges ;  and  Charles  had 
been  obliged  to  modify  his  "Placard"  of  1549  against 
heresy,  because  towns  and  districts  protested  so  loudly 
against  it.  During  these  early  years  Philip  made  no 
alterations  on  his  father's  proclamations  against  heresy. 
He  contented  himself  with  reissuing  the  "Placard"  of 
1549  as  that  had  been  amended  in  1550  after  the  popular 
protests.  The  personality  of  Philip  was  no  doubt  objection- 
able to  his  subjects  in  the  Netherlands,  but  it  cannot  be 
certainly  affirmed  that  had  Charles  continued  to  reign  there 
would  have  been  no  widespread  revolt  against  his  financial, 
ecclesiastical,  and  religious  policy.  The  Kegent  Mary  had 
been  finding  her  task  of  ruling  more  and  more  difficult.  A 
few  weeks  before  the  abdication,  when  the  Emperor  wished 
his  sister  to  continue  in  the  Regency,  she  wrote  to  him : 

"  I  could  not  live  among  these  people  even  as  a  private 
citizen,  for  it  would  be  impossible  to  do  my  duty  towards 
God  and  my  Prince.  As  to  governing  them,  I  take  God  to 
witness  that  the  task  is  so  abhorrent  to  me  that  I  would 
rather  earn  my  daily  bread  by  labour  than  attempt  it." 

In  1559  (Aug.  26th),  Philip  left  the  Netherlands  never 
to  return.  He  had  selected  Margaret  of  Parma,  hi&  half- 
sister,  the  illegitimate  daughter  of  Charles  V.,  for  Itcgeut. 
Margaret  had  been  born  and  brought  up  in  the  country ; 
she  know  the  language,  and  she  had  been  so  long  away  from 
her  native  land  that  sho  was  not  personally  committed  to 


PHILIP   OF   SPAIN  AND   THE  NETHERLANDS      243 

any  policy  nor  acquainted  with  the  leaders  of  any  of  the 
parties. 

The  power  of  the  Eegent,  nominally  extensive,  was  in 
reality  limited  by  secret  instructions.1  She  was  ordered  to 
put  in  execution  the  edicts  against  heresy  without  any 
modification ;  and  she  was  directed  to  submit  to  the  advice 
given  her  by  three  Councils,  a  command  which  placed  her 
under  the  supervision  of  the  three  men  selected  by  Philip  to 
be  the  presidents  of  these  Councils.  The  Council  of  State 
was  the  most  important,  and  was  entrusted  with  the 
management  of  the  whole  foreign  and  home  administration 
of  the  country.  It  consisted  of  the  Bishop  of  Arras 
(Antoine  Perronet  de  .  Granvelle,  afterwards  Cardinal  de 
Granvelle) ; 2  the  Baron  de  Baiiaymont,  who  was  President 
of  the  Council  of  Finance ;  Vigilius  van  Aytta,  a  learned 
lawyer  from  Friesland,  "a  small  brisk  man,  with  long 
yellow  hair,  glittering  green  eyes,  fat  round  rosy  cheeks, 
and  flowing  beard,"  who  was  President  of  the  Privy  Council, 
and  controlled  the  administration  of  law  and  justice ;  and 
two  of  the  Netherland  nobles,  Lamoral,  Count  of  Egrnont 
and  Prince  of  G-avre,  and  William,  Prince  of  Orange. 
The  two  nobles  were  seldom  consulted  or  even  invited  to 
be  present.  ,  The  three  Presidents  were  the  Consults,  or 
secret  body  of  confidential  advisers  imposed  by  Philip  upon 
his  Regent,  without  whose  advice  nothing  was  to  be 
attempted.  Of  the  three,  the  Bishop  of  Arras  (Cardinal  de 

x  The  Royal  Academy  of  Belgium  lias  published  (Brussels,  1877-96) 
the  Correspondence  du  Cardinal  de  Granvelle  in  12  volumes,  and  in  the 
Collection  de  documents  in&dits  sur  I'JFIistoire  de  France  there  are  the  Papiers 
d'Jfitatdu  Cardinal  de  Gtramelle  in  9  vols.,  edited  by  C.  "Weiss  (Paris,  1841- 
52).  Theso  volumes  reveal  the  inner  history  of  the  revolt  in  the  Netherlands. 
The  documents  which  refer  to  the  revolt  in  the  Papiers  d'etat  begin  with 
p.  688  of  vol.  v.  They  show  how,  from  the  very  first,  Philip  n.  urged  the 
extirpation  of  heresy  as  the  most  important  work  to  be  undertaken  by  his 
Government ;  of,  Papiers  d'$tat,  v.  593. 

8  "  Philip  struck  the  koyhote  of  his  reign  on  the  occasion  of  his  first 
public  appearance  as  King  by  presiding  over  ono  of  the  most  splendid  auto- 
da-fe's  that  had  ovor  boon  noon  in  Spain  (Valladolid,  Oct.  18th,  1559)." 
Cambridge  Modern  XKsfany,  in.  482.  It  is  a  singular  commentary  on  six- 
teenth century  Komanisni,  tKL  to  burn  a  largo  number  of  fellow-men  was 
called  "an  act  of  faith." 


244      THIS   REFORMATION   IN   THE   NETHERLANDS 

Granvelle)  was  the  most  important,  and  the  government 
was  practically  placed  in  his  hands  by  his  master.  Behind 
the  Consulta  was  Philip  n.  himself,  who  in  his  business 
room  in  the  Escurial  at  Madrid  issued  his  orders,  repressing 
every  tendency  to  treat  the  people  with  moderation  and 
humanity,  thrusting  aside  all  suggestions  of  wise  tolerance, 
and  insisting  that  his  own  cold-blooded  policy  should  be 
carried  out  in  its  most  objectionable  details.  It  was  not 
until  the  publication  of  de  Granvelle's  State  Papers  and 
Correspondence  that  it  came  to  be  known  how  much  the 
Bishop  of  Arras  has  been  misjudged  by  history,  how  he 
remonstrated  unavailingly  with  his  master,  how  he  was 
forced  to  put  into  execution  a  sanguinary  policy  of  repres- 
sion which  was  repugnant  to  himself,  and  how  Philip 
compelled  him  to  bear  the  obloquy  of  his  own  misdeeds. 
The  correspondence  also  revoals  the  curiously  minute 
information  which  Philip  must  have  privately  received,  for 
he  was  able  to  send  to  the  Eegent  and  the  Bishop  the 
names,  ages,  personal  appearance,  occupations,  residence  of 
numbers  of  obscure  people  whom  he  ordered  to  execution 
for  their  religious  opinions.1  No  rigour  of  persecution 
seemed  able  to  prevent  the  spread  of  the  Eeformation.2 

The  Government — Margaret  and  her  Consulta — offended 
grievously  not  merely  the  people,  but  the  nobility  of  the 
Netherlands.  The  nobles  saw  their  services  and  positions 
treated  as  things  of  no  consequence,  and  the  people 
witnessed  with  alarm  that  the  local  charters  and  privileges 
of  the  land — charters  and  rights  which  Philip  at  hta 
coronation  had  sworn  to  maintain — wore  totally  disregarded. 
Gradually  all  classes  of  the  population  were  united  in  a 
silent  opposition.  The  Prince  of  Orange  and  Count 
Egmont  became  almost  insensibly  the  leaders. 

They  had  been  dissatisfied  witt  their  position  on  the 
Council  of  State ;  they  had  no  real  share  in,  the  business ; 
the  correspondence  was  not  submitted  to  them,  and  they 

1  Papfor*  d'Z&tat  du  Cardinal  de  Granvellt,  v*  pp.  558,  591. 
3  Gachard,  Correspondance  de  Guillaume  U  Taciturn*  (Letters  from  the 
Regent  to  Philip  II, ),  i.  282-80. 


PHILIP   OF   SPAIN  AND  THE  NETHERLANDS      245 

knew  such  details  only  as  Granvelle  chose  to  communicate 
to  them.  Their  first  overt  act  was  to  resign  the  commis- 
sions they  held  in  the  Spanish  troops  stationed  in  the 
country ;  their  second,  to  write  to  the  King  asking  him  to 
relieve  them  of  their  position  on  the  Council  of  State, 
telling  him  that  matters  of  great  importance  were  con- 
tinually transacted  without  their  knowledge  or  concurrence, 
and  that  in  the  circumstances  they  could  not  conscientiously 
continue  to  sustain  the  responsibilities  of  office.1 

The  opposition  took  their  stand  on  three  things,  all  of 
which  hung  together — the  presence  of  Spanish  troops  on 
the  soil  of  the  Netherlands,  the  cruelties  perpetrated  in 
the  execution  of  the  Placards  against  heresy,  an*d  the  insti- 
tution of  the  new  bishoprics  in  accordance  with  the  Bull 
of  Pope  Paul  iv.,  reaffirmed  by  Pius  iv.  in  1560  (Jan.). 
The  common  fighting  ground  for  the  opposition  to  all  the 
three  was  the  invasion  of  the  charters  and  privileges 
of  the  various  provinces  which  these  measures  necessarily 
involved,  and  the  consequent  violation  of  the  King's  coro- 
nation oath. 

Philip  had  solemnly  promised  to  withdraw  the  Spanish 
troops  within  three  or  four  montlis  after  he  left  the 
country.  They  had  remained  for  fourteen,  and  the  whole 
land  cried  out  against  the  pillage  and  rapine  which  accom- 
panied their  presence.  The  people  of  Zeeland  declared 
that  they  would  rather  see  the  ocean  submerge  their 
country — that  they  would  rather  perish,  men,  women,  and 
children,  in  the  waves — than  endure  longer  the  outrages 
which  these  mercenaries  inflicted  upon  them.  They  re- 
fused to  repair  the  Dykes.  The  presence  of  these  troops 
had  been  early  seen  to  be  a  degradation  to  his  country  by 
William  of  Orange.2  At  the  States  General  held  on  the 
eve  of  Philip's  departure,  he  had  urged  the  Assembly  to 

1  Gachard,  Correspondence  de  Gutltamie  U  Tacitwrne,  etc.  ii.  42/.,  106- 
110, 170. 

2  Ho  wrote  to  Philip  ahout  their  excesses  as  early  as  Deo.  29th,  1555, 
Gaohard,  Correspondfrnce  de  ffuiltwwnA  U  Tactturm,  i.  282,  and  about  the 
exasperation  of  the  JSothorlamlors  in  consequence  (ibid,  i,  291). 


246   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

make  the  departure  of  the  troops  a  condition  of  granting 
subsidies,  and  had  roused  Philip's  wrath  in  consequence. 
He  now  voiced  the  cry  of  the  whole  country.  It  was  so 
strong  that  Granvelle  sent  many  an  urgent  request  to  the 
King  to  sanction  their  removal ;  and  at  length  he  and  the 
Regent,  without  waiting  for  orders,  had  the  troops  embarked 
for  Madrid. 

The  rigorous  repression  of  heresy  compelled  the 
Government  to  override  the  charters  of  the  several  pro- 
vinces. Many  of  these  charters  contained  very  strong 
provisions,  and  the  King  had  sworn  to  maintain  them. 
The  constitution  of  Brabant,  known  as  the  joyeuse  entree 
(blyde  irilctfnist),  provided  that  the  clergy  should  not  be 
given  unusual  powers;  and  that  no  subject,  nor  even  a 
foreign  resident,  could  be  prosecuted  civilly  or  criminally 
except  in  the  ordinary  courts  of  the  land,  where  he  could 
answer  and  defend  himself  with  the  help  of  advocates. 
The  charter  of  Holland  contained  similar  provisions.  Both 
charters  declared  that  if  the  Prince  transgressed  these 
provisions  the  subjects  were  freed  from  their  allegiance. 
The  inquisitorial  courts  violated  the  charters  of  those  and 
of  the  other  provinces.  The  great  objection  taken  to  the 
increase  of  the  episcopate,  according  to  the  provisions  of 
the  Bulls  of  Paul  iv.  and  of  Pius  iv.,  was  that  it  involved 
a  still  greater  infringement  of  the  chartered  rights  of  the 
land.  Tor  example,  the  Bulls  provided  that  the  bishops 
were  to  appoint  nine  canons,  who  were  to  assist  thorn  in 
all  inquisitorial  eases,  while  at  least  one  of  them  was  to 
be  an  Inquisitor  charged  with  ferreting  out  and  punishing 
heresy.  This  was  apparently  their  great  charm  for  Philip 
ii.  He  desired  an  instrument  to  extirpate  heretics.  He 
knew  that  the  Reformation  was  making  great  progress  in 
the  Netherlands,  especially  in  the  groat  commercial  cities. 
"  I  would  lose  all  my  States  and  a  hundred  liven  if  I  had 
them/7  ho  wrote  to  the  Pope,  "  rather  than  be  the  lord  of 
heretics." 

The  opposition  at  iirst  contented  itself  with  protesting 
against  the  position  and  rule  of  Ovanvello,  and  with  do- 


PHILIP   OF   SPAIN   AND   THE   NETHERLANDS      247 

manding  Ms  recall,  Philip  came  to  the  reluctant  con- 
clusion to  dismiss  his  Minister,  and  did  so  with  more  than 
his  usual  duplicity.  The  nobles  returned  to  the  Council, 
and  the  Eegent  affected  to  take  their  advice.  But  they 
were  soon  to  discover  that  the  recall  of  the  ohnoxious 
Minister  did  not  make  any  change  in  the  policy  of  Philip. 
The  Eegent  read  them  a  letter  from  Philip  ordering 
the  publication  and  enforcement  of  the  Decrees  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  in  the  Netherlands.1  The  nobles  protested 
vehemently  on  the  ground  that  this  would  mean  a  still 
further  invasion  of  the  privileges  of  the  provinces.  After 
long  deliberation,  it  was  resolved  to  send  Count  Egmont  to 
Madrid  to  lay  the  opinions  of  the  Council  before  the  King. 
The  debate  was  renewed  on  the  instructions  to  be  given  to 
the  delegate.  Those  suggested  by  the  President,  Vigilius, 
were  colourless.  Then  "William  the  Silent  spoke  out.  His 
speech,  a  long  one,  full  of  suppressed  passionate  sympathy 
with  his  persecuted  fellow-countrymen,  made  an  extra- 
ordinary impression.  It  is  thus  summarised  by  Brandt : 

That  they  ought  to  speak  their  minds  freely ;  that  there 
were  such  commotions  and  revolutions  on  account  of  religion 
in  all  the  neighbouring  countries,  that  it  was  impossible  to 
maintain  the  present  regime,  and  think  to  suppress  disturb- 
ances by  means  of  Placards,  Inquisitions,  and  Bishops ;  that 
the  King  was  mistaken  if  he  'proposed  to  maintain  the 
Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent  in  these  Provinces  which 
lay  so  near  Germany,  where  all  the  Princes,  Eoman  Catholics 
as  well  as  Protestants,  have  justly  rejected  them ;  that  it 
would  be  better  that  His  Majesty  should  tolerate  these 
things  as  other  Princes  were  obliged  to  do,  and  annul  or  eke 
moderate  the  punishments  proclaimed  in  the  Placards  ;  tha<; 
though  he  himself  had  resolved  to  adhere  to  the  Catholic 
religion,  yet  he  could  not  approve  that  Princes  should  aim 
at  dominion  over  the  souls  of  men,  or  deprive  them  of  tne 
freedom  of  their  faith  and  religion.2 

1  In  a  letter  to  the  Eegont  (March.  16th,  1566),  William  declared  that  the 
heads  of  the  policy  of  Philip  which  he  most  strongly  disapproved  of  were : 
Z'entretenement  du  concile  de  Trente,  favoriser  les  inquisiteurs  ou  four  office 
et  exfouter  sans  nulle  dissimulation  lesplacars.  Correspondence,  etc.  ii.  129* 

8  Brandt,  The  History  of  the  Reformation,  etc.  i.  150. 


248   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

The  instructions  given  to  Egmont  were  accordingly 
both  full  and  plain-spoken. 

Count  Egmont  departed  leisurely  to  Madrid,  was  well 
received  by  Philip,  and  left  thoroughly  deceived,  perhaps 
self-deceived,  about  the  King's  intentions.  He  had  a  rude 
awakening  when  the  sealed  letter  he  bore  was  opened  and 
read  in  the  Council.  It  announced  no  real  change  in 
policy,  and  in  the.  matter  of  heresy  showed  that  the  King's 
resolve  was  unaltered.  A  despatch  to  the  Eegent  (Nov. 
5th,  15 65)  was  still  more  unbending.  Philip  would  not 
enlarge  the  powers  of  the  Council  in  the  Netherlands ;  he 
peremptorily  refused  to  summon  the  States  General ;  and 
he  ordered  the  immediate  publication  and  enforcement  of 
the  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent  in  every  town  and 
village  in  the  seventeen  provinces.  True  to  the  policy  of 
his  house,  the  Decrees  of  Trent  were  to  be  proclaimed  in 
his  name,  not  in  that  of  the  Pope.  It  was  the  beginning 
of  the  tragedy,  as  William  of  Orange  remarked. 

The  effect  of  the  order  was  immediate  and  alarming. 
The  Courts  of  Holland  and  Brabant  maintained  that  the 
Decrees  infringed  their  charters,  and  refused  to  permit 
their  publication.  Stadtholders  and  magistrates  declared 
that  they  would  rather  resign  office  than  execute  decrees 
which  would  compel  them  to  burn  over  sixty  thousand 
of  their  fellow-countrymen.'  Trade  ceased ;  industries  died 
out ;  a  blight  fell  on  the  land.  Pamphlets  full  of  passion- 
ate appeals  to  the  people  to  put  an  end  to  the  tyranny 
were  distributed  and  eagerly  read.  In  one  of  them,  which 
took  the  form  of  a  letter  to  the  King,  it  was  said : 

"  We  are  ready  to  die  for  the  Gospel,  but  we  read  there- 
in, '  Render  unto  Csesar  the  things  which  are  Cuesar's,  and 
unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's/  We  thank  God  that 
even  our  enemies  are  constrained  to  bear  witnena  to  our 
piety  and  innocence,  for  it  is  a  common  saying :  '  Ho  does 
not  swear,  for  he  is  a  Protestant.  He  is  not  an  immoral 
man,  nor  a  drunkard,  for  ho  belongs  to  the  new  sect  * ;  yet 
we  are  subjected  to  every  kind  of  punishment  that  can  be 
invented  to  torment  us." l 

1  Brandt,  The  History  qft/w  ^formation,  etc,  i,  160. 


PHILIP   OF   SPAIN   AND   THE   NETHERLANDS      249 

The  year  1566  saw  the  origin  of  a  new  confederated 
opposition  to  Philip's  mode  of  ruling  the  Netherlands. 
Francis  Du  Jon,  a  young  Frenchman  of  noble  birth,  belong- 
ing to  Bourges,  had  studied  for  the  ministry  at  Geneva, 
and  had  been  sent  as  a  missioner  to  the  Netherlands,  where 
his  learning  and  eloquence  had  made  a  deep  impression  on 
young  men  of  the  upper  classes.  His  life  was  in  constant 
peril,  and  he  was  compelled  to  flit  secretly  from  the  house 
of  one  sympathiser  to  that  of  another.  During  the 
festivities  which  accompanied  the  marriage  of  the  young 
Alexander  of  Parma  with  Maria  of  Portugal,  he  was  con- 
cealed in  the  house  of  the  Count  of  Culembiirg  in  Brussels. 
On  the  day  of  the  wedding  he  preached  and  prayed  with  a 
small  company  of  young  nobles,  twenty  in  all.  There  and 
at  other  meetings  held  afterwards  it  was  resolved  to  form 
a  confederacy  of  nobles,  all  of  whom  agreed  to  bind  them- 
selves to  support  principles  laid  down  in  a  carefully  drafted 
manifesto  which  went  by  the  name  of  the  Compromise.  It 
was  mainly  directed  against  •  the  Inquisition,  which  it  calls 
a  tribunal  opposed  to  all  laws,  divine  and  human.  Copies 
passed  from  hand  to  hand  soon  obtained  over  two  thousand 
signatures  among  the  lower  nobility  and  landed  gentry. 
Many  substantial  burghers  also  signed.  The  leading  spirits 
in  the  confederacy  were  Louis  of  Nassau,  the  younger 
brother  of  the  Prince  of  Orange,  then  a  Lutheran ;  Philip 
de  Marnix,  lord  of  Sainte  Aldegonde,  a  Calvinist;  and 
Henry  Viscount  Brederode,  a  Koman  Catholic.  The  con- 
federates declared  that  they  were  loyal  subjects;  but 
'pledged  themselves  to  protect  each  other  if  any  of  them 
were  attacked. 

The  confederates  met  privately  at  Breda  and  Hoogs- 
traeten  (March  1566),  and  renolved  to  present  a  petition 
to  the  Eegent  asking  that  the  King  should  be  recommended 
to  abolish  the  Placards  and  the  Inquisition,  and  that 
the  liegont  should  suspend  their  operation  until  the 
King's  wishes  were  known  ;  also  that  the  States  General 
fihoiild  be  assembled  to  consider  other  ordinances  dangerous 
to  the  country.  The  Eegent  had  called  an  assembly  of  the 


250      THE  REFORMATION   IN   THE   NETHERLANDS 

Notables  for  March  28th,  and  it  was  resolved  to  present 
the  petition  then.  The  confederation  and  its  Compromise 
were  rather  dreaded  by  the  great  nobles  who  had  been  the 
leaders  of  the  constitutional  opposition,  and  there  was  some 
debate  about  the  presentation  of  the  Bequest.  The  Baron 
de  Barlaymont  went  so  far  as  to  recommend  a  massacre  of 
the  petitioners  in  the  audience  hall;  but  wiser  counsels 
prevailed.  The  confederates  met  and  marshalled  them- 
selves,— two  hundred  young  nobles, — and  marched  through 
the  streets  to  the  Palace,  amid  the  acclamations  of  the 
populace,  to  present  the  Request*  The  Eegent  was  some- 
what dismayed  by  the  imposing  demonstration,  but 
Barlaymont  reassured  her  with  the  famous  words: 
rt  Madame,  is  your  Highness  afraid  of  these  beggars  (ces 
gueux)  ? "  The  deputation  was  dismissed  with  fair  words, 
and  the  promise  that  although  the  Eegent  bad  no  power 
to  suspend  the  Placards  or  the  Inquisition,  there  would  be 
some  moderation  used  until  the  King's  pleasure  was  known. 
Before  leaving  Brussels,  three  hundred  of  the  confeder- 
ates met  in  the  house  of  the  Count  of  Culemburg  to 
celebrate  their  league  at  a  banquet.  The  Viscount  do 
Brederode  presided,  and  during  the  feast  he  recalled  to 
their  memories  the  words  of  Barlaymont :  "  They  call  ua 
beggars/"  he  said ;  "  we  accept  the  name.  We  pledge  our- 
selves k>  resist  the  Inquisition,  and  keep  true  to  the  King 
and  the  beggar's  wallet,"  He  then  produced  the  leathern 
sack  of  the  wandering  beggars,  strapped  it  round  his  shoulder, 
and  drank  prosperity  to  the  cause  from  a  beggar *B  wooden 
bowl.  The  name-  and  the  emblem  were  adopted  with 
enthusiasm,  and  spread  far  beyond  the  circle  of  tlio  con- 
federacy.2 Everywhere  burghers,  lawyers,  peasant**  as  woll 
as-  mobles  appeared  wearing  the  beggar's  Hack  Medalw, 

1  Gachard,  Correspmtfanca  de  Guittawm  le  Tacifanw,  ii.  484  ff*  * 
J  At  meals  they  sang  : 

*'  Par  cepwtn,  par  ce  set,  ctpar  cette  beswte, 
Jamais  les  fhtews  ne  chctfogeront  pour  chose  qw  Pm/am*" 

"William  of  Orange  wrote  to  tho  Regent  that  he  was  mot  in  Antwerp  try 
crowds,  shouting  JPEw  lc$  Gucux  (Corrcspondance,  ii  186,  etc,)* 


PHILIP   OF   SPAIN   AND   THE   NETHERLANDS      251 

made  first  of  wax  set  in  a  wooden  cup,  then  of  gold  and 
silver,  were  adopted  by  the  confederated  nobles.  On  the 
one  side  was  the  effigies  of  the  King,  and  on  the  obverse 
two  hands  clasped  and  the  beggar's  sack  with  the  motto, 
Fidelles  au  Eoi  jusques  &  porter  la  besace  (beggar's  sack). 

All  these  things  were  faithfully  reported  by  the 
Eegent  to  Philip,  and  she  besought  him  either  to  permit 
her  to  moderate  the  Placards  and  the  Inquisition,  or  to 
come  to  the  Netherlands  himself.  He  answered,  promising 
to  come,  and  permitted  her  some  discretion  in  the  matter 
of  repression  of  heresy. 

Meanwhile  the  people  were  greatly  encouraged  by  the 
success,  or  appearance  of  success,  attending  the  efforts  of 
the  confederates.  Eefugees  returned  from  France,  Germany, 
and  Switzerland.  Missioners  of  the  Eeformed  faith  came 
in  great  numbers.  Field-preachings  were  held  all  over 
the  country.  The  men  came  armed,  planted  sentinels, 
placed  their  women  and  children  within  the  square,  and  thus 
listened  to  the  services  conducted  by  the  excommunicated 
ministers.  They  heard  the  Scriptures  read  and  prayers 
poured  forth  in  their  own  tongue.  They  sang  hymns  and 
psalms  in  French,  Flemish,  and  Dutch.  The  crowds  were 
so  large,  the  sentinels  so  wary,  the  men  so  well  armed,  that 
the  soldiers  dared  not  attempt  to  disperse  them.  At  first 
the  meetings  were  held  at  night  in  woods  and  desolate 
places,  but  immunity  created  boldness. 

"On  July  23rd  (1566)  the  Eeformed  rendezvoused  in 
great  numbers  in  a  large  meadow  not  far  from  Ghent. 
There  they  formed  a  sort  of  camp,  fortifying  themselves 
with  their  waggons,  and  setting  sentinels  at  all  the  roads. 
Some  brought  pikes,  some  hatchets,  and  others  guns.  In 
front  of  them  were  pedlars  with  prohibited  books,  which 
they  sold  to  such  as  came.  They  planted  several  along  the 
road  whose  business  it  was  to  invite  people  to  come  to  the 
preaching  and  to  show  them  the  way.  They  made  a  kind 
of  pulpit  of  planks,  and  set  it  upon  a  waggon,  from  which 
the  minister  preached.  When  the  sermon  was  ended,  all 
the  congregation  sang  several  psalms.  They  also  drew 
water  out  of  a  well  or  brook  near  them,  and  a  child  was 


252      THE   REFORMATION   IN   THE   NETHERLANDS 

baptized.  Two  days  were  spent  there,  and  then  they 
adjourned  to  Deinsen,  then  to  Ekelo  near  Bruges,  and  so 
through  all  West  Flanders."1 

Growing  holder  still,  the  Eef ormed  met  in  the  environs  and 
suburbs  of  the  great  towns.  Bands  of  men  marched 
through  the  streets  singing  Psalms,  either  the  French 
versions  of  Clement  Marot  or  Beze  or  the  Dutch  one  of 
Peter  Dathenus.  It  was  in  vain  that  the  Regent  issued  a 
new  Placard  against  the  preachers  and  the  conventicles. 
It  remained  a  dead  letter.  In  Antwerp,  bands  of  the 
Reformed,  armed,  crowded  to  the  preachings  in  defiance  of 
the  magistrates,  who  were  afraid  of  fighting  in  the  streets. 
In  the  emergency  the  Eegent  appealed  to  William  of 
Orange,  and  he  with  difficulty  appeased  the  tumults  and 
arranged  a  compromise.  The  Calvinists  agreed  to  disarm 
on  the  condition  that  they  were  allowed  the  free  exercise  of 
their  worship  in  the  suburbs  although  not  within  the  towns.2 

The  confederates  were  so  encouraged  with  their 
successes  that  they  thought  of  atteaipting  more.  A  great 
conference  was  held  at  St.  Trond  in  the  principality  of 
Liege  (July  1566),  attended  by  nearly  two  thousand 
members.  The  leader  was  Louis  of  Nassau.  They 
resolved  on  another  deputation  to  the  Eegent,  and  twelve 
of  their  number  were  selected  to  present  their  demands 
These  "  Twelve  Apostles,"  as  the  courtiers  contemptuously 
termed  them,  declared  that  the  persecution  had  not  been 
mitigated  as  promised,  and  not  obscurely  threatened  that  if 
some  remedy  were  not  found  they  might  be  forced  to  invoke 
foreign  assistance.  The  threat  enraged  the  Eegent;  but 
she  was  helpless;  she  could  only  urge  that  she  had 
already  made  representations  to  the  King,  and  had,  sent 
two  members  of  Council  to  inform  the  King  about  the 
condition  of  the  country. 

It  seemed  as  if  some  impression  had  been  made  on 
Philip.  The  Eegent  received  a  despatch  (July  3 1st,  1566) 

1  Brandt's  History  of  tTw  Reformation  .  .  .  in  the  Low  Countries  (London, 
1720),  i  172. 

2Gachard,  Correspondmce  de  Ouiltoime  U  Taciturn^  ii.  186  ,# 


PHILIP   OF  SPAIN   AND   THE   NETHERLANDS      253 

saying  that  he  was  prepared  to  withdraw  the  papal 
Inquisition  from  the  Netherlands,  and  that  he  would  grant 
what  toleration  was  consistent  with  the  maintenance  of  the 
Catholic  religion ;  only  he  would  in  no  way  consent  to  a 
summoning  of  the  States  General. 

There  was  great  triumphing  in  the  Netherlands  at  this 
news.  Perhaps  every  one  but  the  Prince  of  Orange  was 
more  or  less  deceived  by  Philip's  duplicity.  It  is  only  since 
the  archives  of  Simancas  have  yielded  their  secrets  that  its 
depth  has  been  known.  They  reveal  that  on  Aug.  9th  he 
executed  a  deed  in  which  he  declared  that  the  promise  of 
pardon  had  been  won  from  him  by  force,  and  that  he  did  not 
mean  to  keep  it,  and  that  on  Aug.  12th  he  wrote  to  the  Pope 
that  his  declaration  to  withdraw  the  Inquisition  was  a  mere 
blind.  William  only  knew  that  the  King  was  levying  troops, 
and  that  he  was  blaming  the  great  nobles  of  the  Nether- 
lands for  the  check  inflicted  upon  him  by  the  confederates. 

Long  before  Philip's  real  intentions  were  unmasked,  a 
series  of  iconoclastic  attacks  not  only  gave  the  King  the 
pretext  he  needed,  but  did  more  harm  to  the  cause  of  the 
Eeformation  in  the  Low  Countries  than  all  the  persecutions 
under  Charles  v.  and  his  son.  The  origin  of  these  tumul- 
tuous proceedings  is  obscure.  According  to  Brandt,  who 
collects  information  from  all  sides : 

"  Some  few  of  the  vilest  of  the  mob  .  .  .  were  those  who 
began  the  dance,  being  hallooed  on  by  nobody  knows  whom. 
Their  arms  were  staves,  hatchets,  hammers,  ladders,  ropes, 
and  other  tools  more  proper  to  demolish  than  to  fight  with ; 
some  few  were  provided  with  guns  and  swords.  At  first 
they  attacked  the  crosses  and  the  images  that  had  been 
erected  on  the  great  roads  in  the  country ;  next,  those  in 
the  villages ;  and,  lastly,  those  in  the  towns  and  cities.  All 
the  chapels,  churches,  and  convents  which  they  found  shut 
they  forced  open,  breaking,  tearing,  and  destroying  all  the 
images,  pictures,  shrines  and  other  consecrated  things  they 
met  with ;  <nay,  some  did  not  scruple  to  lay  their  hands  upon 
libraries,  boots,  writings,  monuments,  and  even  on  the  dead 
bodies  in  churches  and  churchyards." l 

1  Brandt,  History  of  the  faformafion,  eto.  i.  191. 


254      THE   REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

According  to  almost  all  accounts,  the  epidemic,  for  the 
madness  resembled  a  disease,  first  appeared  at  St.  Omer's 
(Aug.  14th,  1566),  then  at  Ypres,  and  extended  rapidly 
to  other  towns.  It  came  to  a  height  at  Antwerp  (16th 
and  17th  Aug.  1566),  when  the  mob  sacked  the  great 
cathedral  and  destroyed  some  of  its  richest  treasures.1  An 
eye-witness  declared  that  the  rioters  in  the  cathedral  did 
not  number  more  than  one  hundred  men,  women,  and  boys, 
drawn  from  the  dregs  of  the  population,  and  that  the 
attacks  on  the  other  churches  were  made  by  small  parties 
of  ten  or  twelve  persons. 

These  outrages  had  a  disastrous  effect  on  the  Keforma- 
tion  movement  in  the  Netherlands,  both  immediately  and 
in  the  future.  They  at  once  exasperated  the  more  liberal- 
minded  Roman  Catholics  and  enraged  the  Regent :  they 
began  that  gradual  cleavage  which  ended  in  the  separation 
of  the  Protestant  North  from  the  Romanist  South.  The 
Regent  felt  herself  justified  in  practically  withdrawing  all 
the  privileges  she  had  accorded  to  the  Reformed,  and  in 
raising  German  and  Walloon  troops  to  overawe  the  Pro- 
testants. The  presence  of  these  troops  irritated  some  of 
the  Oalvinist  nobles,  and  John  de  Marnix,  elder  brother  of 
Sainte  Aldegonde,  attempted  to  seize  the  Island  of 
Walcheren  in  order  to  hold  it  as  a  city  of  refuge  for  his 
persecuted  brethren.  He  was  unsuccessful;  a  fight  took 
place  not  far  from  Antwerp  itself,  in  which  de  Marnix  was 
routed  and  slain  (March  13th,  1567). 

§  5.    William  of  Orange. 

Meanwhile  William  of  Orange  had  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  Philip  was  meditating  the  suppression  of  the  rights  and 
liberties  of  the  Low  Countries  by  Spanish  troops,  and  was 
convinced  that  the  great  nobles  who  had  hitherto  headed 
the  constitutional  opposition  would  be  the  first  to  bo 
attacked.  He  had  conferences  with  Egmont  and  Hoom  at 

1  For  this  and  earlier  disturbances  at  Antwerp,  cf.  Corresponds^  de 
Philip  //.,  etc.  i.  321,  327,  379. 


WILLIAM   OF   OEANGE  255 

Dendermonde  (Oct.  3rd,  1566),  and  at  Willebroek  (April 
2nd,  1567),  and  endeavoured  to  persuade  them  that  the 
only  course  open  to  them  was  to  resist  by  force  of  arms. 
Sis  arguments  were  unavailing,  and  William  sadly  deter- 
mined that  he  must  leave  the  country  and  retire  to  his 
German  estates. 

His  forebodings  were  only  too  correct.  Philip  had  re- 
solved to  send  the  Duke  of  Alva  to  subdue  the  Netherlands. 
A  force  of  nine  thousand  veteran  Spanish  infantry  with 
thirteen  hundred  Italian  cavalry  had  been  collected  from 
the  garrisons  of  Lombardy  and  Naples,  and  Alva  began  a 
long,  difficult  march  over  the  Mt.  Cenis  and  through 
Tranche  Comt£,  Lorraine,  and  Luxemburg.  William  had 
escaped  just  in  time.  When  the  Duke  arrived  in  Brussels 
and  presented  his  credentials  to  the  Council  of  State,  it 
was  seen  that  the  King  had  bestowed  on  him  such 
extensive  powers  that  Margaret  remained  Eegent  in  name 
only.  One  of  his  earliest  acts  was  to  get  possession  of 
the  persons  of  Counts  Egmont  and  Hoorn,  with  their 
private  secretaries,  and  to  imprison  Antony  van  Straelen, 
Burgomaster  of  Antwerp,  and  a  confidential  friend  of  the 
Prince  of  Orange.  Many  other  arrests  were  ihade;  and 
Alva,  having  caught  his  victims,  invented  an  instrument 
to  help  him  to  dispose  of  them. 

By  the  mere  fiat  of  his  will  he  created  a  judicial 
chamber,  whose  decisions  were  to  override  those  of  any 
other  court  of  law  in  the  Netherlands,  and  which  was  to 
be  i*esponsible  to  none,  not  even  to  the  Council  of  State. 
It  was  called  the  Council  of  Tumults,  but  is  better  known 
by  its  popular  name,  The  Bkody  Tribunal.  It  consisted 
of  twelve  members,  among  whom  were  Barlaymont  and  a 
few  of  the  most  violent  Eomanists  of  the  Netherlands; 
but  only  two,  Juan  de  Vargas  and  del  Eio,  both  Spaniards, 
were  permitted  to  vote  and  influence  the  decisions.  Del 
Kio  was  a  nonentity;  but  de  Yargas  was  a  very  stern 
reality — a  man  of  infamous  life,  equally  notorious  for  the 
delight  he  took  in  slaughtering  his  fellow-men  and  the 
facility  with  which  he  murdered  the  Latin  language  !  He 


256      THE   REFORMATION  IN   THE   NETHERLANDS 

brought  the  whole  population  of  the  Netherlands  within 
the  grip  of  the  public  executioner  by  his  indictment  : 
ffceretici  fraxerunt  templa,  loni  nihil  faxerunt  contra  ;  ergo 
debent  omnes  patibulare ;  by  which  he  meant,  The  heretics 
have  "broken  open  churches,  the  orthodox  have  done  nothing 
to  hinder  them  ;  therefore  they  ought  all  of  them  to  be  hanged 
together.  Alva  reserved  all  final  decisions  for  his  own 
judgment,  in  order  that  the  work  might  be  thoroughly 
done.  He  wrote  to  the  King,  "  Men  of  law  only  condemn 
for  crimes  that  are  proved,  whereas  your  Majesty  knows 
that  affairs  of  State  are  governed  by  very  different  rules 
from  the  laws  which  they  have  here." 

At  its  earlier  sittings  this  terrible  tribunal  defined  the 
crime  of  treason,  and  stated  that  its  punishment  was 
death.  The  definition  extended  to  eighteen  articles,  and 
declared  it  to  be  treason — to  have  presented  or  signed 
any  petition  against  the  new  bishoprics,  the  Inquisition, 
or  the  Placards ;  to  have  tolerated  public  preaching 
under  any  circumstances ;  to  have  omitted  to  resist 
iconoclasm,  or  field-preaching,  or  the  presentation,  of  the 
Request]  to  have  asserted  that  the  King  had  not  the 
right  to  suspend  the  charters  of  the  provinces;  or  to 
maintain  that  the  Council  of  Tumults  had  not  a  right  to 
override  all  the  laws  and  privileges  of  the  Netherlands. 
All  these  things  were  treason,  and  all  of  them  were 
capital  offences.  Proof  was  not  required;  all  that  was 
needed  was  reasonable  suspicion,  or  rather  what  the 
Duke  of  Alva  believed  to  be  so.  The  Council  soon  got 
to  work.  It  sent  commissioners  through  every  part  of 
the  land — towns,  villages,  districts — to  search  for  any 
who  might  be  suspected  of  having  committed  any  act 
which  could  be  included  within  their  definition  of  treason. 
Informers  were  invited,  were  bribed,  to  come  forward ; 
ind  soon  shoals  of  denunciations  and  evidence  flowed  in 
bo  them.  The  accused  were  brought  before  the  Council, 
jried  (if  the  procedure  could  be  called  a  trial),  aud 
3ondemned  in  batches.  The  records  speak  of  ninety-five, 
jighty-four,  forty-six,  thirty-five  at  a  time*  Alva  wrote 


WILLIAM    OF   ORANGE  257 

to  Philip  that  no  fewer  than  fifteen  hundred  had  been 
taken  in  their  beds  early  on  Ash-Wednesday  morning, 
and  later  he  announces  another  batch  of  eight  hundred. 
In  each  case  he  adds,  "  I  have  ordered  all  of  them  to  be 
executed."  In  view  of  these  records,  the  language  of  a 
contemporary  chronicler  does  not  appeared  exaggerated : 

"The  gallows,  the  wheel,  stakes,  trees  along  the  high- 
ways, were  laden  with  carcasses  or  limbs  of  those  who  had 
been  hanged,  beheaded,  or  roasted ;  so  that  the  air  which 
God  made  for  the  respiration  of  the  living,  was  now  become 
the  common  grave  or  habitation  of  the  dead.  Every  day 
produced  fresh  objects  of  pity  and  of  mourning,  and  the 
noise  of  the  bloody  passing-bell  was  continually  heard, 
which  by  the  martyrdom  of  this  man's  cousin,  and  the 
other's  brother  or  friend,  rang  dismal  peals  in  the  hearts  of 
the  survivors." 1 

Whole  families  left  their  dwellings  to  shelter  themselves 
in  the  woods,  and,  goaded  by  their  misery,  pillaged  and 
plundered.  The  priests  had  been  active  as  informers,  and 
these  Wild-Beggars,  as  they  were  called,  "made  excursions 
on  them,  serving  themselves  of  the  darkest  nights  for 
revenge  and  robbery,  punishing  them  not  only  by  despoiling 
them  of  their  goods,  but  by  disfiguring  their  faces,  cutting 
off  ears  and  noses."  The  country  was  in  a  state  of 
anarchy. 

Margaret,  Duchess  of  Parma,  the  nominal  Eegent  of 
the  Netherlands,  had  found  her  position  intolerable  since 
the  arrival  of  the  Duke  of  Alva,  and  was  permitted  by 
Philip  to  resign  (Oct.  6th,  1567).  Alva  henceforth 

*  Brandt,  flwtory  of  the  Zteformation,  etc.  i.  261,  266.  The  executions 
were  latterly  accompanied  by  additional  atrocious  cruelty,  "It  boing 
perceived  with  what  constancy  and  alacrity  many  persons  went  to  the  fire, 
and  how  they  opened  their  mouths  to  make  a  free  confession  of  their  faith, 
and  that  the  wooden  balls  or  gags  were  wont  to  slip  out,  a  dreadful  machine 
was  invented  to  hinder  it  for  the  future :  they  prepared  two  little  irons,, 
between  which  the  tongue  was  screwed,  which  being  seared  at  the  tip  with 
a  glowing  iron,  would  swell  to  such  a  degree  as  to  become  immovable  and 
incapable  of  being  drawn  back  ;  thus  fastened,  the  tongue  would  wriggle 
about  with  the  pain  of  burning,  and  yield  a  hollow  sound  "  (i.  275). 
17** 


258      THE    REFORMATION  IN   THE   NETHERLANDS' 

was  untrammelled  by  even  nominal  restraint.  A  process 
was  begun  against  the  Counts  Egmont  and  Hoorn,  and 
William  of  Orange  was  proclaimed  an  outlaw  (Jan.  24th, 
1568)  unless  he  submitted  himself  for  trial  before  the 
Council  of  Tumults.  Some  days  afterwards,  his  eldest  son, 
a  boy  of  fifteen  and  a  student  in  the  University  of  Louvain, 
was  kidnapped  and  carried  off  to  Spain.1 

William  replied  in  his  famous  Justification  of  the  Prince 
of  Orange  against  his  Calumniators,  in  which  he  declared 
that  he,  a  citizen  of  Brabant,  a  Knight  of  the  Golden 
Fleece,  a  Prince  of  the  Holy  Eoman  Empire,  one  of  the 
sovereign  Princes  of  Europe  (in  virtue  of  the  principality 
of  Orange),  could  not  be  summoned  before  an  incompetent 
tribunal.  He  reviewed  the  events  in  the  Netherlands 
since  the  accession  of  Philip  IL,  and  spoke  plainly  against 
the  misgovernment  caused,  he  said  diplomatically,  by  the 
evil  counsels  of  the  King's  advisers.  The  Justification 
was  published  in  -several  languages,  and  was  not  merely  an 
act  of  defiance  to  Philip,  but  a  plea  made  on  behalf  of 
his  country  to  the  whole  of  civilised  Europe. 

The  earlier  months  of  1568  had  been  spent  by  the 
Prince  of  Orange  in  military  preparations  for  the  relief  of 
his  countrymen,  and  in  the  spring  his  army  was  ready. 
The  campaign  was  a  failure.  Hoogstraten  was  defeated. 
Louis  of  Nassau  had  a  temporary  success  at  Heiliger- 
Lee  (May  23rd,  1568),  only  to  be  routed  at  Jemmingen 
(July  21st,  1568).  After  William  had  issued  a  pathetic 
but  unavailing  manifesto  to  Protestant  Europe,  a  second 
expedition  was  sent  forth  only  to  meet  defeat.  The 
cause  of  the  Netherlands  seemed  hopeless. 

But  Alva  was  beginning  to  find  himself  in  difficulties. 
On  the  news  of  the  repulse  of  his  troops  at  Heiliger-Lee 
he  had  hastily  beheaded  the  Counts  Egmont  and  Hoorn, 
Instead  of  striking  terror  into  the  hearts  of  the  Nether- 
landers,  the  execution  roused  them  to  an  undying  hatred 
of  the  Spaniard.  He  was  now  troubled  by  lack  of  money 
to  pay  his  troops.  He  had  promised  Philip  to  make  gold 
1  Gachard,  Correspwtdance  dt  Ouillawne  U  Tactturne,  iii.  17. 


WILLIAM    OF    ORANGE  259 

flow  from  the  Low  Countries  to  Spain ;  but  Ms  rule  had 
destroyed  the  commerce  and  manufactures  of  the  country, 
the  source  of  its  wealth.  He  was  almost  dependent  on 
subsidies  from  Spain.  Elizabeth  of  England  had  been 
assisting  her  fellow  Protestants  in  the  way  she  liked  best, 
by  seizing  Spanish  treasure  ships ;  and  Alva  was  reduced 
to  find  the  money  he  needed  within  the  Netherlands. 

It  was  then  that  he  proposed  to  the  States  General, 
summoned  to  meet  him  (March  20th,  1569),  his  notorious 
scheme  of  taxation,  which  finally  ruined  him — a  tax  of  one 
per  cent,  (the  "  hundredth  penny  ")  to  be  levied  once  for  all 
on  all  property;  a  tax  of  five  per  cent,  (the  "twentieth 
penny)  to  be  levied  at  every  sale  or  transfer  of  landed 
property :  and  a  tax  of  ten  per  cent,  (the  "  tenth  penny ") 
on  all  articles  of  commerce  each  time  they  were  sold. 
This  scheme  of  taxation  would  have  completely  ruined  a 
commercial  and  manufacturing  country.  It  met  with  uni- 
versal resistance.  Provinces,  towns,  magistrates,,  guilds,  the 
bishops  and  the 'clergy — everyone  protested  against  the 
taxation.  Even  Philip's  Council  at  Madrid  saw  the  im- 
possibility of  exacting  such  taxes  from  a  country.  Alva 
swore  that  he  would  have  his  own  way.  The  town  and 
district  of  Utrecht  had  been  the  first  to  protest.  Alva 
quartered  the  regiment  of  Lombardy  upon  them ;  but  not 
even  the  licence  and  brutality  of  the  soldiers  could  force 
the  wretched  people  to  pay.  Alva  proclaimed  the  whole 
of  the  inhabitants  to  be  guilty  of  high  treason ;  he  took 
from  them  all  their  charters  and  privileges ;  he  declared 
their  whole  property  confiscated  to  the  King.  But 
these  were  the  acts  of  a  furious  madman,  and  were  unavail- 
ing. He  then  postponed  the  collection  of  the  hundredth 
and  of  the  tenth  pennies ;  but  the  need  of  money  forced 
him  on,  and  he  gave  definite  orders  for  the  collection  of  the 
"  tenth w  and  the  "  twentieth  pennies."  The  trade  and 
manufactures  of  the  country  came  to  a  sudden  standstill, 
and  Alva  at  last  knew  that  he  was  beaten.  He  had  to  be 
satisfied  with  a  payment  of  two  millions  of  florins  for  two 
years. 


260   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

The  real  fighting  force  among  the  Reformed  Nether- 
landers  was  to  be  found,  not  among  the  landsmen,  but 
in  the  sailors  and  fishermen.  It  is  said  that  Admiral 
Coligny  was  the  first  to  point  this  out  to  the  Prince  of 
Orange.  He  acted  upon  the  advice,  and  in  1569  he  had 
given  letters  of  marque  to  some  eighteen  small  vessels  to 
cruise  in  the  narrow  seas  and  attack  the  Spaniards.  At 
first  they  were  little  better  than  pirates, — men  of  various 
nationalities  united  by  a  fierce  hatred  of  Spaniards  and 
Papists,  feared  by  friends  and  foes  alike.  William  at- 
tempted, at  first  somewhat  unsuccessfully,  to  reduce  them 
to  discipline  and  order,  by  issuing  with  his  letters  of 
marque  orders  limiting  their  indiscriminate  pillage,  insist- 
ing upon  the  maintenance  of  religious  services  on  board, 
and  declaring  that  one-third  of  the  booty  was  to  be  given 
to  himself  for  the  common  good  of  the  country.  In  their 
earlier  days  they  were  allowed  to  refit  and  sell  their  plunder 
in  English  ports,  but  these  were  closed  to  them  on  strong 
remonstrances  from  the  Court  of  Spain.  It  was  almost  by 
accident  that  they  seized  and  held  (April  1st,  1572) 
Brill  or  Brielle,  a  strongly  fortified  town  on  Voorn, 
which  was  then  an  island  at  the  mouth  of  the  Maas,  some 
twenty  miles  west  or-  seaward  from  Rotterdam.  The  in- 
habitants were  forced  to  take  an  oath  of  allegiance  to 
William  as  Stadtholder  under  the  King,  and  the  flag  of 
what  was  afterwards  to  become  the  United  Provinces  was 
hoisted  on  land  for  the  first  time.  It  was  not  William, 
but  his  brother  Louis  of  Nassau,  who  was  the  first  to  see 
the  future  possibilities  in  this  act.  He  urged  the  seizure 
of  Flushing  or  Vlissingen,  the  chief  stronghold  in  Zeeland, 
situated  on  an  island  at  the  mouth  of  the  Honte  or  western 
Scheldt,  and  commanding  the  entrance  to  Antwerp.  Tho 
citizens  rose  in  revolt  against  the  Spanish  garrison;  the 
Sea-Beggars,  as  they  were  called,  hurried  to  assist  them ; 
the  town  was  taken,  and  the  Spanish  commander,  Pachecho, 
was  captured  and  hanged.  This  gave  the  seamen  possession 
of  the  whole  island  of  Walcheren  save  the  fortified  town  of 
Middleburg.  Dclfshtiven  and  Schiedam  were  seized,  The 


WILLIAM   OF   ORANGE  261 

news  swept  through  Holland,  Zealand,  Guelderland,  Utrecht, 
and  Friesland,  and  town  after  town  declared  for  William  of 
Orange  the  Stadtholdei\  The  leaders  were  marvellously 
encouraged  to  renewed  exertions.1  Proclamations  in  the 
name  of  the  new  ruler  were  scattered  broadcast  through  the 
country,  and  the  people  were  fired  .by  a  song  said  to  be 
written  by  Sainte  Aldegonde,  Wilhelmus  van  Nassouwen, 
which  is  still  the  national  hymn  of  Holland.  The  Prince 
of  Orange  thought  he  might  venture  on  another  invasion,  and 
was  already  near  Brussels  when  the  news  of  the  Massacre 
of  Saint  Bartholomew  reached  him.  His  plans  had  been  based 
on  assistance  from  France,  urged  by  Coligny  and  promised 
by  Charles  ix.  "What  a  sledge-hammer  blow  (coup  de 
massue)  that  has  been,"  he  wrote  to  his  brother ;  "  my  only 
hope  was  from  France."  Mons,  which  Louis  had  seized  in 
the  south  with  his  French  troops,  had  to  be  abandoned ;  and 
William,  after  some  vain  efforts,  had  to  disband  his  troops. 

Then  Alva  came  out  from  Brussels  to  wreak  a  fearful 
vengeance  on  Mons,  Mechlin,  Tergoes,  Naarden,  Haarlem, 
and  Zutphen.  The  terms  of  the  capitulation  of  Mons  were 
violated.  Mechlin  was  plundered  and  set  on  fire  by  the 
Spanish  troops.  The  Spanish  commander  sent  against 
Zutphen  had  orders  to  burn  every  house,  and  to  slay  men, 
women,  .and  children.  Haarlem  was  invested,  resisted 
despetitely,  and  then  capitulated  on  promise  of  lenient 
treatment.  When  the  Spaniards  entered  they  butchered 
in  -cold  blood  all  the  Dutch  soldiers  and  some  hundreds  of 
the  citizens ;  and,  tying  the  bodies  two  and  two  together, 
they  cast  them  into  the  Haarlem  lake.  It  seemed  as  if  the 
Papists  had  determined  to  exterminate  the  Protestants 
when  they  found  that  they  could  not  convert  them. 

Some  towns,  however,  held  out.  Don  Frederick,  tbe 
son  of  Alva  and  the  butcher  of  Haarlem,  was  beaten  back 
from  the  little  town  of  Alkrnaar.  The  Sea-Beggars  met  the 
Spanish  fleet  sent  to  crush  them,  sank  or  scattered  the 

1  Of.  William's  letters,  Correwondance,  etc.  iii.  47-78. 
3  Groen  van  Prinsteter,  Archives  ow  Correspondance  intdite  de  la  Orange- 
Nassau  (Utrecht,  1841-61). 


262      THE   REFORMATION  IN   THE   NETHERLANDS 

ships,  and  took  the  Admiral  prisoner.  The  nation  of  fisher- 
men and  shopkeepers,  once  the  scorn  of  Spain  and  of 
Europe  for  their  patient  endurance  of  indignities,  were 
seen  at  last  to  be  a  race  of  heroes,  determined  never  again 
to  endure  the  yoke  of  the  Spaniard.  Alva  had  soon  to 
face  a  soldiery  mutinous  for  want  of  pay,  and  to  see  all 
his  sea  approaches  in  the  hands  of  Dutch  sailors,  whom 
the  strongest  fleets  of  Spain  could  not  subdue.  The  iron 
pitiless  man  at  last  acknowledged  that  he  was  beaten,  and 
demanded  his  recall.  He  left  Brussels  on  Dec.  18th,  1573, 
and  did  not  again  see  the  land  he  had  deluged  with  blood 
during  a  space  of  six  years.  Like  all  tyrants,  he  had 
great  faith  in  his  system,  even  when  it  had  broken  in  his 
hand.  Had  he  been  a  little  more  severe,  added  a  few  more 
drops  to  the  sea  of  blood  he  had  spilled,  all  would  have 
gone  well.  The  only  advice  he  could  give  to  his  successor 
was,  to  burn  down  every  town  he  could  not  garrison  with 
Spanish  troops. 

The  new  Spanish  Eegent  was  Don  Louis  Kequesens-y- 
Zuniga,  a  member  of  the  higher  nobility  of  Spain,  and  a 
Grand  Commander  of  the  Knights  of  Malta.  He  was 
high-minded,  and  of  a  generous  disposition.  Had  he  been 
sent  to  the  Netherlands  ten  years  sooner,  and  allowed  to 
act  with  a  free  hand,  the  history  of  the  Netherlands  might 
have  been  different  His  earlier  efforts  at  government 
were  marked  by  attempts  to  negotiate,  and  he  was  at 
pains  to  give  Philip  his  reasons  for  his  conduct. 

"  Before  my  arrival,"  he  wrote, <f  I  could  not  comprehend 
how  the  rebels  contrived  to  maintain  fleets  so  considerable, 
while  your  Majesty  could  not  maintain  one.  Now  I  sec 
that  men  who  are  fighting  for  their  lives,  their  families, 
their  property,  and  their  false  religion,  in  short,  for  their  own 
cause,  are  content  if  they  receive  only  rations  without  pay." 

He  immediately  •  reversed  the- policy  of  Alva:  ho  re- 
pealed the  hated  taxes;  dissolved  the  Council  of  Blood, 
and  published  a  general  amnesty.  But  ho  coulcl  not  come 
to  terms  with  tho  "rebels."  William  of  Orange  refused 


WILLIAM    OF   ORANGE  26 S 

all  negotiation  which  was  not  based  on  three  preliminary 
conditions — freedom  of  conscience,  and  liberty  to  preach 
the  Gospel  according  to  the  Word  of  God ;  ,the  restoration 
of  all  the  ancient  charters;  and  the  withdrawal  of  all 
Spaniards  from  all  posts  military  and  civil.  He  woiild 
accept  no  truce  nor  amnesty  without  these.  "  We  have 
heard  too  often/'  he  said,  "  the  words  Agreed,  and  Eternal. 
If  I  have  your  word  for  it,  who  will  guarantee  that  the  King 
will  not  deny  it,  and  be  absolved  for  his  breach  of  faith  by 
the  Pope  ?  "  '  Kequesens,  hating  the  necessity,  had  to  carry 
on  the  struggle  which  the  policy  of  his  Kipg  and  of  the 
Eegents  who  preceded  him.  had  provoked. 

The  fortune  of  war  seemed  to  be  unchanged.  The 
patriots  were  always  victorious  at  sea  and  tenacious  in 
desperate  defence  of  their  fortified  towns  when  they  were 
besieged,  but  they  went  down  before  the  veteran  Spanish 
infantry  in  almost  every  battle  fought  on  land.  In  the 
beginning  of  1574  two  fortresses  were  invested.  The 
patriots  were  besieging  Middleburg,  and  the  Spaniards 
had  invested  Leyden.  The  Sea-Beggars  routed  the  Spanish 
fleet  in  a  bloody  fight  in  the  mouth  of  the  Scheldt,  and 
Middleburg  had  to  surrender.  Leyden  had  two  months' 
respite  owing  to  a  mutiny  among  the  Spanish  soldiers,  but 
the  citizens  neglected  the  opportunity  thus  given  them 
to  revictual  their  town.  It  was  again  invested  (May 
26th),  and  hardly  pressed,  Louis  of  Nassau,  leading  an 
army  to  its  assistance,  was  totally  routed  at  Mookerheide, 
and  he  and  his  younger  brother  Henry  were  among  the 
slain.  The  fate  of  Leyden  seemed  to  b©  sealed,  when 
William  suggested  to  the  Estates  of  Holland  to  cut  the 
dykes  and  let  in  the  sea.  The  plan  was  adopted.  But 
the  dykes  took  long  to  cut,  and  when  they  were  opened 
and  the  water  began  to  flow  in  slowly,  violent  winds 
swept  it  back  to  the  sea.  Within  Leyden  the  supply  of 
food  was  melting  away ;  and  the  famished  and  anxious 
burghers,  looking  over  the  plain  from  the  steeples  of  the 
town,  saw  help  coming  so  slowly  that  it  seemed  as  if  it 
could  arrive  only  when  it  was  too  late.  The  Spaniards 


264   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

knew  also  of  the  coming  danger,  and,  calculating  on  the 
extremities  of  the  townsfolk,  urged  on  them  to  surrender, 
with  promises  of  an  honourable  capitulation.  "  We  have 
two  arms,"  one  of  the  defenders  on  the  walls  shouted  back, 
"  and  when  hunger  forces  us  we  will  eat  the  one  and  fight 
you  with  the  other/'  Four  weary  months  passed  amidst 
indescribable  sufferings,  when  at  last  the  sea  reached  the 
walls.  With  it  came  the  patriotic  fleet,  sailing  over  buried 
corn  fields  and  gardens,  piloted  through  orchards  and 
villages.  The  Spaniards  fled  in  terror,  for  the  Sea-Beggars 
were  upon  them,  shouting  their  battle-cry,  "  Sooner  Turks 
than  Papists/'  Townsmen  and  sailors  went  to  the  great 
church  to  offer  thanksgiving  for  the  deliverance  which  had 
been  brought  them  from  the  sea.  When  the  vast  audience 
was  singing  a  psalm  of  deliverance,  the  voices  suddenly 
ceased,  and  nothing  was  heard  but  low  sobbing;  the 
people,  broken  by  long  watching  and  famine,  overcome  by 
unexpected  deliverance,  could  only  weep. 

The  good  news  was  brought  to  Delft  by  Hans  Brugge, 
who  found  William  in  church  at  the  afternoon  service. 
When  the  sermon  was  ended,  the  deliverance  of  Leyden 
was  announced  from  the  pulpit.  William,  weak  with 
illness  as  he  was,  rode  off  to  Leyden  at  once  to  congratu- 
late the  citizens  on  their  heroic  defence  and  miraculous 
deliverance.  There  he  proposed  the  foundation  of  what 
became  tile  famous  University  of  Leyden,  which  became 
for  Holland  what  Wittenberg  had  been  to  Germany, 
Geneva  to  Switzerland,  and  Saumur  to  France. 

The  siege  of  Leyden  was  the  turning-point  in  the  war 
for  independence.  The  Spanish  Eegent  saw  that  a  new 
Protestant  State  was  slowly  and  almost  imperceptibly 
forming.  His  troops  were  almost  uniformly  victorious 
in  the  field,  but  the  victories  did  not  seem  to  be  of  much 
value.  He  decided  once  more  to  attempt  negotiation, 
The  conferences  came  to  nothing.  The  utmost  that  Philip 
II.  would  concede  was  that  the  Protestants  should  have 
time  to  sell  their  possessions  and  leave  the  country. 
The  war  was  again  renewed,  when  death  came  to  relieve 


WILLIAM    OF   ORANGE  265 

Eequesens  of  his  difficulties  (March  1575).  His  last 
months  were  disgraced  by  the  recommendation  he  made 
to  his  master  to  offer  a  reward  for  the  assassination  of  the 
Prince  of  Orange. 

The  history  of  the  next  few  years  is  a  tangled  story 
which  would  take  too  long  to  telL  When  Eequesens  died 
the  treasury  was  empty,  and  no  public  money  was  forth- 
coming. The  Spanish  soldiers  mutinied,  clamouring  for 
their  pay.  They  seized  on  some  towns  and  laid  hold  on 
the  citadel  of  Antwerp.  Then  occurred  the  awful  pillage 
of  the  great  city,  when,  during  three  terrible  November 
days,  populous  and  wealthy  Antwerp  suffered  all  the 
horrors  that  could  be  inflicted  upon  it. 

The  sudden  death  of  Eequesens  had  left  everything  in 
confusion;  and  leading  men,  both  Eoman  Catholic  and 
Protestant,  conceived  that  advantage  should  be  taken  of 
the  absence  of  any  Spanish  Governor  to  see  whether  all 
the  seventeen  provinces  of  the  Netherlands  could  not  com- 
bine on  some  common  programme  which  would  unite  the 
country  in  spite  of  their  religious  differences.  Delegates 
met  together  at  Ghent  (Oct.  28th,  1576)  and  drafted  a 
treaty.  A  meeting  of  States  General  for  the  southern 
provinces  was  called  to  assemble  at  Brussels  in  November, 
and  the  members  were  discussing  the  terms  of  the  treaty 
when  the  news  of  the  "  Spanish  Fury "  at  Antwerp 
reached  them.  The  story  of  the  ghastly  horrors  perpetrated 
on  their  countrymen  doubtless  hastened  their  decision, 
and  the  treaty  was  ratified  both  by  the  States  General 
and  by  the  Council  of  State.  The  Pa&ification  of  Ghent 
cemented  an  alliance  between  the  southern  provinces 
represented  in  the  States  General  which  met  at  Brussels 
and  the  northern  provinces  of  Holland  and  Zeeland.  Its 
chief  provisions  were  that  all  should  combine  to  drive  the 
Spanish  and  other  foreign  troops  out  of  the  land,  and  that 
a  formal  meeting  of  delegates  from  all  the  seventeen 
provinces  shoufd  be  called  to  deliberate  upon  the  religious 
question.  In  the  meantime  the  Eoman  Catholic  religion 
•  was  to  be  maintained  ;  the  Placards  were  to  be  abolished  ; 


266   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

the  Prince  of  Orange  was  declared  to  be  the  Governor  of 
the  seventeen  provinces  and  the  Admiral-General  of 
Holland  and  Zeeland;  and  the  confiscation  of  the 
properties  of  the  houses  of  Nassau  and  Brederode  was 
rescinded. 

Don  John  of  Austria  had  been  appointed  by  Philip 
Regent  of  the  Netherlands,  and  was  in  Luxemburg  early 
in  November.  His  arrival  there  was  intimated  to  the 
States  General,  who  refused  to  acknowledge  him  as  Eegent 
unless  he  would  approve  of  the  Pacification  of  Grhent  and 
swear  to  maintain  the  ancient  privileges  of  the  various 
provinces.  Months  were  spent  in  negotiations,  but  the 
States  General  were  unmovable.  He  yielded  at  length, 
and  made  his  State  entry  into  Brussels  on  May  1st,  1577. 
When  once  there  he  found  himself  overshadowed  by 
William,  who  had  been  accepted  as  leader  by  Roman 
Catholics  and  Protestants  alike.  But  Philip  with  great 
exertions  had  got  together  an  army  of  twenty  thousand 
veteran  Spanish  and  Italian  troops,  and  sent  them  to  the 
Netherlands  under  the  command  of  Alexander  Farnese, 
the  son  of  the  former  Eegent,  Margaret  Duchess  of  Parma. 
The  young  Duke  of  Parma  was  a  man  of  consummate 
abilities,  military  and  diplomatic,  and  was  by  far  the 
ablest  agent  Philip  ever  had  in  the  Low  Countries.  He 
defeated  the  patriotic  army  at  Gemblours  (Jan.  31st,  1578), 
and  several  towns  at  once  opened  their  gates  to  Parma 
and  Don  John.  To  increase  the  confusion,  John  Casimir, 
brother  of  the  Elector  Palatine,  invaded  the  land  from 
the  east  at  the  head  of  a  large  body  of  German  mercenary 
soldiers  to  assist  the  Calvinists;  the  Archduke  Matthias, 
brother  of  the  Emperor  Eudolph,  was  already  in  the  country, 
invited  by  the  Eoman  Catholics ;  and  the  Duke  of  Anjou 
had  invaded  the  Netherlands  from  the  south  to  uphold 
the  interests  of  those  Bomanists  who  did  not  wish  to 
tolerate  Protestantism  but  hated  the  Spaniards.  These 
foreigners  represented  only  too  woll  the  latent  divisions 
of  the  country — divisions  which  were  skilfully  taker* 
advantage  of  by  the  Duke  of  Parma.  After  struggling 


WILLIAM    OF    ORANGEY  267 

in  vain  for  a  union  of  the  whole  seventeen  provinces  on 
the  basis  of  complete  religious  toleration,  William  saw 
thai;  his  task  was  hopeless.  Neither  the  majority  of  the 
Eomanists  nor  the  majority  of  the  Protestants  could 
understand  toleration.  Delegates  of  the  Eomanist  provinces 
of  Hainault,  Douay,  and  Artois  met  at  Arras  (Jan.  5th, 
1579)  to  form  a  league  which  had  for  its  ultimate  in- 
tention a  reconciliation  with  Spain  on  the  basis  of  the 
Pacification  of  Ghent,  laying  stress  on  the  provision  for 
the  maintenance  of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion.  Thus 
challenged,  the  northern  provinces  of  Holland,  Zeeland, 
Utrecht,  Guelderland,  and  Zutphen  met  at  Utrecht  (Jan. 
29tb,  1579),  and  formed  a  league  to  maintain  themselves 
against  all  foreign  Princes,  including  the  King  of  Spain. 
These  two  leagues  mark  the  definite  separation  of  the 
Eomanist  South  from  the  Protestant  North,  and  the 
creation  of  a  new  Protestant  State,  the  United  Provinces. 
William  did  not  sign  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht  until  May  3rd. 

In  1581,  Philip  made  a  last  attempt  to  overcome  his 
indomitable  antagonist.  He  published  the  Ban  against 
him,  denouncing  him  as  a  traitor  and  an  enemy  of  the 
human  race,  and  offering  a  reward  of  twenty-five  thousand 
crowns  and  a  patent  of  nobility  to  anyone  who  should 
deliver  him  to  the  King  dead  or  alive.  William  answered 
in  his  famous  Apology ',  which  gives  an  account  of  his  whole 
career,  and  contains  a  scathing  exposure  of  Philip's 
misdeeds.  The  Apology  was  translated  into  several 
languages,  and  sent  to  all  the  Courts  of  Europe.  Brabant, 
Flanders,  Utrecht,  Guelderland,  Holland,  and  Zeeland 
answered  Philip  by  the  celebrated  Act  of,  Abjuration 
(J\ily  26th,  1581),  in  which  they  solemnly  renounced 
allegiance  to  the  King  of  Spain,  and  constituted  themselves 
an  independent  republic. 

The  date  of  the  abjuration  may  be  taken  as  the 
beginning  of  the  new  era,  the  birth  of  another  Protestant 
nation.  Its  young  life  had  been  consecrated  in  a  baptism 
of  blood  and  fire  such  as  no  other  nation  in  Europe  h^d  to 
endure.  Its  Declaration  of  Independence  did  riot  procure 


268   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

immediate  relief.  Nearly  thirty  years  of  further  struggle 
awaited  it ;  and  it  was  soon  to  mourn  the  loss  of  its  heroic 
leader.  The  rewards  promised  by  Philip  n.  were  a  spur  to 
the  zeal  of  Eomanist  fanatics.  In  1582  (March  18th), 
Juan  Jaureguy,  a  Biscayan,  made  a  desperate  attempt  at 
assassination,  which  for  the  moment  was  thought  to  be 
successful.  The  pistol  was  so  close  to  the  Prince  that  his 
hair  and  beard  were  set  on  fire,  and  the  ball  entering  under 
the  right  ear,  passed  through  the  palate  and  out  by  the 
left  jaw.  Two  years  later  (July  9th,  1584),  William  fell 
mortally  wounded  by  Balthasar  Gerard,  whose  heirs 
claimed  the  reward  for  assassination  promised  by  Philip, 
and  received  part  of  it  from  the  King.  The  Prince's  last 
words  were  :  "  My  God,  have  mercy  on  my  soul  and  on 
these  poor  people." 

The  sixteenth  century  produced  no  nobler  character 
than  that  of  William,  Prince  of  Orange.  His  family  were 
Lutherans,  but  they  permitted  the  lad  to  be  brought  up 
in  the  Eoman  Catholic  religion — the  condition  which 
Charles  v.  had  imposed  before  he  would  consent  to  give 
effect  to  the  will  of  Ken£,  Prince  of  Orange,1  who,  dying 
at  the  early  age  of  twenty-six,  had  left  his  large  possessions 
tp  his  youthful  cousin,  William  of  Nassau.  In  an  intoler- 
ant age  he,  stands  forth  as  the  one  great  leader  who  rose 
above  the  religious  passions  of  the  time,  and  who  strove 
all  his  life  to  secure  freedom  of  conscience  and  right  of 
public  worship  for  men  of  all  creeds.2  He  was  a  con- 
sistent liberal  Eoman  Catholic  down  to  the  close  of  1555. 
His  letter  (January  24th,  1566)  to  Margaret  of  Parma 

1  The  small  principality  of  Orange-Chalons  was  situated  in  the  south  of 
France  on  the  river  Rhone,  its  south-west  corner  being  about  ten  miles 
north  of  the  city  of  Avignon.  Henry  of  Nassau,  the  uncle  of  our  William 
of  Orange,  had  married  Claude,  the  sister  of  Philibert,  the  last  male  of  the 
House  of  Orange-Chalons  ;  and  Philibert  had  bequeathed  liis  principality 
to  his  nephew  Kene",  the  son  of  Henry  and  Claude.  The  principality  was 
of  no  great  value  compared  with  the  other  possessions  of  the  House  of 
Nassau,  but  as  it  was  under  no  overlord,  its  possessor  took  rank  among  the 
sovereign  princes  of  Europe. 

a  Putnam,  Williwi  ffie  Sifant,  the  Prince  of  Or&ng^  fh&  moderate  mom 
of  the  8fafaenth  Century,  2  vols.,  New  York,  1805. 


WILLIAM   OF   ORANGE  269 

perhaps  reveals  the  beginnings  of  a  change.  He  called 
himself  "  a  good  Christian,"  not  a  "  good  Catholic,"  Before 
the  end  of  that  year  he  had  said  privately  that  he  was 
ready  to  return  to  the  faith  of  his  childhood  and  subscribe 
the  Augsburg  Confession.  During  his  exile  in  1568  he 
had  made  a  daily  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and,  what- 
ever the  exact  shade  of  his  theological  opinions,  had  become 
a  deeply  religious  man,  animated  with  the  lofty  idea  that 
God  had  called  him  to  do  a  great  work  for  Him  and  for 
His  persecuted  people.  His  private  letters,  meant  for  no 
eyes  but  those  of  his  wife  or  of  his  most  familiar  friends, 
are  full  of  passages  expressing  a  quiet  faith  in  God  and  in 
the  leadings  of  His  Providence.1  During  the  last  years  of 
his  life  the  teachings  of  Calvin  had  more  and  more  taken 
hold  on  his  intellect  and  sympathy,  and  he  publicly  declared 
himself  a  Calvinist  in  1573  (October  23rd).  A  hatred  of 
every  form  of  oppression  was  his  ruling  passion,  and  he  him- 
self has  told  us  that  it  was  when  he  learnt  that  the  Kings 
of  France  and  Spain  had  come  to  a  secret  understanding 
to  extirpate  heresy  by  fire  and  sword,  that  he  made  the 
silent  resolve  to  drive  "  This  vermin  of  Spaniards  out  of 
his  country."  2 

The  Protestant  Netherlands  might  well  believe  them- 
selves lost  when  he  fell  under  the  pistol  of  the  assassin ; 
but  he  left  them  a  legacy  in  the  persons  of  his  confidential 
friend  Johan  van  Oldenbarneveldt  and  of  his  son  Maurice. 
Oldenbarneveldt's  patient  diplomatic  genius  completed  the 
political  work  left  unfinished  by  William ;  and  Maurice,* 

1  Gachard,  Gorrespondance  de  6fuiUomme  le  Tacitwrne,  Prince  d' Orange, 
ii.  110. 

2  It  is  said  that  William's  reticence  on  hearing  this  news,  which  moved 
him  so  much,  gained  him  the  name  of  "The  Silent "  (le  taciturne) :  it  is  more 
probable  that  the  soubriquet  was  given  to  him  by  Cardinal  de  Granvelle. 

3  Maurice  succeeded  his  father  as  Stadtholder,  and  became  Prince  of, 
Orange  in  1618  on  the  death  of  his  elder  brother,  Philip  William,  who  was 
kidnapped  from  Louvain  and  brought  up  as  a  Roman  Catholic  by  Philip 
n.    William  was  married  four  times : 

a.  In  1550,  to  Anne  of  Egmont,  only  child  of  Maximilian  of  Bur  en. 
Her  son  was  Philip  William  ;  she  died  in  March  1558. 

&.  In  1561,  to  Anne,  daughter  of  the  Elector  Maurice  of  Saxony,  and 


270   THE  REFORMATION  IN  THE  NETHERLANDS 

a  lad  of  seventeen  at  his  father's  death,  was  acknowledged 
only  a  few  years  afterwards  as  the  greatest  military 
leader  in  Europe.  The  older  man  in  the  politician's  study, 
and  the  boy-general  in  the  field,  were  able  to  keep  the 
Spaniards  at  bay,  until  at  length,  in  1607  (October),  a 
suspension  of  arms  was  agreed  to.  This  resulted  in  a 
truce  for  twelve  years  (April  9th,  1609),  which  was  after- 
wards prolonged  indefinitely.  The  Dutch  had  won  their 
independence,  and  had  become  a  strong  Protestant  power 
whose  supremacy  at  sea  was  challenged  only  by  England. 

Notwithstanding  the  severity  of  the  persecutions  which 
they  endured,  the  Protestants  of  the  Netherlands  organised 
themselves  into  churches,  and  as  early  as  1563  the  dele- 
gates from  the  various  churches  met  in  a  synod  to  settle  the 
doctrine  and  discipline  which  was  to  bind  them  together. 
This  was  not  done  without  internal  difficulties.  The 
people  of  the  Netherlands  had  received  the  Evangelical 
faith  from  various  sources,  and  the  converts  tenaciously 
clung  to  the  creed  and  ecclesiastical  system  with  which  they 
were  first  acquainted.  The  earliest  ^Reformation  preachers 
in  the  Low  Countries  were  followers  of  Luther,  and  many 
of  them  had  been  trained  at  Wittenberg.  Lutherans 
were  numerous  among  the  lesser  nobility  and  the  more 
substantial  burghers.  Somewhat  later  the  opinions  of 
Zwingli  also  found  their  way  into  the  Netherlands,  and 
were  adopted  by  many  very  sincere  believers.  The  French- 
granddaughter  of  Philip  of  Hesse.  She  early  developed  symptoms  of 
incipient  insanity,  which  came  to  a  height  when  she  deserted  her  husband 
in  1567  and  went  to  live  a  disreputable  life  in  Cologne.  She  became  insane, 
and  her  family  seized  her  and  imprisoned  her  until  she  died  in  1573.  She 
was  the  mother  of  Maurice. 

c.  In  1571,  Charlotte  de  Bourbon,  daughter  of  the  Due  de  Montpcnaier. 
She  had  been  a  nun,  had  embraced  the  Reformed  faith,  and  fled  to  Germany* 
The  marriage  was  a  singularly  happy  one.    She -was  scarcely  recovered  from 
childbirth  when  William  was  almost  killed  by  Jaureguy,  and  the  shock, 
combined  with  her  incessant  toil  in  nursing  her  husband,  was  too  much 
for  her  strength  ;  she  died  in  1582  (May  5th). 

d.  In  1583,  to  Louise  de  Ooligny,  daughter  of  the  celebrated  Admiral 
Coligny.  She  had  lost  both  her  parents  in  the  Massacre  of  Saint  Bartholomew. 
She  was  a  wonderful  and  charming  woman,  beloved  by  her  stepchildren 
and  adored  by  her  adopted  country  ;  she  survived  her  husband  forty  years. 


WILLIAM    OF   ORANGE  271 

speaking  provinces  in  the  south  had  been  evangelised  for 
the  most  part  by  missioners  trained  under  Calvin  at 
Geneva,  and  they  brought  his  theology  with  them.  Thus 
Luther,  Zwingli,  and  Calvin  had  all  attached  followers  in 
the  Low  Countries.  The  differences  found  expression,  not 
so  much  in  matters  of  doctrine  as  in  preferences  for 
different  forms  of  Church  government ;  and  although  they 
were  almost  overcome,  they  reappeared  later  in  the  contest 
which  emerged  in  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century 
about  the  relation  which  ought  to  subsist  between  the  civil 
and  the  ecclesiastical  authorities.  In  the  end,  the  teaching 
of  Geneva  displaced  both  Lutheranism  and  Zwinglianism, 
and  the  Eeformed  in  the  Netherlands  became  Calvinist  in 
doctrine  and  discipline. 

Accordingly,  most  of  the  churches  were  early  organised 
on  the  principles  of  the  churches  in  Prance,  with  a  minister 
and  a  consistory  of  elders  and  deacons ;  and  when  delegates 
from  the  churches  met  to  deliberate  upon  an  organisation 
which  would  bind  all  together,  the  system  which  was 
adopted  was  the  Presbyterian  or  Conciliar.  The  meeting 
was  at  Emden  (1569),  as  it  was  too  dangerous  to  assemble 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Government  of  the  Nether- 
lands. It  was  resolved  that  the  Church  should  be  ruled 
by  consistories,  classes,  and  synods.  This  Conciliar  organisation, 
thus  adopted  at  Emden  in  1569,  might  not  have  met  with 
unanimous  support  had  not  the  Eeformed  been  exposed  to 
the  full  fury  of  Alva's  persecution.  The  consistorial 
system  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  and  the  position  which 
Zwingli  assigned  to  the  magistracy,  are  possible  only  when 
the  civil  government  is  favourably  disposed  towards  the 
Church  within  the  land  which  it  rules ;  but  Presbyterianism, 
as  France,  Scotland,  and  the  Netherlands  have  proved, 
is  the  best  suited  for  "  a  Church  under  the  Cross."  Nor 
need  this  be  wondered  at,  for  the  Presbyterian  or  Conciliar 
is  the  revival  of  the  government  of  the  Church  of  the  early 
centuries  'while  still  tinder  the  ban  of  the  Eoman  Empire.1 

1  Lindsay,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry  m  the  Early  Centuries,  2nd  od. 
(London,  1903),  pp.  198,  204/.,  259,  330  n.t  339. 


272      THE   REFORMATION   IN  THE   NETHERLANDS 

A  synod  which  met  at  Dordrecht  (Dort)  in  15*72 
revised,  enlarged,  and  formally  adopted  the  articles  of  this 
Emden  synod  or  conference, 

Two  peculiarities  of  the  Dutch  organisation  ought  to 
be  explained.  The  consistory  or  kirk-session  is  the  court 
which  rules  the  individual  congregation  in  Holland  as  in 
all  other  Presbyterian  lands ;  but  in  the  Dutch  Church  all 
Church  members  inhabiting  a  city  are  regarded  as  one 
congregation;  the  ministers  are  the  pastors  of  the  city, 
preaching  in  turn  in  all  its  buildings  set  apart  for  public 
worship,  and  the  people  are  not  considered  to  be  specially 
attached  to  any  one  of  the  buildings,  nor  to  belong  to  the 
flock  of  any  one  of  the  ministers;  and  therefore  there 
is  one  consistory  for  the  whole  city.  This  peculiarity  was 
also  seen  in  the  early  centuries.  Then  it  must  be  noticed 
that,  owing  to  the  political  organisation  of  the  United 
Provinces,  it  was  difficult  to  arrange  for  a  National  Synod. 
The  civil  constitution  was  a  federation  of  States,  in* many 
respects  independent  of  each  other,  who  were  bound  to 
protect  each  other  in  war,  to  maintain  a  common  army, 
and  to  contribute  to  a  common  military  treasury.  When 
William  of  Orange  was  elected  Stadtholder  for  life,  one  of 
the  laws  which  bound  him  was  that  he  should  not  acknow- 
ledge any  ecclesiastical  assembly  which  had  not  the 
approval  of  the  civil  authorities  of  the  province  in  which 
it  proposed  to  meet.  This  implied  that  each  province 
was  entitled  to  regulate  its  own  ecclesiastical  affairs. 
There  could  be  no  meeting  of  a  National  Synod  unless  all 
the  United  Provinces  gave  their  approval.  Hence  the 
tendency  was  to  prevent  corporate  and  united  action. 

According  to  the  articles  of  Emden,  and  the  revised 
and  enlarged  edition  approved  at  Dordrecht  in  1572,  it 
was  agreed  that  office-bearers  in  the  Church  were  to  sign 
the  Confession  of  Faith.  This  creed  had  been  prepared 
by  G-uido  de  Br&s  (born  at  Mons  in  1540)  in  1561,  and 
had  been  revised  by  several  of  his  friends.  It  was 
based  on  the  Confession  of  the  French  Church,  and  was 
originally  written  in  French.  It  was  approved  by  a  series 


WILLIAM   OF   ORANGE  273 

of  Synods,  and  was  translated  into  Dutch,  German,  and 
Latin.  It  is  known  as  the  Belgic  Confession.  Its  original 
title  was,  A  Confession  of  faith,  generally  and  unanimously 
maintained  ly  Believers  dispersed  throughout  the  Low 
Countries  who  desire  to  live  according  to  the  purity  of  the 
Holy  Gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'1  The  Church  also 
adopted  the  Heidelberg  Catechism2'  for  the  instruction  of 
the  young. 

The  long  fight  against  Spain  and  the  Inquisition  had 
stimulated  the  energies  of  the  Church  and  the  people  of 
the  Netherlands,  and  their  Universities  and  theological 
schools  soon  rivalled  older  seats  of  learning.  The 
University  of  Leyden,  a  thank-offering  for  the  wonderful 
deliverance  of  the  town,  was  founded  in  1575 ;  Franecker, 
ten  years  later,  in  1585  ;  and  there  followed  in  rapid 
succession  the  Universities  of  Gronningen  (1612),  Utrecht 
(1636),  and  Harderwyk  (1648).  Dutch  theologians  and 
lawyers  became  famous  during  the  seventeenth  century 
for  their  learning  and  acumen. 

1  Muller,   Die   JBekenntnisschriften   dcr   reformierten   Kirche  (Leipzig, 
1903),  p.  233  ;  Schaff,  The  Creeds  of  the  Evangelical  Protestant  Churches, 
383. 

2  Ibid.  p.  682, 


18** 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  EEFOKMATION  IN  SCOTLAND.1 

IF  civilisation  means  the  art  of  living  together  in  peace, 
Scotland  was  almost  four  hundred  years  behind  the  rest  of 
Western  Europe  in  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

3  SOUBCES  : — Calendar  of  tTie  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary 
Queen  of  Scots,  1547-1603  ( Edinburgh,  1898,  etc. ) ;  Calendar  of  State  Papers, 
Elizabeth)  Foreign  (London,  1863,  etc.) ;  Acts  of  the  Parliament  of  Scotland, 
ii.  (1814);  Register  of  the  Great  Seal  of  Scotland  (Edinburgh,  1886); 
Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland,  i.  (Edinburgh,  1877) ;  LabanoIF, 
Lettres  incites  de  Marie  Stuart  (Paris,  1839),  and  Lettres,  instruction* 
et  mdnwires  de  Marie  Stuart  (London,  1844) ;  Pollen,  Papal  Negotiations 
with  Mary  Queen  of  Scots  (Scottish  Historical  Society,  Edinburgh,  1901) ; 
Teulet,  Papiers  d'e'tat  .  ,  .  relatifs  a  Vhistoire  de  I'ficosse  (Bannatyne  Club, 
1851),  and  Itelations  politiques  de  la  France  et  de  VEspayne  avec  r$co$se 
(Paris,  1862) ;  Lesley,  History  of  Scotland  (Scottish  Text  Society,  Edinburgh, 
1888) ;  John  Knox,  Works  (edited  by  D.  Laing,  Edinburgh,  1846-55) ; 
The  Book  of  the  Universal  Kwh  (Bannatyne  Club,  Edinburgh,  1839) ;  Gude 
and  Oodlie  Sallatis  (edited  by  Mitchell  for  Scottish  Text  Society,  Edinburgh, 
1897) ;  (Dunlop),  A  Collection  of  Confessions  of  Faith,  etc.  ii.  (Edinburgh, 
1722) ;  Calderwood,  History  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  (Woodrow  Society, 
Edinburgh,  1842-49) ;  Kow,  History  of  the  Kirk  o/  Scotland  (Woodrow 
Society,  Edinburgh,  1842) ;  Spottiswoode,  History  of  the  Church  and  State 
of  Scotland  (Spottiswoode  Society,  Edinburgh,  1851) ;  Scott,  Fasti  J2ccUsia& 
Scoticanoe  (Edinburgh,  1866-71);  Sir  David  Lindsay,  Poetical  Works 
(edited  by  David  Laing,  Edinburgh,  1879) ;  The  Book  of  Common  Order  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland  (edited  by  Sprott  and  Leishman,  Edinburgh,  1868) ; 
Rotuli  Scotice ;  Calvin's  Letters  (Corpus  fieforntatorwm,  xxxviii.-xlviu. ). 

LATER  BOOKS  :  D.  Hay  tleming,  Mary  Queen  of  Scots  from  her  birth  until 
her  flight  into  England  (London,  1897),  The  Scottish  Reformation  (Edinburgh, 
1904),  and  The  Story  of  the  Scottish  Covenants  (Edinburgh,  1904) ;  P.  Hume 
Brown,  John  Knox  (London,  1895),  and  George  Jtfuchanan  (Edinburgh,  1890) ; 
M'Crie,  Life  of  Knox  (Edinburgh,  1840) ;  Grub,  Ecclesiastical  History  of 
Scotland  (Edinburgh,  1861);  Cunningham,  The  CJvurch  History  of  Scotland 
(Edinburgh,  1882) ;  Lorimer,  Life  of  Patrick  Hamilton  (Edinburgh,  1857), 
John  K'nxm  and  the  Church  cf  JSn^Xand  (London,  1875). 


PREPARATION  FOR  THE  REFORMATION     275 

The  history  of  her  kings  is  a  tale  of  assassinations,  long 
minorities,  regencies  scrambled  and  fought  for  by  un- 
scrupulous barons ;  and  kingly  authority,  which  had  been 
growing  in  other  countries,  was  on  the  verge  of  extinction 
in  Scotland.  Her  Parliament  or  Estates  of  the  Eealm 
was  a  mere  feudal  assembly,  with  more  than  the  usual 
uncertainty  regarding  who  were  entitled  to  be  present ; 
while  its  peculiar  management  by  a  Committee  of  the 
Estates  made  it  a  facile  instrument  in  the  hands  of  the 
faction  who  were  for  the  moment  in  power,  and  robbed  it 
of  any  stable  influence  on  the  country  as  a  whole.  The 
Church,  wealthy  so  far  as  acreage  was  concerned,  had 
become  secularised  to  an  extent  unknown  elsewhere,  and 
its  benefices  served  to  provide  for  the  younger  sons  of  the 
great  feudal  families  in  a  manner  which  recalls  the  days 
of  Charles  the  Hammer.1 

Yet  the  country  had  been  prepared  for  the  Reforma- 
tion by  the  education  of  the  people,  especially  of  the  middle 
class,  by  constant  intercourse  between  Scotland  and  France 
and  the  Low  Countries,  and  by  the  sympathy  which  Scottish 
students  had  felt  for  the  earlier  movements  towards 
Church  reform  in  England  and  Bohemia ;  while  the 
wealth  and  immorality  of  the  Romish  clergy,  the  poverty 
of  the  nobility  and  landed  gentry,  and  the  changing 
political  situation,  combined  to  give  an  impetus  to  the 
efforts  of  those  who  longed  for  a  Reformation. 

More  than  one  historian  has  remarked  that  the  state 
of  education  in  Scotland  had  always  been  considerably  in 
advance  of  what  might  have  been  expected  from  its 
backward  civilisation.  This  has  been  usually  traced  to 
the  enduring  influence  of  the  old  Celtic  Church — a  Church 
which  had  maintained  its  hold  on  the  country  for  more 
than  seven  centuries  and  which  had  always  looked  upon 
the  education  of  the  people  as  a  religious  duty.  Old 
Celtic  ecclesiastical  rules  declared  that  it  was  as  important 
to  teach  boys  and  girls  to  read,  as  to  dispense  the  sacraments, 
and  to  take  part  in  soul-friendship  (confession).  The 

1  Of.  Cambridge  Modern  History  (Cambridge,  1903),  ii.  551-68. 


276  THE   REFORMATION  IN  SCOTLAND 

Celtic  monastery  had  always  been  an  educational  centre  ; 
and  when  Charles  the  Great  established  the  High  Schools 
which  grew  to  be  the  older  Universities  of  northern 
Europe,  the  Celtic  monasteries  furnished  many  of  the 
teachers.  The  very  complete  educational  system  of  the 
old  Church  had  been  taken  over  into  the  Eoman  Church 
which  supplanted  it,  under  Queen  Margaret  and  her  sons. 
Hence  it  was  that  the  Cathedral  and  Monastery  Schools 
produced  a  number  of  scholars  who  were  eager  to  enrich 
their  stores  of  learning  beyond  what  the  mother-country 
could  give  them,  and  the  Scotch  wandering  student  was 
well  known  during  the  Middle  Ages  on  the  Continent  of 
Europe.  One  Scottish  bishop  founded  a  Scots  College 
in  Paris  for  his  countrymen  ;  other  bishops  obtained  from 
English  kings  safe-conducts  for  their  students  to  reside 
at  Oxford  and  Cambridge. 

This  scholastic  intercourse  brought  Scotland  in  touch 
Tvith  the  intellectual  movements  in  Europe.  Scottish 
students  at  Paris  listened  to  the  lectures  of  Peter  Dubois 
and  William  of  Ockham  when  they  taught  the  theories 
contained  in  the  Defensor  Pacis  of  Marsiglio  of  Padua, 
who  had  expounded  that  the  Church  is  not  the  hierarchy, 
but  the  Christian  people,  and  had  denied  both  the 
temporal  and  spiritual  supremacy  of  the  Pope.  The 
Rotuli  Scotice,1  or  collection  of  safe-conducts,  issued  by 
English  monarchs  to  inhabitants  of  the  northern  kingdom, 
show  that  a  continuous  stream  of  Scottish  students  went 
to  the  English  Universities  from  1357  to  1389.  During 
the  earlier  years  of  this  period  —  that  is,  up  to  1364  — 
the  safe-conducts  applied  for  and  granted  entitled  the 
bearers  to  go  to  Oxford  or  Cambridge  or  any  other  place 
of  learning  in  England;  but  from  1364  to  1379  Oxford 
seems  to  have  been  the  only  University  frequented. 
During  one  of  these  years  (1365)  safe-conducts  wore 
given  to  no  fewer  than  eighty-one  Scottish  students  to 
study  in  Oxford.  The  period  was  that  during  which 


i.  808,  815,  816,  822,  825,  828,  829,  840,  851,  859,  877, 
881,  886,  891,  896,  ii.  8,  20,  45,  100. 


LOLLARDY  IN  SCOTLAND  277 

the  influence  of  Wiclif  was  most  powerful,  when  Oxford 
seethed  with  Lollardy;  and  the  teachings  of  the  great 
Reformer  were  thus  brought  into  Scotland. 

Lollardy  seems  to  have  made  great  progress.  In 
1405,  Robert,  Duke  of  Albany,  was  made  Governor  of 
Scotland,  and  Andrew  Wyntoun  in  his  Metrical  Chronicle 
praises  him  for  his  fidelity  to  the  Church : 

"He  wes  a  constant  Catholike, 
All  Lollard  he  hatyt  and  heretike."1 

From  this  time  down  to  the  very  dawn  of  the  Reforma- 
tion we  find  references  to  Lollardy  in  contemporary 
writers  and  in  Acts  of  the  Scots  Parliament ;  and  all  the 
earlier  histories  of  the  Reformation  movement  in  Scotland 
relate  the  story  of  the  Lollards  of  Kyle  and  their  inter- 
view with  King  James  iv.2 

The  presence  of  Lollard  opinions  in  Scotland  must 
have  attracted  the  attention  of  the  leaders  of  the  Hussites 
in  Bohemia.  In  1433  (July  23rd),  Paul  Craw  or  Crawar 
was  seized,  tried  before  the  Inquisitorial  court,  condemned, 
and  burnt  as  a  heretic.  He  had  brought  letters  from  the 
Hussites  of  Prag,  and  acknowledged  that  he  had  been  sent 
to  interest  the  Scots  in  the  Hussite  movement — one  of 
the  many  emissaries  who  were  despatched  in  1431  and 
1432  by  Procopius  and  John  Rokycana  into  all  European 
lands.  He  was  found  by  the  Inquisitor  to  be  a  man  in 
sacris  literis  et  in  alkgatione  £iblice  promptus  et  exercitatus. 
Knox  tells  us  that  he  was  condemned  for  denying 
transubstantiation,  auricular  confession  to  the  priests,  and 
prayers  to  saints  departed.  We  learn  also  from  Knox 
that  at  his  burning  the  executioner  put  a  ball  of  brass  in 
his  mouth  that  the  people  might  not  hear  his  defence. 
His  execution  did  not  arrest  the  progress  of  Lollardy. 

1  "Wyntoun,  Orygynale  CronyMl>  ir.  c.  xxvi.  2773,  2774. 

a  For  a  collection  of  these  references,  cf.  The  Scottish  Historical  JRemew 
for  April  1904,  pp.  266jf.  Purvoy's  revision  of  "Wiclif  s  New  Testament  was 
translated  by  Murdoch  Nisbet  into  Soots.  It  is  being  published  by  the 
Scottish  Text  Society,  The  New  Testament  m  Scots,  i.  1901,  ii.  1903.  Th« 
translation  was  made  about  1520. 


278  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

The  earlier  poems  of  Sir  David  Lindsay  contain  Lollard 
opinions.  By  the  time  that  these  were  published  (1529- 
1530),  Lutheran  writings  had  found  their  way  into 
Scotland,  and  may  have  influenced  the  writer;  but  the 
sentiments  in  the  Testament  and  Gomplaynt  of  the  Papyngo 
are  more  Lollard  than  Lutheran. 

The  Romish  Church  in  Scotland  was  comparatively 
wealthy,  and  the  rude  Scottish  nobles  managed  to  place 
their  younger  sons  in  many  a  fat  living,  with  the  result 
that  the  manners  of  the  clergy  did  little  honour  to  their 
sacred  calling.  Satirists  began  to  point  the  moraL  John 
Eow  says : 

"  As  for  the  more  particulare  means  whereby  many  in 
Scotknd  got  some  knowledge  of  God's  trueth,  in  the  time 
of  great  darkness,  there  were  some  books  sett  out,  such  as 
Sir  David  Lindesay  his  poesie  upon  the  Four  Monarchies. 
wherein  many  other  treatises  are  conteined,  opening  up 
the  abuses  among  the  Clergie  at  that  tyme ;  Wedderburn's 
Psalms  and  Godlie  Ballads,  changing  '  many  of  the  old 
Popish  songs  unto  Godlie  purposes;  a  Complaint  given 
in  by  the  halt,  blinde  and  poore  of  England,  aganis  the 
prelats,  preists,  friers,  and  others  such  kirkmen,  who 
prodigallie  wasted  all  the  tithes  and  kirk  liveings  upon 
their  unlawfull  pleasures,  so  that  they  could  get  no 
sustentation  nor  releef  as  God  had  ordained.  This  was 
printed  and  came  into  Scotland.  There  were  also  some 
theatricall  playes,  comedies,  and  other  notable  histories 
acted  in  publict;  for  Sir  David  Lindesay  his  Satyre  was 
acted  in  the  Amphitheater  of  St.  Johnestoun  (Perth),  before 
King  James  the  v.,  and  a  great  part  of  the  nobilitie  and 
gentrie,  fra  morn  to  even,  whilk  made  the  people  sensible 
of  the  darknes  wherein  they  lay,  of  the  wickednes  of  their 
kirfcmen,  and  did  let  them  see  how  God's  Kirk  should  have 
bene  otherwayes  guyded  nor  it  was ;  all  of  whilk  did  much 
good  for  that  tyme." * 

It  may  be  doubted,  however,  whether  the  Scottish  people 
felt  the  real  sting  in  such  satires  until  they  began  to  be 

J  Eow,  History  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  from  the  year  155B  to  Augutt  WSf 
(Edinburgh,  1842),  p.  6. 


LUTHERAN    WRITINGS    IN   SCOTLAND  279 

taught  by  preachers  who  had  been  to  Wittenberg,  or  who 
had  studied  the  writings  of  Luther  and  other  Eeformers, 
or  who  had  learned  from  private  perusal  of  the  Scriptures 
what  it  was  to  be  in  earnest  about  pardon  of  sin  and 
salvation  of  soul 

Some  of  the  towns  on  the  East  Coast  were  centres  of 
trade  with  the  Continent,  and  Leith  had  once  been  an 
obscure  member  of  the  great  Hanseatic  League.  Lutheran 
and  other  tracts  were  smuggled  into  Scotland  from  Camp- 
vere  by  way  of  Leith,  Dundee,  and  Montrose.  The  authori- 
ties were  on  the  alert,  and  tried  to  put  an  end  to  the 
practice.  In  1525,  Parliament  forbade  strangers  bringing 
Lutheran  books  into  Scotland  on  pain  of  imprisonment  and 
forfeiture  of  their  goods  and  ships  ; x  and  in  the  same  year 
the  Government  were  informed  that  "  sundry  strangers  and 
others  within  the  diocese  of  Aberdeen  were  possessed  of 
Luther's  books,  and  favoured  his  errors  and  false  opinions." 
Two  years  later  (1527),  the  Act  was  made  to  include  those 
who  assisted  in  spreading  Lutheran  views.  An  agent  of 
Wolsey  informed  the  Cardinal  that  Scottish  merchants 
were  purchasing  copies  of  Tindale's  New  Testament 
in  the  Low  Countries  and  sending  them  to  Scotland.2 
The  efforts  6f  the  Government  do  not  seem  to  have  been 
very  successful.  Another  Act  of  Parliament  in  1535 
declared  that  none  but  the  clergy  were  to  be  allowed  to 
purchase  heretical  books ;  all  others  possessing  such  were 
required  to  give  them  up  within  forty  days.8  This  legisla- 
tion clearly  shows  the  spread  of  Eeformed  writings  among 
the  people  of  Scotland. 

The  first  Scottish  martyr  was  Patrick  Hamilton,  a 
younger  son  of  Sir  Patrick  Hamilton  of  Kincavel  and 
Stanehouse.  He  had  studied  at  Paris  and  Louvain.  As 
he  took  his  degree  of  M.A.  in  Paris  in  1520,  he  had  been. 
there  when  the  writings  of  Luther  were  being  studied  by 
all  learned  men,  including  the  theological  students  of  the 

1  Act.  Pctrl.  Scot.  ii.  295. 

2  Hay  Fleming,  The  Scottish  Reformation,  p.  12. 
8  Act.  ftvrL  Scot.  ii.  341. 


280  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

Sorbonne  (the  theological  faculty).1  Hamilton  must  have 
been  impressed  by  the  principles  of  the  German  Beforiner, 
and  have  made  no  secret  of  his  views  when  he  returned  to 
Scotland;  for  in  the  beginning  of  1527  he  was  a  suspected 
heretic,  and  was  ordered  to  be  summoned  and  accused  as 
such.  He  fled  from  Scotland,  went  to  Wittenberg,  was 
at  the  opening  of  Philip  of  Hesse's  new  Evangelical  Univer- 
sity of  Marburg  (May  30th,  1527),  and  drafted  the  theses 
for  the  first  academic  Disputation.2  He  felt  constrained, 
however,  to  return  to  his  native  land  to  testify  against  the 
corruptions  of  the  Roman  Church,  and  was  preaching  in 
Scotland  in  the  end  of  autumn  1527.  The  success 
attending  his  ministry  excited  the  fears  of  the  prelates. 
He  was  invited,  or  rather  enticed,  to  St.  Andrews  ;  allowed 
for  nearly  a  month  to  preach  and  dispute  in  the  University ; 
and  was  then  arrested  and  tried  in  the  cathedral.  The 
trial  took  place  in  the  forenoon,  and  at  mid-day  he  was 
hurried  to  the  stake  (Feb.  27th,  1528).  The  fire  by  care- 
lessness rather  than  with  intention  was  slow,  and  death 
came  only  after  lingering  hours  of  agony. 

If  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  thought  to  stamp  out 
the  new  faith  by  this  martyrdom,  they  were  soon  to  discover 
their  mistake.  Alexander  Alane  (Alesius),  who  had  under- 
taken to  convince  Patrick  Hamilton  of  his  errors,  had  been 
himself  converted.  He  was  arrested  and  imprisoned,  but 
escaped  to  the  Continent.  The  following  years  witnessed 
a  succession  of  martyrs — Henry  Forrest  (1533),  David 
Stratton  and  Norman  Gourlay  (1534),  Duncan  Simpson, 
Forrester,  Keillor,  Beverage,  Forret,  Eussell,  and  Kennedy 

1  Luther  says  so  himself;  of.  letter  to  Lange  of  April  13th,  1519 ;  Do 
Wette,  Dr.  Mcvrtin  Luthers  JBriefe,  Scndschreiben,  etc.  (Berlin,  1825-28)  i. 
255  ;   and  Herminjard,   Oorrespondance  des  JRtjforinateurs  dans  les  pays  de 
languefranfaise  (Geneva  and  Paris,  1866-97),  i.  47,  48. 

2  These  theses  were  translated  from  the  Latin  into  the  vernacular  by 
John  Firfch,  and  published  under  tho  title  of  Patrick's  Places.    They  arc 
printed  in  Fox's  Acts  and  Monuments,  and  by  Knox  in  his  History  of  the 
Information  in  Scotland;  The  Works  of  John  Knox  collected  and  edited 
ty  Dcwid  Lamg  (Edinburgh,  1846-64),  i.  IQJ?.    For  Patrick  Hamilton,  of. 
Lorimor,  Patrick  Hamilton^  the  first  Preacher  and  Martyr  of  the  Scottish 
Reformation  (Edinburgh,  1857). 


BEGINNINGS    OF    REFORMATION  281 

(1539).  The  celebrated  George  Buchanan  was  imprisoned, 
but  managed  to  escape.1  The  Scots  Parliament  and  Privy 
Council  assisted  the  Churchmen  to  extirpate  the  new  faith 
in  a  series  of  enactments  which  themselves  bear  witness  to 
its  spread.  In  1540,  in  a  series  of  Acts  (March  14th)  it 
was  declared  that  the  Virgin  Mary  was  "  to  be  reverently 
worshipped,  and  prayers  made  to  her  "  for  the  King's  pro- 
sperity, for  peace  with  all  Christian  princes,  for  the  triumph 
of  the  "  Faith  Catholic,"  and  that  the  people  "  may  remain 
in  the  faith  and  conform  to  the  statutes  of  Holy  Kirk." 
Prayers  were  also  ordered  to  be  made  to  the  saints.  It 
was  forbidden  to  argue  against,  or  impugn,  the  papal 
authority  under  pain  of  death  and  confiscation  of  "  goods 
movable  and  immovable."  No  one  is  to  "  cast  down  or 
otherwise  treat  irreverently  or  in  any  ways  dishonour  "  the 
images  of  saints  canonised  by  the  Church.  Heretics  who 
have  seen  the  error  of  their  ways  are  not  to  discuss  with 
others  any  matters  touching  "our  holy  faith."  No  one 
suspected  of  heresy,  even  if  he  has  recanted,  is  to  be  eligible 
to  hold  any  office,  nor  to  be  admitted  to  the  King's  Council. 
All  who  assist  heretics  are  threatened  with  severe  punish- 
ment. /In  1543,  notwithstanding  all  this  legislation,  the 
Lord  (jrovernor  (the  Earl  of  Arran)  had  to  confess  that 
heretics  increase  rapidly,  and  spread  opinions  contrary  to  the 
Church.2  The  terms  of  some  of  these  enactments  show 
that  the  new  faith  had  been  making  converts  among  the 
nobility ;  and  they  also  indicate  the  chief  points  of  attack 
on  the  Eoman  Church  in  Scotland. 

In  1542  (Dec.  14th),  James  v.  died,  leaving  an  infant 
daughter,  Mary  (b.  Dec.  8th),  who  became  the  Queen  of 
Scots  when  barely  a  week  old.  Thus  Scotland  was  again 
harassed .  with  an  infant  sovereign ;  and  there  was  the 
usual  scramble  for  the  Eegency,  which  this  time  involved 
questions  of  national  policy  as  well  as  personal  aggran- 
disement. 

1  Buchanan,  JRerum  £fcoticarum  £Kstoriat  xiv.  (p.  277  in  Ruddiman's 
edition). 

a  Act.  Pwl.  Scot.  ii.  871,  ii.  443. 


282  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

It  was  the  settled  policy  of  the  Tudor  kings  to  detach 
Scotland  from  the  old  French  alliance,  and  secure  it  for 
England.  The  marriage  of  Margaret  Tudor  to  James  iv. 
shows  what  means  they  thought  to  employ,  and  but  for 
Margaret's  quarrel  with  the  Earl  of  Angus,  her  second 
husband,  another  wedding  might  have  bound  the  nations 
firmly  together. «  The  French  marriages  of  James  v.,  first 
with  Madeleine,  daughter  of  Francis  I.  (1537),  and  on  her 
premature  death  with  Mary  of  Guise  (1538),  showed  the 
recoil  of  Scotland  from  the  English  alliance.  James'  death 
gave  Henry  VIIL  an  opportunity  to  renew  his  father's 
schemes,  and  his  idea  was  to  betroth  his  boy  Edward  to  the 
baby  Mary,  and  get  the  "  little  Queen  "  brought  to  England 
for  education.  Many  Scotsmen  thought  the  proposal  a  good 
one  for  their  country,  and  perhaps  more  were  induced  to 
think  so  by  the  money  which  Henry  lavished  upon  them 
to  secure  their  support.  They  made  the  English  party  in 
Scotland.  The  policy  of  English  alliance  as  against  French 
alliance  was  complicated  by  the  question  of  religion. 
Whatever  may  be  thought  of  the  character  of  the  English 
Eeformation  at  this  date,  Henry  vin.  had  broken 
thoroughly  with  the  Papacy,  and  union  with  England  would 
have  dragged  Scotland  to  revolt  against  the  mediaeval 
Church.  The  leader  of  the  French  and  Eomanist  party 
in  Scotland  was  David  Beaton,  certainly  the  ablest  and 
perhaps  the  most  unscrupulous  man  there.  He  had  been 
made  Archbishop  of  St.  Andrews,  coadjutor  to  his  aged 
uncle,  in  1538. ,  In  the  same  month,  Pope  Paul  irr.,  who 
needed  a  Churchman  of  the  highest  rank  to  publish  his  Bull 
against  Henry  vin.  in  a  place  as  near  England  as  was 
possible  to  find,  had  sent  him  a  Cardinal's  Hat.  The 
Cardinal,  Beaton,  stood  in  Scotland  for  ^France  and  Rome 
against  England  and  the  Reformation.  The  struggle  for 
the  Regency  in  Scotland  in  1542  carried  with  it  an  inter- 
national and  a  religious  policy.  The  clouds  heralding  the 
storm  which  was  to  destroy  Mary,  gathered  round  the 
cradle  of  the  baby  Queen. 

At  first  the  English  faction  prevailed.     The  claims  of 


FRANCE  &  ROMANISM,  ENGLAND  &  REFORMATION       283 

the  Queen  Mother  were  scarcely  considered.  Beaton  pro- 
duced a  will,  said  to  have  been  fraudulently  obtained  from 
the  dying  King,  appointing  him  and  several  of  the  leading 
nobles  of  Scotland,  Governors  of  the  kingdom.  This 
arrangement  was  soon  set  aside,  the  Earl  of  Arran  was 
appointed  Governor  (Jan.  3rd,  1543),  and  Beaton  was 
confined  in  Blackness  Castle* 

The  Governor  selected  John  Eough  for  his  chaplain 
and  Thomas  Williams  for  his  preacher,  both  ardent 
Eeformers.  The  Acts  of  the  previous  reign  against  heresy 
were  modified  to  the  extent  that  men  suspect  of  heresy 
might  enjoy  office,  and  heretics  were  accorded  more 
merciful  treatment.  Moreover,  an  Act  of  Parliament  (March 
15th,  1543)  permitted  the  possession  and  reading  of  a 
good  and  true  translation  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
But  the  masterful  policy  of  Henry  vin.  and  the  weakness 
of  the  Governor  brought  about  a  change.  Beaton  was 
released  from  Blackness  and  restored  to  his  own  Castle  of 
St.  Andrews;  the  Governor  dismissed  his  Eeformed 
preachers;  the  Privy  Council  (June  2nd,  1543)  forbade 
on  pain  of  death  and  confiscation  of  goods  all  criticism  of 
the  mediseval  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  and  forbade  the 
possession  of  heretical  books%  In  September,  Arran  and 
Beaton  were  reconciled;  in  December,  the  Parliament 
annulled  the  treaties  with  England  consenting  to  a  marriage 
between  Edward  and  Mary,  and  the  ancient  league  with 
France  was  renewed.  This  was  followed  by  the  revival  of 
persecution,  and  almost  all  that  had  been  gained  was  lost. 
Henry's  ruthless  devastation  of  the  Borders  did  not  mend 
matters.  The  more  enlightened  policy  of 'Lord  Protector 
Somerset  could  not  allay  the  suspicions  of  the  Scottish 
nation.  Their  "  little  Queen "  was  sent  to  France  to  be 
educated  by  the  Guises,  "  to  the  end  that  in  hir  youth  she 
should  drynk  of  that  lycour,  that  should  remane  with  hir 
all  hir  lyfetyme,  for  a  plague  to  this  realme,  and  for  hir 
finall,  destructions" l 

lThe    Works   of  Jolm  Knox,   collected  amd   edited   ly  David  Laing 
(Edinburgh,  1846-64),  i.  218. 


284  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

But  if  the  Reformation  movement  was  losing  ground 
as  a  national  policy,  it  was  gaining  strength  as  a  spiritual 
quickening  in  the  hearts  of  the  people.  George  Wishart, 
one  of  the  Wisharts  of  Pittarrow,  who  had  fled  from  persecu- 
tion in  1538  and  had  wandered  in  England,  Germany,  and 
Switzerland,  returned  to  his  native  country  about  1543, 
consumed  with  the  desire  to  bear  witness  for  the  Gospel. 
He  preached  in  Montrose,  and  Dundee  during  a  visita- 
tion of  the  plague,  and  Ayrshire.  Beaton's  party  were 
anxious  to  secure  him,  and  after  a  preaching  tour  in  the 
Lothians  he  was  seized  in  Ormiston  House  and  handed  over 
to  the  Earl  of  Bothwell,  who,  breaking  pledges  he  had 
made,  delivered  him  to  the  Cardinal ; '  he  lodged  him  in  the 
dungeon  at  St.  Andrews  (end  of  Jan.  1546),  and  had  him 
tried  in  the  cathedral,  when  he  was  condemned  to  the  stake 
(March  1st,  1546), 

Wishart  was  Knox's  forerunner,  and  during  this  tour 
in  the  Lothians,  Knox  had  been  his  constant  companion. 
The  Eomanist  party  had  tried  to  assassinate  the  bold 
preacher,  and  Knox  carried  a  two-handed  sword  ready 
to  cut  down  anyone  who  attempted  to  strike  at  the 
missionary  while  he  was  speaking.  All  the  tenderness 
which  lay  beneath  the  sternness  of  Knox's  character  appears 
in  the  account  he  gives  of  Wishart  in  his  History.  And  to 
Wishart,  Knox  was  the  beloved  disciple-  When  he  fore- 
saw that  the  end  was  near,  he  refused  to  allow  Knox  to 
share  his  danger.1 

Assassination  was  a  not  infrequent  way  of  getting  rid  of 
a  political  opponent  in  the  sixteenth  century,  and  Beaton's 
death  had  long  been  planned,  not  without  secret  promptings 
from  England.  Three  months  after  Wishart's  martyrdom 
(May  29th,  1546),  Norman  Lesley  and  Kirkcaldy  of  Grange 
at  the  head  of  a  small  band  of  men  broke  into  the  Castle 
of  St.  Andrews  and  slew  the  Cardinal  They  held  the 
stronghold,  and  the  castle  became  a  place  of  refuge  for  men 
whose  lives  were  threatened  by  the  Government,  and  who 
sympathised  with  the  English  alliance.  The  Government 
1  The  Works  of  John  Knox9  etc.  i.  125-45. 


JOHN  KNOX  285 

laid  siege  to  the  place  but  were  unable  to  take  it,  and  their 
troops  withdrew.  John  Bough,  who  had  been  Arran's 
Eeformed  chaplain,  joined  the  company,  and  began  to  preach 
to  the  people  of  St.  Andrews.  Knox,  who  had  become  a 
marked  man,  and  had  thought  of  taking  refuge  in  Germany, 
was  persuaded  to  enter  the  castle,  and  there,  sorely  against 
his  will,  he  was  almost  forced  to  stand  forth  as  a  preacher 
of  the  Word.  His  first  sermon  placed  him  at  once  in  the 
foremost  rank  of  Scottish  Eeformers,  and  men  began  to 
predict  that  he  would  share  the  fate  of  Wishart.  "  Master 
George  Wishart  spak  never  so  plainelye,  and  yitt  he  was 
brunt :  evin  so  will  he  be." I 

Next  to  nothing  is  known  about  the  early  history  of 
John  Knox.  He  came  into  the  world  at  or  near 
Haddington  in  the  year  1515,2  but  on  what  day  or  month 
remains  hidden.  He  sprang  from  the  commons  of  Scotland, 
and  his  forebears  were  followers  of  the  Earls  of  Bothwell ; 
he  was  a  papal  notary,  and  in  priest's  orders  in  1540 ;  he 
was  tutor  to  the  sons  of  the  lairds  of  Ormiston  and 
Longniddry  in  1545;  he  accompanied  Wishart  in 
December  and  January  1545,  1546 — these  are  the  facts 
known  about  him  before  he  was  called  to  stand  forward  as 
a  preacher  of  the  Eeformation  in  Scotland.  He  was  then 
thirty-two — a  silent,  slow  ripening  man,  with  quite  a 
talent  for  keeping  himself  in  the  background. 

Knox's  work  in  the  castle  and  town  of  St.  Andrews 
was  interrupted  by  the  arrival  of  a  French  fleet  (July 
1547),  which  battered  the  walls  with  artillery  until  the 
castle  was  compelled  to  surrender.  He  and  all  the 
inmates  were  carried  over  to  France.  They  had  secured 
as  terms  of  surrender  that  their  lives  should  be  spared ; 
that  they  should  be  safely  transported  to  France ;  and  that 
if  they  could  not  accept  the  terms  there  offered  to  them 
by  the  French  King,  they  should  be  allowed  to  depart  to 

1  The  Works  ofJoJin  JSnox,  etc.  i.  192. 

3  Dr.  Hay  Fleming  has  settled  the  vexed  question  of  the  date  of  Knox's 
birth  in  his  article  in  the  Bookman  for  Sept.  1905,  p.  193  ;  of.  Athcnccum, 
Nov.  5th  and  Dec.  3rd,  1904. 


286  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

any  country  they  might  select  for  their  sojourn,  save 
Scotland.  It  was  cot  the  custom,  however,  for  French 
kings  to  keep  promises  made  to  heretics,  and  Knox  and 
his  companions  were  made  galley-slaves.  For  nineteen 
months  he  had  to  endure  this  living  death,  which  for  long 
drawn  out  torture  can  only  he  compared  with  what  the 
Christians  of  the  earliest  centuries  had  to  suffer  when  they 
were  condemned  to  the  mines.  He  had  to  sit  chained 
with  four  or  six  others  to  the  rowing  benches,  which  were 
set  at  right  angles  to  the  side  of  the  ship,  without  change 
of  posture  by  day,  and  compelled  to  sleep,  still  chained, 
under  the  benches  by  night  ;  exposed  to  the  elements  day 
and  night  alike;  enduring  the  lash  of  the  overseer,  who 
paced  up  and  down  the  gangway  which  ran  between  the 
two  lines  of  benches  ;  feeding  on  the  insufficient  meals  of 
coarse  biscuit  and  porridge  of  oil  and  beans  ;  chained  along 
with  the  vilest  malefactors.  The  French  Papists  had 
invented  this  method  of  treating  all  who  differed  from  them 
in  religious  matters.  It  could  scarcely  make  Knox  the 
more  tolerant  of  French  policy  or  of  the  French  religion. 
He  seldom,  refers  to  this  terrible  experience.  He  dismisses 
it  with  : 

"How  long  I  continewed  prisoneir,  what  torment  I 
susteaned  in  the  galaies,  and  what  war  the  sobbes  of  my 
harte,  is  now  no  time  to  receat:  This  onlie  I  can  nocht 
conceall,  which  mo  than  one  have  hard  me  say,  when  the 
body  was  far  absent  from  Scotland,  that  my  assured  houp 
was,  in  oppin  audience,  to  preache  in  Sanctandrois  befoir  1 
depairt  ed  this  lyeff."  l 
' 


The  prisoners  were  released  from  the  galleys  through 
the  instrumentality  of  the  English  Government  in  tho 
early  months  of  1549,  and  Knox  reached  England  by  the 
7th  of  April.  It  was  there  that  he  began  his  real  work  as 
a  preacher  of  the  Reformation.  He  spent  nearly  five  years 
as  minister  at  Berwick,  at  Newcastle,  and  in  London.  He 
was  twice  offered  preferment  —  the  vacant  bishopric  of 
Rochester  in  1552,  and  the  vicarage  of  All  Hallows  in 

1  Works  of  John  Knot.,  etc.  i.  84  9. 


KNOX   IN    ENGLAND  287 

Bread  St.,  London,  in  the  beginning  of  1553.  He  refused 
both,  and  was  actually  summoned  before  the  Privy  Council 
to  explain  why  he  would  not  accept  preferment.1  It  is 
probable  that  he  had  something  to  do  with  the  production 
of  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  Administration  of  the 
Sacraments  and  other  Bites  and  Ceremonies  in  tJie  Church  of 
England,  155%,  commonly  called  the  Second  Prayer-Book 
of  King  Edward  vi.  The  rubric  explaining  kneeling  at  the 
partaking  of  the  Holy  Supper,  or  at  least  one  sentence  in  it, 
is  most  probably  due  to  his  remonstrances  or  suggestions.2 
The  accession  of  Mary  Tudor  to  the  throne  closed  his 
career  in  England ;  but  he  stuck  to  his  work  long  after  his 
companioji  preachers  had  abandoned  it.  He  was  in  London, 
and  had  the  courage  to  rebuke  the  rejoicings  of  the  crowd 
at  her  entry  into  the  capital — a  fearless,  outspoken  man, 
who  could  always  be  depended  on  for  doing  what  no  one 
else  dared. 

Knox  got  safely  across  the  Channel,  travelled  through 
France  by  ways  unknown,  and  reached  Geneva.  He 
spent  some  time  with  Calvin,  then  went  on  to  Zurich  to 
see  Bullinger.  He  appears  to  have  been  meditating  deeply 
on  the  condition  of  Scotland  and  England,  and  propounded 
a  set  of  questions  to  these  divines  which  show  that  he  was 
trying  to  formulate  for  himself  the  principles  he  afterwards 
asserted  on  the  rights  of  subjects  to  restrain  tyrannical 
sovereigns.8  The  years  1554—58,  with  the  exception  of  a 
brief  visit  to  Scotland  in  the  end  of  1555,  were  spent  on 
the  Continent,  but  were  important  for  his  future  work  in 
Scotland.  They  witnessed  the  troubles  in  the  Frankfort 
congregation  of  English  exiles,  where  Knox's  broad-minded 

1  Calderwood,  The  History  of  me  KwJc  of  Scotland  (Edinburgh,  1843-49) 
i.  280-81. 

2  Lorimer,  John  Knoxr  and  the  Church  of  England  (London,  1875),  pp. 
98,^.    The  rubric  is  to  be  found  in  The  Two  Liturgies  with  other  Documents 
set  forth  oy  Authority  in  the  reign  of  King  Edward  the  flissth  (Cambridge, 
1842),  p.  283.    The  volume  is  one  of  the  Parker  Society's  publications. 

8  The  questions  will  be  found  in  the  volumes,  Original  Letters9  published 
by  the  Parker.  Society  (Cambridge,  1847),  p.  745  j  and  in  The  Works  of  John 
Knoxt  et'.j  ni.  221. 


288  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

toleration  and  straightforward  action  stands  in  noble 
contrast  with  the  narrow-minded  and  crooked  policy  of  his 
opponents.  They  were  the  time  of  his  peaceful  and  happy 
ministrations  among  the  refugees  at  Geneva.  They  made 
hi™  familiar  with  the  leading  Protestants  of  Trance  and 
of  Switzerland,  and  taught  him  the  inner  political  condition 
of  the  nations  of  Europe.  They  explain  Knox's  constant 
and  accurate  information  in  later  years,  when  he  seemed  to 
learn  about  the  doings  of  continental  statesmen  as  early  as 
Cecil,  with  all  the  resources  of  the  English  Foreign  Office 
behind  him.  Above  all,  they  made  him  see  that,  humanly 
speaking,  the  fate  of  the  whole  Reformation  movement  was 
bound  up  with  an  alliance  between  a  Protestant  England 
and  a  Protestant  Scotland. 

Knox  returned  to  Scotland  for  a  brief  visit  of  about 
ten  mouths  (Sept.  1555-July  1556).  He  exhorted  those 
who  visited  him  in  his  lodgings  in  Edinburgh,  and  made 
preaching  tours,  dispensing  the  Lord's  Supper  according  to 
the  Eeformed  rite  on  several  occasions.  He  visited  Dun, 
Oalder  House,  Barr,  Ayr,  Oehiltree,  and  several  other  places, 
and  was  welcomed  in  the  houses  of  many  of  the  nobility. 
He  left  for  Geneva  in  July,  having  found  time  to  marry 
his  first  wife,  Marjory  Bowes, — uxor  suavissima,  and  "a 
wife  whose  like  is  not  to  be  found  everywhere,"  x  Calvin  calls 
her, — and  having  put  some  additional  force  into  the  growing 
Protestantism  of  his  native  land.  He  tells  us  that  most 
part  of  the  gentlemen  of  the  Mearns  "  band  thame  selfis, 
to  the  uttermost  of  thare  poweris,  to  manteane  the  trew 
preaching  of  the  Evangel!  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  God  should 
offer  unto  thame  preacheris  and  opportunitie " — whether 
by  word  of  mouth  or  in  writing,  is  not  certain.2 

In  1557  (Dec.  3rd)  the  Protestants  of  Scotland  laid 
the  foundations  of  a  definite  organisation.  It  took  a 

1  Calvin  to  Knox  (April  23rd,  1561) ;  Calvin  to  Goodman  (4pril  23rd, 
1561) ;  The  WwJcs  of  John  Knox,  etc.   vi.  124,  125  ;  of.    Oalmni  Opera 
(Amsterdam,  1667),  ix.  JSpislolce  et  Response,  p.  150. 

2  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  i.  251  ;  D.  Hay  Fleming,  The  Story  of 
the  Scottish  Covenants  in  Outline  (Edinburgh,  1904),  p.  6. 


"THE  BAND  SUBSCRIBED  BY  THE  LORDS "  289 

form  familiar  enough  in  the  civil  history  of  the  country, 
where  the  turbulent  character  of  the  Scottish  barons  and 
the  weakness  of  the  central  authority  led  to  constant 
confederations  to  carry  out  with  safety  enterprises  some- 
times legal  and  sometimes  outside  the  law.  The  con- 
federates promised  to  assist  each  other  in  the  work 
proposed,  and  to  defend  each  other  from  the  consequences 
following.  Such  agreements  were  often  drafted  in  legal 
fashion  by  public  notaries,  and  made  binding  by  all  forms 
of  legal  security  known.  The  Lords  of  the  Congregation, 
as  they  came  to  be  called,  followed  a  prevailing  custom 
when  they  promised — 

"  Befoir  the  Majestie  of  God  and  His  congregatioun,  that 
we  (be  His  grace)  shall  with  all  diligence  continually  apply 
our  hole  power,  substance,  an,d  our  verray  lyves,  to 
manteane,  sett  fordward,  and  establish  the  most  blessed 
word  of  God  and  His  Congregatioun ;  and  shall  laubour  at 
our  possibilitie  to  have  faythfull  Ministeris  purely  and 
trewlie  to  minister  Christis  Evangell  and  Sacramentes  to 
His  people."  x 

This  "  Band  subscrived  by  the  Lords "  was  the  first 
(if  the  promise  made  by  the  gentlemen  of  the  Mearns  be 
excepted)  of  the  many  Covenants  famous  in  the  history 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland  Reformed.2  It  was*  an  old 
Scottish  usage  now  impregnated  with  a  new  spiritual 
meaning,  and  become  a  public  promise  to  God,  after  Old 
Testament  fashion,  to  be  faithful  to  His  word  and  guidance. 

This  important  act  had  immediate  consequences.  The 
confederated  Lords  sent  letters  to  Knox,  then  at  Geneva, 
and  to  Calvin,  urging  the  return  of  the  Scottish  Eeformer 
to  his  native  land.  They  also  passed  two  notable  re- 
solutions : 

"  First,  It  is  thought  expedient,  devised  and  ordeaned  that 
in  all  parochines  of  this  Eealme  the  Common  Prayeris  (prob- 

1  The  Works  of  JoJm  Knox,  etc.  i.  273. 

2  For  the  Covenants  of  the  Scottish  Church,  of.  D.  Hay  Fleming,  The 
Story  of  the  Scottish  Covenants  in  Outline  (Edinburgh,  1904). 

19** 


290  THE   REFORMATION    IN   SCOTLAND 

ably  the  Second  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  vi.1)  be  redd  owklie 
(weekly)  on  Sounday,  and  other  f  estuall  dayis,  publictlie  in 
the  Paroche  Kirkis,  with  the  Lessonis  of  the  New  and  Old 
Testament,  conforme  to  the  ordour  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayeris :  And  yf  the  eurattis  of  the  parochynes  be  qualified 
to  cause  thame  to  reid  the  samyn ;  and  yf  thei  be  nott,  or 
yf  thei  refuise,  that  the  maist  qualified  in  the  parish  use 
and  read  the  same.  Secoundly,  it  is  thought  necessare  that 
doctrin,  preacheing  and  interpretatioun  of  Scriptures  be 
had  and  used  privatlie  in  Qwyet  housis,  without  great  con- 
ventionis  of  the  people  tharto,  whill  afterward  that  God 
move  the  Prince  to  grant  publict  preacheing  be  faithful  and 
trew  ministeris."  2 

The  Earl  of  Argyle  set  the  example  by  maintaining 
John  Douglas,  and  making  him  preach  publicly  in  his 
mansion. 

This  conduct  evidently  alarmed  the  Queen  Mother, 
who  had  been  made  Eegent  in  1554  (April  12th),  and 
she  attempted  to  stir  the  Primate  to  exercise  his  powers 
for  the  repression  of  heresy.  The  Archbishop  wrote  to 
Argyle  urging  him  to  dismiss  Douglas,  apologising  at  the 
same  time  for  his  interference  by  saying  that  the  Queen 
wondered  that  he  could  "thole"  persons  with  perverted 
doctrine  within  his  diocese. 

Another  step  in  advance  was  taken  some  time  in  1558, 
when  it  was  resolved  to  give  the  Congregation,  the  whole 
company  of  those  in  Scotland  who  sincerely  accepted  the 
Evangelical  Eeformation,  "  the  face  of  a  Church,"  by  the 
creation  and  recognition  of  an  authority  which  could 
exercise  discipline.  A  number  of  elders  were  chosen 
*  by  common  election,"  to  whom  the  whole  of  the  brethren 
promised  obedience.  The  lack  of  a  publicly  recognised 
ministry  was  supplied  by  laymen,  who  gave  themselves 
to  the  work  of  exhortation ;  and  at  the  head  of  them  was 

1  Cecil,  writing  to  Throckmorton  in  Paris  (July  9th,  1559),  says  that  in 
Scotland   "  they  deliver  the  parish   churches  of  altars,  and  receive  the 
service  of  the  Church  of  England  according  to  King  Edward's  book" 
(Ca7endar  of  State  Papers,  Elizabeth,  Fvreign,  1558-59,  p.  367). 

2  The  Works  of  Jolm  Knox,  etc.  i.  '275. 


THE  REGENT  AND  "  THE  CONGREGATION"   291 

to  be  found  Erskine  of  Dun.  The  first  regularly  constituted 
Reformed  church  in  Scotland  was  in  the  town  of  Dundee.1 

The  organisation  gave  the  Protestant  leaders  boldness, 
and,  through  Sir  James  Sandilands,  they  petitioned  the 
Regent  to  permit  them  to  worship  publicly  according  to 
the  Reformed  fashion,  and  to  reform  the  wicked  lives  of 
the  clergy.  This  led  to  the  offer  of  a  compromise,  which 
was  at  once  rejected,  as  it  would  have  compelled  the 
Reformed  to  reverence  the  Mass,  and  to  approve  'of  prayers 
to  the  saints.  The  Queen  Mother  then  permitted  public 
worship,  save  in  Leith  and  Edinburgh.  The  Lords  of 
the  Congregation  next  demanded  a  suspension  of  the  laws 
which  gave  the  clergy  power  to  try  and  punish  heresy, 
until  a  General  Council,  lawfully  assembled,  should  decide 
upon  points  then  debated  in  religion;  and  that  all 
suspected  of  heresy  should  have  a  fair  trial  before 
"temporal  judges/'2  When  the  Regent,  who  gave  them 
"  amyable  lookis  and  good  wordes  in  aboundance,"  refused 
to  allow  their  petition  to  come  before  the  Estates,  and 
kept  it  "  close  in  hir  pocket,"  the  Reformers  resolved  to  go 
to  Parliament  directly  with  another  petition,  in  which 
they  declared  that  since  they  had  not  been  able  to 
secure  a  reformation,  they  had  resolved  to  follow  their 
own  consciences  in  matters  of  religion ;  that  they  would 
defend  themselves  and  all  of  their  way  of  thinking  if 
attacked ;  that  if  tumults  arose  in  consequence,  the  blame 
was  with  those  who  refused  a  just  reformation ;  and  that 
in  forwarding  this  petition  they  had  nothing  in  view  but 
the  reformation  of  abuses  in  religion.3 

Knox  had  been  invited  by  the  Earl  of  Grlencairn,  the 
Lords  Erskine  and  Lorn,  and  James  Stewart  (afterwards 
the  Earl  of  Moray),  to  return  to  Scotland  in  1557.4  He 
reached  Dieppe  in  October,  and  found  letters  awaiting 
him  which  told  him  that  the  times  were  not  ripe.  The 

1  The  Works  of  John  Kno%t  etc.  i.  300.  8  Ibid.  eto.  1.  301-12. 

3  Ibid.  etc.  i.  313. 

4  The  correspondence  will  be  found  in  The  Works  of  JoJm  Knox,  etr.  i. 
267/.,  iv.  251 /. 


292  THE   REFORMATION   IN  SCOTLAND 

answer  he  sent  spurred  the  Reforming  lords  to  constitute 
the  Band,  of  December  1557.  It  was  while  he  was  at 
Dieppe,  chafing  at  the  news  he  had  received,  that  he 
composed  the  violent  treatise,  entitled  The  First  •  Mast  of 
the  Trumpet  against  the  Monstrous  Eegiment  of  Women 1 — 
a  book  which  did  more  to  hamper  his  future  than  any- 
thing else.  The  state  of  things  was  exasperating  to  a 
man  who  longed  to  be  at  work  in  Scotland  or  England. 
"  Bloody  "  Mary  in  England  was  hounding  on  her  officials 
to  burn  Knox's  co-religionists,  and  the  Eeformation,  which 
had  made  so  much  progress  under  Edward  vi.,  seemed  to 
be  entirely  overthrown ;  while  Mary  of  Guise,  the  Queen 
Mother  and  Eegent  in  Scotland,  was  inciting  the  unwilling 
Archbishop  of  St.  Andrews  to  make  use  of  his  legatine  and 
episcopal  powers  to  repress  the  believers  of  his  native  land. 
But  as  chance  would  have  it,  Mary  Tudor  was  dead  before 
the  pamphlet  was  widely  known,  and  the  Queen  whom  of 
all  others  he  desired  to  conciliate  was  seated  on  the 
throne  of  England,  and  had  made  William  Cecil,  the 
staunchest  of  Protestants,  her  Secretary  of  State.  She 
could  scarcely  avoid  believing  that  the  JSlast  was  meant 
for  her;  and,  even  if  not,  it  was  based  on  such  general 
principles  that  it  might  prove  dangerous  to  one  whose 
throne  was  still  insecure.  It  is  scarcely  to  be  wondered 
at  that  the  Queen  never  forgave  the  vehement  writer, 
and  that  the  Blast  was  a  continual  obstacle  to  a  complete 
understanding  between  the  Scottish  Eeformer  and  his 
English  allies.2  If  Knox  would  never  confess  publicly  to 
queens,  whether  to  Elizabeth  Tudor  or  to  Mary  Stuart, 
that  he  had  done  wrong,  he  was  ready  to  say  to  a  friend 
whom  he  loved : 

"My  rude  vehemencie  and  incorisidered  affirmations, 
which  may  rather  appear  to  procead  from  coler  then  of 
zeal  and  reason,  I  do  not  excuse."  3 

1  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  iv.  349. 

2  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Foreign  Series,  on  the  Reign  of  Elizabeth, 
1659-60,  pp.  73,  77  ;  U58-59,  pp.  306,  310. 

*  The  Works  of  John  JCnox,  etc.  v.  5, 


THE  REGENT  AND  "THE  CONGREGATION""   293 

It  was  the  worse  for  Knox  and  for  Scotland,  for  the 
reign  of  women  had  begun.  Charles  v.,  Francis  L,  and 
Henry  vni.  had  passed  away,  and  the  destinies  of  Europe 
were  to  be  in  the  hands  of  Elizabeth,  Catherine  de'  Medici, 
Mary  Stuart,  and  Philip  of  Spain,  the  most  felinely  feminine 
of  the  four. 

Events  marched  fast  in  Scotland  after  Knox  returned 
in  the  early  summer  of  1559.  The  Queen  Eegent  and 
the  Lords  of  the  Congregation  were  facing  each  other, 
determined  on  a  trial  of  strength.  Knox  reached 
Edinburgh  on  May  2nd,  1559,  and  hurried  on  to  Dundee, 
where  the  Reformed  had  gathered  in  some  force.  They 
had  resolved  to  support  their  brethren  in  maintaining  public 
worship  according  to  the  usages  of  the  Eeformed  Church, 
and  in  repressing  "idolatrie"  in  all  towns  where  a 
majority  of  the  inhabitants  had  declared  for  the  Eeformed 
religion.  The  Eegent  threw  down  the  gauntlet  by  sum- 
moning the  preachers  to  appear  before  her,  and  by  inhibiting 
their  preaching.  The  Lords  took  it  up  by  resolving  that 
they  would  answer  the  summons  and  appear  along  with 
their  preachers.  A  letter  was  addressed  to  the  Eegent 
(May  6th,  1559)  by  "The  professouris  of  Christis  Evangell 
in  the  realme  of  Scotland."  It  was  an  admirable  statement 
of  the  principles  of  the  Scottish  Eeformation,  and  may  be 
thus  summarised : 

"  It  records  the  hope,  once  entertained  by  the  writers, 
that  God  would  make  her  the  instrument  of  setting  up  and 
maintaining  his  Word  and  true  worship,  of  defending  his 
congregation,  and  of  downputting  all  idolatry,  abomination, 
and  superstition  in  the  realm;  it  expresses  their  grief  on 
learning  that  she  was  determined  to  do  the  very  opposite ; 
it  warns  her  against  crossing  the  bounds  of  her  own  office, 
and  usurping  a  power  in  Christ's  kingdom  which  did  not 
belong  to  her;  it  distinguishes  clearly  between  the  civil 
jurisdiction  and  the  spiritual;  it  asks  her  to  recall  her 
letters  inhibiting  God's  messengers;  it  insists  that  His 
message  ought  to  be  received  even  though  the  speaker 
should  lack  the  ordinary  vocation;  it  claims  that  the 
ministers  who  had  been  inhibited  wore  sent  by  God,  and 


294  THE  REFORMATION   IN  SCOTLAND 

were  also  called  according  to  Scriptural  order ;  it  points  out 
that  her  commands  must  be  disobeyed  if  contrary  to  God's, 
and  that  the  enemies  were  craftily  inducing  her  to  com- 
mand unjust  things  so  that  the  professors,  when  they  dis- 
obeyed, might  be  condemned  for  sedition  and  rebellion ;  it 
pled  with  her  to  have  pity  on  those  who  were  seeking  the 
glory  of  God  and  her  true  obedience ;  it  declared  that,  by 
God's  help,  they  would  go  forward  in  the  way  they  had 
begun,  that  they  would  receive  and  assist  His  ministers 
and  Word,  and  that  they  would  never  join  themselves  again 
to  the  abominations  they  had  forsaken,  though  all  the 
powers  on  earth  should  command  them  to  do  so ;  it  conveyed 
their  humble  submission  to  her,  in  all  obedience  due  to  her 
in  peace,  in  war,  in  body,  in  goods  and  in  lands ;  and  it 
closed  with  the  prayer  that  the  eternal  God  would  instruct, 
strengthen,  and  lead  her  by  His  Spirit  in  the  way  that  was 
acceptable  to  Him."  a 

Then  began  a  series  of  trials  of  strength  in  which  the 
Kegent  had  generally  the  better,  because  she  was  supplied 
with  disciplined  troops  from  Prance,  which  were  more  than 
a  match  for  the  feudal  levies  of  the  Lords  of  the  Congrega- 
tion. The  uprising  of  the  people  against  the  Eegent  and 
the  Prelates  was  characterised,  as  in  France  and  the 
Low  Countries,  with  an  outbreak  of  iconoclasm  which  did 
no  good  to  the  Protestant  cause.  In  the  three  countries 
the  "raschall  multitude'*  could  not  be  restrained  by  the 
exhortation  of  the  preachers  nor  by  the  commandment 
of  the  magistrates  from  destroying  "the  places  of 
idolatrie."2 

From  the  beginning,  Knox  had  seen  that  the  Eeformers 
had  small  hope  of  ultimate  success  unless  they  were  aided 
from  England;  and  he  was  encouraged  to  expect  help 
because  he  knew  that  the  salvation  of  Protestant  England 
lay  in  its  support  of  the  Lords  of  the  Congregation  in 
Scotland. 

The  years  from  1559  to  1567  were  the  most  critical 
in  the  whole  history  of  the  Reformation.  The  existence 

1  This  summary  has  been  taken  from  Dr.  Hay  Fleming's  admirable  little 
book,  The  Scottish,  Reformation  (Edinburgh,  1904),  p.  44. 

2  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  i.  319. 


KNOX   AND   CECIL  295 

of  the  Protestantism  of  all  Europe  was  involved  in  the 
struggle  in  Scotland;  and  for  the  first  and  perhaps  last 
time  in  her  history  the  eyes  that  had  the  furthest  vision, 
whether  in  Rome,  for  centuries  the  citadel  of  mediaevalism, 
or  in  Geneva,  the  stronghold  of  Protestantism,  were  turned 
towards  the  little  backward  northern  kingdom.  They 
watched  the  birth-throes  of  a  new  nation,  a  British  nation 
which  was  coming  into  being.  Two  peoples,  long  heredi- 
tary foes,  were  coalescing;  the  Romanists  in  England  re- 
cognised the  Scottish  Queen  as  their  legitimate  sovereign, 
and  the  Protestants  in  Scotland  looked  for  aid  to  their 
brethren  in  England.  The  question  was :  Would  the  new 
nation  accept  the  Reformed  religion,  or  would  the  reaction 
triumph?  If  Knox  and  the  Congregation  gained  the 
upper  hand  in  Scotland,  and  if  Cecil  was  able  to  guide 
England  in  the  way  he  meant  to  lead  it  (and  the  two  men 
were  necessary  to  each  other,  and  knew  it),  then  the  Refor- 
mation was  safe.  If  Scotland  could  be  kept  for  France 
and  the  Roman  Church,  and  its  Romanist  Queen  make 
good  her  claim  to  the  English  throne,  then  the  Reformation 
would  be  crushed  not  merely  within  Great  Britain,  but  in 
Germany  and  the  Low  Countries  also.  So  thought  the 
politicians,  secular  and  ecclesiastical,  in  Rome  and  Geneva, 
in  Paris,  Madrid,  and  in  London.  The  European  situation 
had  been  summed  up  by  Cecil :  "  The  Emperor  is  aiming 
at  the  sovereignty  of  Europe,  which  he  cannot  obtain  with- 
out the  suppression  of  the  Reformed  religion,  and,  unless 
he  crushes  England,  he  cannot  crush  the  Reformation." 
In  this  peril  a  Scotland  controlled  by  the  Guises  would 
have  been  fatal  to  the  existence  of  the  Reformation. 

In  1559  the  odds  seemed  in  favour  of  reaction,  if  only 
its  supporters  were  whole-hearted  enough  to  put  aside  for 
the  time  national  rivalries.  The  Treaty  of  Cateau- 
Cambr&is,  concluded  scarcely  a  month  before  Knox  reached 
Scotland  (April  1559),  had  secret  clauses  which  bound 
the  Kings  of  France  and  Spain  to  crush  the  Protestantism 
of  Europe,  in  terms  which  made  the  young  Prince  of 
Orange,  when  he  learned  them,  vow  silently  to  devote  his 


296  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

life  to  protect  his  fellow-countrymen  and  drive  the  "  scum 
of  the  Spaniards"  out  of  the  Netherlands.  Henry  IL  of 
France,  with  his  Edict  of  Chateaubriand  and  his  Ckambre 
Ardente,  with  the  Duke  of  Guise  and  the  Cardinal  Lorraine 
to  counsel  him,  and  Diana  of  Poitiers'  to  keep  him  up  to 
the  mark,  was  doing  his  best  to  exterminate  the  Protestants 
of  France.  Dr.  Christopher  Mundt  kept  reporting  to 
Queen  Elizabeth  and  her  Minister  the  symptoms  of  a 
general  combination  against  the  Protestants  of  Europe — 
symptoms  ranging  from  a  proposed  conquest  of  Denmark 
to  the  Emperor's  forbidding  members  of  his  Household  to 
attend  Protestant  services.1  Throckmorton  wrote  almost 
passionately  from  Paris  urging  Cecil  to  support  the  Scottish 
Lords  of  the  Congregation ;  and  even  Dr.  Mundt  in  Strass- 
burg  saw  that  the  struggle  in  Scotland  was  the  most 
important  fact  in  the  European  situation.2 

Tet  it  was  difficult  for  Cecil  to  send  the  aid  which 
Xnox  and  the  Scottish  Protestants  needed  sorely.  It 
meant  that  the  sovereign  of  one  country  aided  men  of 
another  country  who  were  de  jure  rebels  against  their  own 
sovereign.  It  seemed  a  hazardous  policy  in  the  case  of 
a  Queen  like  Elizabeth,  who  was  not  yet  freed  from  the 
danger  arising  from  rebellious  subjects.  There  was  France, 
with  which  England  had  just  made  peace.  Cecil  had 
difficulties  with  Elizabeth,  She  did  not  like  Calvin  him- 
self. She  had  no  sympathy  with  his  theology,  which,  with 
its  mingled  sob  and  hosanna,  stirred  the  hearts  of  oppressed 
peoples.  There  was  Knox  and  his  Blast,  to  say  nothing 
of  Ms  appealing  to  the  commonalty  of  his  country.  "  God 

3  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  foreign  Serbs,  of  the  Eeign  of  Elizabeth, 
1558-59,  pp,  245,  259;  1559-60,  p.  182.  The  whole  of  Dr.  Mundt's 
correspondence  is  interesting,  and  shows  that  after  the  Treaty  of  Cateau- 
Cambr&is  continual  incidents  occurred  showing  that  the  Romanists  were 
regaining  the  hope  of  repressing  the  whole  Protestant  movement. 

2  Ibid.  1669-60,  p,  68  :  "All  good  men  hope  that  England,  warned  by 
the  dangers  of  others,  will  take  care,  by  dissimulation  and  art,  that  the 
nation  near  to  itself,  whose  cause  is  the  same  as  her  own,  shall  not  be 
first  deserted  and  then  overwhelmed  "  (Dr.  Mundt  to  Cecil,  Oct.  29th, 
1559). 


KNOX   AND   CECIL  297 

keep  us  from  such  visitations  as  Knockes  hath  attempted 
in  Scotland ;  the  people  to  be  orderers  of  things  I "  wrote 
Dr.  Parker  to  Cecil  on  the  6th  of  November.1  Yet  Cecil 
knew — no  man  better — that  if  the  Lords  of  the  Congrega- 
tion failed  there  was  little  hope  for  a  Protestant  England, 
and  that  Elizabeth's  crown  and  Dr.  Parker's  mitre  depended 
on  the  victory  of  Knox  in  Scotland. 

He  watched  the  struggle  across  the  border.  He  had 
made  up  his  mind  as  early  as  July  8th,  1559,  that  assist- 
ance must  be  given  to  the  Lords  of  the  Congregation  "  with 
all  fair  promises  first,  next  with  money,  and  last  with 
arms."  2  The  second  stage  of  his  programme  was  reached 
in  November;  and,  two  days  before  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  was  piously  invoking  God's  help  to  keep 
Knox's  influences  out  of  England,  Cecil  had  resolved  to 
send  money  to  Scotland  and  to  entrust  its  distribution  to 
Knox.  The  memorandum  runs:  Knox  to  be  a  counsel 
with  the  payments,  to  see  that  they  be  employed  to  the 
common  action.8 

The  third  stage-; — assistance  with  arms — came  sooner 
than  might  have  been  expected.  The  condition  of  Prance 
became  more  favourable.  Henry  n.  had  died  (July  10th, 
1559),  and  the  Guises  ruled  France  through  their  niece 
Mary  and  her  sickly  devoted  husband.  But  the  Bourbon 
Princes  and  many  of  the  higher  nobles  did  not  take  kindly 
to  the  sudden  rise  of  a  family  which  had  been  French  for 
only  two  generations,  and  the  easiest  way  to  annoy  them 
was  to  favour  publicly  or  secretly  "  those  of  the  religion." 
There  was  unrest  in  France.  "  Beat  the  iron  while  it  is 
hot,"  Throckmorton  wrote  from  Paris ;  "  their  fair  flatter- 
ings  and  sweet  language  are  only  to  gain  time."4  Cecil 
struck.  He  had  a  sore  battle  with  his  royal  mistress,  but 
he  won.6  An  arrangement  was  come  to  between  England 

1  Calendar  of  Mate  Paupers,  Foreign  Series,  of  the  JReign  of  Mizadeth, 
2539-60,  p.  84. 

2  Ibid.  1568-50,  p.  365,  Cecil  to  Crojt,  July  8th,  1559. 

»  Ibid.  1550-60,  p.  79.  4  Ibid.  p.  352. 

5  Cf.  his  pathetic  letter  offer  ing  to  resign.     Ibid,  p.  186  n. 


298  THE  REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

and  the  Lords  of  the  Congregation  acting  on  behalf  *  of 
the  second  person  of  the  realm  of  Scotland"  (Treaty  of 
Berwick,  May  10th,  1560).1  An  English  fleet  entered 
the  Firth  of  Forth;  an  English  army  beleaguered  the 
French  troops  in  Leith  Fort ;  and  the  end  of  it  was  that 
France  was  obliged  to  let  go  its  hold  on  Scotland,  and 
never  thoroughly  recovered  it  (Treaty  of  Edinburgh,  July 
6th,  1560).2  The  great  majority  of  the  Scottish  people 
saw  in  the  English  victory  only  their  deliverance  from 
French  tyranny,  and  for  the  first  time  a  conquering  English 
army  left  the  Scottish  soil  followed  by  blessings  and  not 
curses.  The  Scottish  Liturgy,  which  had  contained 
Prayers  used  in  the  Churches  of  Scotland  in  the  time  of  their 
persecution  ly  the  Frenchmen,  was  enriched  by  a  Thanksgiving 
unto  God  after  our  deliverance  from  the  tyranny  of  the 
frenchmen;  with  prayers  made  for  the  continuance  of  the 
peace  letwkst  the  realms  of  England  and  Scotland,  which 
contained  the  following  petition : 

"And  seeing  that  when  we  by  our  owne  power  were 
altogether  unable  to  have  freed  ourselves  from  the  tyranny 
of  strangers,  and  from  the  bondage  and  thraldome  pretended 
against  us,  Thou  of  thyne  especial  goodnes  didst  move  the 
hearts  of  our  neighbours  (of  whom  we  deserved  no  such 
favour)  to  take  upon  them  the  common  burthen  with  us, 
and  for  our  deliverance  not  only  to  spend  the  lives  of  many, 
but  also  to  hazarde  the  estate  and  tranquillity  of  their 
Eealme  and  commonwealth :  Grant  unto  us,  0  Lord,  that 
vdtfet  such  reverence  we  may  remember  thy  benefits  received 
that  after  this  in  our  defaute  we  never  enter  into  hostilitie 
against  the  Eealme  and  nation  of  England."  8 

The  Eegent  had  died  during  the  course  of  the 
hostilities,  and  Cecil,  following  and  improving  upon  the 

1  The  Duke  of  Chatellerault  (Earl  off  Arran)  was  next  in  succession  after 
Mary  and  her  offspring ;  cf.  a  curious  note1  on  him  and  his  doings,  Hid. 
p.  24  n.    For  the  Treaty,  cf.  Calendar  cf  State  Papers  relating?  to  Scotland 
and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots,  i.  403,  and  The  Works  of  John  J&nox,  etc.  ii.  45  ff. 

2  Calendar  of  State  Papers^   Foreign  Series,   of  the  Reign  of  Elizabeth* 
1560-61>  pp.  172-78. 

8  The  Works  of  John  JZnoos,  etc.  vi.  309,  313,  314. 


KNOX   AND   CECIL  299 

wise  policy  of  Protector  Somerset,  left  it  entirely  to  the 
Scots  to  settle  their  own  affairs.1 

Now  or  never  was  the  opportunity  for  Knox  and  the 
Lords  of  the  Congregation.  They  had  not  been  idle  during 
the  months  since  Knox  had  arrived  in  Scotland.  They 
had  strengthened  the  ties  uniting  them  by  three  additional 
Bands.  At  a  meeting  of  the  Congregation  of  the  West 
with  the  Congregations  of  Fife,  Perth,  Dundee,  Angus, 
Mearns,  and  Montrose,  held  in  Perth  (May  31st,  1559), 
they  had  covenanted  to  spare  neither 

"  labouris,  goodis,  substancis,  bodyis,  and  lives,  in  mantean- 
ing  the  libertie  of  the  haill  Congregatioun  and  everie  member 
thairof,  aganis  whatsomevir  power  that  shall  intend  trubill 
for  the  caus  of  religion."  2 

They  had  renewed  this  Band  in  Edinburgh  on  July 
13th;  and  at  Stirling  (Aug.  1st)  they  had  covenanted, 

"that  nane  of  us  sail  in  tymeis  cuming  pas  to  the 
Quenis  Grace  Dowriare,  to  talk  or  commun  with  hir  for 
any  letter  without  consent  of  the  rest  and  commone 
consultatioun."  3 

They  had  the  bitter  satisfaction  of  knowing  that 
although  the  French  troops  and  officers  of  the  Eegent 
were  too  strong  for  them  in  the  field,  the  insolence  and 
rapine  of  these  foreigners  was  rousing  all  ranks  and  classes 
in  Scotland  to  see  that  their  only  deliverance  lay  in  the 
English  alliance  and  the  triumph  of  the  Reformation.  The 
Bandoi  1560  (April  27th)  included,  with  "the  nobilitie, 
barronis,  and  gentilmen  professing  Chryst  Jesus  in  Scot- 
land .  .  .  dyveris  utheris  that  joyint  with  us,  for  expelling 
of  the  French  army :  amangis  quhani  the  Erie  of  Huntlie 
was  principal!."  4 

The   Estates    or   Parliament    met   in   Edinburgh    on 

1  "Matters  of  religion  to  be  passed  over  in  silence  "  (Calendar  of  State 
Papers^  etc.  p.  178). 

2  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  i.  344. 

*  Ibid.  i.  382.  */tt&  ii.  61. 


300  THE   REFORMATION  IN   SCOTLAND 

July  10th,  1560.  Neither  the  French  nor  the  English 
soldiers  had  left;  so  they  adjourned  to  August  1st,  and 
again  to  the  8th.1 

Meanwhile  Knox  and  the  Congregation  were  busy. 
The  Reformer  excelled  himself  in  the  pulpit  of  St.  Giles', 
lecturing  daily  on  the  Book  of  the  Prophet  Haggai  (on 
the  building  of  the  Temple) — "  a  doctrine  proper  for  the 
time."  *  Randolph  wrote  to  Cecil,  Aug.  1 5th : 

"Sermons  are  daylie,  and  greate  audience;  though  dyvers 
of  the  nobles  present  ar  not  resolved  in  religion,  yet  do 
thei  repayre  to  the  prechynges,  which  gevethe  a  good  hope 
to  maynie  that  God  wyll  bowe  their  hartes."  s 

The  Congregation  held  a  great  thanksgiving  service 
in  St.  Giles';  and  after  it  arranged  for  eight  fully  con- 
stituted churches,  and  appointed  five  superintendents  in 
matters  of  religion.4  They  also  prepared  a  petition  for 
Parliament  asking  for  a  settlement  of  the  religious  question 
in  the  way  they  desired.5  At  the  request  of  the  Estates 
or  Parliament,  Knox  and  five  companions  prepared  The 
Confessioun  of  Faith  professit  and  "belewt  le  the  Protestantis 
within  the  JRealme  of  Scotland,  which  was  ratified  and  ap- 
proved as  "  hailsome  and  sound  doctrine,  groundit  upoun 
the  infallible  trewth  of  Godis  Word."  It  was  afterwards 
issued  by  the  Estates  as  the  "  summe  of  that  doctrin  quhilk 
we  prof esse,  and  for  the  quhilk  we  haif  sustenit  infamy  and 
daingear."6  Seven  days  later  (Aug.  24th),  the  Estates 
decreed  that  "  the  Bischope  of  Eome  have  na  jurisdictioun 
nor  authoritie  in  this  Eealme  in  tymes  cuming";  they 

1  Of.  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of 
Scots,  i  456-62. 

2  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  ii.  88. 

3  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Qtteen  of  Scots, 
i.  461. 

4  Spottiswoode,  History  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  (Edinburgh,  1847),  i. 
325. 

6  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  ii.  89. 

6  Ibid.    ii.    95 ;   (Dunlop's)    Collection   of   Confessions  of  Faith,    eta 
(Edinburgh,  1722)  .ii.  17,  18. 


THE   REFORMED   CHURCH  301 

annulled  all  Acts  of  previous  Parliaments  which  were  con- 
trary to  the  Confession  of  Faith ;  and  they  forbade  the 
saying,  hearing,  or  being  present  at  Mass,  under  penalty  of 
confiscation  of  goods  and  bodily  punishment  at  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  magistrates  for  the  first  offence,  of  banish- 
ment for  the  second,  and  of  death  for  the  third.1  These 
severe  penalties,  however,  were  by  no  means  rigidly  enforced. 
Lesley  (Eoman  Catholic  Bishop  of  Eoss)  says  in  his 
History : 

"  The  clemency  of  the  heretic  nobles  must  not  be  left 
unmentioned,  since  at  that  time  they  exiled  few  Catholic 
on  the  score  of  religion,  imprisoned  fewer,  and  put  none  to 
death."2 

One  thing  still  required  to  be  done — to  draft  a 
constitution  for  the  new  Protestant  Church.  The  work 
was  committed  to  the  same  ministers  who  had  compiled 
the  Confession.  They  had  been  asked  to  prepare  it  as 
early  as  April  29th,  and  they  had  it  ready  for  the 
Lords  of  the  Congregation  within  a  month.  It  was  not 
approved  by  the  Estates;  but  was  ordered  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  next  general  meeting,  and  was  meanwhile 
translated  into  Latin,  to  be  sent  to  Calvin,  Viret,  and  Beza 
in  Geneva.8  The  delay  seemed  to  some  to  arise  from  the 
unwillingness  of  many  of  the  lords  to  see  "  their  carnal 
liberty  and  worldly  commoditie  impaired  " ; 4  but  another 
cause  was  also  at  work.  Cecil  evidently  wished  that 
the  Church  in  Scotland  should  be  uniform  with  the  Church 
in  England,  and  had  instructed  Eandolph  to  press  this 
question  of  uniformity.  It  was  a  favourite  idea  with 
statesmen  of  both  countries — pressed  on  Scotland  by 
England  during  the  reigns  of  James  I.  and  Charles  I.,  and 
by  Scotland  on  England  in  the  Solemn  League  and 

1  Act.  Part.  Scot.  ii.  526-35. 

2  Lesley,   De   Rebus    Gfestis   Scotorum  (Bannatyne   Club,   Edinburgh), 
p.  537. 

3  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relatwig  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots, 
i.  472,  in  a  letter  from  Randolph  to  Cecil  of  Aug.  25th. 

4  The  Works  of  John  JiCnox,  etc.  ii.  128. 


302  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

Covenant.     Kandolph  was  wise  enough  to  see  that  such 
uniformity  was  an  impossibility.1 

The  Confession  of  tTie  Faith  and  Doctrine,  Believed  and 
Professed  ly  the  Protestants  of  Scotland,  was  translated  into 
Latin,  and,  under  the  title  Oonfessio  Scoticana,  occupies  an 
honoured  place  in  the  collections  of  the  creeds  of  the 
Eeformed  Churches.  It  remained  the  symbol  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland  during  the  first  stormy  century  of  its 
existence.  It  was  displaced  by  the  Westminster  Con- 
fession in  1647,  only  on  the  understanding  that  the  later 
document  was  "  in  nothing  contrary  "  to  the  former ;  and 
continued  authoritative  long  after  that  date.2  Drawn  up 
in  haste  by  a  small  number  of  theologians,  it  is  more 
sympathetic  and  human  than  most  creeds,  and  has  com- 
mended itself  to  many  who  object  to  the  impersonal  logic 
of  the  Westminster  Confession.3  The  first  sentence  of  the 
preface  gives  the  tone  to  the  whole : 

*c  Lang  have  we  thirsted,  dear  Brethren,  to  have  notified 
to  the  Warld  the  Sum  of  that  Doctrine  quhilk  we  professe, 
and  for  quhilk  we  have  susteined  Inf amie  and  Danger ;  Bot 
sik  has  bene  the  Kage  of  Sathane  againis  us,  and  againis 
Christ  Jesus  his  eternal  Veritie  latlie  now  againe  born 
amangst  us,  that  to  this  daie  na  Time  has  been  graunted 
unto  us  to  cleir  our  Consciences  as  maist  gladlie  we  wald 
have  done."4 

The  preface  also  puts  more  clearly  than  any  similiar 
document  save  the  First  Confession  of  Basel  the  reverence 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots, 
i.  471,  472. 

2  The  Scots  Confession  is  to  be  found  in  (Dunlop's)  Collection  of  Confessions 
of  Faith,  Catechisms,  Directories,  JBooks  of  Discipline,  etc.,  of  Public  Authority 
in  the  Church  of  Scotland  (Edinburgh,  1722),  ii.  ISff.,  where  the  Scots  and 
the  Latin  versions  are  printed  in  parallel  columns ;  in  Schaffs  Creeds  of  the 
Evangelical  Protestant  Churches  (London,  1877),  pp.  437^.  ;  and  the  Latin 
version  alone  in  Niemeyer,  Collectio  Confessionum  in  JEcclesiis  Eeformatis 
publicatarum  (Leipzig,  1840),  pp.  340/1.  For  a  statement  of  its  characteristics, 
cf.  Mitchell,  The  Scottish  ^Reformation  (Baird  Lecture  for  1899,  Edinburgh- 
1900),  pp.  99^., 

3  As  Edward  Irving,  cf.  Collected  Writings  (London,  1864),  i.  601  ff. 

4  (Dunlop's)  Collection  of  Confessions,  etc.  pp.  15-18. 


THE   SCOTS    CONFESSION  303 

felt  by  the  early  Keformers  for  the  Word  of  God  and  the 
renunciation  of  any  claim  to  infallibility  of  interpreta- 
tion: 

"Protestand  that  gif  onie  man  will  note  in  this  our 
confessioun  onie  Artickle  repugnand  to  Gods  halie  word, 
that  it  wald  pleis  him  of  his  gentleness  and  for  Christian 
charities  sake  to  admonish  us  of  the  same  in  writing ;  and  we 
upon  our  honoures  and  fidelitie,  be  Gods  grace  do  promise 
unto  him  satisfaction  fra  the  mouth  of  God,  that  is  fra  his 
haly  scriptures,  or  else  reformation  of  that  quhilk  he  sal 
prove  to  be  amisse." 

The  Confession  itself  contains  the  truths  common  to 
the  Eeformed  creeds  of  the  Eeformation.  It  contains  all 
the  (Ecumenical  doctrines,  as  they  have  been  called — that 
is,  the  truths  taught  in  the  early  (Ecumenical  Councils, 
and  embodied  in  the  Apostles'  and  Nicene  Creeds;  and 
adds  those  doctrines  of  grace,  of  pardon,  and  of  enlighten- 
ment through  Word  and  Spirit  which  were  brought  into 
special  prominence  by  the  Eeformation  revival  of  religion. 
The  Confession  is  more  remarkable  for  quaint  suggestive- 
ness  of  titles  than  for  any  special  peculiarity  of  doctrine. 
Thus  the  doctrine  of  revelation  is  defined  by  itself,  apart 
from  the  doctrine  of  Scripture,  under  the  title  of  "  The 
Eevelation  of  the  Promise."  Election  is  treated  according 
to  the  view  of  earlier  Calvinism  as  a  means  of  grace,  and 
an  evidence  of  the  "  invincible  power  "  of  the  Godhead  in 
salvation.  The  "  notes  by  which  the  true  Kirk  is  discerned 
from  the  false  "  are  said  to  be  the  true  preaching  of  the 
Word  of  God,  the  right  administration  of  the  sacraments, 
and  ecclesiastical  discipline  rightly  administered.  The 
authority  of  Scriptures  is  said  to  come  from  God,  and  to 
depend  neither  "  on  man  nor  angels " ;  and  *  the  Church 
knows  them  to  be  true,  because  "  the  true  kirk  always 
heareth  and  obeyeth  the  voice  of  her  own  spouse  and 
pastor." 

Eandolph  says  in  a  letter  to  Cecil  (September  7th, 
1560)  that  before  the  Confession  was  publicly  read  it  was 
revised  by  Lethington  and  Lord  James  Stewart,  who  "  dyd 


304  THE   REFORMATION   IN  SCOTLAND 

mytigate  the  austeritie  of  maynie  wordes  and  sentences/* 
and  that  a  certain  article  which  dealt  with  the  "  dysobediens 
that  subjects  owe  unto  their  magistrates  "  was  advised  to 
be  left  out.1  Thus  amended  it  was  read  over,  and  then 
re-read  article  by  article  in  the  Estates,  and  passed 
without  alteration,2  — "  no  man  present  gainsaying." 3 
When  it  was  read  before  the  Estates : 

"  Maynie  offered  to  sheede  ther  blude  in  defence  of  the 
same.  The  old  Lord  of  Lynsay,  as  grave  and  goodly  a  man 
as  ever  I  sawe,  said,  *  I  have  lyved  maynie  yeres,  I  am  the 
eldest  in  thys  Compagnie  of  my  sorte ;  nowe  that  yt  hathe 
pleased  God  to  lett  me  see  thys  daye  wher  so  maynie  nobles 
and  other  have  allowed  so  worthie  a  work,  I  will  say  with 
Simion,  Nunc  dimittisJ  "  4 

A  copy  was  sent  to  Cecil,  and  Maitland  of  Lethington 
assured  him  that  if  there  was  anything  in  the  Confession  of 
Eaith  which  the  English  Minister  misliked,  "It  may 
eyther  be  changed  (if  the  mater  so  permit)  or  at  least  in 
some  thyng  qualifieed " ;  which  shows  the  anxiety  of  the 
Scots  to  keep  step  with  their  English  allies.5 

The  authors  of  the  Confession  were  asked  to  draw 
up  a  short  statement  showing  how  a  Beformed  Church 
could  best  be  governed.  The  result  was  the  remark- 
able document  which  was  afterwards  called  the  First 
Book  of  Discipline,  or  the  Politie  and  Discipline  of  the 
Cliurch?  It  provided  for  the  government  of  tiie  Church 
by  kirk-sessions,  synods,  and  general  assemblies;  and 
recognised  as  office-bearers  in  the  Church,  ministers, 
teachers,  elders,  deacons,  superintendents,  and  readers. 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots, 
L  477,  478. 

3  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  ii.  121. 

3  Calendar  of  State  Payers,  etc.  i.  465,  Maitland  to  Cecil  (August 
18th). 

*Ibid.  i.  467,  Randolph  to  Cecil  (August  19th}. 

*  Ibid.  i.  479,  Maitland  to  Cecil  (September  13th). 

6  For  a  description  of  the  First  Book  of  Discipline,  cf.  Mitchell,  The 
Scottish  Information,  etc.  pp.  144  ff*  The  document  itself  is  to  be  found  in 
(Buulop's)  Collection  of  Confessions,  etc.  ii. 


ORGANISATION  305 

The  authors  of  this  Book  of  Discipline  professed  to  go 
directly  to  Scripture  for  the  outlines  of  the  system  of 
Church  government  which  they  advised  their  countrymen 
to  adopt,  and  their  profession  was  undoubtedly  sincere  and 
likewise  just.  They  were,  however,  all  of  them  men 
in  sympathy  with  Calvin,  and  had  had  personal 
intercourse  with  the  Protestants  of  France.  Their  form 
of  government  is  clearly  inspired  by  Calvin's  ideas  as 
stated  in  his  Institution,  and  follows  closely  the  Ecclesi- 
astical Ordinances  of  the  French  Church.  The  offices  of 
superintendent  and  reader  were  added  to  the  usual  three- 
fold or  fourfold  Presbyterian  form  of  government.  The 
former  was  due  to  the  unsettled  state  of  the  country 
and  the  scarcity  of  Protestant  pastors.  The  Super- 
intendents took  charge  of  districts  corresponding  not 
very  exactly  with  the  Episcopal  dioceses,  and  were  ordered 
to  make  annual  reports  to  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
ecclesiastical  and  religious  state  of  their  provinces,  and 
to  preach  in  the  various  churches  in  their  district.  The 
Headers  owed  their  existence  to  the  small  number  of  Pro- 
testant pastors,  to  the  great  importance  attached  by  the 
early  Scottish  Eeformers  to  an  educated  ministry,  and  also 
to  the  difficulty  of  procuring  funds  for  the  support  of 
pastors  in  every  parish.  They  were  of  two  classes — those 
of  a  higher  grade,  who  were  permitted  to  deliver  addresses 
and  who  were  called  JSxhorters;  and  those  of  the  lower 
grade,  whose  duty  it  was  to  read  "  distinctly  "  the  Common 
Prayers  and  the  Scriptures.  Both  classes  were  expected 
to  teach  the  younger  children.  JExhorters  who  studied 
theology  diligently  and  satisfied  the  synod  of  their  learning 
could  rise  to  be  ministers.  The  Book  of  Discipline  contains 
a  chapter  on  the  patrimony  of  the  Church  which  urges  the 
necessity  of  preserving  monies  possessed  by  the  Church 
for  the  maintenance  of  religion,  the  support  of  education, 
and  the  help  of  the  poor.  The  presence  of  this  chapter 
prevented  the  book  being  accepted  by  the  Estates  in  the 
same  way  as  the  Confession  of  Faith.  The  barons,  greater 
and  lesser,  who  sat  there  had  in  too  many  cases  appropriated 


306  THE   REFORMATION   IN   SCOTLAND 

the  "patrimony  of  the  Kirk"  to  their  own  private  uses, 
and  were  unwilling  to  sign  a  document  which  condemned 
their  conduct.  The  Book  of  Discipline  approved  by  the 
General  Assembly,  and  signed  by  a  large  number  of  the 
uobles  and  burgesses,  never  received  the  legal  sanction 
accorded  to  the  Confession. 

The  General  Assembly  of  the  Eeformed  Church  of 
Scotland  met  for  the  first  time  in  1560;  and  thereafter, 
in  spite  of  the  struggle  in  which  the  Church  was  involved, 
meetings  were  held  generally  twice  a  year,  sometimes  of tener, 
and  the  Church  was  organised  for  active  work. 

A  third  book,  variously  called  The  Book  of  Common 
Order}-  The  Order  of  Geneva,  and  now  frequently  Knox's 
Liturgy^  was  a  directory  for  the  public  worship  and 
services  of  the  Church.  It  was  usually  bound  up  with 
a  metrical  version  of  the  Psalms,  and  is  often  spoken  of 
as  the  Psalm  £ooh 

Calvin's  Catechism  was  translated  and  ordered  to  be 
used  for  the  instruction^  of  the  youth  in  the  faith.  Later, 
the  Heidelberg  Catechism  was  translated  and  annotated  for 
the  same  purpose.  They  were  both  superseded  by  Craig's 
Catechism,  which  in  its  turn  gave  way  to  the  Larger  and 
Shorter  Catechisms  of  the  Westminster  Divines.2 

The  democratic  ideas  of  Presbyterianism,  enforced  by 
the  practical  necessity  of  trusting  in  the  people,  made 
the  Scotch  Reformers  pay  great  attention  to  education. 
All  the  leaders  of  the  Reformation,  whether  in  Germany, 
France,  or  Holland,  had  felt  the  importance  of  enlighten- 
ing the  commonalty;  but  perhaps  Scotland  and  Holland 
were  the  two  countries  where  the  attempt  was  most 
successful.  The  education  of  the  people  was  no  new 
thing  in  Scotland;  and  although  in  the  troublous  times 
before  and  during  the  Reformation  high  schools  had 

1  For  the  Book  of  Common  Order,  cf.  Mitchell's  Scottish  Information, 
pp,  133/.  The  Book  itself  is  to  be  found  in  (Dunlop's)  Collection  of 
Confessions,  ii.  SSSff.  It  has  been  published  with  learned  preface  and  notes 
by  Sprott  and  Leishman  (Edinburgh,  1868). 

a  Bonar's     Catechisms   of   the    Scottish    Reformation  (London,   1866) ; 
(Dunlop's)  Collection  of  Confessions,  etc.  ii.  139-382. 


EDUCATION  307 

disappeared  and  the  Universities  had  decayed,  still  the 
craving  for  learning  had  not  altogether  died  out.  Knox 
and  his  friend  George  Buchanan  had  a  magnificent 
scheme  of  endowing  schools  in  every  parish,  high 
schools  or  colleges  in  all  important  towns,  and  of  in- 
creasing the  power  and  influence  of  the  Universities. 
Their  scheme,  owing  to  the  greed  of  the  Barons,  who  had 
seized  the  Church  property,  was  little  more  than  a  devout 
imagination ;  but  it  laid  hold  on  the  mind  of  Scotland,  and 
the  lack  of  endowments  was  more  than  compensated  by 
the  craving  of  the  people  for  education.  The  three 
Universities  of  St.  Andrews,  Glasgow,  and  Aberdeen  took 
new  life,  and  a  fourth,  the  University  of  Edinburgh,  was 
founded.  Scotch  students  who  had  been  trained  in  the 
continental  schools  of  learning,  and  who  had  embraced 
the  Reformed  faith,  were  employed  to  superintend  the 
newly-organised  educational  system  of  the  country,  and 
the  whole  organisation  was  brought  into  sympathy  with 
the  everyday  life  of  the  people  by  the  preference  given 
to  day  schools  over  boarding  schools,  and  by  a  system  of 
inspection  by  the  most  pious  and  learned  men  in  each 
circle  of  parishes.  Knox  also  was  prepared  to  order 
compulsory  attendance  at  school  on  the  "part  of  two 
classes  of  society,  the  upper  and  the  lower — the  middle 
class  he  thought  might  be  trusted  to  its  own  natural 
desire  for  learning;  and  he  wished  to  see  the  State  so 
exercise  power  and  patronage  as  to  lay  hold  on  all  youths 
"of  parts'*  and  compel  them  to  proceed  to  the  high 
schools  and  Universities,  that  the  commonwealth  might 
get  the  greatest  good  of  their  service. 

The  form  of  Church  government  given  in  the  First 
Book  of  Discipline  represented  rather  an  outline  requiring 
to  be  filled  in  than  a  picture  of  what  actually  existed  for 
many  a  year  after  1560.  It  provided  for  a  form  of 
Church  government  by  ecclesiastical  councils  rising  from 
the  Session  of  the  individual  congregation  up  to  a 
National  Assembly,  and  its  first  requisite  was  a  fully 
organised  church  in  every  parish  ruled  by  a  minister 


308  THE  REFORMATION  IN   SCOTLAND 

with  his  Session  or  council  of  Elders  and  his  body  of 
Deacons.  But  there  was  a  great  lack  of  men  having  the 
necessary  amount  of  education  to  be  ordained  as  ministers, 
and  consequently  there  were  few  fully  equipped  con- 
gregations. The  first  court  in  existence  was  the  Kirk- 
Session  ;  it  was  in  being  in  every  organised  congregation. 
The  second  in  order  of  time  was  the  General  Assembly. 
Its  first  meeting  was  in  Edinburgh,  Dec.  20th,  1560. 
Forty-two  members  were  present,  of  whom  only  six  were 
ministers.  These  were  the  small  beginnings  from  which 
it  grew.  The  Synods  came  into  existence  later.  At  first 
they  were  yearly  gatherings  of  the  ministry  of  the 
Superintendent's  district,  to  which  each  congregation 
within  the  district  was  asked  to  send  an  Elder  and  a 
Deacon.  The  Court  of  the  Presbytery  came  latest  into 
existence ;  it  had  its  beginnings  in  the  "  weekly  exercise/' 

The  work  had  been  rapidly  done.  Barely  a  year 
had  elapsed  between  the  return  of  Knox  to  Scotland  and 
the  establishment  of  the  Eeforined  religion  by  the  Estates. 
Calvin  wrote  from  Geneva  (Nov.  8th,  1559) : 

"As  we  wonder  at  success  incredible  in  so  short  a  time, 
so  also  we  give  great  thanks  to  God,  whose  special  blessing 
here  shines  forth." 

And  Knox  himself,  writing  from  the  midst  of  the 
battle,  says : l 

"We  doe  nothing  but  goe  about  Jericho,  blowing  with 
trumpets,  as  God  giveth  strength,  hoping  victorie  by  his 
power  alone."  8 

But  dangers  had  been  imminent;  shot  at  through 
his  window,  deadly  ambushes  set,  and  the  man's  powers 
taxed  almost  beyond  endurance : 

"In  twenty-four  hours  I  have  not  four  free  to  naturall 
rest  and  ease  of  this  wicked  carcass  ...  I  have  nead  of  a 

1  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  vi.  95. 

*  Hid.  vi.  78,  Knox  to  Mrs.  Anna,  Locke  (Sept.  2nd,  1559). 


QUEEN   MARY    IN   SCOTLAND  309 

good  and  an  assured  horse,  for  great  watch  is  laid  for  my 
apprehension,  and  large  money  promissed  till  any  that  shall 
kyllme."1 

If  the  victory  had  been  won,  it  was  not  secured.  The 
sovereigns  Mary  and  Francis  had  refused  to  ratify  the 
Acts  of  their  Estates;  and  it  was  not  until  Mary  was 
deposed  in  1567  that  the  Acts  of  the  Estates  of  1560 
were  legally  placed  on  the  Statute  Book  of  Scotland. 
Francis  II.  died  in  1560  (Dec.  5th),  and  Mary  the 
young  and  widowed  Queen  returned  to  her  native  land 
(Aug.  19th,  1561).  Her  coming  was  looked  forward  to 
with  dread  by  the  party  of  the  Eeformation. 

There  was  abundant  reason  for  alarm.  Mary  was 
the  Stuart*  Queen;  she  represented  France,  the  old 
hereditary  ally ;  she  had  been  trained  from  childhood  by  a 
consummate  politician  and  deadly  enemy  of  the  Eeforma- 
tion, her  uncle  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  to  be  his 
instrument  to  win  back  Scotland  and  England  to  the 
deadliest  type  of  Eomanism.  She  was  a  lovely  creature, 
and  was,  besides,  gifted  with  a  power  of  personal  fascination 
greater  than  her  physical  charms,  and  such  as  no  other 
woman  of  her  time  possessed ;  she  had  a  sweet  caressing 
voice,  beautiful  hands;  and  not  least,  she  had  a  gift 
of  tears  at  command.  She  had  been  brought  up  at  a 
Court  where  women  were  taught  to  use  all  such  charms 
to  win  men  for  political  ends.  The  Eseadron  volant  de  la 
Eeine  had  not  come  into  existence  when  Mary  left 
France,  but  its  recruits  were  ready,  and  some  of  them 
had  been  her  companions.  She  had  made  it  clearly 
understood  that  she  meant  to  overthrow  the  Eeformation 
in  Scotland.2  Her  unscrupulous  character  was  already 
known  to  Knox  $nd  the  other  Protestant  leaders. 
Nine  days  before  her  "marriage  she  had  signed  deeds 
guaranteeing  the  ancient  •  liberties  and  independence  of 

1  The  Works  of  John  JKnox,  vi.  88,  Knox  to  Gregory  JRailton  (Oct. 
23rd,  1559). 

2  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots, 
i.  607,  536. 


310  THE   REFORMATION   IN    SCOTLAND 

Scotland;  six  days  after  her  marriage  she  and  her 
husband  had  appended  their  signatures  to  the  same 
deeds;  but  twenty  days  before  her  wedding  she  had 
secretly  signed  away  these  very  liberties,  and  had  made 
Scotland  a  mere  appanage  of  France.1  They  suspected 
that  the  party  in  France  whose  figure-head  she  was, 
would  stick  at  no  crime  to  carry  out  their  designs,  and 
had  shown  what  they  were  ready  to  do  by  poisoning 
four  of  the  Scotch  Commissioners  sent  to  Paris  for  their 
young  Queen's  wedding,  because  they  refused  to  allow 
Francis  to  be  immediately  crowned  King  of  Scotland.2 
They  knew  how  apt  a  pupil  she  had  already  shown 
herself  in  their  school,  when  she  led  her  boy  husband 
and  her  ladies  for  a  walk  round  the  Castle  of  Amboise,  to 
see  the  bodies  of  dozens  of  Protestants  hung  from  lintels 
and  turrets,  and  to  contemplate  "  the  fair  clusters  of 
grapes  which  the  grey  stones  had  produced."  3 

It  was  scarcely  wonderful  that  Lord  James,  Morton, 
and  Lethington,  were  it  not  for  obedience*  sake,  "  cared  not 
thoughe  theie  never  saw  her  face,"  and  felt  that  there 
was  no  safety  for  them  but  'in  Elizabeth's  protection. 
As  for  Knox,  we  are  told :  "  Mr.  Knox  ^is  determined  to 
abide  the  uttermost,  and  others  will  not  leave  him  till 
God  have  taken  his  life  and  theirs  together." 4  What 
use  might  she  not  make  of  these  fascinations  of  hers  on 
the  vain,  turbulent  nobles  of  Scotland  ?  Is  it  too  much 
to  say  that  but  for  the  passionate  womanly  impulse — so 
like  a  Stuart5 — which  made  her  fling  herself  first  into 
the  arms  of  Darnley  and  then  of  Bothwell,  and  but  for 

1  Hay  Fleming,  Mary  Queen  of  Scots  (London,  1897),  pp.  23,  24,  and 
210,  211, 

2  MO.  pp.  25,  212. 

8  Mariejol,  Sistoire  de  France  depuis  Us  Origines  jusgu'a  la  devolution, 
vi,  i.  18  (Paris,  1904). 

4  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  8cots, 
i.  548. 

§  c<  Das  Leben  geliebt  und  die  Krone  gekiisst, 
Und  den  Frauen  das  Herz  gegeben, 
Und  zuletzt  einen  Kuss  auf  das  blut'ge  Gerttst— • 
Das  ist  eiu  Stuartleben," 


QUEEN    MARY   IN    SCOTLAND  311 

Knox,  she  might  have  succeeded  in  re-establishing  Popery 
in  Scotland  and  in  reducing  Protestant  England  ? 

Cecil  himself  was  not  without  his  fears,  and  urged  the 
Protestants  in  Scotland  to  stand  firm.  Randolph's  answer 
shows  how  much  he  trusted  Knox's  tenacity,  however  much 
he  might  sometimes  deprecate  his  violence : 

"Where  your  honour  exhortethe  us  to  stowteness,  I 
assure  you  the  voyce  of  one  man  is  hable  in  one  hower  to 
put  more  lyf  in  us  than  five  hundred  trompettes  contynu- 
ally  blusteringe  in  our  eares."  1 

He  was  able  to  write  after  Mary's  arrival : 

"She  (Mary)  was  four  days  without  Mass;  the  next 
Sunday  after  arrival  she  had  it  said  in  her  chapel  by  a 
French  priest.  There  were  at  it  besides  her  uncles  and  her 
own  Household,  the  Earle  of  Montrose,  Lord  Graham  .  .  . 
the  rest  were  at  Mr.  Knox  sermon,  as  great  a  number  as 
ever  was  any  day."  2 

Mary's  advisers,  her  uncles,  knew  how  dangerous  the 
state  of  Scotland  was  for  their  designs,  and  counselled  her 
to  temporise  and  gradually  win  over  the  leading  Reforming 
nobles  to  her  side.  The  young  Queen  entered  on  her 
task  with  some  zest.  She  insisted  on  having  Mass  for  her 
own  household ;  but  she  would  maintain,  she  promised,  the 
laws  which  had  made  the  Mass  illegal  in  Scotland ;  and  it 
spys  a  great  deal  for  her  powers  of  fascination  and  dissimu- 
lation that  there  was  scarcely  one  of  the  Reforming  nobles 
that  she  did  not  win  over  to  believe  in  her  sincerity  at  one 
time  or  another,  and  that  even  the  sagacious  Randolph 
seemed  for  a  time  to  credit  that  she  meant. what  she  said.3 
Knox  alone  in  Scotland  read  her  character  and  paid  unwill- 
ing tribute  to  her  abilities  from  his  first  interview  with  her.4 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots, 
i.  551. 

*IMd.  i.  547. 

3  That  is  the  impression  which  his  letters  give  me.     Of.  Calendar,  etc. 
pp.  565-609. 

4  "  If  there  be  not  in  her  a  proud  mind,  a  crafty  wit,  and  an  indurate  heart 


312  THE   REFORMATION  IN  SCOTLAND 

He  saw  that  she  had  been  thoroughly  trained  by  het 
uncles,  and  especially  by  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  and  that 
it  was  hopless  to  expect  anything  like  fair  dealing  from 
her: 

"  In  verry  dead  hir  hole  proceadings  do  declayr  that  the 
Oardinalles  lessons  ar  so  deaplie  prented  in  hir  heart,  that 
the  substance  and  the  qualitie  ar  Uek  to  perische  together. 
I  wold  be  glaid  to  be  deceaved,  but  I  fear  I  shall  not.  In 
communication  with  her,  I  espyed  such  craft  as  I  have  not 
found  in  such  aige."  l 

Maitland  of  Lethington  thought  otherwise.  Writing  to 
Cecil  (Oct.  25th,  1561)  he  says: 

"  You  know  the  vehemency  of  Mr.  Knox  spreit,  which 
cannot  be  brydled.  ...  I  wold  wishe  he  shold  deale  with 
her  more  gently,  being  a  young  princess  unpersuaded"  2 

It  was  thought  that  Mary  might  be  led  to  adopt  the 
Befonnation  if  she  were  only  tenderly  guided.  When 
Mary's  private  correspondence  is  read,  when  the  secret 
knowledge  which  her  co-religionists  abroad  had  of  her  designs 
is  studied  and  known,  it  can  be  seen  how  true  was  Knox's 
reading  of  her  character  and  of  her  intentions.3  He  stood 
firm,  almost  alone  at  times  among  the  leading  men,  but 
faithfully  supported  by  the  commons  of  Scotland.* 

Then  began  the  struggle  between  the  fascinating  Queen, 
Mary  Stuart,  one  of  the  fairest  flowers  of  the  French 
Renaissance,  and  the  unbending  preacher,  trained  in  the 
sternest  school  of  the  Reformation  movement  —  a  struggle 
which  was  so  picturesque,  in  which  the  two  opponents  had 
each  such  strongly  marked  individuality,  and  in  which  the 

against  God  and  His  truth,  my  judgment  faileth  me"  (The  Works  of  John 
Enox,  etc.  ii.  286). 

1  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  vi.  132,  Letter  from  Knox  to  Cecil  (Oct. 
7th,  1561). 

a  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots, 
i.  565. 

8  For  summary  of  evidence,  cf.  Hay  Fleming,  Mary  Queen'  of  Scots,  pp. 


4  For  summary  of  evidence,  cf.  Hay  Fleming,  Mary  Queen  of  Scots,  pp. 
51-53,  263. 


AUTOCRACY  AND  DEMOCRACY        313 

accessories  were  so  dramatic,  that  the  spectator  insensibly 
becomes  absorbed  in  the  personal  side  of  the  conflict,  and 
is  tempted  to  forget  that  it  was  part  of  a  Eevolution  which 
was  convulsing  the  whole  of  middle  and  western  Europe. 

A  good  deal  has  been  written  about  the  rudeness  with 
which  Knox  assailed  Mary  in  public  and  in  private,  and 
his  conversations  with  her  are  continually  referred  to  but 
seldom  quoted  in  full.  It  is  forgotten  that  it  was  Mary 
who  wished  to  try  her  gifts  of  fascination  on  the  preacher, 
just  as  Catherine  de'  Medici  tried  to  charm  de  B&ze  before 
Poissy ;  that  Knox  never  sought  an  interview ;  that  he 
never  approached  the  Court  unless  he  was  summoned  by 
the  sovereign  to  her  presence ;  that  he  was  deferential  as  a 
subject  should  be ;  and  it  was  only  when  he  was  compelled 
by  Mary  herself  to  speak  on  themes  for  which  he  was  ready 
to  lay  down  his  life  that  he  displayed  a  sternness  which 
monarchs  seldom  experience  in  those  to  whom  they  give 
audience.  What  makes  these  interviews  stand  forth  in 
history  is  that  they  exhibit  the  first  clash  of  autocratic 
kingship  and  the  hitherto  unknown  power  of  the  people. 
It  was  an  age  in  which  sovereigns  were  everywhere  gaining 
despotic  power,  when  the  might  of  feudal  barons  was  being 
broken,  when  the  commonalty  was  dumb.  A  young  Queen, 
whose  training  from  childhood  had  stamped  indelibly  on 
her  character  that  kingship  meant  the  possession  of  un- 
limited autocratic  privileges  before  which  everything  must 
give  way,  who  had  seen  that  none  in  France  had  dared 
dispute  the  will  of  her  sickly,  dull  boy-husband  simply 
because  he  was  King,  was  suddenly  confronted  by  something 
above  and  beyond  her  comprehension : 

" '  What  have  ye  to  do,'  said  sche, e  with  my  mariage  ? 
Or  what  ar  ye  within  this  Commounwealth  ? '  '  A  subject 
lorne  within  the  same'  said  he,  *  Madam.  And  albeit  I  neather 
be  Erie,  Lord,  nor  Barroun  within  it,  yitt  hes  God  maid  me 
(how  abject  that  ever  I  be  in  your  eyes)  a  profitable  member 
within  the  same/  " l 

1  The  Works  of  John  Knox,  etc.  ii.  388. 


314  THE  REFORMATION  IN  SCOTLAND 

Modern  democracy  came  into  being  in  that  answer.  It  is 
curious  to  see  how  this  conflict  between  autocratic  power 
and  the  civil  and  religious  rights  of  the  people  runs  through 
all  the  interviews  between  Mary  and  Knox,  and  was,  in 
truth,  the  question  of  questions  between  them.1 

It  is  unnecessary  to  tell  the  story  of  the  seven  years 
of  struggle  between  1560  and  1567.  In  the  end,  Mary 
was  imprisoned  in  Lochleven  Castle,  deposed,  and  her 
.infant  son,  James  vi.,  was  placed  on  the  throne.  Lord 
James  Stewart,  Earl  of  Moray,  was  made  Eegent.  The 
Estates  or  Parliament  again  voted  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
and  engrossed  it  in  their  Acts.  The  Eegent,  acting  for  the 
sovereign,  signed  the  Acts.  The  Confession  thus  became 
part  of  the  law  of  the  land,  and  the  Eeformed  Church  was 
legally  recognised  in  Scotland. 

1  Accounts  of  the  fiye  interviews  are  to  be  found  in  The  Works  of  John 
Knox,  etc.  ii.  281/.,  331/.,  871 /.,  387 /.,  403/. 


BOOK  IV. 
THE  REFORMATION  IN  ENGLAND. 

CHAPTER  L 

THE   CHURCH   OF   HENRY  VIII.1 

THE  Church  and  people  of  England  broke  away  from  the 
mediaeval  papal  ecclesiastical  system  in  a  manner  so 
exceptional,  that  the  rupture  had  not  very  much  in 

1SotTBOES:  Lsemmer,  Monwnienta  Vaticana,  historiam  ecclesiasticam 
Qceculi  16  ttlustrantia  (Freiburg,  1861);  Letters  and  Papers,  foreign  ana 
Domestic,  of  the  Reign  of  Henry  VIII.  (19  vols.,  London,  1860-1903) ;  Calendar 
of  Venetian  Mate  Papers,  1620-26,  U27-S3, 1534-54, 1555-56, 1557-58, 1558- 
80 ;  Calendar  of  Spanish  State  Papers  (London,  1886) ;  Furnivall,  Ballads  from. 
Manuscripts  ( Ballad  Society,  London,  1868-72) ;  Gee  and  Hardy,  Document* 
illustrative  of  English  Church  History  (London,  1896) ;  Erasmus,  Opera 
Omnia,  ed.  Le  Clerc  (Leyden,  1703-6) ;  Nichols,  The  Epistles  of  J&rasmui 
from  the  earliest  letters  to  his  fifty-first  year,  arranged  in  order  of  timt 
(London,  1901-4) ;  Pocock,  Eecords  of  the  ^Reformation  (Oxford,  1870) ; 
Theiner,  Vetera  Monumenta  Hibemorum  et  Scotorum  historian,  illustrantia 
(Rome,  1864) ;  Wilkins,  Concilia;  Chronicle  of  the  Grey  Friars  of  London, 
(Camden  Society,  London,  1846) ;  Holinshed,  Chronicles  (London,  1809)  : 
London  Chronicle  in  the  times  of  Henry  VII.  and  Henry  VIII.  (Camden 
Miscellany,  vol.  iv.,  London,  1859) ;  Wright,  Suppression  of  the  Momtstevie*. 
(Camden  Society,  London,  1843) ;  Foxe,  Acts  and  Monuments  (London, 
1846)  j  Ehses,  JRdmische  Dolcwnwnte  zur  Geschichte  des  Heinrichs  VIII.  von 
JEngland,  1527-34  (Paderborn,  1893);  Zurich  Letters,  2  vols.  (Parker 
Society,  Cambridge,  1846-47) ;  Works  of  Archbishop  Cranmer>  2  vols.  (Parkei 
Society,  Cambridge,  1844-46). 

LATBB  BOOKS  :  Bixon,  History  of  the  Church  of  England  (London,  1878, 
etc.)  ;  Fronde,  History  of  England  (London,  1856-70 ;  by  no  means 
superseded,  as  many  would  have  us  believe) ;  Brewer,  The  JReign  of  Henr% 
VIII.  (London,  1884);  Gairdner,  The  English  Church  in  the  Sixteenth 

815 


316  THE   CHURCH   OF  HENRY   VIII. 

common  with  the  contemporary  movements  in  France  and 
Germany.  Henry  vm.  destroyed  the  papal  supremacy, 
spiritual  and  temporal,  within  the  land  which  he  governed ; 
he  cut  the  bands  which  united  the  Church  of  England 
with  the  great  Western  Church  ruled  over  by  the  Bishop 
of  Eome ;  he  built  up  what  may  be  called  a  kingly  papacy 
on  the  ruins  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Pope.  His  starting- 
point  was  a  quarrel  with  the  Pope,  who  refused  to  divorce 
him  from  Catharine  of  Aragon. 

It  would  be  a  mistake,  however,  to  think  that  Henry's 
eagerness  to  be  divorced  from  Catharine  accounts  for  the 
English  Eeformation.  No  king,  however  despotic,  could 
have  forced  on  such  a  revolution  unless  there  was  much 
in  the  life  of  the  people  that  reconciled  them  to  the  change, 
and  evidence  of  this  is  abundantly  forthcoming. 

There  was  a  good  deal  of  heresy,  so  called,  in  England 
long  before  Luther's  voice  had  been  heard  in  Germany. 
Men  maintained  that  the  tithes  were  exactions  of  covetous 
priests,  and  were  not  sanctioned  by  the  law  of  God ;  they 
protested  against  the  hierarchical  constitution  of  the 
mediaeval  Church ;  they  read  the  Scriptures,  and  attended 
services  in  the  vernacular;  and  they  scoffed  at  the 
authority  of  the  Church  and  attacked  some  of  its  doctrines. 
Lollardy  had  never  died  out  in  England,  and  Lollardy  was 
simply  the  English  form  of  that  passive  protest  against  the 
mediaeval  Church  which  under  various  names  had  main- 
tained itself  in  France,  Germany,  and  Bohemia  for  centuries 
in  spite  of  persecution.  Foxe's  Acts  and  Monuments  show 
that  there  was  a  fairly  active  repression  of  so-called  heresy 
in  England  before  Luther's  days,  and  his  accounts  are 
confirmed  by  the  State  Papers  of  the  period.  In  1511, 
Andreas  Ammonius,  the  Latin  secretary  of  Henry  vin., 
writing  to  Erasmus,  says  that  wood  has  grown  scarce  and 
dear  because  so  much  was  needed  to  burn  heretics,  "  and 

Century  (London,  1902) ;  Pollard,  Henry  VIII.  (London,  1905),  Thomas 
Oranmer  (Heroes  of  the  Reformatimi  Series,  New  York  and  London,  1904) ; 
Stubbs,  Seventeen  Lectures  on  the  Study  of  Mediaeval  and  Modern  History, 
Lectures  XI.  and  XIL  (Oxford,  1900)  j  Cambridge  Modern  History,  II.  xiii. 


LOLLARDY  317 

yet  their  numbers  grow."  Yet  Dr.  James  Gairdner  declares 
that  only  a  solitary  pair  had  suffered  during  that  year  at 
the  stake  ! *  Early  in  1512  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
summoned  a  meeting  of  convocation  for  the  express 
purpose  of  arresting  the  spread  of  heresy ; 2  in  that  same  year 
Erasmus  was  told  by  More  that  the  Epistolce  Obscurorunt 
Virorum  were  popular  everywhere  throughout  England ; 3 
and  a  commission  was  given  to  the  Bishop  of  Coventry  and 
others  to  inquire  about  Lollards  in  Wales  and  other  parts  ; 4 
and  as  late  as  1521  the  Bishop  of  London  arrested  five 
hundred  Lollards.5  In  1530,  Henry  vni.  himself,  always 
curious  about  theology  and  anxious  to  know  about  the  books 
which  interested  his  subjects,  sent  to  Oxford  for  a  copy 
of  the  Articles  on  which  "Wiclif  had  been  condemned.6 
Anyone  who  scoffed  at  relics  or  pilgrimages  was  thought  to 
be  a  "Wiclifite.7  In  1531,  divinity  students  were  required  to 
take  an  oath  to  renounce  the  doctrines  of  Wiclif,  Hus,  and 
Luther;8  and  in  1533,  More,  writing  to  Eraemus,  calls 
Tyndale  and  his  sympathisers  Wiclifites.9  Henry  vnr.  was 
engaged  as  early  as  1518  in  composing  a  book  against 
heresy  and  vindicating  the  claims  of  the  Roman  See,  which 
in  its  first  inception  could  scarcely  be  directed  against 
Luther,  and  probably  dealt  with  the  views  of  home  heretics.10 
Some  modern  historians  are  inclined  to  find  a  strong 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  Foreign  and  Domestic,  of  the  Reign  of  Henry  VII2. 
i.  p.  295.    There  was  a  sudden  rise  in  the  price  of  wood  all  over  Europe 
about  that  date,  and  it  is  alleged  to  be  one  of  the  causes  w}iy  the  poorer 
classes  in  Germany  were  obliged  to  give  up  the  earlier  almost  universal  use 
of  the  steam  bath.     In  the  fifteenth  century,  masters  gave  their  workmen  not 
Trinkgelt,  but  JBadgelt.     Nichols,  The  Epistles  of  Erasmw,  i,  40. 

2  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  i.  p.  633. 

3  Ibid.  ii.  i.  777 :  The  Oxford  bookseller  (1520)  John  Borne  had  two 
copies  in  his  stock  of  books  [Oxford  Historical  Society,  Collectanea  (Oxford, 
1885),  p.  155].  y 

4  Letters  and  Papers,  i.  p.  373. 

8  Jacobs,  The  Lutheran  Movement  m  England,  p.  8. 
61  Bale,  Select  Works,  p.  171. 

7  JSrasmi  Colloquia  (Amsterdam,    1662),   Peregrinatio  Religionis  ergo 
p.  376  ;  Viclevita  quispiam,  opinor. 

8  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  v.  p.  140. 

9  Ibid.  vi.  p.  144.  lu  Ibid.  n.  ii.  p.  1319. 


318  THE  CHURCH  OF  HENRY  VIIL 

English  revolt  against  Rome  native  to  the  soil  and  borrow- 
ing little  or  nothing  from  Luther,  which  they  believe  to 
have  been  the  initial  force  at  work  in  shaping  the  English 
Reformation,  Mr.  Pollard  points  out  that  in  many 
particulars  this  Reformation  followed  the  lines  laid  down 
by  Wiclif.  Its  leaders,  like  Wiclif,  denounced  the 
Papal  Supremacy  on  the  ground  of  the  political  injury  it 
did  to  the  English  people ;  declaimed  against  the  sloth, 
immorality,  and  wealth  of  the  English  ecclesiastics ; 
advocated  a  preaching  ministry  ;  and  looked  to  the  secular 
power  to  restrain  the  vices  and  reform  the  manners  of  the 
clergy,  and  to  govern  the  Church.  He  shows  that 

"most  of  the  English  Reformers  were  acquainted  with 
Wycliffe's  works:  Cranmer  declares  that  he  set  forth  the 
truth  of  the  Gospel;  Hooper  i-ecalls  how  he  resisted  'the 
popish  doctrine  of  the  Mass  * ;  Ridley,  how  he  denied  tran- 
substantiation ;  and  Bale,  how  lie  denounced  the  friars.  .  .  . 
Bale  records  with  triumph  that,  in  spite  of  the  efforts  to 
suppress  (the  writings  of  Wicliffe),  not  one  had  utterly 
perished."1 

And  Dr.  Rashdall  goes  the  length  of  saying : 

"It  is  certain  that  the  Reformation  had  virtually  broken 
out  in  the  secret  Bible-readings  of  the  Cambridge  Reformers 
before  either  the  trumpet-call  of  Luther  or  the  exigencies 
of  Henry  vm.*s  personal  and  political  position  set  men  free 
once  more  to  talk  openly  against  the  Pope  and  the  monks, 
and  to  teach  a  simpler  and  more  spiritual  gospel  than  the 
system  against  which  "Wyeliffe  had  striven."  2 

Even  if  it  be  admitted  that  these  statements  are 
somewhat  strong,  they  at  least  call  attention  to  the  fact  of 
the  vigorous  Lollard  leaven  which  permeated  the  English 
people,  and  are  a  very  necessary  corrective  of  the  mislead- 
ing assertions  of  Dr.  James  Gairdner  on  the  matter. 

Henry  vni.  had  other  popular  forces  behind  him — the 

1  Thomas  Cranmer  and  the  English,  Reformation  (New  York  and  London, 
1904),  p.  91. 

2  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  art.  "  Wyeliffe/'  Ixiii.  218. 


THE   CHRISTIAN    HUMANISTS  319 

rooted  dislike  to  the  clergy  which  characterised  a  large 
mass  of  the  people,  the  effects  of  the  teaching  of  the 
Christian  Humanists  of  England,  and  the  spread  of  Lutheran 
opinions  throughout  the  land.  - 

The  Bishop  of  London,  writing  to  Wolsey  ahout  the 
proposal  to  try  his  Chancellor,  Dr.  Horsey,  for  complicity 
in  the  supposed  murder  of  Eichard  Hunne,  declared  that 
if  the  Chancellor 

"  be  tried  by  any  twelve  men  in  London,  they  be  so  malici- 
ously set  infavorem  hceretiece  pramtatis  that  they  will  cast 
and  condemn  any  clerk  though  he  were  as  innocent  as 
Abel."1 

This  dislike  was  not  confined  to  the  capital.  The  Par- 
liaments showed  themselves  anti-clerical  long  before  Henry 
had  thrown  off  his  allegiance  to  Eome ; 2  and  Englishmen 
could  find  no  better  term  of  insult  to  throw1  at  the  Scots 
than  to  call  them  "  Pope's  men."  3  '« 

Nor  should  the  work  of  the  Christian  Humanists  be 
forgotten.  The  double  tendency  in  their  longings  for  a 
reformation  of  the  abuses  of  superstition,  of  pilgrimages,- 
of  relic-worship,  etc.,  may  be  seen  in  the  lives  of  Sir 
Thomas  More  and  of  William  Tyndale.  When  the  former 
saw  that  reform  meant  the  breaking  up  of  the  mediaeval 
Church,  he  became  more  and  more  conservative.  But 
More  in  1520  (Feb.  28th)  could  write  to  Lea  that  if  the 
Pope  (Leo  x.)  should  withdraw  his  approval  of  Erasmus' 
Greek  New  Testament,  Luther's  attacks  on  the  Holy  See 
were  piety  itself  compared  with  such  a  deed.4  Tyndale, 
the  favourite  pupil  of  Dean  Colet,  on  the  other  hand> 
went  forward  and  earned  the  martyr's  crown*  These 
Christian  Humanists  had  expected  much  from  Henry  vni., 
whom  they  looked  on  as  imbued  with  the  New  Learning ; 
and  in  the  end  perhaps  they  were  not  altogether  mistaken. 
If  the  Bishop's  Book  and  the  Kmg's  Book  be  studied,  it  will 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  II.  i.  p.  1. 

2  Ibid.  etc.  I.  p.  961,  n.  i.  pp.  850,  354,  355. 

3  Ibid.  r.  p.  379.  4  Ibid,  in,  p.  215. 


320  THE   CHURCH   OF   HENRY   VIIL 

be  seen  that  in  both  what  is  insisted  upon  is  a  reformation 
of  conduct  and  a  study  of  the  Bible — quite  in  the  spirit  of 
Oolet  and  of  Erasmus. 

,  The  writings  of  Luther  found  early  entrance  into 
England,  and  were  read  by  King  x  and  people.  A  long  list 
of  them,  including  six  copies  of  his  work  De  potestate  Papce, 
is  to  be  found  in  the  stock  of  the  Oxford  bookseller,  John 
Dome2  (1520).  Erasmus,  writing  to  Oecolampadius  (May 
15th,  1521),  declares  that  there  are  many  of  Luther's  books 
in  England,  and  hints  that  but  for  his  exertions  they  would 
have  been  burnt.3  That  was  before  Luther's  official  con- 
demnation. On  May  28tb,  Silvester,  Bishop  of  Worcester, 
wrote  to  Wolsey  from  Home  announcing  that  the  Cardinals 
had  agreed  to  declare  Martin  a  heretic,  and  that  a  Bull  was 
being  prepared  on  the  subject*  The  Bull  itself  appeared 
in  Eome  on  the  15th  of  June;  and  thereafter  our  informa- 
tion about  Luther's  writings  in  England  comes  from 
evidence  of  endeavours  to  destroy  them.  "Warham,  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  wrote  to  Wolsey  (March  8th, 
1521)  that  he  had  received  letters  from  Oxford  which 
declared  that  the  University  was  infected  with  Lutheranism, 
and  that  the  forbidden  books  were  in  circulation  there.6 
Indeed,  most  of  the  canons  appointed  to  Wolsey's  new 
foundation  of  the  Cardinal  College  were  suspect.  Cambridge 
was  as  bad,  if  not  worse.  Members  of  the  University  met 
at  the  White  Horse  Tavern  to  read  and  discuss  Luther's 
writings ;  the  inn  was  called  "  Germany,"  and  those  who 
frequented  it  "  the  Germans."  Pope  Leo  urged  both  the 
King  and  Wolsey  to  prevent  the  circulation  of  Lutheran 
literature ;  and  they  did  their  best  to  obey.  We  read  that 
on  May  12th,  1521,  Wolsey  went  in  great  state  to  St. 
Paul's,  and  after  various  ceremonies  mounted  a  scaffold, 
seated  himself  "  under  a  cloth  of  estate,"  and  listened  to  a 
sermon  preached  by  Bishop  Fisher  against  Lutheran  errors. 

1  Letters  wnd  Papers,  etc.  in.  p.  467. 

2  Oxford  Historical  Society,  Collectanea  (Oxford,  1885),  p.  164. 

8  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  in.  p.  284.          4  lUd.  etc.  in.  i.  p.  298. 
5  Ibid.  in.  p.  449. 


LUTHER'S  WRITINGS  321 

At  his  feet  on  the  right  side  sat  the  Pope's  ambassadors 
and  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  on  the  left  side 
the  imperial  ambassadors  and  the  Bishop  of  Durham. 
While  the  sermon  was  being  preached,  numbers  of  Lutheran 
books  were  burnt  in  a  huge  bonfire  kindled  hard  by  in 
St.  Paul's  Churchyard.1  The  representatives  of  Pope  and 
Emperor  saw  it  all,  and  doubtless  reported  to  their  respect- 
ive Courts  that  Wolsey  was  doing  his  duty  by  Church  and 
Empire.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  such  theatrical 
exhibitions  hindered  the  spread  of  Luther's  books  in 
England  or  prevented  them  being  read. 

All  these  things  indicated  a  certain  preparedness  in 
England  for  the  Eeformation,  and  all  meant  that  there  was 
a  strong  national  force  behind  Henry  viir.  when  he  at  last 
made  up  his  mind  to  defy  Rome* 

Nor  was  a  national  separation  from  Home  so  formid- 
able an  affair  as  Dr.  Gairdner  would  have  us  believe.  The 
Papacy  had  secularised  itself,  and  European  monarchs  were 
accustomed  to  treat  the  Popes  as  secular  princes.  The 
possibility  of  England  breaking  away  from  papal  authority 
and  erecting  itself  into  a  separate  patriarchate  under  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  had  been  thought  probable 
before  the  divorce  was  talked  about.2 

It  was  Henry  himself  who  clung  strenuously  to  the 
conception  of  papal  supremacy,  and  who  advocated  it  in  a 
manner  only  done  hitherto  by  canonists  of  the  Roman 
Curia.  Whatever  be  the  secret  reason  which  he  gave  to  Sir 
Thomas  More,  and  which  silenced  the  letter's  remonstrances, 
it  is  evident  that  the  validity  of  Henry*fer  marriage  and  the 
legitimacy  of  his  children  by  Catharine  of  Aragon  depended 
on  the  Pope  being  in  possession  of  the  very  fullest  powers 
of  dispensation.  Henry  had  been  married  to  Catharine 
under  very  peculiar  circumstances,  which  might  well 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  in.  i.  p.  485. 

2  Ibid,  iv.,  Preface,  p.  170:   "Some  are  of  opinion  that  it  (the  Holy 
See),  should  not  continue  in  Rome,  lest  the  French  King  should  make  a 
patriarch  in  his  kingdom  and  deny  obedience  to  the  said  See,  and  the  King 
of  England  and  all  other  Christian  princes  do  the  same/' 

21** 


322  THE   CHURCH   OF   HENRY   VIII. 

suggest    doubts    about     the    validity    Of    the    marriage 
ceremony. 

The  England  of  Henry  vn.  was  almost  as  much  a 
satellite  of  Spain  as  Scotland  was  of  France,  and  to  make 
the  alliance  still  stronger  a  marriage  was  arranged  between 
Arthur,  Prince  of  Wales,  and  Catharine  the  youngest  of 
the  three  daughters  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  of  Spain. 
The  Spanish  Princess  landed  at  Plymouth  (October  2nd, 
1501),  and  the  wedding  took  place  in  St.  Paul's  on  Novem- 
ber 14th.  But  Prince  Arthur  died  a  few  months  afterwards 
(April  2nd,  1502),  and  Catharine  became  a  widow.  The 
circumstances  of  the  two  nations  appeared  to  require  more 
than  ever  the  cementing  of  the  alliance  by  intermarriage, 
and  it  was  proposed  from  the  side  of  Spain  that  the  young 
widow  should  marry  Henry,  her  brother-in-law,  now  Prince 
of  Wales.1  Ferdinand  brought  pressure  to  bear  on 
England  by  insisting  that  if  this  were  not  done  Catharine 
should  be  sent  back  to  Spain  and  the  first  instalment  of 
her  dowry  (all  that  had  been  paid)  returned.  The  two 
Kings  then  besieged  the  Pope,  Julius  n.,  to  grant  a  dis- 
pensation for  the  marriage.  At  first  His  Holiness  was 
very  unwilling  to  consent.  Such  a  marriage  had  been 
branded  as  sin  by  canonical  law,  and  the  Pope  himself  had 
great  doubts  whether  it  was  competent  for  him  to  grant  a 
dispensation  in  such  a  case.2  In  the  end  he  was  persuaded 
to"  give  it.  '  The  two  young  people  had  their  own  scruples 
of  conscience.  Ferdinand  felt  called  upon  to  reason  with 
his  proposed  son-in-law.3  The  confessor  of  his  daughter 
was  changed.4  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who 
doubted  whether  the  Pope  could  gi&nt  dispensation  for 
what  was  a  mortal  sin  in  -his  eyesf,  :was  silenced.5  The 
wedding  took  place  (June  llth,  1509). 

1  Spanish  Calendar,  i.  267. 

3  Pocock's  Records  of  the  ^Reformation,  i.  1 ;  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  iv. 
iii.  5.  2576.  .    . 

*' Calendar  of  Spanish  State  Papers,  ii.  8. 

4  2bid.,  Preface,  xiii. 

s<  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  iv.  iii.  p.  2579.     A  General  Council  had  pro- 
nounced against  such  a  (tapraS'itioii ;  ibid.  iv.  iii.  p.  2365. 


EEtfRY   VHI.    AND   CATHARINE   OP  AEAGON     323 

The  marriage  was  in  one  sense  singularly  unfortunate. 
The  first  four  children  were  either  stillborn  or  died  soon 
after  birth ;  and  it  was  rumoured  in  Rome  as  early  as 
1514  that  Henry  might  ask  to  be  divorced  in  order  to 
save  England  from  a  disputed  succession.  Mary  was  born 
in  1516  and  survived,  but  all  the  children  who  came 
afterwards  were  either  stillborn  or  died  in  early  infancy. 
It  became  evident  by  1525  that  if  Henry  did  not  divorce 
his  wife  he  would  have  no  male  heir. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  lack  of  a  male  heir  troubled 
Henry  greatly.  The  English  people  had  not  been  accus- 
tomed to  a  female  sovereign ;  it  was  currently,  if  errone- 
ously, reported  in  England  that  the  laws  of  the  land  did 
not  permit  a  woman  to  be  sovereign,  and  such  well- 
informed  diplomatists  as  the  Venetian  Ambassadors  believed 
the  statement;1  and  the  Tudor  dynasty  was  not  so  firmly 
settled  on  the  throne  that  it  could  afford  ,to  look  forward 
to  a  disputed  succession.  The  King's  first  idea  was  to  ask 
the  Pope  to  legitimise  his  illegitimate  son  the  Duke  of 
Eichmond;2  and  Cardinal  Campeggio  actually  suggested 
that  the  Princess  Mary  should  be  married  to  her  half- 
brother.3  These  projects  came  to  an  end  with  the  death 
of  the  young  Prince* 

There  seems  to  be  no  reason  for  questioning  the 
sincerity  of  Henry's  doubts  about  the  legitimacy  of  his 
marriage  with  Catharine,  or  that  he  actually  looked  upon 
the  repeated  destruction  of  his  hopes  of  a  male  heir  as  a 
divine  punishment  for  the  sin  of  that  contract.*  Questions 
of  national  policy  and  impulses  of  passion  quicken  marvel- 
lously conscientious  convictions,  but  they  do  not  show  that 
the  convictions  are  not  real.  In  the  perplexities  of  his 
position  the  shortest  way  out  seemed  to  be  to  ask  the 
Pope  to  declare  that  he  had  nerer  been  legally  married  to 

1  Calendar  of  Venetian  State  Papers,  1527-83,  p.  300. 

3  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  IT.  ii.  p.  1369  ;   Calendar  of  Spanish  State 
Payers,  in.  ii.  482,  109. 

8  Ibid.  etc.  iv.  ii.  p.  2118 ;  Lannmer,  Monuvwnta  Vaticana,  p.  29. 

4  Ibid.  etc.  iv.  iii  p. 


324  THE   CHURCH  OF  HENRY  VIII. 

Catharine.  If  he  had  scruples  of  conscience  about  his 
marriage  with  his  brother's  widow,  this  would  end  them ; 
if  the  fears  of  a  disputed  succession  haunted  him,  he  could 
marry  again,  and  might  hope  for  a  son  and  a  lawful  heir 
whose  succession  none  would  dispute.  Cardinal  Wolsey 
adopted  his  master's  plans,  and  the  Pope  was  to  be  asked 
for  a  declaration  that  the  marriage  with  Catharine  had 
been  no  marriage  at  all. 

There  entered,  however,  into  all  this,  at  what  time  it  is 
not  easy  to  determine,  an  element  of  sordidness  which 
goes  ill  with  asserted  scruples  of  conscience  and  imperious 
necessities  of  State.  Wolsey  was  astonished  when  he 
learned  that  Henry  had  made  up  his  mind  to  marry  Anne 
Boleyn,  a  lady  whose  station  in  life  and  personal  reputation 
unfitted  her  for  the  position  of  Queen  of  England.  It  was 
Henry's  inordinate,  if  not  very  long-lived,  passion  for  this 
lady  that  put  him  in  the  wrong,  and  enabled  the  Pope  to 
pose  as  the  guardian  of  the  public  morality  of  Europe. 

It  is  plain  that  Henry  vni.  fully  expected  that  the 
Pope  would  declare  his  first  marriage  invalid ;  there  was 
many  a  precedent  for  such  action — two  in  Henry's  own 
family;1  and  the  delay  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
interests  of  public  morality.  The  Pope  was  at  the  time 
practically 'in  the  power  of  Charles  v.,  to  whom  his  aunt, 
the  injured  Catharine,  had  appealed,  and  who  had  promised 
her  his  protection.  One  has  only  to  study  the  phases  of 
the  protracted  proceedings  in  the  "  Divorce  "  and  compare 
them  with  the  contemporary  situation  in  Italy  to  see  that 
all  that  the  Curia  cared  for  was  the  success  of  the  papal 
diplomacy  in  the  Italian  peninsula.  The  interests  of 
morality  were  so  little  in  his  mind  that  Clement  proposed 
to  Henry  more  than  once  that  the  King  might  take  a 
second  wife  without  going  through  the  formality  of  having 
his  first  marriage  declared  null  and  void.2  This  had  been 

3  For  the  case  of  Mary  Tudor,  cf.  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  IT.  iii.  p. 
2619,  cf.  iv.  i.  p.  325 ;  and  for  that  of  Margaret  Tudor,  widow  of  Jamea 
iv.,  cf.  nr.  ii.  p.  1826. 

*  Letters  and  P&ioers,  etc.  ir.  iii.  pp.  29S7,  3023,  3189. 


FALL   OF   WOLSEY  325 

the  papal  solution  of  the  matter  in  an  earlier  instance,  and 
Clement  vrr.  saw  no  reasons  why  what  had  been  allowed 
to  a  King  of  Spain  should  be  denied  to  the  King  of 
England.1  He  was  prepared  to  tolerate  bigamy,  but  not 
to  thwart  Charles,  so  long  as  the  Emperor  was  master 
within  Italy.2 

It  is  needless  to  follow  the  intricacies  of  the  Divorce. 
The  protracted  proceedings  were  an  object  lesson  for 
English  statesmen.  They  saw  a  grave  moral  question — 
whether  a  man  could  lawfully  marry  his  deceased  brother's 
widow;  a  matter  vitally  affecting  the  welfare  of  the 
English  people — the  possibility  of  a  disputed  succession ; 
the  personal  wishes  of  a  powerful,  strong-willed,  and 
choleric  sovereign  (for  all  considerations  were  present, 
not  only  the  last) — all  subjected  to  the  shifting  needs  of  a 
petty  Italian  prince.  So  far  as  England  was  concerned, 
the  grave  interest  in  the  case  ended  when  Campeggio 
adjourned  the  inquiry  (July  2  3rd,  1 5  2  9  ).  Henry  knew  that 
he  could  not  expect  the  Pope  to  give  him  what  he  wanted ; 
and  although  his  agents  fought  the  case  at  Borne,  he 
at  once  began  preparing  for  the  separation  from  papal 
jurisdiction. 

The  English  nobles,  who  had  long  chafed  under  the 
rule  of  Wolsey,  took  advantage  of  the  great  Minister's 
failure  in  the  Divorce  negotiations  to  press  forward  his 
downfall  He  was  deprived  of  the  Lord  Chancellorship, 
which  was  given  to  Sir  Thomas  More,  and  was  further 
indicted  before  the  King's  Bench  for  infringement  of  the 
law  of  Prcemunire — an  accusation  to  which  he  pleaded 
guilty.3 

Meanwhile  Henry  had  taken  measures  to  summon  a 
Parliament;  and  in  the  interval  between  summons  and 

1  Calendar  of  Spanish  State  Papers,  ii.  379. 

3  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  iv.  iii.  pp.  2047,  2055. 

8  The  two  statutes  of  Prc&munire  (1358,  1398)  will  be  found  in  Gee  and 
Hardy,  Documents  illustrative  of  English  Church,  History  (London,  1896), 
pp.  103,  122.  They  forbid  subjects  taking  plaints  cognisable  in  the  King's 
courts  to  courts  outside  the  realm,  and  the  second  statute  makes  pointed 
reference  to  the  papal  courts. 


326  THE   CHURCH   OF   HENRY   VIII. 

assembly,  it  had  been  suggested  to  him  that  Cranmer  was 
of  opinion  that  the  best  way  to  deal  with  the  Divorce  was 
to  take  it  out  of  the  hands  of  the  Curia  and  consult  the 
canonists  of  the  various  Universities  of  Europe.  Cranmer 
was  instructed  to  prepare  the  case  to  be  laid  before  them. 
This  was  done  so  successfully  that  the  two  great  English 
Universities,  the  French  Universities  of  Paris,  Orleans, 
Bourges,  and  Toulouse,  decided  that  the  King's  marriage 
with  Catharine  was  not  valid ;  the  Italian  Universities  of 
IPerrara,  Padua,  Pavia,  and  Bologna  came  to  the  same 
conclusion  in  spite  of  a  proclamation  issued  by  the  Pope 
prohibiting  all  doctors  from  maintaining  the  invalid  nature 
of  the  King's  marriage.1 

Parliament  met  on  November  3rd,  1529,  and,  from  the 
matters  brought  before  it,  received  the  name  of  the 
"Parliament  for  the  enormities  of  the  clergy."  2  It  revealed 
the  force  of  lay  opinion  on  which  Henry  might  count  in 
the  struggle  he  was  about  to  begin  with  the  clergy.  With 
a  view  of  strengthening  his  hands  still  further,  the  King 
summoned  an  assembly  of  Notables,3  which  met  on  June 
12th,  1530,  and  addressed  the  Pope  in  a  letter  in  which 
they  prayed  him  to  consent  to  the  King's  desire,  pointed- 
out  the  evils  which  would  follow  from  delaying  the  Divorce, 
and  hinted  that  they  might  be  compelled  to  take  the 
matter  into  their  own  hands.  This  seems  to  have  been 
the  general  feeling  among  the  laity  of  England;  for  a 
foreigner  writing  to  the  Eepublic  of  Florence  says :  "  No- 
thing else  is  thought  of  in  that  island  every  day,  except  of 
arranging  affairs  in  such  a  way  that  they  do  no  longer  be 
in  want  of  the  Pope,  neither  for  filling  vacancies  in  the 
Church,  nor  for  any  other  purpose."4 

1  Paris  and  Orleans,  letters  and  Papers,  etc.  TV.  iii.  p.  2845  ;  Bourges 
and    Bologna,   ibid.   TV.  iii.  p.   2895;    Padua,  ibid.    IV.    iii.    pp.    2921, 
2923  (it  is  said  that  the  Lutherans  in  the  city  strongly  opposed  the  King) ; 
Pavia,  ibid.  TV.  iii.  p.  2988 ;  Ferrara,  ibid.  TV.  iii.  2990. 

2  A  list  of  the  matters  to  be  brought  before  this  Parliament  is  given  in 
Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  TV.  iii.  pp.  2689^. 

8  Ibid.  IV,  iii.  pp.  2929,  2991. 

*  Ibid.  iv.  iii.  p.  3661  (December  25th,  1530), 


SUBMISSION   OF  THE   CLERGY  327 

Having  made  himself  sure  of  the  great  mass  of.  the 
laity,  Henry  next  set  himself  to  force  the  clergy  into 
submission.  He  suddenly  charged  them  all  with  being 
guilty  of  Prcemunire  because  they  had  accepted  the 
authority  of  Papal  Legates  within  the  kingdom;  and 
managed  to  extort  a  sum  of  £100,000,  to  be  paid  in 
five  yearly  instalments,  by  way  of  a  fine  from  the  clergy 
of  the  Province  of  Canterbury.1  At  the  same  meeting  of 
Convocation  (1531)  the  clergy  were  compelled,  under 
threat  of  the  law  of  Prcemunire,  to  declare  that  the  King 
was  "  their  singular  protector  and  only  supreme  lord,  and, 
as  far  as  that  is  permitted  by  the  law  of  Christ,  the  Supreme 
Head  of  the  Church  and  of  the  clergy."  The  ambiguity 
•  in  the  acknowledgment  left  a  loophole  for  weak  consciences ; 
but  the  King  was  satisfied  with  the  phrase,  feeling  confident 
that  he  could  force  his  own  interpretation  of  the  acknow- 
ledgment on  the  Church.  "  It  is  all  the  same,"  Charles  v.'s 
ambassador  wrote  to  his  master,  "as  far  as  the  King 
is  concerned,  as  if  they  had  made  no  reservation ;  for  110 
one  now  will  be  so  bold  as  to  contest  with  his  lord  the 
importance  of  this  reservation."  2 

This  acknowledgment  was,  according  to  the  King,  simply 
a  clearer  statement  of  what  was  contained  in  the  old 
statutes  of  Prcemunire,  and  in  all  his  subsequent 
ecclesiastical  legislation  he  claimed  that  he  was  only 
giving  effect  to  the  earlier  laws  of  England. 

The  Parliament  of  1532  gave  the  King  important 
assistance  in  forcing  on  the  submission,  not  only  of  the 
clergy  of  England,  but  of  the  Pope,  to  his  wishes.  The 
Commons  presented  a  petition  complaining  of  various 
grievances  affecting  the  laity  in  the  working  of  the 
ecclesiastical  courts,  which  was  sent  with  a  set  of  demands 
from  the  King,  to  the.  Convocation.  .  The  result  was  the 
important  resolution  of  Convocation  (May  15th,  1532) 
which  is  called  the  Submission  of  the  Clergy,  where  it  is 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  eta.  v.  71. 

3  Ibid.  etc.  v.  p.  47.  Chapuys  thought  that  the  decla.ration.made  the 
King  *'  Pope  of  England." 


328  THE  CHURCH  OF   HENRY   VIII. 

promised  not  to  make  any  new  canons  without  the  King's 
licence  and  ratification,  and  to  submit  all  previous  canons 
to  a  committee  of  revision,  to  consist  of  thirty-two  persons, 
sixteen  from  Parliament  and  sixteen  from  the  clergy,  and 
all  to  be  chosen  by  the  King.  This  committee  was  to 
expunge  all  containing  anything  prejudicial  to  the  King's 
prerogative.  This  Act  of  Convocation  practically  declared 
that  the  Church  of  England  could  neither  make  any  rules 
for  its  own  guidance  without  the  King's  permission,  nor  act 
according  to  the  common  law  of  the  mediaeval  Church 
when  that,  in  the  King's  opinion,  invaded  the  royal 
prerogative.1  From  this  Act  the  Church  of  England  has 
never  been  able  to  free  itself.  The  other  deed  of  this 
Parliament  which  was  destined  to  be  of  the  greatest  use  to . 
Henry  in  his  dealings  with  the  Pope  was  an  Act  dealing 
with  the  annates,  i.e.  one  year's  income  from  all  ecclesiastical 
benefices  paid  to  the  Pope  on  entrance  into  any  benefice. 
The  Act  declared  that  the  annates  should  be  withheld 
from  the  Pope  and  given  to  the  King,  but  permitted  His 
Majesty  to  suspend  its  operation  so  long  as  it  pleased 
him.2  It  was  the  suspensory  clause  which  enabled  Henry 
to  coerce  the  Pope,  and  he  was  not  slow  to  take  advantage 
of  it.3  Writing  to  Eome  (March  21st,  1532),  he  said: 
"  The  Pope  and  Cardinals  may  gain  our  friendship  by  truth 
and  justice.  Take  care  that  they  do  not  hope  or  despair 
too  much  from  this  power  which  has  been  committed  to  us 
by  the  statute.  I  do  not  mean  to  deceive  them,  but  to 
tell  them  the  fact  that  this  statute  will  be  to  their  ad- 
vantage, if  they  show  themselves  deserving  of  it ;  if  not, 
otherwise.  Nothing  has  been  defined  at  present,  which 
must  be  to  their  advantage  if  they  do  not  despise  my 
friendship."  4 

1  Of.  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documettfs  illustrative  of  the  History  of  the  English 
Church,  p.  176.     Chapuys  declares  that  "  Churchmen  will  be  of  less  account 
than  shoemakers,  who  have  the  power  of  assembling  and  making  their  own 
statutes"  (Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  v.  467  ;  cf.  vi.  121). 

2  Ibid.  p.  178  ;  the  suspensory  clause  is  on  p.  184.    Letters  and  Papers, 
etc.  v.  pp.  343,  413. 

8  Ibid.  etc.  v.  p.  71.  4-2bid.  etc.  V.  p.  415. 


CRANMER   MADE   ARCHBISHOP  329 

Archbishop  Warham,  who  had  presided  at  the  Convo- 
cation which  made  the  submission  of  the  clergy,  died  in 
August  1532;  and  Henry  resolved  that  Cranmer,  not- 
withstanding his  unwillingness,  should  succeed  him  as 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Cranmer  conscientiously 
believed  that  the  royal  supremacy  was  a  good  thing,  and 
would  cure  many  of  the  ecclesiastical  evils  which  no 
appeals  to  the  Pope  seemed  able  to  reform ;  and  he  was 
also  convinced  that  the  marriage  of  Henry  with  Catharine 
had  been  one  for  which  not  even  the  highest  ecclesiastical 
authority  could  give  a  dispensation.  He  was  prepared  to 
carry  out  the  King's  wishes  in  both  respects.  He  could 
not  be  an  acceptable  Primate  to  the  Kornan  Curia.  Yet 
Henry,  by  threatening  the  Pope  with  the  loss  of  the 
annates,  actually  compelled  him  to  send  Bulls  to  England, 
and  that  with  unusual  speed,  ratifying  the  appointment  to 
the  Primacy  of  a  man  who  was  known  to  believe  in  the 
nullity  of  the  King's  marriage,  and  to  be  ready  to  give 
effect  to  his  opinion ;  and  this  at  a  time  when  the  Parlia- 
ment of  England  had  declared  that  the  Primate's  court 
was  the  supreme  ecclesiastical  tribunal  for  the  English 
Church  and  people.  The  deed  made  the  Curia  really 
responsible  for  almost  all  that  followed  in  England.  For 
Parliament  in  February  1533,  acting  on  the  submission  of 
the  clergy,  had  passed  an  Act  prohibiting  all  appeals  to 
Eome  from  the  Archbishop's  court,  and  ordering  that,  if 
any  appeals  were  taken,  they  must  be  to  the  King's  Court 
of  Chancery.  This  was  the  celebrated  Act  of  Restraint 
of  Appeals.1 

In  the  beginning  of  1533  (Jan.  25th),  Henry  vui. 
was  privately  married  to  Anne  Boleyn.  He  had  taken 
the  Pope's  advice  in  this  one  particular,  to  get  married 
without  waiting  for  the  Divorce;  but  soon  afterwards 
(April  5th)  he  got  from  the  Convocation  of  Canterbury  a 
document  declaring  that  the  Pope  had  no  power  to  grant 
a  dispensation  in  such  a  case  as  the  marriage  of  Henry 

1  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  195 ;  the  important  clause  is  on 
p.  198. 


330  THE  CHURCH   OF   HENRY    VIII. 

with  Catharine ; l  and  the  Act  of  Eestraint  of  Appeals  had 
made  such  a  decision  practically  final  so  far  as  England 
was  concerned. 

Cranmer  was  consecrated  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  on 
March  30th,  1533.  His  opinions  were  known.  He  had 
been  one  of  the  Cambridge  "  Germans  " ;  he  had  freely  con- 
sorted with  Lutheran  divines  in  Germany ;  he  had  begun 
to  pray  in  private  for  the  abolition  of  the  Pope's  power  in 
England  as  early  as  1525  ;  and  it  was  not  without  reason 
that  Chapuys  called  him  a  "  Lutheran."  2 

On  April  llth,  1533,  the  new  Primate  asked  the  King 
to  permit  him  to  try  the  question  of  the  Divorce  before 
his  own  ecclesiastical  court ;  and  leave  was  granted  him  on 
the  following  day,  as  the  principal  minister  "of  our 
spiritual  jurisdiction."8  The  trial  was  begun,  and  the  court, 
acting  on  the  decisions  of  Convocation  two  months  earlier, 
which  had  declared  (1)  that  no  dispensation  could  be  given 
for  a  marriage  with  the  widow  of  a  brother  provided  the 
marriage  had  been  consummated,  and  (2)  that  the  marriage 
between  Arthur  and  Catharine  had  been  consummated, 
pronounced  that  the  marriage  between  the  King  and 
Catharine  of  Aragon  was  null  and  void.4  This  was 
followed  by  an  inquiry  about  the  marriage  between  the 
King  and  Anne  Boleyn,  which  was  pronounced  valid,  and 
preparations  were  made  for  the  coronation  of  Queen  Anne, 
which  took  place  on  June  1st,  1533.5 

This  act  of  defiance  to  Borne  was  at  once  resented  by 
the  Pope.  The  Curia  declared  that  the  marriage  between 
Henry  and  Catharine  was  lawful,  and  a  Bull  was  issued 
commanding  Henry  to  restore  Catharine  and  put  away 
Anne  within  ten  days  on  pain  of  excommunication ;  which 
sentence  the  Emperor,  all  Christian  Princes,  and  Henry's 
own  subjects  were  called  upon  to  execute  by  force  of  arms.6 
The  action  at  Borne  was  answered  from  England  by 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  VI.  pp.  145,  148 ;  of.  218. 

2  Ibid.  etc.  vi.  p.  35.  »  Ibid.  vi.  p.  153. 
4  lUd.  vi.  p.  231.  « Ibid.  vi.  p.  246. 
*lMd.  vi.  p.  413. 


SEPARATION    FROM    ROME  331 

the  passing  of  several  strong  Acts  of  Parliament — all  in 
1534.  They  completed  the  separation  of  the  Church  and 
people  of  England  from  the  See  of  Borne. 

1.  The  Act  forbidding  the  payment  of  annates  to  the 
Pope  was  again  introduced,  and  this  time  made  absolute ; 
no  annates  were  for  the  future  to  be  sent  to  Eome  as  the 
first-fruits  of    any  benefice.     In   the  same  Act  new  pro- 
visions were  made  for  the  appointment  of  Bishops ;  they 
were  for  the  future  to  be  elected  by  the  Deans  and  Chapters 
on  receiving  a  royal  letter  of  leave  and  nomination.1 

2.  An  Act  forbidding  the   payment  of  Peter's  Pence 
to  the  Bishop  of  Eome ;  forbidding  all  application  to  the 
Pope  for  dispensations;   and  declaring  that  all  such  dis- 
pensations were    to    be    sought    for    in   the    ecclesiastical 
courts  within  England.2 

3.  The  Act  of  Succession,  which  was  followed  by  a 
second  within  the  same  year  in  which  the  nullity  of  the 
marriage  of  Henry  with  Catharine  of  Aragon  was  clearly 
stated,  and  Catharine  was  declared  to  be  the  "  Princess  of 
Wales/'   i.e.    the    widow    of    Arthur;   which   affirms    the 
validity  of  the  King's    marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn,  and 
declares  that  all  the  issue  of  that  marriage  are  legitimate ; 
and  which  affirms  that,  failing  male  succession,  the  crown 
falls  to  the  Princess  Elizabeth.3 

4.  The  Supremacy  Act,  which  declares  that  the  King 
is  rightfully  the  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England, 
has  been  recognised  as  such  by  Convocation,  and  that  it  is 
within  his  powers  to  make  ecclesiastical  visitations  and  to 
redress  ecclesiastical  abuses.4 

5.  The  Treasons  Act  must  also  be  included,  inasmuch 
as  one  of  its  provisions  is  that  it  is  treason  to  deny  to  the 
King  any  of  his  lawful  titles  (the  Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church  of  England  being  one),  and  that  treason  includes 
calling  the  King  a  heretic  or  a  schismatic.6 

1  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents  illustrative  of  the  History  of  the  English 
Church,  p.  201. 

2  Ibid.  p.  209.  «  Ibid.  pp.  232,  244. 

p.  243.  *2bid.  p.  247. 


332  THE   CHURCH    OF   HENRY   VIII. 

To  complete  the  list,  it  is  necessary  to  mention  that 
the  two  Convocations  of  Canterbury  and  of  York  solemnly 
declared  that  "  the  Roman  Pontiff  had  no  greater  juris- 
diction bestowed  on  him  by  God  in  the  Holy  Scriptures 
than  any  other  foreign  (externus)  Bishop  " — a  declaration 
called  the  Abjuration  of  the  Papal  Supremacy  ty  the 
Clergy* 

This  separation  of  the  Church  of  England  from  Eome 
really  meant  that  instead  of  there  being  a  dual  control, 
there  was  to  be  a  single  one  only.  The  Kings  of  England 
had  always  claimed  to  have  some  control  over  the  Church 
of  their  realm ;  Henry  went  further,  and  insisted  that  he 
would  share  that  supervision  with  no  one.  But  it  should 
be  noticed  that  what  he  did  claim  was,  to  use  the  terms  of 
canon  law,  the  potestas  jurisdiction's,  not  the  potestas  ordinis  ; 
he  never  asserted  his  right  to  ordain  or  to  control  the 
sacraments.  Nor  was  there  at  first  any  change  in  defini- 
tion of  doctrines.  The  Church  of  England  remained  what 
it  had  been  in  every  respect,  with  the  exception  that  the 
Bishop  of  Eome  was  no  longer  recognised  as  the  JUpiscopus 
Universalis,  and  that,  if  appeals  were  necessary  from  the 
highest  ecclesiastical  courts  in  England,  they  were  not  to 
be  taken  as  formerly  to  Eome,  but  were  to  be  settled  in  the 
King's  courts  within  the  land  of  England.  The  power  of 
jurisdiction  over  the  affairs  of  the  Church  could  scarcely 
be  exercised  by  the  King  personally.  Appeals  could  be 
settled  by  his  judges  in  the  law  courts,  but  he  required  a 
substitute  to  exercise  his  power  of  visitation.  This  duty 
was  given  to  Thomas  Cromwell,  who  was  made  Vicar- 
General,2  and  the  office  to  some  small  extent  may  be  said 
to  resemble  that  of  the  Papal  Legate ;  he  represented  the 
King  as  the  Legate  had  represented  the  Pope. 

It  was  impossible,  however,  for  the  Church  of  England 
to  maintain  exactly  the  place  which  it  had  occupied. 
There  was  some  stirring  of  Eeformation  life  in  the  land. 
Cranmer  had  been  early  attracted  by  the  writings  of 
Luther;  Thomas  Cromwell  was  not  unsympathetic,  and, 
1  Gee  and  Hardy,  Dociwwnte,  etc.  p.  251.  *  Ibid.  p.  256. 


THE   TEN   ARTICLES  333 

besides,  lie  had  the  idea  that  there  would  be  some  advantage 
gained  politically  by  an  approach  to  the  German  Pro- 
testants.- There  was  soon  talk  about  a  set  of  Articles 
which  would  express  the  doctrinal  beliefs  of  the  Church  of 
England.  It  was,  however,  no  easy  matter  to  draft  them. 
While  Cranmer,  Cromwell,  and  such  new  Bishops  as 
Latimer,  had  decided  leanings  towards  the  theology  of 
the  Reformation,  the  older  Bishops  held  strongly  by  the 
mediaeval  doctrines.  The  result  was  that,  after  prolonged 
consultations,  little  progress  was  made,  and  very  varying 
doctrines  seem  to  have  been  taught,  all  of  which  tended 
to  dispeace.  In  the  end,  the  King  himself,  to  use  his  own 
words,  "  was  constrained  to  put  bis  own  pen  to  the  book, 
and  conceive  certain  articles  which  were  agreed  upon  by 
Convocation  as  catholic  and  meet  to  be  set  forth  by 
authority."1  They  were  published  in  1536  under  the 
title,  Articles  devised  "by  the  Kyng's  Highnes  Majestie  to 
stablysh  Christen  quietnes,  and  were  ordered  to  be  read 
"  plainly "  in  the  churches.2  They  came  to  be  called  the 
Ten  Articles,  the  first  doctrinal  symbol  of  the  Church  of 
England. 

According  to  the  preface,  they  were  meant  to  secure, 
by  royal  authority,  unity  and  concord  in  religious  beliefs, 
and  to  repress  and  utterly  extinguish  all  dissent  and  discord. 
Foxe  the  Martyrologist  describes  them  very  accurately  as 
meant  for  "  weaklings  newly  weaned  from  their  mother's 
milk  of  Borne."  Five  deal  with  doctrines  and  five  with 
ceremonies.  The  Bible,  the  Three  Creeds  (Apostles', 
Nicene,  and  Athanasian),  and  the  doctrinal  decisions  of 
the  first  four  (Ecumenical  Councils,  are  to  be  regarded  as 
the  standards  of  orthodoxy;  baptism  is  necessary  for 
salvation — children  dying  in  infancy  "  shall  ^undoubtedly 
be  saved  thereby,  and  else  not " ;  the  Sacrament  of  Penance 
is  retained  with  confession  and  absolution,  which  are  de- 
clared to  be  expedient  and  necessary;  the  substantial, 
real,  corporeal  Presence  of  Christ's  Body  and  Blood  under 
the  form  of  Bread  and  Wine  in  the  Eucharist  is  taught ; 

1  Letters  aiid  Papers,  etc.  xi.  p.  445.  a  Ibid.  xi.  pp.  80,  445. 


334  THE   CHURCH    OF   HENRY    VIII. 

faith  as  well  as  charity  is  necessary  to  salvation ;  images 
are  to  remain  in  the  churches ;  the  saints  and  the  Blessed 
Virgin  are  to  be  reverenced  as  intercessors ;  the  saints  are 
to  be  invoked ;  certain  rites  and  ceremonies,  such  as  clerical 
vestments,  sprinkling  with  holy  water,  carrying  candles  on 
Candlemas  Day,  and  sprinkling  ashes  on  Ash- Wednesday, 
are  good  and  laudable ;  the  doctrines  of  Purgatory  and  of 
prayers  for  the  dead  were  not  denied,  but  people  were 
warned  about  them.  It  should  be  noticed  that  while  the 
three  Sacraments  of  Baptism,  the  Eucharist,  and  Penance 
are  retained,  no  mention  is  made  of  the  other  four,  and 
that  this  is  not  unlike  what  Luther  taught  in  the  Babylonian 
Captivity  of  the  Church  of  Christ;  that  while  the  Eeal 
Presence  is  maintained,  nothing  is  said  about  Transub- 
stantiation;  that  while  images  are  retained  in  churches, 
all  incensing,  kneeling,  or  offering  to  images  is  forbidden ; 
that  while  saints  and  the  Virgin  may  be  invoked  as  inter- 
cessors, it  is  said  that  it  is  a  vain  superstition  to  believe 
that  any  saint  can  be  more  merciful  than  Christ  Himself ; 
and  that  the  whole  doctrine  of  Attrition  and  Indulgences 
is  paralysed  by  the  statement  that  amendment  of  life  is  a 
necessary  part  of  Penance. 

It  is  only  when  these  Articles  are  read  along  with  the 
Injunctions  issued  in  1536  and  1538  that  it  can  be  fully 
seen  how  much  they  were  meant  to  wean  the  people,  if 
gradually,  from  the  gross  superstition  which  disgraced  the 
popular  mediaeval  religion.  If  this  be  done,  they  seem 
an  attempt  to  fulfil  the  aspirations  of  Christian  Humanists 
like  Dean  Colet  and  Erasmus. 

After  warning  the  clergy  to  observe  all  the  laws  made 
for  the  abolition  of  the  papal  supremacy,  all  those  insisting 
on  the  supremacy  of  the  King  as  the  "  supreme  Head  of 
the  Church  of  England,"  and  to  preach  against  the  Pope's 
usurped  power  within  the  realm  of  England,  the  Injunctions 
proceed  to  say  that  the  clergy  are  to  expound,  the  Ten 
Articles  to  their  people.  In  doing  so  they  are  to  explain 
why  superfluous  holy  days,  ought  not  to  be  observed ;  they 
are  to  exhort  their  people  against  such  superstitions  as 


THE   TEN   ARTICLES  335 

images,  relics,  and  priestly  miracles.  They  are  to  tell  them 
that  it  is  best  to  keep  God's  commandments,  to  fulfil  His 
works  of  charity,  to  provide  for  their  families,  and  to 
bestow  upon  the  poor  the  money  they  often  lavish  on 
pilgrimages,  images,  and  relics.  They  are  to  see  that 
parents  and  teachers  instruct  children  from  their  earliest 
years  in  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Creed,  and  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments. They  are  to  be  careful  that  the  sacraments 
are  duly  and  reverently  administered  within  their  parishes, 
are  to  set  an  example  of  moral  living,  and  are  to  give 
themselves  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures.  The  second 
set  of  Injunctions  (1538)  goes  further.  The  clergy  are 
told  to  provide  "  one  whole  Bible  of  the  largest  volume  in 
English/'  which  is  to  be  set  somewhere  in  the  church 
where  the  parishioners  can  most  easily  read  it ;  and  they 
are  to  beware  of  discouraging  any  man  from  perusing  it, 
"  for  it  is  the  lively  word  of  God  that  every  Christian  man 
is  bound  to  embrace  and  follow."  They  are  to  preach 
a  sermon  at  least  every  quarter,  in  which  they  are  to 
declare  the  very  gospel  of  Christ,  and  to  exhort  the  people 
to  the  works  of  charity,  mercy,  and  faith  especially  pre- 
scribed in  the  Scriptures.  They  are  to  warn  them  against 
trusting  to  fancies  entirely  outside  of  Scripture,  such  as 
"  wandering  to  pilgrimages,  offering  of  money  or  candles  to 
images  or  relics,  kissing  or  licking  the  same,  and  saying 
over  a  number  of  beads  or  suchlike  superstitions.3'  They 
are  not  to  permit  candles,  tapers,  or  images  of  wax  to  be 
placed  before  the  images  in  the  churches,  in  order  to  avoid 
"  that  most  detestable  offence  of  idolatry."  x 

The  Ten  Articles  thus  authoritatively  expounded  are 
anything  but  "  essentially  Eomish  with  the  Pope  left  out 
in  the  cold."  They  are  rather  an  attempt  to  construct  a 
brief  creed  which. a  pliant  Lutheran  and  a  pliant  Romanist 
might  agree  upon — a  singularly  successful  attempt,  and 
one  which  does  great  credit  to  the  theological  attainments 
of  the  English  King. 

1  The  two  sets  of  Injunctions  are  printed  in  Gee  and  Hardy's  Documents 
illustrative  of  the  History  of  the  English  Church,  pp.  269,  275. 


336  THE   CHURCH   OF   HENRY    VIII. 

It  was  thought  good  to  have  a  brief  manual  of 
religious  instruction  to  place  in  the  hands  of  the  lower 
clergy  and  of  the  people,  perhaps  because  the  Ten  Articles 
were  not  always  well  received.  A  committee  of  divines, 
chiefly  Bishops,1  were  appointed  to  "  compile  certain  rudi- 
ments of  Christianity  and  a  Catechism."  2  The  result  was 
a  small  book,  divided  into  four  parts — an  exposition  of 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  of  the  seven  Sacraments,  of  the  Ten 
Commandments,  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  the  Ave  Maria. 
Two  other  parts  were  added  from  the  Ten  Articles — one  on 
Justification,  for  which  faith  is  said  to  be  necessary ;  and 
the  other  on  Purgatory,  which  is  stoutly  denied.  Great 
difficulties  were  experienced  in  the  compilation,  owing  to 
the  "  great  diversity  of  opinions  "  s  which  prevailed  among 
the  compilers;  and  the  book  was  a  compromise  between 
those  who  were  stout  for  the  old  faith  and  those  who  were 
keen  for  the  new ;  but  in  the  end  all  seemed  satisfied  with 
their  work.  The  chief  difference  between  its  teaching  and 
that  of  the  Ten  Articles  is  that  the  name  sacrament  is 
given  to  seven  and  not  three  of  the  chief  ceremonies  of 
the  mediaeval  Church ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  doctrine 
of  Purgatory  is  denied.  It  was  expected  that  the  King 
would  revise  the  book  before  its  publication,4  but  he  "  had 
no  time  convenient  to  overlook  the  great  pains  "  bestowed 
upon  it.5  Drafts  of  an  imprimatur  by  the  King  have 
been  found  among  the  State  Papers,6  but  the  book  was 
finally  issued  in  1537  by  the  "  Archbishops  and  Bishops 
of  England,"  and  was  therefore  popularly  called  the 
Bishops'  Book.  All  the  clergy  were  ordered  "to  read 
aloud  from  the  pulpit  every  Sunday  a  portion  of  this  book  " 
to  their  people.7  The  Catechism  appears  to  have  been 
published  at  the  same  time,  and  to  have  been  in  large 
request.8 

1  The  list  of  members  is  given  in  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  xii.  ii.  p.  163. 

2  Letters  and  Papers,  xii.  ii.  p.  165  (Foxe  of  Hereford  to  Bucer). 

3  Ibid.  etc.  xii.  ii.  p.  122. 
*Ibid.  xii.  ii.  pp.  118,  122,  162. 

6  Ibid.  XII.  ii.  p.  228.  « IWd.  XU.  ii.  p.  228. 

7  Ibid.  XII.  ii.  252,  296.  a  lUd.  xii.  ii.  p.  384. 


TRANSLATIONS   OF   THE   SCRIPTURE  337 

Henry  YHI.  afterwards  revised  the  Bishops'  Book 
according  to  his  own  ideas.  The  revision  was  published 
in  1543,  and  was  known  as  the  King's  Book.1 

Perhaps  the  greatest  hoon  bestowed  on  the  people  of 
England  by  the  Ten  Articles  and  the  Injunctions  which 
enforced  them  was  the  permission  to  read  and  hear  read 
a  version  of  the  Bible  in  their  own  tongue.  For  the 
vernacular  Scriptures  had  been  banned  in  England  as  they 
had  not  been  on  the  Continent,  save  perhaps  during  the 
Albigensian  persecution.  The  seventh  of  the  Constitutions 
of  Thomas  Arundel  ordains  "  that  no  one  hereafter  trans- 
lates into  the  English  tongue  or  into  any  other,  on  his  own 
authority,  the  text  of  Holy  Scripture  either  by  way  of 
book,  or  booklet,  or  tract."  This  constitution  was  directed 
against  Wiclifs  translation,  which  had  been  severely 
proscribed.  That  version,  like  so  many  others  during  the 
Middle  Ages,  had  been  made  from  the  Vulgate.  But 
Luther's  example  had  fired  the  heart  of  William  Tyndale 
to  give  his  countrymen  an  English  version  translated 
directly  from  the  Hebrew  and  the  Greek  originals. 

Tyndale  was  a  distinguished  scholar,  trained  first  at 
Oxford  and  then  at  Cambridge.  When  at  the  former 
University  he  had  belonged  to  that  circle  of  learned  and 
pious  men  who  had  encouraged  Erasmus  to  complete  his 
critical  text  of  the  New  Testament.  He  knew,  as  did 
More,  that  Erasmus  desired  that  the  weakest  woman  should 
be  able  to  read  the  Gospels  and  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul ; 
that  the  husbandman  should  sing  portions  of  them  to 
himself  as  he  followed  the  plough ;  that  the  weaver  should 
hum  them  to  the  tune  of  his  shuttle;  and  that  the 
traveller  should  beguile  the  tedium  of  the  road  by  repeating 
their  stories ;  and  he  did  not,  like  More,  turn  his  back  on 
the  ennobling  enthusiasms  of  his  youth.2 

1  Cranmev's    Miscellaneous     Writings    and   Letters    (Parker     Society, 
Cambridge,  1846),  pp.  83-114,  contains  Corrections  of  the  Institution,  of  a 
Christian  Man  (the  Bishops'  JBook)  ly  Henry  F/JJT.,  with  Archbishop  Cranmer's 
Annotations. 

2  As  late  as  Jan.  1533  we  find  him  writing :  "  Let  us  agitate  for  the  use 

22** 


338  THE   CHURCH   OF   HENRY   VIIL 

Tyndale  found  that  he  could  not  attempt  his  task  in 
England.  He  went  to  Germany  and  began  work  in 
Cologne ;  but,  betrayed  to  the  magistrates  of  that  centre  of 
German  Eomanisni,  he  fled  to  Worms.  There  he  finished 
the  translation  of  the  New  Testament,  and  printed  two 
editions,  one  in  octavo  and  the  other  in  quarto — the  latter 
being  enriched  with  copious  marginal  notes.  The  ecclesi- 
astical authorities  in  England  had  early  word  of  this  trans- 
lation, and  by  Nov.  3rd,  Archbishop  Warham  was  exerting 
himself  to  buy  and  destroy  as  many  copies  as  he  could  get 
hold  of  both  in  England  and  abroad ;  and,  thanks  to  his 
exertions,  Tyndale  was  supplied  with  funds  to  revise  his 
work  and  print  a  corrected  edition.  This  version  was 
welcomed  in  England,  and  passed  secretly  from  hand  to 
hand.  It  was  severely  censured  by  Sir  Thomas  More, 
not  because  the  work  was  badly  done,  but  really  because 
it  was  so  scholarly.  The  faithful  translation  of  certain 
words  and  sentences  was  to  the  reactionary  More  "a 
mischievous  perversion  of  those  writings  intended  to 
advance  heretical  opinion  "  ; 1  and,  strange  to  say,  Dr.  James 
Gairdner  seems  to  agree  with  him.2  Tyndale's  version  had 
been  publicly  condemned  in  England  at  the  Council  called 
by  the  King  in  1530  (May),  and  copies  of  his  book  had 
been  publicly  burnt  in  St,  Paul's  Churchyard,  while  he 
himself  had  been  tracked  like  a  wild  beast  by  emissaries 
of  the  English  Government  in  the  Netherlands. 

Cranmer  induced  Convocation  in  1534  to  petition  for 
an  English  version  of  the  Bible,  and  next  year  Cromwell 
persuaded  Miles  Coverdale  to  undertake  his  translation  in 
1535.  It  was  made  from,  the  Vulgate  with  some  assist- 

of  Scripture  in  the  mother-tongue,  and  for  learning  in  the  Universities.  .  .  . 
I  never  altered  a  syllable  of  God's  Word  myself,  nor  would,  against  my 
conscience"  (Letters  and  Payers,  etc.  vi.  p.  184). 

1  Of.  Tyndale's  answer  to  Sir  Thomas  More'*  animadversions,    Works 
(Day's  edition),  p.  118. 

2  Of.  Pollard's  excellent  and  trenchant  note,  Cranmer  and  the  English 
Reformation  (New  York  and  London,  1904),  p.  110  ;  Gairdner,  The  JEnglish 
Church  in  the  Sixteenth  Centwry,  from  the  Accession  of  Henry  VIII.  to  tJie 
Death  of  Mary  (London,  1902),  pp.  190-91. 


TRANSLATIONS    OF   THE   SCRIPTURE  339 

ance  from  Luther's  version,  and  was  much  inferior  to  the 
proscribed  version  of  Tyndale ;  but  it  had  a  large  private 
sale  in  England,  and  the  King  was  induced  to  license  it  to 
enable  the  clergy  to  obey  the  Injunctions  of  1536,  which 
had  ordered  a  copy  of  the  English  Bible  to  be  placed  in  all 
the  churches  before  August  1537.1 

v  The  Archbishop,  however,  had  another  version  in  view, 
which  he  sent  to  Cromwell  (Aug.  1537),  saying  that  he 
liked  it  better  than  any  other  translation,  and  hoped  it 
would  be  licensed  to  be  read  freely  until  the  Bishops  could 
set  forth  a  better,  which  he  believes  will  not  be  "until  after 
Doomsday.  This  version  was  practically  Tyndale's. 

Tyndale  had  entrusted  one  of  his  friends,  Eogers, 
with  his  translation  of  the  Old  Testament,  finished  as  far 
as  the  Book  of  Jonah,  and  with  his  complete  version  of 
the  New  Testament.  Eogers  had -taken  Tyndale's  New 
Testament,  his  Old  Testament  as  far  as  the  Book  of 
Chronicles,  borrowed  the  remaining  portion  of  the  Old 
Testament  from  Coverdale's  version,  and  printed  them 
with  a  dedication  to  the  King,  signed  Thomas  Matthew.2 
This  was  the  edition  recommended  by  Cranmer  to  Cromwell, 
which  was  licensed.  The  result  was  that  Tyndale's  New 
Testament  (the  same  version  which  had  been  denounced 
as  pernicious,  and  which  had  been  publicly  burnt  only  a 
few  years  before)  and  a  large  part  of  his  Old  Testament 
were  publicly  introduced  into,  the  parish  churches  of 
England,  and  became  the  foundation  of  all  succeeding 
translations  of  the  Bible  into  the  English  language.8  On 
reconsideration,  the  translation  was  found  to  be  rather  too 
accurate  for  the  Government,  and  some  changes  (certainly 
not  corrections)  were  made  in  1538—39.  Thus  altered, 
the  translation  was  known  as  the  Grreat  Bible,  and,  because 
Cranmer  wrote  the  preface,  as  Cranmer's  Bible.4  This 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  xn.  il.  p.  174. 
a  Motional  Dictionary  of  Biography,  art.  "  Rogers." 
8  Tne  excellence  of  Tyndale's  version  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  many  of 
his  renderings  have  been  adopted  in  the  Revised  Version. 

4  Dixon,  History  of  the  Church  of  England  (London,  1878,  etc.),  ii.  77. 


340  THE   CHURCH   OF   HENRY   Till. 

was  the  version,  the  Bible  "  of  the  largest  volume,"  which 
was  ordered  to  be  placed  in  the  churches  for  the  people 
to  read,  and  portions  of  which  were  to  be  read  from  the 
pulpit  every  Sunday,  according  to  the  Injunctions  of  1538. 

From  1533  on  to  the  middle  of  1539,  there  was  a 
distinct  if  slow  advance  in  England  towards  a  real  Eeforma- 
tion :  then  the  progress  was  arrested,  if  the  movement  did 
not  become  decidedly  retrograde.  It  seems  more  than 
probable  that  if  Henry  had  lived  a  few  years  longer, 
there  would  have  been  another  attempt  at  an  advance. 

Part  of  the  advance  had  been  a  projected  political  and 
religious  treaty  with  the  German  Protestants.  Neither 
Henry  VIIL  nor  John  Frederick  of  Saxony  appears  to 
have  been  much  in  earnest  about  an  alliance,  and  from 
the  English  King's  instructions  to  his  envoys  it  would 
appear  that  his  chief  desire  was  to  commit  the  German 
divines  to  au  approval  of  the  Divorce.1  Luther  was 
somewhat  scornful,  and  seems  to  have  penetrated  Henry's 
design.2  The  German  theologians  had  no  doubt  but  that 
the  marriage  of  Henry  with  Catharine  was  one  which 
should  never  have  taken  place ;  but  they  all  held  that,  once 
made,  it  ought  not  to  be  broken.8  Determined  efforts  were 
made  to  capture  the  sympathies  of  Melanchthon.  Bishop 
Foxe,  selected  as  the  theological  ambassador,  was  instructed 
to  take  him  presents  to  the  value  of  £70.4  His  books 
were  placed  on  the  course  of  study  for  Cambridge  at 
Cromwell's  order.5  Henry  exchanged  complimentary  letters, 
and  graciously  accepted  the  dedication  of  Melanchthon's 
J)e  Locis  Communibusf  An  embassy  was  despatched, 
consisting  of  Foxe,  Bishop  elect  of  Hereford;  Heath, 
Archdeacon  of  Canterbury;  and  Dr.  Barnes,  an  English 
divine,  who  was  a  pronounced  Lutheran.  They  met  the 
Protestant  Princes  at  Schmalkald  and  had  long  .discussions. 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  ix.  p.  69.  2  Ibid.  ix.  119. 

3  Ibid.  x.  p.  234  ;  cf.  De  Wette,  Dr.  Martin  Luthers  JBriefe,  etc.  iv. 
p.  668. 

4  Ibid.  ix.  p.  72  ;  cf.  p.  70.  •  Hid.  IX.  p.  208. 
•  Ibid.  ix.  pp.  74,  75,  166,  311. 


HENRY  VIII.    AND   THE   SCHM ALKALI)   LEAGUE     341 

The  confederated  Princes  and  Henry  found  themselves  in 
agreement  on  many  points  :  they  would  stoutly  disown 
the  primacy  of  the  Pope;  they  would  declare  that  they 
would  not  he  bound  by  the  decrees  of  any  Council  which 
the  Pope  and  the  Emperor  might  assemble;  and  they 
would  pledge  each  other  to  get  their  Bishops  and  preachers 
to  declare  them  null  and  void.  The  German  Princes 
were  quite  willing  to  give  Henry  the  title  of  "  Defender 
of  the  Schmalkald  League."  But  they  insisted  as  the 
first  articles  of  any  alliance  that  the  English  Church  and 
King  must  accept  the  theology  of  the  Augsburg  Confession 
and  adopt  the  ceremonies  of  the  Lutheran  Church;  and 
on  these  rocks  of  doctrine  and  ritual  the  proposed  alliance 
was  shattered.1  The  Germans  had  their  own  private 
view  of  the  English  Eeformation  under  Henry  vm.,  which 
was  neither  very  flattering  nor  quite  accurate. 

*  So  far  the  King  has  become  Lutheran,  that,  because 
the  Pope  has  refused  to  sanction  his  divorce,  he  has  ordered, 
on  penalty  of  death,  that  every  one  shall  believe  and  preach 
that  not  the  Pope  but  himself  is  the  head  of  the  universal 
Church.  All  other  papistry,  monasteries,  mass,  indulgences, 
and  intercessions  for  the  dead,  are  pertinaciously  adhered 
to."2 

The  English  embassy  went  from  Schmalkald  to 
Wittenberg,  where  they  met  a  number  of  divines,  including 
Luther  and  Melanchthon,  and  proceeded  to  discuss  the 
question  of  doctrinal  agreement.  Melanchthon  had  gone 
over  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  produced  a  series  of 
articles  which  presented  all  that  the  Wittenberg  theologians 
could  concede,  and  Luther  had  revised  the  draft.8  Both 
the  Germans  were  charmed  with  the  learning  and  courtesy 
of  Archdeacon  Heath.  Bishop  Foxe  "  had  the  manner 
of  prelates/'  says  Melanchthon,  and  his  learning  did  not 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  ix.  pp.  344-48. 

2  Ibid.  X.  p.  38. 

8  These  articles  have  been  printed  with  a  good  historical  introduction  by 
Professor  Mentz  of  Jena,  Die  Witteriberger  Artikel  von  1686  (Leipzig,  1905). 


342  THE  CHURCH   OF   HENRY    VIII. 

impress  the  Germans.1  The  conference  came  to  nothing. 
Henry  did  not  care  to  accept  a  creed  ready  made  for  him, 
and  thought  that  ecclesiastical  ceremonies  might  differ  in 
different  countries.  He  was  a  King  "  reckoned  somewhat 
learned,  though  unworthy/'  he  said,  "  and  having  so  many 
learned  men  in  his  realm,  he  could  not  accept  at  any 
creature's  hand  the  observing  of  his  and  the  realm's 
faith;  but  he  was  willing  to  confer  with  learned  men 
sent  from  them."  2 

Before  the  conference  at  Wittenberg  had  come  to  an 
end,  Henry  believed  that  he  had  no  need  for  a  German 
alliance.  The  ill-used  Queen  Catharine,  who,  alone  of  all 
persons  concerned  in  the  Divorce  proceedings,  comes  out 
unstained,  died  on  Jan.  7th,  1536.  Her  will  contained 
the  touching  bequest:  "To  my  daughter,  the  collar  of 
gold  which  I  brought  out  of  Spain"3 — out  of  Spain, 
when  she  came  a  fair  young  bride  to  marry  Prince  Arthur 
of  England  thirty-five  years  before. 

There  is  no  need  to  believe  that  Henry  exhibited  the 
unseemly  manifestations  of  joy  which  his  enemies  credit 
him  with  when  the  news  of  Catharine's  death  was  brought 
to  hiTTf),  but  it  did  free  him  from  a  great  dread.  'He  read 
men  and  circumstances  shrewdly,  and  he  knew  enough  of 
Charles  v.  to  believe  that  the  Emperor,  after  his  aunt's 
death,  and  when  he  had  no  flagrant  attack  on  the  family 
honour  of  his  house  to  protest  against,  would  not  make 
himself  the  Pope's  instrument  against  England. 

Henry  had  always  maintained  himself  and  England 
by  balancing  Prance  against  the  Empire,  and  could  in 
addition  weaken  the  Empire  by  strengthening  the  German 
Protestants.  But  in  1539,  Trance  and  the  Emperor 
had  become  allies,  and  Henry  was  feeling  himself  very 
insecure.  It  is  probable  that  the  negotiations  which 
led  to  Henry's  marriage  with  -Anne  of  Cleves  were  due 
to  this  new  danger.  On  the  other  hand,  there  had 
been  discontent  in  England  at  many  of  the  actions 

1  Letters  aiid  Papers,  etc.  x.  p.  98  ;  cf.  58,  97, 108, 
3  Ibid.  ix.  p.  346.  3  Ibid.  X.  p.  15. 


THE   VISITATION   OF   THE   MONASTEEIES          S43 

which  were  supposed  to  come  from  the  advance  towards 
Eeformation. 

Henry  vin.  had  always  spent  money  lavishly.  His 
father's  immense  hoards  had  disappeared,  while  England, 
under  Wolsey,  was  the  paymaster  of  Europe,  and  the 
King  was  in  great  need  of  funds.  In  England  as  else- 
where the  wealth  of  the  monasteries  seemed  to  have  been 
collected  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  an  empty  royal 
exchequer.  A  visitation  of  monasteries  was  ordered,  under 
the  superintendence  of  Thomas  Cromwell ;  and,  in  order  to 
give  him  a  perfectly  free  hand,  all  episcopal  functions 
were  for  the  time  being  suspended.  The  visitation  dis- 
closed many  scandalous  things.  It  was  followed  by  the 
Act  of  Parliament  (1536)  for  The  Dissolution  of  the  Lesser 
Monasteries.1  The  lands  of  all  monasteries  whose  annual 
rental  was  less  than  £200  a  year  were  given  to  the 
King,  as  well  as  all  the  ornaments,  jewels,  and  other  goods 
belonging  to  them.  The  dislodged  monks  and  nuns  were 
either  to  be  taken  into  the  larger  houses  or  to  receive 
some  measure  of  support,  and  the  heads  were  to  get 
pensions  sufficient  to  sustain  them.  The  lands  thus  acquired 
might  have  been  formed  into  a  great  crown  estate  yielding 
revenues  large  enough  to  permit  taxation  to  be  dis- 
pensed with ;  but  the  King  was  in  need  of  ready  money, 
and  he  had  courtiers  to  gratify.  The  convent  lands 
were  for  the  most  part  sold  cheaply  to  courtiers,  and 
the  numbers  and  power  of  the  county  families  were 
largely  increased.  A  new  visitation  of  the  remaining 
monasteries  was  begun  in  1538,  this  time  accompanied 
with  an  inquiry  into  superstitious  practices  indulged 
in  in  various  parts  of  the  country,  and  notorious  relics 
were  removed.  They  were  of  all  sorts — part  of  St. 
Peter's  hair  and  beard  ;  stones  with  which  St.  Stephen 
was  stoned ;  the  hair  shirt  and  bones  of  St.  Thomas  the 
martyr;  a  crystal  containing  a  little  quantity  of  Our 
Lady's  milk,  "  with  two  other  bones " ;  the  "  principal 
relic  in  England,  an  angel  with  one  wing  that  brought  to 

1  The  Act  is  printed  in  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  257. 


344  THE   CHURCH   OF   HENEY   VIII. 

Caversham  (near  Beading)  the  spear's  head  that  pierced 
the  side  of  our  Saviour  on  the  cross  " ;  the  ear  of  Malchus, 
which  St.  Peter  cut  off;  a  foot  of  St.  Philip  at  Winchester 
"  covered  with  gold  plate  and  (precious)  stones " ;  and  so 
forth.1  Miraculous  images  were  brought  up  to  LondoD 
and  their  mechanism  exposed  to  the  crowd,  while  an 
eloquent  preacher  thundered  against  the  superstition : 

"The  bearded  crucifix  called  the  '  Eood  of  Grace '(was 
brought  from  Maidstone,  and)  while  the  Bishop  of  Rochester 
preached  it  turned  its  head,  rolled  its  eyes,  foamed  at  the 
mouth,  and  shed  tears, — in  the  presence,  too,  of  many  other 
famous  saints  of  wood  and  stone  *  .  .  the  satellite  saints  of 
the  Kentish  image  acted  in  the  same  way.  It  is  expected 
that  the  Virgin  of  Walsingham,  St.  Thomas  of  Canter- 
bury, and  other  images  will  soon  perform  miracles  also  in 
the  same  place ;  for  the  trickery  was  so  thoroughly 
exposed  that  every  one  was  indignant  at  the  monks  and 
impostors."  2 

A  second  Act  of  Parliament  followed,  which  vested  all 
monastic  property  in  the  King ;  and  this  gave  the  King 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  XTII.  ii.  pp.  36,  78,  147,  155.  In  Letters  and 
Papers,  etc.  xiv.  i.  p.  153,  there  is  an  official  account  of  the  English 
Reformation  under  Henry  vui.,  in  which  there  is  the  following  (p.  155) : 
"Touching images  set  in  the  churches,  as  books  of  the  unlearned,  though 
they  arenottecessary,  but  rather  give  occasion  to  Jews,  Turks,  and  Saracens 
to  think  we  are  idolaters,  the  King  tolerates  them,  except  those  about  which 
idolatry  has  been  committed.  .  .  .  Our  Lady  of  "Worcester,  when  her  gar- 
ments were  taken  off,  was  found  to  be  the  similitude  of  a  bishop,  like  a 
giant,  almost  ten  feet  long ;  .  .  -  the  roods  at  Boxelegh  and  other  places, 
which  moved  their  eyes  and  lips  when  certain  keys  and  strings  were  bent  or 
pulled  in  secret  places — images  of  this  sort  the  King  has  caused  to  be  voided 
and  committed  other  as  it  was  convenient,  following  the  example  of  King 
Hezekiah,  who  destroyed  the  brazen  serpent.  Shrines,  copses,  and 
reliquaries,  so  called,  have  been  found  to  be  feigned  things,  as  the  blood  of 
Christ  was  but  a  piece  of  red  silk  enclosed  in  a  thick  glass  of  crystalline, 
and  in  another  place  oil  coloured  of  sanguis  draconis,  instead  of  the  milk  of 
Our  Lady  a  piece  of  chalk  or  ceruse.  Our  Lady's  girdle,  the  verges  of 
Moses  and  Aaron,  etc.,  and  more  of  the  Holy  Cross  than  three  cars  may 
carry,  the  King  has  therefore  caused  to  be  taken  away  and  the  abusive 
pieCvS  burnt,  and  the  doubtful  sort  hidden  away  honestly  for  fear  of 
idolatry." 

2  Ibid.  xrn.  i.  283-84,  Nicholas  Partridge  to  BulUnger  (April  12th). 


DESTRUCTION   OF   SHRINES   AND    RELICS         345 

possession  not  only  of  huge  estates,  but  also  of  an  immense 
quantity  of  jewels  and  precious  metals.1  The  shrine  of  St. 
Thomas  at  Canterbury,  when  "  disgarnished,"  yielded,  it  is 
said,  no  fewer  than  twenty-six  cartloads  of  gold  and 
silver.2 

This  wholesale  confiscation  of  monastic  property, 
plundering  of  shrines,  and  above  all  the  report  that  Henry 
had  ordered  the  bones  of  St.  Thomas  of  Canterbury  to  be 
burned  and  the  ashes  scattered  to  the  winds,  determined 
Pope  Paul  in.  to  renew  (Dec.  17th,  1538)  the  execution 
of  his  Bull  of  excommunication  (Aug.  30th,  1535),  which 
had  been  hitherto  suspended.  It  was  declared  that  the 
Bull  might  be  published  in  St.  Andrews  or  "in  oppido 
Calistrensi  "  in  Scotland,  at  Dieppe  or  Boulogne  in  France, 
or  at  Tuam  in  Ireland.8  The  Pope  knew  that  he  could  not 
get  it  published  in  England  itself. 

The  violent  destruction  of  shrines  and  pilgrimage 
places,  which  had  been  holiday  resorts  as  well  as  places  of 
devotion,  could  not  fail  to  create  some  popular  uneasiness, 
and  there  were  other  and  probably  deeper  roots  of  dis- 
content. England,  like  other  nations,  had  been  suffering 
from  the  economic  changes  which  were  a  feature  of  the 
times.  One  form  peculiar  to  England  was  that  wool- 
growing  had  become  more  profitable  than  keeping  stock 
or  raising  grain,  and  landed  proprietors  were  enclosing 
commons  for  pasture  land  and  letting  much  of  their  arable 
land  lie  fallow.  The  poor  men  could  no  longer  graze  their 
beasts  on  the  commons,  and  the  substitution  of  pasture  for 
arable  land  threw  great  numbers  out  of  employment. 
They  had  to  sell  the  animals  they  could  no  longer  feed, 
and  did  not  see  how  a  living  could  be  earned;  nor  had 
they  the  compensation  given  to  the  disbanded  monks. 
The  pressure  of  taxation  increased  the  prevailing  distress. 

1  The  Act  for  the  Dissolution  of  the  Greater  Monasteries  is  printed  in  Gee 
and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  281. 

2  Ibid.  xiri.  ii.  p.  49. 

3  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  xni.  ii.  p.  459.     "In  oppido  Calistrensi '*  ia 
probably  "at  Coldstream "  ;  Beaton  Lad  been  made  a  Cardinal  to  be  ready 
to  make  the  publication. 


346  THE   CHURCH   OF    HENRY    VIII. 

Risings  took  place  in  Yorkshire,  Lancashire,  and  Lincoln- 
shire, and  the  insurgents  marched  singing : 

"Christ  crucified, 
For  Thy  woundes  wide, 
Us  commons  guyde, 
Which  pilgrims  be, 
Through  Godes  grace, 
For  to  purchache, 
Old  wealth  and  peax 
Of  the  Spiritualitie."  * 

In  their  demands  they  denounced  equally  the  contempt 
shown  for  Holy  Mother  Church,  the  dissolution  of  the 
monasteries,  the  spoliation  of  shrines,  the  contempt  shown 
to  *  Our  Ladye  and  all  the  saints/'  new  taxes,  the  enclosure 
of  commons,  the  doing  away  with  use  and  wont  in  tenant 
rights,  the  branding  of  the  Lady  Mary  as  illegitimate, 
King's  counsellors  of  *  low  birth  and  small  estimation/'  and 
the  five  reforming  Bishops — Cranmer  and  Latimer  being 
considered  as  specially  objectionable.2  The  Yorkshire 
Bising  was  called  the  Pilgrimage  of  Grace. 

The  insurgents  or  "  pilgrims  "  were  not  more  consistent 
than  other  people,  for  they  plundered  priests  to  support 
their  "  army  " ; 3  and  while  they  insisted  on  the  primacy  of 
the  Bishop  of  Eome,  they  had  no  wish  to  see  his  authority 
re-established  in  England.  They  asked  the  King  to  admit 
the  Pope  to  be  head  of  spiritual  things,  giving  spiritual 
authority  to  the  Archhishops  of  Canterbury  and  York,  "  so 
that  the  said  Bishop  of  Eome  have  no  further  meddling."  * 

The  insurrections  were  put  down,  and  Henry  did  not 
cease  his  spoliation  of  shrines  and  monasteries  in  conse- 
quence of  their  protests;  but  the  feelings  of  the  people 
made  known  by  their  proclamations,  at  the  conferences  held 
between  their  leaders  and  the  representatives  of  authority, 
and  by  the  examination  of  prisoners  and  suspected  persons, 
must  have  suggested  to  his  shrewd  mind  whether  the 

1  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  XI.  p.  305. 

3  Ibid.  xi.  pp,  238,  272,  355,  356,  477,  504,  507. 

8  Ibid.  xi.  238.  *  Ibid.  XI.  477, 


SIGNS    OF  BETROGBESSION  347 

Eeformation  was  not  being  pressed  onward  too  hastily  for 
the  great  majority  of  the  English  laity.  England  did  not 
produce  in  the  sixteenth  century  a  great  spiritual  leader  in- 
spired by  a  prophetic  conviction  that  he  was  speaking  the 
truth  of  God,  and  able  to  create  a  like  conviction  in  the 
hearts  of  his  neighbours,  while  he  was  never  so  far  before 
them  that  they  could  not  easily  follow  him  step  by  step. 
The  King  cried  halt ;  and  when  Cromwell  insisted  on  his 
plan  of  alliance  with  the  Protestants  of  the  Continent  of 
Europe,  he  went  the  way  of  all  the  counsellors  of  Henry 
who  withstood  their  imperious  master  (July  28th,  1540). 

But  this  is  to  anticipate.  Negotiations  were  still  in 
progress  with  the  Lords  of  the  Schmalkald  League  in  the 
spring  of  15  3  9,1  and  the  King  was  thinking  of  cementing 
his  connection  with  the  German  Lutherans  by  marrying 
Anne  of  Cleves,2  the  sister-in-law  of  John  Frederick  of 
Saxony.  The  Parliament  of  1539  (April  28th  to  June 
28th)  saw  the  beginnings  of  the  change.  Six  questions 
were  introduced  for  discussion : 

"  Whether  there  be  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar  tran- 
substantiation  of  the  substance  of  bread  and  wine  into  the 
substance  of  flesh  and  blood  or  not  ?  Whether  priests  may 
marry  by  the  law  of  God  or  not?  Whether  the  vow  of 
chastity  of  men  and  women  bindeth  by  the  law  of  God  or 
not?  Whether  auricular  confession  be  necessary  by  the 
law  of  God  or  not  ?  Whether  private  Masses  may  stand 
with  the  Word  of  God  or  not  ?  Whether  it  be  necessary 
by  the  Word  of  God  that  the  sacrament  of  the  altar  should 
be  administered  under  both  kinds  or  not  ? n  8 

The  opinions  of  the  Bishops  were  divided ;  but  the  lay 
members  of  the  House  of  Lords  evidently  ddd  not  wish  any 
change  from  the  mediaeval  doctrines,  and  believed  that  no 
one  could  be  such  a  wise  theologian  as  their  King  when 
he  confounded  the  Bishop  with  his  stores  of  learning. 
"We  of  the  temporalitie,"  wrote  one  who  was  present, 
"  have  been  all  of  one  opinion  ...  all  England  have  cause 

1  Letters  <md  Papers,  etc.  xiv.  i.  p.  344. 

» Ibid.  xiv.  i.  pp.  191,  192,  537.  8  Ibid.  xiv.  i.  p.  489. 


348  THE   CHURCH   OF  HENRY  VIII. 

to  thank  God  and  most  heartily  to  rejoice  of  the  King's 
most  godly  proceedings." 1  So  Parliament  enacted  the  Six 
Articles  Act?  a  ferocious  statute  commonly  called  "  the 
bloody  whip  with  six  strings/'  To  deny  transubstantiation 
or  to  deprave  the  sacraments  was  to  be  reckoned  heresy, 
and  to  be  punished  with  burning  and  confiscation  of  goods. 
It  was  made  a  felony,  and  punishable  with  death,  to  teach 
that  it  was  necessary  to  communicate  in  both  kinds  in  the 
Holy  Supper;  or  that  priests,  monks,  or  nuns  vowed  to 
celibacy  might  marry.  All  clerical  marriages  which  had 
been  contracted  were  to  be  dissolved,  and  clerical  in- 
continence was  punishable  by  loss  of  property  and  benefice. 
Special  commissions  were  issued  to  hold  quarterly  sessions 
in  eyery  county  for  the  enforcement  of  the  statute.  The 
official  title  of  the  Act  was  An  Act  abolishing  Diversity  of 
Opinion.  The  first  commission  issued  was  for  the  county 
of  London,  and  at  the  first  session  five  hundred  persons 
were  indicted  within  a  fortnight.  The  law  was,  however, 
much  more  severe  than  its  enforcement.  The  five  hundred 
made  their  submission  and  received  the  King's  pardon.  It 
was  under  this  barbarous  statute  that  so-called  heretics 
were  tried  and  condemned  during  the  last  years  of  the 
reign  of  Henry  VIIL 

The  revival  of  mediaeval  doctrine  did  not  mean  any 
difference  in  the  strong  anti-papal  policy  of  the  English 
King.  It  rather  became  more  emphatic,  and  Henry  spoke 
of  the  Pope  in  terms  of  the  greatest  disrespect.  "That- 
most  persistent  idol,  enemy  of  all  truth,  and  usurpator  of 
Princes,  the  Bishop  of  Rome,"  "  that  cankered  and  venomous 
serpent,  Paul,  Bishop  of  Eome,"  are  two  of  his  phrases.8 

The  Act  of  the  Six  Statutes  made  Lutherans,  as  previous 
Acts  had  made  Papists,  liable  to  capital  punishment ;  but 
while  Cromwell  remained  in  power  he  evidently  was  able 
to  hinder  its  practical  execution.  Cromwell,  however,  was 
soon  to  fall.  He  seemed  to  be  higher  in  favour  than  ever. 

1  Letters  (md  Papers,  etc.  xiv.  i.  p.  475. 

2  G-ee  and  Hardy,  Dncuments,  etc.  p.  303. 

a  Letters  and  Papers,  etc.  xiv.  i.  pp.  349,  438, 


THE   ACT   OF   THE   SIX  STATUTES  349 

He  had  almost  forced  his  policy  on  his  master,  and  the 
marriage  of  Henry  with  Anne  of  Cleves  (Jan.  6th,  1540) 
seemed  to  be  his  triumph.  Then  Henry  struck  suddenly 
and  remorselessly  as  usual.  The  Minister  was  impeached, 
and  condemned  without  trial.  He  was  executed  (July 
28th);  and  Anne  of  Cleves  was  got  rid  of  on  the  plea  of 
pre-contract  to  the  son  of  the  Duke  of  Lorraine  (July  9th). 
It  was  not  the  fault  of  Gardiner,  the  sleuth-hound  of  the 
reaction,  that  Cranmer  did  not  share  the  fate  of  the 
Minister.  Immediately  after  the  execution  of  Cromwell 
(July  30th),  the  King  gave  a  brutal  exhibition  of  his 
position.  Three  clergymen  of  Lutheran  views,  Barnes, 
Garret,  and  Jerome,  were  burnt  at  Smithfield ;  and  three 
Eomanists  were  beheaded  and  tortured  for  denying  .the 
King's  spiritual  supremacy. 

Henry  had  kept  himself  ostentatiously  free  from 
responsibility  for  the  manual  of  doctrine  entitled  Institution 
of  a  Christian  Man.  Perhaps  he  believed  it  too  advanced 
for  his  people ;  it  was  at  all  events  too  advanced  for  the 
theology  of  the  Six  Articles ;  another  manual  was  needed, 
and  was  published  in  1543  (May  19th).  It  was  entitled 
A  Necessary  Doctrine  and  Erudition  for  any  Christian 
Man ;  set  forth  ly  the  King's  Majesty  of  England. 

It  was  essentially  a  revision  of  the  former  manual,  and 
may  have  been  of  composite  authorship.  Cranmer  was 
believed  to  have  written  the  chapter  on  faith,  and  it  was 
revised  by  Convocation.  The  King,  who  issued  it  himself 
with  a  preface  commending  it,  declared  it  to  be  "  a  true 
and  perfect  doctrine  for  all  people."  It  contains  an 
exposition  of  the  Creed,  the  Ten  Commandments,  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  and  of  some  selected  passages  of  Scripture.  Its 
chief  difference  from  the  former  manual  is  that  it  teaches 
unmistakably  the  doctrines  of  Transulstantiation,  the  Invoca- 
tion of  Saints,  and  the  Celibacy  of  the  Clergy.  It  may  be 
said  that,  it  very  accurately  represented  the  theology  of  the 
majority  of  Englishmen  in  the  year  1543.  For  King  and 
people  were  not  very  far  apart.  They  both  clung  to 
mediaeval  theology ;  and  they  both  detested  the  Papacy, 


350  THE  CHURCH  OF  HENRY  VIIL 

and  wished  the  clergy  to  be  kept  in  due  subordination. 
There  was  a  widespread  and  silent  movement  towards  an 
Evangelical  Eeformation  always  making  itself  apparent 
when  least  expected;  but  probably  three-fourths  of  the 
people  had  not  felt  it  during  the  reign  of  Henry.  It 
needed  Mary's  burnings  in  Smithfield  and  the  fears  of  a 
Spanish  overlord,  before  the  leaven  could  leaven  the  whole 
lump. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE   KEFORMATION  UNDER  EDWARD  VI.1 

WHEN  Henry  VIH.  died,  in  1547  (Jan.  28th),  the  situa- 
tion in  England  was  difficult  for  those  who  came  after 
him.  A  religious  revolution  had  been  half  accom- 
plished ;  a  social  revolution  was  in  progress,  creating 
popular  ferment ;  evicted  tenants  and  uncloistered  monks 
formed  raw  material  for  revolt ;  the  treasury  was  empty, 
the  kingdom  in  debt,  and  the  coinage  debased.  The  kingly 
authority  had  undermined  every  other,  and  the  King  was  a 
child.  The  new  nobility,  enriched  by  the  spoils  of  the 
Church,  did  not  command  hereditary  respect ;  and  the 
Council  which  gathered  round  the  King  was  torn  by  rival 
factions.2 

Henry  vm.  had  died  on  a  Friday,  but  his  death  was 

1  SOURCES  in  addition  to  those  given  on  p.  313  :  Calendar  of  State  Papers, 
Domestic  Series,  of  the  Reign*  of  Edward  VI.,  Mary,  and  'Elizabeth  (this 
Calendar  is  for  the  most  part  merely  an  index  to  documents  which  must 
be  read  in  the  Record  Office) ;  Correspondance  politique  d'Odet  de  Selve: 
Commission  des  -Archives  Politiques,  Paris,  1888) ;  Literary  JSemains  of 
"Edward,  VI.  (Roxburgh  Club,  London,  1857)  ;  Narratives  of  the  JReformation 
(Camden  Society,  London,  1860) ;  Wriothesley,  Chronicle  (Camden  Society, 
London,  1875)  ;  "Weiss,  Papiers  d'fitat  du  Cardinal  de  Granvelle  (Collection 
de  Documents  vnedits,  Paris,  1841-52) ;  Furnivall,  Ballads  from  Manu- 
scripts (Ballad  Society,  London,  1868) ;  Four  Supplications  of  the  Commons, 
and  Thomas  Starkey,  England  under  Henry  VIH.  (Early  English  Text 
Society,  1871);  Strype,  Ecclesiastical  Memorials  and  Life  of  Cranmer 
[Oxford  edition,  26  vols.  1820,  etc.);  Liturgies  of  Edwwd  VI.  (Parker 
Society,  Cambridge,  1844) ;  Stow  Annals  (London,  1631). 

LATER  BOOKS  in  addition  to  those  given  on  p.  313  i  Pollard,  England 
under  Protector  Somerset  (London,  1900) ;  Burnet,  History  of  the  JKeforma- 
\ion  (Oxford  edition,  1865) ;  Dixon,  History  of  the  Church  of  England 
[London,  1893) ;  -Gasquet  and  Bishop,  Edward  VI.  and  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  (London,  1890).  Cambridge  Modern  History,  ii.  xiv. 

3  Pollard,  Cambridge  Modern  History ',  ii.  474. 

851 


352         THE  REFORMATION   UNDER   EDWARD   VL 

kept  concealed  till  the  Monday  (Jan.  31st),  when  Edward 
VT.  was  brought  by  his  uncle,  the  Earl  of  Hertford,  and 
presented  to  the  Council.  There  a  will  of  the  late  King 
was  produced,  the  terms  of  which  make  it  almost  impossible 
to  believe  that  Henry  did  not  contemplate  a  further 
advance  towards  a  Eeformation.  It  appointed  a  Council 
of  Kegency,  consisting  of  sixteen  persons  who  were  named. 
Eleven  belonged  to  the  old  Council,  and  among  them  were 
five  who  were  well  known  to  desire  an  advance,  while  the 
two  most  determined  reactionaries  were  omitted — Bishop 
Gardiner  and  Thirlby.  The  will  also  mentioned  by  name 
twelve  men  who  might  be  added  to  the  Council  if  their 
services  were  thought  to  be  necessary.  These  were  added. 
Then  the  Earl  of  Hertford  was  chosen  to  be  Lord  Protector 
of  the  Eealm,  and  was  promoted  to  be  Duke  of  Somerset. 
The  coronation  followed  (Feb.  20th),  and  all  the  Bishops 
were  required  to  take  out  new  commissions  in  the  name 
of  the  young  King — the  King's  ecclesiastical  supremacy 
being  thus  rigidly  enforced.  Wriothesley,  Henry's  Lord 
Chancellor,  who  had  been  created  the  Earl  of  Southampton, 
was  compelled  to  resign  the  Great  Seal,  and  with  his  retire- 
ment the  Government  was  entirely  in  the  hands  of  men  who 
wished  the  nation  to  go  forward  in  the  path  of  Eeformation. 

Signs  of  their  intention  were  not  lacking,  nor  evidence 
that  such  an  advance  would  be  welcomed  by  the  population 
of  the  capital  at  least  On  Feb.  10th  a  clergyman  and 
churchwardens  had  removed  the  images  from  the  walls  of 
their  church,  and  painted  instead  texts  of  Scripture;  an 
eloquent  preacher,  Dr.  Barlow,  denounced  the  presence  of 
images  in  churches;  images  were  pulled  down  from  the 
churches  in  Portsmouth;  and  so  on.  In  May  it  was 
announced  that '  a  royal  visitation  of  the  country  would 
be  made,  and  Bishops  were  inhibited  from  making  their 
ordinary  visitations. 

In  July  (31st)  the  Council  began  the  changes.  They 
issued  a  series  of  Injunctions'1  to  the  clergy,  in  which  they 

a  These  Injunctions,  and  the  Articles  of  Inquiry  which  interprets  them,  are 
printed  in  Strype,  Ecclesiastical  Memorials,  etc.  (Oxftord,  1822)  II.  i.  gp.  74-83. 


VISITATIONS  353 

were  commanded  to  preach  against  "  the  Bishop  of  Rome's 
usurped  power  and  jurisdiction "  ;  to  see  that  all  images 
which  had  been  "  abused  "  as  objects  of  pilgrimages  should 
be  destroyed ;  to  read  the  Gospels  and  Epistles  in  English 
during  the  service;  and  to  see  that  the  Litany  was  no 
longer  recited  or  sung  in  processions,  but  said  devoutly 
kneeling.  They  next  issued  Twelve  Homilies,  meant  to 
guard  the  people  against  "  rash  preaching."  Such  a  series 
had  been  suggested  as  early  as  1542,  and  a  proposed  draft 
had  been  presented  to  Convocation  by  Cranmer  in  that  year, 
but  had  not  been  authorised.  They  were*  now  issued  on 
the  authority  of  the  Council.  Three  of  them  were  com- 
posed by  Cranmer.  These  sermons  contain  little  that  is 
doctrinal,  and  confine  themselves  to  inciting  to  godly 
living.1  Along  with  the  Homilies,  the  Council  authorised 
the  issue  of  Tldall's  translation  of  the  Paraphrases  of 
Erasmus,  which  they  meant  to  be  read  in  the  churches. 

The  royal  visitation  seems  to  have  extended  over  a 
series  of  years,  beginning  in  1547.  Dr.  James  Gairdner 
discovered,  and  has  printed  with  comments,  an  account  or 
report  of  a  visitation  held  by  Bishop  Hooper  in  the  diocese 
of  Gloucester  in  1551.  One  of  the  intentions  of  the 
visitation  was  to  discover  how  far  it  was  possible  to  expect 
preaching  from  the  English  clergy.  Dr.  Gairdner  sums  up 
the  illiteracy  exhibited  in  the  report  as  follows : — Three 
hundred  and  eleven  clergymen  were  examined,  and  of  these 
one  hundred  and  seventy-one  were  unable  to  repeat  the 
Ten  Commandments,  though,  strangely  enough,  all  but 
thirty-four  could  tell  the  chapter  (Ex.  xx.)  in  which  they 
were  to  be  found ;  ten  were  unable  to  repeat  the  Lord's 
Prayer ;  twenty-seven  could  not  tell  who  was  its  author ; 
and  thirty  could  not  tell  where  it  was  to  be  found.  The 
Eeport  deserves  study  as  a  description  of  the  condition  of 
the  clergy  of  the  Church  of  England  before  the  Reformation. 
These  clergymen  of  the  diocese  of  Gloucester  were  asked 
nine  questions — three  under  three  separate  heads :  (1) 

1  Cranmer,  Miscellaneous   Writings  and  Letters  (Parker  Society,  Cam- 
bridge, 1846),  p.  128. 


354         THE   REFORMATION  UNDER   EDWARD   VI. 

How  many  commandments  are  there?  Where  are  they 
to  be  found  ?  Repeat  them.  (2)  What  are  the  Articles 
of  the  Christian  Faith  (the  Apostles'  Greed)  ?  Eepeat 
them.  Prove  them  from  Scripture.  (3)  Kepeat  the 
Lord's  Prayer.  How  do  you  know  that  it  is  the  Lord's  ? 
Where  is  it  to  be  found?  Only  fifty  out  of  the  three 
hundred  and  eleven  answered  all  these  simple  questions, 
and  of  the  fifty,  nineteen  are  noted  as  having  answered 
mediocriter.  Eight  clergymen,  could  not  answer  any  single 
one  of  the  questions ;  and  while  one  knew  that  the  number 
of  the  Commandments  was  ten,  he  knew  nothing  else. 
Two  clergymen,  when  asked  why  the  Lord's  Prayer  was 
so  called,  answered  that  it  was  because  Christ  had  given 
it  to  His  disciples  when  he  told  them  to  watch  and  pray ; 
another  said  that  he  did  not  know  why  it  was  called  the 
Lord's  Prayer,  but  that  he  was  quite  willing  to  believe 
that  it  was  the  Lord's  because  the  King  had  said  so ;  and 
another  answered  that  all  he  knew  about  it  was  that  such 
was  the  common  report.  Two  clergymen  said  that  while 
they  could  not  prove  the  articles  of  the  Creed  from 
Scripture,  they  accepted  them  on  the  authority  of  the 
King ;  and  one  said  that  he  could  not  tell  what  was  the 
Scripture  authority  for  the  Creed,  unless  it  was  the  first 
chapter  of  Genesis,  but  that  it  did  not  matter,  since  the 
King  had  guaranteed  it  to  be  correct.1 

There  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  clergy  of  this 
diocese  were  worse  than  those  in  other  parts  of  England. 
If  this  report  be  compared  with  the  accounts  of  the  un- 
reformed  clergy  of  central  Germany  given  in  the  reports 
of  the  visitations  held  there  between  1528  and  1535,  the 
condition  of  things  there  which  filled  Luther  with  such 
despair,  and  induced  him  to  write  his  Small  Cathechism, 
was  very  much  better  than  that  of  the  clergy  of  England. 
Not  more  than  three  or  perhaps  four  out  of  the  three 
hundred  and  eleven  had  ever  preached  or  could  preach. 
These  facts,  extracted  from  the  formal  report  of  an 
authoritative  visitation  made  by  a  Bishop,  explain  the 

1  English  Historical  JKcvicw  for  1904  (January),  pp.  98  ,# 


PROGRESS  OF  REFORMATION         355 

constant  cry  of  the  Puritans  under  Elizabeth  for  a  preach- 
ing ministry. 

The  Council  were  evidently  anxious  that  the  whole 
service  should  be  conducted  in  the  English  language,  and 
that  a  sermon  should  always  be  part  of  the  public  worship. 
The  reports  of  the  visitation  showed  that  it  was 
useless  to  make  any  general  order,  but  an  example  was 
given  in  the  services  conducted  in  the  Royal  Chapel. 
Meanwhile  (1547)  Thomas  Hopkins  was  engaged  in 
making  a  version  of  the  Psalms  in  metre,  to  be  sung  both 
in  private  and  in  the  churches,  and  these  soon  became 
highly  popular.  Like  corresponding  versions  in  France 
and  in  Germany,  it  served  to  spread  the  Eeformation 
among  the  people;  and,  as  *  might  have  been  expected, 
Archbishop  Laud  did  his  best  to  stop  the  singing  of  these 
Psalms  in  later  days. 

The  first  Parliament  of  Edward  vi.  (Nov.  4th  to  Dec. 
24th,  1547)  made  large  changes  in  the  laws  of  England 
affecting  treason,  which  had  the  effect  of  sweeping  away 
the  edifice  of  absolute  government  which  had  been  so 
carefully  erected  by  Henry  vin.  and  his  Minister  Thomas 
Cromwell  The  kingly  supremacy  in  matters  of  religion 
was  maintained ;  but  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles  was  erased 
from  the  Statute  Book,  and  with  it  all  heresy  Acts  which 
had  been  enacted  since  the  days  of  Eichard  u.,  and 
treason  was  defined  as  it  had  been  in  the  days  of  Edward 
in.  This  legislation  gave  an  unwonted  amount  of  freedom 
to  the  English  people. 

Convocation  had  met  in  November  and  December 
(1547),  and,  among  other  things,  had  agreed  unanimously 
that  in  the  Holy  Supper  the  partakers  should  communicate 
in  both  Mnds,  and  had  passed  a  resolution  by  fifty-three 
votes  to  twelve  that  all  canons  against  the  marriage  of 
the  clergy  should  be  declared  void.  These  two  resolutions 
were  communicated  to  Parliament,  with  the  result  that  an 
Act  was  passed  ordaining  that  "  the  most  blessed  Sacrament 
be  hereafter  commonly  administered  unto  the  people  within 
the  Church  of  England  and  Ireland,  and  other  the  King's 


356         THE  REFORMATION   UNDER   EDWARD   VI. 

dominions,  under  both  the  kinds,  that  is  to  say,  of  bread 
and  wine,  except  necessity  otherwise  require."  *  -  An  Act 
was  also  framed  permitting  the  marriage  of  the  clergy, 
which  passed  the  Commons,  but  did  not  reach  the  House 
of  Lords  in  time  to  be  voted  upon,  and  did  not  become  law 
until  the  following  year.  Other  two  Acts  bearing  on  the 
condition  of  the  Church  of  England  were  issued  by  this 
Parliament.  According  to  the  one,  Bishops  were  hence- 
forth to  be  appointed  directly  by  the  King,  and  their  courts 
were  to  meet  in  the  King's  name.  According  to  the 
other,  the  property  of  all  colleges,  chantries,  guilds,  etc.,  with 
certain  specified  exceptions,  was  declared  to  be  vested  in 
the  Crown.2 

Communion  in  both  kinds  made  necessary  a  new 
Communion  Service,  and  as  a  tentative  measure  a  new 
form  for  the  celebration  was  issued  by  the  Council,  which 
is  called  by  Strype  the  Book  of  Communion?  It  enjoined 
that  the  essential  words  of  the  Mass  should  still  be  said 
in  Latin,  but  inserted  seven  prayers  in  English  in  the. 
ceremony.  The  Council  also  proceeded  in  their  war 
against  superstitions.  They  forbade  the  creeping  to  the 
Cross  on  Good  Friday,  the  use  of  ashes  on  Ash-Wednesday, 
of  palms  on  Palm  Sunday,  and  of  candles  on  Candlemas  ; 
and  they  ordered  the  removal  of  all  images  from  the 
churches.  Cranmer  asserted  that  all  these  measures  had 
been  intended  by  Henry  vm. 

The  next  important  addition  to  the  progress  of  the 
Eeformation  was  the  preparation  and  introduction  of  a 
Service  Book4 — TJie  Uokc  of  the  Common  Praier  and 
Administration  of  the  Sacramentes  and  other  Bites  and 
Ceremonies  after  the  use  of  the  Churche  of  England 

1  This  Act,  entitled  Act  against  jRevilers,  and  for  receiving  w>  both  JK"indst 
is  printed  in  Gee  and  Hardy,  Doeumeitis,  etc.  p.  322. 

2  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  328. 

8  Ecclesiastical  Memorials,  etc.  n.  i.  p.  133.  It  is  printed  in  The  Two 
Liturgies,  with  other  Documents  set  forth  by  Authority  in  the  Reign  of  King 
JEdward  the  Sixth  (Parker  Society,  Cambridge,  1844),  p.  1. 

4  The  book  is  printed  in  The  Two  Liturgies,  etc.,  of  the  Parker  Society, 
pp.  9J. 


THE   FIRST   PRAYER-BOOK   OF   EDWARD   VI.       357 


(1549),  commonly  called  The  First  Prayer-Book  of 
Edward  vi.  It  was  introduced  by  an  Act  of  Uniformity?- 
which,  after  relating  how  there  had  been  for  long  time  in 
England  "divers  forms  of  Common  Prayer  .  .  .  the  use 
of  Sarum,  York,  Bangor,  and  of  Lincoln,"  and  that 
diversity  of  use  caused  many  inconveniences,  ordains  the 
universal  use  of  this  one  form,  and  enacts  penalties  on 
those  who  make  use  of  any  other.  The  origin  of  the 
book  is  somewhat  obscure.  There  is  no  trace  of  any 
commission  appointed  to  frame  it,  nor  of  any  formally 
selected  body  of  revisers.  Oranmer  had  the  chief  charge 
of  it,  and  was  assisted  by  a  number  of  divines  —  though 
where  they  met  is  uncertain,  whether  at  Windsor  as  the 
King  records  in  his  diary,  or  at  Chertsey  Abbey,  as  is  said 
in  the  Grey  Friars  Chronicle.  About  the  end  of 
October  the  Bishops  were  asked  to  subscribe  it,  and  it  was 
subjected  to  some  revision.  It  was  then  brought  before 
the  House  of  Lords  and  discussed  there.  It  was  in  this 
debate  that  Cranmer  disclosed  that  he  had  definitely 
abandoned  the  theory  of  transubstantiation.  The  Prayer- 
Book,  however,  was  eminently  conservative,  and  could  be 
subscribed  to  by  a  believer  in  the  old  theory.  The  giving 
and  receiving  of  the  Bread  is  called  the  Communion  of  the 
Body  of  Christ,  of  the  Wine,  the  Communion  of  the  Blood 
of  Christ  ;  and  the  practice  of  making  the  sign  of  the  Cross 
is  adhered  to  at  stated  points  in  the  ceremony.  An 
examination  of  its  structure  and  contents  reveals  that  it 
was  borrowed  largely  from  the  old  English  Use  of  Sarum, 
and  from  a  new  Service  Book  drafted  by  the  Cardinal 
Quignon  and  dedicated  to  Pope  Paul  in.  The  feeling 
that  a  new  Service  Book  was  needed  was  not  confined  to 
the  Reformers,  but  was  affecting  all  European  Christians. 
The  great  innovation  in  this  Liturgy  was  that  all  its  parts 
were  in  the  English  language,  and  that  every  portion  of 
the  service  could  be  followed  and  understood  by  all  the 
worshippers. 

With  the  publication  of  this  First  Prayer-Book  of  King 
1  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  pp.  358  ff. 


358         THE   REFORMATION   UNDER   EDWARD    VI. 

Edward  vi.  the  first  stage  of  the  Eeformation  during  his 
reign  comes  to  an  end.  The  changes  made  had  all  been 
contemplated  by  Henry  vni*  himself,  if  we  are  to  believe 
what  Craniner  affirmed.  They  did  not  content  the  more 
advanced  Eeformers,  and  they  were  not  deemed  sufficient 
by  Cranmer  himself. 

The  changes  made  in  the  laws  of  England — the 
repeal  of  the  *  bloody  "  Statute  of  the  Six  Articles  and  of  the 
treason  kw& — had  induced  many  of  the  English  refugees 
who  had  gone  to  Germany  and  to  Switzerland  to  return  to 
their  native  land.  The  Emperor  Charles  v.  had  defeated 
the  German  Protestants  in  the  battle  of  Miihlberg  in 
1547  (April),  and  England  for  a  few  years  became  a 
place  of  refuge  for  continental  Protestants  fleeing  from 
the  requirements  and  penalties  of  the  Interim.  All  this 
gave  a  strong  impetus  to  the  Eeformation  movement  in 
England.  Martin  Bucer,  compelled  to  leave  Strassburg, 
found  refuge  and  taught  in  Cambridge,  where  he  was  for 
a  time  the  regius  professor  of  divinity.  Paul  Btichlin 
(usually  known  by  his  latinised  name  of  Fagius),  a 
compatriot  of  Bucer  and  a  wall-known  Hebrew  scholar, 
was  also  settled  at  Cambridge,  where  he  died  (Nov.  1549). 
Peter  Martyr  Vermigli  and  Bernardino  Ochino,  two  illus- 
trious Italian  Protestants,  came  to  England  at  the 
invitation  of  Cranmer  himself,  and  long  afterwards 
Queen  Elizabeth  confessed  that  she  had  been  drawn 
towards  their  theology.  Peter  Alexander  of  Aries  and 
John  i  Lasco,  the  Pole,  also  received  the  protection  and 
hospitality  of  England.1  The  reception  of  these  foreign 

1  Mr.  Pollard  (Cambridge  Modem  History,  ii.  pp.  478,  479)  thinks  that 
the  influence  of  these  foreign  divines  on  the  English  Reformation  has  been 
overrated ;  and  he  is  probably  correct  so  far  as  changes  in  worship  and 
usages  go.  His  idea  is  that  the  English  Reformers  followed  the  lead  of 
Wiclif,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  rather  than  that  of  continental  divines  ; 
jut  if  the  root-thought  in  all  Reformation  theology  be  considered,  it  may  bo 
loubted  whether  Wiclif  could  supply  what  the  English  divines  had  in 
common  with  their  continental  contemporaries.  "Wiclif,  with  all  his  desire 
br  Reformation,  was  essentially  a  mediaeval  thinker.  The  theological 
luestion  which  separated  every  mediaeval  Reformer  from  the  thinkers  of  the 
ieformation  was,  How  the  benefits  won  by  the  atoning  work  of  Christ 


THE   FALL   OF    PROTECTOR   SOMERSET  359 

divines,  and  their  appointment  as  teachers  in  the  English 
universities,  did  not  escape  protest  from  the  local  teachers 
of  theology,  who  were  overruled  by  the  Government. 

Between  the  first  and  the  second  stage  of  the  Eeforma- 
tion  of  the  Church  of  England  in  this  reign,  a  political 
change  occurred  which  must  be  mentioned  but  need  not 
be  dwelt  upon.  The  Duke  of  Somerset  incurred  the 
wrath  of  his  colleagues,  and  of  the  new  nobility  who  had 
profited  by  the  sale  of  Church  lands,  by  his  active 
sympathy  with  the  landless  peasantry,  and  by  his  proposals 
to  benefit  them.  He  was  driven  from  power,  and  his 
place  was  taken  by  the  unscrupulous  Earl  of  Warwick,  who 
became  Lord  Protector,  and  received  the  Dukedom  of 
Northumberland.  The  new  Governor  of  England  has 
been  almost  universally  praised  by  the  advanced  Reformers 
because  of  the  way  in  which  he  pushed  forward  the 
Eeformation.  It  is  well  to  remember  in  these  days,  when 
the  noble  character  of  the  Duke  of  Somerset  has  received 
a  tardy  recognition,1  that  John  Knox,  no  mean  judge  of 
men,  never  joined  in  the  praise  of  Northumberland,  and 
greatly  preferred  his  predecessor,  although  his  advance  in 
the  path  of  Eeformation  had  been  slower  and  much  more 
cautious. 

There  was  much  in  the  times  to  encourage  Northumber- 
land and  his  Council  to  think  that  they  might  hurry  on 
the  Reformation  movement. 

The  New  Learning  had  made  great  strides  in  England, 
and  was  leavening  all  the  more  cultured  classes,  and  it 
naturally  led  to  the  discredit  of  the  old  theology.  The 
English  advanced  Eeformers  who  had  taken  refuge  abroad, 
and  who  BOW  returned, — men  like  Eidley  and  Hooper, — 
could  not  fail  to  have  had  some  influence  on  their 
countrymen ;  they  had  almost  all  become  imbued  with  the 

were  to  be  appropriated  by  men  ?  The  universal  mediaeval  answer  was,  By 
an  imitation  of  Christ ;  while  the  universal  Eeformation  answer  was,  By 
trust  in  the  promises  of  God  (for  that  is  what  is  meant  by  Justification  by 
Faith).  In  their  answer  to  this  test  question,  the  English  divines  are  at 
one  with  the  Reformers  on  the  Continent,  and  not  with  Wiclif. 
1  Pollarc},  JSnyJa'nd  under  Protector  Somerset  (London,  1900). 


360         THE   REFORMATION   UNDER    EDWARD   VI. 

Zwinglian  type  of  theology,  and  Bullinger  was  their  trusted 
adviser*  It  seemed  as  if  the  feelings  of  the  populace 
were  changing,  for  the  mobs,  instead  of  resenting  the 
destruction  of  images,  were  rather  inspired  by  too  much 
iconoclastic  zeal,  and  tried  to  destroy  stained-glass  windows 
and  to  harry  priests.  Cranmer's  influence,  always  on  the 
side  of  reform,  had  much  more  weight  with  the  Council 
than  was  the  case  under  Henry  VIIL  He  had  abandoned 
long  ago  his  belief  in  transubstantiation,  he  had  given  up 
the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  consubstantiation,  if  he  ever  held 
it,  and  had  now  accepted  a  theory  of  a  real  but  spiritual 
Presence  in  the  communion  elements  which  did  not  greatly 
differ  from  the  more  moderate  Zwinglian  view.  The  clergy, 
many  of  them,  wore  making  changes  which  went  far  beyond 
the  Act  of  Uniformity.  The  removal  of  restrictions  on 
printing  the  Bible  had  resulted  in  the  publication  of  more 
than  twenty  editions,  most  of  them  with  annotations  which 
explained  and  enforced  the  new  theology  on  the  authority 
of  Scripture. 

In  these  circumstances  the  Council  enforced  the  Act 
of  Uniformity  in  a  one-sided  way — against  the  Eomanist 
sympathisers.  Many  Eomanist  Bishops  were  deprived  of 
their  sees,  and  their  places  were  filled  by  such  men  as 
Coverdale,  Eidley,  Ponet,  and  Scovey  —  all  advanced 
Eeformers.  John  Knox  himself,  freed  from  his  slavery  in 
the  French  galleys  by  the  intervention  of  the  English 
Government  and  made  one  of  the  King's  preachers,  was 
offered  the  bishopric  of  Eochester,  which  he  declined.  It 
must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  Lord  Protector  and 
his  entourage  seem  to  have  been  quite  as  much  animated 
by  a  desire  to  fill  their  own  pockets  as  by  zeal  to  promote 
the  cause  of  the  Eeformation.  Indeed,  there  came  to  be  in 
England  at  this  time  something  like  the  tulchan  Bishops 
of  a  later  period  in  Scotland ;  great  nobles  got  possession 
of  the  episcopal  revenues  and  allowed  the  new  Bishops  a 
stipend  out  of  them.1 

1  "  Tulchan  is  a  calf  skin  stuffed  with  straw  to  cause  the  cow  to  give 
milk.   The  Bisljop  served  to  cause  the  bishoprick  to  yeeld  commoditie  to  my 


THE  SECOND   PRAYER-BOOK   OP  EDWARD  VI.     361 

Then  came  a  second  revision  of  the  Prayer-Book — The 
JBoJce  of  Common  Praier  and  Administration  of  the  Sacra- 
mentes  and  other  Sites  and  Ceremonies*  in  the  Churche  of 
England  (1552),  It  is  ommonly  called  the  Second 
Prayer-Boole  of  King  Edward  the  Sixth?-  Cranmer  had 
conferences  with  some  of  the  Bishops  as  early  as  Jan. 
1551  on  the  subject,  and  also  with  some  of  the  foreign 
divines  then  resident  in  England;  and  it  is  more  than 
probable  that  his  intention  was  to  frame  such  a  liturgy  as 
would  bring  the  worship  of  the  Church  of  England  into 
harmony  with  that  of  the  continental  Reformers.  There  is 
no  proof  that  the  book  was  ever  presented  to  Convocation 
for  revision,  or  that  it  was  subject  to  a  debate  nb  Parlia- 
ment, as  was  its  predecessor.  The  authoritative  proclama- 
tion says : 

"  The  King's  most  excellent  majesty,  with  the  assent  of 
the  Lords  and  Commons  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled, 
and  by  the  authority  of  the  'same,  has  caused  the  aforesaid 
order  of  common  service,  entitled  The  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  to  be  faithfully  and  godly  perused,  explained,  and 
made  fully  perfect,  and  by  the  aforesaid  authority  has  an- 
nexed and  joined  it,  so  explained  and  perfected,  to  this 
present  statute."2 

This  Book  of  Common  Prayer  deserves  special  notic$, 
because,  although  some  important  changes  were  made,4t«is 
largely  reproduced  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  which 
is  at  present  used  in  the  Church  of  England.  Thd  main 
differences  between  it  and  the  First  Prayer-Book  of  King 
Edward  appear  for  the  most  part  >  in  the  communion 
service,  and  were  evidently  introduced  to  do  away  with 
all  thought  of  a  propitiatory  Mass.  The  word  altar  is 
expunged,  and  table  is  used  instead:  minister  and p riest  are 
used  indifferently  as  equivalent  terms.  "  The  minister  at, 

lord  who  procured  it  to  him."  Scott's  Apologetical  Narration  of  the  State 
and  Government  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  since  the  Jtefownation  (Woodrow 
Society,  Edinburgh,  1846),  p.  25.' 

1  The  book  is  printed  in  The  Two  Liturgies,  with  other  £ocumentsft\tc. 
(Parker  Society),  p.  187. 

2  G1  e  and  Hardy,  Doownents,  etc.  p,  371. 


362         THE   REFORMATION   UNDER   EDWARD   VI. 

the  time  of  the  communion,  and  at  all  other  times  in  his 
ministration,  shall  use  neither  Alb,  Vestment,  nor  Cope : 
but  being  an  archbishop  or  bishop,  he  shall  have  or  wear 
a  rochet :  and  being  a  priest  or  deacon,  he  shall  have  and 
wear  a  surplice  only/'  Instead  of  "  standing  humbly  afore 
the  midst  of  the  altar/'  he  was  to  stand  "at  the  north 
side  of  the  table  " ;  and  the  communion  table  was  ordered  to 
be  removed  from  the  east  end  of  the  church  and  to  be 
placed  in  the  chancel*  Ordinary  instead  of  unleavened 
bread  was  ordered  to  be  used.  In  the  older  book  the 
prayer,  Have  mercy  on  us,  0  Lord,  had  been  used  as  an 
invocation  of  God  present  in  the  sacramental  elements; 
in  the,  new  it  became  an  ordinary  prayer  to  keep  the  com- 
mandments. The  Ten  Commandments  were  introduced  for 
the  first  time.  Some  rubrics — that  enjoining  the  minister 
to  add  a  little  water  to  the  wine — were  omitted.  Similar 
changes  were  made  in  the  services  for  baptism  and  confirma- 
tion, and  in  the  directions  for  ordination.  One  rubric  was 
retained  which  the  more  advanced  Reformers  wished  done 
away  with.  Communicants  were  required  to  receive  the 
elements  kneeling.  But  the  difficulties  were  removed  by 
a  later  rubric : 

"Yet  lest  the  same  kneeling  might,  be  thought  or  taken 
otherwise,  we  do  declare  that  it  is  not  meant  thereby,  that 
any  adoration  is  done,  or  ought  'to  be  done,  either  unto  the 
sacramental  bread  or  wine  there  bodily  received,  or  to  any 
real, or  essential  presence  there  being  of  Christ's  natural 
flesh  and  blood/' 

This  addition  is  said,  on  somewhat  uncertain  evidence, 
to  have  been  suggested  by  John  Knox. 

The  most  important  change,  however,  was  that  made 
in  the  words  to  be  addressed  to  the  communicant  in  the 
act  of  partaking.  In  the  First  Prayer-Book  the  words 
were: 

"  When  the  priest  delivereth  the  sacrament  of  the  Body 
of  Christ,  he  shall  say  to  every  one  these  words : 

*  The  JB,>dy  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  was  given  for 
thee,  preserve  thy  'body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life! 


THE   SECOND    PRAYER-BOOK   OF   EDWARD   VI.     363 

And  the  minister  delivering  the  sacrament  of  the  Blood, 
and  giving  every  one  once  to  drink  and  no  more,  shall 
say: 

*  The  Blood  of  our  Lord,  Jesus  Christ,  which  was  shed  for 
tkee,  preserve  thy  "body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life!  "  x 

In  the  Second  Prayer-Booh  the  rubric  was  altered  to : 

"  Then  the  minister,  when  he  delivereth  the  bread,  shall 
say: 

'  Take  and  eat  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ  died  for 
thee,  and  feed  on  Him  in  thy  heart  by  faith  and  with  thanks- 
giving? 

And  the  minister  that  delivereth  the  cup  shall  say : 

*  Drink  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ's  blood  was  slied 
for  thee,  and  be  thankful.' "  2 

The  difference  represented  by  the  change  in  these 
words  is  between  what  might  be  the  doctrine  of  transub- 
stantiation  and  a  sacramental  theory  distinctly  lower  than 
that  of  Luther  or  Calvin,  and  which  might  be  pure 
Zwinglianism. 

This  Second  Prayer-Book  of  King  Edward  was  enforced 
by  a  second  Act  of  Uniformity,  which  for  the  first  time 
contained  penalties  against  laymen  as  well  as  clergymen — 
•against  "  a  great  number  of  people  in  divers  parts  of  the 
realm,  who  did  wilfully  refuse  to  come  to  their  parish 
churches."  The  penalties  themselves  show  that  many  of 
the  population  refused  to  be  dragged  along  the  path  of 
reformation  as  fast  as  the  Council  wished  them  to  go.8 

Soon  after  there  followed  a  new  creed  or  statement  of 
the  fundamental  doctrines  received  by  the  Church  of 
England.  This  was  the  Forty-two  Articles,  interesting 
because  they  formed  the  basis  of  the  later  Elizabethan 
Thirty-nine  Articles.  They  were  thrust  on  the  Church  of 
England  in  a  rather  disreputable  way.  It  was  expressly 
stated  on  the  title-page  that  they  had  been  agreed 
upon  by  the  Bishops  and  godly  divines  at  the  last  Con- 

4  Compare  Tfo  Two  ZUuryUs,  etc.  (Parker  Society)  p.  283. 

1  Ibid.  pp.  92,  JJ79. 

1  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documetd^  etc.  p.  209, 


364         THE   REFORMATION   UNDER   EDWARD   VI. 

vocation  in  London — a  statement  which  is  not  correct 
They  were  never  presented  to  Convocation,  and  were 
issued  on  the  authority  of  the  King  alone,  and  received 
his  signature  on  June  12th  (1553),  scarcely  a  month 
before  he  died. 

One  other  document  belonging  to  the  reign  of  Edward 
VI.  must  be  mentioned — the  Reformatio  Legum  Ecelesiasti- 
carum,  drafted  by  Cranmer.  The  Archbishop  had  begun 
in  1544  to  collect  passages  from  the  old  Canon  Law  which 
he  thought  might  serve  to  regulate  the  government  and 
discipline  of  the  Church  of  England.  A  commission  oi: 
thirty-two  was  appointed  to  assist  him,  and  from  these  a 
committee  of  eight  were  selected  to  "  rough  hew  the  Canon 
Law."  When  the  selection  was  made,  a  Bill  to  legalise  it 
was  introduced  into  Parliament,  but  it  failed  to  pass ;  and 
the  Seformatio  Legum  never  became  authoritative  in 
England.  It  was  as  well,  for  the  book  enacted  death 
penalties  for  various  heresies,  which  would  have  made  it  a 
cruel  weapon  in  the  hands  of  a  persecuting  government. 

During  the  reign  of  Edward  vi.  the  beginnings  of  that 
Puritanism  which  was  so  prominent  in  the  time  of 
Elizabeth  first  manifested  themselves.  Its  two  principal 
spokesmen  were  the  Bishops  Hooper  and  Ridley.  Hooper 
was  an  ardent  follower  of  Zwingli,  and  was  esteemed  to  be 
the  leader  of  the  party ;  and  Eidley's  sentiments  were  not 
greatly  different.  Hooper  came  into  contact  with  the 
Government  when  he  was  appointed  to  the  See  of 
Gloucester.  He  then  objected  to  the  oath  required  from 
Bishops  at  their  consecration,  and  to  the  episcopal  robes, 
which  he  called  "Aaronic"  vestments.  The  details  of 
the  contest  are  described  by  a  Zwinglian  sympathiser, 
Macronius,  in  a  letter  to  Bullinger  at  Zurich1  (Aug.  28th, 
1550): 

"The  King,  as  you  know, -has  appointed  him  (Hooper) 
to  the  bishopric  of  Gloucester,  which,  however,  he  refused 
to  accept  unless  he  cd.  be  altogether  relieved  from  all 

1  Original  Letters  relative  to  the  English  Information  (Parker  Society, 
Cambridge,  1847),  ii.  566. 


BISHOP   HOOPER   AND   VESTMENTS  365 

appearance  of  popish  superstition.  Here  then  a  question 
immediately  arises  as  to  the  form  of  oath  which  the  Bishops 
have  ordered  to  be  taken  in  the  name  of  God,  the  saints, 
and  the  Gospels;  which  impious  oath  Hooper  positively 
refused  to  take.  So,  when  he  appeared  before  the  King  in 
the  presence  of  the  Council,  Hooper  convinced  the  King  by 
many  arguments  that  the  oath  should  be  taken  in  the  name 
of  God  alone,  who  knoweth  the  heart.  This  took  place  on 
the  20th  of  July.  It  was  so  agreeable  to  the  godly  King, 
that  with  his  own  pen  he  erased  the  clause  of  the  oath, 
which  sanctioned  swearing  by  any  creatures.  Nothing  could 
be  more  godly  than  this  act,  or  more  worthy  of  a  Christian 
king.  When  this  was  done  there  remained  the  form  of 
episcopal  consecration,  wh.,  as  lately  prescribed  by  the 
Bishops  in  Parliament,  differs  but  little  from  the  popish  one. 
Hooper  therefore  obtained  a  letter  from  the  King  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Cranmer),  that  he  might  be  con- 
secrated without  superstition.  But  he  gained  nothing  by 
this,  as  he  was  referred  from  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
to  the  Bishop  of  London  (Eidley),  who  refused  to  use 
any  other  form  of  consecration  than  that  which  had  been 
subscribed  by  Parliament.  Thus  the  Bishops  mutually 
endeavour  that  none  of  their  glory  shall  depart.  A  few 
days  after,  on  the  30th  of  July,  Hooper  obtained  leave  from 
the  King  and  the  Council  to  be  consecrated  by  the  Bishop 
of  London  without  any  superstition.  He  replied  that  he 
would  shortly  send  an  answer  either  to  the  Council  or  to 
Hooper.  While,  therefore,  Hooper  was  expecting  the 
Bishop's  answer,  the  latter  went  to  court  and  alienated  the 
minds  of  the  Council  from  Hooper,  making  light  of  the  use 
of  the  vestments  and  the  like  in  the  church,  and  calling 
them  mere  matters  of  indifference.  Many  were  BO  convinced 
by  him  that  they  would  hardly  listen  to  Hooper's  defence 
when,  he  came  into  court  shortly  afterwards.  He  therefore 
requested  them,  that  if  they  would  not  hear  him  speak, 
they  would  at  least  think  it  proper  to  hear  and  read  his 
written  apology.  His  request  was  granted:  wherefore  he 
delivered  to  the  King's  councillors,  in  writing,  his  opinion 
respecting  the  discontinuance  of  the  use  of  vestments  and 
the  like  puerilities.  And  if  the  Bishop  cannot  satisfy  the 
King  with  other  reasons,  Hooper  will  gain  the  victory.  We 
are  daily  expecting  the  termination  of  this  controversy, 
which  is  only  conducted  between  individuals,  either  by  con- 
ference or  by  letter,  for  fear  of  any  tumult  boiwg  excited 


366         THE   REFORMATION    UNDER   EDWARD   VI. 

among  the  ignorant.  You  see  in  what  a  state  of  affairs  the 
Church  would  be  if  they  were  left  to  the  Bishops,  even  to 
the  best  of  them." 

In  the  end,  Hooper  allowed  himself  to  be  persuaded,  and 
was  consecrated  in  the  usual  way. 

The  advanced  Eeformers  in  England  were  probably 
incited  to  demand  more  freedom  than  the  law  permitted  by 
the  sight  of  the  liberty  enjoyed  by  men  who  were  not 
Englishmen.  French  and  German  Protestants  had  come 
to  England  for  refuge,  and  had  been  welcomed.  The  "King 
had  permitted  them  to  use  the  Augustines'  church  in 
London,  that  they  might  "  have  the  pure  ministry  of  the 
Word  and  Sacraments  according  to  the  apostolic  form/'  and 
they  enjoyed  their  privileges. 

"  We  are  altogether  exempted  by  letters  patent  from  the 
King  and  Council  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishops.  To 
each  church  (I  mean  the  German  and  the  French)  are 
assigned  two  ministers  of  the  Word  (among  whom  is  my 
unworthy  self),  over  whom  has  been  appointed  super- 
intendent the  most  illustrious  John  £  Lasco;  by  whose 
aid  alone,  under  God,  we  foreigners  have  arrived  at  our 
present  state  of  pure  religion.  Some  of  the  Bishops,  and 
especially  the  Bishop  of  London,  with  certain  others,  are 
opposed  to  our  design;  but  I  hope  their  opposition  will 
be  ineffectual.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the  special 
patron  of  foreigners,  has  been  the  chief  support  and 
promoter  of  our  church,  to  the  great  astonishment  of 
some."  * 

These  foreigners,  outside  episcopal  control  and  not 
subject  to  the  Acts  of  Uniformity,  enjoyed  liberties  of 
worship  which  were  not  granted  to  Englishmen.  They 
were  driven  out  of  the  country  when  Mary  succeeded ;  but 
under  Elizabeth  and  James  they  had  the  same  privileges 
and  were  naturally  envied  by  the  English  Puritans,  coerced 
by  Bishops  and  harried  by  Acts  of  Uniformity. 

While  the  Eeformation  was  being  pushed  forward  in 

1  Origvwl  Letters,  etc.  (Parker  Society)  ii.  568,  Macronius  to  Xullinger 
(August  28th,  1550). 


THE   REFORMATION    UNDER   EDWARD    VI.        367 

England  at  a  speed  too  great  for  the  majority  of  the  people, 
the  King  was  showing  the  feebleness  of  his  constitution. 
He  died  on  the  6th  of  July  1553,  and  the  collapse  of  the 
Reformation  after  his  death  showed  the  uncertainty  of  the 
foundation  on  which  it  had  been  built 


CHAPTER   IIL 

THE  REACTION  UNDER  MARY,1 

ONE  of  the  last  acts  of  the  dying  King  had  been  to  make 
a  will  regulating  the  succession.  It  was  doubtless  suggested 
to  him  by  the  Duke  of  Northumberland,  but,  once  adopted, 
the  lad  clung  to  it  with  Tudor  tenacity.  It  set  aside  as 
illegitimate  both  his  sisters.  It  also  set  aside  the  .young 
Queen  of  Scotland,  who,  failing  Mary  and  Elizabeth,  was 
the  legitimate  heir,  being  the  granddaughter  of  Margaret, 
the  eldest  sister  of  Henry  VHL,  and  selected  the  Lady  Jane 
Grey,  the  representative  (eldest  child  of  eldest  child)  of 
Mary,  the  younger  sister  of  Henry  viil.  Both  the  King  and 
his  Council  seem  to  have  thought  that  the  nation  would 
not  submit  to  a  Roman  Catholic  on  the  throne;  and 
Charles  V.  appears  to  have  agreed  with  them.  He  con- 
sidered the  chances  of  Mary's  succession  small. 

The  people  of  England,  however,  rallied  to  Mary,  as  the 
nearest  in  blood  to  their  old  monarch,  who,  notwithstanding 
his  autocratic  rule,  had  never  lost  touch  with  his  people. 

1  SOURCES  in  addition  to  those  on  pp.  351 :  Epistolce  Eeginaldi  Poli, 
S.  jR.  E.  Cardinalis,  5  vols.  (Brixen,  1744-57)  j  Chronicle  of  Queen  Jane  and 
of  two  years  of  Queen  Mary,  and  especially  of  the  Rebellion  of  Sir  Thomas 
Wyatt  written  by  a  ^Resident  in  the  Tower  of  London  (Oamden  Society, 
London,  1850) ;  Garnett,  The  Accession  of  Queen  Mary ;  "being  the  con- 
temporary narrative  of  Antonio  Guaras,  etc.  (London,  1892). 

LATER  BOOKS  :  Stone,  History  of  Mary  J.,  Queen  of  England  (London, 
1901) ;  Banke,  Dieromischen  Papste  (Berlin,  1854) ;  Hume,  Visit  of  Philip 
If.  (1554)  (English  Historical  Iteview,  1892) ;  Leadam,  Narrative  of  the 
Pursuit  of  the  English  Refugees  in  Germany  under  Queen  Mary  (Transactions 
of  Boyal  Historical  Society,  1896)  ;  Wiesener,  The  Youth  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
15SS-58  (English  translation,  London,  1879);  Zitnmermann,  Cardinal 
Pole  sein  Leben  und  seine  Schriften  (Regensburjy,  1893). 


THE   RELIGIOUS    QUESTION  369 

The  new  Queen  naturally  turned  to  her  cousin  Charles 
V.  for  guidance.  He  had  upheld  her  mother's  cause  and 
her  own ;  and  in  the  dark  days  which  were  past,  his 
Ambassador  Chapuys  had  been  her  indefatigable  friend. 

It  was  Mary's  consuming  desire  to  bring  back  the 
English  Church  and  nation  to  obedience  to  Borne — to 
undo  the  work  of  her  father,  and  especially  of  her  brother. 
The  Emperor  recommended  caution ;  he  advised  the  Queen 
to  be  patient ;  to  watch  and  accommodate  her  policy  to  the 
manifestations  of  the  feelings  of  her  people ;  to  punish  the 
leaders  who  had  striven  to  keep  her  from  the  throne,  but 
to  treat  all  their  followers  with  clemency.  Above  all,  she 
was  to  mark  carefully  the  attitude  of  her  sister  Elizabeth, 
and  to  reorganise  the  finances  of  the  country. 

Mary  had  released  Gardiner  from  the  Tower,  and  made 
him  her  trusted  Minister.  His  advice  in  all  matters,  save 
that  of  her  marriage,  coincided  with  the  Emperor's.  It 
was  thought  that  small  difficulty  would  be  found  in 
restoring  the  Eoman  Catholic  religion,  but  that  difficulties 
might  arise  about  the  papal  supremacy,  and  especially  about 
the  reception  of  a  papal  Legate.  Much  depended  on  the 
Pope.  If  His  Holiness  did  not  demand  the  restoration 
of  the  ecclesiastical  property  alienated  during  the  last  two 
reigns,  and  now  distributed  among  over  forty  thousand 
proprietors,  all  might  go  well. 

Signs  were  not  wanting,  however,  that  if  the  people 
were  almost  unanimous  in  accepting  Mary  as  their  Queen, 
they  were  not  united  upon  religion.  When  Dr.  Gilbert 
Bourne,  preaching  at  St.  Paul's  Cross  (Aug.  13th,  1553) 
praised  Bishop  Bonner,  he  was  interrupted  by  shouts ;  a 
•dagger  was  thrown  at  him ;  he  was  hustled  out  of  the 
pulpit,  and  his  life  was  threatened.  The  tumult  was  only 
appeased  when  Bradford,  a  known  Protestant,  appealed  to 
tho  crowd.  The  Lord  Mayor  of  London  was  authorised  to 
declare  to  the  people  that  it  was  not  tho  Queen's  intention 
to  constrain  men's  consciences,  and  that  she  meant 
lo  trust  solely  to  persuasion  to  bring  thorn  to  the  true 
faith. 


370        THE  REACTION  UNDER  MAKY 

Five  days  later  (August  18th),  Mary  issued  her  first 
Proclamation  about  Jteligion,  in  which  she  advised  her 
subjects  "to  live  together  in  quiet  sort  and  Christian 
charity,  leaving  those  new-found  devilish  terms  of  papist 
or  heretic  and  such  like."  She  declared  that  she  meant  to 
support  that  religion  which  she  had  always  professed ;  but 
she  promised  "that  she  would  not  compel  any  of  her 
subjects  thereunto,  unto  such  time  as  further  order,  by 
common  assent,  may  be  taken  therein" — a  somewhat 
significant  threat.  The  proclamation  prohibited  unlicensed 
preaching  and  printing  "  any  book,  matter,  ballad,  rhyme, 
interlude,  process,  or  treatise,  or  to  play  any  interlude, 
except  they  have  Her  Grace's  special  licence  in  writing  for 
the  same/'  which  makes  it  plain  that  from  the  outset  Mary 
did  not  intend  that  any  Protestant  literature  should  be  read 
by  her  subjects  if  she  could  help  it*1 

Mary  was  crowned  with  great  ceremony  on  October  1st, 
and  her  first  Parliament  met  four  days  later  (Oct.  5th 
to  Dec.  6th,  1553).  It  reversed  a  decision  of  a  former 
Parliament,  and  declared  that  Henry  vm.'s  marriage  with 
Catharine  of  Aragon  had  been  valid,  and  that  Mary  was 
the  legitimate  heir  to  the  throne ;  and  it  wiped  out  all  the 
religious  legislation  under  Edward  VI.  The  Council  had 
wished  the  anti-papal  laws  of  Henry  VIIL  to  be  rescinded ; 
but  Parliament,  especially  the  House  of  Commons,  was 
not  prepared  for  anything  so  sweeping.  The  Church  of 
England  was  legally  restored  to  what  it  had  been  at  the 
death  of  Henry,  and  Mary  was  left  in  the  anomalous 
position  of  being  the  supreme  head  of  the  Church  in 
England  while  she  herself  devoutly  believed  in  the 
supremacy  of  the  Bishop  of  Home.  The  title  and  the 
powers  it  gave  were  useful  to  restore  by  royal  proclama- 
tion the  mediaeval  ritual  and  worship,  and  Mass  was 
reintroduced  in  this  way  in  December.2 

Meanwhile   the    marriage   of    the  Queen  was   being 

1  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  373. 
*  The  Act  of  Parliament  is  printed  in  Gee  and  Hardy, 
p.  377. 


THE  QUEEN'S  MARRIAGE       371 

discussed.  Mary  herself  decided  the  matter  by  solemnly 
promising  the  Spanish  Ambassador  (Oct.  19th)  that  she 
would  wed  Philip  of  Spain;  the  marriage  treaty  was 
signed  on  January  12th,  1554;  the  formal  betrothal  took 
place  in  March,  and  the  *  wedding  was  celebrated  on  July 
25th.1  It  was  very  unpopular  from  the  first.  The  boys 
of  London  pelted  with  snowballs  the  servants  of  the 
Spanish  embassy  sent  to  ratify  the  wedding  treaty  (Jan. 
1st,  1554);  the  envoys  themselves  were  very  coldly 
received  by  the  populace ;  and  Mary  had  to  issue  a 
proclamation  commanding  that  all  courtesy  should  be  used 
to  the  Prince  of  Spain  and  his  train  coming  to  England  to 
marry  the  Queen.2 

In  September  (1553)  the  pronouncedly  Protestant 
Bishops  who  had  remained  in  England  to  face  the  storm, 
Cranmer,  Eidley,  Coverdale,  Latimer,  were  ejected  and 
imprisoned;  the  Protestant  refugees  from  France  and 
Germany  and  many  of  the  eminent  Protestant  leaders  had 
sought  safety  on  the  Continent ;  the  deprived  Eomanist 
Bishops,  Gardiner,  Heath,  Bonner,  Day,  had  been  reinstated; 
and  the  venerable  Bishop  Tunstall,  who  had  acted  as 
Wolsey's  agent  at  the  famous  Diet  of  Worms,  had  been 
placed  in  the  See  of  Durham. 

Various  risings,  one  or  two  of  minor  importance  and  a 
more  formidable  one  under  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt,  had  been 
crushed.  Lady  Jane  Grey,  Lord  Guilford  Dudley  (February 
12th,  1554),  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt,  Lord  Suffolk,  and  others 
were  executed.  Charles  y,  strongly  recommended  the 
execution  of  the  Princess  Elizabeth,  but  his  advice  was  not 
followed. 

England  was  still  an  ,  excommunicated  land,  and  both 
Queen  and  King  Consort  were  anxious  to  receive  the  papal 
peace.  As  soon  as  he  had  been  informed  by  Mary  of  her 
succession  to  the  throne,  the  Pope,  Julius  IL,  had  selected 

1  Philip's  marriages  had  this  peculiarity  about  them,  that  his  second  wife 
(Mary)  had  been  betrothed  to  his  father,  and  his  third  wife  had  been 
betrothed  to  his  son. 

a  Strype,  Memorials  of  Queen  Mary's  Keign,  ni,*ii.  216, 


372         THE  REACTION  UNDER  MARY 

Cardinal  Pole  to  be  his  Legate  to  England  (early  in  August 
1553).  No  one  could  have  been  more  suitable.  He  was 
related  to  the  royal  house  of  England,  a  grandson  of  the 
Duke  of  Clarence,  who  was  the  brother  of  Edward  rv.  He 
had  so  thoroughly  disapproved  of  the  anti-papal  policy  of 
Henry  VHL  that  he  had  been  compelled  to  live  in  exile. 
He  was  a  Cardinal,  and  had  almost  become  Pope.  No 
one  could  have  been  more  acceptable  to  Mary.  He  had 
protested  against  her  mother's  divorce,  and  had  suffered  for 
it ;  and  he  was  as  anxious  as  she  to  see  England  restored 
to  the  papal  obedience.  But  many  difficulties  had  to  be 
cleared  away-  before  Pole  could  land  in  England  as  the 
Pope's  Legate.  The  English  people  did  not  love  Legates, 
and  their  susceptibilities  had  to  be  soothed.  If  the  Pope 
made  the  restoration  of  the  Church  lands  a  condition  of  the 
restoration  of  England  to  the  papal  obedience,  and  if  Mary 
insisted  'on  securing  that  obedience,  there  would  be  a 
rebellion,  and  she  would  lose  her  crown.  No  one  knew  all 
these  difficulties  better  than  the  Emperor,  and  he  exerted 
himself  to  overcome  them.  The  Curia  was  persuaded  that, 
as  it  was  within  the  Canon  Law  to  alienafce  ecclesiastical 
property  for  the  redemption  of  prisoners,  the  Church  might 
give  xip  her  claims  to  the  English  abbey  lands  in  order  to 
win  back  the  whole  kingdom.  Pole  himself  had  doubts 
about  this.  He  believed  that  he  might  be  allowed  to 
reason  with  the  lay  appropriators  and  persuade  them  to 
make  restoration,  and  his  enthusiasm  on  the  subject  caused 
many  misgivings  in  the  minds  of  both  Charles  and  Philip. 
Nor  could  the  Cardinal  land  in  England  until  his  attainder 
as  an  English  nobleman  had  been  reversed  by  Parliament. 
He  had  been  appointed  Legate  to  England  once  before 
(February  7th,  1536),  in  order  to  compass  Henry  vni/s 
return  to  the  papal  obedience ;  he  had  written  against  the 
Eoyal  Supremacy.  Neither  Lords  nor  Commons  were  very 
anxious  to  receive  him. 

At  last,  paore  than  thirteen  months  after  his  appoint- 
ment, the  way  was  open  fpr  his  coining  to  England.  He 
landed  at  Dover  (Nov.  20th,  1554),  went  on  to  Gravesend, 


RESTORATION  TO  THE  PAPAL  OBEDIENCE   373 

and  there  found  waiting  him  an  Act  of  Parliament  revers- 
ing his  attainder.  It  had  been  introduced  into  the  Lords, 
passed  in  the  Upper  House  in  two  days,  was  read  three 
times  in  the  Commons  in  one  day,  and  received  the 
Eoyal  Assent  immediately  thereafter  (Nov.  27th,  1554). 
Tunstall,  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  brought  him  letters 
patent,  empowering  him  to  exercise  his  office  of  Legate 
in  England*  He  embarked  in  a  royal  barge  with  his 
silver  cross  in  the  prow,  sailed  up  the  Thames  on  a 
favouring  tide,  landed  at  Whitehall,  and  was  welcomed 
by  Mary  and  Philip.  On  the  following  day  the  two 
Houses  of  .Parliament  were  invited  to  the  Palace  to  meet 
him,  and  he  explained  his  commission.  The  day  after, 
the  question  was  put  in  both  Houses  of  Parliament 
whether  the  nation  should  return  to  the  papal  obedience, 
and  was  answered  affirmatively.  Whereupon  Lords  and 
Commons  joined  in  a  supplication  to  the  Queen  "  that 
they  might  receive  absolution,  and  be  received  hUo  the 
body  of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  under  the  Pope,  the 
Supreme  Head  thereof."  The  Supplication  was  presented 
on  the  30th,  and  in  its  terms  the  Queen  besought  the 
Legate  to  absolve  the  realm  for  its  disobedience  and 
schism.  Then,  while  the  whole  assembly  knelt,  King 
and  Queen  on  their  knees  with  the  others,  the  Legato 
pronounced  the  absolution,  and  received  the  kingdom: 
"again  into  the  unity  of  our  Mother  the  Holy 
Church." 

It  now  remained  to  Parliament  -to  pass  the  laws  which 
the  change  required.  In  one  comprehensive  statute  all 
the  anti-papal  legislation  of  the  reigns  of  Henry  vin.  and 
of  Edward  vi.  was  rescinded,  and  England  was,  so  far  as 
laws  could  make  it,1  what  it  h&d  been  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  vn.  Two  days  later  (Dec.  2nd,  1554),  on  the 
first  Sunday  in  Advent,  Philip  and  Mary,  with  the  Legate, 
attended  divine  service  •  in  St.  Paul's,  and  after  Mass 
listened  to  an  eloquent  sermon  •  from  Bishop  Gardiner, 
ia  the  course  of  which  he  publicly  abjured  the  teaching 
1  Geu  and  Hardy,  IhcnmciU^  etc.  p.  385, 


374        THE  REACTION  UNDER  MARY 

of  his  book  De  mm  obedientia.1  Convocation  received  a 
special  absolution  from  the  Legate.  To  show  how 
thoroughly  England  had  reconciled  itself  to  Mother 
Church,  Parliament  proceeded  to  revive  the  old  Acts 
against  heresy  which  had  been  originally  passed  for  the 
suppression  of  Lollardy,  among  them  the  notorious  De 
hceretico  comburendo,  and  England  had  again  the  privilege 
of  burning  Evangelical  Christians  secured  to  it  by  Act  of 
Parliament.2 

In  March  15 54  the  Queen  had  issued  a  series  of 
Injunctions  to  all  Bishops,  instructing  them  on  a  variety 
of  matters,  all  tending  to  bring  the  Church  into  the 
condition  in  which  it  had  been  before  the  innovations  of 
the  late  reign.  The  Bishops  were  to  put  into  execution 
all  canons  and  ecclesiastical  laws  which  were  not  expressly 
contrary  to  the  statutes  of  the  realm.  They  were  not  to 
inscribe  on  any  of  their  ecclesiastical  documents  the 
phrase  regia  auetoritate  fulcitus ;  they  were  to  see  that 
no  heretic  was  admitted  to  any  ecclesiastical  office ;  they 
were  to  remove  all  married  priests,  and  to  insist  that 
every  person  vowed  to  celibacy  was  to  be  separated  from 
his  wife  if  he  had  married ;  they  were  to  observe  all  the 
holy  days  and  ceremonies  which  were  in  use  in  the  later 
days  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  vin. ;  all  schoolmasters 
suspected  of  heresy  were  to  be  removed  from  their  office. 
These  Injunctions  kept  carefully  within  the  lines  of  the 
Act  which  had  rescinded  the  ecclesiastical  legislation  of 
the  reign  of  Edward  VL3  The  Bishop  of  London,  Bonner, 
had  previously  issued  a  list  of  searching  questions  to  be 
put  to  the  clergy  of  his  diocese,  which  concerned  the 

1  In  the  days  of  Henry  vni.,  Bishop  Gardiner  had  published  a  book, 
under  this  title,  in  which  the  papal  jurisdiction  in  England  was  strongly 
repudiated.    Someone,  prbbably  Bale,  when  Gardiner  was  aiding  the  Quoen 
to  restore  that  supremacy,  had  translated  the  book  into  English,  and  had 
printed  at  the  bottom  of  the  title-page,  *'  A  double-minded  man  is  in- 
constant in  all  his  ways. " 

2  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  384.    The  Act  de  h&retico  com- 
lurendo'vrill  be  found  on  p.  133. 

8  2l>id.  p.  380. 


RESTORATION  TO  THE  PAPAL  OBEDIENCE   375 

laity  as  well  as  the  clergy,  and  which  went  a  good  deal 
further.  He  asked  whether  there  were  any  married 
clergymen,  or  clergymen  who  had  not  separated  themselves 
from  their  wives  or  concubines  ?  Whether  any  of  the 
clergy  maintained  doctrines  contrary  to  the  Catholic 
faith?  Whether  any  of  the  clergy  had  been  irregularly 
or  schismatically  ordained  ?  Whether  any  of  them  had 
said  Mass  or  administered  the  sacraments  in  the  English 
language  after  the  Queen's  proclamation  ?  Whether  they 
kept  all  the  holy  days  and  fasting  days  prescribed  by  the 
Church  ?  Whether  any  of  the  clergy  went  about  in  other 
than  full  clerical  dress  ?  Whether  any  persons  in  the 
parish  spoke  in  favour  of  clerical  marriage  ?  These  and 
many  other  minute  questions  were  put,  with  the  evident 
intention  of  restoring  the  mediaeval  ceremonies  and 
customs  in  every  detail.1  His  clergy  assured  the  Bishop 
that  it  was  impossible  to  make  all  the  changes  he 
demanded  at  once,  and  Bonner  was  obliged  to  give  them 
till  the  month  of  November  to  get  their  parishes  in  order. 
This  London  visitation  evidently  provoked  a  great  deal 
of  discontent.  In  April  (1554)  "a  dead  cat  was  hung  on 
the  gallows  in  the  Cheap,  habited  in  garments  like  those 
of  a  priest.  It  had  a  shaven  crown,  and  held  in  its  fore- 
paws  a  round  piece  of  paper  to  represent  a  wafer.  ...  A 
reward  of  twenty  marks  was  offered  for  the  discovery 
of  the  author  of  the  outrage,  but  it  was  quite  ineffectual."  2 
Other  graver  incidents  showed  the  smouldering  discontent. 
The  revival  in  Parliament  of  the  old  anti-heresy  laws 
may  be  taken  as  the  time  clearly  foreshadowed  in  the 
Queen's  first  proclamation  on  religious  affairs  when  per- 
suasion was  to  cease  and  force  take  its  place.  The 
platitijdes  of  many  modern  historians  about  Mary's 
humane  and  merciful  disposition,  about  Gardiner's  aversion 
to  shedding  blood,  about  "the  good  Bishop"  Banner's 

1  Bonnet's  Articles  of  Inquiry  are  printed  in  Strype's  Historical 
Memorials,  Ecclesiastical  and  Civil,  eto.  III.  ii.  p.  217. 

9  Gairdner's  TJie  JBnglish  Church  in  the  ftfxtunth  Century,  etc,  (London, 
1902)  p,  339. 


376         THE  REACTION  UNDER  MARY 

benevolent  attempt  to  persuade  Ms  victims  to  recant, 
may  be  dismissed  from  our  minds.  The  fact  remains, 
that  the  persecutions  which  began  in  1555  were  clearly 
indicated  in  1553,  and  went  on  with  increasing  severity 
until  the  Queen's  death  put  an  end  to  them. 

The  visitations  had  done  their  work,  and  the  most 
eminent  of  the  Eeforined  bishops  and  divines  had  been 
caught  and  secured  in  various  prisons.  "  The  Tower,  the 
Fleet,  the  Marshalsea,  the  King's  Bench,  Newgate,  and  the 
two  Counters  were  full  of  them."1  Their  treatment 
differed.  "  The  prisoners  in  the  King's  Bench  had  toler- 
ably fair  usage,  and  favour  sometimes  shown  them.  There 
was  a  pleasant  garden  belonging  thereunto,  where  they 
had  liberty  sometimes  to  walk/'  They  had  also  the 
liberty  of  meeting  for  worship,  as  had  the  prisoners  in  the 
Marshalsea.  Their  sympathisers  who  had  escaped  the  search 
kept  them  supplied  with  food,  as  did  the  early  Christians 
their  suffering  brethren  in  the  first  centuries.  But  in  some 
of  the  other  prisons  the  confessors  were  not  only  confined 
in  loathsome  -cells,  but  suffered  terribly  from  .  lack  of  food. 
At  the  end  of  Strype's  catalogue  of  the  two  hundred 
and  eighty-eight  persons  who  were  burnt  during  the 
reign  of  Mary,  he  significantly  adds,  "  besides  those  that 
dyed  of  famyne  in  sondry  prisons."2  Some  of  the  im- 
prisoned were  able  to  draw  up  (May  8th,  1554)  and 
send  out  for  circulation  a  confession  of  their  faith,  meant 
to  show  that  they  were  suffering  simply  for  holding  and 
proclaiming  what  they  believed  to  be  scriptural  truth. 
They  declared  that  they  believed  all  the  canonical  books 
of  Scripture  to  be  God's  very  Word,  and  that  it  was  to 
be  the  judge  in  all  controversies  of  faith;  that  the 
Catholic  Church  was  the  Church  which  believed  and 
followed  the  doctrines  taught  in  Scripture;  that  they 
accepted  the  Apostles'  Creed  and  the  decisions  of  the 
first  four  (Ecumenical  Councils  and  of  the  Council  of 
Toledo,  as  well  as  the  teachings  of  Athanasius,  Ireuams, 

1  Stvype,  Memorial^  M-clcsiaUical  and  Civil,  etc.  in.  i.  221,  228. 
8  Ibid,  m,  ii,  556. 


THE   MARTYRS  377 

Tertullian,  and  Damasus  ;  that  they  believed  that  justifica- 
tion came  through  the  mercy  of  God,  and  that  it  was 
received  by  none  but  by  faith  only,  and  that  faith  was 
not  an  opinion,  but  a  persuasion  wrought  by  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  they  declared  that  *  the  external  service  of  God 
ought  to  be  according  to  God's  Word,  and  conducted  in 
a  language  which  the  people  could  understand;  they 
confessed  that  God  only  by  Jesus  Christ  is  to  be  prayed 
to,  and  therefore  disapproved  of  the  invocation  of  the 
saints ;  they  disowned  Purgatory  and  Masses  for  the  dead ; 
they  held  that  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  were  the 
Sacraments  instituted  by  Christ,  were  to  be  administered 
according  to  the  institution  of  Christ,  and  disallowed  the 
mutilation  of  the  sacrament,  the  theory  of  transubstantia- 
tion,  and  the  adoration  of  the  bread.1  This  was  signed 
by  Ferrar,  Hooper,  Coverdale  (Bishops),  by  Rogers  (the 
first  martyr),  by  Bradford,  Philpot,  Crome,  Saunders,  and 
others.  John  Bradford,  the  single-minded,  gentle  scholar, 
was  probably  the  author  of  the  Confession. 

Cardinal  Pole,  in  his  capacity  as  papal  Legate,  issued 
a  commission  (Jan.  28th,  1555)  to  Bishop  Gardiner  and 
several  others  to  try  the  prisoners  detained  for  heresy. 
Then  followed  (Feb.,  4th,  1555)  the  burning  off  John 
Rogers,  to  whom  Tyndale  had  entrusted  his  translation 
of  the  Scriptures,  and  who  was  the  real  compiler  of  the 
Bible  known  as  Matthews'.  The  scenes  at  his  execution 
might  have  warned  the  authorities  that  persecution  was 
not  going  to  be  persuasive.  Crowds  cheered  him  as  he 
passed  to  his  death,  "  as  if  he  were  going  to  his  wedding," 
the  French  Ambassador  reported.  His  fate  excited  a 
strong  feeling  of  sympathy  among  almost  all  classes  in 
society,  which  was  ominous.  Even  Simon  Eenard,  the 
trusted  envoy  of  Charles  v.,  took  the  liberty  of  warning 
Philip  that  less  extreme  measures  ought  to  be  used.  But 
the  worst  of  a  persecuting  policy  is  that  when  it  has 
once  begun  it  is  almost  impossible  to  give  it  up  with- 
out confession  of  defeat.  Bishop  Hooper  was  sent  to 
1  Strypo,  Memorials,  Ecclesiastical  and  Civil,  etc.  in.  i.  222,  in,  ii.  224, 


378        THE  REACTION  UNDER  MARY 

Gloucester  to  suffer  in  his  cathedral  town,  Saunders  to 
Coventry,  and  Dr.  Taylor  was  burnt  on  Aldham  Common 
in  Suffolk  Several  other  martyrs  suffered  the  same  fate 
of  burning  a  few  days  afterwards. 

Eobert  Ferrar,  the  Reformed  Bishop  of  St.  David's,  was 
sent  to  Carmarthen  to  be  burnt  in  the  chief  town  of  his 
diocese  (March  30th,  1555).  Perhaps  it  was  his  death 
that  gave  rise  to  the  verses  in  Welsh,  exhorting  the  men 
of  the  Principality  to  rise  in  defence  of  their  religion 
against  the  English  who  were  bent  on  its  destruction,  and 
calling  them  to  extirpate  image  worship  and  the  use  of 
the  crucifix.1 

Bishops  Ridley  and  Latimer  and  Archbishop  Cranmer 
had  been  kept  in  confinement  at  Oxford  since  April  1554; 
and  they  were  now  to  be  proceeded  against.  The  two 
Bishops  were  brought  before  the  Court  acting  on  a  com- 
mission from  Cardinal  Pole,  the  Legate.  They  were  con- 
demned on  Oct.  1st,  1555,  and  on  the  16th  they  were 
burnt  at  Oxford  in  the  present  Broad  Street  before  Balliol 
College.  Cranmer  witnessed  their  death  from  the  top  of 
the  tower  in  which  he  was  confined. 

In  the  Archbishop's  case  it  was  deemed  necessary,  in 
order  to  fulfil  the  requirements  of  Canon  Law,  that  he 
should  be  tried  by  the  Pope  himself.  He  was  accordingly 
informed  that  his  sovereigns  had  "  denounced  "  him  to  the 
Pope,  and  that  His  Holiness  had  commissioned  the  Cardinal 
Du  Puy,  Prefect  of  the  Inquisition,  to  act  on  his  behalf, 
and  that  Du  Puy  had  delegated  the  duty  to  James  Brooks, 
who  had  succeeded  Hooper  as  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  to  the 
Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  and  to  the  Archdeacon  of  Canterbury. 
The  trial  took  place  in  St.  Mary's  Church.  The  accusers, 
Philip  and  Mary,  were  represented  by  Drs.  Martyn  and 
Story.  They,  in  the  name  of  their  sovereigns,  presented 
a  lengthy  indictment,  in  which  the  chief  charges  were 
adultery,  perjury,  and  heresy.  The  first  meant  that 
although  a  priest  he  had  been  married,  and  had  even 

1  Cal&ndar  of  State  Payers,  Domestic  Series,  of  the  JKeign  of  Elizabeth, 
1601-3;  with  Addenda,  1547-65  (London,  1870),  p.  483. 


CRANMER'S  TRIAL  379 

married  a  second  time  after  he  had  been  made  an  Arch- 
bishop ;  the  second,  that  he  had  sworn  obedience  to  the 
Pope  and  broken  his  oath;  and  the  third,  that  he  had 
denied  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.1 

Cranmer  refused  to  acknowledge  the  jurisdiction  of  his 
judges,  but  answered  the  charges  brought  against  him  to 
his  accusers  because  they  represented  his  sovereigns.  He 
denied  that  the  Pope  had  any  ecclesiastical  power  within 
England ;  but  submitted  to  the  kingly  supremacy.  As  Brooks 
had  no  authority  from  the  Pope  to  do  more  than  hear  the 
case,  no  judgment  was  pronounced ;  it  was  only  intimated 
that  the  proceedings  would  be  reported  to  Rome.  Cranmer 
was  conducted  back  to  his  prison.  There  he  addressed 
first  one,  then  a  second  letter  to  the  Queen.2  In  dignified 
and  perfectly  respectful  language  he  expressed  the  degra- 
dation of  the  kingdom  exhibited  in  the  act  of  the  sovereigns 
appealing  to  an  "  outward  judge,  or  to  an  authority  coming 
from  any  person  out  of  this  realm  "  to  judge  between  them, 
and  one  of  their  own  subjects.  Cranmer  early  in  his 
career  had  come  to  the  unalterable  opinion  that  the  papal 
supremacy  was  responsible  for  the  abuses  and  disorders  in 
the  mediaeval  Church,  and  that  reformation  was  impossible 
so  long  as  it  was  maintained.  In  common  with  every 
thoughtful  man  of  his  generation,  he  repudiated  the  whole 
structure  of  papal  claims  built  up  by  tho  Roman  Curia 
during  the  fifteenth  century,  and  held  that  it  was  in  every 
way  incompatible  with  the  loyalty  which  every  subject 
owed  to  his  sovereign  and  to  the  laws  of  his  country.  He 
took  his  stand  on  this  conviction. 

"  Ignorance,  I  know,"  he  said,  "  may  excuse  other  men ; 
but  he  that  knoweth  how  prejudicial  and  injurious  the 
power  and  authority  which  the  Pope  challengeth  everywhere 
is  to  the  Crown,  laws,  and  customs  of  this  realm,  and  yet 
will  allow  the  same,  I  cannot  sec  in  anywise  how  he  can 

1  An  account  of  Cranmer's  trial  is  given  in  Foxe,  Acts  and  Monuments 
(London,  1851),  iii.  656/1  The  process  is  in  Cranmer's  Miscellaneous  Writ- 
ings and  Letters  (Parker  Society),  pp.  541  ff, 

3  Cranmer's  Works,  ii.  U7  /. 


380        THE  REACTION  UNDER  MARY 

keep  his  due  allegiance,  fidelity,  and  truth  to  the  Crown  and 
state  of  this  realm/' 

In  his  second  letter  he  struck  a  bolder  note,  and  de- 
clared that  the  oath  which  Mary  had  sworn  to  maintain 
the  laws,  liberties,  and  customs  of  the  realm  was  incon- 
sistent with  the  other  oath  she  had  taken  to  obey  the 
Pope,  to  defend  his  person,  and  to  maintain  his  authority, 
honour,  laws,  and  privileges.  The  accusation  of  perjury 
did  not  touch  him  at  all.  The  sovereigns — Bishop  Brooks, 
appointed  to  try  him — every  constituted  authority  in  the 
realm — when  confronted  by  it,  had  to  choose  between  the 
oath  of  allegiance  to  country  or  to  Papacy ;  he  had  chosen 
allegiance  to  his  fatherland ;  others  who  acted  differently 
betrayed  it.  That  was  his  position.  The  words  he 
addressed  to  Queen  Mary — "  I  fear  me  that  there  be  con- 
tradictions in  your  oath  " — was  his  justification. 

At  Borne,  Cranmer  was  found  guilty  of  contumacy,  and 
the  command  went  forth  that  he  was  to  be  deposed,  de- 
graded, and  punished  as  a  heretic.  In  the  meantime  he 
was  burnt  in  effigy  at  Rome.  When  he  heard  his  sentence, 
he  composed  an  Appeal,  to  a  General  Council,  following, 
he  said,  the  example  of  Luther.1  The  degradation  was 
committed  to  Bonner  and  Thirlby,  and  was  executed  by 
the  former  with  his  usual  brutality.  This  done,  he  was 
handed  over  to  the  secular  authorities  for  execution.  Then 
began  a  carefully  prepared  course  of  refined  mental  tor- 
ture, which,  resulted  in  the  "Recantations  of  Thomas 
Cranmer."2  A  series  of  recantations  was  presented  to 
him,  which  he  was  ordered  to  sign  by  his  sovereign ;  and, 
strange  as  it  may  seem  now,  it  was  the  sovereign's  command 
that  made  it  almost  impossible  for  Cranmer  to  refuse  to 
sign  the  papers  which,  one  after  another,  were  given  him. 
He  was  a  man  who  felt  the  necessity  of  an  ultimate 
authority.  He  had  deliberately  put  aside  that  of  the  Pope, 
and  as  deliberately  placed  that  of  the  sovereign  in  its 
place;  and  now  the  ultimate  authority,  which  his  con- 

1  Works,  ii.  pp.  445-56. 

9  Miscellaneous  Writings,  etc.  (Parker  Society)  p.  563. 


CRANMER'S  MARTYRDOM  381 

science  approved,  commanded  him  to  sign.  The  first  four 
were  not  real  recantations ;  Cranmer  could  sign  them  with 
a  good  conscience ;  they  consisted  of  generalities,  the  effect 
of  which  depended  on  the  meaning  of  the  terms  used,  and 
everyone  knew  the  meanings  which  he  had  attached  to  the 
words  all  throughout  his  public  life.  But  the  fifth  and 
the  sixth  soiled  his  conscience  and  occasioned  his  remorse. 
It  was  not  enough  for  Mary,  Pole,  and  Bonner  that  they 
were  able  to  destroy  by  fire  the  bodies  of  English  Ee- 
formers,  they  hoped  by  working  partly  on  the  conscience 
and  partly  on  the  weakness  of  the  leader  of  the  English 
Reformation,  to  show  the  worthlessness  of  the  whole  move- 
ment. In  the  end,  the  aged  martyr  redeemed  his  momen- 
tary weakness  by  a  last  act  of  heroism.  He  knew  that 
his  recantations  had  been  published,  and  that  any  further 
declaration  made  would  probably  be  suppressed  by  his  un- 
scrupulous antagonists.  He  resolved  by  a  single  action  to 
defeat  their  calculations  and  stamp  his  sincerity  on  the 
memories  of  his  countrymen.  His  dying  speech  was 
silenced,  as  he  might  well  have  expected;  but  he  had 
made  up  his  mind  to  something  which  could  not  be 
stifled.1 

"At  the  moment  he  was  taken  to  the  stake  he  drew  from 
his  bosom  the  identical  paper  (the  recantation),  throwing  it, 
in  the  presence  of  the  multitude,  with  his  own  hands  into 
the  flames,  asking  pardon  of  God  and  of  the  people  for 
having  consented  to  such  an  act,  which  he  excused  by  say- 
ing that  he  did  it  for  the  public  benefit,  as,  had  his  life, 
which  he  sought  to  save,  been  spared  him,  he  might  at  some 
time  have  still  been  of  xise  to  them,  praying  them  all  to  per- 
sist in  the  doctrines  believed  by  him,  and  absolutely  denying 
the  Sacrament  and  the  supremacy  of  the  Church.  And, 
finally,  stretching  forth  his  arm  and  right  hand,  he  said : 
'  This  which  hath  sinned,  having  signed  the  writing,  must 
be  the  first  to  suffer  punishment ' ;  and  thus  did  he  place  it 
in  the  fire  and  burned  it  himself."2 

1  Pollard,  Crammer,  pp.  867-81. 

fl  Calendar  of  State  Papers  and  MSS.  existing  fa  the  Archives  and  Collec- 
tions of  Venice,  l$$$-$6,  p.  886. 


382        THE  REACTION  UNDER  MARY 

If  the  martyrdoms  of  Ridley  and  Latimer  lighted  the 
torch,  Cranmer's  spread  the  conflagration  which  in  thfe 
end  burnt  up  the  Romanist  reaction  and  made  England  a 
Protestant  nation.  The  very  weakness  of  the  aged  Primate 
became  a  background  to  make  the  clearer  his  final  heroism. 
The  "  common  man  "  sympathised  with  him  all  the  more. 
He  had  never  been  a  very  strong  man  in  the  usual  sense 
of  the  words.  The  qualities  which  go  to  form  the  exquisite 
liturgist  demand  an  amount  of  religious  sensibility  and 
sympathy  which  seldom  belongs  to  the  leader  of  a  minority 
with  the  present  against  it  and  the  future  before  it.  His 
peculiar  kind  of  courage,  which  enabled  him  to  face  Henry 
vni.  in  his  most  truculent  moods,  was  liker  a  woman's  than 
a  man's,  and  was  especially  called  forth  by  sympathy  with 
others  in  suffering.  None  of  Henry's  Ministers  pleaded 
harder  or  more  persistently  for  the  Princess  Mary,  the 
woman  who  burnt  him,  than  did  Cranmer ;  and  he  alone 
of  all  his  fellows  dared  to  beseech  the  monarch  for  Crom- 
well in  his  fall.1 

The  death  of  Cranmer  was  followed  by  a  long  succes- 
sion of  martyrdoms.  Cardinal  Pole  became  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  and  in  Philip's  absence  the  principal  adviser 
of  the  Queen.  He  did  not  manage,  if  he  tried,  to  stop  the 
burnings.  Sometimes  he  rescued  prisoners  from  the  vindic- 
tive Bonner ;  at  others  he  seems  to  have  hounded  on  the 
persecutors.  Mary's  conscience,  never  satisfied  at  the 
confiscation  of  property,  compelled  her  to  restore  the  lands 
still  in  possession  of  the  Crown,  and  to  give  up  the  "first 
fruits"  of  English  benefices — the  only  result  being  to 
awaken  the  fears  of  thousands  of  proprietors,  and  set  them 
against  the  papal  claims.  She  attempted  to  restore  the 
monastic  institutions,  with  but  scanty  results;  to  revive 
pilgrimages  to  shrines,  which  were  very  forced  affairs,  and 
had  to  be  kept  alive  by  fining  the  parents  of  children 
who  did  not  join  them.  The  elevation  of  Pope  Paul  IV. 
(Cardinal  Caraffa)  to  the  See  of  Rome  increased  her 
difficulties.  The  new  Pontiff,  a  Neapolitan,  hated  her 

1  Pollard,  Orwmer,  p.  328. 


DEATH    OF   QUEEN   MARY  383 

Spanish  husband,  and  personally  disliked  Cardinal  Pole, 
her  chief  adviser.  Her  last  years  were  full  of 
troubles. 

Mary  died  in  1558  (Nov.  17th).  "The  unhappiest 
of  queens,  and  wives,  and  women,"  she  had  been  born 
amidst  the  rejoicings  of  a  nation,  her  mother  a  princess  of 
the  haughtiest  house  in  Europe.  In  her  girlhood  she  had 
been  the  bride-elect  of  the  Emperor — a  lovely,  winning 
young  creature,  all  men  say.  In  her  seventeenth  year,  at 
the  age  when  girls  are  most  sensitive,  the  crushing  stroke 
which  blasted  her  whole  life  fell  upon  her.  Her  father, 
the  Parliament,  and  the  Church  of  her  country  called  her 
illegitimate ;  and  thus  branded,  she  was  sent  into  solitude 
to  brood  over  her  disgrace.  When  almost  all  England 
hailed  her  Queen  in  her  thirty-seventh  year,  she  was 
already  an  old  woman,  with  sallow  face,  harsh  voice,  her 
dark  bright  eyes  alone  telling  how  beautiful  she  had  once 
been.  But  the  nation  seemed  to  love  her  who  had  been 
so  long  yearning  for  affection ;  she  married  the  man  of  her 
choice;  and  she  felt  herself  the  instrument  selected  by 
Heaven  to  restore  an  excommunicated  nation  to  the  peace 
of  God.  Her  husband,  whom  she  idolised,  tired  of  living 
with  her  after  a  few  years.  The  child  she  passionately 
longed  for  and  pathetically  believed  to  be  coming  never 
came.1  The  Church  and  the  Pope  she  had  sacrificed  so 
much  for,  disregarded  her  entreaties,  and  seemed  careless 
of  her  troubles.  The  people  who  had  welcomed  her,  and 
whom  she  really  lovod,  called  her  "Bloody"  Mary, — a 
name  which  was,  after  all,  so  well  deserved  that  it  will 

1  There  are  few  more  pathetic  documents  among  the  State  Papers  than 
those  thus  catalogued  : 

"  King  Philip  and  Queen  Mary  to  Cardinal  Pole,  notifying  that  the  Queen 
has  been  delivered  of  a  Prince.*' 

"  Passport  signed  by  the  King  and  Queen  for  Sir  Henry  Sydney  to  go 
over  to  the  King  of  the  Romans  and  the  King  of  Bohemia,  to  announce  the 
Queen's  happy  delivery  of  a  Prince." 

There  are  several  such  notifications  all  ready  for  the  birth  which  never 
took  place.  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,  of  the  Reiyns  of 
JSdward  VI,,  Mary,  JMtea&ctk,  '1547-80  (London,  1856),  p.  67. 


384  THE   REACTION   UNDER   MARY 

always  remain.  Each  disappointment  she  took  as  a 
warning  from  Heaven  that  atonement  had  not  yet  been 
paid  for  England's  crimes,  and  the  fires  of  persecution  were 
kept  burning  to  appease  the  God  of  sixteenth  century 
Romanism. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  SETTLEMENT  UNDER  ELIZABETH.1 

MARY  TUDOE'S  health  had  long  been  frail,  and  when  it  was 
known  for  certain, that  she  would  leave  no  direct  heir  (i.e. 
from  ahout  June  1558),  the  people  of  England  were  silently 
coining  to  the  conclusion  that  Elizabeth  must  be  Queen,  or 
civil  war  would  result.  It  seemed  also  to  be  assumed  that 
she  would  be  a  Protestant,  and  that  her  chief  adviser  would 

1  SOURCES  :  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Elizabeth,  Foreign  (London,  1863, 
etc.) ;  Calendar  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots 
(Edinburgh,  1898,  etc.) ;  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Hatfield  MSS.  (London, 
1883);  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Venetian,  U58-8Q  (London,  1890); 
Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Spanish,  1553-67  (London,  18&2)  ;  Weiss, 
Papiers  d'ttat  du  Cardinal  Oranwlle,  vols,  iv.-yi.  (Paris,  1843-46) ; 
JBullarium  fiomanum,  for  two  Bulls — the  one  of  1559  (i.  840)  and  the  one 
deposing  Elizabeth  (ii.  324) ;  A  Collection  of  Original  Letters  from  the  Bishops 
to  the  Privy  Council,  1664  (vol.  ix.  of  the  Camden  Miscellany,  London, 
1893) ;  Calvin's  Letters  (vola.  xxxviii.-xlviii.  of  the  Corpus  Reformatomm) ; 
Zurich  Letters  (two  series)  (Parker  Society,  Cambridge,  1853)  j  Liturgies 
and  occasional  Forms  of  Prayer  set  forth  in  the  Jteign  of  Queen  Elizabeth 
(Parked  Society,  Cambridge,  1847) ;  Dysen,  Queene  Elizabeth's  Proclama- 
tion (1618). 

LATER  BOOKS:  Creighton,  Queen  Elizabeth  (London,  1896) ;  Hume,  The 
Courtships  of  Queen  Elizabeth  (London,  1896) ;  and  The  great  Lord  Bur ghley 
(London,  1898) ;  Philippson,  La  contre-rtvolution  religieuse  (Brussels, 
1884) ;  Ruble,  Le  traitd  de  Cateau-Cambrtsis  (Paris,  1889) ;  Gee,  The 
Elizabethan  Clergy  (Oxford,  1898) ;  and  The  Elizabethan  Prayer*£ook  and 
Ornaments  (London,  1P02) ;  Tomlinson,  The  Prayer-Book,  Articles  and 
Homilies  (London,  1897) ;  Hardwick,  History  of  the  Articles  of  lleliy\o% 
(Cambridge,  1859) ;  Lorimer,  John  JKnox  and  the  Church  of  Jtingland 
(London,  1875)  j  Neal,  History  of  the  Puritans  (London,  1754)  ;  P».rker, 
The  Ornaments  Rubric  (Oxford,  1881) ;  Shaw,  Elizabethan  Presbyte  nanism 
(English  Historical  Review,  iii.  655) ;  Cambridge  Modern  History,  ii.  550  ff.  j 
Frere, ,  History  of  the  English  Church  in  the  fteign*  of  Elizabeth,  aud  James, 
(London,  1904). 

25** 


386  THE  SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

be  "William  Cecil,  who  had  been  trained  in  statecraft  as 
secretary  to  England's  greatest  statesman,  the  Lord  Pro- 
tector Somerset.  So  it  fell  out. 

Many  things  contributed  to  create  such  expectations. 
The  young  intellectual  life  of  England  was  slowly  becoming 
Protestant.  Both  the  Spanish  ambassadors  noticed  this 
with  alarm,  and  reported  it  to  their  master.1  This  was 
especially  the  case  among  the  young  ladies  of  the  upper 
classes,  who  were  becoming  students  learned  in  Latin, 
Greek,  and  Italian,  and  at  the  same  time  devout  Protestants, 
with  a  distinct  leaning  to  what  afterwards  became  Puritan- 
ism. Elizabeth  herself,  at  her  most  impressionable  age  had 
been  the  pupil  of  Bishop  Hooper,  who  was  accustomed  to 
praise  her  intelligence.  "In  religious  matters  she  has 
been  saturated  ever  since  she  was  born  in  a  bitter  hatred 
to  our  faith/'  said  the  Bishop  of  Aquila.2  The  common 
people  had  been  shoeing  their  hatred  of  Eomanism,  and 
"images  and  religious  persons  were  treated  disrespect- 
fully." It  was  observed  that  Elizabeth  "  was  very  much 
wedded  to  the  people  and  thinks  as  they  do,"  and  that 
"her  attitude  was  much  more  gracious  to  the  common 
people  than  to  others."  3  The  burnings  of  the  Protestant 
martyrs,  and  especially  the  execution  of  Cranmer,  had 
stirred  the  indignation  of  the  populace  of  London  and  the 
south  counties  against  Eomanism,  and  the  feelings  were 
spreading  throughout  the  country.  All  classes  of  the 
people  hated  the  entire  subjugation  of  English  interests  to 
those  of  Spain  during  the  late  reign,  just  as  the  people  of 
Scotland  at  the  same  time  were  growing  weary  of  French 
domination  under  Mary  of  Lorraine,  and  Elizabeth  shared 
the  feeling  of  her  people.4 

Yet  there  was  so  much  in  the  political  condition  of 
the  times  to  make  both  Elizabeth  and  Cecil  pause  before 

1  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  JBnyUsh  Affairs,  pre- 
served principally  in  the  Archives  of  tfvniancas  (London,  1892),  i.  p.  7. 

2  Ibid.  p.  89.     In  the  same  letter  the  Bishop  blames  the  instructions  of 
the  "Italian  keretic  friars,"  i.e.  Peter  Martyr  Vermigli  and  Oohino ;  of. 
p.  81. 

*  Ibid.  pp.  1,  4,  5,  etc.  «  Ibid.  pp.  3,  77. 


THE  CONDITION  OF  ENGLAND        387 

committing  themselves  to  the  Keformation,  that  it  is 
necessary  to  believe  that  religious  conviction  had  a  great 
influence  in  determining  their  action.  England  was  not 
the  powerful  nation  in  1558—60  which  it  became  after 
twenty  years  tinder  the  rule  of  the  great  Queen.  The 
agrarian  troubles  which  had  disturbed  the  three  reigns  of 
Henry  VIIL,  Edward,  and  Mary  had  not  died  out  Tbo 
coinage  was  still  as  debased  as  it  had  been  in  the  closing 
years  of  Henry  VIIL  Trade  was  stagnant,  and  the  country 
was  suffering  from  a  two  years'  visitation  of  the  plague. 
The  war  with  France,  into  which  England  had  been 
dragged  by  Spain,  had  not  merely  drained  the  country  of 
men  and  money,  but  was  bringing  nothing  save  loss  of 
territory  and  damage  to  prestige.  Nor  was  there  much 
to  be  hoped  from  foreign  aid.  The  Eomanist  reaction  was 
in  full  swing  throughout  Europe,  and  the  fortunes  of  the 
continental  Protestants  were  at  their  lowest  ebb.  It  was 
part  of  the  treaty  of  Gateau-  Oauibresis  (April  1559)  that 
France  and  Spain  should  unite  to  crush  the  Protestantism 
of  the  whole  of  Europe,  and  the  secret  treaty  between 
Philip  IL  and  Catherine  de'  Medici  in  1565  l  showed  that 
such  a  design-  was  thought  possible  of  accomplishment 
during  the  earlier  years  of  Elizabeth.  It  was  never 
wholly  abandoned  until  the  defeat  of  the  Armada  in  1588. 
Cecil's  maxim,,  that  the  Reformation  could  not  be  crushed 
until  England  had  been  conquered,  had  for  its  corollary 
that  the  conquest  of  England  must  be  the  prime  object  of 
the  Komanist  sovereigns  who  were  bent  on  bringing  Europe 
back  to  the  obedience  of  Eome.  The  determination  to 
take  the  Protestant  side  added  to  the  insecurity  of 
Elizabeth's  position  in  the  earlier  years  of  her  reign.  She 
was,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Pope  and  probably  of  all  the 
European  Powers,  Romanist  and  Protestant,  illegitimate  ; 
and  heresy  combined  with  bantardy  was  a  terrible  weapon 
in  the  hands  of  Honry  IL  of  France,  who  meant  to  support 
the  claims  of  his  daughtor-in-law,  the  'young  Queen  of 


of  Letters  and  Mate  Papers  relating  to  Engli&h,  Affairs, 
Introduction,  p.  lv. 


388  THE  SETTLEMENT  UNDER  ELIZABETH 

Scots, — undoubtedly  the  lawful  heir  in  the  eyes  of  all  who 
believed  that  Henry  VIIL  had  been  lawfully  married  to 
Catharine  of  Aragon.  The  Spanish  Ambassador,  Count  de 
Feria,  tried  to  frighten  Elizabeth  by  reminding  her  how, 
in  consequence  of  a  papal  excommunication,  Navarre  had 
been  seized  by  the  King  of  Spain.1  His  statement  to  his 
iBaster,  that  at  her  accession  two-thirds  of  the  English 
people  were  Eomanists,2  may  be  questioned  (he  made 
many  miscalculations),  but  it  is  certain  that  England  was 
anything  but  a  united  Protestant  nation.  Still,  who  knew 
what  trouble  Philip  might  have  in  the  Netherlands,  and 
the  Lords  of  the  Congregation  might  be  encouraged  enough 
to  check  French  designs  on  England  through  Scotland.3 
At  the  worst,  Philip  of  Spain  would  not  like  to  see 
England  wholly  in  the  grip  of  France.  The  Queen  and 
Cecil  made  up  their  minds  to  take  the  risk,  and  England 
was  to  be  Protestant  and  defy  the  Pope,  from  "  whom 
nothing  was  to  be  feared  but  evil-  will,  cursing,  and 
practising." 

Paul  iv.,  it  was  said,  was  prepared  to  receive  the  news 
of  Elizabeth's  succession  favourably,  perhaps  under  con- 
ditions to  guarantee  her  legitimacy;  but  partly  to  his 
astonishment,  and  certainly  to  his  wrath,  he  was  not  even 
officially  informed  of  her  accession,  $nd  the  young  Queen's 
ambassador  at  Rome  was  told  that  she  had  no  need  for 
him  there. 

The  changes  at  home,  however,  were  made  with  all  due 
caution.  In  Elizabeth's  first  proclamation  an  "  et  cetera  " 
veiled  any  claim  to  be  the  Head  of  the  Church,4  and 
her  earliest  meddling  with  ecclesiastical  matters  was  to 
forbid  all  contentious  preaching.5  The  statutory  religion 
(Romanist)  was  to  be  maintained  for  the  'meantime.  No 

1  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  IshigUsh  Affairs,  etc. 
p.  62. 

*lbid.  pp.  39,  67;  cf.  83. 

8  Of.  Device  in  Gee's  Elizabethan  Prayer-Book,  p.  197. 

4  Strype,  Annafo  of  the  ^formation  and  Establishment  of  Religion,  etc. 
(Oxford,  1824)  I.  ii,  389. 

0  Gee  and  Hardr,  Documents)  etc.  p.  416. 


GODERICK'S  ADVICE  389 

official  proclamation  was  made  foreshadowing  coming 
changes. 

Elizabeth,  however,  did  not  need  to  depend  on  proclama- 
tions to  indicate  to  her  people  the  path  she  meant  to  tread. 
She  graciously  accepted  the  Bible  presented  to  her  on  her 
entry  into  London,  clasped  it  to  her  bosom,  and  pressed  it 
to  her  lips.  Her  hand  ostentatiously  shrank  from  the  kiss  of 
Bonner  the  persecutor.  The  great  lawyer,  Goderick,  pointed 
out  ways  in  which  Protestant  feeling  might  find  vent  in  a 
legal  manner ; 

"  In  the  meantime  Her  Majesty  and  all  her  subjects  may 
by  licence  of  law  use  the  English  Litany  and  suffrages  used 
in  King  Henry's  time,  and  besides  Her  Majesty  in  her  closet 
may  use  the  Mass  without  lifting  up  the  Host  according  to 
the  ancient  canons,  and  may  also  have  at  every  Mass  sonie 
communicants  with  the  ministers  to  be  used  in  both  kinds." l 

The  advice  was  acted  upon,  improved  upon.  "  The  affairs 
of  religion  continue  as  usual,"  says  the  Venetian  agent 
(Dec.  17th,  1558),  "but  I  hear  that  at  Court  when  the 
Queen  is  present  a  priest  officiates,  who  says  certain 
prayers  with  the  Litanies  in  English,  after  the  fashion  of 
King  Edward."  2  She  went  to  Mass,  but  asked  the  Bishop 
officiating  not  to  elevate  the  Host  for  adoration ;  and  when 
he  refused  to  comply,  she  and  her  ladies  swept  out  of 
church  immediately  after  the  Gospel  was  read.8  Parlia- 
ment was  opened  in  the  usual  manner  with  the  per- 
formance of  Mass,  but  the  Queen  did  not  appear  until  it 
was  over;  and  then  her  procession  was  preceded  by  a 
choir  which  sang  hymns  in  English.  When  the  Abbot  of 
Westminster  met  her  in  ecclesiastical  procession  with  the 
usual  candles  sputtering  in  the  hands  of  his  clergy,  the 

1  Goderick's  Dwwa  Points  of  Religion  contrary  to  the  Church  of  Rome  is 
printed  by  Dr.  Gee  in  the  appendix  to  his  JSlizabethan  Prayer-JSook  and 
Ornament*  (London,  1902),  pp.  202  ff.  ;  the  sentence  quoted  is  on  p.  205 ; 
the  document  is  also  in  Dixon's  History  of  the  Church  ofJSfagland,  v.  28. 

3  Venetian  State  Papers,  W$B-8Q>  1. 

8  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  English,  Affairs,  pre- 
served chiefly  in  the  Archives  of  Simancas>  L  17,  25. 


390  THE   SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

Queen  shouted,  "  Away  with  these  torches,  we  have  light 
enough."  x 

She  was  crowned  on  January  15th,  1559  ;  but  whether 
with  all  the  customary  ceremonies,  it  is  impossible  to  say ; 
it  is  most  likely  that  she  did  not  communicate.2  The 
Bishops  swore  fealty  in  the  usual  way,  but  were  chary  of 
taking  any  official  part  in  the  coronation  of  one  so  plainly 
a  heretic.  Later  in  the  day,  Dr.  Cox,  who  had  been  King 
Edward's  tutor,  and  was  one  of  the  returned  refugees, 
preached  before  the  Queen.  As  early  as  Dec.  14th 
(1558)  the  Spanish  Ambassador  could  report  that  the 
Queen  "is  every  day  standing  up  against  religion 
(Eomanism)  more  openly/'  and  that  "  all  the  heretics  who 
had  escaped  are  beginning  to  flock  back  again  from 
Germany/3  3 

When  Convocation  met  it  became  manifest  that  the 
clergy  would  not  help  the  Government  in  the  proposed 
changes.  They  declared  in  favour  of  transubstantiation 
and  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  and  against  the  royal 
supremacy.  The  Reformation,  it  was  seen,  must  be  carried 
through  by  the  civil  power  exclusively ;  and  it  was  somewhat 
difficult  to  forecast  what  Parliament  would  consent  to  do. 

"What  was  actually  done  is  still  matter  of  debate,  but 
it  seems  probable  that  the  Government  presented  at  least 
three  Bills.  The  first  was  withdrawn;  the  second  was 
wrecked  by  the  Queen  withholding  her  Eoyal  Assent ;  the 
third  resulted  in  the  Act  of  Supremacy  and  in  the  Act  of 
Uniformity.  It  is  most  likely  that  the  first  and  second 
Bills,  which  did  not  become  law,  included  in  one  proposed 
Act  of  legislation  the  proposals  of  the  Government  about 
the  Queen's  Supremacy  and  about  Uniformity  of  Public 
Worship.4  The  first  was  introduced  into  the  House  of 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,  of  the  J&eigns  of  JEdward  p/., 
Mary,  and  Elizabeth  (London,  1856),  i.  123. 

2  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  English  JJfairs,  pre- 
served chiefly  in  the  Archives  of  Simancas,  i.  25. 

8  MA.  pp.  7,  12. 

*  English  Historical  Review  for  July  1903,  pp.  517  ff.  ;  Dublin  Meview, 
Jail.  1908  ;  The  Church  Intelligencer,  Sept.  1903,  pp. 


THE  LORDS    OPPOSE   THE   REFORMATION         391 

Commons  on  Feb.  9th  (1559),  was  discussed  there  Feb. 
13th  to  16th,  and  then  withdrawn.  A  "  new "  Bill  "  for 
the  supremacy  annexed  to  the  Crown  "  was  introduced  in 
the  Commons  on  Feb.  21st,  passed  the  third  reading  on 
the  25th,  and  was  sent  to  the  Lords  on  the  27th.1 

The  majority  in  the  House  of  Commons  was  Protestant  \ 2 
but  the  Marian  Bishops  had  great  influence  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  and  it  was  there  that  the  Government  proposals 
met  with  strong  opposition.  Dr.  Jewel  describes  the 
situation  in  a  letter  to  Peter  Martyr  (March  20th): 

"  The  bishops  are  a  great  hindrance  to  us ;  for  being,  as 
you  know,  among  the  nobility  and  leading  men  in  the 
Tipper  House,  and  having  none  there  on  our  side  to  expose 
their  artifices  and  confute  their  falsehoods,  they  reign  as 
sole  monarchs  in  the  midst  of  ignorant  and  weak  men,  and 
easily  overreach  our  little  party,  either  by  their  numbers 
or  their  reputation  for  learning.  The  Queen,  meanwhile, 
though  she  openly  favours  our  cause,  yet  is  wonderfully 
afraid  of  allowing  any  innovations."  s 

The  Bill  (BUI  No.  2 — the  "new"  Bill),  which  had  passed 
the  Commons  on  the  25th,  was  read  for  the  first  time  in 
the  Lords  on  the  28th,  passed  the  second  reading  on  March 
1 3th,  and  was  referred  to  a  Committee  consisting  of  the  Duke 
of  Norfolk,  the  Bishops  of  Exeter  and  Carlisle,  and  Lords 
Winchester,  Westmoreland,  Shrewsbury,  Eutland,  Sussex, 
Pembroke,  Montagu,  Clinton,  Morley,  Eich,  Willoughby, 
and  North.  They  evidently  made  such  alterations  on  the 
Bill  as  to  make  that  part  of  it  at  least  which  enforced  a 
radical  change  in  public  worship  useless  for  the  purpose  of 

1  Of.  Tomlinson,  "Elizabethan  Prayer-Book:  chronological  table  of  its 
enactment,"  in  Church  Gazette  for  Oct.  1906,  p.  233. 

2  Dublin  Review,  Jan.  1903,  p,  48  n :  "  Ad  quem  eundem  locum  (House 
of  Commons)  isti  convenerunt  (ut  communis  fertur  opinio)  ad  numerum 
ducentorum  virorum,  et  non  decent  catholici  inter  illos  aunt  reperti." 

8  Zurich  Letters,  i.  10  (Parker  Society,  Cambridge,  1842) ;  of.  Calendar 
of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  English  Jffairs,  preserved  principally 
in  the  Archives  of  SimancaS)  1558~67,  p.  88  t  "To-morrow  it  (the  Bill)  goes 
to  the  Upper  House,  where  the  bishops  and  some  others  are  ready  to'  die 
rather  than  consent  to  it," 


392  THE  SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

the  Government.  The  clearest  account  of  what  the  Lords 
did  is  contained  in  a  letter  of  a  person  who  signs 
himself  "II  Schifanoya,"  which  is  preserved  in  the  State 
Archives  in  Mantua.1  He  says : 

"  Parliament,  which  ought  to  have  ended  last  Saturday, 
was  prolonged  till  next  Wednesday  in  Passion  Week,  and 
according  to  report  they  will  return  a  week  after  Easter 
(March  26,  1559);  which  report  I  believe,  because  of  the 
three  principal  articles  the  first  alone  passed,  viz.  to  give 
the  supremacy  of  the  Anglican  Church  to  the  Queen  .  .  . 
notwithstanding  the  opposition  of  the  bishops,  and  of  the 
chief  lords  and  barons  of  this  kingdom;  but  the  Earls  of 
Arundel  and  Derby,  who  are  very  good  Christians,  absented 
themselves  from  indisposition,  feigned,  as  some  think,  to 
avoid  consulting  about  such  ruin  of  this  realm. 

The  Earl  of  Pembroke,  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  Viseoui*t 
Montague  and  Lord  Hastings  did  not  fail  in  their  duty,  like 
true  soldiers  of  Christ,  to  resist  the  Commons,  whom  they 
compelled  to  modify  a.  book  passed  "by  the  Commons  forbidding 
the  Mass  to  be  said  or  the  Communion  to  le  administered  (ne 
se  communicassero)  except  at  the  table  in  the  manner  of 
Edward  vi. ;  nor  were  the  Divine  offices  to  be  performed  in 
church;  priests  likewise  being  allowed  to  marry,  and  the 
Christian  religion  and  the  Sacraments  being  absolutely 
abolished;  adding  thereto  many  extraordinary  penalties 
against  delinquents.  By  a  majority  of  votes  they  have 
decided  that  the  aforesaid  things  shall  be  expunged  from 
the  book,  and  that  the  Masses,  Sacraments,  and  the  rest  of 
the  Divine  offices"  shall  be  performed  as  hitherto.  .  .  .  Tbe 
members  of  the  Lower  House,  seeing  that  the  Lords  passed 
this  article  of  the  Queen's  supremacy  of  the  Church,  but 
not  as  the  Commons  drew  it  up, — the  Lords  cancelling  the 
aforesaid  clauses  and  modifying  some  others, — grew  angry, 
and  would  consent  to  nothing,  but  are  in  very  great  con- 
troversy."3 

The  Lords,  induced  by  the  Marian  Bishops,  had  wrecked 
the  Government's  plan  for  an  alteration  of  religion. 

The  Queen  then  intervened.     She  refused  her  assent 

1  For  "II  Schifauoya "  and  his  trustworthiness,  of.  Calendar  of  State 
Papers,  fynetiafy  1558-80,  Preface  viii. 
3  Ibid.  p.  52. 


THE    ACT   OF  SUPREMACY  393 

to  the  Bill,  on  the  dexterous  pretext  that  she  had  doubts 
about  the  title  which  it  proposed  to  confer  upon  her — 
Supwme  Head  of  the  Church.1  She  knew  that  Romanists 
and  Calvinists  both  disliked  it,  and  she  adroitly  managed 
to  make  both  parties  think  that  she  had  yielded  to  the 
arguments  which  each  had  brought  forward.  The  Spanish 
Ambassador  took  all  the  credit  to  himself ;  and  Sandys  was 
convinced  that  Elizabeth  had  been  persuaded  by  Mr. 
Lever,  who  "  had  put  a  scruple  into  the  Queen's  head  that 
she  would  not  take  the  title  of  Supreme  Head."  2 

The  refusal  of  Royal  Assent  enabled  the  Government 
to  start  afresh.  They  no  longer  attempted  to  put  every- 
thing in  one  Bill.  A  new  Act  of  Supremacy,3  in  which 
the  Queen  was  declared  to  be  "  the  only  supreme  governor 
of  this  realm  ...  as  well  in  all  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical 
things  or  causes  as  temporal,"  was  introduced  into  the 
Commons  on  April  10th,  and  was  read  for  a  third  time  on 
the  13th.  Brought  into  the  Lords  on  April  14th,  it  was 
read  for  a  second  time  on  the  17th,  and  finally  passed  on 
April  29th.  If  the  obnoxious  title  was  omitted,  all  the 
drastic  powers  claimed  by  Henry  vm.  were  given  to 
Elizabeth.  The  Elizabethan  Act  revived  no  less  than  nine 
of  the  Acts  of  Henry  vm.,4  and  among  them  the  statute 

1  Canon  Dixon  (History  of  tTie  Church  of  England,  v.  67)  declares  that 
the  phrase  "  Supreme  Head  "  was  not  in  the  Bill.  He  has  overlooked  the 
fact  that  Heath  in  his  speech  against  it  quotes  the  actual  words  used  in  the 
proposed  Act:  "I  promised  to  move  your  honours  to  consider  what  this 
supremacy  is  which  we  go  about  by  virtue  of  this  Act  to  give  to  the  Queen's 
Highness,  and  wherein  it  doth  consist,  as  whether  in  spiritual  government 
or  in  temporal.  If  in  spiritual,  like  as  the  words  of  the  Act  do  import, 
scilicet :  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England  immediate  and  nesot  under 
God,  then  it  would  be  considered  whether  this  House  hathe  authority  to 
grant  them,  and  Her  Highness  to  receive  the  same  "  (Strype,  Anna2s>  r.  i. 
405). 

3  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  English  Affairs,  pre- 
served chiefly  in  the  Archives  of  Simancas,  1558-80,  pp.  37,  44,  50,  55, 
66  ;  Parker's  Correspondence^  p.  66  j  Zurich  Letters,  i.  88. 

3  The  Act  is  printed  in  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  442. 

4  The  Acts  of  Honry  vm.  which  wore  revived  were: — 24  Hen.  vm.  c. 
1%—The  fiestrafatof  Appeals,  passed  in  1583  ;  28  Hen.  vni.  c,  20—  The 
conditional  Restraint  ofAnnates ;  '25  Hen.  vm.  c.  10— The  Submission  of  the 


394  THE   SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

concerning  doctors  of  civil  law,1  which  contained  these 
sentences :  "  Most  royal  majesty  is  and  hath  always  been, 
by  the  Word  of  God,  Supreme  Head  on  earth  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  hath  full  power  and  authority  to 
correct,  punish,  and  repress  all  manner  of  heresies  .  .  . 
and  to  exercise  all  other  manner  of  jurisdiction  commonly 
called  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  "  ;  and  his  majesty  is  "  the 
only  and  undoubted  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  also  of  Ireland,  to  whom  by  Holy  Scripture 
all  authority  and  power  is  wholly  given  to  hear  and 
determine  all  manner  of  causes  ecclesiastical."  Thus  the 
very  title  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England  was 
revived  and  bestowed  on  Elizabeth  by  this  Parliament  of 
1559.  Tt  may  even  be  said  that  the  ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction  bestowed  upon  Elizabeth  was  more  extensive 
than  that  given  to  her  father,  for  schisms  were  added  to 
the  list  of  matters  subject  to  the  Queen's  correction,  and 
she  was  empowered  to  delegate  her  authority  to  com- 
missioners.— a  provision  which  enabled  her  to  exercise  her 
supreme-  governership  in  a  way  to  be  felt  in  every  corner 
of  the  land.a  This  Act  of  Supremacy  revived  an  Act  of 
King  Edward  VL,  enjoining  that  the  communion  should 
be  given  in  both  "kinds,"  and  declared  that  the  revived 
Act-  should  take  effect  from  the  last  day  of  Parliament.3 
It  contained  an  interesting  proviso  that  nothing  should 
be  judged  to  be  heresy  which  was  not  condemned  by 
canonical  Scripture,  or  by  the  first  four  General  Councils 
"  oar  any  of  them."  * 

The  same  Parliament,  after  briefer  debate  (April  1 8th 

CVergy  and  I&stradnt  of  Appeals  of  1584 ?  25  Hen.  vm.  c.  20— The  Ecclesi- 
astical Appointments  A  ct ;  The  absolute  JRestraint  of  Annates,  Election  of 
Bishops,  and  Letters  Missive  Act  of  1534  ;  25  Hen.  vm.  c.  21 — Actforbidding 
Papal  Dispensations  and  the  Payment  of  Peter's  Pence  of  1684 ;  26  Hen. 
Tin.  c.  l±— Suffragan  Bishops'  Act  tf  1534  ;  and  28  Hen.  vm.  c.  16— Act 
for  the  Release  of  such  as  Jiave  obtained  pretended  Dispensations  from  the  See  of 
Rome.  These  Acts  are  all,  save  the  last  mentioned,  printed  in  Gee  and 
Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  pp.  178-232,  253-56. 

1  Ibid.  p.  445.  *JMd.  p.  447. 

3  Ibid.  p.  446.  4  Hid.  p.  455. 


THE   ACT  OF   UNIFORMITY  395 

to  28th),  passed  an  Act  of  Uniformity  which  took  an 
interesting  form.1  The  Act  began  by  declaring  that  at  the 
death  of  King  Edward  vi.  there  "  remained  one  uniform 
order  of  common  service  and  prayer,  and  of  the  administra- 
tion of  sacraments,  rites,  and  ceremonies  in  the  Church  of 
England,  which  was  set  forth  in  one  Book,  entitled  The 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  Administration  of  the  Sacra- 
ments and  other  Rites  and  Ceremonies  in  the  Church  of 
England!9  This  Book  had  been  authorised  by  Act  of 
Parliament  held  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  years  of  King 
Edward  VL,  and  this  Act  had  been  repealed  by  an  Act  of 
Parliament  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary 
"  to  the  great  decay  of  the  due  honour  of  God,  and  dis- 
comfort of  the  professors  of  the  truth  of  Christ's  religion." 
This  Act  of  Queen  Mary  was  solemnly  repealed,  and  the 
Act  of  King  Edward  VL,  with  some  trifling  alterations,  was 
restored.  In  consequence,  "  all  and  singular  ministers  in 
any  cathedral  or  parish  church  "  were  ordered  "  to  say  and 
use  the  Matins,  Evensong,  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  administration  of  each  of  the  sacraments,  and 
all  their  common  and  open  prayer,  in  such  order  and  form 
as  is  mentioned  in  the  said  Book,  so  authorised  by 
Parliament  in  the  said  fifth  and  sixth  years  of  the  reign  of 
King  Edward  VL,  with  one  alteration  or  Addition  of  certain 
lessons  to  be  used  on  every  Sunday  in  the  year,  and  the 
form  of  the  Litany  altered  and  corrected,  and  two  sentences 
only  added  in  the  delivery  of  the  sacrament  to  the  com- 
municants, and  none  other  or  otherwise."  This  meant  that 
while  there  might  be  the  fullest  freedom  of  'thought  in 
the  country  and  a  good  deal  of  liberty  of  expression,  there 
was  to  be  no  freedom  of  public  worship.  All  Englishmen, 
of  whatever  creed,  were  to  be  compelled  by  law  to  join  in 
one  common  public  worship  according  to  the  ritual 
prescribed.  The  Act  of  Parliament  which  compelled  them 
to  this  had  no  specific  Book  of  Common  Prayer  annexed  to 
it  and  incorporated  in  it.  It  simply  replaced  on  the 
Statute  Book  the  Act  of  Kirig  Edward  vi.,  and  with  it 
1  The  Act  is  printed  in  Gee  and  Hardy,  Docwwnts,  etc.  pp.  458  ff. 


396  THE  SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

tjxe  Second  Prayer-Book  of  King  Edward,  which  with  its 
rubrics  had  been  "  annexed  and  joined "  to  that  Act 1  — 
certain  specified  alterations  in  the  Book  being  notified  in 
the  Elizabethan  Act. 

The  history  of  the  Elizabethan  Prayer-Book  is  con- 
fessedly obscure.  If  an  important  paper  called  the  Device? 
probably  drafted  by  Cecil,  embodied  the  intentions  of  the 
Government,  their  procedure  may  be  guessed  with  some 
probability.  It  enumerates  carefully,  after  the  manner  of 
the  great  Elizabethan  statesman,  the  dangers  involved  in 
any  "  alteration  of  religion,"  and  shows  how  they  can  be 
met  or  averted.  France  and  Scotland  can  be  treated 
diplomatically.  Borne  may  be  left  unheeded — it  is  far 
away,  and  its  opposition  will  not  go  beyond  "  evil  will  and 
cursing."  The  important  dangers  were  at  home.  They 
would  come  from  two  sides — from  the  Eomanists  backed 
by  most  of  the  higher  clergy ;  and  from  the  advanced 
Eeformers,  who  would  scoff  at  the  alteration  which  is  alone 
possible  in  the  condition  of  the  kingdom,  and  would  call  it 
a  "  cloaked  papistry  and  a  mingle-mangle."  Yet  both  may 
be  overcome  by  judicious  firmness.  The  Komanists  may 
be  coerced  by  penal  laws.  The  danger  from  the  advanced 
Eeformers  may  be  got  over  by  a  carefully  drafted  Prayer- 
Book,  made  as  far  as  possible  to  their  liking,  and  enforced 
by  such  penalties  as  would  minimise  all  objections.  There 
is  great  hope  that  such  penalties  would  "  touch  but  few." 
"And  better  it  were  that  they  did  suffer  than  Her 
Highness  or  Commonwealth  should  shake  or  be  in  danger." 
The  Device  suggested  that  a  small  committee  of  seven 
divines — all  of  them  well-known  Eeformers,  and  most'  of 
them  refugees — should  prepare  a  Book  "which,  being 
approved  by  Her  Majesty,"  might  be  laid  before  Parliament. 
It  was  evidently  believed  that  the  preparation  of  the  Book 
would  take  some  time,  for  suggestion  is  made  that  food, 
drink,  wood,  and  coals  should  be  provided  for  their  sus- 

1  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  371. 

2  The  Device  is  printed  in  Strype,  Annals,  etc.  r.  ii.  392,  and  in  Gee'a 
JSlisxdetJum  Prayer  Book  and  Ornaments  (London,  1902),  p.  195. 


THE  ELIZABETHAN    PRAYER   BOOK  397 

tenance  and  ,  comfort.  There  is  no  direct  evidence  to  show 
that  the  suggested  committee  met  or  was  even  appointed  ; 
but  evidence  has  been  brought  forward  to  show  that  mosfc 
of  the  theologians  named  were  in  London,  and  were  in  a 
position  to  meet  together  and  consult  during  the  period 
when  such  a  Book  would  naturally  be  prepared.1  The 
whole  matter  is  shrouded  in  mystery,  and  secrecy  was 
probably  .necessary  in  the  circumstances.  No  one  knew 
exactly  what  was  to  take  place ;  but  some  change  was 
universally  expected.  "  There  is  a  general  expectation 
that  all  rites  and  ceremonies  will  shortly  be  reformed," 
said  Eichard  Hilles,  writing  to  Bullinger  in  the  end  of 
February  (1559),  "  by  our  faithful  citizens  and  other  godly 
men  in  the<  afore-mentioned  Parliament,  either  after  the 
pattern  which  was  lately  in  use  in  the  time  of  King 
Edward  the  Sixth,  or  which  is  set  forth  by  the  Protestant 
Princes  of  Germany  in  the  afore-mentioned  Confession  of 
Augsburg."  2 

The  authorities  kept  their  own  counsel,  and  nothing 
definite,  was  known  to  outsiders.  A  Book  was  presented 
to  the  Commons — The  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and 
Ministration  of  the  Sacraments — on  Feb.  16th,  at  the  time 
when  the  first  draft  of  the  Supremacy  Bill  was  being 
discussed.8  It  must  have  been  withdrawn  along  with 
that  Bill.  The  second  attempt  at  a  Supremacy  Act  was 
probably  accompanied  with  a  Prayer-Book  annexed  to  the 
Bill ;  and  this  Prayer-Book  was  vehemently  opposed  in  the 
Lords,  who  struck  out  all  the  clauses  relating  to  it.4 
What  this  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was,  cannot  be  exactly 
known.  Many  competent  liturgist  scholars  are  inclined 

1  Gee's  Elizabethan  Prayer-Book  and  Ornaments,  pp.  76 /, 

a  Zurich  Letters,  ii.  17. 

8  The  Journal  of  the  House  of  Commons,  i.  54  :  "  The  Bill  for  the  Order 
of  Service  and  Ministers  in  the  Church  "  (Feb.  15th) ;  The  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer  and  Ministration  of  Sacraments  (Feb.  16th). 

4  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Venetian,  1558-80 \  p.  45  :  "a  book  passed 
by  the  Commons "  ;  of.  above,  p.  392  ;  of.  also  Bishop  Scot's  speech  on 
the  reading  of  the  Bill  which  was  emasculated  by  the  Lords,  in  Strype'e 
Annah,  I.  ii.  408. 


398'  THE  SETTLEMENT  UNDER   ELIZABETH 

to  believe  that  it  was  something  more  drastic  than  the 
Edwardine  Prayer-Book  of  1552,  and  that  it  was  proposed 
to  enforce  it  by  penalties  more  drastic  than  those  enacted 
by  the  Act  of  Uniformity  which  finally  passed.  They  find 
the  characteristic  features  of  the-  Book  in  the  well-known 
letter  of  Guest  (Geste)  to  Cecil1  Such  suggestions  are 
mere  conjectures.  The  Book  may  have  been  the  Edwardine 
Prayer-Book  of  1552. 

The  Government  had  made  slow  progress  with  their 
proposed  "alteration  of  religion,"  and  the  Protestant 
party  were  chafing  at  the  delay.  Easter  was  approaching, 
and  its  nearness  made  them  more  impatient.  Canon  law 
required  everyone  to  communicate  on  Easter  Day,  which 
in  1559  fell  on  the  26th  of  March,  and  by  a  long 
'established  custom  the  laity  of  England  had  gone  to  the 
Lord's  Table  on  that  one  day  of  the  year.  Men  were 
asking  whether  it  was  possible  that  a  whole  year  was  to 
elapse  before  they  could  partake  of  the  communion  in  a 
Protestant  fashion.  The  House  of  Commons  was  full  of 
this  Protestant  sentiment.  The  reactionary  proceedings 
in  the  House  of  Lords  urged  them  to  some  protest.2  A 
Bill  was  introduced  into  the  Lower  House  declaring  that 
"  no  person  shall  be  punished  for  now  using  the  religion 
used  in  King  Edward's  last  year."  It  was  read  twice  and 
engrossed  in  one  day  (March  15th),  and  was  read  a  third 
time  and  passed  on  March  18th.s  It  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  before  the  Lords ;  but  it  was  acted  on  in  a 
curious  way.  A  proclamation,  dated  March  22nd,  declares 
that  the  Queen,  "  with  the  assent  of  Lords  and  Commons," 

3  Dr.  Gee  rejects  the  idea  that  Guest's  letter  had  anything  to  do  with  the 
Book  passed  by  the  Commons  and  rejected  by  the  Lords  ;  cf.  his  Elizabethan 
Prayer-Book  and  Ornaments,  pp.  32  ff. ;  and  for  a  criticism  of  Dr.  Gee, 
Tomlinson,  The  Elizabethan  Prayer- Book  and  Ornaments;  a  Review,  p.  12. 
'Guest's  letter  is  printed  by  Dr.  Gee  in  his  Elizabethan  Prayer-Book,  etc. 
p.  152,  and  more  accurately  by  Mr.  Tomlinson  in  his  tract,  Why  was  the 
First  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  VI.  rejected? 

a"Il  Sohifanoya "  reports  the  wrath  of  the  Commons:  They  "grew 
angry,  and  would  consent  to  nothing,  but  are  in  very  great  controversy " 
^(Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Venetian,  1558-80,  p.  52) ;  cf.  p.  892, 

3  Journal  of  the  House  of  Commons,  i.  57. 


THE  ELIZABETHAN   PRAYER   BOOK  399 

in  the  "  present  last  session,"  has  revived  the  Act  of  King 
Edward  vi.  touching  the  reception  of  the  Communion  in 
both  "kinds,"  and  explains  that  the  Act  cannot  be  ready 
for  Easter.  It  proceeds :  "  And  because  the  time  of  Easter 
is  so  at  hand,  and  that  great  numbers,  not  only  of  the 
noblemen  and  gentry,  but  also  of  the  common  people  of 
this  realm,  be  certainly  persuaded  in  conscience  in  such 
sort  as  they  cannot  be  induced  in  any  wise  to  communicate 
or  receive  the  said  holy  Sacrament  but  under  both  kinds, 
according  to  the  first  institution,  and  to  the  common  use 
both  of  the  Apostles  and  of  the  Primitive  Church  ...  it 
is  thought  necessary  to  Her  Majesty,  by  the  advice  of 
sundry  of  her  nobility  and  commons  lately  assembled  in 
Parliament,"  to  declare  that  the  statute  of  Edward  is  in 
force,  and  all  and  sundry  are  commanded  to  observe  the 
provisions  of  the  statute.3  What  is  more,  the  Queen 
acted  upon  her  proclamation.  The  well-informed  "  Schi- 
fanoya,"  writing  on  March  28th,  says  that  the  Government 
"during this  interval  (i.e.  between  March  22nd  and  March 
28th)  had  ordered  and  printed  a  proclamation  for  every 
one  to  take  the  communion  in  both  "  kinds  "  (sul  utrctque 
specie).  He  goes  on  to  say  that  on  Easter  Day  "  Her 
Majesty  appeared  in  chapel,  where  Mass  was  sung  in 
English,  according  to  the  use  of  her  brother,  Kimg  Edward, 
and  the  communion  received  in  both  'kinds/  kneeling." 
The  chaplain  wore  nothing  "  but,  the  mere  surplice  "  (fe 
sempltce  cotta)?  The  news  went  the  round  of  Europe. 

1  Professor  Maitland   (English  Historical  JRwiew,  July  1903,  p.  527^.) 
and  Father  J.  H.   Pollen  (tMWin  JReview,  January  1903)  think  that  this 
proclamation  of  the  22nd  of  March  was  never  issued  ;  but  "II  Schifanoya  " 
can  hardly  refer  to  any  other. 

2  "  On  Easter  Day,  Her  Majesty  appeared  in  the  chapel,  where  Mass  was 
sung  in  English,  according  to  the  use  of  her  brother,  King  Edward,  and  the 
communion  was  received  in  both  'kinds,'  kneeling,  facendoli  il  sacerdote  let 
credenza,  del  eorpo  efr  sangue  prima  ;  nor  did  he  wear  anything  but  the  mere 
surplice  (la  semplice  cotta),   having   divested  himself  of  the  vestments 
(U  pwtmenti)  in  which  he  had  sung  Mass ;  and  thus  Her  Majesty  was 
followed  by  many  Lords  both  of  the  Council  and  others.    Since  that  day 
things  have  returned  to  their  former  state,  though  unless  the  Almighty 
stretch  forth  His  arm  a  relapse  i,s  expected.    These  accursed  preachers,  who 


400  THE  SETTLEMENT    UNDER    ELIZABETH 

Elizabeth  had  at  last  declared  herself  unmistakably  on 
the  Protestant  side. 

Easter  had  come  and  gone,  and  the  religious  question 
had  not  received  final  settlement.  The  authorities  felt 
that  something  must  be  done  to  counteract  the  speeches 
of  the  Eomanist  partisans  in  the  Lords,1  So,  while 
Parliament  was  sitting,  a  conference  was  arranged  between 
Koman  Catholic  and  Protestant  divines.  It  seems  to  have 
been  welcomed  by  both  parties.  Count  Feria,  the  Spanish 
Ambassador,  declared  that  he  had  something  to  do  with  it. 
He  was  anxious  that  the  disputation  should  be  in  Latin, 
that  the  arguments  should  be  reduced  to  writing,  and  that 
each  disputant  should  sign  his  paper.  He  was  overruled 
so  far  as  the  language  was  concerned.  The  authorities 
meant  that  the  laity  should  hear  and  understand.  The 
three  questions  debated  were: — Whether  a  "particular 
Church  can  change  rites  and  ceremonies ;  Whether  the 
services  of  public  worship  must  be  conducted  in  Latin ; 
Whether  the  Mass  is  a  propitiatory  sacrifice."  The  confer- 
ence was  held  at  Westminster  on  March  31st,  in  presence 
of  the  Privy  Council,  the  Lords  and  Commons,  and  the 
"multitude."  Great  expectations  were  cherished  by  both 
parties  in  anticipation,  and  when  the  Eomanist  divines 
withdrew  on  points  of  procedure,  their  cause  suffered  in  the 

have  come  from  Germany,  do  not  fail  to  preach  in  their  own  fashion,  both 
in  public  and  in  private,  in  such  wise  that  they  persuaded  certain  rogues  to 
forcibly  enter  the  church  of  St.  Mary-le-Bow,  in  the  middle  of  Oheapside, 
and  force  the  shrine  of  the  most  Holy  Sacrament,  breaking  the  tabernacle, 
and  throwing  the  most  precious  consecrated  body  of  Jesus  Christ  to  the 
ground.  They  also  destroyed  the  altar  and  the  images,  with  the  pall  (polio) 
and  church  linen  (tovalie),  breaking  everything  into  a  thousand  pieces. 
This  happened  this  very  night,  which  is  the  third  after  Easter.  .  „  .  Many 
persons  have  taken  the  communion  in  the  usual  manner,  and  things  continue 
as  usual  in  the  churches"  (Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Venetian,  1658-80, 
p.  57). 

1  The  speeches  of  Abbot  Feckenham  and  Bishop  Scot,  reprinted  in  Gee's 
Mfaabethan  Prayer-Boole,  etc.  pp.  228  jf.,  represent  the  arguments  used  in  the 
Lords.  Scot's  speech  was  delivered  on  the  third  reading  of  the  Act  of  Uni- 
formity, quite  a  month  after  the  "Westminster  conference,  and  Feokenham's 
may  have  been  made  at  the  same  time  ;  still  they  show  the  arguments  of 
the  Romanists. 


THE   ELIZABETHAN   PRAYER   BOOK  401 

popular  estimation.  Two  of  the  Bishops  were  sent  to  the 
Tower  "for  open  contempt  and  contumacy";  and  others 
seem  to  have  been  threatened.1 

Parliament  reassembled  after  the  Easter  recess  and 
passed  the  Act  of  Supremacy  in  its  third  form,  and  the 
Act  of  Uniformity,  which  re-enacted,  as  has  been  said,  the 
revised  Prayer-Book — that  is,  the  Second  Book  of  King 
Edward  vi.  with  the  distinctly  specified  alterations.  The 
most  important  of  these  changes  were  the  two  sentences 
added  to  the  words  to  be  used  by  the  officiating  minister 
when  giving  the  communion.  The  clauses  had  been  in 
the  First  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  vi. 

While  in  the  Second  Prayer-Book  of  King  Edward 
the  officiating  minister  was  commanded  to  say  while  giving 
the  Bread :  . , 

"  Take  and  eat  this,  in  remembrance  that  Christ  died  for 
thee,  and  feed  on  Him  in  thy  heart  "by  faith  with  thanks- 
giving? 

and  while  giving  the  Cup,  to  say : 

"Drink  thfe  in  remembrance  that  Christ's  Mood  was  shed 
for  thee,  and  be  thankful ;  " 

the  words  were  altered  in  the  Elizabethan  book  to : 

"  The  Body  of  OUT  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  was  given  for 
thee,  preserve  thy  body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life.  Take 
and  eat  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ  died  for  thee,  and 
feed  on  Him  in  thy  heart  by  faith  with  thanksgiving  ;  " 

"  The  Blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  was  shed  for 
thee,  preserve  thy  body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life.  Drink 
this  in  remembrance  that  Christ's  Blood  was  shed  for  thee,  and 
be  thankful." 

The  additions  in  no  way  detracted  from  the  Evangelical 
doctrine  of  the  Sacrament.  They  rather  brought  the 

1  Calendar  of*  Letter  a  and  State  Papers  relating  to  English,  Affairs,  pre- 
served principality  in  the  Archive*  of  Simancas,  Id 5 8-67,  pp.  45,  46-48  ; 
Zurich  Zetters,  i.  18jf.;  Strype's  Annals,  etc.  I.  i.  128-40,  i.ii.  466 ;  Calendar 
of  State  Payers,  Venetian,  155S-8Q,  pp.  64,  65. 

26** 


402  THE   SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

underlying  thought  into  greater  harmony  with  the  doctrine 
D£  the  Beformed  Churches.  But  they  have  had  the  effect 
of  enabling  men  who  hold  different  views  about  the  nature 
of  the  rite  to  join  in  its  common  use. 

When  the  Act  of  Uniformity  was  passed  by  Parliament, 
the  advanced  Eeformers,  who  had  chafed  at  what  appeared 
to  them  to  be  a  long  delay,  were  contented.  They,  one 
and  all,  believed  that  the  Church  of  England  had  been 
restored  to  what  it  had  been  during  the  last  year  of  the 
reign  of  Edward  vi. ;  and  this  was  the  end  for  which  they 
had  been  striving,  the  goal  placed  before  them  by  their 
friend  and  adviser,  Henry  Bullinger  of  Zurich.1  Their 
letters  are  full  of  jubilation.2 

Yet  there  were  some  things   about    this  Elizabethan 

1  "King  Edward's  reformation  satisfieth  the  godly":  Bullinger  to 
Utenhovius  (Zurich  Letters,  2nd  series,  p.  17  n. ;  Strype,  Annals,  i.  i.  259). 

3  May  20th,  Cox  to  "Weidner :  "The  sincere  religion  of  Christ  is  there- 
fore established  among  us  in  all  parts  of  the  kingdom,  just  in  the  same 
manner  as  it  was  formerly  promulgated  under  our  Edward  of  blessed  memory  " 
(Zurich,  Letters,  i.  28). 

,  May  21st,  Parkhurst  to  Bullinger :  "  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  set 
forth  in  the  time  of  King  Edward,  is  now  again  in  general  use  throughout 
England,  and  will  be  everywhere,  in  spite  of  the  struggles  and  opposition 
of  the  pseudo-bishops"  (Zurich  Letters,  i.  29). 

May  22nd,  Jewel  to  Bullinger :  "  Keligion  is  again  placed  on  the  same 
footing  on  which  it  stood  in  King  Edward's  time ;  to  which  event  I  doubt 
not  but  that  your  own  letters  and  those  of  your  republic  have  powerfully 
contributed  "  (Zurich  Letters,  i.  33), 

May  23rd,  Grindal  to  Conrad  Hubert :  "  But  now  at  last,  by  the  bless- 
ing of  God,  during  the  prorogation,  of  Parliament,  there  has  been  published 
a  proclamation  to  banish  the  Pope  and  his  jurisdiction  altogether,  and  to 
restore  religion  to  that  form  which  we  had  in  the  time  of  Edwai'd  vi." 
(Zurich  Letters,  ii.  19). 

Dr.  Gee  seems  to  beg  an  important  historical  question  when  he  says  that 
these  letters  must  have  been  written  before  the  writers  knew  that  the  Prayer- 
Book  had  been  actually  altered  in  more  than  the  three  points  mentioned  in 
the  Act  of  Uniformity.  Grindal,  writing  again  to  Hubert  on  July  14th, 
when  he  must  have  known  everything,  says:  "The  state  of  our  Church 
(to  come  to  that  subject)  is  pretty  much  the  same  as  when  I  last  wrote  to 
you,  except  only  that  what  had  heretofore  been  settled  by  proclamations 
and  laws  with  respect  to  the  reformation  of  the  churches  is  now  daily 
being  carried  into  effect."  Cf.  Gee's Mizdbethan  Prayer  Book,  etc.  p.  10 i  w., 
for  the  actual  differences  between  the  Edwardine  Book  of  1552  and  the 
Elizabethan  Book  of  1559. 


THE  ELIZABETHAN  PRAYER  BOOK  AND  VESTMENTS     403 

settlement  which,  if  interpreted  as  they  have  heen  by 
some  ecclesiastical  historians,  make  it  very  difficult  to 
understand  the  contentment  of  such  men  as  Grindal,  Jewel, 
and  Sandys.  "Of  what  was  done  in  the  matter  of 
ornaments,"  says  Professor  Maitland,  "by  statute,  by  the 
rubrics  of  the  Book,  and  by  Injunctions  that  the  Queen 
promptly  issued,  it  would  be  impossible  to  speak  fairly 
without  lengthy  quotation  of  documents,  the  import  of 
which  became  in  the  nineteenth  century  a  theme  of 
prolonged  and  inconclusive  disputation."1  All  that  can 
be  attempted  here  is  to  mention  the  principal  documents 
involved  in  the  later  controversy,  and  to  show  how  they 
were  interpreted  in  the  life  and  conduct  of  contemporaries. 
The  Act  of  Uniformity  had  restored,  with  some  trifling 
differences  clearly  and  definitely  stated,  Edward  VL'S 
Prayer-Book  of  1552,  and  therefore  its  rubrics.2  It  had 

1  Cambridge  Modern  History,  ii.  570. 

2  The  rubric  explaining  kneeling  at  the  communion  had  not  the  authority 
of  Parliament,  but  only  of  the  Privy  Council,  and  was  not  included. 

The  rubric  of  1552  regarding  ornaments,  which  had  the  authority  of 
Parliament  and  was  re-enacted  by  the  Act  of  Uniformity  of  1559,  was :  **  And 
here  is  to  be  noted  that  the  minister  at  the  time  of  communion,  and  at  all 
other  times  in  his  ministration,  shall  use  neither  alb,  vestment,  nor  cope; 
but  being  archbishop  or  bishop,  he  shall  have  and  wear  a  rochet :  and  being 
priest  or  deacon,  he  shall  have  and  wear  a  surplice  only." 

This  is  the  real  ornaments  rubric  of  the  Elizabethan  settlement,  and 
appears  to  be  such  in  the  use  and  wont  of  the  Church  of  England  from  1559 
to  1566,  save  that  copes  were  used  occasionally. 

The  proviso  in  the  Act  of  Uniformity  (1559)  was  :  "Such  ornaments  of  the 
Church  and  of  the  ministers  thereof  shall  be  retained  and  be  in  use  as  was  in 
this  Church  of  England  by  authority  of  Parliament  in  the  second  year  of 
the  reign  of  King  Edward  vi.,  until  other  order  shall  be  therein  taken  by 
the  authority  of  the  Queen's  Majesty,  with  the  advice  of  her  commissioners 
appointed  and  authorised  under  the  Great  Seal  of  England  for  causes 
ecclesiastical,  or  of  the  metropolitan  of  this  realm." 

The  ornaments  in  use  in  the  second  year  of  Edward  vi.  are  stated  in  the 
rubrics  of  the  first  Prayer-Book  of  King  Edward  (1549) ; 

"Upon  the  day,  and  at  the  time  appointed  for  the  ministration  of  the 
Holy  Communion,  the  Priest  that  shall  execute  the  holy  ministry  shall  put 
upon  him  the  vesture  appointed  for  that  ministration,  that  is  to  say :  a  white 
Albe  plain,  with  a  vestment  or  Cope.  And  where  there  be  many  Priests  or 
Deacons,  there  so  many  shall  be  ready  to  help  the  Priest  in  the  ministration  as 
shall  be  requisite :  and  shall  have  upon  them  likewise  the  vestures  appointed 
for  their  ministry,  that  is  to  say,  Albes  with  tunicles."  At  the  end  there 


404  THE  SETTLEMENT  UNDER   ELIZABETH 

at  the  same  time  contained  a  proviso  saying  that  the 
ornaments  sanctioned  by  the  authority  of  Parliament  in 
the  second  year  of  Edward  vi.  were  "  to  be  retained  and 
be  in  use  "  "  until  further  order  shall  therein  be  taken." 

Men  like  Grindal  and  Jewel  took  no  exception  to  this 
proviso,  which  they  certainly  would  have  done  had  they 
believed  that  it  ordained  the  actual  use  in  time  of  public 
worship,  of  the  ornaments  used  in  the  second  year  of  King 
Edward.  The  interpretation  they  gave  to  the  proviso  is 
seen  from  a  letter  from  Sandys  to  Parker  (afterwards 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury),  written  two  days  after  the  Act 
of  Uniformity  had  passed  the  Lords.  He  says : 

"The  last  book  of  service  has  gone  through  with  a 
proviso  to  retain  the  ornaments  which  were  used  in  the 
tirst  and  second  year  of  King  Edward,  until  it  please  the 
Queen  to  take  other  order  for  them.  Our  gloss  upon  the 
text  is  that  we  shall  not  be  enforced  to  use  them,  but  that 
others  in  the  meantime  shall  not  convey  them  away,  but 
that  they  may  remain  for  the  Queen." l 

Sandys  and  others  understood  the  proviso  to  mean 
that  recalcitrant  clergy  like  the  Warden  of  Manchester, 
who  carried  his  consecrated  vestments  to  Ireland,  were  not 
to  make  off  with  the  ornaments,  and  that  churchwardens 
or  patrons  were  not  to  confiscate  them  for  their  private 
use.  They  were  property  belonging  to  the  Queen,  and  to 
be  retained  until  Her  Majesty's  pleasure  was  known.  The 
whole  history  of  the  visitations  goes  to  prove  that  Sandys' 
interpretation  of  the  proviso  was  that  of  its  framers. 

When  the  Prayer-Book  was  actually  printed  it  was 
found  to  contain  some  differences  from  the  Edwardine 

is  another  rubric :  "Upon  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  the  English  Litany  shall 
be  said  or  sung  in  all  placed  after  such  form  as  is  appointed  by  the  Kind's 
Majesty's  Injunctions ;  or  as  is  or  shall  be  otherwise  appointed  by  His  High- 
ness. And  though  there  be  none  to  communicate  with  the  Priest,  yet  these 
days  (after  the  Litany  ended)  the  Priest  shall  put  upon  him  a  plain  Albo  or 
surplice,  with  a  cope,  and  say  all  things  at  the  Altar  appointed  to  be  said  at 
the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  until  after  the  offertory." 
1  Parker  Correspondency  p,  65. 


THE  ELIZABETHAN  PRAYER  BOOK  AND  VESTMENTS     405 

Book  of  1552  besides  those  mentioned  in  the  Act  as  the 
only  ones  to  be  admitted;  and  early  editions  have  not 
always  the  same  changes.  But  the  one  thing  of  import- 
ance was  a  rubric  which,  on  what  seems  to  be  the  only 
possible  interpretation,  enjoins  the  use  in  public  worship  of 
the  ornaments  (i.e.  the  vestments)  in  use  in  the  second 
year  of  King  Edward.1  How  this  rubric  got  into  the 
Prayer-Book  it  is  impossible  to  say.  It  certainly  was  not 
enacted  by  the  Queen  "  with  assent  of  Lords  and  Commons." 
We  have  no  proof  that  it  was  issued  by  the  Privy  Council.2 

1  The  rubric  is :  "And  here  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  minister  at  the 
time  of  communion  and  at  all  other  times  in  his  ministrations,  shall  use 
such  ornaments  in  the  church  as  were  in  use  by  authority  of  Parliament  in 
the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Edward  vi.,  according  to  the  Act  of 
Parliament  set  in  the  beginning  of  this  Book." 

2  Dr.  Gee  (Elizabethan  Ornaments,  etc.  p.  131)  thinks  that  there  can  be 
no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  rubric  was  recorded  on  the  authority  of  the 
Privy  Council.      "The  Privy  Council  had  certainly  inserted  the  Black 
Bubric  in  1552,  as  their  published  Acts  attest,  but  all  the  records  of  the 
Privy  Council  from  13th  May  1559  until  28th  May  1562  have  disappeared." 
The  precedent  cited  is  scarcely  a  parallel  case.    The  Black  Rubric  was  an 
explanation ;  the  Rubric  of  1559  is  almost  a  contradiction  in  terms  of  the 
Act  which  restores  the  Prayer-Book  of  1552.     If  I  may  venture  to  express 
an  opinion,  it  seems  to  me  most  likely  that  the  rubric  was  added  by  the 
Queen  herself,  and  that  she  inserted  it  in  order  to  be  able  to  "  hedge."    It 
is  too  often  forgotten  that  the  danger  which  overshadowed  the  earlier  years 
of  Elizabeth  was  the  issue  of  a  papal  Bull  proclaiming  her  a  heretic  and 
a  bastard,  and  inviting  Henry  n.  of  France  to  undertake  its  execution. 
The  Emperor  would  never  permit  such  a  Bull  if  Elizabeth  could  show 
reasonable  pretext  that  she  and  her  kingdom  held  by  the  Lutheran  type 
of  Protestantism.      An    excommunication    pronounced   in   such   a   case 
would  have  invalidated  his  own  position,  which  he  owed  to  the  votes  of 
Lutheran  Electors.    In  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century  the  difference 
between  the  different  sections  of  Christianity  was  always  estimated  in 
the  popular  mind  by  differences  in  public  worship,  and  especially  in  the 
celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper.     All  over  Germany  the  Protestant  was 

'  distinguished  from  the  Romanist  by  the  fact  that  he  partook  of  the  com- 
raTraion.in  both  "kinds."  Elizabeth  had  definitely  ranged  herself  on  the 
Protestant  side  from  Easttr  Day  1559  ;  and, a  more  or  less  ornate  ritual 
could  never  explain  away  the  significance  of  this  fact.  The  great  difference 
between  the  Lutherans  and  the  Calvinists  to  the  popular  mind  waa  that  the 
former  retained  and  the  latter  discarded  most  of  the  old  ceremonial.  Luther 
says  expressly:  "Da  lassen  wyr  die  Messgowand,  altar,  lieohter  noch 
bleyben"  (Daniel,  Codex  Ltturyicw  J&cclevfa  Luttorance,  p.  105);  and 
crosses,  vestments,  lights,  and  an  altar  appear  in  regular  Lutheran  fafhioix 


406  THE  SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

The  use  and  wont  of  the  Church  of  England  during  the 
period  of  the  Elizabethan  settlement  was  as  if  this  rubric 
had  never  existed.  It  is  directly  contradicted  by  the 
thirtieth  Injunction  issued  for  the  Eoyal  Visitation  of 
1559.1  It  was  not  merely  contemptuously  ignored  by 
the  Elizabethan  Bishops:  they  compelled  their  clergy,  if 
compulsion  was  needed,  to  act  in  defiance  of  it. 

Contemporary  sources  abundantly  testify  that  in  the 
earlier  years  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  the  English 
clergy  in  their  ministrations  scarcely  ever  wore  any 
.ecclesiastical  garment  but  the  surplice ;  and  sometimes  not 
even  that.  The  Advertisements*  of  1566,  which  almost 
all  contemporary  notices  speak  of  as  prescribing  what  had 
been  enjoined  in  the  Injunctions  of  1559,  were  drafted  for 
the  purpose  of  coercing  clergymen  who  were  in  the  habit 
of  refusing  to  wear  even  the  surplice,  and  they  enjoined 
the  surplice  only,  and  the  cope3  in  cathedrals.  In  the 

whenever  the  Queen  wished  to  place  herself  and  her  land  under  the  shield 
of  the  Augshurg  Peace.  This  rubric  was  a  remarkably  good  card  to  play 
in  the  diplomatic  game. 

1  XXXth  Injunction  of  1559 :   ^Item,  Her  Majesty  being  desirous  to 
have  the  prelacy  and  clergy  of  this  realm  to  be  had  as  well  in  outward 
reverence,  as  otherwise  regarded  for  the  worthiness  of  their  ministries,  and 
thinking  it  necessary  to  have  them  known  to  the  people  in  all  places  and 
assemblies,  loth  in  the  church  and  without,  and  thereby  to  receive  the 
honour  and  estimation  due  to  the  special  messengers  and  ministers  of 
Almighty  God,  wills  and  commands  that  all  archbishops  and  bishops,  and 
all  other  that  be  called  or  admitted  to  preaching  or  ministry  of  the 
sacraments,  or  that  be  admitted  into  any  vocation  ecclesiastical,  or  into  any 
society  of  learning  in  either  of  ,the  Universities  or  elsewhere,  shall  use  and 
wear  such  seemly  habits,  garments,  and  such  square  caps  as  wore  most 
commonly  and  orderly  received  in  the  latter  year  of  tfo  reign  of  King 
Edward  VI. ;  not  meaning  thereby  to  attribute  any  holiness  or  special 
worthiness  to  the  said  garments,  but  as  St.  Paul  write th  :  '  Omnia  decenter  et 
secundum  ordinem fiant*  (LCor.  xiv.  cap.)."    Of.  Gee's  Elizabethan  Prayer 
Book  and  Ornaments  (London,  1902) ;  Tomlinson,  The  Prayer  Book,  Articles 
and  Homilies  (London,  1897) ;  Parker,   The  Ornaments  Rubric  ( Oxford, 
1881). 

2  The  Advertisements  are  iprinted  in  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p. 

407  ;  the  Injunctions,  at  p.  "417. 

3  Copes  were  used  in  the  cathedrals  and  sometimes  in  collegiate  clwrchqs 
in  the  years  between  1559  and  1566,  when  it  was  desired  to  add  some 
ninguificenoe  to  the  service  ;  but  it  ought  to  be  remembered  that  the  cope 


THE  ELIZABETHAN  PRAYER  BOOK  AND  VESTMENTS    407 

Visitation  carried  out  in  accordance  with  the  directions  in 
the  Injunctions,  a  clean  sweep  was  made  of  almost  all  the 
ornaments  which  were  not  merely  permitted  but  ordered  in 
the  proviso  of  the  Act  of  Uniformity  and  the  Rubric  of 
1559  on  the  ordinary  ritualistic  interpretation  of  these 
clauses.  The  visitors  proceeded  on  a  uniform  plan,  and 
what  we  hear  was  done  in  one  place  may  be  inferred 
as  the  common  practice.  The  Spanish  Ambassador  (July 
or  August  1559)  wrote  to  his  master:  "They  are  now 
carrying  out  the  law  of  Parliament  respecting  religion  with 
great  rigour,  and  have  appointed  six  visitors.  .  „  .  They 
have  just  taken  the  crosses,  images,  and  altars  from  St. 
Paul's  and  all  the  other  London  churches."  x  A  citizen  of 
London  noted  in  his  diary :  "  The  time  before  Bartholomew 
tide  and  after,  were  all  the  roods  and  Maries  and  Johns, 
and  many  other  of  the  church  goods,  both  copes,  crosses, 
censers,  altar  cloth,  rood  cloths,  books,  banners,  banner 
stays,  wainscot  and  much  other  gear  about  London, 
burnt  in  Smithfield." 2  What  took  place  in  London 
was  done  in  the  provinces.  At  G-rantham,  "  the  vestments, 
copes,  albs,  tunicles,  and  all  other  such  baggages,  were 
defaced  and  openly  sold  by  the  general  consent  of  the 
whole  corporation,  and  the  money  employed  in  setting  up 
desks  in  the  church,  and  making  of  a  decent  communion 
table,  and  the  remnant  to  the  poor."  * 

It  is  true  that  we  find  complaints  on  the  part  of  men 
like  Jewel  of  ritualistic  practices  which  they  do  not  like : 
but  these  in  almost  every  case  refer  to  worship  in  the 
royal  chapel.  The  services  there  were  well  known,  and 
bojbh  friends  and  foes  of  the  Reformation  seemed  to  take 
it  for  granted  that  what  was  the  fashion  in  the  royal 

was  neyer  a  sacrificial  vestment.  It  was  originally  the  cappa  of  the  earlier 
Middle  Ages — the  mediaeval  greatcoat.  Large  churches  were  cold  places, 
the  clergy  naturally  wore  their  greatcoats  when  officiating,  and  the  homely 
garment  grew  in  magnificence.  It  never  had  a  doctrinal  significance  like 
the  chasuble  or  casula. 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  (Spanish,  155B-61 \  p.  89. 

8  Maohyn's  Diary  (Camden  Society,  London,  1844),  p.  108. 

*  PeaooeVa  CJwrch  Farni'uw,  ]».  37* 


408  THE   SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

chapel  would  soon  extend  to  the  rest  of  the  realm.1 
Historians  have  usually  attributed  the  presence  of  crosses, 
vestments,  lights  on  the  altar,  to  the  desire  of  the  Queen 
to  conciliate  her  Romanist  subjects,  or  tci  stand  well  with 
the  great  Roman  Catholic  Powers  of  Europe.  It  is  quite 
likely  that  the  Queen  had  this  thought  in  her  mind. 
Elizabeth  was  a  thrifty  lady,  and  liked  to  bring  down 
many  birds  with  the  one  stone.  But  the  one  abiding 
thought  in  the  mind  of  the  astute  Queen  was  to  stand  well 
with  the  Lutherans,  and  to  be  able,  when  threatened  with 
papal  excommunication,  to  take  shelter  under  the  aegis  of 
the  Peace  of  Augsburg. 

When  the  Government  had  secured  the  passing  of  the 
Acts  of  Supremacy  and  Uniformity,  they  were  in  a  position 
to  deal  with  the  recalcitrant  clergy.  Eleven  of  the 
English  Episcopal  Sees  had  been  vacant  at  the  accession  of 
Elizabeth,  among  them  that  of  the  Primate ;  for  Cardinal 
Pole  had  died  a  few  hours  after  Mary.  In  the  summer 
and  autumn  of  1559  the  sixteen  Bishops  were  called  upo^* 
to  sign  the  Oath  of  Supremacy,  in  which  the  papal  rule 
over  the  Church  of  England  was  abjured,  and  the  Queen 
declared  to  be  the  Supreme  Governor  of  the  Church.  All 
the  Bishops,  more  or  less  definitely,  refused  to  take  the 
oath;  although  three  were  at  first  doubtful.  They  were 
deprived,  and  the  English  Church  was  practically  without 
Bishops.2  Some  of  the  deprived  Bishops  of  King  Edward's 
time  survived,  and  they  were  restored.  Then  came  dis- 
cussion about  the  manner  of  appointing  new  ones.  Some 
would  have  preferred  a  simple  royal  nomination,  as  in 
Edward's  time;  but  in  the  end  it  was  resolved  that  itfie 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Spanish,  1558-67,  p.  105  :  "The  crucifixes 
and  vestments  that  were  burnt  a  month  ago  publicly  are  now  Set  up  again 
in  the  royal  chapel,  as  they  soon  will  be  all  over  the  kingdom,  unless, 
which  God  forbid,  there  is  another  change  next  week.  They  are  doing  it 
out  of  sheer  fear  to  pacify  the  Catholics ;  but  as  forced  favours 'are  no  sign 
of  affection,  they  often  do  more  harm  than  good."  Of.  Zurich  Letters,  i. 
63,  etc. 

9  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  -relating  to  English  Affairs,  pre* 
served  principally  in  the  Archives  of  Simancas,  i.  pp.  76,  79. 


COMPLETED      409 

appointment  should  be  nominally  in  the  hands  of  the 
Deans  and  Chapters  according  to  mediaeval  rule,  with  the 
proviso,  however,  that  the  royal  permission  to  elect  had 
first  to  be  given,  and  that  the  person  named  in  the  "  leave 
to  elect "  should  be  chosen.  Then  the  question  of  conse- 
cration gave  rise  to  some  difficulties ;  but  these  were  got 
over  in  ways  which  were  deemed  to  be  sufficient.  Matthew 
Parker,  after  more  than  one  refusal,  was  nominated  and 
consecrated  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Lists  of  clerical 
persons  suitable  for  promotion  were  prepared  for  the 
Queen,1  and  the  other  Sees  were  gradually  filled.  The 
Elizabethan  episcopate,  with  the  exception  of  the  few 
Edwardine  Bishops,  was  an  entirely  new  creation.  A  large 
number  of  the  Deans  and  members  of  the  Cathedral 
Chapters  had  also  refused  to  sign  the  Oath  of  Supremacy ; 
they  were  deprived,  and  others  who  were  on  the  lists  were 
appointed  in  their  place.  The  inferior  clergy  proved  to 
be  much  more  amenable,  and  only  about  two  hundred  were 
in  the  end  deprived.  The  others  all  accepted  the  "  altera- 
tion of  religion";  and  the  change  was  brought  about 
quietly  and  without  the  riotings  which  had  accompanied 
the  alterations  made  in  the  days  of  Edward,  or  the  whole- 
sale deprivations  which  had  followed  upon  those  made  by 
Queen  Mary — when  almost  one-third  of  the  beneficed 
clergy  of  the  Church  of  England  had  been  removed  from 
their  benefices.  A  similar  passive  acquiescence  was  seen  in 
the  introduction  of  the  new  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and 
in  the  fulfilment  of  the  various  orders  for  the  removal  of 
images,  etc.  The  great  altars  and  crucifixes  were  taken 
away,  and  the  pictures  covered  with  whitewash,  without 
any  disturbances  to  speak  of. 

The  comparative  ease  with  which  the  "alteration  of 
religion"  was  effected  was  no  doubt  largely  due  to  the 
increased  Protestant  feeling  of  the  country ;  but  the  tact 
and  forbearance  of  those  who  were  appointed  to  see  the 
changes  carried  out  counted  for  something;  and  perhaps 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,  Edward  VL,  Mcwy,  JSlixabeth, 
i.  130. 


410  THE  SETTLEMENT    UNDER  ELIZABETH 

the  acquiescence  of  the  Roman  Catholics  was  due  to  the 
fact  that  they  had  no  great  leader,  that  they  did  not 
expect  the  Elizabethan  settlement  to  last  long,  and  that 
they  waited  in  expectation  that  one  or  other  of  the  two 
Romanist  Powers,  France  or  Spain,  would  interfere  in 
their  behalf.  'The  religious  revolution  in  Scotland  in 
1560  saved  the  Elizabethan  settlement  for  the  time;  and 
Philip  of  Spain  trifled  away  his  opportunities  until  a 
united  England  overthrew  his  Armada,  which  came  thirty 
years  too  late. 

The  change  was  given  effect  to  by  a  Royal  Visitation. 
England  was  divided  into  six  districts,  and  lists  of  visitors 
were  drawn  up  which  included  the  Lords  Lieutenants  of 
the  counties,  the  chief  men  of  the  districts,  and  some  lawyers 
and  clergymen  known  to  be  well  affected  to  the  Reformation. 
They  had  to  assist  them  a  set  of  Injunctions,  modelled 
largely,  not  entirely,  on  those  of  Edward  vi.,  drafted  and 
issued  by  royal  command.1  The  members  of  the  clergy 
were  dealt  with  very  patiently,  and  explanations,  public 
and  private,  were  given  of  the  Act  of  Supremacy  which 
made  it  easier  for  them  to  accept  it.  The  Elizabethan 
Bishops  were  also  evidently  warned  to  deal  tenderly  with 
stubborn  parish  clergymen;  they  would  have  been  less 
patient  with  them  if  left  to  themselves.  One,  Bishop 
Best,  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  is  found  writing  to  Cecil  about 
his  clergy,  that  "  the  priests  are  wicked  impes  of  Anti- 
christ," for  the  most  part  very  ignorant  and  stubborn; 
another,  Pilkington,  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  in  describing 
the  disordered  state  of  his  diocese,  declared  that  "like 
St.  Paul,  he  has  to  fight  with  beasts  at  Ephesus  " ;  and  a 
third,  Scory,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  wrote  that  he  was 
much  hindered  by  justices  of  the  peace  who  were  Roman 
Catholics,  and  that  when  certain  priests  who  had  refused  to 
take  the  oath  were  driven  out  of  Exeter  and  elsewhere,  they 
were  received  and  feasted  in  the  streets  with  torchlights.2 

1  The  Injunctions  are  printed  in  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  etc.  p.  417. 

2  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,  of  the  Reigns  of  jEdtoard  V/.9 
Mary,  and  Elizabeth,  i.  pp.  180.  183,  187. 


THE   THIRTY-NINE   ARTICLES  411 

Elizabeth's  second  Parliament  was  very  much  -more 
Protestant  than  the  first,  and  insisted  that  the  Oath  of 
Supremacy  must  be  taken  by  all  the  members  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  by  all  lawyers,  and  by  all  school- 
masters. The  Convocation  of  1563  proved  that  the  clergy 
desired  to  go  much  further  in  the  path  of  Reformation 
than  the  Queen  thought  desirable. 

They  clearly  wished  for  some  doctrinal  standard,  and 
Archbishop  Parker  had  prepared  and  laid  before  Con- 
vocation a  revised  edition  of  the  Forty-two  Articles  which 
had  defined  the  theology  of  the  Church  of  England  in  the 
last  year  of  King  Edward  vi.1  The  way  had  been  pre- 
pared for  the  issue  of  some  authoritative  exposition  of  the 
doctrinal  position  of  the  Elizabethan  Church  by  the  Declara- 
tion of  the  Principal  Articles  of  Religion — a  series  of  eleven 
articles  framed  by  the  Bishops  and  published  in  1561 
(March),  which  repudiates  strongly  the  Eomanist  doctrines 
of  the  Papacy,  private  Masses,  and  the  propitiatory  sacrifice 
in  the  Holy  Supper.  The  Spanish  Ambassador,  who  had 
heard  of  the  meetings  of  the  Bishops  for  this  purpose, 
imagined  that  they  were  preparing  articles  to  be  presented 
to  the  Council  of  Trent  on  behalf  of  the  Church  of 
England.2  The  Archbishop's  draft  was  revised  by  Con- 
vocation, and  was  "  diligently  read  and  sifted "  by  the 
Queen  herself  before  she  gave  her  consent  to  the 
authoritative  publication  of  the  Articles. 

These  Thirty-nine  Articles  expressed  the  doctrine  of 
the  Eeformed  or  Calvinist  as  distinguished  from  the 
Evangelical  or  Lutheran  form  of  Protestant  doctrine,  and 
the  distinction  lay  mainly  in  the  views  which  the  respective 
Confessions  of  the  two  Churches  held  about  the  Presence 
of  Christ  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Holy  Supper.  By  this 
time  (1562)  Zwinglianism,  as  a  doctrinal  system,  not  as 

1  For  the  history  of  these  Articles,  ace  Hard-wick,  A  History  of  the 
Articles  of  Religion;  to  which  is  added  a  Series  of  Documents  from  A.J>. 
1$B6  to  A.I>.  1B1$,  etc.  (Cambridge,  1859). 

2  Calendar  of  letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  JSfoglish  Affairs,  pre- 
sewed  principally  in  the  Archives  of  8i mancas,  i.  190. 


412  THE   SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

an  ecclesiastical  policy,  had  disappeared ; *  and  the  three 
theories  of  the  Presence  of  Christ  in  the  Sacrament  had 
all  to  do  with  the  Presence  of  the  Body  of  Christ  and 
not  with  a  spiritual  Presence  simply.  The  Romanist 
theory,  transubstantiation,  was  based  on  the  mediaeval 
conception  of  a  substance  existing  apart  from  all  accidents 
of  smell,  shape,  colour,  etc.,  and  declared  that  the 
"  substance "  of  the  Bread  and  of  the  Wine  was  changed 
into  the  "substance'*  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ, 
while  the  accidents  or  qualities  remained  the  same — the 
change  being  miraculously  effected  by  the  priest  in  conse- 
crating the  communion  elements.  The  Lutheran  explana- 
tion was  based  upon  a  mediaeval  theory  also — on  that  of 
the  ubiquity  or  natural  omnipresence  of  the  "glorified" 
Body  of  Christ.  The  Body  of  Christ,  in  virtue  of  its 
ubiquity,  was  present  everywhere,  in  chairs,  tables,  stones 
flung  through  the  air  (to  use  Luther's  illustrations),  and 
therefore  in  the  Bread  and  in  the  Wine  as  everywhere 
else.  This  ordinary  presence  became  an  efficacious  sacra- 
mental Presence  owing  to  the  promise  of  God.  Calvin 
had  discarded  both  mediaeval  theories,  and  started  by 
asking  what  was  meant  by  substance  and  what  by  presence ; 
he  answered  that  the  substance  of  anything  is  its  power 
(wi),  and  its  presence  is  the  immediate  application  of 
its  power.  Thus  the  substance  of  the  crucified  Body  of 
Christ  is  its  power,  and  the  Presence  of  the  crucified  Body 
of  Christ  is  the  immediate  application  of  its  power ;  and 
the  guarantee  of  the  application  of  the  power  is  the 
promise  of  God  received  by  the  believing  communicant. 
By  discarding  the  Lutheran  thought  that  the  substance  of 
the  Body  of  Christ  is  something  extended  In  space,  and 
accepting  the  thought  that  the  main  thing  in  substance 
is  power,  Calvin  was  able  to  think  of  the  substance  of  the 
Body  of  Christ  in  a  way  somewhat  similar  to  the  mediaeval 
conception  of  "  substance  without  accidents/'  and  was  able 
to  show  that  the  Presence  of  Christ's  Body  in  the  sacrament 
could  be  accepted  and  understood  without  the  priestly 
1  The  Consensus  Tigurinus  (1549)  dates  the  disappearance* 


THE   THIRTY-NINE   ARTICLES  413 

miracle,  which  he  and  all  Protestants  rejected.  Hence  it, 
came  to  pass  that  Calvin  could  teach  the  Eeal  Presence 
of  Christ's  Body  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Supper  without 
having  recourse  to  the  mediaeval  doctrine  of  "  ubiquity," 
which  was  the  basis  of  the  Lutheran  theory.  They  both 
(Calvin  and  Luther)  insisted  on  the  Presence  of  the  Body 
of  Christ ;  but  the  one  (Luther)  needed  the  theory  of 
"ubiquity"  to  explain  the  Presence,  while  the  other 
(Calvin)  did  not  need  it.  But  as  both  discarded  the 
priestly  miracle  while  insisting  on  the  Presence  of  the 
Body,  the  two  doctrines  might  be  stated  in  almost  the  same 
words,  provided  all  mention  of  "  ubiquity "  was  omitted. 
Calvin  could  and  did  sign  the  Augsburg  Confession ; 
but  he  did  not  read  into  it  whab  a  Lutheran  would 
have  done,  the  theory  of  "ubiquity";  and  a  Calvinist 
statement  of  the  doctrine,  provided  only  "  ubiquity "  was 
not  denied,  might  be  accepted  by  a  Lutheran  as  not 
differing  greatly  from  his  own.  Bishop  Jewel  asserts 
again  and  again  in  his  correspondence,  that  the  Elizabethan 
divines  did  not  believe  in  the  theory  of  "  ubiquity,"  x  and 
many  of  them  probably  desired  to  say  so  in  their  articles 
of  religion.  Hence  in  the  first  draft  of  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  presented  to  Convocation  by  Archbishop 
Parker,  Article  XXVIII.  contained  a  strong  repudiation  of 
the  doctrine  of  "  ubiquity,"  which,  if  retained,  would  have 
made  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England  more  anti- 
Lutheran  than  even  the  second  Helvetic  Confession.  The 
clause  was  struck  out  in  Convocation,  probably  because 
it  was  thought  to  be  needlessly  offensive  to  the  German 
Protestants.2  The  Queen,  however,  was  not  satisfied  with 

1  The  Zurich  Letters,  1558-79,  JMrst  Series  (Parker  Society,  Cambridge, 
1842),  pp.  123,  127,  186,  100,  189.  Bishop  Jewel,  writing  to  Peter  Martyr 
(p.  100),  says :  "As  to  matters  of  doctrine,  we  have  pared  everything  away  to 
the  very  quick^  and  do  not  differ  from  your  doctrine  "by  a  natt's  breadth" 
(Feb.  7th,  1562) ;  and  Bishop  Horn,  writing  to  Bullinger  (Dec.  18th,  1563, 
i.e.  after  the  Queen's  alterations),  says,  :  "  We  have  throughout  England  the 
same  ecclesiastical  doctrine  as  yourselves  "  (ibid.  p.  185). 

aThe  deleted  clause  was;  4tChristus  in,  c&lum  aycendens,  corpori  suo 
immortalitatem  dedit,  naturam  non  ab&tulit,  humance  enim  naturae  veritatem 


414  THE  SETTLEMENT   UNDER   ELIZABETH 

what  her  divines  had  done,  and  two  important  interferences 
with  the  Articles  as  they  came  from  Convocation  are 
attributed  to  her.  The  first  was  the  addition  of  the 
words :  and  authoritie  in  controversies  offayth,  in  Article  XX., 
which  deals  with  the  authority  possessed  by  the  Church. 
The  second  was  the  complete  suppression  for  the  time 
being  of  Article  XXIX.,  which  is  entitled,  Of  the  wicked 
whwh  do  not  eate  the  Body  of  Christe  in  the  use  of  the  Lordes 
Supper,  and  is  expressed  in  terms  which  most  Lutherans 
would  have  been  loath  to  use. 

The  Queen's  action  was  probably  due  to  political 
reasons.  It  was  important  in  international  politics  for  a 
Protestant  Queen  not  yet  securely  seated  on  her  throne 
to  shelter  herself  under  the  shield  which  a  profession  of 
Lutheranism  would  give.  The  German  Lutherans  had 
won  legal  recognition  within  the  Empire  at  the  Diet  of 
Augsburg  in  1555  ;  the  votes  of  two  Lutheran  Electors 
had  helped  to  place  the  Emperor  on  his  throne ;  and  the 
Pope  dared  not  excommunicate  Lutheran  Princes  save  at 
the  risk  of  offending  the  Emperor  and  invalidating  all  his 
acts.  This  had  been  somewhat  sternly  pointed  out  to 
him  when  he  first  threatened  to  excommunicate  Elizabeth, 
and  the  Queen  knew  all  the  difficulties  of  the  papal 
position.  One  has  only  to  read  an  account  of  a  long 
conversation  with  her,  reported  by  the  Spanish  Ambassador 
to  his  master  (April  29th,  1559),  to  see  what  use  the 
"  wise  Queen  with  the  eyes  that  could  flash " x  made 
of  the  situation.  The  Ambassador  had  not  obscurely 
threatened  her  with  a  papal  Bull  declaring  her  a  bastard 
and  a  heretic,  and  had  brought  home  its  effects  by  citing 
the  case  of  the  King  of  Navarre,  whose  kingdom  was  taken 

(juxta  Scripturas),  perpetuo  retinet,  quam  uno  et  definite  loco  esse,  et  non  in 
multat  vel  omnia  simul  loca  diffundi  oportet.  Quum  igitwr  Christus  in 
coslum  sublatius,  ibi  usque  ad  finem  seculi  permansurus,  atque  inde,  non 
aliunde  (ut  loquitur  A  vgustinus)  venturus  sit,  adjudicandum  vivos  et  mortos, 
nondebetquisquamfidelium,  et  carniseius,  etsanguinis,  realewiet  corporealem 
(ut  Icqiwntwr)  presentiam  in  Eucharistia  vet  credere,  vel profiteri." 

1  "  Cette  reine  est  extromement  sage,  et  a  des  yeux  terribles."    Calendar 
o]  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,  of  the  Eeign  of  Elizabeth,  1695-97,  p.  xxi. 


THE  THIRTY-NINE   ARTICLES  415 

from  him  by  Ferdinand  of  Spain  acting  as  the  Pope's 
agent,  and  Elizabeth  had  played  with  him  in  her  usual 
way.  She  had  remarked  casually  "  that  she  wished  the 
Augsburg  Confession  to  be  maintained  in  her  realm, 
whereat,"  says  the  Count  de  Feria,  "  I  was  much  surprised, 
and  found  fault  with  it  all  I  could,  adducing  the  argu- 
ments I  thought  might  dissuade  her  from  it.  She  then 
told  me  it  would  not  be  the  Augsburg  Confession,  but 
something  else  like  it,  and  that  she  differed  very  little 
from  us,  as  she  believed  that  G'od  was  in  the  Sacrament  of 
the  E^wharist>  and  only  dissented  from  three  or  four  things 
in  the  Mass.  After  this  she  told  me  that  she  did  not  wish 
to  argue  about  religious  matters." x  She  did  not  need  to 
argue  ;  the  hint  had  been  enough  for  the  baffled  Ambassador. 

Article  XXIX.  was  suppressed,  and  only  Thirty-eight 
Articles  were  acknowledged  publicly.  The  papal  Bull  of 
excommunication  was  delayed  until  1570,  when  its 
publication  could  harm  no  one  but  Elizabeth's  own 
Romanist  subjects,  and  the  dangerous  period  was  tided 
over  safely.  When  it  carne  at  last,  the  Queen  was  not 
anathematised  in  terms  which  could  apply  to  Lutherans, 
but  because  she  personally  acknowledged  and  observed  "  the 
impious  constitutions  and  atrocious  mysteries  of  Calvin," 
and  had  commanded  that  they  should  be  observed  by  her 
subjects.2  Then,  when  the  need  for  politic  suppression 
was  past,  Article  XXIX.  was  published,  and  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  became  the  recognised  doctrinal  standard  of 
the  Church  of  England  (1571). 

What  the  Queen's  own  doctrinal  beliefs  were  no  one  can 
toll ;  and  she  herself  gave  the  most  contrary  descriptions 
when  it  suited  her  policy.  The  disappearance  and  re- 
appearance of  crosses  and  candles  on  the  altar  of  the  royal 
chapel  were  due  as  much  to  the  wish  to  keep  in  touch 
with  the  Lutherans  as  to  any  desire  to  conciliate  the 
Queen's  Eomanist  subjects. 

*  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  JEnglish  Affairs,  pre- 
served principally  in  the  Archives  of  Simancas,  i.  61,  62. 
3  Calendar  of  Mate  Papers,  Venetian,  1558-80,  p.  449. 


416  THE  SETTLEMENT    UNDER   ELIZABETH 

The  Convocation  of  1563  had  other  important  matters 
before  it.  Its  proceedings  showed  that  the  new  Elizabethan 
clergy  contained  a  large  number  who  were  in  favour  of 
some  drastic  changes  in  the  Prayer-Book  and  in  the  Act 
of  Uniformity.  Many  of  them  had  become  acquainted  with 
and  had  come  to  like  the  simplicity  of  the  Swiss  worship, 
thoroughly  purified  from  what  they  called  "  the  dregs  of 
Popery  " ;  and  others  envied  the  Scots,  "  who,"  wrote  Park- 
hurst  to  Bullinger  (Aug.  23rd,  1559),  "have  made  greater 
progress  in  true  religion  in  a  few  months  than  we  have 
done  in  many  years/' *• 

Such  men  were  dissatisfied  with  much  in  the  Prayer- 
Book,  or  rather  in  its  rubrics,  and  brought  forward  pro- 
posals for  simplifying  the  worship,  which  received  a  large 
measure  of  support.  It  was  thought  that  all  organs 
should  be  done  away  with ;  that  the  ceremony  of  "  cross- 
ing "  in  baptism  should  be  omitted ;  that  all  festival  days 
save  the  Sundays  and  the  "  principal  feasts  of  the  Church  " 
should  be  abolished ; — this  proposal  was  lost  by  a  majority . 
of  one  in  the  Lower  House.  Another  motion,  leaving  it  to 
the  option  of  communicants  to  receive  the  Holy  Supper 
either  standing,  sitting,  or  kneeling,  as  it  pleased  them,  was 
lost  by  a  very  small  majority.  Many  of  the  Bishops  them- 
selves were  in  favour  of  simplifying  the  rites  of  the  Church  ; 
and  five  Deans  and  twelve  Archdeacons  petitioned  against 
the  use  of  the  surplice.  The  movement  was  so  strong 
that  Convocation,  if  left  to  itself,  would  probably  have 
purified  the  Church  in  the  Puritan  sense  of  the  word. 
But  the  Queen  had  all  the  Tudor  liking  for  a  stately  cere- 
monial, and  she  had  political  reasons,  national  and  inter- 
national, to  prevent  her  allowing  any  drastic  changes. 
She  was  bent  on  welding  her  nation  together  into  one,  and 
she  had  to  capture  for  her  Church  the  large  mass  of  people 
who  were  either  neutral  or  who  had  leanings  to  Eomanism, 
or  at  least  to  the  old  mediaeval  service.  The  Council 
of  Trent  was  sitting ;  Papal  excommunication  was  always 
threatened,  and,  as  above  explained,  Lutheran  protection 

1  The  Zurich  Letters,  etc.,  First  Series,  p,  91. 


DISCIPLINE  417 

and  sympathy  were  useful.  The  ceremonies  were  retained, 
the  crucifixes  and  lights  on  the  altars  were  paraded  in  the 
chapel  royal  to  show  the  Lutheran  sympathies  of  the 
Queen  and  of  the  Church  of  England.  The  Reforming 
Bishops,  with  many  an  inward  qualm,1  had  to  give  way ; 
and  gradually,  as  the  Queen  had  hoped,  a  strong  Conservative 
instinct  gathered  round  the  Prayer-Book  and  its  rubrics. 
The  Convocation  of  1563  witnessed  the  last  determined 
attempt  to  propose  any  substantial  alteration  in  the  public 
worship  of  the  English  people. 

At  the  same  Convocation  a  good  deal  of  time  was 
spent  upon  a  proposed  Book  of  Discipline,  or  an  authorita- 
tive statement  of  the  English  canon  law.  It  is  probable 
that  its  contents  are  to  be  found  in  certain  **  Articles  for 
government  and  order  in  the  Church,  exhibited  to  "be  permitted 
ty  authority  ;  but  not  allowed"  which  are  printed  by  Strype 2 
from  Archbishop  Parker's  MSS.  Such  a  book  would  have 
required  parliamentary  authority,  and  the  Parliament  of 
1563  was  too  much  occupied  with  the  vanishing  protec- 
tion of  Spain  and  with  the  threatening  aspect  of  France 
and  Scotland.  The  marriage  of  the  Queen  of  Scots  with 
Darnley  had  given  additional  weight  to  her  claims  on  the 
English  throne;  and  it  was  feared  that  the  English 
liomanists  might  rise  in  support  of  the  legitimate  heir. 
Parliament  almost  in  a  panic  passed  severe  laws  against 
all  recusants,  and  increased  the  penalties  against  all  who 
refused  the  oath  of  allegiance  or  who  spoke  in  support  of 
the  authority  of  the  Bishop  of  Borne,  The  discipline  of 
the  Church  was  left  to  be  regulated  by  the  old  statute  of 
Henry  vin.,  which  declared  that  as  much  of  the  mediaeval 
canon  law  as  was  not  at  variance  with  the  Scriptures  and 
the  Acts  of  the  English.  Parliament  was  to  form  the  basis 
of  law  for  the  ecclesiastical  courts.  This  gave  the  Bishop's 

1  The  Zurich  letters,  etc.,  First  Series,  p.  74  ;  of,  55,  63,  64,  6(J,  68, 
100,  129,  135*  Bishop  Jewel  called  clerical  dress  the  "relics  of  the 
Aroorites"  (p,  52),  and  wished  that  he  could  get  rid  of  the  surplice  (j>  100) ; 
and  "the  little  silver  cross"  in  the  Queen's  chapel  was  to  him  an  ill- 
omened  thing  (p,  55) ;  cf.  Strype,  ^nttofe,  etc,  i.  i.  260. 

9  Aw*aZs>  etc.  i.  ii.  562. 
27** 


418  THE  SETTLEMENT    UNDER   ELIZABETH 

officials  who  presided  over  the  ecclesiastical  courts  a  very 
free  hand ;  and  under  their  manipulation  there  was  soon 
very  little  left  of  the  canon  law — less,  in  fact,  than  in  the 
ecclesiastical  courts  of  any  other  Protestant  Churches.  For 
these  officials  were  lawyers  trained  in  civil  law  and  imbued 
with  its  principles,  and  predisposed  to  apply  them  whenever 
it  was  possible  to  do  so. 

The  formulation  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  in  the  Con- 
vocation of  1563  may  be  taken  as  marking  the  time  when 
the  "alteration  of  religion"  was  completed.  The  result, 
arrived  at  during  a  period  of  exceptional  storm  and  strain, 
has  had  the  qualities  of  endurance,  and  the  Church  of 
England  is  at  present  what  the  Queen  made  it.  It  was  the 
Eoyal'  Supremacy  which  secured  for  High  Church  Anglicans 
the  position  they  have  to-day.  The  chief  features  of  the 
settlement  of  religion  were : 

1.  The  complete   repudiation   within   the    realm   and 
Church    of  England   of    the  authority  of    the  Bishop  of 
Eome.     All  the  clergy  and  everyone  holding  office  under 
the  Crown  had  to  swear  to   this  repudiation.      If  they 
refused,  or  were  recusants  in  the  language  of  the  day,  they 
lost  their  offices  and  benefices ;  if  they  persisted  in  their 
refusal,   they    were   liable    to   forfeit    all    their    personal 
property ;  if  they  declined  to  take  the  oath  for  a  third 
time,  they  could  be  proclaimed  traitors,  and  were  liable  to 
the  hideous  punishments  which  the  age  inflicted  for  that 
crime.    But  Elizabeth,  with  all  her  sternness,  was  never  cruel, 
and  no  religious  revolution  was  effected  with  less  bloodshed. 

2.  The  sovereign  was  made  the  supreme  Governor  of 
the  Church  of  England ;  and  that  the  title  differed  in  name 
only  from  that  assumed  by  Henry  vni.  was  made  plain  in 
the  following  ways : 

(a)  Convocation  was  stript  of  all  independent  legisla- 
tive action,  and  its  power  to  make  ecclesiastical  laws  and 
regulations  was  placed  under  strict  royal  control.1 

1  The  ^Advertisements  of  Archbishop  Parker,  issued  and  enforced  on  the 
authority  of  the  Primate,  to  which  tho  royal  imprimatur  was  rnoro  than 
onoe  refused,  may  be  looked  on  as  au  exception,  For  these  rules,  meant 


THE  ELIZABETHAN  SETTLEMENT       419 

(&)  Appeals  from  all  ecclesiastical  courts,  which  were 
themselves  actually,  if  not  nominally,  under  the  presidency 
of  civil  lawyers,  could  be  made  to  royal  delegates  who 
might  be  laymen ;  and  these  delegates  were  given  very  full 
powers,  and  could  inflict  civil  punishments  in  a  way  which 
had  not  been  permitted  to  the  old  mediaeval  ecclesiastical 
courts.  These  powers  raised  a  grave  constitutional  question 
in  the  following  reigns.  The  royal  delegates  became  a 
Court  of  High  Commission,  which  may  have  been  modelled 
on  the  Consistories  of  the  German  Princes,  and  had  some- 
what the  same  powers. 

3.  One  uniform  ritual  of  public  worship  was  prescribed 
for  all  Englishmen  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  with  its 
rubrics,  enforced  by  the  Act  of  Uniformity.     No  liberty  of 
worship  was   permitted.      Any  clergyman  who    deviated 
from   this   prescribed  form  of   worship  was    liable  to   be 
treated  as  a   criminal,  and    so  also  were  all  those  who 
abetted  him.     No  one  could,  under  penalties,  seek  to  avoid 
this  public  worship.     Every  subject  was  bound  to  attend 
church  on  Sunday,  and  to  bide  the  prayers  and  the  preach- 
ing, or  else  forfeit  the  sum  of  twelvepence  to  the  poor. 
Obstinate    recusants    or    nonconformists    might    be    ex- 
communicated,   and   all    excommunicated    persons    were 
liable  to  imprisonment. 

4.  Although  it  was  said,  and  was  largely  true,  that  there 
was  freedom  of  opinion,  still  obstinate  heretics  were  liable 
to  be  held  guilty  of  a  capital  offence.     On  the  other  hand, 
the  Bishops  had  little   power    to  force  heretics  to  stand 
a  trial,  and,  unless  Parliament  or  Convocation  ordered  it 
otherwise,  only  the  wilder  sectaries  were  in  any  danger.1 

Protestant  England  grew  stronger  year  by  year.  Tho 
debased  copper  and  brass  coinage  was  replaced  gradually  by 
honest  gold  and  silver.2  Manufactures  wore  encouraged. 

to  control  the  Church  in  the  vestiarian  controversy,  soe  Gee  and  Hardy, 
Documents,  etc*  p.  467 ;  and  for  the  vexed  question  of  their  authority, 
Moore,  History  of  the  Reformation,  p.  266. 

1  Maitland,  Cambridge  Modern  History,  ii.  569  flF. 

3  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  JSeriea,  of  the  Meiyns  ofMward  VI.. 
Mary,  and  ElisabcfJi,  W47-SO,  p.  150. 


420  THE  SETTLEMENT   UNDER  ELIZABETH 

Merchant  adventurers,  hiring  the  Queen's  ships,  took  an 
increasing  share  in  the  world-trade  with  Elizabeth  as  a 
partner.1  Persecuted  Huguenots  and  Flemings  settled  in 
great  numbers  in  the  country,  and  brought  with  them  their 
thrift  and  knowledge  of  mechanical  trades  to  enrich  the 
land  of  their  adoption ; 2  and  the  oppressed  Protestants  of 
France  and  of  the  Low  Countries  learnt  that  there  was  a 
land  beyond  the  sea  ruled  by  a  "  wise  young  Queen  "  which 
might  be  their  city  of  refuge,  and  which  was  ready  to  aid 
them,  if  not  openly,  at  least  stealthily.  England,  formerly 
unarmed,  became  supplied  "more  abundantly  than  any 
other  country  with  arms,  munitions,  and  artillery."  Sound 
money,  enlarged  trade,  growing  wealth,  and  an  increasing 
sense  of  security,  were  excellent  allies  to  the  cause  of  the 
Protestant  Eeligion. 

So  long  as  Mary  of  Scotland  was  in  Holyrood  and  able 
to  command  the  sympathy,  if  not  the  allegiance,  of  the 
English  Eoman  Catholics,  the  throne  of  Elizabeth  was 
never  perfectly  secure ;  but  the  danger  from  Scotland  was 
minimised  by  the  jealousy  between  Catherine  de'  Medici  and 
her  daughter-in-law,  and  the  Scottish  Protestant  Lords 
could  always  be  secretly  helped.  When  Philip  n.  of  Spain, 
in  his  slow,  hesitating  way,  which  made  him  always  miss  the 
turn  of  the  tide,  at  length  resolved  to  aid  Mary  to  crush  her 
rebels  at  home  and  to  prosecute  her  claims  on  England,  his 
interference  had  no  further  consequences  than  to  afford 
Elizabeth  an  honourable  pretext  for  giving  effectual  assist- 
ance in  the  conflict  which  drove  Mary  from  her  throne, 
and  made  Scotland  completely  and  permanently  Protestant.8 

1  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Domestic  Series,  etc.  p.  247. 

5  Ibid.  p.  177  ;  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to  English 
Affairs,  preserved  principally  m  the  Archives  of  Simancas,  i.  77,  118,  119. 

8  The  story  of  Francis  Yaxley,  Mary's  agent,  of  his  dealings  with 
Philip  ii.,  of  Philip's  subsidy  to  Scotland  of  20,000  crowns,  of  its  loss  by 
shipwreck,  and  how  the  money  was  claimed  as  trcasure*trove  by  the  Duke  of 
Northumberland,  Eoman  Catholic  and  a  pledged  supporter  of  Mary  as  he 
was,  may  be  traced  in  the  Calendar  of  Letters  and  State  Papers  relating  to 
English  Affairs,  preserved  principally  in  the  Archives  of  Simanras,  pp.  lix, 
499,  506,  516,  523,  546,  557 ;  and  how  the  Pope  also  gave  aid  in  money, 
p.  550. 


BOOK  V. 
ANABAPTISM  AND  SOCINIANISM. 

CHAPTEK    I. 

REVIVAL   OF   MEDIAEVAL  ANTI-ECCLESIASTICAL 
MOVEMENTS. 

THE  revolt  of  Luther  was  the  occasion  for  the  appearance — 
the  outbreak,  it  might  be  called — of  a  large  amount  of 
irregular  independent  thinking  upon  religion  and  theology 
which  had  expressed  itself  sporadically  during  the  whole 
course  of  the  Middle  Ages.  The  great  difference  between 
the  thinkers  and  their  intellectual  ancestors  who  were  at 
war  with  the  mediaeval  Church  life  and  doctrine,  did  not 
consist  in  the  expression  of  anything  essentially  new,  but 
in  the  fact  that  the  Renaissance  had  introduced  a  profound 
contempt  for  the  intellectual  structure  of  ecclesiastical 
dogma,  and  that  the  whole  of  the  sixteenth  century  was 
instinct  with  the  feeling  of  individuality  and  the  pride  of 
personal  existence.  The  old  thoughts  were  less  careful  to 
accommodate  themselves  to  the  recognised  modes  of  theo- 
logical statement,  they  took  bolder  forms  of  expression, 
presented  sharper  outlines,  and  appeared  in  more  definite 
statements. 

Part  of  this  thinking  scarcely  belongs  to  ecclesiastical 
history  at  all.  It  never 'became  the  intellectual  baste  of 
an  institution ;  it  neither  stirred  nor  moulded  the  lives  of 
masses  of  men.  The  leaders  of  thought  remained  solitary 
thinkers,  surrounded  by  a  loose  fringe  of  followers.  But 


421 


422      MEDIJSVAL   ANTI-ECCLESIASTICAL   MOVEMENTS 

as  there  is  always  something  immortal  in  the  forcible  ex- 
pression of  human  thought,  their  opinions  have  not  died 
altogether,  but  have  affected  powerfully  all  the  various 
branches  of  the  Christian  Church  at  different  periods  and 
in  divers  ways.  The  old  conceptions,  somewhat  disguised, 
perhaps,  but  still  the  same,  reappear  in  most  systems  of 
speculative  theology.  It  therefore  demands  a  brief  notice. 

The  greater  portion  of  this  intellectual  effervescence, 
however,  did  not  share  the  same  fate.  Menno  Simons, 
aided,  no  doubt,  by  the  winnowing  fan  of  persecution,  was 
able  to  introduce  order  into  the  wild  fermenting  elements 
of  Anabaptism,  and  to  form  the  Baptist  Church  which  has 
had  such  an  honourable  history  in  Europe  and  America. 
Fausto  Sozzini  did  the  same  for  the  heterogeneous  mass  of 
anti-Trinitarian  thinking,  and  out  of  the  confusion  brought 
the  orderly  unity  of  an  institutional  life. 

This  great  mass  of  crude  independent  thought  may  be 
roughly  classified  as  Mystic,  or  perhaps  Pantheist  Mystic, 
Anabaptist,  and  anti-Trinitarian ;  but  the  division,  so  far 
as  the  earlier  thinkers  go,  is  very  artificial.  The  groups 
continually  overlap ;  many  of  the  leaders  of  thought  might 
be  placed  in  two  or  in  all  three  of  these  divisions.  What 
characterised  them  all  was  that  they  had  little  sense  of 
historical  continuity,  cared  nothing  for  it,  and  so  broke 
with  the  past  completely;  that  they  despaired  of  seeing 
any  good  in  the  historical  Church,  and  believed  that  it 
must  be  ended,  as  it  was  impossible  to  mend  it ;  and  that 
they  all  possessed  a  strong  sense  of  individuality,  believing 
the  human  soul  to  be  imprisoned  when  it  accepted  the  con- 
finement of  a  common  creed,  institution,  or  form  of  service 
unless  of  the  very  simplest  kind. 

Pantheistic  Mysticism  was  no  new  thing  in  Christianity. 
As  early  as  the  sixth  century  at  least,  schools  of  thought 
may  be  found  which  interpreted  such  doctrines  as  the 
Trinity  and  the  Person  of  Christ  in  ways  which  led  to 
what  must  be  called  Pantheism  ;  and  if  such  modes  of  dis- 
solving Christian  doctrines  had  not  a  continuous  succession 
within  the  Christian  Church,  they  wore  always  appearing. 


PANTHEISTIC   MYSTICS  423 

They  were  generally  accompanied  with  a  theory  of  an 
"  inner  light "  which  claimed  either  to  supersede  the  Scrip- 
tures as  the  Rule  of  Faith,  or  at  least  to  interpret  them.  The 
Scriptures  were  the  husk  which  might  be  thrown  away 
when  its  kernel,  discovered  by  the  "  inner  light,"  was  once 
revealed.  The  Schwenkfelds,  Weigels,  Giordano  Brunos  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  who  used  what  they  called  the 
"inner  light"  in  somewhat  the  same  way  as  the  Council  of 
Trent  employed  dogmatic  tradition,  had  a  long  line  of 
ancestry  in  the  mediaeval  Church,  and  their  appearance  at 
the  time  of  the  Reformation  was  only  the  recrudescence 
of  certain  phases  of  mediaeval  thought.  But,  as  has  been 
said,  such  thinkers  were  never  able,  nor  perhaps  did  they 
wish,  to  form  their  followers  into  a  Church ;  and  they  be- 
long much  more  to  the  history  of  philosophy  than  to  an 
ecclesiastical  narrative.  They  had  no  conception  whatever 
of  religion  in  the  Reformation  sense  of  the  word.  Their 
idea  of  faith  was  purely  intellectual — something  to  be  fed 
on  metaphysics  more  or  less  refined. 

By  far  the  most  numerous  of  those  sixteenth  century 
representatives  of  mediaeval  nonconformists  were  classed 
by  contemporaries  under  the  common  name  of  Anabaptists 
or  Katabaptists,  because,  from  1526  onwards,  they  all,  or 
most  of  them,  insisted  on  re-baptism  as  the  sign  of  belong- 
ing to  the  brotherhood  of  believers.  They  were  scattered 
over,  the  greater  part  of  Europe,  from  Sweden  in  the  north 
to  Venice  in  the  south,  from  England  in  the  west  to 
Poland  in  the  east.  The  Netherlands,  Germany, — southern, 
north-western,  and  the  Rhineland, — Switzerland,  the  Tyrol, 
Moravia,  and  Livonia  were  scenes  of  bloody  persecution 
endured  with  heroic  constancy.  Their  leaders  flit  across 
the  pages  of  history,  courageous,  much-enduring  men,  to 
whom  the  world  was  nothing,  whose  eyes  were  fixed  on 
the  eternal  throne  of  God,  and  who  lived  in  the  calm  con- 
sciousness that  in  a  few  hours  they  might  be  fastened  to 
the  stake  or  called  upon  to  endure  more  dreadful  and 
more  prolonged  tortures, — men  of  every  varying  typo  of 
character,  from  tho  gentle  and  pious  young  Humanist  Hans 


424      MEDIEVAL  ANTI-ECCLESIASTICAL   MOVEMENTS 

Denck  to  Jan  Matthys  the  forerunner  of  the  stern  Cami- 
sard  and  Covenanter.  No  statement  of  doctrine  can 
include  the  beliefs  held  in  all  their  innumerable  groups. 
Some  maintained  the  distinctive  doctrines  of  the  mediaeval 
Church  (the  special  conceptions  of  a  priestly  hierarchy,  and 
of  the  Sacraments  being  always  excluded);  others  were 
Lutherans,  Calvinists,  or  Zwinglians ;  some  were  Unitarians, 
and  denied  the  usual  doctrine  of  the  Person  of  Christ ; x  a 
few  must  be  classed  among  the  Pantheists.  All  held  some 
doctrine  of  an  "  inner  light " ;  but  while  some  sat  very  loose 
to  the  letter  of  Scripture,  others  insisted  on  the  most 
literal  reading  and  application  of  Biblical  phraseology. 
They  all  united  in  maintaining  that  true  Christians  ought 
to  live  separate  from  the  world  (i.e.  from  those  who  were 
not  rebaptized),  in  communities  whose  lives  were  to  be 
modelled  on  the  accounts  given  in  the  New  Testament  of 
the  primitive  Christians,  and  that  the  true  Church  had 
nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  State. 

Curiously  enough,  the  leaders  in  the  third  group,  the 
anti-Trinitarians,  were  almost  all  Italians. 

The  most  outstanding  man  among  them,  distinguished  t 
alike  by  his  learning,  his  pure  moral  life,  a  distinct  vein  of 
piety,  and  the  calm  courage  with  which  he  faced  every 
danger  to  secure  the  propagation  of  his   opinions,  was  the 
Spaniard  Miguel    Servede  (Servetus),2  who  was  burnt  at 

*For  example,  the  Mkolsburger  Articles  say:  "Cristus  sei in der  erb- 
sunden  entphangen ;  Cristus  sei  nit  Got  sunder  ein  prophet,  dem  das 
geaprech  oder  wort  Gottes  bevollen  worden  "  (Cornelius,  Oeschwhte  des  Afiln- 
sterischen  Aufruhrs,  ii.  279,  280). 

2  Servede  was  born  in  1511,  in  the  small  town  of  Tudela,  which  then 
belonged  to  Aragon.  He  came  from  an  ancient  family  of  jurists,  and  was 
at  first  destined*  to  the  profession  of  law.  His  family  came  originally 
from  the  township  of  Villanova,  which  probably  accounts  for  the  fact  that 
Servede  sometimes  assumed  that  name.  He  was  in  correspondence  with 
Oecolampadius  (Heusgen)  in  1530 ;  and  from  the  former's  letters  to  and 
about  Servede,  it  is  evident  that  the  young  Spaniard  was  then  fully  per- 
suaded about  his  anti-Trinitarian  opinions.  No  publisher  in  Basel  would 
print  his  book,  and  he  travelled  to  Strassburg.  When  his  first  theological 
book  became  known,  its  sale  was  generally  interdicted  by  the  secular  authori- 
ties. His  great  book,  which  contains  his  whole  theological  thinking,  was 
published  in  1553  without  name  of  place  or  author.  Its  full  title  is: 


ANTI-TRINITARIANS  425 

Geneva  in  1553.  He  was  very  much  a  man  by  himself. 
His  whole  line  of  thought  separated  him  from  the  rest  of 
the  anti-Trinitarian  group  associated  with  the  names  of 
the  Sozzini.  He  reached  his  position  through  a  mystical 
Pantheism — a  course  of  thought  which  one  might  have  ex- 
pected from  a  Spaniard.  He  made  few  or  no  disciples,  and 
did  not  exert  any  permanent  influence. 

The  other  anti-Trinitarians  of  the  first  rank  were 
all  cultured  Italians,  whom  the  spirit  of  the  Renaissance 
prompted  to  criticise  and  reconstruct  theology  as  they 
found  it.  They  were  all  men  who  had  been  driven  to 
reject  the  Roman  Church  because  of  its  corruptions  and 
immoralities,  and  who  had  no  conception  of  any  other 
universal  Christian  society.  Men  of  pure  lives,  pious 
after  their  own  fashion,  they  never  had  any  idea  of  what 
lay  at  the  root  of  the  Reformation  thought  of  what  real 
religion  was.  It  never  dawned  upon  them  that  the  sum 
of  Christianity  is  the  God  of  Grace,  manifest  in  Christ, 
accessible  to  every  believing  soul,  and  unwavering  trust 
on  man's  part.  Their  interest  in  religion  was  almost 
exclusively  intellectual.  The  Reformers  had  defined  the 
Church  as  the  fellowship  of  believers,  and  they  had  said 
that  the  marks  of  that  fellowship  were  the  preaching  of 

Christianismi  Restitutio,  Totius  ecclesice  apostoliccc  ad  sua  limit)  a  vocatio,  in 
integrum  restituta  cognitione  Dei,  fidei  Qhristi,  jiMfiecttwwis  nostrce,  regeiw- 
rationis  baptisimi  et  cc&ncu  domini  mwiducationis,  JResfotnto  deniquc. 
nobis  regno  co&lesti,  Babylonia  impice  captivitate  soluta,  et  Anticliristo  cum 
suispenitus  destructo.  He  entered  into  correspondence  with  Calvin,  offered 
to  come  to  Geneva  to  explain  his  position  ;  but  the  Reformer  plainly  indicated 
that  he  had  no  time  to  bestow  upon  him.  The  account  of  his  trial,  con- 
demnation, and  burning  at  Geneva  is  to  bo  found  in  the  Corpw  JReforma- 
torum,  xxxvi.  720  ff.  The  sentence  is  found  on  p.  825 :  "Icy  est  este  parle 
du  proces  de  Michiel  Servet  prisonnier  et  veu  le  sommairre  dycelluy,  le 
raport  de  ceux  esquelz  Ion  a  consulte  et  considere  les  grands  erreurs  et 
blaff ernes — est  este  arreste  II  soit  oondampne  a  estre  mene  en  Champel  et  la 
eatre  brusle  tout  vyfz  et  soit  exequente  a  demain  et  ses  livres  brusles."  This 
trial  and  execution  is  the  one  black  blot  on  the  character  of  Calvin.  He 
was  by  no  means  omnipotent  in  Geneva  at  the  time ;  but  he  thoroughly  ap- 
proved of  what  was  done,  and  had  expressed  the  opinion  that  if  Servede  came 
to  Geneva,  he  would  not  leave  it  alive  .  "iNTam  si  venerit  modo  valeat  mea 
auctoritas,  virum  exironunquam  patiar"  (Corpus  Jtef.  xi.  283). 


426      MEDIEVAL   ANTI-ECCLESIASTICAL   MOVEMENTS 

the  Word  and  the  right  use  of  the  sacraments — the  means 
through  which  God  manifests  Himself  to  men,  and  men 
manifest  their  faith  in  God.  These  men  never  ap- 
prehended this;  the  only  idea  which  they  seemed  able 
to  have  of  the  Church  was  a  school  of  definite  and 
correct  opinions.  Compelled  to  flee  from  their  native 
land,  they  naturally  took  refuge  in  Switzerland  or  in  the 
Grisons.  It  is  almost  pathetic  to  see  how  they  utterly 
failed  to  understand  the  men  among  whom  they  found 
themselves.  Eeformation  to  them  was  a  criticism  and 
reconstruction  of  theology;  they  were  simply  carrying 
the  criticism  a  little  further  than  their  new  neighbours. 
They  never  perceived  the  real  gulf  fixed  between  them  and 
the  adherents  of  the  Eeformation. 

They  were  all  highly  educated  and  cultivated  men — 
individual  units  from  all  parts  of  Italy.  Camillo  Eenato, 
who  proclaimed  himself  an  Anabaptist,  was  a  Sicilian. 
Gentili  came  from  Calabria ;  Gribaldo  from  Padua ; 
Bernardino  Occhino,  who  in  his  later  days  joined  the 
band,  and  the  two  Sozzini  from  Siena.  Alciato  was  a 
Piedmontese.  Blandrata  (Biandrata),  the  most  energetic 
member  of  the  group  save  Fausto  Sozzini,  belonged  to  a 
noble  family  in  Saluzzo  which  had  long  been  noted  for 
the  protection  it  had  afforded  to  poor  people  persecuted 
by  the  Church.  They  were  physicians  or  lawyers;  one, 
Gentili,  was  a  schoolmaster. 

The  strong  sense  of  individuality,  which  seems  the 
birthright  of  every  Italian,  fostered  by  their  life  within 
their  small  city  republics,  had  been  accentuated  by  the 
Renaissance.  The  historical  past  of  Italy,  and  its  political 
and  social  condition  in  the  sixteenth  century,  made  it 
impossible  for  the  impulse  towards  reform  to  take  any 
other  shape  than  that  of  individual  action.  The  strength 
and  the  impetus  which  conies  from  the  thought  of  fellow- 
man,'  fellow-believer,  and  which  was  so  apparent  in  the 
Eeformation  movements  beyond  the  •  Alps  and  in  the 
Jesuit  reaction,  was  entirely  lacking  among  these  Ee- 
formers  in  Italy.  In  that  land  the  Empire  had  never 


ANTI-TRINITARIANS  427 

regained  its  power  lost  under  the  great  Popes,  Gregory 
vn.  and  Innocent  HI.  The  Eomish  Church  presented 
itself  to  all  Italians  as  the  only  possible  form  under 
which  a  wide-spreading  Christian  Society  could  be 
organised.  If  men  rejected  it,  personal  Christian  life  alone 
remained.  The  Church  dominated  the  masses  unprepared 
by  any  such  conception  of  ecclesiastical  reform  as  in- 
fluenced the  people  in  Germany  and  Switzerland.  Only 
men  who  had  received  some  literary  education  were 
susceptible  to  the  influences  making  for  Reformation. 
They  were  always  prevented  by  the  unbroken  power  of 
the  agencies  of  the  Church  from  organising  themselves 
publicly  into  congregations,  and  could  only  meet  to  ex- 
change confidences  privately  and  on  rare  occasions.1  We 
hear  of  several  such  assemblies,  which  invariably  took  the 
form  of  conferences,  in  which  the  members  discussed  and 
communicated  to  each  other  the  criticisms  of  the  mediaeval 
theology  which  solitary  meditation  had  suggested  to  them. 
They  were  much  more  like  debating  societies  than  the 
beginnings  of  a  Church.  Thus  we  hear  of  one  at 
Vincenza,2  in  1546,  where  about  fotty  friends  met, 
among  whom  was  Lelio  Sozzini,  where  they  debated  such 
doctrines  as  the  Satisfaction  of  Christ,  the  Trinity,  etc., 
and  expressed  doubts  about  their  truth.  It  was  inevitable 
that  such  men  could  not  hope  to  create  a  popular  move- 
ment towards  Eeformation  in  their  native  land,  and  also 
that  they  should  be  compelled  to  seek  safety  beyond  the 
bounds  of  Italy.  They  fled,  one  by  one,  across  the  Alps. 
In  the  Grisons  and  in  Reformed  Switzerland  they  fount! 
little  communities  of  their  countrymen  who  had  sought 

1  Eitschl,  A  critical  History  of  the  Christian  Doctrine  of  Justification  and 
Reconciliation  (Eng.  trans.,  Edin.  1872),  p.  295. 

3 "  Circa  annum  1546  instituerat  (Ltfelius  Sooinus)  cum  sooiis  suis 
iisdem  Italis,  quorum  nunierus  quadragenarium  excedebat,  in  Yeneta  ditione 
(apud  Vincentiam)  collegia  colloquiaque  de  roligione,  in  quibus  potissimum 
dogmata  vulgaria  de  Trinitato  ao  Christi  Satis  faction  e  hisquo  similia  in 
dubiuxnrevooabant"  (Bibh  Antit.  p.  19—1  have  taken  the  quotation  from 
Foek,  Per  Socinianismua  <nach  s&in&r  ftftfhttiw  in  der 
tics  cJirfaffMuw  Grisfca,  etc.,  Kiel,  1847,  i.  132). 


428       MEDIAEVAL   ANTI-ECCLESIASTICAL   MOVEMENTS 

shelter  there,  and  their  presence  was  always  followed 
by  dissensions  and  by  difficulties  with  the  native 
Protestants. 

Their  whole  habits  of  life  and  thought  were  not  of  the 
kind  calculated  to  produce  a  lasting  Christian  fellowship. 
Their  theological  opinions,  which  were  not  the  outcome 
of  a  new  and  living  Christian  experience,  but  had  been 
the  result  of  an  intellectual  criticism  of  the  mediaeval 
theology,  had  little  stability,  and  did  not  tend  to  produce 
unity.  The  execution  of  Servede  and  the  jealousy  which 
all  the  Reformed  cantons  of  Switzerland  manifested 
towards  opinions  in  any  way  similar  to  those  of  the 
learned  Spaniard,  made  life  in  Switzerland  as  unsafe 
as  it  had  been  in  Italy.  They  migrated  to  Poland  and 
Transylvania,  attracted  by  the  freedom  of  thought  existing 
in  both  lands. 

Poland,  besides,  had  special  attractions  for  refugees 
from  Italy.  The  two  countries  had  long  been  in  intimate 
relationship.  Italian  architects  had  designed  the  stately 
buildings  in  Crakau  and  other  Polish  cities,  and  the 
commercial  intercourse  between  the  two  countries  was 
great.  The  independence  and  the  privileges  of  the 
Polish  nobles  secured  them  from  ecclesiastical  interference, 
and  both  Calvinism  and  Lutheranism  had  found  many 
adherents  among  the  aristocracy.  They,  like  the  Roman 
patricians  of  the  early  centuries,  gave  the  security  of 
their  halls  to  their  co-religionists,  and  the  heads  of  the 
Romanist  Church  chafed  at  their  impotence  to  prevent 
the  spread  of  opinions  and  usages  which  they  deemed 
heretical.  In  Transylvania  the  absence  of  a  strong 
central  government  permitted  the  same  freedom  to  the 
expression  of  every  variety  of  religious  opinion. 

The  views  held  by  the  group  of  anti-Trinitarians 
were  by  no  means  the  same.  They  reproduced  in 
Poland  the  same  medley  of  views  we  find  existing  in  the 
end  of  the  third  century.  Some  were  Sabellians,  others 
Adoptianists,  a  few  were  Arians.  Perhaps  most  of  them 
believed  in  the  miraculous  birth  of  our  Lord,  and  held  as 


ANTI-TRINITARIANS  429 

a  consequence  that  He  ought  to  be  adored ;  but  a  strong 
minority,  under  the  leadership  of  Francis  Davidis,  re- 
pudiated the  miraculous  birth,  and  refused  to  worship 
Christ  (non-adorantes).  Tor  a  time  they  seem  to  have 
lived  in  a  certain  amount  of  accord  with  the  members  of 
the  Reformed  communities.  A  crisis  came  at  the  Polish 
Diet  of  1564,  and  the  anti-Trinitarians  were  recognised 
then  to  be  a  separate  religious  community,  or  eccle&ia 
minor.  This  was  the  field  in  which  Fausto  Sozzini 
exercised  his  commanding  intellect,  his  genius  for 
organisation,  and  his  eminently  strong  will.  He  created 
out  of  these  jarring  elements  the  Socinian  Church. 

The  Anabaptist  and  the  Socinian  movements  require, 
however,  a  more  detailed  description. 


CHAPTEE  IL 

ANABAPTISM.1 

THE  old  monotonous  mode  of  describing  Anabaptism  has 
almost  entirely  disappeared  with  the  modern  careful  exami- 
nation of  sources.  It  is  no  longer  possible  to  sum  up  the 

1  SOURCES  :  Magnet,  BibliotJieca  Veterum  Patrum  (Colonise  Agrippinae, 
1618),  xiii.  299-307 ;  Sebastian  Franck,  Chronica,  Zeitbuch  uiid  Ges- 
chichtbibel  (Augsburg,  1565),  pt.  iii.  ;  Hans  Denck,  Von  dev  waren  Lieb, 
etc.  (1527 — reptiblished  by  the  Menonitische  Verlags&uchhandlung,  Elkhart, 
Indiana,  U.S.A.) ;  Bouterwek,  Zur  Literatur  und  Geschichte  der  Wieder- 
taufer  (Bonn,  1864 — gives  extracts  from  the  rarer  Anabaptist  writings  such 
as  the  works  of  Hubmaier) ;  Auvbund  etlicker  sch'oner  christlicfier  geseng,  etc. 
(1583);  Liliencron,  "Zur  Liederdichtung  der  Wiedertaufer "  (in  the 
Abhandlungen  der  konig.  JBavr.  AJcad.  der  Wissenschaften  JPhiZosophische 
JElasse,  1878) ;  von  Zezschwitz,  Die  Katacliismen  der  Waldenser  wid 
£dmischen  Cruder  (Erlangen,  1863);  Beck,  GeschichtsMcher  der 

Wied&rttiufer  in  Oestreich-Ungem,  1526  Us  1785  (Vienna,  1883),  printed 
in  the  Fontes  JRer.  Austr.  Diplom.  et  Acta,  xliii.  ;  Kessler,  Safibata,  ed. 
by  Egli  and  Schoch  (St.  Gall,  1902) ;  Bullinger,  Der  Wiedertauferen 

Ursprung,  JSecten,  etc.  (Zurich,  1560) ;  Egli,  Actensammlung  zur  GescJiichte 
der  Zuricher  ItefvnnaMan  (Zurich*,  1879),  Die  ZiLricher  Wiedertaufer 
(Zurich,  1878) ;  Leopold  Dickius,  Adversus  impios  Anafoaptistarum 
errores  (1533) ;  Cornelius,  JBerichte  der  Augenzeugen  fiber  das  M&nsterischc 

Wiedertauferreich,  forming  the  2nd  vol.  of  the  QeschichtsqueUen  des 
Bisthwms  MUnster  (Mlinster,  1853)  a/nd  the  Beilage  in  his  GeschfoUe  des 
jMtiinsterfecTien  Aufruhrs  (Leipzig,  1855) ;  Detmer's  edition  of  Kerssenbroch, 
AnabaptisUcifuroris  Monasterium  inclitam  Westphalice  metropolis,  evertentis 
historica  narratio,  forming  vols.  v.  and  vi.  of  the  Qesckiclvtsquellen  des 
Bisthums  Mimster  (Miiiister,  1899,  1900)  ;  ChroniJcen  der  deutschen  Stcidte, 
Wurriberg  Chronik,  vols.  i.  and  iv. 

LATER  BOOKS  :  Keller,  Geschickte  der  Wiedert&ufer  wnd  three  Eeichs 
zu  Muster  (Miinster,  1880),  Mn  Apostel  der  Wiedertfiufer*  Hans  Denck 
(Leipzig,  1882),  and  Die  Reformation  und  die  alteren  JRefomnparteien 
(Leipzig,  1885 — Keller  is  apt  to  make  inferences  beyond  his  facts) ;  Heath, 
Anabaptfom,  from  its  rise  at  JZwickau  to  its  fall  at  Miinster,  15Z1-15S6 
(London,  1895) ;  Belfort  Bax,  Rite  and  Fall  of  Hie  Anabaptists  (London, 

430 


THE   ANABAPTISTS  431 

movement  in  four  stages,  beginning  with  the  Zwickau 
prophets  and  ending  with  the  catastrophe  in  Miinster,  or 
to  explain  its  origin  by  calling  it  the  radical  side  of 
the  Eeformation  movement.1  It  is  acknowledged  by 
careful  students  to  have  been  a  very  complicated  affair, 
to  have  had  roots  buried  in  the  previous  centuries,  and  to 
have  had  men  among  its  leaders  who  were  distinguished 
Humanists.  It  is  now  known  that  it  spread  over  Europe 
with  great  rapidity,  and  attracted  to  itself  an  enormously 
larger  number  of  adherents  than  had  been  imagined. 

It  is  impossible  within  the  limits  of  one  brief  chapter 
to  state  and  criticise  the  various  theories  of  the  origin  and 
roots  of  the  movement  which  modern  investigation  has 

1903)  ;  Rbrich,  "Die  Gottesfreunde  und  die  Winkeler  am  Oberrhein"  (in 
Zeitschrift  fiir  hist.  Theol.  i.  118  ff.,  1840)  ;  Zur  Oeschichte  der  strassburg- 
ischen  Wiedertaufer  (Zeitschrift  fiir.  hist.  Theol.  xxx.  1860) ;  S.B.  ten  Gate, 
Geschiedenis  der  doopffezinden  in  Grotivngen,  etc.,  2  vols.  (Leewarden,  1843) ; 
Gesch\edenis  der  doopgezinden  in  Friesland  (Leewarden,  1839) ;  Geschiedenis 
der  doopgezinden  in  Holland  en  Guelderland,  2  vols.  (Amsterdam,  1847) ; 
Tileman  van  Braght,  Het  bloedig  Toeneel  of  Martelaars  Spiegel  der 
doopgesinde  (Amsterdam,  1685) ;  E.  B.  Underbill,  Afartyrology  of  tlie 
Churches  of  Christ  commonly  ealled  Baptist  (translated  from  Van  Braght) ; 
H.  S.  Barrage,  A  History  of  the  Anilaptists  in  Switzerland  (founded  on 
Egli's  researches,  Philadelphia,  1881) ;  Newman,  A  History  of  Anti- 
Pedobaptism  (Philadelphia,  1897)  j  Detmer,  Mlder  aus  den  religiosen  und 
sozialen  Unruhen  in  Munster  wahrend  des  16  Jahrhunderts :  i.  Johann  von 
Leiden  (Mttnster,  1903),  ii.  Bernhard  Hothmann  (1904),  iii.  Ueoer  die 
Aujfassung  von  der  Ehe  wn&  die  JDurchf&hrung  der  Vielweiberei  in  M twister 
wahrend  der  Taiiferherrschaft  (1904) ;  Heath,  Contemporary  JReview,  lix. 
389  ("The  Anabaptists  arid  their  English  Descendants"),  Ixii.  880 
("Hans  Denck  the  Baptist),  Ixvii  578  (Early  Anabaptism,  what  it  meant, 
and  what  we  owe  to  it),  Ixx.  247  ("Living  in  Community— a  sketch  of 
Moravian  Anabaptism"),  541  ("The  Archetype  of  the  Pilgrim^ 
Progress"),  Ixxii.  105  ("The  Archetype  of  the  Holy  JTor"). 

1  The  difference  in  treatment  may  be  seen  at  a  glance  by  comparing  the 
articles  on  Anabaptism  in  the  second  (1877)  and  in  the  third  (1890) 
edition  of  Herzog's  Healencyclopadie  f&r  protestantisehe  Theolo(,ie  und 
Kircke.  Some  eminent  historians,  however,  still  cling  to  old  ideas ;  for 
example,  Edward  Armstrong,  The  Emperor  Charles  K  (London,  1902),  who 
justifies  the  treatment  his  hero  meted  out  to  the  Anabaptists— roasting 
them  to  death  before  slow  fires— by  saying  tbat  "whenever  they 
momentarily  gained  the  upper  hand,  they  applied  the  practical  methods 
of  modern  Anarchism  or  Nihilism  to  the  professed  principles  of 
Oommunism"  (ii.  342).  No  one  who  has  examined  the  original  sources 
could  have  pennod  such  a  sentence. 


432  ANABAPTISM 

suggested.  All  that  can  be  done  is  to  set  down  succinctly 
the  conclusions  reached  after  a  tolerably  wide  examination 
of  the  sources — admitting  at  the  same  time  that  more  in- 
formation must  be  obtained  ere  the  history  of  the  move- 
ment advances  beyond  the  controversial  stage. 

It  is  neither  safe  nor  easy  to  make  abrupt  general 
statements  about  the  causes  or  character  of  great  popular 
movements.  The  elements  which  combine  to  bring  them 
into  being  and  keep  them  in  existence  are  commonly  as 
innumerable  as  the  hues  which  blend  in  the  colour  of  a 
mountain  side.  Anabaptism  was  such  a  complicated  move- 
ment that  it  presents  peculiar  difficulties.  As  has  been  said, 
it  had  a  distinct  relation  to  two  different  streams  of 
mediaeval  life,  the  one  social  and  the  other  religious — the 
revolts  of  peasants  and  artisans,  and  the  successions  of  the 
Brethren. 

From  the  third  quarter  of  the  fifteenth  century  social 
uprisings  had  taken  place  almost  every  decade,  all  of  them 
more  or  less  impregnated  with  crude  religious  beliefs. 
They  were  part  of  the  intellectual  and  moral  atmosphere 
that  the  "common  man,"  whether  in  town  or  country 
district,  continuously  breathed,  and  their  power  over  him 
must  not  be  lost  sight  of.  The  Eeformation  movement 
quickened  and  strengthened  these  influences  simply  because 
it  set  all  things  in  motion.  It  is  not  possible,  therefore,  to 
draw  a  rigid  line  of  separation  between  some  sides  of  the 
Anabaptist  movement  and  the  social  revolt ;  and  hence  it 
is  that  there  is  at  least  a  grain  of  truth  in  the  conception 
that  the  Anabaptists  were  the  revolutionaries  of  the  times 
of  the  Eeformation. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  are  good  reasons  for  asserting 
that  the  distinctively  religious  side  of  Anabaptism  had  little 
to  do  with  the  anarchic  outbreaks.  It  comes  in  direct 
succession  from  those  communities  of  pious  Christians  who, 
on  the  testimony  of  their  enemies,  lived  quiet  God-fearing 
lives,  and  believed  all  the  articles  in  the  Apostles'  Creed  ; 
but  who  were  strongly  anti-clerical.  They  lived  unobtrus- 
ively, and  rarely  appear  in  history  save  when  the  chronicle 


THE   MEDIAEVAL   BRETHREN  433 

of  some  town  makes  casual  mention  of  their  existence,  or 
when  an  Inquisitor  ferreted  them  out  and  records  their  so- 
called  heresies.  Their  objections  to  the  constitution  and 
ceremonies  of  the  mediaeval  Church  were  exactly  those  of 
the  Anabaptists  of  the  sixteenth  century ;  and  if  we  do  not 
find  a,  universal  repudiation  of  infant  baptism,  there  are 
traces  that  some  did  not  approve  of  it.  They  insisted  that 
the  ^service  ought  to  be  in  the  vulgar  tongue ;  they  objected 
to  all  the  Church  festivals;  to  all  blessing  of  buildings, 
crosses,  and  candles  ;  they  alleged  that  Christ  did  not  give 
His  Apostles  stoles  or  chasubles ;  they  scoffed  at  excom- 
munications, Indulgences,  and  dispensations  ;  they  declared 
that  there  was  no  regenerative  efficacy  in  infant  baptism ; 
and  they  were  keenly  alive  to  all  the  injunctions  of  Christian 
charity — it  was  better,  they  said,  to  clothe  the  poor  than 
to  expend  money  on.  costly  vestments  or  to  adorn  the  walls 
of  Churches,  and  they  kept  up  schools  and  hospitals  for 
lepers.  They  met  in  each  other's  houses  for  public  worship, 
which  took  the  form  of  reading  and  commenting  upon  the 
Holy  Scriptures.1 

As  we  are  dependent  on  very  casual  sources  of  informa- 
tion, it  is  not  surprising  that  we  cannot  trace  their  continu- 
ous descent  down  to  the  period  of  the  Eeformation ;  but 
we  do  find  in  the  earlier  decades  of  the  sixteenth  century 
notices  of  the  existence  of  small  praying  communities, 
which  have  all  the  characteristics  of  those  recorded  in  the 
Inquisitors'  reports  belonging  to  the  end  of  the  fourteenth . 
or  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  centuries.  They  appeared  in 
Basel  in  1514,  in  Switzerland  in  1515,  in  Mainz  in  1518, 
and  in  Augsburg  somewhat  earlier.2  By  the  year  1524 
similar  "  praying  circles "  were  recorded  as  existing  in 
France,  in  the  Netherlands,  in'  Italy,  in  Saxony,  in 
Franconia,  at  Strassburg,  and  in  Bohemia.  They  used  a 
common  catechism  for  the  instruction  of  their  young 

1  Magnn  Billiotficca  VeterumPatmm  (Colonise  Agrippinse,  1618),  xiii.  299, 
300,  307  (the  Summa  of  Eaivorus  Saochonus).     Of.  i.  152. 

2  These  are  the  dates  at  which  town  chronicles  incidentally  show  that 
such  communities  existed,  not  the  dates  of  their  origin. 

28** 


434  ANABAPTISM 

people  which  was  printed  in  French,  German,  Bohemian, 
and  perhaps  Italian.  In  Germany,  the  Bible  was  the 
German  Vulgate — a  version  retained  among  the  Anabaptists 
long  after  the  publication  of  Luther's.  They  exhibited 
great  zeal  in  printing  and  distributing  the  pious  literature 
of  the  Friends  of  God  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth 
centuries.  Many  of  them  taught  Baptist  views,  though 
the  tenets  were  not  universally  accepted,  and  they  were 
already  called  Anabaptists  or  Katabaptists — a  term  of 
reproach.  Some  of  their  more  distinguished  leaders  were 
pious  Humanists,  and  their  influence  may  perhaps  be  seen 
in  the  efforts  made  by  the  Brethren  to  print  and  distri- 
bute the  Defensor  Pacis  of  Marsiglio  of  Padua. 

This  quiet  Evangelical  movement  assumed  a  more 
definite  form  in  1524.  Before  that  date  the  associations 
of  pious  people  acted  like  the  Pietists  of  the  seventeenth 
or  like  the  Wesleyans  of  the  eighteenth  century.  They 
associated  together  for  mutual  edification ;  they  did  not 
obtrusively  separate  themselves  from  the  corrupt  or  sloth- 
ful Church.  But  in  June  1524,  delegates  representing  a 
very  wide  circle  of  "  praying  assemblies  "  or  Readings  met 
at  Waldshut,  in  the  house  of  Balthasar  Hiibmaier,1  bringing 
their  Bibles  with  them,  to  consult  how  to  organise  their 
Christian  living  on  the  lines  laid  down  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. No  regular  ecclesiastical  organisation  was  formed. 
The  Brethren  resolved  to  separate  from  the  Papal  Church ; 
.  they  published  a  Directory  for  Christian  living,  and  drew 
up  a  statement  of  principles  in  which  they  believed. 
Amongst  other  things,  they  protested  against  any  miraculous 
efficacy  in  the  Sacraments  in  general,  and  held  that  Baptism 
is  efficacious  only  when  it  is  received  in  faith.  This  led 
afterwards  to  the  adoption  of  Baptist  views.  A  second 
conference  was  held  at  Augsburg  in  1526,  which  probably 
dates  the  time  when  adult-baptism  became  a  distinctive 
belief  among  all  the  Brethren.  This  conference  suggested 
a  General  Synod  which  met  at  Augsburg  in  1527  (Aug.), 
and  included  among  its  members,  delegates  from  Munich, 

1  Vedder,  £althaza<r  HMnnafar  (New  York,  1905). 


ORGANISATION  435 

Franconia,  Ingolstadt,  Upper  Austria,  Styria,  and  Switzer- 
land. There  they  drew  up  a  statement  of  doctrinal  truth, 
which  is  very  simple,  and  corresponds  intimately  with  what 
is  now  taught  among  the  Moravian  Brethren.  Their  Hyinn- 
book *  does  not  bear  any  traces  of  the  errors  in  doctrine 
usually  attributed  to  them.  Its  chief  theme  is  the  love  of 
God  awakening  our  love  to  God  and  to  our  fellow-men. 
Instead  of  infant  baptism  they  had  a  -ceremony  in  which 
the  children  were  consecrated  to  God.  Baptism  was  re- 
garded as  the  sign  of  conversion  and  of  definite  resolve  to 
give  one's  self  up  to  the  worship  and  service  of  God.  It 
was  administered  by  sprinkling ;  the  recipient  knelt  to  re- 
ceive it  in  the  presence  of  the  congregation.  The  Holy 
Sapper  was  administered  at  stated  times,  and  always  after 
one  or  two  days  of  solemn  preparation.  Their  office- 
bearers were  deacons,  elders,  masters  and  teachers,  or 
pastors.  They  distinguished  between  pastors  who  were 
wandering  evangelists  and  those  who  were  attached  to 
single  congregations.  The  latter,  who  were  ordained  by  the 
laying  on  of  hands,  alone  had  the  right  to  dispense  the 
Sacraments.  All  the  deacons,  elders,  and  pastors  belonging 
to  communities  within  a  prescribed  district,  selected  from 
among  themselves  delegates  who  formed  their  ecclesiastical 
council  for  the  district,  and  this  council  elected  one  of  the 
pastors  to  act  as  Bishop  or  Superintendent.  It  was  the 
Superintendent  who  ordained  by  laying  on  of  hands.  The 
whole  of  the  Brethren  were  governed  ecclesiastically  by  a 
scries  of  Synods  corresponding  to  those  in  the  Presbyterian 
Churches.  This  organisation  enabled  the  Anabaptists  to 
endure  the  frightful  persecution  which  they  were  soon  to 
experience  at  the  hands  of  the  papal  and  Lutheran  State 
Churches. 

The  chief  leaders  were  Balthasar  Hiibmaier  and  Hans 
Denck.  Hiibmaier  was  a  distinguished  scholar.  He  be- 
came, at  an  unusnally  early  age,  Professor  of  theology  at 

1  Lilienoron,  "Zur  Liederdichtungder  Wiedertaiifer,"  in  the  Transactions 
qf  the  JBSwtgl.  Bair.  Mad.  der    Wissenschajten,  PMlosoptiisfih-historischc 
1877. 


436  ANABAPTISM 

Ingolstadt  (1512);  he  was  Eector  of  the  famous  High 
School  in  that  city  (1515);  and  Cathedral  preacher  at 
Regensburg  (Eatisbon)  (1516).  In  1519,  feeling  that  he 
could  no  longer  conscientiously  occupy  such  positions,  he 
retired  to  the  little  town  of  Waldshut.  Hans  Denck  was 
a  noted  Humanist,  a  member  of  the  "  Erasmus  circle  "  at 
Basel,  and  esteemed  the  most  accurate  Greek  scholar  in  the 
learned  community.  Conrad  Grebel,  another  well-known 
Anabaptist  leader,  also  belonged  to  the  "  Erasmus  circle," 
and  was  a  member  of  one  of  the  patrician  families  of  Zurich. 
Like  Hiibmaier  and  Denck,  he  gave  up  all  to  become  an 
evangelist,  and  spent  his  life  on  long  preaching  tours. 
These  facts  are  sufficient  to  refute  the  common  statement 
that  the  Anabaptists  were  ignorant  fanatics. 

Perhaps  Denck  was  the  most  widely  known  and  highly 
esteemed.  In  the  summer  of  1523  he  was  appointed 
Eector  of  the  celebrated  Sebaldus  School  in  KTiirnberg. 
In  the  end  of  1524  he  was  charged  with  heresy,  and 
along  with  him  Jorg  Penz,  the  artist,  the  favourite  pupil 
of  Albert  Diirer,  and  four  others.  Denck  was  banished 
from  the  city,  and  his  name  became  well  known.  This 
trial  and  sentence  was  the  occasion  of  his  beginning  that 
life  of  wandering  evangelist  which  had  among  other 
results  the,  conferences  in  1526  and  1527,  and  the 
organisation  above  described.  Denck  had  drunk  deeply 
at  the  well  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  century  Mystics, 
and  his  teaching  was  tinged  by  many  of  their  ideas.  He 
believed  that  there  was  a  spark  of  the  divine  nature  in  man, 
an  Inner  Word,  which  urged  man  to  walk  in  the  ways  of 
God,  and  that  man  could  always  keep  true  to  the  inward 
monitor,  who  was  none  else  than  Christ.  The  accounts 
given  of  some  of  his  addresses  seem  to  be  echoes  of  Tauler's 
famous  sermon  on  the  Bridegroom  and  the  Bride,  for  he 
taught  that  the  sufferings  of  the  faithful  are  to  be  looked 
upon  as  the  love-gifts  of  the  Saviour,  and  are  neither  to 
be  mourned  nor  resisted.  We  are  told  in  the  quaint 
Chronicle  of  Sebastian  Franck,  that  the  Baptist  current 
swept  swiftly  through  the  whole  land ;  many  thousands  were 


VARIETIES   OF   TEACHING  437 

baptized,  and  many  hearts  drawn  to  them.  "For  they 
taught  nothing  but  love,  faith,  and  crucifixion  of  the  flesh, 
manifesting  patience  and  humility  under  many  sufferings, 
breaking  bread  with  one  another  in  sign  of  unity  and  love, 
helping  one  another  with  true  helpfulness,  lending,  borrow- 
ing, giving,  learning  to  have  all  things  in  common,  calling 
each  other  *  brother/  " l  He  adds  that  they  were  accused 
of  many  things  of  which  they  were  innocent,  and  were 
treated  very  tyrannically. 

The  Anabaptists,  like  the  earlier  Mystics,  displayed  a 
strong  individuality;  and  this  makes  it  impossible  to 
classify  their  tenets  in  a  body  of  doctrine  which  can  be 
held  to  express  the  system  of  intellectual  belief  which  lay 
at  the  basis  of  the  whole  movement.  We  have  three 
contemporary  accounts  which  show  the  divergence  of 
opinion  among  them — two  from  hostile  and  one  from  a 
sympathetic  historian.  Bullinger2  attempts  a  classifica- 
tion of  their  different  divisions,  and  mentions  thirteen 
distinct  sects  within  the  Anabaptist  circle;  but  they 
manifestly  overlap  in  such  a  way  as  to  suggest  a  very 
large  amount  of  difference  which  cannot  be  distinctly 
tabulated.  Sebastian  Franck3  notes  all  the  varieties  of 
views  which  Bullinger  mentions,  but  refrains  from  any 
classification.  "  There  are/'  he  says,  "  more  sects  and 
opinions,  which  I  do  not  know  and  cannot  describe,  but 
it  appears  to  me  that  there  are  not  two  to  be  found 
who  agree  with  each  other  on  all  points."  ELessler,4 
who  recounts  the  story  of  the  Anabaptists  of  St.  Gallen, 
notes  the  same  great  variety  of  opinions. 

It  is  quite  possible  to  describe  the  leading  ideas  taught 
by  a  few  noted  men  and  approved  of  by  their  immediate 
circle  of  followers,  and  so  to  arrive  with  some  accuracy 
at  the  popularity  of  certain  leading  principles  among 
different  parties,  but  it  must  be  remembered  that  no  great 

1  Chronica  (Augsburg  edition,  1565),  f.  164. 

a  Dcr  Wiedert&ufcr&n.  Urspmwg,  Fwgang,  fatten,  etc.  (Zurich,  1560). 

3  Chronica  (8  pts,,  Strassburg,  1531). 

*  SaXbato  (cd.  by  Kgli  and  Schoch,  St.  Gall,  1902). 


438  ANABAPTISM 

leader  imposed  his  opinions  on  the  whole  Anabaptist 
circle,  and  that  the  views  held  at  different  times  by  pro- 
minent men  were  not  invariably  the  sentiments  which  lay 
at  the  basis  of  the  whole  movement. 

The  doctrine  of  passive  resistance  was  held  by  almost 
all  the  earlier  Anabaptists,  but  it  was  taught  and  practised 
in  such  a  great  variety  of  ways  that  a  merely  general  state- 
ment gives  a  misleading  idea.  All  the  earlier  Anabaptists 
believed  that  it  was  unchristian  to  return  evil  for  evil,  and 
that  they  should  take  the  persecutions  which  came  to  them 
without  attempting  to  retaliate.  Some,  like  the  young 
Humanist,  Hans  Denck,  pushed  the  theory  so  far  that  they 
believed  that  no  real  Christian  could  be  either  a  magistrate 
or  a  soldier.  A  small  band  of  Anabaptists,  to  whom  one 
of  the  Counts  of  lichtenstein  had  given  shelter  at  Nikols- 
burg,  told  their  protector  plainly  that  they  utterly  dis- 
approved of  his  threatening  the  Austrian  Commissary 
with  armed  resistance  if  he  entered  the  Nikolsburg 
territory  to  seize  them.  In  short,  what  is  called  "  passive 
resistance "  took  any  number  of  forms,  from  the  ordinary 
Christian  maxim  to  be  patient  under  tribulation,  to  that 
inculcated  and  practised  by  the  modern  sect  of  Dunkhers. 

The  followers  of  Melchior  Hoffmann,  called  "  Melchior- 
ites,"  held  apocalyptic  or  millenarian  views,  and  expected 
in  tbe  near  future  the  return  of  Christ  to  reign  over  His 
saints ;  but  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  this  con- 
ception was  very  widely  adopted,  still  less  that  it  can  be 
called  a  tenet  of  Anabaptism  in  general.  All  the  Ana- 
baptists inculcated  the  duty  of  charity  and  the  claims  of 
the  poor  on  the  richer  members  of  the  community ;  but 
that  is  a  common  Christian  precept,  and  does  not  necessarily 
imply  communistic  theories  or  practices.  All  that  can 
be  definitely  said  of  the  whole  Anabaptist  circle  was  that 
they  did  keep  very  clearly  before  them  the  obligations  of 
Christian  love.  The  so-called  Communism  in  Miinster 
will  be  described  later. 

When  we  examine  carefully  the  incidental  records 
of  contemporary  witnesses  observing  their  Anabaptist 


ANABAPTIST    EVANGELISTS  439 

neighbours,  we  reach  the  general  conclusion  that  their 
main  thought  was  to  reproduce  in  their  own  lives  what 
seemed  to  them  to  be  the  beliefs,  usages,  and  social 
practices  of  the  primitive  Christians.  Translations  of  the 
Bible  and  of  parts  of  it  had  been  common  enough  in 
Germany  before  Luther's  days.  The  "common  man," 
especially  the  artisan  of  the  towns,  knew  a  great  deal 
about  the  Bible.  It  was  the  one  book  he  read,  re-read,  and 
pondered  over.  Fired  with  the  thoughts  created  in  his 
mind  by  its  perusal,  simple  men  felt  impelled  to  become 
itinerant  preachers.  The  "  call "  came  to  them,  and  they 
responded  at  once  to  what  they  believed  to  be  the  divine 
voice.  Witness  Hans  Ber  of  Alten-Erlangen,  a  poor 
peasant.  He  rose  from  his  bed  one  night  and  suddenly 
began  to  put  on  his  clothes.  "Whither  goest  thou?" 
asked  his  poor  wife.  "I  know  not;  God  knoweth,"  he 
answered.  "What  evil  have  I  done  thee?  Stay  and 
help  me  to  bring  up  my  little  children."  "Dear  wife," 
he  answered,  "trouble  me  not  with  the  things  of  time. 
I  must  away,  that  I  may  learn  the  will  of  the  Lord." l  Such 
men  wandered  about  in  rude  homespun  garments,  often 
barefooted,  their  heads  covered  with  rough  felt  hats.  They 
craved  hospitality  in  houses,  and  after  supper  produced 
their  portions  of  the  Bible,  read  and  expounded,  then 
vanished  in  the  early  morning.  We  are  told  how  Hans 
Hut  came  to  the  house  of  Franz  Strigel  at  Weier  in 
Franconia,  produced  his  Bible,  read  and  expounded, 
explained  the  necessity  of  adult  baptism,  convinced  Strigel, 
the  house  father,  and  eight  others,  and  baptized  them  there 
and  then.  He  wandered  forth  the  same  night.  None 
of  the  baptized  saw  him  again ;  but  the  little  community 
remained — a  small  band  of  Anabaptists.2 

These  wandering  preachers,  "  prophets "  they  may  be 
called  if  we  give  them  the  early  Christian  name,  were  not 
drilled  in  any  common  set  of  opinions.  Each  conceived 

1  0.  A.  Cornelius,  Geschichte  des  Jtofilnstenschen  Aufruhrs  (Leipzig,  1855), 
ii.  49. 

*  Md.  ii.  49. 


440  ANABAPTISM 

the  primitive  teaching  and  social  life  as  he  seemed  to  see 
it  reflected  in  the  New  Testament ;  and  no  two  conceptions 
were  exactly  the  same.  The  circumstances  and  surroundings 
produced  an  infinite  variety  of  thought  about  the  doctrines 
and  usages  which  ought  to  be  accepted  and  practised. 
Yet  they  had  traditional  modes  of  interpretation  handed 
down  to  them  from  the  praying  circles  of  the  "  Brethren." 
Compare  what  the  Austrian  Inquisitor  says  of  the 
"  Brethren "  in  the  thirteenth  century,  with  what  Johann 
Kessler  tells  about  the  Anabaptists  of  St.  Gallen,  and 
the  resemblance  is  striking  so  far  as  external  appearance 
goes.  '*  Haeretici  cognoscuntur  per  mores  et  verba,"  says 
the  Inquisitor,  "Sunt  enim  in  moribus  compositi  et 
modesti ;  superbiam  in  vestibus  non  habent,  nee  pretiosis, 
nee  multum  abjectis  utuntur.  .  .  .  Doctores  etiam 
ipsorum  sunt  sutores  et  textores.  Divitias  non  multi- 
plicant,  sed  necessariis  sunt  contenti.  Casti  etiam  sunt. 
.  .  ,  Temperati  etiam  in  cibo  et  potu.  Ad  tabernas 
non  eunt,  nee  ad  choreas,  nee  ad  alias  vanitates.  Ab  ira 
se  cohibent ;  semper  operantur,  discunt  vel  docent,  et  ideo 
parum  orant.  .  .  .  Cognoscuntur  etiam  in  verbis  praecisis 
tjfc  tpodestis.  Cavent  etiam  a  scurrilitate  et  detractione, 
et  verborum  levitate,  et  mendacio,  et  juramento." 1  Kessler 
tells  us  that  the  walk  and  conversation  of  these  Anabaptists 
was  "  throughout  pious,  holy,  and  blameless " ;  that  they 
refrained  from  wearing  costly  apparel,  despised  luxurious 
eating  and  drinking,  clothed  themselves  in  rough  cloth, 
wore  slouch  hats  on  their  heads.  Franck  relates  that 
they  refused  to  frequent  wine-shops  and  the  "  gild  "  rooms 
where  dances  were  held. 

As  they  lived  again  the  life  of  these  mediaeval  sectaries, 
so  they  reproduced  their  opinions  in  the  same  sporadic  way. 
Some  of  them  objected  to  all  war  even  in  self-defence, 
as  did  some  of  the  earlier  Lollards.  Their  Lord  had  said 
to  His  first  disciples:  "Go  your  ways:  behold,  I  send 
you  forth  as  lambs  in  the  midst  of  wolves/'  They  flung 

1  Magnet,  BlUwtheca,    Teterum   Patrum   (Colonise   Agrippinae, 
Rainorii  Socchoni,  tfumma,  o,  vii. 


FREEDOM    OF   CONSCIENCE  441 

from  them  the  sword,  with  which  peasant  and  artisan  were 
then  alike  girt,  and  went  about  as  the  apostles  were  ordered 
to  do,  with  staves  in  their  hands — the  Stabler  or  staffmen  who 
would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  weapons  of  wolves. 
Others,  also  like  some  of  the  Lollards,  would  not  enter  the 
"  huge  stone  houses  with  great  glass  windows  which  men 
called  'churches.'"  The  early  Christians  had  preached 
and  "broken  bread"  in  houses;  and  they  would  follow 
their  example ;  and  in  private  rooms,  in  the  streets,  in  the 
market-places,  they  proclaimed  their  gospel  of  peace  and 
contentment.  The  infinitesimal  number  who  taught  some- 
thing like  "  free  love/'  and  who  were  repudiated  by  the 
others,  were  reproducing  the  vagaries  of  the  mediaeval 
Brethren  and  Sisters  of  the  Free  Spirit,  who  gave  Meister 
Eckhart  so  much  trouble  centuries  before  in  the  Ehineland. 
All  the  more  extravagant  ideas  and  practices  which  appear 
among  small  sections  of  these  Anabaptists  of  the  sixteenth 
century  can  be  found  among  the  sectaries  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  For  the  whole  Anabaptist  movement  was  mediaeval 
to  the  core ;  and,  like  most  of  the  mediaeval  religious  awaken- 
ings, produced  an  infinite  variety  of  opinions  and  practices. 
The  one  idea  common  to  all  was,  that  the  Christians  of  the 
sixteenth  century  were  called  to  reproduce  in  thought  and 
life  the  intellectual  beliefs  and  usages  of  the  primitive 
Christians.  It  is  simply  impossible  to  give  any  account  of 
opinions  and  practices  which  were  universally  prevalent 
among  them.  Even  the  most  widely  spread  usages,  aclulb 
baptism  and  the  "  breaking  of  bread,"  were  not  adopted  in 
all  the  divisions  of  the  Anabaptists. 

What  is  more,  they  were  modern  enough,  at  least  in 
the  earlier  stages  of  the  movement,  to  be  conscious  of  this 
(which  the  Mystics  were  not),  and  to  give  it  expression. 
All  felt  and  thought  as  did  a  *  simple  man,"  Hans  Mtiller 
of  Medikon,  when  brought  before  the  Zurich  magistrates : 
w  Do  not  lay  a  burden  on  my  conscience,  for  faith  is  a  gift 
given  freely  by  God,  and  is  not'  common  property.  The 
mystery  of  God  lies  hidden,  like  the  treasure  in  the  field, 
which  no  one  can  find  but  he  to  whom  the  Spirit  shows  it 


442  ANABAPTISM 

So  I  beg  you,  ye  servants  of  God,  let  my  faith  stand  free." a 
And  the  Anabaptists,  alone  of  all  the  religious  parties  in 
those  strenuous  times,  seem  to  have  recognised  that  what 
they  claimed  for  themselves  they  were  bound  to  grant  to 
others.  Great  differences  in  opinion  did  not  prevent  the 
strictest  brotherly  fellowship.  Hans  Denck  held  a  doctrine 
of  non-resistance  as  thoroughgoing  as  that  of  Count  Tolstoy, 
and  fully  recognised  the  practical  consequences  to  which  it 
led.  But  this  did  not  prevent  the  ardent  and  gifted  young 
Humanist  working  loyally  with  Hubmaier,  who  did  not  share 
his  extreme  opinions.  The  divergences  among  the  leaders 
appeared  in  their  followers  withoiit  destroying  the  sense  of 
brotherhood.  Franck  tells  us  in  his  Chronicle 2  that  some, 
but  very  few,  held  that  no  Christian  could  enter  the 
magistracy,  for  Christians  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  sword, 
but  only  with  spiritual  excommunication,  and  that  no 
Christian  should  fight  and  slay.  The  others,  he  says,  in- 
cluding the  very  great  majority,  believed  that  Christians 
might  become  magistrates,  and  that  in  case  of  dire  necessity 
and  when  they  clearly  saw  the  leading  of  God,  might  take 
their  share  in  fighting  as  soldiers. 

Melchior  Hoffmann,  while  he  believed  in  the  incarna- 
tion, held  that  Jesus  received  His  flesh  directly  from  God, 
and  did  not  owe  His  body  to  the  Virgin  Mother,  through 
whom  He  passed  "as  light  through  a  pane  of  glass." 
He  also  held  that  the  whole  history  of  the  world,  down 
to  the  last  days,  was  revealed  in  Scripture,  and  could  be 
discovered  through  prayer  and  meditation.  He  was  an 
eloquent  and  persuasive  preacher,  and  his  views  were 
accepted  by  many;  but  it  would  be  a  great  mistake  to 
assume  that  they  were  shared  in  by  the  Anabaptists  as  a 
community.  Tet  even  contemporaries,  who  were  opponents, 
usually  attribute  the  extreme  opinions  of  a  few  to  the  entire 
body. 

It  ought  to  be. observed  that  this  tolerance  of  different 
opinions  within  the  one -society  did  not  extend  to  those 

*  Egli,  'Die  Z'dricher  WisfortSfufyr  (Zurich,  3878),  p.. 96. 
.  »,  ?olio  158*  of  the  Augsburg  edition  of  1565. 


NO    STATE    CHURCH  443 

who  remained  true  to  the  State  Churches,  whether  Eomanist 
or  Reformed.  The  Anabaptists  would  have  nothing  to  do 
with  a  State  Church ;  and  this  was  the  main  point  in  their 
separation  from  the  Lutherans,  Zwinglians,  and  Calvinists. 
It  was  perhaps  the  one  conception  on  which  all  parties 
among  them  were  in  absolute  accord.  The  real  Church, 
which  might  be  small  or  great,  was  for  them  an  association 
of  believing  people  ;  and  the  great  ecclesiastical  institutions 
into  which  unconscious  infants  were  admitted  by  a  ceremony 
called  baptism  long  before  they  could  have  or  exercise  faith, 
represented  to  them  an  idea  subversive  of  true  Christianity. 
They  had  no  wish  to  persecute  men  who  differed  widely 
from  them,  but  they  would  not  associate  with  them.  This 
enforced  "  separation,"  like  everything  else  connected  with 
Anabaptism,  differed  considerably  in  the  way  in  which  it 
was  carried  into  practice.  In  some  of  the  smaller  sections  it 
appeared  in  very  extravagant  forms.  Wives  and  husbands, 
Anabaptists  whose  partners  belonged  to  the  State  Churches, 
were  in  some  small  sections  advised  to  refuse  cohabita- 
tion. It  is  more  than  probable  that  some  recorded  sayings 
on  which  opponents  have  founded  charges  of  encouraging 
sexual  irregularities, — that  it  was  better  for  women  to  have 
connection  irregularly  with  members  of  the  brotherhood 
than  to  cohabit  with  unbelieving  husbands, — were  simply 
extravagant  ways  of  expressing  this  duty  of  separation. 

It  is  also  true  that  as  time  went  on  and  sects  of  ex- 
treme opinions  multiplied,  the  excommunication  of  members 
for  their  views  came  to  be  a  common  practice.  It  was  as 
frequent  among  some  of  the  smaller  divisions  as  it  is  among 
modern  Plymouth  Brethren;  but  the  occasion  was,  as  a  rule, 
difference  of  opinion  about  the  way  to  express  and  exercise 
the  duty  of  not  returning  evil  for  evil — was  it  permitted 
to  pay  taxes  or  not  ?  was  it  lawful  to  see  without  protest 
their  protectors  using  force  to  prevent  their  enemies  from 
attacking  them,  etc.  ? 

The  earlier  ideas  of  non-resistance,  whatever  practical 
shape  they  might  take,  gave  way  before  the  continuous  and 
terrible  persecution  which  the  Anabaptists  had  to  endure. 


444  ANABAPTISM 

They  were  first  definitely  condemned  by  Melchior  Hoffmann 
and  his  followers.  They  believed  in  the  speedy  establish- 
ment on  earth  of  the  millennial  kingdom  of  Christ,  and 
they  declared  that  they  were  ready  to  fight  for  it  when  it 
appeared.  With  them  the  conception  was  simply  a  pious 
opinion,  and  they  had  no  occasion  to  reduce  it  to  action. 
The  Anabaptists,  however,  who  followed  the  teaching  of 
Jan  Matthys  and  of  his  disciple  Jan  Bockelson,  repudiated 
passive  resistance  both  in  theory  and  in  practice. 

Of  course,  there  are  many  things  about  some,  perhaps 
all,  great  religious  awakenings  which  critics  can  lay  hold  of 
to  their  disparagement ;  and  it  was  so  with  the  Anabaptist 
movement.  Everything,  from  the  scientific  frame  of  mind 
to  the  religious  sensibility,  has  the  defects  of  its  qualities. 
When  a  man  is  seized  and  possessed  by  a  new  spiritual 
emotion  which  seeins  to  lift  him  above  all  previous  ex- 
perience of  life  or  of  thought,  all  things  are  new  to  him, 
and  all  things  seem  possible.  His  old  life  with  its  limita- 
tions has  departed.  He  is  embarked  on  a  sea  which  has 
no  imprisoning  shores.  He  is  carried  along  on  a  great 
current  of  emotion,  and  others  are  borne  with  him.  Human 
deep  calleth  unto  deep  when  they  exchange  confidences. 
He  and  his  fellows  have  become  new  creatures ;  and  that 
is  almost  all  that  they  know  about  themselves.  Such 
experiences  are  quite  consistent  with  soundness  of  mind 
and  clearness  of  vision  of  God  and  Divine  things — that 
is  usual ;  but  sometimes  they  are  too  powerful  for  the 
imperfect  mind  which  holds  them.  The  converts  are 
"puffed  up,"  as  St.  Paul  said.  Then  arise  morbid 
states,  distorted  vision,  sometimes  actual  shipwreck  of 
mental  faculties,  not  seldom  acute  religious  mania. 
Leaders  in  a  great  religious  awakening  have  always  to 
reckon  with  such  developments — St.  Paul,  Francis  of 
Assisi,  Eckhart,  Tauler,  to  say  nothing  of  modern  instances. 
The  Apostle  addressed  morbid  souls  with  severe  sarcasm. 
Did  any  man  really  think,  he  asked,  that  to  commit 
incest,  to  take  to  wife  his  father's  widow,  was  an  example 
of  the  freedom  with  which  Christ  had  made  them  free  ? 


ANABAPTISTS   IN   SWITZERLAND  445 

The  Anabaptist  movement  had  its  share  of  such  eases, 
like  other  religious  movements;  they  grew  more  frequent 
as  the  unfortunate  people  were  maddened  by  persecution; 
and  these  exceptional  incidents  are  invariably  retailed  at 
length  by  historians  hostile  to  the  movement. 

The  Anabaptists,  as  a  whole,  were  subjected  to  persecu- 
tions, especially  from  the  Romanists  and  the  Lutherans, 
much  more  harsh  than  befell  any  of  the  religious  parties 
of  the  sixteenth  century.  Their  treatment  in  Zurich 
may  be  taken  as  an  example  of  how  they  came  in  contact 
with  the  civil  authorities,  and  how  their  treatment  grew  in 
severity.1 

The  Swiss  Anabaptists  were  in  no  sense  disciples  of 
Zwingli.  They  had  held  their  distinctive  principles  and 
were  a  recognised  community  long  before  Zwingli  came 
from  Einsiedeln,  and  were  the  lineal  descendants  of  the 
mediaeval  Waldenses.  They  welcomed  the  Reformer ;  some 
of  them  were  in  the  company  who  challenged  the  authorities 
by  eating  meat  during  Lent  in  1522 ;  but  a  fundamental 
difference  soon  emerged.  After  the  Public  Disputation  of 
1523,  when  it  became  clear  that  Zurich  meant  to  accept 
the  Reformation,  a  deputation  of  the  Brethren  appeared 
before  the  Council  to  urge  their  idea  of  what  a  Reformed 
Church  should  be.  Their  statement  of  principles  is  an 
exposition  of  the  fundamental  conceptions  which  lay  at  the 
basis  of  the  whole  Anabaptist  movement,  and  explains  why 
they  could  not  join  either  the  Lutheran  or  the  Reformed 
branch  of  the  Reformation  Church.  They  insisted  that 
an  Evangelical  Church  must  differ  from  the  Roman  Church 
in  this  among  other  things,  that  it  should  consist  of 
members  who  had  made  a  personal  profession  of  faith  in 
their  Saviour,  and  who  had  vowed  to  live  in  obedience  to 

*The  Swiss  Anabaptists  have  been  selected  because  we  have  very  full 
contemporary  documentary  evidence  in  their  case.  Of.  Egli,  Actensamm- 
l<mg  zur  GesMcUe  der  Zlfaieher  Reformation  (Zurich,  1879) ;  Die  Zwricher 
Wiedertdufer  (Zurich,  1878) ;  Die  St.  Qaller  Wiedert&ufer  (Zurich). 

The  documentary  evidence  given  in  Egli's  works  has  been  condensed  and 
summarised  by  H.  S.  Burrage,  A  History  of  the  Aiiabuptiats  in  Switzerland 
(Philadelphia,  1881). 


446  ANABAPTISM 

Jesus  Christ  their  Hawptmann.  It  could  not  be  like  a 
State  Church,  whether  Romanist  or  other,  to  which  people 
belonged  without  any  individual  profession  of  faith.  They 
insisted  that  the  Church,  thus  formed,  should  be  free  from 
all  civil  control,  to  decide  for  itself  what  doctrines  and  cere- 
monies of  worship  were  founded  on  the  Word  of  God,  and 
agreeable  thereto,  and  should  make  this  decision  according 
to  the  opinions  of  a  majority  of  the  members.  They  further 
asked  that  the  Church  should  be  free  to  exercise,  by 
brotherly  admonition  and,  as  a  last  resort,  by  excommunica- 
tion, discipline  on  such  of  its '  members  as  offended  against 
the  moral  law.  They  also  declared  that  the  Church  which 
thus  rejected  State  control  ought  to  refuse  State  support, 
and  proposed  that  the  tithes  should  be  secularised.  The 
New  Testament,  they  said,  knew  nothing  about  interest  and 
usury,  tithes,  livings,  and  prebends. 

These  views  were  quite  opposed  to  the  ideas  of  the 
Zurich  Council,  who  contemplated  a  State  Church  reformed 
from  Romanist  abuses,  but  strictly  under  the  control  of  the 
State,  and  supported  by  the  tithes,  as  the  mediaeval  Church 
had  been.  They  refused  to  adopt  the  ideas  of  the  Anabap- 
tists; and  this  was  the  beginning  of  the  antagonism. 
The  Council  found  that  the  great  majority  of  the  petitioners 
had  doubts  about  infant  baptism,  and  were  inclined  to  what 
are  now  called  Baptist  views ;  and  they  brought  matters  to 
a  crisis  by  ordering  a  Public  Disputation  on  Baptism  (Jan. 
17th,  1525).  Among  the  Anabaptists  who  appeared  to 
defend  their  principles,  were  young  Conrad  Grebel  the 
Humanist,  Felix  Manz,  and  Brother  Jorg  from  Jacob's 
House,  a  conventual  establishment  near  Chur,  who  is 
always  called  "Blaurock"  (Blue-coat).  They  were  op- 
posed by  Zwingli,  who  insisted  that  infant  baptism  must  be 
maintained,  because  it  took  the  place  of  circumcision.  THe 
Council  decided  that  Zwingli's  contention  was  right,  and 
they  made  it  a  law  that  all  children  must  be  baptized,  and 
added  that  all  persons  who  refused  to  have  their  children 
baptized  after  Feb.  1st,  1525,  were  to  be  arrested.  The 
Anabaptists  were  not  slow  to  answer  the  challenge  thus 


PERSECU  TIONS  447 

given.  They  met,  and  after  deliberation  and  prayer  Blau- 
rock  asked  Conrad  Grebel  to  baptize  him  in  a  truly  Chris- 
tian fashion,  "  there  being  no  ordained  person  present,"  and 
Grebel  did  so.  "When  this  had  been  done  the  others 
entreated  Blaurock  to  baptize  them,  which  he  did ;  and  in 
deep  fear  of  the  Lord  they  gave  themselves  to  God/'  They 
resolved  to  preach  and  baptize,  because  in  this  they  ought 
to  obey  God  rather  than  men.1 

When  the  Council  heard  that  adult  baptism  had 
begun,  they  enacted  that  all  who  had  been  rebaptized 
after  Feb.  8th  (1525)  were  to  be  fined  a  silver  mark,  and 
that  whoever  was  baptized  after  the  issue  of  their  decree 
should  be  banished.  They  also  imprisoned  the  leaders. 
When  they  found  that  neither  fines,  nor  threats,  nor 
imprisonment,  nor  banishment  had  any  effect  on  the 
Anabaptists,  the  Town  Council  thought  to  terrify  them  by 
a  death  sentence.  Two  were  selected,  Manz  and  Blaurock. 
The  latter  was  nob  a  citizen,  and  the  sentence  of  death  was 
commuted  to  one  of  public  scourging  and  being  thrust  out 
of  the  town;  but  Felix  Manz,  a  townsman,  was  put  to 
death  by  drowning  (1527).  Zwingli  insisted  that  this 
judicial  murder  was  not  done  because  of  baptism,  but 
because  of  rebellion ! 

What  was  done  in  Reformed  Switzerland  was  seen  all 
over  Eoman  Catholic  and  Lutheran  Germany.  It  is  only 
fair  to  say  that  the  persecution  was  more  murderous  within 
the  Eomanist  districts ;  but  the  only  Lutheran  Prince  who 
refused  to  permit  a  death  penalty  on  Anabaptism  was 
Philip  of  Hesse  He  was  afterwards  joined  by  the  Elector 
of  Saxony. 

In  1527  (Aug.  26th),  the  Archduke  Ferdinand  of 
Austria  published  an  imperial  mandate  threatening  all 
Anabaptists  with  the  punishment  of  death.  Two  months 
later,  two  thousand  copies  of  this  proclamation  were  sent 
to  the  provinces  of  the  German  Empire,  calling  on  the 
authorities  to  extirpate  these  unfortunate  people.  The 

1  The  scene  is  described  in  Beck,  Die  @e$chicht$-J3ilcher  der  Wiedertaufer 
in  Qstrtich-Ungcrn  von  2526  Us  1V86 (Vienna^  1883), 


448  ANABAPTISM 

rulers  in  Salzburg  and  in  the  Tyrol  obeyed  the  order 
at  once,  and  a  fierce  persecution  soon  raged.  The  minds 
of  the  population  were  inflamed  by  infamous  calumnies. 
It  was  said  in  Salzburg  that  the  Anabaptists  had  planned 
to  massacre  all  the  priests  and  monks  within  the  princi- 
pality. The  well-known  dislike  of  the  brethren  to  war 
was  tortured  into  the  accusation  that  on  a  Turkish 
invasion  they  would  side  with  the  enemy  against  all  loyal 
Germans.  A  certain  Leopold  Dickius,  who  wrote  an 
atrocious  book  against  the  Anabaptists,  demanded  that  all 
the  men  should  be  slain  and  the  women  and  children 
suffered  to  perish  from  starvation ;  in  this  way  only,  he 
said,  could  their  errors  be  stamped  out. 

The  Salzburg  chronicler,  Kilian  Leib,  a  Eomanist,  gives 
details  of  the  persecution.  He  tells  us  that  men,  women, 
and  young  maidens  suffered  death  by  fire,  beheading, 
and  drowning,  not  only  uncomplainingly,  but  with  solemn 
joy.  He  dwells  on  the  case  of  "  a  beautiful  young  girl " 
of  sixteen,  whose  gentle  innocence  excited  universal 
compassion,  and  who  utterly  refused  to  recant.  The 
executioner  pinned  her  hands  to  her  sides,  plunged  her 
head  downwards  into  a  horse  trough,  held  her  there  till 
she  was  suffocated,  and  then  took  her  body  away  to  burn 
it.  The  official  lists  show  that  the  victims  came  from  all 
classes  in  society.  Noblemen,  girdle-makers,  wallet-makers, 
shoemakers,  a  town  clerk,  and  ex-priests. 

The  persecution  in  the  Tyrol  was  severe  and  thorough. 
A  large  number  of  the  miners  of  the  district  were  Ana- 
baptists, and  it  was  resolved  to  root  out  the  so-called 
heresy.  Descriptions  were  published  of  prominent 
Anabaptists,  who  wandered  from  place  to  plaeo  en- 
couraging their  brethren  to  steadfastness.  "One  named 
Mayerhofer  has  a  long  brown  beard  and  wears  a  grey 
soldier's  coat  j  a  companion,  tall  and  pale,  wears  a  long 
black  coat  with  trimming ;  a  third  is  shorter ;  a  fourth, 
thin  and  of  a  ruddy  complexion,  is  known  as  a  cutler." 
Conrad-  Braun,  an  assessor  to  the  imperial  Chamber  and 
an  eye- witness  to  the  persecutions,  wrote, — "  I  have  seeu 


PERSECUTIONS  449 

with  my  own  eyes  that  nothing  has  been  able  to  bring 
back  the  Anabaptists  from  their  errors  or  to  make  them 
recant.  The  hardest  imprisonment,  hunger,  fire,  water,  the 
sword,  all  sorts  of  frightful  executions,  have  not  been  able 
to  shake  them.  I  have  seen  young  people,  men,  women,  go 
to  the  stake  singing,  filled  with  joy ;  and  I  can  say  that  in 
the  course  of  my  whole  life  nothing  has  moved  me  more." l 
In  the  Tyrol  and  Gurz  the  nximber  of  executions  by  the 
year  1531  amounted  to  a  thousand,  according  to  the 
chronicler  Kirchmayr.  Sebastian  Franck  reckons  the 
number  in  Enisheim,  within  the  government  of  Upper 
Austria,  at  six  hundred.  Seventy-three  martyrs  suffered 
in  Linz  within  six  weeks.  The  persecution  in  Bavaria  was 
particularly  severe ;  Duke  William  ordered  that  those  who 
recanted  were  to  be  beheaded,  and  those  who  refused  were 
to  be  burned.  The  general  practice,  made  a  law  by 
Ferdinand  of  Austria  in  1529  (April  2 3rd),  was  that  only 
preachers,  baptizers,  Baptists  who  refused  to  recant,  and 
those  who  had  relapsed  after  recantation,  were  to  be 
punished  with  death.2 

In  those  bloody  persecutions,  which  raged  over  almost 
all  Europe,  most  of  the  earlier  leaders  of  the  Anabaptists 
perished  ;  but  the  great  body  of  their  follower)?;  were  neither 
intimidated  nor  disposed  to  abjure  their  teaching.  Per- 
secution did  not  como  unexpectedly.  No  one  was  admitted 
into  an  Anabaptist  community  without  being  warned  of  Who 
pixwablo  fate  which  lay  before  him.  Baptinm  was  a  vow 
that  he  would  be  constant  unto  death ;  the  "  breaking  of 
bread "  strengthened  his  faith  ;  the  sermon  was  full  of 
exhortations  to  endurance  unto  the  end.  Their  whole 
service  of  worship  was  a  preparation  for  and  an  expectation 
of  martyrdom. 

The  strain  of  Christian  song  seemed  to  rise  higher 
with  the  liros  of  persecution.  Most  of  the  Anabaptist 

*  Tlio  history  of  the  pwaoaution  in  tho  Tyrol  i»  to  bo  found  in  J*  Loserth, 
dnalaptimuw  in  Tirol ;  awd  iu  Kirohmayr,  Dmkw&nliykvttm  Miner  Z&it^ 

pt.  i.  iu  Wmfw  Karum  Amtritwirum,  i.  417-584, 
tt  OornoHuH,  (jtMchirJtfe  dv»  MUwkrisdwn  Ayfrvhw  (Lolpssig,  185f>),  ii»  68. 


450  ANABAPTISM 

hymns  belong  to  the  time  when  their  sufferings  were 
greatest.  Some  are  simply  histories  of  a  martyrdom,  as 
of  Jorg  Wagner  at  Munich,  or  of  the  "  Seven  Brethren  .at 
Gerniind."  They  are  all  echoes  of  endurance  where  the 
notes  of  the  sob,  the  trust,  the  warning,  the  hosanna  of  a 
time  of  martyrdom,  blend  in  rough  heroic  strains.  They 
sing  of  Christ,  who  in  these  last  days  has  manifested 
Himself  that  the  pure  word  of  His  Gospel  may  again 
run  through  the  earth  as  it  did  in  the  days  of  the  early 
Church.  They  tell  how  the  arch-enemy  of  souls  seeks  to 
protect  himself  against  the  advancing  host  of  Jesus  by 
exciting  bloody  persecutions.  They  utter  warnings  against 
false  prophets,  ravening  wolves  in  sheep's  clothing,  who 
beset  all  the  paths  of  life  leading  towards  the  true  fold, 
who  pour  forth  threats  and  curses  against  the  people  of 
God,  and  urge  on  the  rulers  of  this  world  to  torture  and 
to  slay.  They  depict  how  the  evil  world  storms  against 
the  true  Church,  shrieks  out  lies  against  the  true  followers 
of  Jesus,  and  threatens  them  with  burnings  and  all 
manner  of  cruel  deaths.  They  mourn  that  the  disciples 
of  Jesus  are  slaughtered  like  sheep  who  have  lost  their 
shepherd ;  that  they  wander  in  wildernesses  full  of  thorns 
that  tear ;  that  they  have  their  homes  like  the  night-birds 
among  the  cliffs  or  in  the  clefts  of  the  rocks ;  that  they 
are  snared  in  the  nets  of  the  fowler ;  that  they  are 
hunted  with  hounds  like  the  hares.  Others,  inspired 
by  the  internal  hope  which  lives  undying  in  every 
Christian  heart,  tell  how  Christ  the  Bridegroom  seeks  the 
love  of  the  soul  His  bride,  and  how  He  wins  hor  to 
Himself  by  His  love-gifts  of  trial  and  of  suffering,  till  at 
last  the  marriage  feast  is  held,  and  the  soul  becomos 
wholly  united  to  her  Lord.  The  thoughts  and  phrases 
of  the  old  Hebrew  prophets,  of  the  Psalmist,  of  the 
hymns  of  the  Apocalypse,  which  have  fed  the  fears 
and  the  hopes  of  longing,  suffering,  trusting  generations 
of  Christian  people,  reappear  in  those  Anabaptist  hymns. 
Life  is  for  them  a  continuous  Holy  War,  a  Pilgrim's 
Progress  through  an  evil  world  full  of  Htiaros,  of  dangevB, 


THE    KINGDOM    OF   GOD   IN    MUNSTER  451 

of  temptations,  until  at  last  the  weary  feet  tread  the 
Delectable  Mountains,  the  Eiver  of  Death  is  passed,  and 
the  open  gates  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  receive  the 
wayfarer  who  has  persevered  to  the  end. 

These  poor  persecuted  people  naturally  sought  for 
some  city  of  refuge,  i.e.  a  municipality  or  district  where 
baptism  of  children  was  not  enforced  under  penalties,  and 
where  the  re-baptism  of  adults  was  not  punished  by 
imprisonment,  torture,  and  death.  For  a  time  they  found 
many  such  asylums.  The  Anabaptists  were  for  the  most 
part  good  workmen,  and  patient  and  provident  cultivators 
of  the  soil,  ready  to  pay  all  dues  but  the  unscriptural 
war-tax.  They  were  a  source  of  wealth  to  many  a  great 
landed  proprietor  who  was  willing  to  allow  them  to  live 
their  lives  in  peace.  Moravia,  East  Friesland,  and, 
among  the  municipalities,  Augsburg,  Worms,  and  Strass- 
burg  gave  shelter  until  the  slow  determined  pressure  of  the 
higher  authorities  of  the  Empire  compelled  them  to  act 
otherwise.  All  that  the  Anabaptists  desired  wats  to  be 
allowed  to  live  in  peaco,  and  wo  hear  of  no  great  disturb- 
ances caused  by  their  presence  in  any  of  these  "  cities  of 
refugo." 

This  brings  us  to  what  has  been  called  "  The  Kingdom 
of  God  in  Miinster,"  and  to  the  behaviour  of  the  Ana- 
baptists there — the  communism,  polygamy,  and  so  forth, 
which  are  described  in  all  histories  of  the  times. 

Miinster  was  the  capital  of  the  large  and  important 
ecclesiastical  principality  which  boars  the  same  name. 
The  bishop  was  a.  Prince  of  the  (Herman  Empire,  and 
ruled  his  principality  with  all  the  rights  of  a  secular  prince, 
Olorgy  filled  almost  all  the  important  posts  of  govern- 
ment ;  they  levied  taxes  on  imports  and  exports ;  the  rich 
ouHourics  of  the  cathedral  were  reserved  for  the  sons  of 
the  landed  gentjry ;  the  townspeople  had  no  share  in  the 
richer  benofices,  and  chafed  under  their  clerical  rulers. 
The  citiisons  lived  in  a  state  of  almost  permanent  dis- 
affection, and  their  discontent  had  frequently  taken  the 
form'  of  civic  inaurrectiona  They  rone  in  1525,  in  1527 


452  ANABAPTISM 

(in  which  year  the  name  of  a  wealthy  burgher,  Bernard 
Knipperdolling,  first  appears  as  a  leader  of  his  fellow- 
citizens),  and  in  1529,  the  dreadful  year  of  famine  and 
plague.1  Many  have  been  disposed  to  see  in  these 
emeutesy  anticipations  of  the  struggle  which  followed ;  but 
nothing  in  the  sources  warrants  the  conclusion.  They 
were  simply  examples  of  the  discontent  of  the  unprivileged 
classes  which  had  been  common  enough  in  Germany  for 
at  least  a  century. 

The  city  of  Munster  had  been  slow  to  receive  the 
religious  Eeformation,  but  in  1529  the  people  began  to 
listen  to  the  preaching  of  an  obscure  young  chaplain 
attached  to  the  Church  of  St.  Maurice,  built  outside  the 
walls  of  the  town.2  Bernhard  Eothmann  was  a  scholar, 
imbued  with  Humanist  culture,  gifted  with  the  power  of 
clear  reasoning,  and  with  natural  eloquence.  It  is  probable 
that  he  had  early  been  attracted  by  the  teaching  of 
Luther ; 3  but  while  he  dwelt  upon  justification  by  faith, 
his  sermons  were  full  of  that  sympathy  for  the  down- 
trodden toiling  masses  of  the  community  which  was  a 
permanent  note  in  all  Anabaptist  teaching.  His  sermons 
were  greatly  appreciated  by  the  townsfolk,  especially  by 
the  artisans,  who  streamed  out  of  the  gate  to  hear  the 

1  The  disease  was  known  as  the  English  plague  or  the  sswcating  sickness. 
It  is  thus  described  by  Hecker  (Epidemics  of  the  Middle  Ages,  p.  181): 
"  It  was  violent  inflammatory  fever,  winch,  after  a  short  rigour,  prostrated 
the  powers  as  with  a  blow  ;  and  amidst  painful  oppression  at  tho  stomach, 
headache,  and  lethargic  stupor,  suffused  the  whole  body  with  foitid 
perspiration.  All  this  took  place  within,  the  course  of  a  few  hours,  and  tho 
crisis  was  always  over  within  the  space  of  a  day  and  a  night.  Tho  internal 
heat  that  the  patient  suffrrod  was  intolerable,  yet  every  refrigerant  was 
death." 

3  Kothmann  was  born  at  Stadtlohn,  and  received  tho  rudiments  of 
education  in  the  village  school  there ;  a  relation  sont  him  to  tho  Gymnasium 
at  Munster  ;  he  studied  afterwards  at  Mains!,  where  he  received  tho  degree  of 
M.A.  ;  he  was  made  chaplain  in  the  St.  Maurice  church  at  Munster 
about  1525. 

3  His  confession  of  faith,  published  in  Latin  and  Gorman  in  1582,  shows 
this.  I  know  it  only  by  the  summary  iu  Detmcr  (Jtternhard  Jtothmmn, 
Miiuster,  1904,  pp.  41/.).  Detmer  says  that  he  knows  of  only  ono  printed 
copy,  which  is  in  the  University  Library  at  Mttnster, 


BERNHARD    ROTHMANN  453 

young  chaplain  of  St.  Maurice.  Was  he  not  one  of 
themselves,  the  son  of  a  poor  smith !  The  cathedral 
Canons,  who,  in  the  absence  of  the  Bishop,  had  the 
oversight  of  all  ecclesiastical  affairs,  grew  alarmed  at  his 
popularity.  Their  opportunity  for  interference  came  when 
the  mob,  excited,  they  said,  by  Kothmann's  denunciations 
of  relic  and  image  worship,  profaned  the  altars,  tore  the 
pictures,  and  destroyed  the  decorations  in  St.  Maurice  on 
the  eve  of  Good  Friday,  1531.  Rothmann's  influence 
with  the  townsmen  might  have  enabled  him  to  defy  the 
Canons,  especially  as  the  Prince  Bishop,  Friedrich  von 
Wied,  showed  no  inclination  to  molest  the  chaplain,  and 
was  himself  suspected  of  Evangelical  sympathies.  But 
he  quietly  left  the  town  and  spent  a  year  in  travelling. 
He  visited  Wittenberg,  where  he  made  the  acquaintance 
of  Luther,  Melanchthon,  and  Bugenhugcn  ;  went  to  Marburg, 
Speyor,  and  Strassburg.  At  Sirassburg  he  had  long 
intercourse  with  Capito  and  with  Schwenkfeld  the  Mystic, 
who  is  frequently  classed  with  the  Anabaptists.  An 
irresistible  impulse  seems  to  have  drawn  him  back  to 
Mliuster,  where  he  was  welcomed  by  the  people,  and  the 
church  of  St.  Maurice  became  henceforth  the  centre  of  a 
movement  for  religious  Reformation,;  the  preacher  was 
supported  by  the  "  gilds "  of  artisans  and  by  most  of  the 
citizens,  among  whom  the  most  noted  was  Bernhard 
Knipperdolling. 

An  energetic  protest  by  the  Canons  induced  the 
Bishop  to  inhibit  Rothxuann  from  preaching  in  St.  Maurice, 
Ho  continued  his  addresses  in  the  churchyard  of  St. 
Lambert  (Feb.  18th,  1532),  and  a  few  days  later  he  was 
placed  in  possession  of  the  church  itself.  St.  Lambert's 
had  boon  built  by  the  municipality,  and  was  the  property 
of  the  town*  Rothmann  was  appointee!  by  the  Town 
Council  Evangelical  preacher  to  the  town,  and  was  given 
one  of  the  town's  "  gild  "  houses  for  a  parsonage. 

Two  months  later  the  Bishop  resigned,  and  was 
succeeded  by  Duke  Erich  of  Brunswiek-Grubenhagen, 
already  Bishop  of  Osnabriick  and  Paderborn,  The  new 


454  ANABAPTISM 

Bishop  determined  to  get  rid  of  Bothmann.  He  made 
representations  to  Hesse  and  Electoral  Saxony  and  other 
Evangelical  Powers,  and  persuaded  them  to  induce  the 
more  moderate  of  the  reforming  party  in  Mtinster  to 
abandon  Eothmann;  and,  this  done,  the  preacher  was 
ordered  to  leave  the  city.  The  "gilds"  of  artisans 
refused  to  let  their  preacher  depart,  and,  under  the 
leadership  of  Knipperdolling,1  drafted  a  letter  to  the 
authorities  declaring  their  determination  to  retain  him  at 
all  hazards.  The  democracy  of  Mlinster  and  the  religious 
movement  for  the  first  time  openly  combined  against  the 
authorities  of  the  city. 

While  things  were  at  this  pass,  the  Bishop  died  (May 
13th,  1532).  The  Chapter  elected  (June  1st)  Count  Franz 
von  Waldeck,  already  in  possession  of  Minden,  and  made 
Bishop  of  Osnabriick  a  few  days  later  (June  llth) — a 
pluralist  of  the  first  rank.  The  reforming  party  in 
Minister  expected  the  worst  from  their  new  ruler.  A 
full  assembly  of  the  "  gilds  "  of  the  town  was  held,  and 
by  an  overwhelming  majority  the  members  pledged  them- 
selves to  defend  their  pastor  and  his  Gospel  with  body 
and  goods  while  life  lasted.  A  committee  of  thirty-six 
burghers  was  elected  to  watch  the  course  of  events  and 
to  take  counsel  with  the  civic  rulers  and  the  presidents  of 
the  "gilds."  Eothmann  published  theses  explaining  his 
teaching,  and  challenging  objectors  to  a  public  disputa- 
tion. Public  meetings  were  held;  the  Town  Council 
was  formally  requested  to  hand  over  all  the  parochial 
churches  to  Evangelical  preachers ;  which  was  done — 
the  Cathedral  alone  remaining  for  lioman  Catholic 
worship. 

These  proceedings  produced  unavailing  remonstrances 
from  the  Bishop.  The  nobles  in  the  neighbourhood  tried 
to  interfere,  but  to  no  purpose.  In  October  (1532)  the 

1  Bernard  KnipperdoUing  or  Knipperdollinck  (both  forms  are  found) 
was  a  wealthy  cloth  merchant,  an  able  and  fervent  speaker,  a  man  of 
strong  convictions,  who  had  early  espoused  the  people's  cause,  and  had 
become  the  trusted  leader  of  the  democracy  of  Mtinster. 


BERNHARD    ROTHMANST  455 

Bishop's  party  within  the  town  began  to  take  action. 
They  attempted  to  sequester  the  goods  of  the  more 
prominent  disaffected  citizens ;  chains  were  placed  across 
the  principal  streets  to  prevent  communication  between 
the  different  quarters ;  an  attempt  was  made  to  isolate 
the  town  itself.  These  things  meant  war.  The 
"gilds,"  always  a  military  organisation  in  mediaeval 
cities,  armed.  A  party  of  knights  sent  to  invade  the 
town  retired  before  the  armed  citizens.  While  the 
Bishop  sought  to  strengthen  himself  by  alliances  and  to 
beguile  the  townsmen  by  negotiation,  a  thousand  armed 
burghers  marched  by  night  to  the  little  township  of 
Telgte,  where  a  large  number  of  the  ecclesiastical  and 
secular  nobles  were  encamped,  surrounded  it,  captured 
the  Bishop's  partisans,  and  returned  to  hold  them  as 
hostages.  This  act  afforded  the  occasion  for  the  inter- 
vention of  Philip  of  Hesse.  An  arrangement  was  come 
to  by  which  Miinster  was  declared  to  be  an  Evangelical 
city  and  enrolled  within  the  Schmalkald  League.  The 
history  of  Minister  up  to  this  time  (Feb.  14th,  1533) 
did  not  differ  from  that  of  many  towns  which  had 
adopted  the  Eoforniation.  Eothmann  had  been  the 
loader  in  Mimster,  like  Brenz  in  Hall,  Alber  in  Eeutlingen, 
or  Lachmann  at  Heilbron. 

It  is  usually  assumed  that  up  to  this  time  Eothmann 
was  a  Lutheran  in  his  teaching,  that  he  had  won  Miinster 
for  the  great  Lutheran  party,  and  that  his  future  aberra- 
tions from  the  Evangelical  theology  were  due  to  his  weakness 
before  the  Anabaptist  mob  who  later  invaded  the  city* 
This  seems  to  be  a*  mere  assumption.  He  had  certainly 
taught  justification  by  faith ;  but  that  did  not  make  him 
a  Lutheran.  The  dividing  line  between  the  various 
classes  of  objectors  to  the  Roman  Catholic  theology  in 
the  sixteenth  century  was  drawn  at  the  meaning  of  the 
Sacraments,  and  especially  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  There 
is  absolutely  no  evidence  to  show  that  Eothmann  was 
ever  a  follower  of  Luther  in  his  theory  of  the  Holy  Supper. 
He  had  visited  Luther  and  Melanchthon  during  his  year 


456  ANABAPTISM 

of  absence  from  Minister,  but  they  had  never  been  quite 
sure  of  him.  He  has  confessed  that  it  was  at  Strassburg 
and  not  at  Wittenberg  that  he  got  most  help  for  his 
future  work  and  received  it  from  Capito,  who  was  no 
Lutheran,  and  from  Schwenkfeld,  who  was  an  Anabaptist 
Mystic.  It  was  Strassburg  and  not  Wittenberg  that  he 
called  "  the  crown  of  all  Christian  cities  and  Churches ! " 
In  his  confession  of  faith  he  says  that  the  Mass  is  no 
sacrifice,  but  only  a  sign  of  the  true  Sacrifice ;  and  that 
the  Mass  and  the  Lord's  Supper  have  no  other  meaning 
than  to  remind  us  of  .the  death  of  Christ,  and  to  awaken 
in  our  hearts  a  certainty  of  the  freely  given  grace  of 
God.  That  is  not  Lutheran  doctrine,  it  is  not  even 
Zwinglian ;  it  is  much  nearer  the  Anabaptist.  It  is  also 
pretty  clear  that  he  held  the  doctrine  of  the  "  inner  light " 
in  the  sense  of  many  Anabaptists.  It  may  be  safely 
said  that  if  Eothmann  was  not  an  Anabaptist  from  the 
beginning,  his  was  a  mind  prepared  to  accept  their  doctrines 
almost  as  soon  as  they  were  clearly  presented  to  him. 
Heinrich  Boll,  a  fugitive  from  Jiilich  who  sought  refuge 
in  Mtinster,  convinced  Eothmann  of  the  unlawfulness  of 
infant  baptism.  No  sooner  had  this  conviction  laid  hold 
on  him  than  he  refused  to  baptize  infants — for  Rothmanu 
was  always  straightforward.  His  views  annoyed  a  large 
number  of  the  leading  citizens,  prominent  among  whom 
was  Van  der  Wieck,  the  syndic  of  the  town.  These  men, 
all  Lutherans,  besieged  their  pastor  with  remonstrances, 
and  finally  brought  him  before  the  Town  Council.  The 
matter  came  to  a  head  on  Sept.  7th  (1533),  when 
Staprade,  the  assistant  preacher  at  St.*  Lambert's,  refused 
to  baptize  the  children  of  two  Lutheran  members  of  the 
Town  Council  who  had  been  brought  to  the  church  for 
the  purpose.  When  the  preachers  were  brought  -before 
the  Council,  they  were  informed  that  such  things  would 
not  be  allowed.  Staprade,  the  chief  offender  and  a 
non-burgher,  was  banished,  and  Eothmann  with  the  other 
clergy  who  agreed  with  him  were  threatened  with  the 
same  fate  if  they  pei-sisted  in  declining  to  baptize  infanta. 


PUBLIC    DISPUTATION   ON   BAPTISM  457 

They  refused  to  obey  the  Council;  they  were  promptly 
deposed,  and  their  churches  were  closed  against  them. 
But  the  mass  of  the  citizens  were  attached  to  Bothmann, 
and  their  attitude  became  too  threatening  for  the 
Magistrates  to  maintain  their  uncompromising  position. 
Eothmann  was  permitted  to  remain,  and  was  allowed  to 
preach  in  the  Church  of  St.  Servetius.  The  Lutheran 
Magistrates  brought  preachers  into  the  town  to  occupy 
the  other  places  of  worship. 

The  Magistrates,  Van  der  Wieck  being  the  leading  spirit 
among  them,  resolved  to  hold  a  public  disputation  on  the 
subject  of  Baptism,  They  had  brought  to  Mtinster  the 
famous  Humanist,  Hermann  von  dem  Busche,  now  a  pro- 
fessor in  Marburg  and  a  distinguished  defender  of  the 
Lutheran  Beforination,  and  they  counted  on  his  known 
learning  and  eloquence  to  convince  their  fellow-citizens  that 
the  views  of  liothmann  were  unscriptural.  The  conference 
was  to  be  perfectly  free.  Eoman  Catholic  theologians  were- 
invited,  and  took  part.  Kothmatm  appeared  to  defend  his 
position.  The  invitations  had  been  signed  not  only  by  the 
Magistrates,  but  by  the  heads  of  the  "  gilds  "  of  the  town.1 
Van  der  "Wieck  confessed  that  the  result  of  the  disputa- 
tion was  not  what  he  expected.  So  far  as  the  great  masa 
of  the  people  were  concerned,  Bothinaun  appeared  to  have 
•  the  best  of  the  argument*  and  he  stood  higher  than  ever  in 
the  estimation  of  the  citizens.  Eothmann,  whose  whole 
career  shows  that  opposition  made  him  more  and  more 
advanced,  now  began  to  dwell  upon  the  wrongs  of  the 
commonalty  and  the  duty  of  the  rich  to  do  much  more 
for  their  poorer  brethren,  than  they  did.  He  taught  by 
precept  as  well  as  example*  He  lived  an  openly  ascetic 
lite,  that  he  might  abound  In  charity.  His  sermons  and 
his  lifo  had  an  extraordinary  effect  on  the  rich  ,09  well  as  on 
the  poor.  Creditors  forgave  debtors,  men  placed  sums  of 
money  in  the  hands  of  Eothmann  for  distribution.  There 
was  no  enforced  *  commxmisin,  but  the  example  of  the 

The  detail*  of  this  Deputation  haro  boon  published  by  Detmer  in  the 

},  ix.  273/. 


458  ANABAPTISM 

primitive  Church  in  Jerusalem  was  followed  as  far  as 
possible.  Among  these  thoroughgoing  followers  of 
Bothmann,  <a  wealthy  lady,  the  mother-in-law  of  Bernard 
Knipperdolling,  was  conspicuous. 

The  Magistrates  became  seriously  alarmed  at  the  con- 
dition of  things.  They  knew  that  so  long  as  they  remained 
a  Lutheran  municipality,  even  nominally,  the  great  Lutheran 
Princes,  like  Philip  of  Hesse  and  the  Elector  of  Saxony, 
would  protect  them  against  their  Eomanist  Bishop;  but 
Lutherans  and  Eomanists  alike  disliked  and  distrusted 
Anabaptists,  and  the  imperial  edict  would  surely  be  enforced 
against  them  sooner  or  later.  Eothmann's  preaching, 
which  they  could  not  control,  and  the  power  he  exercised 
through  the  "  gilds,"  made  it  impossible  for  them  to  main- 
tain that  Munster  was  a  member  of  the  confederacy  of 
Lutheran  cities.  On  the  other  hand,  the  news  that  Munster 
had  practically  become  Anabaptist,  spread  far  and  wide 
*  among  these  persecuted  people,  who  began  to  think  that  it 
was  destined  to  be  a  conspicuous  city  of  refuge,  perhaps  the 
Zion  or  New  Jerusalem  whose  establishment  Melchior 
Hoffmann  had  predicted.  They  gathered  from  all  parts 
to  place  themselves  under  the  protection  of  its  walls.  The 
great  majority  naturally  came  from  the  Netherlands, 
where  the  persecution  was  hottest.  The  refugees  were 
almost  all  Melchiorites — men  who  looked  for  a  speedy 
termination  of  their  sufferings  in  the  establishment  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  upon  the  earth ;  and  the  majority  of  them 
were  Dutch  Melchiorites,  men  to  whom  freedom  was  a  tradi- 
tion, ready  to  fight  for  it,  disciples  of  Jan  Matthys,  who  had 
taught  them  to  abandon  the  doctrine  of  passive  resistance 
so  universally  held  by  all  sections  of  the  earlier  Ana- 
baptists.1 Eothmann  had  long  been  acquainted  with  the 
books  and  tracts  of  Hoffmann,  and  had  great  sympathy 
with  them.  He  as  well  as  the  Magistrates  foresaw  trouble 
for  himself  and  for  the  city.  He  went  the  length  of 
advising  friends  who  did  not  share  his  opinions  to  leave 
the  town;  for  himself,  his  manifest  duty  appeared  to  be 

aOf.,  above,  ii.  285  /, 


DUTCH    ANABAPTISTS    IN    MUNSTER  459 

to  risk  all  on  behalf  of  the  poor  people  whom  God  had 
given  into  his  hand. 

The  last  months  of  1532  saw  Eothmann  and  the 
Lutheran  Town  Council  facing  each  other  with  growing 
mutual  suspicion.  On  Dec.  8th,  a  journeyman  smith, 
Johann  Schroder,  began  preaching  Anabaptist  doctrines 
in  the  -churchyard  of  St.  Lambert's,  and  challenged  the 
Lutheran  pastor,  Fabricius,  to  a  disputation.  This  was 
more  than  the  Town  Council  could  endure.  They  pro- 
hibited Rothmann  preaching,  and  declared  that  they 
withdrew  their  protection — a  sentence  of  virtual  outlawry 
(Dec.  llth).  He  calmly  told  the  messenger  of  the  Council 
that  he  depended  on  the  help  of  higher  powers  than  his 
masters,  and  preached  publicly  in  the  Church  of  St. 
Servatius.  Schroder  had  begun  to  preach  again,  and  was 
apprehended.  The  "  gild  "  of  the  smiths  rose,  and,  headed 
by  their  officials,  forced  the  Council  to  release  their 
comrade.  The  Anabaptists  and  Eothmann  had  won  a 
notable  triumph,  which  was  soon  widely  known.  Banished 
Anabaptist  pastors  returned  to  the  town. 

Events  marched  quickly  thereafter.  Bartholomaeus 
Bookbinder  and  Willom  de  Kuiper,  sent  by  Jan  Matthys, 
appeared  in  Mtinster  (Jan.  5th,  1533).  We  can  infer 
what  their  message  was  from  what  followed.  Eothmann 
denounced  the  Council  and  its  Lutheran  preachers.  Eiots 
were  the  consequence,  many  of  the  rioters  being  women, 
among  whom  the  nuns  of  the  Uberwasser  convent  were 
conspicuous.  It  was  declared  that  all  believers  ought  to 
be  rebapttaed,  and  that  a  list  of  the  faithful  ought  to 
bo  made.  The  document  contained  fourteen  hundred 
names  within  eight  days.  The  mass  of  the  people 
enthusiastically  believed  in  the  near  approach  of  the  Day 
of  the  Lord. 

Soon  afterwards  (Jan-  13th,  1533),  Jan  Bockelson 
(John  of  Leyden)  entered  the  town.  He  was  the  favourite 
disciple  and  alter  ego  of  Jan  Matthys.  He  brought  with 
him  the  famous  Twenty-one  Articles,  and  called  upon  the 
faithful  l/o  unite  themselves  into  a  compact  organisation 


460  ANABAPTISM 

pledged    to    carry   them    out.     He    was    received    with 
enthusiasm. 

The  Council,  feeling  their  helplessness,  appealed  to 
the  Bishop,  who  contented  himself  with  ordering  them 
to  execute  the  imperial  mandate  against  Anabaptists. 
He  was  as  much  incensed  against  the  Lutherans  as 
against  the  Anabaptists,  and  hoped  that  the  two  parties 
would  destroy  themselves.  Within  the  town,  Anabaptists 
fought  with  the  combined  Evangelicals  and  Eomanists, 
and  on  two  occasions  the  tumults  were  succeeded  by 
truces  which  guaranteed  full  liberty  of  worship  to  all 
persons  (Jan.  28th  and  Feb.  9th).  Then  the  Council 
abandoned  the  struggle.  The  principal  Burgomaster, 
Tylbeck,  was  baptized,  and  Van  der  Wieck,  with  many  of 
the  principal  citizens,  left  the  town.  Van  der  Wieck 
fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Bishop,  who  slaughtered  him 
barbarously. 

A  new  Council,  entirely  Anabaptist,  was  elected,  with 
Bernard  Knipperdolling  and  Gerhard  Kibbenbroick,  a 
leading  merchant,  as  Burgomasters  (Feb.  28th).  The 
complete  rule  of  the  Anabaptists  had  begun.  This  date 
also  marks  the  beginning  of  the  investment  of  the  city  by 
the  Bishop's  troops.  It  should  never  be  forgotten,  as  it 
frequently  is,  that  during  the  wJiole  period  of  Anabaptist 
domination  in  Minister  the  town  was  undergoing  the 
perils  of  a  siege,  and  that  military  considerations  had  to 
be  largely  kept  in  mind.  Nor  should  it  be  forgotten  that 
during  its  existence  the  Bishop's  troops  were  murdering 
in  cold  blood  every  Anabaptist  they  could  lay  their 
hands  on, 

Jan  Matthys  himself  had  come  to  Miinster  some  time 
in  February,  urged  thereto  by  a  letter  from  Bockolson, 
and  the  citizens  had  become  accustomed  to  see  the  long 
lean  figure  of  the  prophet,  with  his  piercing  eyes  and 
flowing  black  beard,  pass  to  and  fro  in  their  streets.  They 
had  learned  to  hang  breathless  on  his  words  as  his  sonorous 
voice  repeated  the  message  which  the  Lord  had  given 
him  to  utter,  or  described  the  visions  which  had  been 


JAN   MATTHYS  461 

vouchsafed  to  him.  When  an  Anabaptist  Council  ruled 
the  city  they  were  but  the  mouthpiece  of  the  prophet. 
His  reign  was  brief,  but  while  it  lasted  he  issued  command 
after  command. 

Separation  from  the  world  was  one  of  the  ideas  he 
dwelt  upon  in  his  addresses  ;  and  to  him  this  meant  that 
no  unbelievers,  no  unbaptized,  could  remain  within  the 
walls  of  an  Anabaptist  city.  The  command  went  forth 
that  all  adults  must  be  baptized  or  leave  the  town.  It  is 
scarcely  to  be  wondered  that,  with  the  great  likelihood  of 
falling  into  the  hands  of  the  Bishop's  soldiers  as  soon  as 
they  got  beyond  the  walls,  the  great  majority  of  those 
who  had  not  yet  received  the  seal  of  the  new  communion 
submitted  to  the  ceremony.  They  were  marched  to  the 
market-place,  where  they  found  "three  or  more"  Ana- 
baptist preachers,  each  with  a  great  vessel  full  of  water 
before  them.  The  neophytes  knelt  down,  received  the  usual 
admonition,  and  a  dish  of  water  was  thrice  emptied  on 
their  heads  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the 
Holy  Ghost.  This  done,  they  went  to  the  Burgomaster's 
house  and  had  their  names  entered  on  the  roll1 

It  was  also  by  Matthys*  orders  that  what  is  called 
the  communism  of  Mtinstor  was  begun.  The  duty  of 
systematic  and  brotherly  charity  had  from  the  first  been 
an  outstanding  one  among  the  Anabaptists.  Like  all 
other  principles  which  find  immediate  outcome  in  action, 
this  one  of  brotherly  love  had  found  many  ways  of  taking 
actual  shape.  In  a  few  of  the  smaller  sections  of  the 
brethren  it  had  appeared  in  the  form  of  communism  so 
far  as  food  and  raiment  went.  In  some  of  the  commumtiea 
in  Moravia  the  Brethren  subscribed  to  a  common  fund  out 
of  which  common  meals  were  provided;  and  these  pay- 
ments were  compulsory.  We  have  seen  how  Bothmann's 
sermons  had  produced  an  extraordinary  outburst  of  bene- 
volence in  Miinster  before  the  coming  of  the  prophets. 


ITeinrich  QretibtoWs  Jtericht  von  d&r  Wfodertcwtfe  in 
p.  20  (edited  by  Cornelius  for  Din  GesMcJitsqucllcn  des  JBfathuma  Munster, 
vol.  ii,  Mttnator,  1863), 


462  ANABAPTISM 

It  does  not  appear  that  Matthys'  commands  went  further 
than  the  exhortations  of  Eothmann.  Miinster  was  a 
beleaguered  city.  When  the  siege  began  it  contained 
about  seventeen  hundred  men,  between  five  and  six 
thousand  women,  besides  thousands  of  children.  The 
largest  proportion  of  these  were  refugees.  It  is  evident 
that  numbers  could  not  support  themselves,  but  were 
absolutely  dependent  upon  the  charity  of  their  neighbours. 
The  preachers  invited  the  faithful  to  give  up  their  money, 
and  what  provisions  they  could  spare  to  feed  the  poverty 
striken.  Large  numbers  thus  appealed  to  brought  all 
their  portable  property ;  others  gave  part ;  some  refused, 
and  were  denounced  publicly.  The  provisions  stored  in 
the  monasteries  or  in  private  houses  abandoned  by  their 
proprietors — were  taken  for  the  common  good.  When  the 
siege  had  lasted  long,  and  the  enemy  were  deliberately 
starving  the  inhabitants  into  surrender,  the  communism 
in  food  became  stricter,  as  is  the  case  in  any  beleaguered 
fortress.  No  attempt  was  ever  made  to  institute  a 
thoroughgoing  communism.  What  existed  at  first  was 
simply  an  abundant  Christian  charity  enforced  by  public 
opinion,1  and  latterly  a  requisitioning  of  everything  that 
could  be  used  to  support  the  whole  population  of  a 
besieged  city. 

Jan  Matthys  did  not  long  survive  his  coming  to 
Mtinster.  On  the  evening  of  the  4th  of  April,  as  ho  sat 
at  supper  in  a  friend's  house,  he  was  observed  to  spend 
long  minutes  in  brooding.  At  last,  sighing  heavily,  he 
was  heard  to  ejaculate,  "  Loved  Father,  not  my  will  but 
Thine  be  done."  He  rose  quietly  from  his  seat,  shook 
hands  with  all  his  companions,  solemnly  kissed  each  one ; 
then  left  the  house  in  silence,  accompanied  by  his  wife, 
Next  day  with  about  twenty  companions  he  went  out  by 
one  of  •  the  gates  of  the  city,  fell  fiercely  on  the  enemy, 
was  overpowered  by  numbers,  and  received  his  death-stroke. 

1  Of.  Die  Mtinsteriwhe  Ayologie,  printed  by  Cornelius  in  his  Xerichto  dev 
Augewzeuy&n,  i^ber  das  vntttntierische  Wiederttiyfyrreich,  p.  467  (Qe$Mcftiit* 
qudUn  dc$  JBistftums  Minster,  vol.  ii»). 


POLYGAMY  463 

A  religious  enthusiast  and  a  singularly  straightforward 
and  courageous  man ! 

His  death  depressed  the  defenders  of  Miinster  greatly ; 
but  they  were  rallied  by  the  persuasive  eloquence  of  Jan 
Bockelson,  the  favourite  disciple  of  the  dead  prophet.  It 
was  under  the  leadership  of  Bockelson — Jan  of  Leyden  he 
was  called — that  the  Town  Council  of  Miinster  was 
abolished;  that  twelve  elders  were  chosen  to  rule  the 
people;  that  Jan  himself  became  king,  and  had  his 
Court;  that  the  old  miracle  plays  were  revived,  etc. 
The  only  one  of  the  many  actions  of  this  highly  talented 
and  eloquent  young  Dutchman  which  need  concern  us 
was  the  institution  of  polygamy,  for  which  he  seems  to 
have  been  almost  solely  responsible. 

Polygamy  is  the  one  dark  stain  on  the  Anabaptists 
of  Mtinster,  and  one  that  is  ineffaceable.  Not  unnaturally, 
yet  quite  unjustly,  the  fact  of  its  institution  has  been 
used  continually  to  blacken  the  character  of  the  whole 
movement.  It  was  an  episode,  a  lamentable  one,  in  the 
history  of  Anabaptism  in  Miinster;  it  had  nothing 
to  do  with  the  brethren  outside  the  town.  The  whole 
question  presents  difficulties  which,  with  our  present 
information,  cannot  be  removed.  That  men  whoso  whole 
past  lives  had  been  examples  of  the  most  coirrect  moral 
behaviour,  and  who  had  been  influenced  by  deep  and 
earnest  religious  feelings,  should  suddenly  (for  it  was 
sudden)  have  given  the  lie  to  thoir  own  previous  teaching 
and  to  the  tenets  of  every  separate  section  of  Anabaptism, 
that  they  should  have  sullied,  the  last  few  months  of  an 
heroic  and  desperate  defence  within  a  doomed  city  by  the 
institution  of  polygamy,  IB  an  insoluble  pimle.1 

We   are   not  now  dependent   for   our   knowledge  of 

1  By  far  the  best  and  moat  impartial  discussion  of  the  institution  of 
polygamy  in  Miinstor— one  that  is  based  on  the  Tory  widest  examination 
of  contemporary  documentary  evidence-— is  that  of  Dr.  Detmer,  UeUr  die 
AuffcwMwiig  von  for  %he\  und  Me  frwrctytthrmg  dcr  Vi&lweilw&i  in  Monster 
w&hrvwl  far  T&v/wlwrraclwft  (MUnstor,  1904).  It  forms  the  third  of  his 
Mldw  &w  dan  rdigiQwn  wid  soziakn,  Uwrufan  in  Mtintter  w&brend  dw  16. 


464  ANABAPTISM 

the  Anabaptist  movement  on  the  writings  of  embittered 
opponents,  or  upon  such  tainted  sources  as  confessions  of 
martyrs  wrung  from  them  under  torture.  The  diligence 
of  archaeologists  has  exhumed  a  long  list  of  writings  of 
the  leaders  in  the  rising.  They  give  us  trustworthy 
accounts  of  the  opinions  and  teachings  of  almost  every 
sect  classed  under  the  common  name.  We  know  what 
they  thought  about  all  the  more  important  matters  which 
were  in  controversy  during  the  sixteenth  century  —  what 
they  taught  about  Tree  Will,  Original  Sin,  Justification, 
the  Trinity,  the  Person  of  Christ,  and  so  on.  We  have 
clear  glimpses  of  the  kind  of  lives  they  led  —  a  genuinely 
pious,  self-denying,  Christian  walk  and  conversation.  Their 
teaching  was  often  at  variance  with  the  .Romanist  and 
the  Lutheran  doctrinal  confessions  ;  but  they  never  varied 
from  the  moral  life  which  all  Christians  are  called  upon 
to  live.  Their  writings  seldom  refer  to  marriage;  but 
when  they  do  it  is  always  to  bear  witness  to  the  universal 
and  deeply  rooted  Christian  sentiment  that  marriage  is  a 
sacred  and  unbreakable  union  of  one  man  with  one 
woman.  Nay  more,  one  document  has  descended  to  us 
which  bears  testimony  to  the  teaching  of  the  Anabaptists 
within  the  beleaguered  city  only  a  few  weeks  before  the 
proclamation  of  polygamy.  It  is  entitled  JBekenlones  dcs 
globens  und  lebens  der  gemein  Criste  m*  Monster?-  and  was 
meant  to  be  an  answer  to  calumnies  circulated  by  their 
enemies.  It  contains  a  paragraph  on  Marriage  which  is 
a  clear  and  distinct  assertion  that  the  only  Christian 
marriage  is  the  unbreakable  union  of  cue  man  with  one 
woman.2 


1  The  tract  is  to  be  found  in  Cornelius,  Sendhte  der 

das  mtinsteristfw    Wtedwttiitfemich,  which  forms  the  second  volume  of 
Die  Qeschichtsquetten  des  BiAwm  Mimster  (pp.  445/0- 

2  "Die  ehe,  sagen  wir  und  halten  mit  der  Schriffc,  das  sie  ist  eins  mans 
und  weips  vorgaderong  nnd  vorpflichtong  in  dem  Herrn  .  „  *  Got  hot  don 
monchon  von  anfauck  gosohaflen,  ein  man  und  weip  hat  Er  sie  goschaflfcn, 
di  peido  in  don  heiligon  estant  (ehestat)  voreiniget,  dos  di  poido  zwo  sellen 
und  eiu  fleischo  solen  sein.     Und,  mage  also  kern  menacho  scheiden  seiche 
voreinigoiig"  (pp.  457,  458). 


POLYGAMY  465 

It  is  true  that  the  Anabaptist  thought  of  "  separation," 
when  carried  out  in  its  most  extreme  way  and  to  its 
utmost  logical  consequences,  struck  a  blow  at  the  sanctity 
of  the  marriage  tie.  All  taught  that  the  "  believer,"  i.e. 
he  or  she  who  had  been  rebaptized,  ought  to  keep 
themselves  separate  from  the  "  world/'  i.e.  those  who  had 
not  submitted  to  rebaptism;  and  in  the  more  extreme 
sects  it  was  alleged  that  this  meant  that  spouses  ought 
not  to  cohabit  with  "unbelieving"  partners.  This  was 
held  and  practised  among  the  Melchiorttes,  and  was  stated 
in  its  extremest  form  in  the  Twenty-one  Eules  sent  to 
Miinster  by  Jan  Matthys  by  the  hand  of  Bockelson.  They 
contained  two  prescriptions — one  for  the  unmarried, 
which  exhorted  them  only  to  marry  in  the  Lord ;  another 
for  the  married,  which  implies  that  marriage  contracted 
between  husband  and  wife  before  rebaptism  ought  to  be 
repeated.  This  meant  that  marriages  contracted  by 
persons  yet  "  in  the  world  "  were  not  valid,  and,  of  course, 
destroyed  the  sanctity  of  all  marriages  outside  the  circle 
of  the  brethren.  But  when  a  Mekhiorite  at  Strassburg, 
Klaus  Frey,  whose  wife  was  not  an  Anabaptist,  carried 
out  the  principle  to  its  logical  consequences  and  married 
an  Anabaptist  woman,  his  "  unbelieving "  wife  being  alive, 
he  was  promptly  excommunicated. 

When  the  information  to  be  gathered  from  the  various 
sources  is  combined,  what  took  place  in  Miinater  seems  to 
have  been  as  follows.  Sometime  in  July  (1534),  John 
Bockelson  summoned  the  preachers,  Eothmann  at  their 
head,  and  the  twelve  elders  to  meet  him  in  the  JRathaus. 
There  he  propounded  to  them  his  proposal  to  inaugurate 
polygamy,  and  argued  the  matter  with  them  for  eight 
successive  days.  We  are  told  that  Eothmann  and  the 
preachers  opposed  the  scheme  in  a  determined  manner. 
The  arguments  used  by  the  prophet — arguments  of  the 
flimaieat  nature— ^-have  also  been  recorded.  He  dwelt  on 
the  necessity  of  accepting  certain  biblical  expressions  in 
their  most  literal  sense,  and  in  giving  them  their  widest 
application.  Ho  insisted  especially  on  the  command  of 
30** 


466  ANABAPTISM 

God,  Be  fruitful,  and  multiply,  and  replenish  the  earth ; 
he  brought  forward  the  example  of  the  patriarchs  and 
other  examples  of  polygamy  from  the  Old  Testament ;  he 
went  the  length  of  saying  that  when  St.  Paul  insisted 
that  bishops  must  be  husbands  of  one  wife,  the  phrase 
implied  that  all  who  were  not  bishops  were  free  to  take 
more  than  one ;  he  dwelt  on  the  special  conditions  existing 
among  the  population  within  the  town, — the  number  of 
male  refugees,  either  unmarried  or  who  had  left  their 
wives  behind  them  in  the  places  from  which  they  had  fled ; 
the  disproportionate  number  of  women  (more  than  three 
women  for  every  man), — and  the  difficulties  thereby 
created  to  prevent  them  from  obeying  the  command  of 
God  to  be  fruitful  and  increase;  and  he  urged  that  in 
their  present  condition  the  command  of  God  could  only 
be  obeyed  by  means  of  polygamy. 

In  the  end  he  brought  preachers  and  elders  round  to 
his  opinion ;  and  in  spite  of  opportunities  given  them  for 
revolt,  they  remained  steadfast  to  it.  They  preached  upon 
its  advantages  for  three  days  to  the  people  in  the  Cathedral 
square ;  and  it  was  Eothmann  who  proclaimed  the  decree 
commanding  polygamy  to  the  people.  How  were  the 
preachers  ,  persuaded  to  forego  their  opposition  ?  What 
one  of  the  threadbare  arguments  used  by  the  prophet 
convinced  them?  Had  he  proclaimed  polygamy  as  a 
divine  command  received  by  him  as  a  prophet,  we  might 
imagine  the  preachers  ;and  people,  such  was  the  exalted 
state  of  their  minds,  receiving  it  with  reverence ;  btit  the 
prophet  did  not  announce  that  he  had  received  any  such 
message.  He  relied  solely  upon-  his  arguments.  They 
did  not  convince  all  the  people.  The  proclamation  of 
polygamy  awoke  violent  protests  upon  the  part  of  the 
native  townsman,  who,  headed  by  a  "  master-smith  *'  named 
Mollenbecke,  felt  that  they  would  rather  hand  over  the 
city  to  the  Bishop's  forces  than  live  in  a  polygamdst 
society,  and.: the  revolt- was  almost  successful;  but  the 
preachers  stood  firm  in  their  support  of  the  -prophet 
and  of  his  polygamy-;  and  .it  was  the  women  who  were 


POLYGAMY  467 

mainly  instrumental  in  causing  the  revolt  to  be  a 
failure. 

If  we  are  to  judge  by  the  use  made  of  it  in  Eoth- 
mann's  Restitution*  which  defends  the  introduction  of  the 
new  marriage  laws,  the  preachers  seem  to  have  been  most 
impressed  by  the  argument  which  dwelt  on  the  condition 
of  the  city — the  large  proportion  of  men  whose  wives 
were  in  the  towns  they  had  abandoned  to  take  refuge  in 
Miinster,  and  the  great  multitude  of  women.  It  is  just 
possible  that  it  was  this  economic  argument  that  affected 
both  them  and  the  prophet  himself.  This  is  the  view 
taken  by  such  writers  as  Kautsky,  Belfort  Bax,  and 
Heath.  The  explanation  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that 
the  decree  was  more  than  a  proclamation  of  polygamy. 
It  provided  that  all  marriageable  men  must  take  wives, 
and  that  all  women  must  be  under  the  care  of  a  husband. 
The  laws  against  sexual  irregularity  were  as  strong 
during  the  reign  of  polygamy  as  before  its  introduction. 
But  there  is  this  to  be  said  against  it,  that  the  town  of 
Munster,  notwithstanding  its  abnormal  conditions,  was 
singularly  pure  in  life,  and  that  polygamy,  so  far  from 
improving  the  moral  condition,  made  it  distinctly  worse. 

Detmer,  whose  opinions  are  always  worthy  of  respect, 
believes  than  Jan  of  Leyden  had  fallen  violently  in  love 
with  the  young,  beautiful,  and  intellectual  Divara,  the 
widow  of  Jan  Matthys,  and  that,  as  he  could  not  many 
her  apart  from  polygamy,  he  persuaded  his  preachers 
and  elders  to  consent  to  his  proposals.  His  wonderful 
magnetic  influence  overbore  thoir  better  judgment. 

What  is  evident  is  that  the  decree  of  polygamy  was 
Huddenly  conceived  and  forced  upon  the  people.  If  Jan 
of  Loyden  *  took  no  share  in  its  proclamation,  he  set  the 

1  The  jRdtiiMfon,  written  by  Rothmanu  and  Kloprya  in  conjunction 
•with  Jau  of  Loydon  and  the  elders,  is  published  in  Boutorwek,  lAicmtur 
w)d  Gwchwhte  der  Wtefart&'uf&r ;  marriage  and  polygamy  are  treated  in 
aectUouH  14-16. 

8  Jau  BoflJwilson,  commonly  called  Jan  ran  Leyden,  was  the  illegitimate 
gen  of  a  village  magistrate,  and  wag  bom  near  Loyden  in  1310.  After  a 
brief  time  of  education  at  a  village  school  he  was  apprenticed  to  a  tailor, 


468  AETABAPTISM 

people  an  example  of  obedience.  He  promptly  married 
Divara  as  soon  as  it  was  lawful  to  do  so.  He  used  the 
ordinance  to  strengthen  his  position.  His  other  wives — 
he  had  sixteen  in  all — were  the  daughters  or  near  relations 
of  the  leaders  in  Miinster,  There  is  evidence  to  show 
that  his  own  character  deteriorated  rapidly  under  the  new 
conditions  of  life. 

The  siege  of  Miinster  went  on  during  all  these 
months.  The  Bishop's  soldiers  attempted  several  assaults, 
and  were  always  beaten  back.  They  seem  latterly  to 
have  relied  on  the  power  of  hunger.  The  sufferings  of 
the  citizens  during  the  later  weeks  were  terrible.  At 
length  Heinrich  G-resbeck,  deserting  to  the  besiegers'  camp, 
offered  to  betray  the  city  to  its  enemies.  He  showed 
them,  by  plans  and  models  in  clay,  how  to  get  through  the 
defences,  and  himself  prepared  the  way  for  the  Bishop's 
soldiers  to  enter.  The  Anabaptists  gathered  for  one  last 
desperate  defence  in  the  market-place,  under  the  leadership 
of  Bernard  Kmpperdolling  and  Bernard  Krechting,  with 
Rothmann  by  their  side.  When  the  band  was  reduced  to 
three  hundred  men,  they  capitulated  on  promise  of  safe- 
conduct  to  leave  the  town.  It  is  needless  to  say  that  tho 
bargain  was  not  kept.  Eothmann  was  believed  to  have 
perished  in  the  market-place.  The  city  was  given  over 
to  pillage,  and  the  streets  were  soon  strewn  with  dead 
bodies.  Then  a  court  was  established  to  try  the  Ana- 
baptist prisoners.  The  first  woman  to  suffer  was  tho 

and  in  his  leisure  hours  diligently  educated  himself.  Ho  travelled  more 
widely  than  artisans  usually  did  during  their  year  of  wandering — visiting 
England  as  well  as  most  parts  of  Flanders.  On  his  return  homo  ho 
married  the  widow  of  a  shipmaster,  and  started  business  as  a  merchant. 
He  was  a  prominent  member  of  the  literary  "gilds "  of  his  town,  and  had 
a  local  fame  as  a  poet  and  an  actor.  His  conversion  through  Jan  Matthyn 
changed  his  whole  life ;  there  is  not  the  slightest  reason,  to  suppofto  that  ho 
was  not  an  earnest  and  honest  adherent  of  the  Anabaptist  doctrines  an 
taught  by  Matthys.  He  is  described  as  strikingly  handsome,  with  a  fine 
sonorous  voice.  He  had  remarkable  powers  of  organisation.  His  whole 
brief  life  reveals  him  to  be  a  very  remarkable  man.  He  wa«  barely 
twenty-five  when  he  was  tortured  to  death  by  the  Bishop  of  MUnster  after 
tho  capture  of  the  town. 


MENNO    SIMONS  469 

fair  young  Divara.  She  steadfastly  refused  to  abjure,  and 
met  her  fate  in  her  own  queenly  way.  No  man  who  had 
been  in  any  way  prominent  during  the  siege  was  allowed 
to  escape  death.  Jan  Bockelson,  Bernard  Knipperdolling, 
and  Bernard  Krechting  were  reserved  to  suffer  the  most 
terrible  tortures  that  the  diabolical  ingenuity  of  mediaeval 
executioners  could  devise.  It  was  long  believed  that 
Kothmann  had  escaped,  and  that  he  had  got  away  to 
Rostock  or  to  Liibeck ;  more  than  one  person  was  arrested 
on  the  suspicion  of  being  the  famous  preacher  of  Minister 
— "a  short,  dark  man,  with  straight  brown  hair,"  was  his 
description  in  the  Lubeck  handbills. 

The  horrible  fate  of  Miinster  did  not  destroy  the 
indomitable  Anabaptists.  Menno  Simons  (b.  1496  or 
1505  at  Witmarsum,  a  village  near  Franccker),  "a  man  of 
integrity,  mild,  accommodating,  patient  of  injuries,  and  so 
ardent  in  his  piety  as  to  exemplify  in  his  own  life  the 
precepts  ho  gave  to  others,"  spent  twenty-five  laborious 
years  in  visiting  the  scattered  Anabaptist  communities 
and  uniting  them  in  a  simple  brotherly  association.  He 
purged  their  minds  of  the  apocalyptic  fancies  taught  by 
many  of  their  later  leaders  xmder  the  influence  of  persecu- 
tion, inculcated  the  old  ideas  of  non-resistance,  of  the  evils 
of  State  control  over  the  Church,  of  the  need  of  personal 
conversion,  and  of  adult  baptism  as  its  sign  and  seal. 
From  his  labours  have  come  all  the  modern  Baptist 
Churches. 


CHAPTER   III. 

SOCINIANISM.1 

THE  fathers  of  the  Socinian  Church  were  the  two  Sozzini, 
uncle  and  nephew,  Lelio  and  Fausto,  both  natives  of  the 
town  of  Siena. 

The  uncle,  Lelio  Sozzini  (b.  1525),  was  by  profession 
a  lawyer.  He  was  a  man  of  irreproachable  moral  life,  a 
Humanist  by  training,  a  student  of  the  classics  and  also 
of  theology.  He  was  thoroughly  dissatisfied  with  the 
condition  of  the  Eomish  Church,  and  early  began  to 
entertain  grave  doubts  about  some  of  its  leading  doctrinal 
positions.  He  communicated  his  views  to  a  select  circle 
of  friends.  Notwithstanding  the  precautions  he  had  taken, 
he  became  suspected.  Cardinal  Caraffa  had  persuaded 
Pope  Paul  in.  to  consent  to  the  reorganisation  of  the 
Inquisition  in  1542,  and  Italy  soon  became  a  very  unsafe 
place  for  any  suspected  person.  Lelio  left  Siena  in 
1547,  and  spent  the  remaining  portion  of  his  life  in 
travelling  in  those  lands  which  had  accepted  the  Lutheran 
or  the  Eeformed  faith.  He  made  the  acquaintance  of  all 
the  leading  Protestant  theologians,  including  Melanchthon 
and  Calvin.  He  kept  up  an  extensive  correspondence 

1  SOURCES  :  Moliotheca  JFratrwn  JPolonorum  (Amsterdam,  1666)  i.  ii. 
Racoviun  Catechism  (London,  1818). 

LATER  BOOKS  :  Fock,  Der  jSocinianismus  nach  seiner  BUllung  in  dcr 
OesammtentwicJclung  des  cliristlichen  Qeiates,  nach  seinem  historischen 
Vtrlavf  und  nach  seimm  Lehrbegriff  dargestellt  (Kid,  1847) ;  A  Ritsohl, 
Jahrbiteher  /.  deutsche  Theologie,  xiii,  268/.,  288jf,  ;  A  critical  History  of 
the  Christian  Doctrine  of  Justification  <wd  Reconciliation  (Edinburgh, 
1872) ;  Bilthoy,  Archiv  f.  Ocschichte  d*  Philos*  vi. ;  Harnaok,  Wtiory 
of  Dogma,  vii.  118^.  (London,  1899). 

470 


FAUSTO   SOZZINI  471 

with  them,  representing  his  own  personal  theological 
opinions  in  the  form  of  questions  which  he  desired  to 
have  solved  for  him.  From  Calvin's  letters  we  can 
learn  that  the  great  theologian  had  grave  doubts  about 
the  moral  earnestness  of  his  Italian  correspondent,  and 
repeatedly  warned  him  that  he  was  losing  hold  on  the 
saving  facts  of  heart  religion. 

All  the  while  Sozzini  seems  to  have  made  up  his  mind 
already  on  all  the  topics  introduced  into  his  correspond- 
ence, and  to  have  been  communicating  his  views,  on  pledge 
of  secrecy,  to  the  small  communities  of  Italian  refugees  who 
were  settled  in  Switzerland.  He  can  scarcely  be  blamed 
for  this  secretiveness ;  toleration,  as  the  sad  example  of 
the  burning  of  Servede  had  shown,  was  not  recognised  to 
be  a  Christian  principle  among  the  Churches  of  the 
[Reformation.  Lelio  died  at  Zurich  in  1562  without 
having  published  his  opinions,  and  without  his  neighbours 
and  hosts  being  aware  of  his  real  theological  position. 

He  bequeathed  all  his  property,  including  his  books 
and  his  manuscripts,  to  his  nephew,  Fauato,  who  had 
remained  at  Siena.  This  nephew  was  the  founder  of 
the  Socinian  Church. 

Fausto  Sozzini  (b.  1539)  was,  like  his  uncle,  a  man 
of  irreproachable  life,  a  lawyer,  a  diligent  and  earnest 
student,  fond  of  theology,  and  of  great  force  of  character. 
How  early  ho  had  come  to  think  as  his  uncle  had  done, 
is  unknown.  Report  affirms  that  after  he  had  received 
liis  uncle's  books  and  papers,  and  had  given  sufficient 
time  to  their  study,  he  left  Italy,  visited  the  places  whoro 
Lelio  had  gathered  small  companies  of  secret  sympathisers, 
to  confirm  them  in  the  faith.  His  uncle  had  visited 
Poland  twice,  and  Fausto  went  there  in  1579.  He  found 
that  the  anti-Trinitarians  there  had  no  need  to  conceal 
thoir  opinions.  The  Transylvanian  Prince,  Stephen  Bdthory, 
protected  them,  and  they  had  in  the  town  of  Krakau  their 
own  church,  school,  and  printing-press.  But  the  sect  as  a 
whole  was  torn  by .  internal  divisions  Fausto  bent  his 
whole  energies  to  overcome  those  differences. 


472  SOCINIANISM 

Before  his  arrival  in  Poland  he  had  published  two 
books,  which  are  interesting  because  they  show  the  path- 
way by  which  Fausto  arrived  at  his  theological  conclusions. 
He  started  not  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity  or  of  tho 
Person  of  Christ,  but  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Atonement 
— a  fact  to  be  kept  in  mind  when  the  whole  Socinian 
system  of  theology  is  examined. 

He  believed  that  the  real  cause  of  the  divisions  which 
wasted  the  sect  was  that  the  Polish  Unitarians  were 
largely  Anabaptists.  They  insisted  that  no  one  could  be 
a  recognised  member  of  the  community  unless  he  was 
rebaptized.  They  refused  to  enroll  Fausto  Sozzini  himself, 
and  excluded  him  from  the  Sacrament  of  the  Supper, 
because  he  would  not  submit  to  rebaptism.  They  declared 
that  no  member  of  their  communities  could  enter  the 
magistracy,  or  sue  in  a  civil  court,  or  pay  a  war  tax. 
They  disagreed  on  many  small  points  of  doctrine,  and  used 
the  ban  very  freely  against  each  other.  Sozzini  saw 
that  he  could  not  hope  to  make  any  progress  in  his 
attempts  to  unite  the  Unitarians  unless  he  was  able  to 
purge  out  this  Anabaptist  leaven.  His  troubles  can  be 
seen  in  his  correspondence,  and  in  some  of  his  smaller 
tracts  in  the  first  volume  of  the  BiUiotkeca  Fratrym 
Polonorum.1  In  spite  of  the  rebuffs  he  met  with,  he 
devoted  all  his  energies  to  the  thankless  task  of  furthering 
union,  and  in  the  end  of  his  days  he  had  the  satisfaction 
of  seeing  that  he  had  not  laboured  in  vain.  Shortly 
before  his  death,  a  synod  held  at  Krakau  (1603)  declared 
that  rebaptism  was  not  necessary  for  entrance  into  a 
Unitarian  community.  Many  of  the  lesser  differences 
had  been  got  rid  of  earlier.  The  literary  activity  of 
Sozzini  was  enormous :  books  and  pamphlets  flowed  from 
his  untiring  pen,  all  devoted  to  the  enforcing  or  explaining 
the  Socinian  theology.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the 
inner  history  of  the  Unitarian  communities  in  Poland 
from  1579  until  his  death  in  1604  is  contained  in  his 
voluminous  correspondence.  The  united  Unitarians  of 

1  l'l>.  307/. 


CRITICISM    OF    DOCTRINES  473 

Poland  took  the  name  of  the  Polish  Brethren ;  and  from 
this  society  what  was  known  as  Socinian  theology  spread 
through  Germany  (especially  the  Ehineland),  Switzerland, 
and  England.  Its  principles  were  not  formulated  in 
a  creed  until  1642,  when  the  Bacoman  Catechism  was 
published.  It  was  never  formally  declared  to  be  the 
standard  of  the  Unitarian  Church,  but  its  statements  are 
universally  held  to  represent  the  views  of  the  older 
Socinians. 

Socinianism,  unlike  the  great  religious  movement  under 
the  guidance  of  Luther,  had  its  distinct  and  definite 
beginning  in  a  criticism  of  doctrines,  and  this  must  never 
be  forgotten  if  its  true  character  is  to  be  understood.  We 
have  already  seen x  that  there  ia  no  trace  of  any  intellectual 
difficulties  about  doctrines  or  statement  of  doctrines  in 
Luther's  mind  during  the  supreme  crisis  in  his  spiritual 
history.  Its  whole  course,  from  the  time  be  entered  the 
Erfurt  convent  down  to  the  publication  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  shows  that  the  spiritual  revolt  of  which  he 
was  the  soul  and  centre  took  its  rise  from  something 
much  deeper  than  any  mere  criticism  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  mediaeval  Church,  and  that  it  resulted  in  something 
very  much  greater  than  a  reconstruction  of  doctrinal 
conceptions.  The  central  thing  about  the  Protestant 
Eeformation  was  that  it  meant  a  rediscovery  of  religion 
as  faith,  "  as  a  relation  between  person  and  person,  higher 
therefore,  than  all  reason,  and  living  not  upon  commands  and 
hopes,  but  on  the  power  of  God,  and  apprehending  in  Jesus 
Christ  the  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth  as  Father/'2  The 
Eeformation.  started  from  this  living  experience  of  the 
believing  Christian,  which  it  proclaimed  to  be  the  one 
fundamental  fact  iji  Christianity — something  which  could 
never  be  proved  by  argument,  and  could  never  be  dissolved 
away  by  speculation. 

On  the  contrary,  the  earliest  glimpse  that  we  have  of 
Lelio  Sozzini  is  his  meeting  with  friends  to  discuss  and 
cast  doubts  upon  such  doctrines  as  the  Satisfaction  of 

1  Of.  i.  420 jf.  fl  Barnaul*,  H'htory  of  Dogma^  vii.  167. 


474  SOCINIANISM 

Christ,  the  Trinity,  and  others  like  them.1  Socinianism 
maintained  to  the  end  the  character  with  which  it  came 
into  being.  It  was  from  first  to  last  a  criticism  and 
attempted  reconstruction  of  doctrines. 

This  is  sufficient  of  itself  to  discount  the  usual  accounts 
which  Romanist  controversialists  give  of  the  Socinian 
movement,  and  of  its  relation  to  the  Protestant  Reforma- 
tion. They,  and  many  Anglicans  who  have  no  sympathy 
with  the  great  Reformation  movement,  are  accustomed  to 
say  that  the  Socinian  system  of  doctrines  is  the  legitimate 
deduction  from  the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  and 
courageously  carries  out  the  rationalist  conceptions  lurking 
in  all  Protestant  theology.  They  point  to  the  fact  that 
many  of  the  early  Presbyterians  of  England  and  Puritans 
of  America  have  furnished  a  large  number  of  recruits  to 
the  Unitarian  or  Socinian  ranks.  They  assert  that  the 
central  point  in  the  Socinian  theology  is  the  denial  of  the 
Divinity  of  our  Lord,  which  they  allege  is  the  logical 
outcome  of  refusing  to  accept  the  Romanist  doctrine  of 
the  Mass  and  the  principle  of  ecclesiastical  tradition. 

The  question  is  purely  historical,  and  can  only  be 
answered  by  examining  the  sources  of  Socinian  theology 
and  tracing  it  to  its  roots.  The  result  of  such  an  examina- 
tion seems  to  show  that,  while  Socinianism  did  undoubtedly 
owe  much  to  Humanism,  and  to  the  spirit  of  critical  inquiry 
and  keen  sense  of  the  value  of  the  individual  which  it 
fostered,  most  of  its  distinguishing  theological  conceptions 
are  mediaeval.  It  laid  hold  on  the  leading  principles  of 
the  Scotist-Pelagian  theology,  which  were  extremely 
popular  in  the  fifteenth  and  beginning  of  the  sixteenth 
centuries,  and  carried  them  out  to  their  logical  consequences. 
In  fact,  most  of  the  theological  principles  of  Socinian 
theology  are  more  akin  to  those  of  the  Jesuit  dogmatic — 
which  is  the  prolongation  of  Scotism  ijato  modern  times — 
than  they  are  to  the  theology  of  Luther  or  of  Calvin, 
It  is,  of  course,  to  be  remembered  that  by  discarding  the 
authority  of  the  Church  the  Socinians  are  widely  separated 

1  Of.  p.  427. 


FAITH  475 

from  both  Scotists  and  Jesuits.  Still  the  roots  of  Socinian 
theology  are  to  be  found  in  the  Scotist  doctrines  of  God  and 
of  the  Atonement,  and  these  two  doctrines  are  their  starting- 
point,  and  not  the  mere  negation  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ. 

In  three  most  important  conceptions  the  Socinian 
thought  is  distinctly  mediaeval,  and  mediseval  in  the 
Scotist  way. 

Their  idea  of  faith  is  intellectual.  It  is  assensus  and 
not  fiducia.  "  In  Scripture,"  says  the  Eacovian  Catechism, 
"the faith  is  most  perfectly  taught^  that  God  exists  and 
that  He  recompenses.  This,  however,  and  nothing  else, 
is  the  faith  that  is  to  be  directed  to  God  and  Christ."  It  is 
afterwards  described  as  the  way  in  which  one  must  adjust 
himself  to  the  known  commands  and  promises  of  God; 
and  there  is  added  that  this  faith  "both  makes  our 
obedience  more  acceptable  and  well-pleasing  to  God,  and 
supplies  the  defects  of  our  obedience,  provided  it  be  sincere 
and  earnest,  and  brings  it  about  that  we  are  justified 
by  God."  This  is  good  Scotist  doctrine.  These  theologians 
were  accustomed  to  declare  that  all  that  the  Christian 
needs  is  to  have  faith  in  God  as  the  recompenser  (i.e. 
to  assent  to  the  truth  that  God  does  recompense),  and 
that  with  regard  to  all  the  other  doctrines  of  the  Church 
implicit  faith  (i.e.  submission  to  the  Church's  teaching)  is 
enough.  Of  course  the  extreme  individualism  of  the 
Socinians  coloured  their  conception  of  faith ;  they  cannot 
accept  an  implicit  faith ;  their  assent  to  truth  must  always 
be  explicit;  what  they  assent  to  must  recommend  itself 
to  their  individual  reason.  They  cannot  assent  to  a  round 
of  truths  which  are  presented  to  them  by  the  Church,  and 
receive  them  implicitly  on  the  principle  of  obedience  to 
authority.  But  what  is  to  bo  observed  here  is  that  the 
Hocinion  type  of  faith  is  always  assent  to  truths  which 
dan  be  stated  in  prepositional  form ;  they  have  no  idea 
oi!  that  faith  which,  to  use  Luther's  phrase,  throws  itself 
upon  God,  They  further  declare,  quite  in  accordance  with 
Hootist  teaching,  that  1x1011  are  justified  because  of  their 
adual  obedience  to  the  known  eonnuuutlH  ami  prouiiaca  of 


476  SOCINIANISM 

God.  There  is  not  a  trace  of  the  Evangelical  attitude. 
The  accordance  with  Scotist  theology  descends  to  very 
minute  particulars,  did  space  permit  to  trace  it. 

The  Socioian  conception  of  Scripture  corresponds  to 
their  idea  of  faith.  The  two  thoughts  of  Scripture  and 
saving  faith,  as  has  been  already  said,1  always  correspond 
in  mediaeval  theology  they  are  primarily  intellectual  and 
prepositional;  in  Eeformation  thinking  they  are,  in  the 
first  instance,  experimental  and  personal.  The  Socinian 
conception  allies  itself  with  the  mediaeval,  and  discards 
the  Eeformation  way  of  regarding  both  faith  and  Scripture. 
With  the  Socinians  as  with  mediaeval  theologians,  Scripture 
is  the  divine  source  of  information  about  doctrines  and 
morals;  they  have  no  idea  of  Scripture  as  a  means  of 
grace,  as  the  channel  of  a  personal  communion  between 
God  and  His  trusting  people.  But  here  as  elsewhere  the 
new  individualism  of  the  Socinians  compels  them  to  establish 
both  the  authority  and  the  dogmatic  contents  of  Scripture 
in  a  way  different  from  their  mediaeval  predecessors.  They 
had  rejected  altogether  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and 
they  could  not  make  use  of  the  thought  to  warrant  either 
the  authority  of  Scripture  or  a  correct  interpretation  of 
its  contents.  In  the  place  of  it  they  put  what  they 
called  reason.  "The  use  of  right  reason  (rectce  rationis) 
is  great  in  things  which  pertain  to  salvation,  since  without 
it,  it  is  impossible  either  to  grasp  with  certainty  the 
authority  of  Scripture,  or  to  understand  those  things  that 
are  contained  in  it,  or  to  deduce  some  things  from  other 
things,  or,  finally,  to  recall  them  to  put  them  to  uso  (ad 
usum  rewcari)"  The  certitudo  sacrarum  Mtterarum  is 
accordingly  established,  or  attempted  to  be  proved,  by  a 
series  of  external  proofs  which  appeal  to  the  ordinary 
reasoning  faculties  of  man.  The  Eeformation  conception 
of  the  Witness  of  the  Spirit,  an  essential  part  of  its 
doctrine  of  Scripture,  finds  no  place  in  Socinian  theology. 
They  try  to  establish  the  authority  of  Scriptxire  without 
any  appeal  to  faith;  the  Confessions  of  the  Eeformation 

1  Of.  i.  46L 


THE   WORK    OF   CHRIST  477 

do  not  recognise  any  infallibility  or  divine  authority  which 
is  otherwise  apprehended  than  by  faith.  The  Reformation 
and  the  Socinian  doctrines  are  miles  apart;  but  the 
Socinian  and  the  mediaeval  approach  each  other  closely. 
It  is  somewhat  difficult  to  know  what  books  the  older 
Socinians  recognise  as  their  rule  of  faith.  They  did  not 
accept  the  Canon  of  the  mediaeval  Church.  They  had  no 
difficulty  about  the  New  Testament ;  but  the  references  to 
the  Old  Testament  in  the  Eacovian  Catechism  are  very 
slight :  its  authority  is  guaranteed  for  them  by  the  refer- 
ences to  it  in  the  New  Testament. 

When  we  turn  to  the  Socinian  statements  about  God, 
and  to  their  assertions  about  the  nature  and  meaning  of 
the  Work  of  Christ,  we  find  the  clearest  proof  of  their 
mediaeval  origin.  The  Scotist  theology  is  simply  reproduced , 
and  cleared  of  its  limitations. 

A  fundamental  conception  of  God  lay  at  the  basis  of 
the  whole  Scotist  theology.  God,  it  maintained,  could 
best  be  defined  as  Dominium  Alsolutum ;  man  as  set  over 
against  God  they  described  as  an  individual  free  will.  If 
God  be  conceived  as  simply  Dominium  Absolutum,  we  can 
never  affirm  that  God  must  act  in  any  given  way ;  we 
may  not  even  say  that  He  is  bound  to  act  according  to 
moral  considerations.  Ho  is  high  above  all  considera- 
tions of  any  kind.  He  does  not  will  to  act  in  any  way 
because  it  is  right ;  and  action  is  right  because  God  wills 
to  act  in  that  way.  There  can  be  neither  metaphysical 
nor  moral  necessity  in  any  of  God's  actions  or  purposes. 
This  ScotiHt  idea,  that  God  is  the  absolutely  arbitrary  one, 
iw  cxpresssd  in  the  strongest  language  in  tho  Eacovian 
CatoohiBiu.  "  It  belongs  to  the  nature  of  God  that  He  has 
the  right  and  supreme  power  to  decree  whatsoever  He 
wills  concerning  all  things  and  concerning  us,  even  in. 
those  matters  with  which  no  other  power  has  to  do; 
for  example,  He  can  give  laws,  and  appoint  rewards  and 
penalties  according  to  His  own  judgment,  to  our  thoughts, 
hidden  an  thone  may  be  in  the  innermost  recesses  of  our 
henvta." 


478  SOCINIANISM 

If  this  thought,  that  God  is  simply  Dominium  Alsolutum, 
he  applied  to  explain  the  nature  and  meaning  of  the  work 
of  Christ,  of  the  Atonement,  it  follows  at  once  that  there 
can  he  no  real  necessity  for  that  work ;  for  all  necessity, 
metaphysical  or  moral,  is  derogatory  to  the  Dominium 
Jbsolutum,  which  is  God.  If  the  Atonement  has  merit  in 
it,  that  is  only  because  God  has  announced  that  He  means 
to  accept  the  work  of  Christ  as  meritorious,  and  that  He 
will  therefore  free  men  from  the  burden  of  sin  on  account 
of  what  Christ,  the  Saviour,  has  done.  It  is  the  announced 
acceptation  of  God  which  makes  the  work  of  Christ 
meritorious.  A  meritorious  work  has  nothing  in  its  nature 
which  makes  it  so.  To  be  meritorious  simply  means  that 
the  work  so  described  will  be  followed  by  God's  doing 
something  in  return  for  its  being  done,  and  this  only 
because  God  has  made  this  announcement.  God  could 
have  freed  men  from  the  guilt  and  punishment  due  for 
sin  without  the  work  of  Christ ;  He  could  have  appointed  a 
human  mediator  if  He  had  so  willed  it ;  He  might  have 
pardoned  and  accepted  man  as  righteous  in  His  sight 
without  any  mediator  at  all.  He  could  have  simply 
pardoned  man  without  anything  coming  between  His  act 
of  pardon  and  man's  sin.  This  being  the  case,  the  Scotist 
theologians  argued  that  it  might  seem  that  the  work  of 
Christ,  called  the  Atonement,  was  entirely  superfluous ;  it 
is,  indeed,  superfluous  as  far  as  reason  is  concerned;  it 
can  never  be  justified  on  rational  grounds.  But,  according 
to  the  dogmatic  tradition  of  the  Church,  confirmed  by 
the  circle  of  the  Sacraments,  God  has  selected  this  inoclo 
of  getting  rid  of  the  sin  and  guilt  of  man.  Ho  has 
announced  that  He  will  accept  this  work  of  Christ,  Atone- 
ment, and  therefore  the  Scotist  theologians  declared  the 
Atonement  must  be  believed  in  and  seen  to  be  the  divinely 
appointed  way  of  salvation.  Erasmus  satirised  the  long 
arguments  and  hypotheses  of  the  Scotist  theologians  when 
he  enumerated  among  the  questions  which  were  highly 
interesting  to  them :  "  Could  God  have  taken  the  form  of 
a  woman,  a  devil,  an  ass,  a  gourd,  or  a  stone  ?  How 


THE   WORK   OF   CHRIST  479 

could  a  gourd  have  preached,  done  miracles,  hung  on  the 
Cross?"1 

It  is  'manifest  that  this  idea  of  Dominium  Absolutuvn 
is  simply  the  conception  of  the  extremest  individualism 
applied  to  God  instead  of  being  used  to  describe  man.  If 
we  treat  it  anthropomorphically,  it  comes  to  this,  that  the 
relation  of  G-od  to  man  is  that  of  an  infinite  Individual 
Will  set  over  against  a  number  of  finite  individual  wills.  If 
this  view  be  taken  of  the  relations  between  God  and  man, 
then  God  can  never  be  thought  of  as  the  Moral  Euler  in  a 
moral  commonwealth,  but  only  as  a  private  individual  face 
to  face  with  other  individuals ;  and  the  relations  between 
God  and  man  must  be  discussed  from  the  standpoint  of 
private  and  not  of  public  law.  When  wrong-doing  is 
regarded  under  the  scheme  of  public  law,  the  ruler  can 
never  treat  it  as  an  injury  done  to  himself,  and  which  he 
can  forgive  because  he  is  of  a  kindly  nature;  he  must 
consider  it  an  offence  against  the  whole  community  of 
which  he  is  the  public  guardian.  On  the  other  hand, 
when  offences  are  considered  under  a  scheme  of  private 
law,  they  arc  simply  wrongs  done  to  a  private  person  who, 
as  an  individual,  may  forgive  what  is  merely  a  debt  due 
to  himself.  In  such  a  case  the  wrong-doer  may  be  for- 
given without  infringing  any  general  moral  principle. 

The  Socinians,  following  tho  medieval  Scotist  theo- 
logians, invariably  applied  tho  principles  of  private  law 
to  the  relations  between  God  and  man.  God,  the 
Dominium  Alsolutum,  the  Supreme  Arbitrary  Will,  was 
never  regarded  as  the  Moral  liuler  in  a  moral  common- 
wealth where  subjects  and  rulers  are  constrained  by  the 
same  moral  laws*  Sins  are  simply  private  debts  due  by 
tho  individual  finite  wills  to  the  Ono  Infinite  Will,  From 
Buch  premises  tho  Sootiets  deduced  the  conclusion  that 
the  Atonement  was  unnecessary;  there  they  stopped; 
they  could  not  say  that  there  was  no  such  thing  as 
Atonement,  for  the  dogmatic  tradition  of  the  Church 
prevented  them.  Tho  Socinians  had  thrown  overboard  the 
1  Erasmus,  Opera  Owwiifo,  iv.  406 » 


480  SOCINIANISM 

thought  of  a  dogmatic  tradition  which  had  to  be  respected 
even  when  it  appeared  to  be  irrational.  If  the  Atonement 
was  not  necessary,  that  meant  to  them  that  it  did  not 
exist ;  they  simply  carried  out  the  theological  premises  of 
the  Scotist-Pelagian  medieval  theologians  to  their  legitimate 
consequences. 

In  these  three  important  conceptions — faith,  Scripture, 
the  nature  of  God,  involving  the  character  of  His  relations 
to  man — the  Socinians  belong  to  a  mediaeval  school  of 
thought,  and  have  no  sympathy  whatever  with  the  general 
principles  which  inspired  Eeformation  theological  thinking. 

But  the  Socinians  were  not  exclusively  mediaeval; 
they  owed  much  to  the  Eenaissance.  This  appears  in  a 
very  marked  manner  in  the  way  in  which  they  conceived 
the  very  important  religious  conception  of  the  Church.  It 
is  a  characteristic  of  Socinian  theology,  that  the  individual 
believer  is  considered  without  much,  if  any,  reference  to 
the  Church  or  community  of  the  saved.  This  separates 
the  Socinians  not  only  from  mediaeval  Christians,  but  from 
all  who  belonged  to  the  great  Protestant  Evangelical 
movement. 

The  mediaeval  Church  always  regarded  itself,  and 
taught  men  to  look  to  it,  as  a  religious  community  which 
came  logically  and  really  before  the  individual  believer. 
It  presented  itself  to  men  as  a  great  society  founded  on  a 
dogmatic  tradition,  possessing  the  Sacraments,  and  governed 
by  an  officially  holy  caste.  The  pious  layman  of  the 
Middle  Ages  found  himself  within  it  as  he  might  have 
done  within  one  of  its  great  cathedrals.  The  dogmatic 
tradition  did  not  trouble  him  much,  nor  did  the  worldlinoHS 
and  insincerity  often  manifested  by  its  official  guardian**. 
What  they  required  of  him  was  implicit  faith,  which  really 
meant  a  decorous  external  obedience.  That  once  rendered, 
he  was  comparatively  free  to  worship  within  what  was  for 
him  a  great  house  of  prayer.  The  hymns,  the  prayers, 
many  of  the  sermons  of  the  mediaeval  Ohxirch,  make  tis 
feel  that  the  Institution  was  for  the  medieval  Ohrifitiarx 
the  visible  symbol  of  a  wide  purpose  of  God,  which 


THE   CHURCH  481 

embraced  his  individual  life  and  guaranteed  a  repose 
which  he  could  use  in  resting  on  the  promises  of  God. 
The  records  of  mediaeval  piety  continually  show  us  that 
the  Church  was  etherealised  into  an  assured  and  historical 
fellowship  of  believers  into  which  the  individual  entered, 
and  within  which  he  found  the  assuring  sense  of  fellowship. 
He  left  all  else  to  the  professional  guardians  of  this 
ecclesiastical  edifice.  Probably  such  are  the  unspoken 
thoughts  of  thousands  of  devout  men  and  women  in  the 
Roman  and  Greek  communions  to-day.  They  value  the 
Church  because  it  represents  to  them  in  a  visible  and 
historical  way  a  fellowship  with  Christ  and  His  saints 
which  is  the  result  of  His  redeeming  work. 

This  thought  is  as  deeply  rooted  in  Eeformation  as  in 
mediaeval  piety.  The  Reformers  felt  compelled  to  protest 
against  the  political  form  which  the  mediaeval  Church  had 
assumed.  They  conceived  that  to  be  a  degradation  from 
its  ideal.  They  saw  the  manifold  abuses  which  the 
degradation  had  given  rise  to.  But  they  always  regarded 
visible  Christendom  as  a  religious  community  called  into 
being  by  the  work  of  Christ.  They  had  always  before 
them  the  thought  of  the  Church  of  Christ  as  the  fellow- 
ship which  logically  and  really  comes  "before  the  individual 
believer,  the  society  into  which  the  believer  is  brought; 
and  this  conception  stood  with  them  in  close  and  reciprocal 
connection  with  the  thought  that  Jesus,  by  His  work  of 
Atonement,  had  reconciled  men  with  God,  had  founded  the 
Church  on,  that  work  of  His,  and,  vMhm  it  had  opened  for 
Binnors  the  way  to  God,  They  protested  against  the 
political  form  which  the  Church  had  assumed ;  they  never 
ceuaed  to  cling  to  the  thought  of  the  Catholic  Church 
Visible  which  is  founded  on  the  redeeming  work  of  Christ, 
and  within  which  man  finds  the  way  of  salvation.  They 
described  this  Church  in  all  their  creeds  and  testimonies ; 
they  gave  the  marks  which  characterised  it  and  manifested 
its  divine  origin;  the  thought  was  an  essential  part  of 
their  theology. 

The  Hooinianfl  never  felt  the  need  of  any  such  cou- 


482  SOCINIANISM 

ception.  Jesus  was  for  them  only  the  teacher  of  a 
superior  kind  of  morality  detailed  in  the  commands  and 
promises  of  God ;  they  looked  to  Him  for  that  guidance 
and  impulse  towards  a  moral  self-culture  which  each  man 
can  appropriate  for  himself  without  first  coming  into  a 
society  which  is  the  fellowship  of  the  redeemed.  Had 
they  ever  felt  the  burden  of  sin  as  the  Reformers  felt  it, 
had  they  ever  yearned  for  such  a  fellowship  with  Christ 
as  whole-hearted  personal  trust  gives,  or  even  for  such  as 
comes  in  the  sense  of  bodily  contact  in  the  Sacrament,  had 
they  ever  felt  the  craving  to  get  in  touch  with  their  Lord 
somehow  or  anyhow,  they  would  never  have  been  able  to  do 
without  this  conception  of  a  Church  Catholic  of  some  kind 
or  other.  They  never  seemed  to  feel  the  need  of  it.  The 
Eacovian  Catechism  was  compelled  to  make  some  reference 
to  the  kingly  and  priestly  offices  of  Christ.  It  owed  so 
much  to  the  New  Testament.  Its  perfunctory  sentences 
show  that  our  Lord  was  for  the  Socinians  simply  a 
Prophet  sent  from  God  to  proclaim  a  superior  kind  of 
morality.  His  highest  function  was  to  communicate 
knowledge  to  men,  and  perhaps  to  teach  them  by  example 
how  to  make  use  of  it.  They  had  no  conception  that 
Jesus  came  to  do  something  for  His  people,  and  that  what 
He  did  was  much  more  valuable  than  what  He  said,  how- 
ever precious  that  might  be.  They  were  content  to  become 
His  scholars,  the  scholars  of  a  teacher  sent  from  God,  and 
to  become  members  of  His  school,  where  His  opinions  wore 
known  and  could  be  learned.  They  had  no  idea  that  they 
needed  to  be  saved  in  the  deeper  sense  of  that  word.  They 
have  no  need,  therefore,  for  the  conception  of  the  Church ; 
what  they  did  need  and  what  they  have  is  the  thought  of 
a  school  of  opinions  to  which  they  could  belong,1 

In  this  one  thought  they  were  equally  far  apart  from 

1 A  very  full  analysis  of  the  contents  of  the  Eaoovian  Catechism  is  given 
in  Harnack's  History  of  Dogma,  vii.  137  £,  also  in  lock,  D&r  tfociwicwiwnw, 
etc.  ii.  A.  Rltschl  has  shown  that  the  Unitarianism  of  the  Sooinians  is  simply 
the  legitimate  conclusion  from  their  theory  of  the  nature  of  God  and  of  tho 
work  of  Christ,  in  his  two  essays  in  the  JoMtielier  /.  deutsehe  TheoL  xiii. 
268  ff.,  283  ft 


THE   CHURCH  483 

the  circle  of  mediaeval  and  of  Keformation  theological 
thinking.  In  most  of  their  other  theological  conceptions 
their  opinions  were  inherited  from  mediaeval  theology. 
They  had  little  or  no  connection  with  Keformation  theology 
or  with  what  that  represents — the  piety  of  the  mediaeval 
Church. 


BOOK  VI. 
THE  COUNTER-REFORMATION. 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE   NECESSITY  OF  A  REFORMATION  OF    SOME   SORT 
UNIVERSALLY  ADMITTED.1 

IN  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  and  beginning  of  the  sixteenth 
centuries  the  urgent  need  for  a  Eeformation  of  the  Church 
was  recognised  by  all  thoughtful  men  everywhere  throughout 
western  Europe,  and  was  loudly  expressed  by  almost  every- 
one outside  the  circle  of  the  influence  of  the  Koman  Curia. 
Statesmen  and  men  of  letters,  nobles  and  burghers,  great 
Churchmen  as  well  as  monks  and  parish  priests — all  be- 
wailed the  condition  of  the  organised  Christian  life,  and 
most  of  them  recognised  that  the  unreformed  Papacy  was 

1  SOURCES  :  Laemmer,  Monumenta  Vaticana,  hutoriam  eccle.siasticam  seculi 
16  illustrantia  (Freiburg  i.  B.  1861) ;  Weiss,  fa/piers  d?$tat  du  Cardinal 
Perronet  de  Granvelle  (in  the  Collection  des  documents  vnddits  de  rHixloire 
de  France,  1885-49) ;  Fiedler,  JRelationen  Venetianischer  JBoteckq/lton,  'tlbtir 
DeutsMand  und  Oesterreich  im  lOten  Jahrhunderte  (in  the  Fontes  Xterum 
Austriacarum,  Dijplomatica  et  Acta,  xxx.,  Tienna,  1870) ;  Friedenburg, 
Nuntiaturberichte  aus  Deutschland,  1533-89  (Gotha,  1892-98) ;  Courteggio  di 
Vittoria  Oolonna  (Rome,  1889). 

LATER  BOOKS  :  Marrenbrecher,  Geschichte  der  Tcatholischen  Reformation 
(Ni3rdlingen,  1880— only  one  volume  published,  which  ends  with  1684) ; 
also  Karl  V.  und  die  deutschen  ProtcBtantcn  (Dttsseldorf,  1865)  ;  Banke,  JD& 
r&minchen  Pcipstc,  ihw  JfircTie  und  ihr  Stoat  im  secliszehwten  wnd  ttebwhenUn 
Jahrhwidet't ;  Gothoin,  Ignatius  von  Loyola  wad  die  Oegdnrqformalion 
(Halle,  1896) ;  Philippson,  La  Contre-Mevolution  religieuM  du  IQt  tiMe 
(Brussels,  1884) ;  Ward,  The  Connter-fieformation  (London,  1889) ;  Dupin, 
ffistoire  de,  Vftglim  du  m  sttclc  (Paris,  1701-13) ;  Jonold,  Vittoria  Oolonna 
(London,  1906). 

484 


NEED   FOR   REFORMATION  485 

the  running  sore  of  Europe.  The  protest  against  the 
state  of  religion  was  not  confined  to  individual  outcries ; 
it  found  expression  in  the  States-General  of  France,  in  the 
Diet  of  Germany,  and  in  the  Parliament  of  England. 

The  complaints  took  many  forms.  One  of  the  most 
universal  was  that  the  clergy,  especially  those  of  higher 
rank,  busied  themselves  with  everything  save  the  one  thing 
which  specially  belonged  to  them — the  cure  of  souls. 
They  took  undue  share  in  the  government  of  the  countries 
of  Europe,  and  ousted  the  nobles  from  their  legitimate 
places  of  rule.  Clerical  law-courts  interfered  constantly 
with  the  lives  of  burghers ;  and  the  clergy  protested  that 
they  were  not  bound  to  obey  the  ordinary  laws  of  the  land. 
A  brawling  priest  could  plead  the  "  benefit  of  clergy  " ;  but 
a  layman  who  struck  a  priest,  no  matter  what  the  pro- 
vocation, was  liable  to  the  dread  penalty  of  excommunica- 
tion. Their  "right  of  sanctuary"  was  a  perpetual 
encouragement  to  crime.1  They  and  their  claims  menaced 
the  quiet  life  of  civilised  towns  and  States.  Constitutional 
lawyers,  trained  by  Humanism  to  know  the  old  imperial  law 
codes  of  Theodosius  and  Justinian,  traced  these  evils  back 
to  tho  interference  of  Canon  Law  with  Civil,  and  that  to 
the  universal  and  absolute  dominion  of  a  papal  absolutism. 
The  Reformation  desired,  floated  before  the  minds  of  states- 
men as  a  reduction  more  or  less  thorough  of  the  papo-1 
absolutism,  and  of  the  control  exercised  by  the  Pope  and 
the  clergy  over  the  internal  affairs  of  the  State,  even  its 
national  ecclesiastical  regulations.  The  historical  fact  that 
the  loosely  formed  kingdoms  of  the  Middle  Ages  were  being 
slowly  transformed  into  modern  States,  perhaps  furnished 
unconsciously  the  basis  for  this  idea  of  a  Reformation. 

The  same  thought  took  another  and  more  purely  ecclesi- 
astical form.  The  papal  absolutism  meant  frequently  that 
Italians  received  preferments  all  over  western  Europe,  and 
supplanted  the  native  clergy  in  the  more  important  and 
richer  benefices.  Why  should  the  Churches  of  Spain, 

*  Of*  A  Relation  ,  ,  .  of  the  Mwid  qf  Knglmd  .  .  .  about  the  year  1600 
(Oamdon  Society,  London!  1847),  pp.  34-86,  86-80. 


486  THE  NECESSITY   OF   A   REFORMATION" 

England,  or  France  be  ruled  by  Italian  prelates,  whether 
resident  or  non-resident  ?  It  was  universally  felt  that 
Koman  rule  meant  a  lack  of  spirituality,  and  was  a  source 
of  religious  as  well  as  of  national  degradation.  Men 
longed  for  a  change,  clergy  as  well  as  laity;  and  the 
thought  of  National  Churches  really  independent  of  Borne, 
if  still  nominally  under  the  Western  Obedience,  filled  the 
minds  of  many  Reformers.1 

The  early  mediaeval  Church  had  been  a  stern  preacher 
of  righteousness,  had  taught  the  barbarous  invaders  of 
Europe  lessons  of  pure  living,  honesty,  sobriety;  it  had 
insisted  that  the  clergy  ought  to  be  examples  as  well  as 
preachers;  Canon  Law  was  full  of  penalties  ordained  to 
check  clerical  vices.  But  it  was  notorious  that  the  higher 
clergy,  whose  duty  it  was  to  put  the  laws  in  execution, 
were  themselves  the  worst  offenders.  How  could  English 
Bishops  enforce  laws  against  incontinence,  when  Wolsey, 
Archbishop,  Cardinal,  and  Legate,  had  made  his  illegitimate 
daughter  the  Abbess  of  Salisbury  ?  What  hope  was  there 
for  strict  discipline  when  no  inconsiderable  portion  of  a 
Bishop's  annual  income  came  from  money  paid  in  order 
to  practise  clerical  incontinence  in  security?  Eeformers 
demanded  a  reformation  of  clerical  morals,  beginning  with 
the  Bishops  and  descending  through  all  grades  to  monks 
and  nuns,2 

1  Of.  i.  36. 

2  This  had  been  protested  against  for  a  century  and  a  half,  not  merely  by 
individual  moralists,  but  by  such  conventions  of  notables  as  tho  English 
Parliament ;  cf.  Molls  of  JParttament,  ii.  313-14  ;  lt&m>  "prie  laCommwnoque 
conime  autre  foithz  au  Parlement  tonuz  a  Wyncestro,  supplie  y  fuist  par  la 
Commune  de  remedie  de  ce  que  les  Prelatz  et  Ordinarcs  do  Soint  EHgli.so 
pristrent  sommes  pecuniers  de  gentz  de  Soint  Esglise  et  autres  pur  redemp- 
tion de  lour  pecche  de  jour  en  jour,  et  an  en  an,  do  ce  que  ils  tie  ml  rent 
overtement  lours  concubines  ;  et  pur  autres  pecches  et  offenses  a  eux  surniys, 
dount  peyne  pecunier  ne  serroit  pris  de  droit :  Quolo  choso  ost  causes,  tnoiw- 
tenance  et  norisement  de  lour  pecche,  en  ovorto  desclandre,  ot  mal  enaamplo 
de  tut  la  Commune ;  quele  chose  issint  continue  mont  duement  puny,  ont 
desesploit  an  Roi  et  a  tout  le  Boiahno.     Qo  ploisc  a  nostro  Seigneur  lo  Hoi 
ent  ordeiner  que  touz  ticls  redemptions  soient  de  tut  onsteiz  ;  et  quo  si  mil 
viegne  encontre  ceste  Ordinance,  quo  le  prenour  enoourgc  la  nomnie  <M 
double  issint  pris  (lovers  la  Roi  et  ccly  quo  lo  pnie  oit  mesmo  la  peyne." 


NATIONAL   CHURCHES  487 

Humanism  brought  forward  yet  another  conception  of 
reform.  It  demanded  either  a  thorough  repudiation  of  the 
whole  of  Scholastic  Theology  and  a  return  to  the  pure  and 
simple  "  Christian  Philosophy  "  of  the  Church  of  the  first 
six  centuries,  or  such  a  relaxation  of  that  Scholastic  as  would 
afford  room  for  the  encouragement  of  the  New  Learning. 

Lastly,  a  few  pious  souls,  with  the  clear  vision  of  God 
which  purity  and  simplicity  of  heart  and  mind  give, 
declared  that  the  Church  had  lost  religion  itself,  and  that 
the  one  reformation  needed  was  the  rediscovery  of  religion 
and  the  gracious  enlightenment  of  the  individual  heart  and 
conscience.1 

The  first  conception  of  a  reformation  which  looked  for 
a  cure  of  the  evils  which  all  acknowledged  to  the  supremacy 
of  the  secular  over  ecclesiastical  rule,  may  be  seen  in  the 
reformation  of  the  local  Churches  of  Brandenburg  and 
Saxony  under  Frederick  of  Brandenburg  and  William,  of 
Saxony.  Archbishop  Cranmer  believed  that  the  only  way 
of  removing  the  evils  under  which  the  Church  of  the  later 
Middle  Ages  was  groaning  was  to  subordinate  the  ecclesi- 
astical to  tho  eocular  powers.  Tho  reformation  of  the 
Church  of  England  under  Henry  VIIL  carried  out  this  idea 
to  practical  issue,  but  involved  with  it  a  nominal  as  well 
as  a  real  destruction  of  tho  political  unity  of  the  mediceval 
Church.  His  actions  were  carefully  watched  and  admired 
by  many  of  the  Gorman  Eomanist  Princes,  who  made  more 
than  one  attempt,  about  tho  year  1540,  to  create  a  National 
Church  in  Germany  under  secular  guidance,  and  remaining 
true  to  medieval  doctrine,  hierarchy,  and  ritual.*  The 
thought  of  a  reformation  of  this  kind  was  so  familiar  to 
men  of  tho  sixteenth  century,  that  the  probability  of 
Henry  VIIL'S  separation  from  Eome  was  matter  of  discussion 
long  before  it  had  entered  into  the  mind  of  that  monarch.8 

*  Of.  i,  166,  1213.  *  Of,  vol.  1  140,  141,  878  ;  vol.  ii. 

*  Letters  and  Papers^  Foreign  wd  Domestic,  of  MM  JReign  ofHwry  Fill., 
iv,,  Preface,  p.  485.    Of,  Brown,  3?awimdu8  rerum  e^tfandarum  et  fugi- 
cndarum  (1690),  pp.  19,  20,  for  tho  flpeoch  of  an  English  Binhop  at  Rome 
(Nov.  27th,  1425),  saying  that  if  tho  Curia  doea  not  speedily  undertake 
the  work  of  Reformation,  tho  mumlm*  powers  must  iiitorfcre. 


CHAPTER    II 

THE  SPANISH  CONCEPTION  OF  A  REFORMATION.1 
§  1.  The  Religious  Condition  of  Spain. 

THE  country,  however,  where  all  these  various  concep- 
tions of  what  was  meant  by  a  reformation  of  the  Church 
were  combined  in  one  definite  scheme  of  reform  which 
was  carried  through  successfully,  was  Spain.  It  is  to  that 
country  one  must  turn  to  see  what  medievalists,  who  were 
at  the  same  time  reformers,  wished  to  effect,  and  what  they 
meant  by  a  reformation  of  the  Church.  It  included  a 
measure  of  secular  control,  a  revival  and  enforcement  of 
all  canonical  laws  framed  to  purify  the  morals  of  the 
clergy,  a  measured  accommodation  with  Humanism,  a 
steady  adherence  to  the  main  doctrines  of  the  Scholastic 
Theology,  the  preservation  in  their  entirety  of  the  hierarchy, 
the  rites  and  the  usages  of  the  mediaeval  Church,  and  a 
ruthless  suppression  of  heresy.  Spain  furnishes  tho 
example  of  what  has  been  called  the  Catholic  Reformation. 
In  Spain,  as  nowhere  else  in  mediaeval  Europe,  tho 
firm  maintenance  of  the  Christian  religion  and  patriotism 
had  been  felt  to  be  one  and  the  same  thing.  Tho  seven 
hundred  years'  war,  which  the  Christians  of  Spain  had 
waged  with  the  Moors,  had  given  strength  and  tenacity  to 
their  religious  sentiments,  and  their  experience  as 

*  Lea,  Chapters from  the  Religious  History  of  Spain  (Philadelphia,  1890) ; 
Prescott,  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  (London,  1887) ;  V.  do  la  Ftiento,  Htetvria 
edesiastica  en  ISspana  (Madrid,  1873,  etc.)  j  Menendozy  Palayo,,2/0#//rtfor0- 
doxos  JZspanoles  (Madrid,  1880) ;  Hofelo,  The  Cardinal  Ximene*  (London, 
1860) ;  Paul  llousselot,  Lett  Afystiyucs  Evpagnols  (Paris,  1867). 

488 


THE   RELIGIOUS   CONDITION  OF   SPAIN  489 

Christians  in  daily  battle  with  an  enemy  of  alien  race  and 
alien  faith,  left  to  themselves  in  their  Peninsula,  cut  off 
from  the  rest  of  Europe,  had  made  them  cling  all  the 
more  closely  to  that  visible  solidarity  of  all  Christian 
people  which  found  expression  in  the  mediaeval  conception 
of  the  mediaeval  Catholic  Church.  Spain  had  given  birth 
to  the  great  missionary  monastic  order  of  the  Dominicans, 
— the  leaders  of  an  intellectual  crusade  against  the 
penetrating  influence  of  a  Moslem  pantheism  (Averroism), 
— and  to  the  great  repressive  agency  of  the  Inquisition  in 
its  sternest  and  most  savage  form.  It  was  Spain  that  was 
to  furnish  the  Counter-Eeformation,  with  its  most  devoted 
leader,  Ignatius  Loyola,  and  with  its  strongest  body  of 
combatants,  the  Society  of  Jesus  which  he  founded. 

It  need  scarcely  be  wondered  at  that  it  was  in  Spain 
that  we  find  the  earliest  systematic  attempts  made  to  save 
the  Church  from  the  blindness  and  perversity  of  its  rulers 
by  tho  interposition  of  the  secular  authority  to  combat 
the  deteriorating  influence  of  the  Roman  Curia  upon 
the  local  Church,  and  to  restore  discipline  among  the 
clergy.  The  Cortes  of  the  various  small  kingdoms  of 
tho  Spanish  Peninsula  repeatedly  interfered  to  limit  the 
overgrowth  of  clerical  privileges,  to  insist  on  the  submis- 
sion of  the  clergy  to  the  common  law  of  the  land,  and  to 
prevent  the  too  great  preponderance  of  clerical  influence 
in  secular  administration.  The  ordinances  of  their  Kings 
were  used,  time  after  time,  to  counteract  the  influence  of 
harmful  papal  Bulls,  and  to  prevent  the  interference  of 
Italian  ecclesiastics  ixx  the  affairs  of  the  Spanish  Church. 
In  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  the  Spanish  Bishops  had 
boon  reduced  to  a  state  of  dependence  on  tho  Crown ;  all 
oxorciBO  of  ecclesiastical  authority  was  carefully  watched ; 
tho  extent  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  was  specifically 
limited,  and  clerical  courts  were  made  to  feel  their  depend- 
once  on  the  secular  tribunals*  The  Crown  wrung  from  the 
'Papacy  the  right  to  see  that  piety  and  a  seal  for  religion 
wore  to  be  indispensable  qualifications  for  clerical  promotion. 
All  this  regulative  zeal  was  preserved  from  being  simpj,y 


490      THE  SPANISH   CONCEPTION   OF   A    REFORMATION 

the  attempts  of  politicians  to  control  a  rival  power  by 
certain  fundamental  elements  in  the  national  religious 
character,  which  expressed  themselves  in  rulers  as  well  as 
in  the  mass  of  their  subjects.  In  Spain,  more  than  in  any 
other  land,  asceticism  and  mystical  raptures  were  recognised 
to  be  the  truest  expression  of  genuine  religious  sentiment. 
Kings  and  commonalty  alike  shared  in  the  firm  belief  that 
a  real  imitation  of  Christ  meant  to  follow  in  the  footsteps 
of  the  Man  of  Sorrows,  who  wandered  about  not  knowing 
where  to  lay  His  head,  and  who  was  enabled  to  endure 
what  was  given  Him  to  do  and  to  suffer  by  continuous  and 
rapt  communion  with  the  Unseen. 

The  ecclesiastical  Reformer  of  Spain  had  all  these 
elements  to  work  upon,  and  they  made  his  task  compara- 
tively easy. 

§  2.  Reformation  under  Ximenes. 

The  consolidation  of  the  Peninsula  under  Ferdinand 
and  Isabella  suggested  a  thorough  reorganisation  of  the 
Spanish  Church.  The  Crown  extorted  from  the  Papacy 
extraordinary  powers  to  deal  with  the  secular  clergy  and 
with  the  monasteries.  The  great  Queen  was  determined  tn 
purge  the  Church  of  her  realm  of  all  that  she  deemed 
to  be  evil.  She  called  to  her  councils  three  famous 
Churchmen  in  whom  she  had  thorough  confidence — the 
great  Spanish  Cardinal,  Meudoza,  her  confessor,  Fernanda 
de  Talavera,  and  Francesco  Ximenes.  It  was  Ximenos 
who  sketched  the  plan  and  who  carried  through  the 
reformation. 

Francesco  Ximenes  de  Cisneros,  as  he  is  called,  had 
been  a  Franciscan  monk  devoted  to  the  ideals  of  his  order. 
He  belonged  to  a  poor  family,  and  had  somehow  or  other 
attracted  the  attention  of  Cardinal  Meudossa,  at  whoso 
instigation  the  Queen  had  made  him  her  father-confessor 
(1492).  She  insisted  on  his  accepting  the  dignity  of 
Archbishop  of  Toledo  (1495),  and  had  selected  him  to 
carry  out  her  plans  for  the  organisation  and  purification  of 


REFORMATION   UNDER  XIMENES  491 

the  Spanish  Church.  After  his  elevation  to  the  arch- 
episcopal  chair  he  gave  the  example  of  what  he  believed 
to  be  the  true  clerical  life  by  following  in  the  most;  literal 
way  the  maxims  of  St.  Francis  about  self-denial,  devotion, 
and  ascetic  life.  He  made  these  the  ideal  for  the  Spanish 
clergy  ;  they  followed  where  he  led. 

The  Concordat  of  1482  gave  the  Spanish  Crown  the 
right  of  ""visitation  "  (held  to  involve  the  power  to  dismiss 
from  office)  and  of  nomination  to  benefices.  Ximenes 
used  these  powers  to  the  full.  He  "  visited  "  the  monas- 
teries personally,  and  received  full  reports  about  the 
condition  of  the  convents.  He  re-established^  in  all  of 
them  monastic  discipline  of  the  strictest  kind.  The  secular 
clergy  were  put  to  like  proof.  The  secular  power  was 
invoked  to  sweep  all  opponents  to  reform  from  his  path. 
His  Queen  protected  him  when  the  vacillations  of  the 
papal  policy  threatened  to  hinder  his  work.  In  the  end, 
the  Church  in  Spain  secured  a  devoted  clergy  whose 
personal  life  was  free  from  the  reproaches  justly  levelled 
at  the  higher  clergy  of  other  lands. 

Ximenes,  having  purified  the  morals  of  the  Spanish 
clergy,  next  set  himself  to  overcome  their  ignorance  and 
lack  of  culture.  In  every  Chapter  within  Castile  and 
Aragon,  two  prebends  were  set  apart  for  scholars,  one 
of  them  for  a  student  in  Canon  Law,  and  the  other  for  an 
expert  theologian.  A  special  "visitation"  of  the  clergy 
removed  from  their  places  all  utterly  ignorant  persons. 
New  schools  of  theology  were  instituted.  In  addition  to 
the  mediaeval  Universities  of  Salamanca  and  Valladolicl, 
Xirnenos  founded  one  in  Alcala,  another  in  Seville,  a  third 
at  Toledo.  Alcala  and  Valladolid  were  the  principal 
theological  schools,  and  there,  in  addition  to  the  older 
studios  of  Dogmatic  Theology  and  Ethics,  courses  of  lectures 
wore  given  in  Biblical  Exegesis.  The  theology  tatight  was 
that  of  Thomas  Aquinas,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  later 
developments  of  Scholastic  under  John  Duns  Scotus  and 
William  of  Occam.  The  Augustinian  elements  in  Thomas 
wore  specially  dwelt  upon ;  and  soon  there  arose  a  school  of 


492      THE   SPANISH   CONCEPTION   OF  A   REFORMATION 

theologians  who  were  called  the  New  Thomists,  who  became 
very  powerful,  and  were  later  the  leading  opponents  of  the 
Jesuit  teachers.  There  was  also  an  attempt  to  make  use 
of  the  New  Learning  in  the  interest  of  the  old  theology. 
Xiinenes  collected  at  Alcala  the  band  of  scholars  who 
tinder  his  superintendence  prepared  the  celebrated  Com- 
plutensian  Polyglot. 

The  labours  of  Erasmus  were  sympathised  with  by 
the  leaders  of  this  Spanish  movement.  The  Princes  of  the 
Church  delighted  to  call  themselves  his  friends.  They 
prevented  the  Spanish  monks  from  attacking  him  even 
when  he  struck  hardest  at  the  follies  of  the  monastic  life. 
He  was  esteemed  at  Court.  The  most  prominent  statesmen 
who  surrounded  Charles,  the  young  Prince  of  the  Nether- 
lands, the  King  of  Spain,  called  themselves  Erasmians. 
Erasmus,  if  we  are  to  believe  what  he  wrote  to  them, — 
which  is  scarcely  possible, — declared  that  the  work  in 
Spain  under  Ximenes  followed  the  best  type  of  a  reforma- 
tion in  the  Church. 

But  there  was  another  and  terrible  side  to  this 
Spanish  purification  of  the  Church  and  of  the  clergy 
The  Inquisition  had  been  reorganised,  and  every  opinion 
and  practice  strange  to  the  mediaeval  Church  was  relentlessly 
crushed  out  of  existence.  This  stern  repression  was  a 
very  real  part  of  the  Spanish  idea  of  a  reformation. 

The  Spanish  policy  for  the  renovation  of  the  Church 
was  not  a  reformation  in  the  sense  of  providing  room 
for  anything  new  in  the  religious  experience.  Its  fiolo 
aim  was  to  requicken  religious  life  within  the  limits 
which  had  been  laid  down  during  the  Middle  Ages.  The 
hierarchy  was  to  remain,  the  mediaeval  conceptions  of 
priesthood  and  sacraments ;  the  Pope  was  to  continue  to  be 
the  acknowledged  and  revered  Head  of  the  Church ;  "  the 
sacred  ceremonies,  decrees,  ordinances,  and  sacred  usages  " l 
were  to  be  left  untouched ;  the  dogmatic  theology  of  the 

1  Of.  paper  read  by  Charles  v.  to  the  Estates  of  Germany  at  "Worms 
•— Wrede,  Dtutitche  MciclistayaMen  unter  Kafaer  Kwrl  v.  (Gotha,  1890) 
ii.  595. 


THE  SPANIARDS  AND  LUTHER        493 

mediaeval  Church  was  to  remain  in  all  essentials  the  same 
as  before.  The  only  novelty,  the  only  sign  of  appreciation 
of  new  ideas  which  were  in  the  air,  was  that  the  papal 
interference  in  the  affairs  of  national  Churches  was 
greatly  limited,  and  that  at  a  time  when  the  Papacy  had 
become  so  thoroughly  secularised  as  to  forget  its  real 
duties  as  a  spiritual  authority.  The  sole  recognition  of 
the  new  era,  with  its  new  modes  of  thought,  was  the 
proposal  that  the  secular  authorities  of  the  countries  of 
Europe  should  undertake  duties  which  the  Papacy  was  plainly 
neglecting.  Perhaps  it  might  be  added  that  the  slight 
homage  paid  to  the  New  Learning,  the  appreciation  of  the 
need  of  an  exact  text  of  the  original  Scriptures,  its  guarded 
approval  of  the  laity's  acquaintance  with  Holy  Writ, 
introduced  something  of  the  new  spirit ;  but  these  things 
did  not  really  imply  anything  at  variance  with  what  a 
devoted  adherent  of  the  mediaeval  Church  might  readily 
acquiesce  in. 

§  3.  The  Spaniards  and  Luther. 

Devout  Spaniards  were  able  to  appreciate  much  in 
Luther's  earlier  work.  They  could  sympathise  with  his 
attack  on  Indulgences,  provided  they  did  not  inquire  too 
closely  into  the  principles  implied  in  the  Theses — principles 
which  Luther  himself  scarcely  recognised  till  the  Leipzig 
Disputation,  Their  hearts  responded  to  the  intense 
religious  earnestness  and  high  moral  tone  of  his  earlier 
writings.  They  could  welcome  his  appearance,  even  when 
they  cotild  not  wholly  agree  with  all  that  he  said,  in  the  hope 
that  his  utterances  would  create  an  impetus  towards  the 
kind  of  reformation  they  desired  to  see.  The  reformation 
of  the  Spanish  Church  under  Cardinal  Xirnenes  enables  us 
to  understand  both  the  almost  universal  welcome  which 
greeted  Luther's  earlier  appearances  and  the  opposition 
which  he  afterwards  encountered  from  many  of  his  earlier 
supporters.  Sotxie  light  in  also  cast  on  that  opposition 
when  we  remember  that  the  Emperor  Charles  himself 


494      THE  SPANISH   CONCEPTION   OF   A   REFORMATION 

fully  accepted  the  principles  underlying  the  Spanish 
Reformation,  and  that  they  had  been  instilled  into  his 
youthful  mind  by  his  revered  tutor  whom  he  managed  to 
seat  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter — Adrian  YL,  whose  short- 
lived pontificate  was  an  attempt  to  force  the  Spanish 
Reformation  on  the  whole  of  the  Western  Obedience. 

If  it  be  possible  to  accept  the  statements  made  by 
Glapion,  the  Emperor's  confessor,  to  Dr.  Bruck,  the  Saxon 
Chancellor  in  the  days  before  Luther's  appearance  at 
"Worms,  as  a  truthful  account  of  the  disposition  and 
intentions  of  Charles  V.,  it  may  be  said  that  an  attempt 
was  made  to  see  whether  Luther  himself  might  be  made 
to  act  as  a  means  of  forcing  the  Spanish  Reformation  on 
the  whole  German  Church.  Glapion  professed  to  speak 
for  the  Emperor  as  well  as  for  himself.  Luther's  earlier 
writings,  he  said,  had  given  him  great  pleasure;  he 
believed  him  to  be  a  "  plant  of  renown,"  able  to  produce 
splendid  fruit  for  the  Church.  But  the  book  on  the 
Babylonian  Captivity  had  shocked  him ;  he  did  not  believe 
it  to  be  Luther's ;  it  was  not  in  his  usual  style ;  if 
Luther  had  written  it,  it  must  have  been  because  he  was 
momentarily  indignant  at  the  papal  Bull,  and  as  it  was 
anonymous,  it  could  easily  be  repudiated;  or  if  not 
repudiated,  it  might  be  explained,  and  its  sentences  shown 
to  be  capable  of  a  catholic  interpretation.  If  this  were 
done,  and  if  Luther  withdrew  his  violent  writings  againflt 
the  Popef  there  was  no  reason  why  an  amicable ,  arrange- 
ment should  not  be  come  to.  The  papal  Bull  could 
easily  be  got  over,  it  could  be  withdrawn  on  the  ground 
that  Luther  had  never  had  a  fair  trial.  It  was  a  miHtako 
to  suppose  that  the  Emperor  was  not  keenly  alive  to  the 
need  for  a  Reformation  of  the  Church ;  there  wore  limits 
to  his  devotion  to  the  Pope ;  the  Emperor  bolioved  that 
he  would  deserve  the  wrath  of  God  if  ho  did  not  try  to 
amend  the  deplorable  condition  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 
Such  was  Glapion's  statement.  It  is  a  question  how  far 
he  was  sincere,  and  if  so,  whether  he  really  did  oxproHS 
what  was  in  the  mind  of  the  Emperor.  Frederick  of 


THE  SPANIARDS  AND  LUTHER        495 

Saxony  did  not  believe  either  in  his  sincerity  or  in  his 
representation  of  the  Emperor's  real  opinions ;  and  Luther 
himself  refused  all  private  conference  with  Glapion.  Yet 
it  is  almost  certain  that  Glapion  did  express  what  many 
an  earnest  Spanish  ecclesiastic  thoroughly  believed.  We 
have  an  interesting  confirmation  of  this  in  the  conversation 
which  Conrad  Pellican  had  with  Francisco  de  los  Angeles, 
the  Provincial  of  the  Spanish  Franciscans  at  Basel.  The 
Franciscan  expressed  himself  in  almost  the  very  same 
terms  as  Glapion.1 

Three  forces  met  at  the  Diet  of  Worms  in  1521 — 
the  German  movement  for  Eeform  inspired  by  Luther,  the 
Spanish  Reformation  represented  by  Charles  v.,  and  the 
stolid  inertia  of  the  Eoman  Curia  speaking  by  the  Nuncio 
Aleander.  The  first  and  the  second  could  unite  only  if 
Luther  retraced  his  steps  and  stood  where  he  did  before 
the  Leipzig  Disputation.  If  he  refused,  the  inevitable  result 
was  that  the  Emperor  and  the  Curia  would  combine  to 
crush  Mm  before  preparing  to  measure  their  strength 
against  each  other.  Tho  two  different  conceptions  of 
reform  may  be  distinguished  from  each  other  by  saying 
that  the  Spanish  conception  sought  to  awaken  the  benumbed 
and  formalist  mediaeval  Church  to  a  new  religious  life, 
leaving  unchanged  its  characteristics  of  a  sacerdotal 
ministry,  an  external  visible  unity  under  a  hierarchy 
culminating  in  the  Papacy,  and  a  body  of  doctrine 
guaranteed  by  the  decisions  of  (Ecumenical  Councils. 
The  other  wished  to  free  the  human  spirit  from  the 
fetters  of  merely  ecclesiastical  authority,  and  to  roquicken 
the  life  of  the  Church  through  the  spiritual  priesthood  of 
all  believers.  The  former  sought  the  aid  of  uhe  secular 

1  "la  Ctoearis  consanguinous,  legatus  missus  a  Wormaoia,  fofltinumlo 
ad  lltapauoa  pro  aodando  quodam  tumnltu.  la  in  pro  fen  to  vigilue  mitalicii 
dominioi  mipcmrjie-ns  equos,  cum  ministris,  biduo  manens  integro  ot 
tribus  noctibus,  tnihi  raultum  loquobatur  de  causa  LUtherana,  qnm  magna 
ex  parto  arridobat  viro  bouo  et  dooto,  prater  librum  de  caytivitofa  Jlabcl, 
quom  logorat  Wormatito  cum  mmroro  ot  diaplictmtia,  <juem  ogo  ncmdnxu 
vidoratn"  (Riggenbooh,  Das  Ohrvn&son  de$  Kwwad  Pcllikan,  p,  77 
(BomO,  1877). 


496      THE  SPANISH   CONCEPTION   OF   A   REFORMATION 

power  to  purge  national  Churches  and  restore  ecclesiastical 
discipline,  but  always  under  a  decorous  air  of  submission 
to  the  Bishop  of  Koine,  and  with  a  very  real  belief  in  the 
supremacy  and  infallibility  of  a  General  Council.  The 
latter  was  prepared  to  deny  the  authority  of  the  Bishop 
of  Borne  altogether,  and  to  see  the  Church  of  the  Middle 
Ages  broken  up  into  territorial  or  National  Churches, 
each  of  which,  it  was  contended,  was  a  portion  of  the  one 
Visible  Catholic  Church.  But  as  separate  tendencies  may 
be  represented  by  a  single  contrast,  it  may  be  said  that 
Charles  would  have  forgiven  Luther  much  had  the 
Eeformer  been  able  to  acknowledge  the  infallibility  of  a 
General  Council.  The  dramatic  wave  of  the  hand  by 
which  Charles  ended  the  altercation  between  Official  Eck 
and  Luther,  when  the  latter  insisted  that  General  Councils 
had  erred,  and  that  he  could  prove  it,  ended  the  dream 
that  the  movement  in  Germany  could  be  used  to  aid  in 
the  universal  introduction  of  the  Spanish  Beformation. 
If  the  ideas  of  reforming  Spanish  ecclesiastics  and  states- 
men were  to  requicken  the  whole  mediaeval  Church, 
some  other  way  of  forcing  their  acceptance  had  to  be 
found. 

§  4.  Pope  Adrian  VI.  and  the  Spanish,  Reformation. 

The  opportunity  seemed  to  come  when,  owing  to  the 
rivalries  of  powerful  Cardinals  and  the  steady  pressure  of 
Charles  v.  on  the  Conclave,  Adrian  of  Utrecht  was 
elected  Pope.  The  new  Pontiff  had  a  long  reputation 
for  learning  and  piety.  His  courage  had  been  manifested 
in  his  fearless  denunciation  of  prevailing  clerical  abuses, 
and  in  the  way  he  had  dealt  with  difficult  questions  in 
mediaeval  theology.  He  had  no  sympathy  with  the  new 
curialist  ideas  of  papal  inerrancy  and  infallibility,  nor 
with  the  repeated  assertions  of  Italian  canonists  that  the 
Pope  was  superior  to  all  ecclesiastical  law.  He  rather 
believed  that  such  ideas  were  responsible  for  the  degrada- 
tion of  the  Church,  and  that  no  amendment  was  possible 


POPE  ADRIAN  VI.  AND  THE  SPANISH  REFORMATION    497 

until  the  whole  system  of  papal  reservations,  exemptions, 
and  other  ways  in  which  the  Papacy  had  evaded  the 
plain  declarations  of  Canon  Law,  was  swept  away.  The 
public  confidence  in  his  piety,  integrity,  and  learning  was 
so  great  that  the  Netherlands  had  entrusted  him  with 
the  religious  education  of  their  young  Prince,  and  none  of 
his  instructors  so  stamped  themselves  on  the  mind  of 
Charles. 

Adrian  was  a  Dutch  Ximenes.  He  had  the  same 
passionate  desire  for  the  Eeformation  of  the  Church,  and 
the  same  ideas  of  how  such  Eeformation  could  be  brought 
about.  He  prized  the  ascetic  life ;  he  longed  to  see  the 
monastic  orders  and  the  secular  clergy  disciplined  in  the 
strictest  way;  he  had  a  profound  admiration  for  Thomas 
Aquinas,  and  especially  for  that  side  of  the  great  School- 
man's teaching  which  represented  the  ideas  of  St.  Augustine. 
He  so  exactly  reproduced  in  his  own  aspirations  the 
desires  of  the  Spanish  Reformers,  that  Cardinal  Carvajal, 
who  with  the  grave  enthusiasm  of  his  nation  was  engaged 
in  the  quixotic  task  of  commending  the  Spanish  Eeforma- 
tion to  the  authorities  in  Eome,  desired  to  take  him  there 
as  an  indispensable  assistant.  He  was  also  in  full 
sympathy  with  the  darker  side  of  the  Spanish  Eeforma- 
tion. During  his  sojourn  in  Spain  he  had  become  one  of 
tho  heads  of  the  Inquisition,  and  was  firmly  opposed  to 
any  relaxation  of  the  rigours  of  the  Holy  Office,  With 
Adrian  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  the  Emperor  and  the 
leaders  of  the  Spanish  Church  might  hope  to  see  their 
type  of  a  reformation  adopted  to  cure  the  ills  under  which 
the  Church  was  suffering* 

The  new  Pope  did  not  lack  sympathisers  in  Italy 
when  he  began  his  task  of  cleansing  the  Augean  stables 
without  turning  the  torrent  of  revolution  through  them. 
Cardinal  Carvajal  welcomed  him  in  a  speech  which  ex- 
pressed Ms  own  ideas  if  it  displeased  Ms  colleagues  in 
whose  name  he  was  supposed  to  speak.  A  memorial 
drafted  by  Egidio,  General  of  the  Augustinian  Eremites, 
was  presented  to  him,  which  practically  embodied  the 
32** 


498      THE  SPANISH   CONCEPTION   OF  A   REFORMATION 

reforms  the  new  Pope  wished  to  see  accomplished.1  His 
programme  was  as  extensive  as  it  was  thorough.  A  large 
part  of  it  may  be  compared  with  the  reforms  sketched  in 
Luther's  Address  to  the  Nobility  of  the  German  Nation. 
He  disapproved  of  the  way  in  which  prebends  were  taken 
from  foundations  within  national  Churches  to  swell  the 
incomes  of  Eoman  Cardinals.  He  disliked  the  whole 
system  of  papal  reservations,  indults,2  exemptions,  expectances, , 
which  under  the  fostering  care  of  Pope  John  xxn.  had 
converted  the  Curia  into  a  great  machine  for  raking  in 
money  from  every  corner  of  western  Europe.8  He  dis- 
approved of  the  system  of  encouraging  complainants  to 
pass  over  the  episcopal  courts  of  their  own  lands  and  bring 
their  cases  at  once  before  the  papal  court.  But  every  one 
of  these  reforms  would  cut  off  a  source  of  revenue.  It 
meant  that  hundreds  of  hungry  Italian  Humanists  would 
lose  their  pensions,  and  that  as  many  pens  would  lampoon 
the  Holy  Father  who  was  intent  on  taking  bread  from  his 
children.  It  meant  that  hundreds  of  ecclesiastical  lawyers 
who  had  invested  their  savings  in  purchasing  places  in  the 
Curia,  would  find  themselves  reduced  to  penury.  It 
meant  that  the  incomes  of  the  Princes  of  the  Church 
would  shrink  in  an  incalculable  manner.  Adrian  sot 
himself  to  show  such  men  how  to  meet  the  changes  in 
prospect.  He  brought  his  old  Flemish  peasant  housekeeper 
with  him  to  Borne,  contented  himself  with  the  simple 
dishes  she  cooked  for  him,  and  lived  the  life  of  an  anchorite 
in  a  corner  of  his  vast  palace  on  the  Vatican  hill ;  but  in 
this  case  example  did  not  seem  better  than  precept.  It 
had  seemed  so  easy  to  the  simple-minded  Dutch  scholar  to 

1  CarvajaTs  speech  and  Egidio's  memoir  are  given  in  Hoflor,  "Analncton 
z.  Geschich.  Deutschlands  und  Italiens  "  (Mhandlnngen  der  Munch.  A/cad. 
IV.  iii.  57-89). 

2  An  indult  can  be  best  explained  by  an  example :    according  to  tho 
Council  of  Bourges  (1438),  tho  selection  of  French  Bishops  was  left  ex- 
clusively in  the  hands  of  the  Chapters  of  the  Cathedrals ;  but  Pope  Eugewius 
iv.  permitted  Charles  vii.  the  right  to  appoint  to  several  specified  bishoprics ; 
such  a  papal  grant  was  called  an  indult. 

.      «  Of.  vol.  i.  12/. 


POPE  ADRIAN  VI.  AND  THE  SPANISH  REFORMATION    499 

reform  the  Church;  everything  was  provided  for  in  the 
Canon  Law,  whose  regulations  had  only  to  be  put  in 
force.  His  Spanish  experience  had  confirmed  him  in  the 
possibility  of  the  task.  But  at  Rome  he  found  a  system 
of  Eules  of  Chancery  which  could  not  be  set  aside  all  at 
once ;  there  was  no  convenient  Inquisition  so  organised 
that  it  could  clear  all  objectors  out  of  his  path ;  no  secular 
power  always  ready  to  support  a  reforming  Churchman. 

,  Where  was  he  to  begin?  The  whole  practice  of 
Indulgences  appeared  to  be  what  was  most  in  need  of 
reform.  Its  abuses  had  kindled  the  storm  in  Germany. 
To  purge  them  away  would  show  how  much  in  earnest  he 
was.  He  knew  the  subject  well.  He  had  written  upon 
it,  and  therefore  had  studied  it  from  all  sides.  Eightly 
understood,  Indulgences  wove  precious  things.  They 
showed  how  a  merciful  God  had  empowered  His  Church  to 
declare  that  He  pardoned  sins  freely ;  and,  besides,  they 
proclaimed,  as  no  other  usage  of  the  Church  did,  the 
brotherhood  of  all  believers,  within  which  the  stronger 
could  help  the  weaker,  and  the  holier  the  more  sinful,  and 
all  could  fulfil  the  law  of  Christ  by  bearing  each  other's 
burdens.  Only  it  was  to  bo  remembered  that  every  pardon 
required  a  heart  unfeignedly  penitent,  and  the  sordid  taint 
of  money  must  be  got  rid  of.  Btxt — there  was  always  a 
"  but "  for  poor  Adrian — it  was  shown  to  him  that  the 
papal  court  could  not  possibly  pay  its  way  without  the 
money  which  came  in  so  easily  from  tho  sale  of  Indulgences. 
He  was  baffled  at  the  very  start;  chocks,  for  the  moat 
part  quite  unexpected,  thwarted  every  effort.  He  wa« 
like  a  man  in  a  nightmare,  set  in  a  thicket  of  thorny 
where  no  hewing  could  set  him  free,  clothes  torn,  limbs 
bleeding,  till  at  last  he  sank  exhausted,  welcoming  tho 
death  which  freed  him  ,from  his  impossible  task,  Adrian 
was  the  distinguished  martyr  of  the  Spanish  Reformation. 
History  has  dwelt  upon  his  failures;  they  were  only  too 
manifest.  It  has  derided  his  simplicity  in  sending 
Ohierogati  to  Germany  with  the  confession  that  the  Curia 
waw  tho  sotu'oe  of  most  of  the  evils  which  Ixjfiot  tho 


500      THE  SPANISH   CONCEPTION   OF   A   REFORMATION 

mediaeval  Church,  and  at  the  same  time  demanding  the 
death  of  Luther,  who  had  been  the  first  to  show  the  fact- 
in  such  a  way  that  all  men  could  see  it.  It  has  said  little 
of  the  success  that  came  in  due  time.  Ohieregati  was 
unable  to  overcome  the  deeply  rooted  Evangelical  Eef orma- 
tion  in  Germany.  But  his  mission  and  the  honest  state- 
ment that  the  Curia  was  the  seat  of  evil  in  the  Church, 
date  the  beginnings  of  a  reaction,  of  a  genuine  Eomanist 
party  with  a  vague  idea  of  reforms  on  mediaeval  lines.  It 
must  be  taken  as  the  starting-point  of  the  Counter- 
Reformation  in  Germany.  Adrian's  example,  too,  did 
much  to  encourage  the  few  spiritually  minded  Churchmen 
in  Italy,  and  its  effects  can  be  seen  in  the  revival  of  a 
zeal  to  purify  the  Church  which  arose  during  the  pontificate 
of  Paul  ill. 


CHAPTEE  III. 

ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN   CATHOLICS   AND   THEIR 
CONCEPTION   OF  A  REFORMATION.1 

§  1.   The  Religious  Condition  of  Italy. 

ITALY  is  the  land  which  next  to  Spain  is  the  most  import- 
ant for  the  Counter-Eeformatioia.  While  we  can  trace  in 
Spain  and  in  Germany  a  certain  solidarity  of  religious 
movement,  the  spiritual  conditions  of  Italy  during  the  first 
half  of  the  sixteenth  century  were  as  manifold  as  its 
political  conditions.  It  is  impossible  to  speak  of  the 
Italians  as  a  whole.  Italy  had  been  the  land  of  the  Renais- 
sance, but  that  great  intellectual  movement  had  never 
rooted  itself  deeply  in  the  people  as  it  had  done  in 
Germany,  Trance,  or  England. 

The  Italian  peasantry  wore  a  class  apart  from  the 
burghers  as  they  were  nowhere  else.  Their  religion  was 
usually  a  thinly  veiled  paganism,  a  belief  in  the  omni- 
presence of  spirits,  good  and  bad,  to  be  thanked,  propitiated, 
coaxed  or  compelled  by  use  of  charms,  amulets,  spells,  and 

lSotr»OBS:  Contarini,  Opera  (Paris,  1573);  Correspondent*  Contarims, 
cd,  by  L,  Pastor  (1880) ;  Cortesc,  JSpistolarum  familiarwn,  liber  (Venice, 
1678) ;  GMberti,  Opera  (Verona,  1740) ;  Sadolcto,  Jfyristofarumlibrisexdccim 
.(Lyons,  1560);  Pole,  JEpiatolce,  et  aliorum  ad  ipsum  (Brescia,  1744-57), 
Carteggio  M  Fittoria  Colonna  (Turin,  1889) ;  Vergcrio,  JSriefwechsel  (edited 
for  the  MUfotMc  ties  litcrarischen  Feretfp,*,  Stuttgart,  1875). 

LATfltt  BOOKS  ;  Jacob  Burokhardt,  The  Civilisation  of  the  Period  of  the 
J&enaissance  (Eng.  trans*,  London,  1892) ;  Symonds,  Renaissance  in  Italy. 
The  Catholic  Reaction  (London,  1886) ;  Cantu,  CM  Jfretiei  d*  Italia  (Turin, 
1865-67)  ;  Braun,  Cardinal  Oasparo  Contarini  (1908) ;  Dittrich,  Gasp&ro 
Cont&rin'C  (Braunsberg,  1888) ;  Buruy,  Z«  Cardinal  Carlo  Caraffa  (Paris, 
'1882) ;  Gothein,  Igvatiu*  Loyola  wd  die  Qegenreformation,  pp.  77-207 
(Halle>  1895) ;  v.  Kcwmont,  nttoria  Colonna  (Freiburg  i.  B.  1881). 

r>oi 


502  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN   CATHOLICS 

ceremonies.  The  gods  of  their  pagan  ancestors  had  been 
replaced  by  local  saints,  and  received  the  same  kind  of 
worship.  To  fight  for  their  faith  had  never  been  a 
tradition  with  them  as  with  the  Spaniards ;  they  were  not 
troubled  by  any  continuous  sense  of  sin  as  were  the  people 
of  the  northern  nations ;  but  they  had  an  intense  fear  of 
the  supernatural,  and  their  faith  in  the  priest,  who  could 
stand  between  them  and  the  terrors  of  the  unseen,  was 
boundless.  Goodness  touched  them  as  it  does  all  men. 
But  the  immorality  of  their  religious  guides  did  not 
embarrass  them ;  a  bad  priest  had  as  powerful  spells  as  a 
good  one.  The  only  kind  of  Christianity  which  seemed 
able  to  impress  them  and  hold  them  was  that  of  Francis  of 
Assisi.  He  was  the  highest  embodiment  of  the  Christian 
spirit  for  the  Italian  peasantry;  the  impression  he  had 
made  upon  the  people  of  the  Peninsula  was  enduring ;  the 
wandering  revivalist  preacher  who  lived  as  Francis  had 
done  always  made  the  deepest  impression.  John  of 
Capistrano  owed  much  of  his  power  to  the  fact  that  he 
remained  always  the  Abruzzi  peasant.  During  the  whole 
of  the  period  of  the  Kenaissance  the  peasantry  and  the 
clergy  who  served  the  village  chapels  were  regarded  by 
those  above  them  with  a  scorn  that  degenerated  into 
hatred.  We  may  search  in  vain  through  the  whole  of 
the  literature  of  the  time  for  the  thought  that  any 
attempt  ought  to  be  made  to  lead  them  to  a  deeper 
faith  and  a  purer  life.  The  whole  of  the  peasant  popula- 
tion of  Italy  were  believed  to  be  beneath  the  level  of 
desire  for  something  better  than  what  the  religious  life 
of  the  times  gave.1 

1  Mediaeval  songs  tell  us  that  this  hatred  of  the  peasantry  is  much  older 
than  the  Renaissance  f 

"  Si  quis  scire  vult  naturam, 
Maledictam  ot  obscurant 
Rusticorum  genituram 
Infelicem  et  non  puram 
Denotent  sequentia,"  etc* 

Cwrmina  Medii  d£vi  (Florence,  1883),  p.  34 ;  the  song  belongs  to  tho 
thirteenth  century. 


THE   RELIGIOUS    CONDITION   OF   ITALY  503 

The  towns  presented  an  entirely  different  picture. 
There  was  a  solidarity  binding  together  all  the  civic  popu- 
lation. The  ordinary  division  of  ranks,  made  by  greater 
or  less  possession  of  wealth  or  by  social  standing,  existed, 
but  it  did  not  prevent  a  common  mode  of  thinking.  We 
can  trace  the  same  thoughts  among  artisans,  small  shop- 
keepers, rich  merchants,  and  the  patricians  of  the  towns. 
No  country  presented  so  many  varieties  of  local  character 
as  Italy ;  but  the  inhabitants  of  Venice  or  Florence,  Milan, 
Naples,  however  else  they  might  differ,  were  all  on  the 
same  spiritual  level.  They  thought  much  about  religion ; 
they  took  the  moral  degradation  of  the  Church  and  of  the 
clergy  to  heart ;  they  longed  to  see  some  improvement,  if 
it  was  only  within  their  own  city.  They  were  clearsighted 
enough  to  trace  the  mischief  to  the  influence  of  the  Eoman 
Curia,  and  their  belief  in  the  hopelessness  of  reforming 
the  evil  Court  gives  a  settled  despondency  to  their  thought 
which  appears  in  most  of  the  Chronicles.  The  external 
side  of  religion  was  inextricably  interwoven  with  their 
city  life.  The  civic  rulers  had  always  something  to  do 
with  the  churches,  monasteries,  and  other  ecclesiastical 
foundations  within  their  walls.  They  had  no  great  interest 
in  doctrine;  what  they  wanted  was  a  real  improvement 
in  the  moral  living  of  clergy  and  of  people.  When  an 
Italian  town  was  blessed  with  a  good  and  pious  Bishop,  it 
is  touching  to  see  how  the  whole  population  rallied  round 
him. 

When  we  turn  to  the  outstanding  men  of  the  Italian 
peninsula,  whose  opinions  have  been  preserved  in  their 
writings  or  correspondence,  we  find,  to  begin  with,  a  great 
variety  of  religious  opinions  whoso  common  note  is  uncon- 
strained hostility  to  the  Church  as  it  watf  then  constituted. 
The  Institution  was  a  necessary  evil,  very  important  as  a 
factor  in  the  game  of  politics,  useless  for  the  religious  life. 
This  sentiment  existed  almost  universally,  both  among 
those  who  merely  maintained  a  decorous  relation  towards 
the  existing  ecclesiastical  institutions,  and  among  those  who 
really  believed  in  Christianity,  and  acknowledged  its  power 


504  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN   CATHOLICS 

over  their  mind  and  life.  The  papal  Curia  oppressed 
them ;  they  were  hopeless  of  its  reformation,  and  yet  there 
was  little  hope  of  a  revival  of  religion,  with  its  social  worship 
and  its  sacraments,  unless  it  was  reformed.  The  feeling  of 
hopelessness  is  everywhere  apparent ;  the  deepest  spiritual 
longings  and  experiences  were  to  be  treasured  as  sacred 
secrets  of  the  heart,  and  not  to  be  spoken  about.  Yet  the 
work  of  Savonarola  had  not  been  entirely  consumed  in  the 
fire  that  burnt  the  martyr,  and  the  earlier  message  of 
Luther  had  found  an  echo  in  many  Italian  hearts. 

§  2.  The  Italian  Eoman  Catholic  Reformers. 

There  is  no  evidence  of  any  widespread  acceptance 
of  the  whole  of  Luther's  teaching,  little  appreciation  of  the 
thought  that  the  Church  may  be  conceived  as  a  fellowship 
of  God  with  man  depending  on  the  inscrutable  purpose  of 
G-od  and  independent  of  all  visible  outward  organisation, 
none  of  the  idea  that  the  Visible  Church  Catholic  exists 
one  and  indivisible  in  the  many  forms  in  which  men 
combine  to  listen  to  the  Word  and  to  manifest  their  faith. 
The  Catholic  Church  was  always  to  these  pious  Italians  the 
great  historical  and  external  institution  with  its  hierarchy, 
and  its  visible  head  in  the  Bishop  of  Borne.  A  reform  of 
the  Church  meant  for  them  the  reformation  of  that 
institution.  So  long  as  this  was  denied  them  they  could 
always  worship  within  the  sanctuary  of  their  own  souls, 
and  they  could  enjoy  the  converse  of  likeminded  friends. 
So  there  came  into  existence  coteries  of  pious  Italians  who 
met  to  encourage  each  other,  and  to  plan  the  restoration 
of  religion  within  the  Church,  Humanism  had  left  ite 
mark  on  all  of  them,  and  their  reunions  were  called 
academies,  after  the  Platonic  academies  of  the  earlier 
Eenaissance.  The  first  had  come  into  being  before  the 
death  of  Leo.  x. — a  society  of  pious  laymen  and  prelates, 
who  met  in  the  little  church  of  Santi  Silvestro  et  Dorotea 
in  the  Trastevere  in  Borne.  The  associates  were  more 
than  fifty  in  number,  and  they  were  all  rtifltmgxiished  by 


THE   ITALIAN   ROMAN   CATHOLIC    REFORMERS      505 

their  love  of  the  New  Learning,  the  strict  purity  of  their 
lives,  and  their  devotion  to  the  theology  of  St.  Augustine. 
The  members  were  scattered  after  the  sack  of  Koine  (1527), 
but  this  Oratory  of  Divine  Love  gave  rise  to  many  kindred 
associations  within  which  the  original  members  found  a 
congenial  society. 

The  most  important  found  a  home  in  Venice.  Its 
most  prominent  members  were  Gasparo  Contarini,  a 
distinguished  Senator,  who  afterwards  was  induced  to 
become  a  Cardinal.  With  him  were  Cardinal  Caraffa, 
already  meditating  upon  taking  another  path,  and  Gregorio 
Cortese,  then  Abbot  of  San  Giorgio  Maggiore.  The 
friends  met  in  the  beautiful  garden  of  the  convent.  All 
shades  of  opinion  were  represented  in  this  circle,  where 
Humanists  and  Churchmen  met  to  exchange  views  about 
a  reformation  of  the  Church.  To  share  in  such  intercourse, 
Keginald  Pole  willingly  spent  his  days  far  from  his  native 
England.  Cardinal  Fregoso,  Archbishop  of  Salerno,  gathered 
a  similar  company  around  him  at  Genoa;  and  Ghiberti, 
Bishop  of  Verona,  collected  likeminded  friends  to  talk 
about  the  possibilities  of  reformation.  Modena  and 
Padua  had  their  Christian  academies  also.  Nor  must 
the  influence  of  well-born,  cultured  and  pious  ladies  be 
forgotten. 

BentSo,  Duchess  of  Ferrara  and  daughter  of  Louis  xit.  of 
France,  had  accepted  the  Reformation  in  its  entirety,  and 
had  surrendered  herself  to  the  guidance  of  Calvin.  She 
corresponded  with  the  great  Frenchman  and  with  Bullinger. 
She  sheltered  persecuted  Italian  Protestants,  or  had  thorn 
safely  conveyed  to  Switzerland.1  But  she  saw  good  whor- 
ovor  it  was  to  be  found.  Her  letters,  instinct  with  Christian 
graciousness,  remind  the  reader  of  those  of  her  kinswoman 
Marguerite  of  Navarre.  She  was  full  of  sympathy  with 
the  circle  of  men  and  women  who  longed  for  a  regeneration 
of  Italy ;  and  it  is  interesting  to  notice  how  the  far  more 
highly  gifted  Vittoria  Colonna  leant  on  the  woman  whose 
spiritual  insight  was  deeper,  and  whose  heart  was  purified 

1  Ilorminjard,  Cfomwyondance,  etc,  viii.  161. 


506  ITALIAN   LIBERAL    ROMAN   CATHOLICS 

by  the  trials  which  her  decision  in  religious  matters  made 
her  pass  through. 

Oaterina  Cyb6,  a  niece  of  Pope  Clement,  Princess  of 
Camerino,  Eleonore  Gonzaga,  Duchess  of  Urbino,  Julia 
Gonzaga  at  Naples,  and  Vittoria  Colonna  at  Viterbo  and 
at  Borne,  formed  a  circle  of  highly  intellectual  and  deeply 
pious  women,  who  by  their  letters  and  intercourse  inspired 
men  who  were  working  for  the  regeneration  of  the  Church 
in  Italy. 

The  network  of  their  correspondence  covered  Italy 
from  Venice  to  Naples  and  from  Genoa  to  Camerino,  and 
the  letters  exchanged  between  Marguerite  of  Navarre  and 
Vittoria  Colonna  extended  the  influence  of  the  association 
beyond  the  peninsula.  The  correspondents,  men  and 
women,  regarded  themselves  as  a  band  of  companions 
pledged  to  each  other  to  work  together  for  the  Eeformation 
of  the  Church  and  of  society.  It  is  not  easy  to  describe 
their  aims,  for  they  contented  themselves  for  the  most  part 
with  vague  aspirations  ;  and  they  all  had  their  favourite  likes 
and  dislikes.  It  is  impossible  to  doubt  their  earnestness, 
but  it  was  of  the  high-bred  placid  kind.  It  had  nothing 
of  the  Spanish  exaltation  of  Teresa,  of  the  German 
vehemence  of  Luther,  of  the  French  passion  scarcely  veiled 
by  the  logical  precision  of  Calvin,  They  all  admired  St. 
Francis,  but  in  a  way  out  of  sympathy  with  the  common 
people,  for  they  looked  on  asceticism  with  a  mild  wonder, 
and  had  no  eagerness  for  that  type  of  the  imitation  of 
Christ,  Vittoria  Colonna  indeed  found  tho  convent  at 
Viterbo  a  pleasant  retreat  for  a  few  weeks  at  a  time.  A 
sigh  sometimes  escaped  her  that  perhaps  the  nuiiH  wore  all 
Marys  who  had  chosen  the  better  part,  but  that  wan  only 
when  she  was  weary  with  tho  perversities  of  tho  in- 
comprehensible world.  Their  correspondence  suggests  an 
academy  of  the  earlier  Italian  Eenaissancc,  whore  the 
theory  of  Ideas  had  given  way  to  doctrines  of  Justification, 
and  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  had  taken  the  place  of  tho 
Dialogues  of  Plato.  There  is  a  touch  of  dilettantism  in 
their  habits  of  thought,  and  a  savour  of  the  eighteenth 


THE   ITALIAN   ROMAN    CATHOLIC    REFORMERS       507 

century  Salon  in  their  intercourse.  They  longed  to  mediate 
between  contending  parties  in  the  religious  strife  which  was 
convulsing  Europe  beyond  the  Alps  and  might  invade 
Italy ;  but  they  were  unfit  for  the  task.  A  true  via 
media  can  only  be  found  by  men  who  see  both  sides  of  the 
controversy  in  the  clear  vision  of  thought,  not  by  men  who 
perceive  neither  distinctly.  Sadoleto,  to  take  one  example, 
declared  that  he  could  see  much  to  admire  in  the  German 
Eeformation,  but  what  he  approved  were  only  the  external 
portions  which  came  from  Humanism,  not  those  elements 
which  made  the  movement  a  religious  revival.  He  disliked 
Luther,  but  had  a  great  esteem  for  Bucer  and  Melanchthon. 
Indeed,  the  Italian  Cardinal  may  be  called  the  Melanchthon 
of  Eomanism.  Melanchthon,  rooted  in  Protestantism,  felt 
compelled  by  his  intellectual  sympathy  and  humility  to 
believe  that  there  was  some  good  in  Eomanism  and  to  try 
to  find  it ;  Sadoleto,  rooted  in  Eomanism,  was  impelled  to 
some  sympathy  with  the  Protestant  theology.  He  had, 
however,  a  fatal  lack  of  precision  of  thought.  One  doctrine 
tended  to  slide  insensibly  into  another,  into  its  opposite 
even,  under  the  touch  of  his  analysis.  The  man  who  could 
defend  and  commend  auricular  confession  because  it  was 
an  example  of  Christian  humility,  and  saint-worship 
because  it  was  a  testimony  to  the  immortality  of  the  soul, 
ran  the  risk  of  being  regarded  as  a  trifler  by  Protestants 
and  a  traitor  by  Eornanists.  Such  was  his  fate. 

Contemporary  with  these  offshoots  from  the  Oratory  of 
Divine  Love  was  a  revival  among  some  of  the  monastic 
orders  in  Italy  which  had  distinct  connection  with  some 
of  the  members  of  the  associations  above  mentioned. 

The  most  important  for  its  influence  on  the  religious 
life  of  the  people  was  the  Order  of  the  Capucins.  It  took 
its  rise  from  Matteo  de  Grassis,  a  man  of  no  intellectual 
powers,  but  endowed  with  more  than  the  usual  obstinacy 
of  the  Italian  peasant  He  was  an  Umbrian,  like  Francis 
himself.  He  belonged  to  a  district  where  traditions  of  the 
great  medieval  revivalist  had  been  handed  down  from 
parents  to  children  for  generations,  and  one  of  these  insisted 


508  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN   CATHOLICS 

that  St.  Francis  had  worn  a  hood  with  its  peak  pointed 
and  not  rounded,  as  the  fashion  among  the  monks  then 
was.  He  declared  that  St.  Francis  had  appeared  to  him 
in  a  vision,  and  had  said  that  the  brethren  of  the .  order 
ought  to  obey  his  rules  "  to  the  letter,  to  the  letter,  to  the 
letter."  He  for  one  resolved  to  obey.  He  threw  away  his 
rounded  hood  and  wore  one  with  pointed  peak.  The 
peasants  refused  to  recognise  the  novelty,  and  drove  him  off 
with  stones  ;  his  brethren  argued  with  him,  and  belaboured 
him  with  their  fists ;  but  Matteo  stuck  to  his  pointed  hood. 
The  shape  was  nothing,  but  the  Founder's  qommands  wero 
everything;  Matteo  would  die  before  he  would  wear  tLo 
rounded  thing  which  had  never  been  hallowed  by  St. 
Francis.  The  Princess  Caterina  Cybo  took  compassion  on 
the  hunted  man,  and  gave  him  an  asylum  within  her  little 
principality  of  Oamerino,  where  he  wore  his  pointed  capuze 
in  peace.  He  soon  sank  back  into  the  obscurity  from 
which  he  had  for  a  moment  emerged.  But  new  life  was 
stirring  among  the  Franciscans.  Many  were  dissatisfied 
with  the  laxity  of  the  order,  and  were  longing  for  a 
monastic  Eeformation.  All  down  the  Middle  Ages  the 
watchword  of  every  monastic  revival  had  been,  "  Back  to 
the  Founder's  rules."  The  pointed  hood  was  a  trifle,  but  it 
was  the  symbol  of  a  return  to  the  rigid  discipline  of 
Francis.  Men  heard  that  Camerino  was  an  asylum  for 
Franciscans  discontented  with  the  laxity  of  the  superiors 
of  the  order,  and  gradually  they  flocked  to  the  little 
principality.  Vittoria  Colonna  had  long  moxirned  over  the 
decadence  of  the  genuine  monastic  life ;  she  encouraged 
her  friend  the  Princess  Caterina  to  beseech  her  uncle  the 
Pope  to  permit  the  pointed  hood,  and  gradually  there 
came  into  being  a  new  fresh  offshoot  of  the  Franciscans, 
called  the  Capucins,  who  revived  the  traditions  of  St 
Francis,  and  went  preaching  among  the  villages  after  tho 
fashion  of  his  earlier  followers.  Francis  had  told  his 
disciples  to  beware  of  books  when  making  their  sermons ; 
he  had  advised  them  to  talk  to  'the  women  as  they  washed, 
Italian  fashion,  by  the  side  of  streams,  to  masons  while 


THE   ITALIAN   ROMAN   CATHOLIC   REFORMERS      509 

they  were  hewing,  to  artisans  at  their  work,  to  find  out 
what  their  religious  difficulties  were,  what  prevented  them 
becoming  really  Christians  in  their  lives,  and  then  to 
discourse  on  the  things  they  had  heard.  This  old 
Franciscan  preaching  was  restored  by  the  Capucins,  and 
they  did  more  than  any  others  to  bring  the  people  of 
Italy  back  to  the  discredited  Church.  They  were  accused 
of  heresy.  What  "  reformation  "  of  the  Franciscans  was 
not  ?  They  were  called  Lutherans ;  and  a  good  deal  of 
Luther's  Evangelical  teaching  was  unconsciously  presented 
in  their  sermons ;  but  they  could  always  quote  St.  Francis 
for  what  they  said ;  and  who  could  gainsay  what  Francis 
had  taught  ? 

This  monastic  revival  affected  the  commonalty; 
anotther  spoke  to  the  educated  classes.  As  early  as  1504 
an  attempt  had  been  made  to  reorganise  the  great 
Benedictine  order,  and  a  number  of  Benedictine  abbeys 
had  united  to  form  a  Congregation,  which  soon  after  its 
institution  took  the  name  of  tho  Benedictine  Mother- 
Cloister,  Monte  Cassino.  Gregorio  Cortcse,  one  of  the 
members  of  the  Oratory  of  Divine  Love,  entered  into  the 
movement,  and  as  Abbot  of  the  Benedictine  convent  on 
the  Island  of  Lerina  on  the  Eiviera,  and  afterwards  in  the 
convent  of  San  Giorgio  Maggiore  at  Venice,  led  his  monks 
to  show  that  their  convents  were  tho  centres  of  learning 
dedicated  to  tho  service  of  the  Church.  He  interested 
himself  more  especially  in  historical  studies  with  a  view  of 
maintaining  the  historic  traditions  of  the  Church,  which 
were  beginning  to  be  shaken  by  historical  criticism,  then 
iu  its  infancy. 

Tho  improvement  of  the  secular  clergy  was  more 
important  for  tho  Church  in  Italy  than  any  reforms  of  tho 
monastic  orders.  An  attempt  to  do  this  was  begun  by  two 
mombors  of  the  Oratory  of  JDivine  Love,  Giovanni  Pietro 
Caraffa  and  Gaetano  da  Thiene.  Their  idea  was  that  in 
every  diocese  there  ought  to  be  a  small  band  of  men  doing 
tho  work  of  secular  clergy  but  bound  by  monastic  vows. 
Thoir  idoa  was  token  from  Augustine's  practice  of  living 


510  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   BOM  AN   CATHOLICS 

monastically  with  some  of  his  clergy ;  and  fulfilled  itself  in 
the  order  of  the  Theatines.  The  name  was  derived  from 
Theate  (Chieti),  the  small  See  of  which  Caraffa  was  Bishop. 
These  picked  clergy  were  to  be  to  the  Bishop  what  his 
staff  is  to  a  general.  The  Theatines  were  not  to  be 
numerous,  still  less  to  include  the  whole  secular  clergy  of  a 
diocese ;  but  they  were  to  incite  by  precept,  and  above  all 
by  example,  to  a  truly  clerical  life.  The  idea  spread,  and 
similar  associations  arose  all  over  Italy.1 

Such  were  the  preparations  in  Italy  for  the  Counter- 
Reformation.  There  was  no  prospect  of  any  attempt  to  set 
the  Church  in  order  while  Pope  Clement  vn.  lived.  He 
exhausted  all  his  energies  in  preventing  the  summoning  of 
a  General  Council — a  measure  on  which  Charles  v.  was 
growing  more  and  more  set  as  the  only  means  of  ending  the 
religious  dispute  in  Germany. 

The  accession  of  Paul  m.  (1534)  seemed  to  inaugurate 
a  new  era  full  of  hopes  for  the  advocates  of  reform  at  the 
centre  of  the  Koman  Church.  The  new  Pope  made  Gasparo 
Contarini,  Caraffa,  Sadaleto,  and  Pole  Cardinals.  A  Bull, 
which  remained  unpublished,  was  read  in  the  Consistory 
(January  1536),  sketching  the  possibility  of  reforming  the 
Curia.  The  Pope  appointed  a  commission  of  nine  members 
to  report  upon  the  needful  reforms,  and  the  commission  wa« 
everywhere  regarded  as  a  sort  of  preliminary  Council,  a 
body  of  men  who  were  appointed  to  investigate  and  tabulate 
a  programme  of  necessary  reforms  to  bo  laid  before  a 
General  Council.  The  Commissioners  wore  Contavini, 
Caraffa,  Ghiberti,  Sadoleto,  Pole,  tYegoso,  all  of  whom  had 
been  members  of  the  Oratory  of  Divine  .Love,  Aleamler  who 
had  been  Nuncio  at  the  Diet  of  Worms,  and  Tomaso  Badia, 
Master  of  the  Sacred  Palace.  They  mot  and  drafted  n 
report  which  was  presented  to  the  Popo  in  1537,  and  i« 
known  as  the  Oonsilium  dclectorum  cardin&lium  c,t  aliorum 
prcelatorum  de  emendanda  ecclesia.  A  more  scathing 
indictment  of  the  condition  of  the  Roman  Church  could 

1  The  name  went  beyond  the  original  foundation,    The  Jenxiita  were 
sometimes  called  TkcaUncs  both  in  Spain  and  in  France, 


THE   ITALIAN   ROMAN   CATHOLIC   REFORMERS      511 

scarcely  be  imagined,  nor  one  which  spoke  more  urgently 
of  the  need  of  radical  reformation.  Its  very  thoroughness 
was  disconcerting.  It  revealed  so  many  scandals  connected 
with  the  Papacy  that  it  was  resolved  not  to  make  it  known. 
But  it  had  been  printed  as  a  private  document ;  a  copy 
somehow  or  other  reached  Germany;  it  was  at  once 
republished  there,  with  comments  showing  how  a  papal 
commission  itself  had  justified  all  the  German  demands  for 
a  reformation  of  the  Church.  At  Rome  the  appearance  of 
reforming  activity  was  maintained.  Contarini,  Caraffa, 
Aleander,  and  Badia  were  appointed  to  investigate  the 
workings  of  those  departments  of  the  Curia  which  had  most 
to  do  with  the  abuses  detailed  in  the  report  of  the 
Commission  of  Nine — the  Chancery,  the  Datary,  and  the 
Penitentiary,  where  reservations,  dispensations,  exemptions, 
etc.,  were  given  and  registered.  They  presented  their 
report  in  the  autumn  of  1537.  It  was  entitled  Consilium 
quattuor  delectorum  a  Paulo  III.  super  reformatione  sanctce 
Romance  Ecdesice.  But  Contarini  evidently  felt  that  the 
Pope  needed  pressing.  When  the  Commission  of  Nine  had 
been  appointed,  the  Pope  had  summoned  a  General  Council 
to  meet  at  Mantua  in  May  1537,  in  a  Bull  published  on 
May  29th,  1536,  and  had  also  published  a  Bull  of 
Information  in  September  of  that  year.  The  Council 
never  met — th$  war  between  Charles  v.  and  Francis  I. 
preventing.  The  Council  was  then  summoned  to  meet  at 
Vicenza,  but  was  again  postponed.  The  Emperor  had  no 
wish  for  a  General  Council  in  Italy,  and  the  Pope  was 
determined  not  to  call  one  to  meet  in  Germany.  In  these 
circumstances  Contarini  published  his  Epistola  de  potestate 
Pontificis  in  usu  clavium,  and  his  De  potentate  Pontifitis  in 
Compositionibus.1 

1  They  are  to  be  found  in  JSibliotheca  Matoima  Pentificfa  (Rome,  1790), 
pp.  1 7  8  ff*  The  contents  of  the  second  letter  are  condensed  in  the  phrase  which 
occurs  near  the  end  ;  "  in  logibus  voluntas  non  dobet  regula  oaso  "  (p.  183). 
The  fiwt  letter  itrges  the  Popo  to  make  an  e*nd  of  the  scandals  caused  by  the 
sale  of  dispOTiHations  ;  "  Diaponsator  non  potost  vend  ere  id  quod  non  suuni 
081;  wed  iJomiui.  Noque  otiam  poto»t  trauagredi  in  dispenaatione  nmndatum 
Domini.  .  ,  .  Kxpvoaso  Clmatiw  in  Kvangolio  prwcipit;  Gratis  accepiatisi 


512  ITALIAN  LIBERAL   ROMAN  CATHOLICS 

Historians  differ  about  the  sincerity  of  Pope  Paul  m.  in 
the  matter  of  reform,  and  there  is  room  for  two  opinions. 
His  Italian  policy  was  anti-Hapsburg,  and  the  German 
Eomanisb  Princes,  at  all  events,  had  little  belief  in  his 
sincerity,  and  were  seriously  meditating  on  following  the 
example  of  Henry  Yin.  Cardinal  Morone,  the  Nuncio  in 
Germany,  made  no  concealment  of  the  difficulties  attending 
the  position  of  the  Komanist  Church  there,  and  urged 
continually  substantial  reforms  in  Italy,  and  the  necessity 
of  a  General  Council.  Perhaps  these  energetic  messages 
stirred  the  Pope  to  renewed  activity  in  Home,  and  also  to 
the  necessity  of  formulating  a  definite  policy  with  regard 
to  the  Lutherans  beyond  the  Alps.  In  April  (1540) 
commissions  were  appointed  to  reform  certain  offices  in  the 
Curia  —  the  Eota,  the  Chancery,  and  the  Penitentiary. 
Consultations  were  held  about  how  to  deal  with  the  state 
of  affairs  in  Germany.  For  the  moment  the  ideas  of  the 
more  liberal-minded  Italian  Reformers  were  in  the  ascendant. 
Charles  had  determined  to  find  out  whether  it  was  not 
possible  to  reunite  the  broken  Church  in  Germany. 
Conferences  were  to  be  held  with  the  leading  Lutheran 
theologians.  The  Pope  determined  to  reject  tho  advice  of 
Faber,  the  Bishop  of  Vienna,  and  to  refrain  from  pro- 
nouncing judgment  on  a  series  of  Lutheran  proposition?! 
sent  to  him  for  condemnation.  Cardinal  Contarini,  whoso 
presence  had  been  urgently  required  by  tho  Emperor,  wa» 
permitted  to  cross  the  Alps  to  see,  in  conference  with 
distinguished  Lutherans,  whether  some  common,  terms  ot 
agreement  might  be  arrived  at  which  would  sorvo  an 
a  programme  to  0e  set  before  the  Gonoral  Council, 
which  all  were  agreed  must  be  summoned  sometime 
soon. 


Gratis  date  w  (p.  79).  It  closes  with  an  urgent  appeal  :  ** 
ingressus  es  viam  Christi,  audaeter  ago.  .  .  *  Deus  omnipotent)  dirigot 
gresaus  tuos,  et  tuorum  omnium.  Fatniliae  tuae  Protector  orit,  ot  aupor 
orania  bona  sua  constituet  te,  ut  ipso  in  Evangelio  polliootur  norvo  fitloK, 
quern  constituit  super  familiam  suam.  Dominua  diu  nobiw  sorvet  Sanotitatom 
tuam  mcolumem." 


CARDINALS    CONTARINI   AND   CARAFFA  513 


§  3.  Cardinals  Contarini  and  Caraffa. 

This  mission  of  Contarini's  to  Germany  dates  the 
separation  between  two  different  ways  of  proposing  to 
deal  with  the  Reformation  movement.  The  two  methods 
were  embodied  in  two  men,  Cardinals  Contarini  and 
Caraffa.  They  had  both  belonged  to  the  Oratory  of 
Divine  Lom\  they  were  both  zealous  to  see  the  Church 
reformed  in  the  sense  of  reviving  its  moral  and  spiritual 
life ;  they  both  longed  to  see  the  rent  which  had  made 
itself  apparent  repaired,  and  the  Church  again  reunited. 
They  differed  entirely  about  the  means  to  be  adopted  to 
bring  about  the  desirable  end.  The  differences  originated 
in  the  separate  characters  and  training  of  the  two 
loaders. 

Gasparo  Contarini  belonged  to  an  ancient  patrician 
family  of  Venice,  and  spent  the  greater  portion  of  his  life  in 
tho  service  of  the  Eepublic.  He  was  looked  on  as  the 
ablest  and  most  upright  of  its  statesmen.  He  had  drunk 
dooply  of  the  well  of  the  Now  Learning,  and  yet  can  hardly 
bo  called  a  Humanist.  He  had  been  a  student  at  Padua, 
and  had  there  studied  and  learned  to  appreciate  Scholastic 
Theology.  Ho  had  boen  trained  as  ft  Venetian  statesman, 
and  clung  to  the  political  ideas  of  the  mediaeval  juris- 
prudence. The  whole  round  of  medieval  thought  encircled 
and  possessed  him.  Christendom  was  one  great  common- 
wealth, and  embodied  three  great  imperialist  ideas — a 
world  King,  the  Emperor;  a  world  priest,  the  Pope;  a 
realm  of  sanctified  science,  the  Scholastic  Philosophy  under 
Theology,  the  Queen  of  the  Sciences.  He  held  these  three 
conceptions  in  a  broad-minded  and  liberal  way.  There 
was  room  under  the  Emporor  for  a  community  of  Christian 
States,  under  the  Popo  for  a  brotherhood  of  national 
Churches,  undor  Scholastic  for  tho  Now  Learning  and  what 
it  brought  to  enrich  tho  mind  of  mankind. 

EruamuH  had  ridicxilocl  Scholastic;  Contarini's  friend 
oallod  it  a  farrago  of  words ;  Luther  had  maintained 
33** 


514  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN   CATHOLICS 

that  it  sounded  hollow  because  at  its  centre  was  the  vague 
eternal  Something  of  Pagan  Philosophy  and  not  the  Father 
who  had  revealed  His  heart  in  Jesus  Christ ;  but  Contarini 
saw  the  grandeur  of  the  imposing  edifice,  believed  in  its 
solidity,  and  would  do  nothing  to  destroy  it.  But  this  did 
not  prevent  him  sympathising  strongly  with  Luther's 
doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith,  nor  from  believing  that 
room  might  be  found  for  it  and  other  Protestant  concep- 
tions within  the  circle  of  mediaeval  theological  thought. 
He  had  little  sympathy  with  the  enthusiasm  which  some 
of  his  friends — Cardinal  Pole  for  example — expressed  for 
Plato.  Aristotle  was  for  him  the  great  master-builder  of 
human  systematic  thinking ;  but  the  Aristotle  he  recognised 
as  the  Master  was  not  the  sage  revealed  in  the  Greek  text 
or  commentaries  (although  he  studied  both),  but  the 
Aristotle  who  had  cast  his  spell  over  Thomas  Aquinas  and 
Albertus  Magnus.  He  was  firmly  persuaded  that  the 
Bishop  of  Borne  was  the  Head  of  the  Church,  and  as  such 
had  his  place  in  the  political  system  of  Christendom  from 
which  he  could  not  be  removed  without  serious  danger  to 
the  whole  existing  framework  of  society ;  but  he  looked  on 
the  Pope  as  a  constitutional  monarch  bound  to  observe  in 
his  own  person  the  ecclesiastical  laws  imposed  by  his 
authority  on  the  Christian  world.  Luther,  he  believed,  had 
recognised  this  in  his  earlier  writings,  and  in  this  recognition 
lay  the  possibilities  of  a  readjustment  which  would  bring 
Christendom  together  again.  On  the  other  hand,  Calvin's 
Lislitutio  filled  him  with  mingled  admiration  and  dread. 
He  recognised  it  to  be  the  ablest  book  which  the  Protestant 
movement  had  produced ;  but  the  thought  of  a  Christian 
democracy  with  which  it  was  permeated,  the  stress  ifc  laid 
on  the  procession  of  the  divine  purpose  down  through  the 
ages,  and  the  manner  in  which  it  taught  the  provenience 
of  divine  grace,  were  conceptions  whose  acceptance, 
he  thought,  would  be  dangerous  to  the  political  governance 
of  mankind. 

Ho  dwelt  with  complacency  on  the  thought  that  he 
had  never  longed  for  ecclesiastical  place  or  power,     The 


CARDINALS  CONTARINI  AND  CARAFFA     515 

Pope  had  persuaded  him  to  permit  himself  to  be  made 
Cardinal  because  the  Holy  See  had  need  of  his  service. 
He  was  conscious  with  a  sort  of  proud  humility  that  he 
was  generally  esteemed  the  foremost  Italian  of  his  genera- 
tion, that  enthusiastic  friends  spoke  of  his  learning  and 
virtue  as  "  more  divine  than  human."  He  thought  much 
more  of  his  position  as  a  Venetian  Senator  and  the  trusted 
counsellor  of  the  Eepublic,  whose  constitution  he  believed 
to  be  the  embodiment  of  the  best  political  principles  of  the 
time,  than  he  did  of  his  place  in  the  Eoman  Court.  "  I 
for  my  part,  to  tell  the  truth,  do  not  think  that  the  Keel 
Hat  is  my  highest  honour,"  he  was  accustomed  to  say. 
Such  was  the  leader  of  the  liberal-minded  Eoman  Catholics 
of  Italy,  who  was  asked  by  the  Pope  and  urgently  entreated 
by  the  Emperor  to  visit  Germany  and  end  the  schism  by 
his  persuasions. 

Giovanni  Pietro  Caraffa,  the  intimate,  the  rival  and  the 
supplant er  of  Contarini,  belonged  to  one  of  the  oldest 
noble  families  of  Naples.  His  house  was  intimately 
allied  to  the  Church,  and  for  more  than  one  hundred  years 
its  members  had  been  Archbishops  of  Naples,  and  several 
had  been  made  Cardinals.  The  boy  was  destined  for  the 
Church.  As  a  child  he  had  longed  to  enter  a  cloister, 
and  had  once  set  out  to  join  the  Dominicans.  His  family, 
however,  had  other  views  for  him.  He  was  sent  when 
eighteen  years  of  age  to  the  papal  court,  and  was  soon 
almost  burdened  with  marks  of  distinction  and  with 
offices.  He  had  been  highly  educated  while  at  Naples, 
and  had  steeped  himself  in  the  New  Learning.  At  the 
Humanist  Courts  of  Alexander  vi.  and  Julius  n.  he  studied 
Greek  and  Hebrew,  and  became  an  accomplished  theologian 
besides.  In  1504,  much  against  his  will,  he  had  been 
consecrated  Bishop  of  the  small  diocese  of  Chieti  (Theate), 
lying  in  the  wild  Abruzzi  district,  almost  due  east  of 
•Borne,  on  the  elopes  from  the  highest  spurs  of  the 
Apennines  to  the  Adriatic,  He  found  his  people 
demoralised  by  constant  feuds,  and  the  priests  worse 
Hum  their  parishioners.  Caraffa,  determined  to  reduce  his 


516  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN  CATHOLICS 

unruly  diocese  to  order,  began  with  persuasion ;  and  finding 
this  of  small  avail,  flogged  people  and  clergy  into  some- 
thing like  decency  by  repeated  spiritual  censures  and 
rigidly  enforced  excommunications.  His  methods  revealed 
the  man.  His  talents  were  of  too  high  an  order  and 
his  family  influence  too  great  to  permit  him  to  linger 
in  his  uncivilised  diocese.  He  was  sent  as  Nuncio  to 
England  and  thence  to  Spain.  His  visit  to  the  latter 
country  made  an  indelible  impression  on  his  strong  nature. 
His  earnest  petitions  for  the  independence  of  his  native 
Naples  were  contemptuously  refused  by  the  young  King 
Charles,  and  the  fierce  Neapolitan  pursued  the  Emperor 
with  an  undying  hatred.  But  what  was  more  important, 
his  stay  in  Spain  imbued  him  with  the  ideas  of  the 
Spanish  Eeformation.  He  was  too  much  an  Italian  and 
too  strong  a  believer  in  the  papal  supremacy  to  adopt  the 
thought  of  secular  interference  in  the  affairs  of  the  Church, 
but  with  that  exception  the  Spanish  method  of  renovating 
the  Church  took  possession  of  him  heart  and  soul.  The 
germs  of  fanaticism,  hitherto  sleeping  within  him,  wore 
awakened  to  life,  and  never  afterwards  slumbered.  Ho 
sympathised  with  the  projects  of  Adrian  vi,  and  was  a 
power  during  his  brief  pontificate.  During  the  reign  of 
Clement  vn.  he  took  little  part  in  public  affairs,  but  all 
the  attempts  to  put  new  life  into  the  monastic  orders 
were  assisted  by  him.  He  viewed  with  some  suspicion 
the  attempt  to  conciliate  the  Germans;  and  the  results 
of  Contarini's  dealing  with  the  Protestants  at  Begcnsburg 
filled  him  with  alarm. 

Contarini's  attempt  to  reunite  the  Church  by  rooon- 
ciliation  was  twenty  years  too  late.  It  is  doubtful  whether 
anyone  in  Germany  save  the  Emperor  had  much  faith  in 
the  uniting  influences  of  a  conference.  Morono,  who  had 
for  years  represented  the  Vatican  at  the  Court  of  Ferdinand 
of  Austria,  and  who  was  perpetually  urging  the  Pope  to 
summon  a  General  Council,  was  afraid  ever  since  Hagoiuui 
that  conferences  benefited  the  Protestants  more  than  tho 
Romanists.  Contarini  himself  had  said  that  what  was 


CARDINALS   CONTARINI   AND   CARAFFA  517 

needed  to  overcome  the  German  movement  was  neither 
conferences  nor  discussions  about  doctrine,  but  a  Eeforma- 
tion  in  morals.  The  Curia  regarded  his  mission  as  a 
dangerous  experiment.  They  tied  his  hands  as  firmly  as 
they  could  by  his  letter  of  instructions :  He  was  to  inform 
the  Emperor  that  no  Legate,  not  even  the  Pope  himself 
until  he  had  consulted  the  other  nations,  could  modify 
the  doctrines  of  the  Church  for  the  sake  of  the  Germans ; 
he  was  to  do  his  utmost  to  prevent  the  assembly  of 
a  National  Council  for  Germany.  He  heard  from  Paris 
tha*3  the  French  Eomanists  believed  that  he  was  about  to 
betray  the  Church  to  the  heretics.  No  one  encouraged 
him  except  his  own  circle  of  immediate  friends.  The 
men  with  whom  he  was  to  work,  Cardinal  de  Granvelle 
and  Dr.  Eck,  were  suspicious  of  him  and  of  his  antecedents. 
Nevertheless  his  natural  and  confirmed  optimism  urged 
him  to  the  task. 

The  situation,  looked  at  broadly  and  from  the  point 
of  view  taken  by  a  contemporary  who  had  mado  himself 
acquainted  with  the  theology  and  constitution  of  the 
moditcval  Church,  was  not  so  hopeless  as  it  must  seem 
to  us  with  the  history  of  what  followed  to  enlighten 
us.  The  great  mass  of  medieval  doctrines  lay  uncertified. 
They  wore  not  codified  until  the  Council  of  Trent.  The 
extreme  claims  made  by  the  supporters  of  a  papal  absolut- 
ism— claims  which  may  be  briefly  expressed  by  the  sentence : 
Tho  Church  Universal  is  condensed  in  the  Roman  Church, 
and  the  Komaa  Church  is  represented  by  the  Popo — which 
had  boon  used  to  crush  the  Lutheran  movement  in  *its 
earliest  stages,  were  of  recent  origin,  Curialism  cotild  be 
represented  to  bo  almost  as  mueh  opppsod  to  the  mediajvul 
theory  of  the  Church  as  anything  that  Luther  had  brought 
forward.  There  was  a  real  via  media,  if  it  could  only 
be  discovered  and  defined.  The  commonplace  opinions 
of  men  who  wore  sincerely  attached  to  the  mediaeval 
conception  of  the  Church,  with  its  claims  to  catholicity, 
with  its  doctrines,  usages,  ceremonies  and  hierarchy,  could 
scarcely  be  better  represented  than  in  the  declaration 


518  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN   CATHOLICS 

said  to  have  been  made  by  Charles  V.  to  his  sister  Maria, 
his  governor  in  the  Netherlands : 

"  It  happened  that  on  the  Vigil  of  St.  John  the  Baptist 
the  Emperor  held  a  banquet  in  the  garden.  Now,  when 
Queen  Maria  asked  him  what  he  thought  of  doing  with  the 
people  and  with  the  Confession  (the  Augsburg)  that  had 
been  presented,  he  made  reply :  '  Dear  Sister,  when  I  was 
made  chief  of  the  Holy  Eoman  Empire,  the  great  complaint 
reached  me  that  the  people  who  profess  this  doctrine  were 
more  wicked  than  the  devil.  But  the  Bishop  of  Seville  gave 
me  the  advice  that  I  should  not  think  of  acting  tyrannically, 
but  should  ascertain  whether  the  doctrine  is  at  variance 
with  the  articles  of  the  Christian  faith  (the  Apostles'  Creed). 
This  advice  pleased  me,  and  so  I  find  that  the  people  are 
not  so  devilish  as  had  been  represented ;  nor  is  the  subject 
of  dispute  the  Twelve  Articles,  but  a  matter  lying  outside 
them,  which  I  have  therefore  handed  over  to  the  scholars. 
If  their  doctrine  had  been  in  conflict  with  the  Twelve  Articles 
I  should  have  been  disposed  to  apply  the  edge  of  the  sword.'  "l 

The  Twelve  Articles,  as  the  Apostles'  Creed  was 
called,  always  occupied  a  peculiar  position  in  the  Western 
Church.  They  were  believed  to  contain  the  whole  of  the 
theologia  revelata.  The  great  Schoolmen  of  the  most 
opposite  parties  (Thomas  Aquinas  and  John  Duns  Scotus 
alike)  were  accustomed  to  deduce  from  tho  Apostles' 
Creed  fourteen  propositions,  seven  on  God  and  seven  on 
the  Incarnation,  and  to  declare  that  they  contained  the 
sum  of  revealed  theology;  everything  else  was  natural 
thgology  on  which  men  might  differ  without  being  con- 
sidered to  have  abandoned  the  essentials  of  the  Christian 
faith.  Charles  v.  had  been  taught  at  first,  probably  by 
Aleander's  insistent  reiterations,  that  Luther  had  denied 
some  portion  of  this  revealed  theology;  he  had  como  to 
learn  that  he  had  been  wrongly  informed ;  therefore  con- 
ference and  adjustment  were  possible. 

Men  like  Charles  v.  and  Contarini  could  honestly 
believe  that  so  far  as  doctrine  was  concerned  a  compromise 
might  be  effected. 

1  Kaworau,  Jokatin  Ai/ricola  (1881),  p.  100. 


THE  CONFERENCE  AT  REGENSBURG      519 

§  4.   The  Conference  at  Regensburg. 

The  Diet  was  opened  at  Eegensburg  in  February  1541, 
The  -Emperor  explained  his  position  and  intentions.  He 
declared  that  the  most  important  duty  before  them  was  to 
try  to  heal  the  division  in  religion  which  was  separating 
Germany  into  two  opposing  parties.  The  one  duty  of  the 
hour  was  to  endeavour  to  come  to  a  unanimous  decision 
on  religious  matters,  and  to  bring  about  this  he  proposed 
to  name  some  peace-loving  men  who  could  confer  together 
upon  the  points  in  debate.  Count  Frederick  of  the 
Palatinate,  brother  of  the  Elector,  and  Cardinal  de  Granvelle 
were  nominated  presidents :  three  pronounced  Protestants, 
two  pronounced  Eornanista,  and  one  whose  opinions  were 
doubtful,  were  the  assessors;  Eck,  Gropper,  and  Pflug 
were  to  support  the  Komanist  side,  Melanchthon,  Bucer, 
and  Pistorius  were  the  speakers  for  the  Protestants. 
Perhaps  the  only  name  that  could  be  objected  to  was  that 
of  Eck ;  it  was  impossible  to  think  of  him  as  a  man  of 
peace.  The  Legate  Contarini  guided  everything. 

During  preliminary  conferences  an  understanding  was 
come  to  on  some  practical  questions  which  served  to 
preserve  an  appearance  of  unanimity.  It  was  thought 
that  marriage  might  be  permitted  to  the  clergy  and  the 
cup  to  the  laity  within  Germany;  that  the  Pope  might 
be  honoured  as  the  Primate  of  the  Church,  provided  it 
was  clearly  understood  that  his  position  did  not  give  him 
the  power  of  perpetual  interference  in  the  affairs  of  tjie 
national  Churches ;  that  the  hierarchy  might  be  Maintained 
if  the  episcopal  jurisdiction  were  exercised  conjointly  by 
a  vicar  appointed  by  the  Bishop  and  a  learned  layman 
appointed  by  the  secular  authority. 

It  was  the  business  of  the  conference  to  discuss  the 
deeper  theological  differences  which  were  supposed  to 
separate  ohe  two  parties.  So'  in  the  opening  meetings 
the  delegates  began  to  consider  those  questions  which 
gathered  round  the  thought  of  Justification. 

It  wan  agreed  that  there  WUH  no  tUBtinclion  between 


520  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN   CATHOLICS 

the  ordinances  of  grace  and  those  of  nature  in  the 
original  condition  of  man.  This  declaration  involved  the 
denial  of  the  distinction  between  the  dona  supernaturalia 
and  the  dona  naturalia  made  so  much  of  in  Scholastic 
Theology,  and  the  basis  of  a  great  deal  of  its  Pelagian 
tendencies.  It  was  expressly  conceded  by  the  Komanist 
theologians  that  man  had  lost  his  original  freedom  of 
will  by  the  Fall  —  a  concession  directly  at  variance  with 
the  future  declaration  of  the  Council  of  Trent.1  The 
statement  agreed  upon  about  the  origin  of  sin  was  given 
almost  in  the  words  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and 
agrees  with  them.  The  doctrine  of  the  tenacity  of  original 
sin  scarcely  differs  from  a  statement  of  Luther's  which 
had  been  condemned  in  the  Bull  Exurge  Domine  of  Pope 
Leo  x.2  In  the  discussions  and  conclusions  about  this 
first  head  of  doctrine  the  conclusions  of  Protestant  theology 
had  been  amply  vindicated. 

There  was  more  difficulty  on  the  matter  of  Justification. 
Two  definitions  suggested  by  the  Romanist  theologians 
and  by  Melanchthon  were  successively  rejected,  and  one 
.brought  forward,  it  is  said  by  Contarini  himself,  WUB 
accepted  after  some  discussion.  It  was  couched  in 
language  which  the  Lutheran  theologians  had  not  boon 
accustomed  to  use.  It  embodied  phrases  which  Polo, 
Contarini,  and  other  liberal  Italian  Itomou  Catholics  had 
made  their  own.  The  Protestants  of  Germany,  however, 
saw  nothing  in  it  to  contradict  thoir  cherished  idcaH  upon 
Justification,  and  they  gladly  accepted  the  definition,  Tho 
statement,  repeated  more  than  once,  that  grace  iw  the  froo 
gift  of  God  and  is  not  merited  by  our  work«,  oxproHHwl 
their  deepest  thought,  and  completely  excluded  tho 


1  The  Kogensburg  article  said:  Crcata,  HbertoA  par  homini* 
amissa  ;  the  decree  of  Trent  declared  :  tii  qufo  libtrvm  Aow&wb  tt,rtri,triu,m 
pott  Ada  peccatum  cmissum  et  eMnctum   me  dtxwto,    anuthw 
(Denzingor,  £hichindim  Sytribolorum  et  D(^finUionumt  etc,,  0th  <xi  p. 

3  Tho  Regcnsburg  article  says  :  JBtoi  poitt  Ic^tinnum  negare 
maUriale  peccatum,  etc.,  the  second  heresy  of  Luther  cowloiWHxl  in  th«  Bull 
is  :  In  puero  post  baptfomm  negare  nrnwum*  pewctiwn,  tot  P&ulwu  et 
Christum  ssimul  concukarc  (ibid.  p.  176)- 


THE  CONFERENCE  AT  REGENSBURG      521 

meritorious  character  of  ecclesiastical  good  works.  They 
seemed  rather  pleased  than  otherwise  that  their  thoughts 
could  be  expressed  in  language  suggested  by  Komanist 
theologians.1  It  appears  that  Eck,  while  consenting  to 
the  definition,  wished  to  avoid  signing  it,  but  was  compelled 
by  Granvelle  to  fix  his  name  to  the  document.2 

The  fact  that  the  Romanist  and  Protestant  members  of 
the  conference  could  agree  upon  an  article  on  Justification 
caufwil  groat  rejoicings  among  Gontarini's  friends  in  Italy. 
Cardinal  Polo  wan  convinced  that  every  obstacle  in  the 
way  of  reunion  had  boon  removed,  and  the  mo«l  ex- 
travagant expectations  were  cherished.3  The  Protestant 
inomborH  of  the  conference  wore  entirely  satisfied  with  the 
wuiltH  BO  far  as  they  had  gone. 

Tho  conference  them  turned  to  questions  affecting  the 
organisation  and  wovnhip  of  the  Church. 

Somewhat  to  their  Burpriso,  the  ProtoBtantB  found  that 
their  opponents  wore  willing  to  accept  thoir  general  theory 
of  what  waa  meant  by  the  Church  and  what  wore  its 

1  Calvin,  who  w&fl  present  at  tho  oonfortmoo,  wmia  \tp  th«  roaults  HO  far  in 
ft  Ittttm*  to  Faro!  ftfl  follow*  :  ttofocM  ntmtori  da  ywewto  origimli  «MM  diffmilfor 
nftqiwta  e»t  dwfmttttw  dt\  Hlwro  arbitrio,  gttm  ex  Awjmtini 
wita  fttit  t  niktt  in  ufrw/ue  nobfo  dfwwiL  Xte  jit*t\/te,utitMA 
fiwwmt  cmtfMtiww*.  Twittfint  cvnttrriptd  «*t  formula.^  quam 
ewtin  etirnwtfatoitnu  utriwtu?  rtewwwtf*  Mlmbfri»,  •  ttrio, 
kwtuw*  GMUHMtMtit  guMm  t?0wiA  eastm^r^  ifa  ut  pitafowfan 
faM  futi>  qiwd  litorte  incfamm  n^rten.  JRttiMMrunt  mim 
dovtrinw  verm  nuntnuwi;  ut  nihil  iltic  cmnirrchfitwtitn  $it>  qutxt  non 
#<riyti#  notirt*  :  *m^»  dMkitw&h  efarforwn  e^/Kfitv^^mtm,  ft,  in  ea  re 
iibi  (Wfientwntfm  haMdx.  l^ruit^  si  rtytutra  (fuitnimtm  hommitms 
iwbitt  *Mt  agtuuw*  Muttwn  aww  tftrtvm  ((Jturpvt  flf/mntttoirMn, 
xxxix.  215).  (Mvfu  had  lunm  Hommvlmt  «uHpiolouH  of  CouUriiu  at  th« 
(tutm*t  s  <*fw*4rttww/*  iii'M  mntfttin*  AuMffrr*  mm  wtpU  ;  ywfadtt  tmtot  <mnflit 

Hi/ttlmtU  M  «#«*  utititatfi  wgttfii  *Ur»  r*n;«»  (ibht*  xxxix.  176). 
9  In  th«  tlmtictttion  of  tht*  fourth  j»orUtm  of  MolftnchtlumV  Worku  to 
u.  of  HratHttmtiurKt  U»«  wlitor  r«u«M*r  «ftynj  (hwwlhui*  .  .  . 


body,  I»f»  louti  Immh  v(»ltt«f  hiit  tmllyiit^  huhitf, 


by  PirkUnim<*r  of  NUrntmrg, 

»  fyiitnlarum  Itejiwldi  Mi,  .V.  IL  K.  Uardiiwti*  (Brixi^  1744-57),  iiL 


522  ITALIAN   LIBERAL   ROMAN   CATHOLICS 

distinguishing  characteristics.  The  Christian  Society  was 
defined  without  any  reference  to  the  Pope  as  its  permanent 
Head  on  earth.  This  provoked  strong  dissents  from  Rome 
when  the  definition  was  known  there.  Differences  emerged 
when  the  power  of  the  Church  was  discussed,  and  as  there 
was  no  prospect  of  agreement  it  was  resolved  for  the 
meanwhile  to  omit  the  article.1 

The  question  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Holy  Supper 
evoked  differences  which  were  felt  to  be  almost 
insuperable.  It  was  inevitable.  For  here  the  one  funda- 
mental divergence  between  the  new  Evangelical  faith  and 
mediaeval  religion  came  to  practical  expression.  No- 
thing could  reconcile  the  Evangelical  thought  of  a  spiritual 
priesthood  of  all  believers  with  the  belief  in  a  mediating 
priesthood  who  could  give  and  could  withhold  God. 
Doctrines  might  be  stated  in  terms  which  hid  this  funda- 
mental difference;  a  definition  of  Justification  by  Faith 
alone  might  be  conceded  to  the  Protestants;  but  any 
thought  of  a  priestly  miracle  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Holy 
Supper  had  to  be  repudiated  by  the  one  party  and  clung  to 
by  the  other. 

At  first  things  went  smoothly  enough  ;  it  was  conceded 
that  special  ways  of  dispensing  the  Sacraments  were  matters 
indifferent,  but  whenever  the  question  of  Transubstantiation 
emerged,  things  came  to  a  deadlock.  It  was  perhaps 
characteristic  of  Contarinfs  somewhat  surface  way  of  deal- 
ing with  the  whole  question  at  stake  between  the  two 
parties,  that  he  never  probed  the  deeper  question.  He 
rested  his  plea  for  Transubstantiation  on  the  ground  that 
an  important  article  of  faith  which  had  been  assented  to 
for  so  long  must  not  be  questioned.2  The  Protestants  held 
a  private  conference,  at  which  all  the  theologians  present 
were  asked  to  give  their  opinions  in  turn.  There  Calvin 

1  Calvin  says :  Venfotm  est  dewide  ad  ecefasia'M, :  in  definitions  congruebant 
sentential ;  in  potestate  dissidere  c&perunt.     Quum  nutto  modo  powent  con- 
ciliarii  vzsuw,  est  articulum  ill-win  wmttere. 

2  Nwiquawi  Legatum  assensurum,  ut  conspicua  fidei  decreta  tot  scecufri* 
cuUa  in  dubiuwi  adducerentur* 


THE  CONFERENCE  AT  REGENSBURG      523 

spoke,  dwelling  on  the  thought  that  Transubstantiation 
implied  adoration,  which  could  never  be  conceded.  His 
firmness  produced  unanimity.  Melanchthon  drafted  their 
common  opinion,  which  was  given  in  writing  to  Granvelle, 
who  refused  in  strong  language  to  accept  it,  and  the 
conference  came  to  an  end.  The  more  difficult  practical 
subjects  of  the  sacrificial  character  of  the  Mass  and  of 
private  Masses  were  not  discussed.1 

This  conference  at  Eegensburg  may  almost  be  said  to 
be  the  parting  of  the  ways.  Up  to  1525  the  movement 
under  Luther  had  the  appearance  of  a  Beformation  of  the 
whole  Church  in  Germany.  From  1525  to  the  date  of 
this  conference  there  was  always  the  expectation  that  the 
Lutherans  who  had  formed  territorial  Churches  might  yet 
bo  included  in  a  general  Reformation  of  the  whole  German 
Church.  Joachim  IT.  of  Brandenburg  cherished  the  idea 
long  after  1541 ;  and  Charles  V.  still  believed  that  what 
could  not  be  effected  by  mutual  compromise  might  be  done 
by  a  mediating  creed  imposed  upon  all  by  the  authority  of 

1  Tbo  proceedings  of  the  conference  are  given  in  full  ,in  the  Acta, 
Xtatisbonwma*  By  far  the  most  succinct  account  is  to  be  found  in  Calvin's 
letter  to  Farel  of  date  llth  May  1541.  He  says  of  the  discussion  about  the 
sacraments  :  Jh  saoramentis  rixati  sunt  nonnihil :  sed  quum  nos&ri  suas  illis 
cceremottias,  ut  res  medias,  permitlereut,  usque  ad  c&nam  proyressi  sunt. 
lllic  fuit  insuperabilis  scapulas.  jRepudiata  transubstantiadio,  reposilio, 
circumffestatio,  et  reliqui  superstitiosi  cultus.  ffwc  adversariis  nequaquam 
tolerabilia.  Collega,  mem  (JBuoer),  qui  totus  arM  studio  concordice,  f return 
et  faidiynari,  quod  intempestive  fuissent  motca  eiusmodi  quoeationeS)  Ph'iZJppit$ 
(Melanchthon)  in  adversam  partem  magis  tenderc,  ut  rebus  exulceratis  omncm 
pacificatwnis  spem  prcecidfiret*  Nostri  Tiabita,  consuttatione,  nos  convocarunt. 
Sum  mnius  omms  ordine  diccre  sentcnttas:  fuit  una  omnium  wxt  tran- 
subatantia/wnem  rein  esse  fiGtitiavn,,  rc-positionem  wperstitiosam,  idoZolatricam 
MS*  adomttoneui,  wl  sattem  pwiculosam,  quum  fiat  sine  verbo  Dei.  Me 
quoque  fistytonere  latim  oportuit  quid  sentirem.  Tmietti  nemmem  ex  Mis 
Mfll/eMdram  (because  thoy  spoke  in  Gorman),  libere  tamcn  sine  timore 
ojffcnsioniu,  illam  locakm  prcwentiam  damnavi:  adorationem  asserui  mihi 
ftsse  intolerabilem*  Cfrede  mihi,  in  ciusmodi  actionibus  opus  est  fortibus 
animis,  qui  olios  cmftnmnt.  .  «  .  Scriptum  deinde  a  Philippo  com,positum, 
qruod  ubi  Oranvellano  oblatum  est,  aspcris  verbis  repudi&vit,  quod  illi  tres 
deUdi  ad  nos  retufa'swnt.  ffmc  quumfiant  in  ipso  limine,  wgita  quantum  adhuc 
supersit  difficuttatix,  in  missa  privata,  8acrificio>  in  communicatione  cal-icte. 
Quid  si  ad  apertam  prwwntiw  cwi/esitionwi  wmretwr  ?  quanti  famultus  i 
(Oorpua  Jfrforniatorwrt,  xxxix,  215,  216). 


524  ITALIAN  LIBERAL  ROMAN  CATHOLICS 

the  Emperor.     But  compromise  failed  at  Eatisbon,  and 
there  was  no  further  hope  of  its  succeeding. 

The  decisive  character  of  the  Regensburg  conference 
was  seen  in  Italy  almost  at  once.  Its  failure  involved  the 
destruction  of  the  party  of  Italian  Eomanists  who  hoped  to 
end  the  religious  strife  by  a  compromise.  When  Contarini 
returned  to  Italy  he  found  that  his  influence  was  gone. 
He  was  rewarded  with  the  Government  of  Bologna,  which 
removed  him  from  the  centre  of  things.  He  died  soon 
after  (Aug.  24th,  1542),  leaving  none  behind  him  to  fill 
his  place.  Ghiberti  survived  him  only  sixteen  months. 
Caraffa  had  become  more  and  more  alienated  from  his 
early  friends.  Sadoleto,  Pole,  and  Morone  remained,  all  of 
them  men  of  intellect,  but  lacking  the  qualities  which  fit 
men  to  be  leaders  in  trying  times.  Pole  lived  to  make 
atonement  for  his  liberalism  by  hounding  on  the  perse- 
cutions in  England,  and  Morone  by  becoming  the  champion 
of  ultramontanism  at  the  close  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 
The  conception  of  a  Catholic  Eef ormation  disappeared ;  the 
idea  of  a  Counter-Eeformation  took  its  place. 


CHAPTEE  IV. 

IGNATIUS  LOYOLA  AND  THE  COMPANY  OF  JESUS.1 
§  1.  At  Manresa. 

THE  little  mountainous  province  of  Guipuzcoa,  lying  at  the 
corner  of  the  Bay  of  Biscay,  bordering  on  France,  was  the 
district  of  Spain  which  produced  one  of  the  greatest  of  her 
sons,  Inigo  de  Recalde  de  Loyola,  the  founder  of  the  Society 
of  Jesus.  The  tower  which  was  the  family  seat  still  stands, 
rough  and  windowless  as  a  Scottish  border  keep,  adorned 
with  one  ornament  only,  a  stone  above  the  doorway,  on 
which  are  carved  the  arms  of  the  family — two  wolves  in 
quest  of  prey.  Guipuzcoa  had  never  been  conquered  by 
the  Moors,  and  its  nobles,  poor  in  their  barren  highlands, 
boasted  that  the  bluest  Gothic  blood  ran  in  their  veins. 
The  Eecaldes  belonged  to  the  very  oldest  nobility  of  the 
district,  and  possessed  the  highly  valued  privilege  of  the 

1  SOXJJROBS  :  Monumenta  historica  Societatis  Jesu,  nunc  primum  edita  a 
JPatribus  ejusdem  Societatis  (Madrid,  1894,  etc.) ;  Cartaa  de  San  Ignacio  de 
Loyola,  fundador  de  la  Oompania  de  Jesus  (Madrid,  1874,  etc.) ;  G.  P 
MaflTei,  De  vita  et  morious  IgnaMi  Loyola,  qui  Societatein  Jesu  fundamt 
(Cologne,  1585) ;  Bibadeneyra,  Vida  del  JP.  Ignacio  de  Loyola  (Madrid, 
1094) ;  Orlandino,  Historia  Societatis  Jesu,  $ars  prima  siue  Ignatius,  etc. 
(Rome,  1616) ;  Braunsberger,  Petri  CcwMi,  tyistolto  et  Aeta  (Freiburg  i. 
B.  1896)  j  Decreta,  etc.,  Societctii$  Jew  (Avignon,  1827) ;  Constitutiones 
Societatis  Jesu  (Rome,  1558). 

LATER  BOOKS:  Huber,  Der  Jcswit-Orden  nach  seiner  Verfasswirig  und 
Doctrin,  Wirksamkeit  iwd  GescMcbte  characterisirt  (Berlin,  1873) ;  Gotheiu, 
Ignatius  von  Loyola  und  die  Gfegenreformation  (Halle,  3895);  Symonds, 
Jtenaittsance  in  Italy,  The  Catholic  Reaction  (London,  1886) ;  Cretinau-Joly, 
Histoire  reliffieuse  yolitigue  et  litttraire  de  U  Oompagnie  de  J&us  (Paris, 
1845-46) ;  Maiirice  Martel,  Ignace  de  Loyola,  flssai  de  psychologie  religieuae 
(Paris). 

025 


526      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE   COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

right  of  personal  summons  to  the  coronation  of  the  Kings 
of  Leon.  Their  younger  sons  were  welcomed  at  Court  aa 
pages,  and  then  as  soldiers;  and  the  young  Inigo  was  a 
page  at  the  Court  of  Ferdinand.  He  was  well  educated 
for  a  Spanish  noble;  could  read  and  write;  composed 
ballads ;  and  could  illuminate  manuscripts  with  miniatures. 
Most  of  his  spare  time  was  employed  in  reading  those 
romances  of  chivalry  then  very  popular.  When  older  he 
became  a  soldier  like  his  elder  brothers. 

In  1521,  when  twenty-eight  years  of  age  (b.  1493), 
he  was  the  youngest  officer  in  command  of  the  garrison  of 
Pampeluna,  ordered  to  withstand  a  combined  force  of  in- 
vading French  troops  and  some  revolting  Spaniards.  The 
enemy  appeared  before  the  place  in  such  overwhelming 
numbers  that  all  but  the  youngest  officer  wished  to 
surrender  without  a  struggle.  Inigo's  eloquence  persuaded 
the  garrison  to  attempt  a  desperate  defence.  No  priest 
was  among  the  soldiers ;  the  Spaniards,  according  to  their 
custom,  confessed  each  other,  and  were  ready  to  die  at 
their  posts.  A  bullet  struck .  the  young  officer  as  he  stood 
in  the  breach  encouraging  his  men.  His  fall  gave  the 
victory  to  the  besiegers. 

The  conspicuous  bravery  of  Inigo  had  won  the  respect 
of  his  enemies.  They  extricated  him  from  the  heap  of 
dead  under  which  he  was  buried,  and  conveyed  him  to  the 
old  family  castle.  There  his  shattered  leg  was  so  badly 
set  as  to  unfit  him  for  a  soldier's  career.  He  had  it  twice 
broken  and  twice  reset.  The  prolonged  torture  was  useless ; 
he  had  to  believe  that  he  would  never  fight  on  horseback 
again.  The  dream  of  taking  a  man's  part  in  the  conquests 
which  all  Spaniards  of  that  age  believed  lay  before  their 
country,  had  to  be  abandoned.  His  body  was  a  useless  log. 

But  Inigo  was  a  noble  of  the  Basque  provinces,  and 
possessed,  in  a  superlative  degree  it  was  to  be  discovered, 
the  characteristics  of  his  race  —  at  once  taciturn  and 
enthusiastic,  wildly  imaginative,  and  sternly  practical.  He 
has  himself  recorded  that,  as  soon  as  he  was  convinced  that 
he  could  never  become  a  distinguished  soldier,  lie  asked 


AT   MANRESA  527 

himself  whether  he  might  not  become  a  famous  saint  like 
Dominic  or  Francis,  and  that  the  question  arose  from  no 
spiritual  promptings,  hut  simply  from  the  determination  to 
win  fame  before  his  death.  As  he  lay  bedridden,  thinking 
much  and  dreaming  more,  it  suddenly  occurred  to  him 
that  no  one  could  become  a  saint  unless  he  lived  very  near 
God,  and  that  his  life  had  not  been  of  such  a  kind.  He  at 
once  resolved  that  he  would  change;  he  would  feed  on 
herbs  like  a  holy  hermit ;  he  would  go  to  Jerusalem  as  a 
devout  pilgrim.  This  vow,  he  tells  us,  was  the  earliest 
conscious  movement  of  his  soul  towards  God  His  reward 
came  soon  in  the  shape  of  his  first  revelation.  The  blessed 
Virgin,  with  the  Child  Jesus  in  her  arms,  appeared  to  him 
in  a  dream.  He  awoke,  hustled  out  of  bed,  dragged  him- 
self to  the  small  window  of  his  turret-room,  and  looked 
•  out  The  earth  was  dark,  an  obscure  mingling  of  black 
shadows ;  the  heavens  were  a  great  vault  of  deepest  blue 
strewn  with  innumerable  stars.  The  sight  was  a  parable 
and  an  inspiration.  "  How  dull  earth  is,"  he  cried,  "  how 
glorious  heaven ! "  He  felt  that  he  must  do  something  to 
get  nearer  God.  He  must  be  alone  in  some  holy  place  to 
think  things  out  with  his  own  soul.  His  brother's  servants 
hoisted  the  maimed  body  of  the  onco  brilliant  soldier  on 
an  ass,  one  foot  in  a  boot,  the  wounded  leg  still  swathed 
in  bandages  and  its  foot  in  a  large  soft  slipper,  and  Ifiigo 
left  the  old  castle  determined  to  live  a  hermit's  life  on 
Montserrat,  the  holy  hill  of  Aragon. 

There  in  the  church  of  Our  Lady  of  Montserrat  he 
resolved  to  dedicate  himself  to  her  service  with  all  the 
ceremonies  prescribed  in  that  masterbook  of  mediaeval 
chivalry,  Amadis  of  Gaul,  He  hung  his  arms  on  her 
altar,  and  throughout  the  long  night,  standing  or  kneeling, 
he  kept  his  watch,  consecrating  his  knightly  service  to  the 
Blessed  Virgin.  At  daybreak  he  donned  an  anchorite's 
dress,  gave  his  knightly  robes  to  the  first  beggar  he  met, 
and,  mounted  on  his  ass,  betook  himself  to  the  Dominican 
convent  of  Manresa,  no  longer  Iftigo  Eecalde  de  Loyola, 
but  simply  Ignatius, 


528      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE   COMPANY   OF  JESUS 

At  Manresa  he  practised  the  strictest  asceticism,  hoping 
to  become  in  heart  and  soul  fitted  for  the  saint  life  he 
wished  to  live.  Then  began  a  time -of  unexpected,  sore 
and  prolonged  spiritual  conflict,  not  unlike  what  Luther 
experienced  in  the  Erfurt  convent.  Who  was  he  and 
what  had  been  his  past  life  that  he  should  presumptuously 
think  that  God  would  ever  accept  him  and  number  him 
among  His  saints?  He  made  unwearied  use  of  all  the 
mediaeval  means  of  grace;  he  exhausted  the  resources  of 
the  confessional;  he  consulted  one  spiritual  guide  after 
another  without  experiencing  any  relief  to  the  doubts 
which  were  gnawing  at  his  soul.  The  whole  machinery  of 
the  Church  helped  him  as  little  as  it  had  Luther :  it  could 
not  give  peace  of  conscience.  He  has  placed  on  record 
that  the  only  real  help  he  received  during  this  prolonged 
period  of  mental  agony  came  from  an  old  woman.  Con- 
fession, instead  of  soothing  him,  rather  plunged  him  into  a 
sea  of  intolerable  doubt.  To  make  his  penitence  thorough, 
to  know  himself  as  he  really  was,  he  wrote  out  his 
confession  that  he  might  see  his  sins  staring  at  him  from 
the  written  page.  He  fasted  till  his  life  was  in  danger ; 
he  prayed  seven  times  and  scourged  himself  thrice  daily, 
but  found  no  peace.  He  tells  us  that  he  often  shrieked 
aloud  to  God,  crying  that  He  must  Himself  help  him,  for 
no  creature  could  bring  him  comfort.  No  task  would  be 
too  great  for  him,  he  exclaimed,  if  he  could  only  see  God. 
"  Show  me,  O  Lord,  where  I  can  find  Thee ;  I  will  follow 
like  a  dog,  if  I  can  only  learn  the  way  of  salvation."  His 
anguish  prompted  him  to  suicide.  More  than  once,  he 
says,  he  opened  his  window  with  the  intention  of  casting 
himself  down  headlong  and  ending  his  life  then  and  there ; 
but  the  fear  of  his  sins  and  their  consequences  restrained 
him.  He  had  read  of  a  saint  who  had  vowed  to  fast  until 
he  had  been  vouchsafed  the  Beatific  Vision,  so  he  com- 
municated at  the  altar  and  fasted  for  a  whole  week ;  but 
all  ended  in  vanity  and  vexation  of  spirit. 

Then,  with  the  sudden  certainty  of  a  revelation,  he 
resolved  to  throw  himself  on  the  mercy  of  God,  whose  long- 


AT   MANRESA  529 

suffering  pity  would  pardon  Ms  sins.  This  was  the  crisis. 
Peace  came  at  last,  and  his  new  spiritual  life  began.  He 
thought  no  longer  about  his  past ;  he  no  longer  mentioned 
former  sins  in  his  confessions ;  the  certainty  of  pardon  had 
begun  a  new  life  within  him ;  he  could  start  afresh.  It  is 
impossible  to  read  his  statements  without  being  struck  with 
the  similarity  between  the  spiritual  experience  of  Ignatius 
and  what  Luther  calls  Justification  by  Faith ;  the  words 
used  by  the  two  great  religious  leaders  were  different,  but 
the  experience  of  pardon  won  by  throwing  one's  self  upon 
the  mercy  of  God  was  the  same. 

This  new  spiritual  life  was,  as  in  Luther's  case,  one  of 
overflowing  gladness.  Meditation  and  introspection,  once 
a  source  of  anguish,  became  the  spring  of  overpowering  joy. 
Ignatius  felt  that  he  was  making  progress.  "God,"  he 
says,  "  dealt  with  me  as  a  teacher  with  a  scholar  ;  I  cannot 
doubt  that  He  had  always  been  with  me."  Many 
historical  critics  from  Eanke  downwards  have  been  struck 
with  the  likeness  of  the  experience  gone  through  by  Luther 
and  Ignatius.  One  great  contrast  manifested  itself  at 
once.  The  humble-minded  and  quiet  German,  when  the 
new  life  awoke  in  him,  set  himself  unostentatiously  to  do 
the  common  tasks  which  daily  life  brought ;  the  fiery  and 
ambitious  Spaniard  at  once  tried  to  conquer  all  mysteries, 
to  take  them  by  assault  as  if  they  were  a  beleaguered 
fortress. 

He  had  his  visions  as  before,  but  they  were  no  longer 
temptations  of  Satan,  the  source  of  doubt  and  torture.  He 
believed  that  he  could  actually  see  with  bodily  eyes  divine 
mysteries  which  the  intelligence  could  not  comprehend. 
After  lengthened  prayer,  every  faculty  concentrated  in  one 
prolonged  gaze,  he  felt  assured  that  he  could  see  the 
n^ystery  of  Transubstantiation  actually  taking  place.  At 
the  supreme  moment  he  saw  Christ  in  the  form  of  a  white 
ray  pass  into  the  consecrated  bread  and  transform  it  into 
the  Divine  Victim  (Host),  He  declared  that  in  moods  of 
exaltation  the  most  impenetrable  mysteries  of  theology,  the 
Incarnation  of  our  Lord,  the  Holy  Trinity,  the  personality 


530      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE  COMPANY   OF  JESUS 

of  Satan,  were  translated  into  visible  symbols  which  made 
them  plainly  understood.  These  visions  so  fascinated  him, 
that  he  began  to  write  them  down  in  simple  fashion  for 
his  own  satisfaction  and  edification. 

In  all  this  the  student  of  the  religious  life  of  Spain 
during  the  sixteenth  century  will  recognise  the  mystical 
devotion  which  was  then  characteristic  of  the  people  of  the 
Peninsula. "  The  Spanish  character,  whether  we  study  it  in 
the  romances  of  chivalry  which  the  land  produced,  or  in 
the  writing  of  her  religious  guides,  was  impregnated  by 
enthusiasm.  It  was  passionate,  exalted,  entirely  penetrated 
and  possessed  by  the  emotion  which  for  the  time  dominated 
it.  In  no  country  were  the  national  and  religious  senti- 
ment so  thoroughly  fused  and  united.  The  long  wars 
with  the  Moors,  and  their  successful  issue  in  the  conquest 
of  Grenada,  had  made  religion  and  patriotism  one  and  the 
same  thing.  Priests  invariably  accompanied  troops  on  the 
march,  and  went  into  battle  with  them.  St.  James  of 
Compostella  was  believed  to  traverse  the  country  to  bring 
continual  succour  to  the  soldiers  who  charged  the  Moors 
invoking  his  name.  A  victory  was  celebrated  by  a  solemn 
procession  in  honour  of  God  and  of  the  Virgin,  who  had 
delivered  the  enemy  into  the  hands  of  the  faithful.  This 
intensity  of  the  Spanish  character,  this  temperament  dis- 
tinguished by  force  rather  than  moderation,  easily  gave  birth 
to  superstition  and  burning  devotion,  and  both  furnished 
a  fruitful  soil  for  the  extravagances  of  Mysticism,  which 
affected  every  class  in  society.  Statesmen  like  Xiiuenes, 
no  less  than  the  common  people,  were  influenced  by  the 
exhortations  or  predictions  of  the  Beatce, — women  who  had 
devoted  themselves  to  a  religious  life  without  formally 
entering  into  a  convent, — and  changed  their  policy  in  conse- 
quence. It  was  universally  believed  that  such  devotees, 
men  and  women,  could  be  illuminated  divinely,  and  could 
attain  to  a  state  of  familiar  intercourse  with  God,  if  not  to 
an  actual  union  with  Him,  by  giving  themselves  to  prayer, 
by  abstinence  from  all  worldly  thoughts  and  actions,  and 
by  practising  the  most  rigid  asceticism.  It  was  held  that 


AT  MANRESA  531 

those  who  had  attained  to  this  state  of  mystical  union 
received  in  dreams,  trances,  and  ecstasies,  visions  of  the 
divine  mysteries. 

The  heads  of  the  Spanish  Inquisition  viewed  this 
Mysticism,  so  characteristic  of  the  Peninsula,  with  grave 
anxiety.  The  thought  that  ardent  believers  could  by  any 
personal  process  attain  direct  intercourse,  even  union  with 
God,  apart  from  the  ordinary  machinery  of  the  Church,  cut 
at  the  roots  of  the  mediaeval  penitential  system,  which 
always  presupposed  that  a  priestly  mediation  was  required. 
If  God  can  be  met  in  the  silence  of  the  believer's  soul, 
where  is  the  need  for  the  priest,  who,  according  to 
mediaeval  ideas,  must  always  stand  between  the  penitent 
and  God,  and  by  his  action  take  the  hand  of  faith  and  lay 
it  in  the  hand  of  the  divine  omnipotence  ?  Other  dangers 
appeared.  The  Mystic  professed  to  draw  his  knowledge 
of  divine  things  directly  from  the  same  source  as  the 
Church,  and  his  revelations  had  the  same  authority.  It  is 
true  that  most  of  the  Spanish  Mystics,  like  St.  Teresa,  had 
humility  enough  to  place  themselves  under  ecclesiastical 
direction,  but  this  was  not  the  case  with  all.  Some 
prophets  and  prophetesses  declared  themselves  to  be 
independent,  and  these  illuminati,  as  they  were  called, 
spread  disaffection  and  heresy.  Hence  the  attitude  of  the 
Inquisition  towards  Mystics  of  all  kinds  was  one  of 
suspicious  watchfulness.  St.  Teresa,  St.  Juan  de  la  Cruz, 
Ignatius  himself,  were  all  objects  of  distrust,  and  did  not 
win  ecclesiastical  approbation  until  after  long  series  of 
tribulations. 

It  is  necessary  to  insist  on  the  fact  that  Ignatius  had 
a  deeply  rooted  connection  with  the  Spanish  Mystics. 
His  visions,  his  methods,  the  Spiritual  Exercises  themselves, 
cannot  be  understood  apart  from  their  intimate  relations 
to  that  Mysticism  which  was  characteristic  of  the  religion 
of  his  land  and  of  his  age. 

Ignatius  was  no  ordinary  Mystic,  however.  What 
seemed  the  whole  or  the  end  to  Teresa  or  Osuna  was  to 
him  only  a  part,  or  the  moans  to  something  bettor.  While 


532      IGNATIUS    LOYOLA   AND   THE   COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

he  received  and  rejoiced  in  the  visions  vouchsafed  to  him, 
he  practised  the  keenest  introspection.  He  observed  and 
analysed  the  moods  and  states  of  mind  in  which  the  visions 
came  most  readily  or  the  reverse,  and  made  a  note  of  them 
all.  He  noted  the  postures  and  gestures  of  the  body  which 
helped  or  hindered  the  reception  of  visions  or  profitable 
meditation  on  what  had  been  revealed.  He  saw  that  he 
could  reproduce  or  at  least  facilitate  the  return  of  his 
visions  by  training  and  mastering  his  mind  and  body,  and 
by  subjecting  them  to  a  spiritual  drill  which  might  be 
compared  with  the  exercises  used  to  train  a  soldier  in 
the  art  of  war.  Out  of  these  visions,  introspections, 
comparisons,  experiments  experienced  in  solitude  at 
Manresa,  came  by  long  process  of  gradual  growth  and 
elaboration  the  famous  Spiritual  Exercises,  which  may  be 
called  the  soul  of  the  Counter-Keformation,  as  Luther's 
book  on  The  Liberty  of  the  Christian  Man  contains  the 
essence  of  Protestantism. 

Ignatius  spent  nearly  a  year  at  Manresa.  He  had 
accomplished  his  object — to  find  himself  at  peace  with 
God.  It  remained  to  fulfil  his  vow  of  pilgrimage.  He 
laid  aside  his  hermit's  garb,  and  with  it  his  ascetic 
practices;  but  he  believed  it  to  be  his  duty  to  renounce 
all  property  and  live  absolutely  poor.  He  left  all  the 
money  he  possessed  upon  a  bench  and  walked  to  Barce- 
lona, supporting  himself  by  begging.  There  he  was  given 
a  passage  to  Venice,  and  thence  he  sailed  for  the  Holy 
Land.  His  enthusiasm,  and  above  all  his  project  for 
beginning  a  mission  among  the  Turks,  alarmed  the  chief  of 
the  Franciscans  in  Jerusalem,  who  insisted  on  shipping 
him  back  to  Italy.  He  reached  Barcelona  determined 
to  pursue  such  studies  as  would  enable  him  to  know 
theology.  He  had  never  learned  Latin,  the  gateway  to  all 
theological  learning,  and  the  man  of  thirty  entered  school, 
and  seated  himself  on  the  bench  with  boys.  Thence  he  went 
to  Alcala  and  to  Salamanca,  and  attended  classes  in  these 
towns.  Before  be  had  quitted  Manresa  he  had  begun  to 
speak  to  others  about  his  visions,  and  to  persuade  them  to 


IGNATIUS   AT   PARIS  533 

submit  themselves  to  the  spiritual  drill  of  his  Exercises. 
Some  ladies  in  Barcelona  had  become  his  devoted  disciples. 
At  Alcala  and  Salamanca  he  had  tried  to  make  converts 
to  his  system.  The  ecclesiastical  authorities  of  the  districts, 
fearing  that  this  was  a  new  kind  of  dangerous  Mysticism, 
seized  him,  and  he  was  twice  incarcerated  in  the  episcopal 
Inquisition.  It  would  probably  have  fared  ill  with  him 
had  it  not  been  for  the  intercession  of  some  of  the 
distinguished  ladies  who  had  been  his  disciples.  His 
imprisonment  in  both  cases  was  short,  but  he  was  for- 
bidden to  discriminate  between  mortal  and  venial  sins  (a 
thing  essential  if  he  acted  as  a  spiritual  director)  until 
he  had  studied  theology  for  four  years. 

§  2.  Ignatius  at  Paris. 

With  prompt  military  obedience  Ignatius  decided  to 
study  at  Paris.  He  reached  the  city  in  the  beginning  of 
1528,  driving  an  ass  laden  with  his  books  and  clothes.  He 
went  naturally  to  the  College  Montaigii,  which  under  its 
Principal,  Noel  Beda,  was  the  most  orthodox  in  Paris  ;  but 
with  his  well  known  determination  to  see  and  judge 
everything  for  himself,  he  soon  afterwards  obtained 
leave  to  reside  in  the  College  Ste.  Barbe,  one  of  the 
most  liberal,  in  which  George  Buchanan  was  then  a 
Regent.1 

1  "The  residence  of  Ignatius  Loyola  in  the  College  of  Ste.  Barbe  is 
connected  with  an  incident  which  is  at  once  illustrative  of  his  own  spirit 
and  of  the  manners  of  the  time.  He  had  come  to  Paris  for  the  purpose  of 
study;  but  he  could  not  resist  the  temptation  to  make  converts  to  his 
groat  mission.  Among  these  converts  was  a  Spaniard  named  Amador,  a 
promising  student  in  philosophy  in  Ste.  Barbe.  This  Amador,  Loyola  had 
transformed  from  a  diligent  student  into  a  visionary  as  wild  as  himself, 
to  the  intense  indignation  of  the  University,  and  especially  of  his  own 
countrymen.  About  the  same  time  Loyola  craved  permission  to  attend  Ste. 
Barbe  as  a  student  of  philosophy.  He  was  admitted  on  the  express  condition 
that  he  should  make  no  attempt  on  the  consciences  of  his  fellows.  Loyola 
kept  his  word  as  far  as  Amador  was  concerned,  but  he  could  not  resist 
the  temptation  to  communicate  his  visions  to  others.  The  Eegent  thrice 
warned  him  of  what  would  be  the  result,  and  at  length  made  his  complaint 


534      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   ABTD  THE   COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

His  sojourn  in  Paris  could  not  fail  to  make  a  deep 
impression  on  the  middle-aged  Spaniard,  consumed  with 
zeal  to  maintain  in  its  minutest  details  the  old  religion, 
and  to  destroy  heresy  and  disobedience.  Two  passions 
possessed  him,  both  eminently  Spanish.  He  could  say 
with  St.  Teresa  that  he  suffered  so  much  to  see  the 
Lutherans,  whose  baptism  had  rendered  them  members  of 
the  Church,  lose  themselves  unhappily,  that  had  he  several 
lives  he  would  willingly  give  them  to  deliver  only  one  of 
them  from  the  horrible  torments  which  awaited  them ; 
but  he  also  believed  that  it  was  for  God  a  point  of  honour 
to  avenge  Himself  on  those  who  despised  His  word,  and 
that  it  belonged  to  all  the  faithful  to  be  instruments  of  the 
vengeance  of  the  Almighty. 

His  keen  practical  nature  grasped  the  religious  situa- 
tion in  Paris  (City  and  University),  and  suggested  his 
lifework.  He  saw  the  strength  of  the  Eoman  Catholic 
democracy  face  to  face  with  the  Eeformation,  and  to 
what  power  it  might  grow  if  it  were  only  organised  and 
subjected  to  a  more  than  military  discipline.  Ignatius 
was  in  Paris  during  the  years  when  partisan  feelings 
ran  riot. 

Francis  I.  was  by  taste  and  training  a  man  of  the 
^Renaissance.  It  pleased  him  to  be  called  and  to  imagine 
himself  to  be  the  patron  of  men  of  letters.  He  was  as 
devoted  as  his  selfish,  sensual  nature  permitted  him  to  be, 
to  his  sister  Marguerite  d'AngoulSme,  and  for  her  sake 

to  the  Principal  (Jacques  de  Gouve'a).  Gonve'a  was  furious,  and  gave 
orders  that  next  day  Loyola  should  be  subjected  to  the  most  disgraceful 
punishment  the  College  could  inflict.  This  running  of  the  gauntlet,  known 
as  la  satte,  was  administered  in  the  following  manner.  After  dinnei-,  when 
all  the  scholars  were  present,  the  masters,  each  with  his  ferule  in  his  hand, 
ranged  themselves  in  a  double  row.  The  delinquent,  stripped  to  the  waist, 
was  then  made  to  pass  between  them,  receiving  a  blow  across  the  shoulders 
from  each.  This  was  the  ignominious  punishment  to  which  Loyola, 
then  in  his  fortieth  year,  as  a  member  of  the  College,  was  bound  to  submit. 
The  tidings  of  what  was  in  store  for  him  reached  his  ears,  and  in  a  private 
interview  he  contrived  to  turn  away  GouveVs  wrath.  .  .  .  This  was  in  1529, 
the  year  of  Buchanan's  entrance  into  St<\  Barbe  M  (P.  Hume  Brown,  George 
Xuchanan,  ffimwnist  and  Reformer,  Edinburgh,  1890,  pp.  62/.). 


IGNATIUS   AT   PARIS  535 

countenanced  such  Reformers  as  Lef  ^vre  and  the  "  group  of 
Meaux."  He  had  a  grudge  against  the  Sorbonne  and  the 
Parlement  of  Paris  for  their  attempts  to  baffle  the  Concordat 
of  1516;  while  he  recognised  the  power  which  these 
two  formidable  associations  possessed.  He  was  an  anti- 
Sorbonnist,  who  feared  the  Sorbonne  (the  great  theological 
faculty  of  the  University  of  Paris),  and  could  not  help 
displaying  his  dread.  He  had  long  dreamed  of  insti- 
tuting a  ColUge  de  France,  a  free  association  of  learned 
teachers,  men  who  could  introduce  the  New  Learning  and 
form  a  counterpoise  to  the  Sorbonne  which  dominated  the 
University.  The  project  took  many  forms,  and  never 
came  to  full  fruition  until  long  after  the  days  of  Francis ; 
but  the  beginnings  were  sufficient  to  encourage  Reformers 
and  to  irritate  to  fury  the  supporters  of  the  Sorbonne. 
The  theological  faculty  of  the  University  was  then  ruled 
by  Noel  Beda,  a  man  of  no  great  intellectual  capacity, 
who  hated  everything  which  seemed  to  menace  medievalism. 
Beda,  by  his  dogged  courage,  by  his  unflinching  determina- 
tion, by  his  intense  conviction  that  he  was  in  the  right, 
was  able  to  wage  a  pitiless  warfare  against  the  New 
Learning  and  every  appearance  of  religious  reform.  He 
was  able  to  thwart  the  King  repeatedly,  and  more  than 
once  to  attack  him  through  Marguerite,  his  sister.  His 
whole  attitude  and  activity  made  him  a  forerunner  of  the 
Romanist  League  of  two  generations  later,  and,  like 
the  Leaguers,  he  based  his  power  on  organising  the 
Romanist  fanaticism  lying  in  the  populace  of  Paris  and 
among  the  students  of  the  Sorbonne.  All  this  Loyola 
saw  under  his  eyes  during  his  stay  in  Paris.  He  heard 
the  students  of  the  Sorbonne  singing  their  ferocious 
song : 

w  Prions  tous  le  Koi  de  gloire 
Qu'il  confonde  ces  chiens  mauldicts, 
Afin  qu'il  n'eii  soit  plus  m&noire, 
3Sfon  plus  que  de  vielz  os  pourris. 
Au  feu,  au  feu  1  c'est  leur  repere 
Fais-en  justice  1    Dieu  1'a  permye"; 


536      IGNATIUS  LOYOLA  AND  THE  COMPANY   OF  JESUS 
and  the  defiant  answer : 

**  La  Sorbonne,  la  bigotte, 

La  Sorbonne  se  taira  1 
Son  grand  hoste,  1'Aristote, 
De  la  bande  s'ostera ! 
Et  son  escot,  quoi  qu'il  eoste, 
Jamais  ne  la  softlera  1 

La  Sorbonne,  la  bigotte, 

La  Sorbonne  se  taira  I 
•  .  .  •  • 

La  saincte  Eecriture  toute 
Purement  se  preschera, 
Et  toute  doctrine  sotte 
Des  hommes  on  oublira ! 

La  Sorbonne,  la  bigotte, 

La  Sorbonne  se  taira !  *  * 

Amidst  this  seething  crowd  of  warring  students  and 
teachers,  Ignatius  went,  silent,  watchful,  observing  every- 
thing. He  cared  little  for  theological  speculation,  being  a 
true  and  typical  Spaniard.  The  doctrines  of  the  mediaeval 
theology  were  simply  military  commands  to  his  disciplined 
mind;  things  to  be  submitted  to  whether  understood  or 
not.  Heresy  was  mutiny  in  the  ranks.  He  had  a 
marvellous  natural  capacity  for  penetrating  the  souls  of 
others,  and  had  cultivated  and  strengthened  it  by  his 
habits  of  daily  introspection  and  of  writing  down  whatever, 
good  or  bad,  passed  through  his  own  soul.  It  is  told  of 
him  that  in  company  he  talked  little,  but  quietly  noted 
what  others  said,  and  that  he  had  infinite  genius  for 
observing  and  storing  details.2  He  sought  to  learn  the 
conditions  of  life  and  thought  outside  Paris  and  France, 
and  made  journeys  to  the  Low  Countries  and  to  England, 
saying  little,  thinking  much,  observing  more.  All  the 
time  he  was  winning  the  confidence  of  fellow-students,  and 

1  Bulletin  de  la  SovteU  fa  Z'EKstoire  de  Proteatantisme  tfranpctfo,  xii.  129. 

2  One  of  Loyola's  earliest  biographers,  Ribadeueyra,  dwells  on  the  eager- 
ness with  which  Ignatius  welcomed  the  slightest  details  of  the  life  of  his 
disciples  in  the  Indies,  and  how  he  one  day  said  :  "  I  would  assuredly  like 
to  know,  if  it  were  possible,  how  many  fleas  bit  them  eacb  night." 


IGNATIUS   AT   PARIS  537 

taking  infinite  pains  to  do  so — weighing  and  testing  their 
character  and  gifts.  He  played  billiards  with  some,  paid 
the  college  expenses  of  others,  and  was  slowly,  patiently 
making  his  selection  of  the  young  men  whom  he  thought 
fit.  to  be  the  confidants  of  his  plans  for  the  regeneration  of 
Christendom,  and  to  be  associates  with  him  in  the  discipline 
which  the  Exercises  gave  to  his  own  soul.1 

He  finally  chose  a  little  band  of  nine  disciples — Peter 
Faber,  Diego  Lainez,  Francis  Xavier,  Alonzo  Salmeron, 
Nicholas  Boabdilla,  Simon  Eodriguez,  Paul  Broet,  Claude 
Jay,  and  Jean  Codure.  Codure  died  early.  Faber,  the 
first  selected,  was  a  Savoyard,  the  son  of  a  poor  peasant, 
with  the  unbending  will  and  fervent  spiritual  imagina- 
tion of  a  highlander.  No  one  of  the  band  was  more 
devoted  to  his  leader.  Francis  Xavier  belonged,  like 
Loyola  himself,  to  an  ancient  Basque  family;  none  was 
harder  to  win  than  this  proud  young  Spaniard.  Lainez 
and  Salmeron  were  Castilians,  who  had  been  fellow- 
students  with  Ignatius  at  Alcala.  Lainez  had  always 
been  a  prodigy  of  learning,  "  a  young  man  with  the  brain 
of  an  ancient  sage."  He,  too,  had  been  hard  to  win,  for 
his  was  not  a  nature  to  kindle  easily ;  but,  once  subdued 
he  was  the  most  important  member  of  the  band.  Salmeron, 
his  early  companion,  was  as  impetuous  and  fiery  as  Lainez 
was  cool  and  logical.  He  was  the  eloquent  preacher  of 
the  company.  Boabdilla,  also  a  Spaniard,  was  a  man  of 
restless  energy,  who  needed  the  strictest  discipline  to  make 
him  keep  touch  with  his  brothers.  Eodriguez,  a  Portuguese, 
and  Jay,  from  Geneva,  were  young  men  of  insinuating 
manners,  and  were  the  destined  diplomatists  of  the  littlo 
company.  Broet,  a  phlegmatic  Netherlander  among  these 
fiery  southerners,  endeared  himself  to  all  of  them  by  his 
sweet  purity  of  soul. 

Such  were  the  men  whom  Ignatius  gathered  together 
on  the  Feast  of  the  Ascension  of  Mary  in  1534  in  the 

1  Loyola  had  long  abandoned  the  vow  of  poverty ;  his  faithful  disciples, 
the  circle  of  Barcelona  ladies,  «ont  him  supplies  of  money,  and  he  received 
sums  from  Spanish  merchants  in  France  and  the  Low  Countries. 


538      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE   COMPANY   OF  JESUS 

Church  of  St.  Mary  of  Montmartre,  then  outside  the  walls 
of  Paris.  There  they  vowed  that  if  no  insuperable 
difficulty  prevented,  they  would  go  together  to  Palestine 
to  work  for  the  good  of  mankind.  If  this  became  im- 
possible, they  would  ask  the  Pope  to  absolve  them  from 
their  vow  and  betake  themselves  to  whatever  work  for  the 
good  of  souls  His  Holiness  directed  them  to  do.  No  Order 
was  founded ;  no  vows  of  poverty  and  obedience  were  taken  ; 
the  young  men  were  a  band  of  students  who  looked  on 
each  other  as  brothers,  and  who  promised  to  leave  family 
and  friends,  and, "  without  superfluous  money,"  work  together 
for  a  regeneration  of  the  Church.  Faber,  already  in  priest's 
orders,  celebrated  Mass;  the  company  dined  together  at 
St.  Denys.  Such  was  the  quiet  beginning  of  what  grew 
to  be  the  Society  of  Jesus. 

The  companions  parted  for  a  season  to  meet  again  at 
Venice. 

§  3.   The  Spiritual  Exercises. 

All  the  nine  associates  had  submitted  themselves  to 
the  spiritual  guidance  of  Ignatius,  and  had  all  been  sub- 
jected to  the  training  contained  in  the  Exercitia  Spiritualia. 
It  is  probable  that  this  manual  of  military  drill  for  the 
soul  had  not  been  perfected  at  the  date  of  the  meeting  at 
Montuaiartre  (15  34),  for  we  know  that  Loyola  worked  at 
it  from  1522  on  to  1548,  when  it  was  approved  by  Pope 
Paul  ra. ;  but  it  may  be  well  at  this  stage  to  give  sonic 
account  of  this  marvellous  book,  which  was  destined  to 
have  such  important  results  for  the  Counter-Reformation.1 

The  thought  that  the  spiritual  senses  and  faculties 
might  be  strengthened  and  stimulated  by  the  continuous 
repetition  of  a  prescribed  course  of  prayer  and  meditation, 

1  The  JBxercitta  Spirituatw,  S.  P.  Ignatii  Zoyofa,  Fundatoris  OrMnis 
SotietotiB  Jesu,  and  their  indispensable  companion  the  Directorium  in 
JSxertitia  tSpirituatia  B.  P.  N.  JCgnatn,  are  to  be  found  in  vol.  iv.  of  the 
Insti.  Soc.  Jem.  The  editions  used  here  are,  of  the  Exercises,  that  of 
Antwerp,  1676,  and  of  the  Directory,  that  of  Borne,  1615. 


THE   SPIRITUAL   EXERCISES  539 

was  not  a  new  one.  The  German  Mystics  of  the  fourteenth 
century,  to  name  no  others,  had  put  their  converts  through 
such  a  discipline,  and  the  practice  was  not  unusual  among 
the  Dominicans.  It  is  most  likely  that  a  book  of  this  kind, 
the  Exercitatorio  dela  vida  spirital  of  Garcia  de  Cisneros, 
Abbot  of  the  Monastery  of  Montserrat  (1500),  had  been 
studied  by  Ignatius  while  he  was  at  Manresa.  But  this 
detracts  nothing  from  the  striking  and  unique  originality 
of  the  Exercitia  Spiritualia\  they  stand  alone  in  plan, 
contents,  and  intended  result.1  They  were  the  outcome  of 
Loyola's  protracted  spiritual  struggles,  and  of  his  cool  intro- 
spection of  his  own  soul  during  these  months  of  doubt  and 
anguish.  Their  evident  intention  is  to  guide  the  soul 
through  the  long  series  of  experiences  which  Loyola  had 
endured  unaided,  and  to  lead  it  to  the  peace  which  he  had 
found. 

It  is  universally  admitted  that  Ignatius  had  always 
before  him  the  conception  of  military  drill.  He  wished  to 
discipline  the  soul  as  the  drill-sergeant  moulds  the  body. 
The  Exercises  are  not  closet-rules  for  solitary  believers 
seeking  to  rise  to  communion  with  God  by  a  ladder  of 
meditation.  A  guide  was  indispensable,  the  Master  of  the 
Exercises,  who  had  himself  conquered  all  the  intricacies  of 
the  method,  and  who,  besides,  must  have  as  intimate  a 
knowledge  as  it  was  possible  to  acquire  of  the  details  of 
the  spiritual  strength  and  weakness  of  his  pupil.  It  was 
the  easier  to  have  this  knowledge,  as  the  disciple  must  be 

1 A  careful  study  of  the  ^Exercises,  of  the  Directory,  of  Loyola's  correspond- 
ence, and  of  his  sayings  recorded  by  early  and  contemporary  biographers, 
has  convinced  me  that  the  book  was  mainly  constructed  out  of  the  abundant 
notes  which  Loyola  took  of  his  own  inward  experiences  at  Manresa,  and 
that  the  only  book  he  used  in  compiling  it  was  the  De  Jmitatione  Christi 
of  Thomas  a  Kempis— a  book  which  Ignatius  believed  to  have  been  written 
by  Gorson.  We  know  otherwise  how  highly  Ignatius  prized  the  De  Imita- 
tionc.  When  he  visited  the  Abbey  of  Monte  Casino  he  took  with  him  as 
many  copies  as  there  were  monks  in  tlio  monastery  ;  it  was  the  one  volume 
which  he  kept  on  the  small  table  at  his  bedside  ;  and  it  was  the  only  book 
which  the  neophyte  was  permitted  to  read  during  the  first  week  of  the 
Exercises  :  "  si  tamen  instructor!  videbitur,  posset  in  prima  hebdomada  legera 
librum  Gersows  de  Imitatione  Christi  "  (Directory,  iii.  2). 


540      IGNATIUS  LOYOLA   AND   THE  COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

nore  than  half  won  before  he  is  invited  to  pass  through 
the  drill.  He  must  have  submitted  to  one  of  the  fathers 
in  confession ;  he  must  be  made  to  understand  the  absolute 
necessity  of  abandoning  himself  to  the  exercises  with  his 
whole  .heart  and  soul ;  he  must  promise  absolute  submission 
to  the  orders  of  the  director ;  he  must  by  frequent  con- 
fession reveal  the  recesses  of  his  soul,  and  describe  the 
most  trivial  thoughts  which  flit  through  it ;  above  all,  he 
must  enter  on  his  prolonged  task  in  a  state  of  the  liveliest 
expectation  of  the  benefits  to  be  derived  from  his  faithful 
performance  of  the  prescribed  exercises.1  A  large,  though 
strictly  limited,  discretion  is  permitted  to  the  Master  of  the 
Exercises  in  the  details  of  the  training  he  insists  upon. 

The  course  of  drill  extends  over  four  weeks  2  (twenty- 
five  days).  It  includes  prolonged  and  detailed  meditations 
on  four  great  subjects : — sin  and  conscience ;  the  earthly 
Kingdom  of  Christ ;  the  Passion  of  Jesus ;  and  the  Love 
of  God  with  the  Glory  of  the  Eisen  Lord.3  During  all 
this  time  the  pupil  must  live  in  absolute  solitude.  Neither 
sight  nor  sound  from  the  world  of  life  and  action  must  be 
allowed  to  enter  and  disturb  him.  He  is  exhorted  to  purge 
his  mind  of  every  thought  but  the  meditation  on  which  he 
is  engaged;  to  exert  all  his  strength  to  make  his  intro- 
spection vivid  and  his  converse  with  the  Deity  unimpeded. 

1  Cfl  Directory,  i.  ii.  v. 

2  It  is  explained  that  by  "week"  is  meant  not  a  space  of  time,  seven 
days,  but  a  distinct  subject  of  meditation.     The  drill  may  be  finished  within 
seven  or  eight  days  ;  it  may  have  to  be  prolonged  beyond  the  twenty-five. 
The  first  meditation  is  the  basis  of  all,  and  it  may  have  to  be  repeated  over 
and  over  again  until  the  soul  is  sufficiently  bruised  (Directory,  xi.  1), 

3  "Prima  continet  considerationem  peccatorum,  ut  eorum  foeditatem 
cognoscamus,  vereque  detestemur  cum  dolore,  et  satisfactions  convenient!. 
Secunda  proponit  vitam  Christi  ad  exeitandum  in  nobis  desiderium  ac 
studium  earn  imitandi.      Quam  imitationem  ut  melius  perficiamus,  pro- 
ponitur  etiam  modus  eligendi  vel  vitse  statum,  qui  sit  maxime  ex  volunttite 
Dei ;  vel  si  jam  eligi  non  possit,  dantur  qusedam  monita  ad  eum  in  quo 
quisque  sit,  reformandum.    Tertia  continet  Passionom  Christi,  qua  miseratio, 
dolor,  confusio  genera tur,  et  illud  imitationis  desiderium  una  cum.  Dei  o,more 
vehementius  inflammatur.      Quarta  demum  eat  do  Kcsurrecfciono  Christi, 
ejusque  gloriosis  apparitionibus,  et  de  beneficiis,  et  similibus,  qua  pertinent 
ad  Dei  amorem  in  nobis  excitandum  "  (Directory,  xi.  2). 


THE   SPIRITUAL   EXERCISES  541 

True  meditation,  according  to  Ignatius,  ought  to  include 
four  things — a  preparatory  prayer ;  prceludia,  or  the  ways 
of  attuning  the  mind  and  sense  in  order  to  bring  methodi- 
cally and  vividly  some  past  historical  scene  or  embodiment 
of  doctrine  before  the  soul  of  the  pupil ;  puncta,  or  definite 
heads  of  each  meditation  on  which  the  thoughts  are  to  be 
concentrated,  and  on  which  memory,  intellect,  and  will  are 
to  be  individually  exercised ;  colloguia,  or  ecstatic  converse 
with  God,  without  which  no  meditation  is  supposed  to  be 
complete,  and  in  which  the  pupil,  having  placed  the 
crucifix  before  him,  talks  to  God  and  hears  His  voice 
answering  him. 

When  the  soul's  progress  on  the  long  spiritual  journey 
in  which  it  is  led  during  these  meditations  is  studied,  one 
can  scarcely  fail  to  note  the  crass  materialism  which  en- 
velops it  at  every  step.  The  pupil  is  required  to  see  in 
the  mirror  of  his  imagination  the  boundless  flames  of  hell, 
and  souls  encased  in  burning  bodies ;  to  hear  the  shrieks, 
howlings,  and  blasphemies ;  to  smell  the  sulphur  and  intoler- 
able stench ;  to  taste  the  saltness  of  the  tears,  and  to  feel 
the  scorching  touch  of  the  flames.1  When  the  scene  in 
the  Garden  of  Gethsemane  is  the  subject  of  meditation,  he 
must  have  in  the  camera  obscura  of  his  imagination  a 
garden,  large  or  small,  see  its  enclosing  walls,  gaze  and 
gaze  till  he  discerns  where  Christ  is,  where  the  Apostles 
sleep,  perceive  the  drops  of  sweat,  touch  the  clothes  of  our 
Lord.2  When  he  thinks  of  the  Nativity,  he  must  conjure 
up  the  figures  of  Joseph,  Mary,  the  Child,  and  a  maid- 
servant,  hear  their  homely  family  talk,  see  them  going 

1  "  Punctum  primum  est,  spectare  per  imaginationem  vasta  inferornm 
inccndia,  et  anirnas  igncis  quibusdam  corporibns,  velut  ergastnlis  inclusas. 
Secunduiin,   audire  iniaginarie,    planctus,    ejulatus,    vooiferationes,  atque 
blasphemias  iu  Christum  et  Sanctos  ojus  illinc  erumpentes.      Tcrtinm, 
imaginario  etiam  olfactu  funmm,  sulphur,  et  sentinee  cujusdam  seu  fneuis 
atque  putredinis  graveolentiam  persentire.    Quartum,  gustaro  similiter  res 
amarissimas,  ut  laelirymas,  rancorem,  oonscientiaeque  vermem,     Quintum, 
tangere  quodammodo  igucs  illos,  quorum  tactu  animse  ipsso  amburuntur " 
(JBxmvitia,  Spirttualia,  Quintum  Jflxercitium  (pp.  105, 106  in  Antwerp  edition 
of  1676)). 

2  Exercitia,  Tertia  Hebdomada,  ii.  Contcmplalio  (p.  157). 


542      IGNATIUS    LOYOLA   AND   THE   COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

about  their  ordinary  work.1  The  same  crass  materialism 
envelops  the  meditations  about  doctrinal  mysteries. 
Thinking  upon  the  Incarnation  is  almost  childishly  limited 
to  picturing  the  Three  Persons  of  the  Trinity  contemplating 
the  broad  surface  of  the  earth  and  men  hurrying  to  de- 
struction, then  resolving  that  the  Second  is  to  descend  to 
save ;  and  to  the  interview  between  the  angel  Gabriel  and 
the  Virgin.2 

A  second  characteristic  of  this  scheme  of  meditation 
is  the  extremely  limited  extent  of  its  sphere.  The  atten- 
tion is  confined  to  a  few  scenes  in  the  life  of  our  Lord  and 
of  the  Virgin.  No  lessons  from  the  Old  Testament  are 
admitted.  All  theological  speculation  is  strictly  excluded. 
What  is  aimed  at  is  to  produce  an  intense  and  concentrated 
impression  which  can  never  be  effaced  while  life  lasts. 
The  soul  is  alternately  torn  by  terror  and  soothed  by  the 
vision  of  heavenly  delights.  "  The  designed  effect  was  to 
produce  a  vivid  and  varied  hypnotic  dream  of  twenty-five 
days,  from  the  influence  of  which  a  man  should  never 
wholly  free  himself."  3 

The  outstanding  feature,  however,  of  the  Exercises  and 
of  the  Directory  is  the  minute  knowledge  they  display  of 
the  bodily  conditions  and  accompaniments  of  states  of 
spiritual  ecstasy,  and  the  continuous,  not  to  say  unscrupu- 
lous, use  they  make  of  physical  means  to  create  spiritual 
abandon.  They  master  the  soul  by  manipulating  the  body. 
Not  that  self-examination,  honest  and  careful  recognition  of 
sins  and  weaknesses  in  presence  of  temptation,  have  no 
place  in  the  prolonged  course  of  discipline.  This  is 
inculcated  with  instructions  which  serve  to  make  it 
detailed,  intense,  almost  scientific.  The  pupil  is  ordered  to 
examine  himself  twice  a  day,  in  the  afternoon  and  in  the 
evening,  and  to  make  clear  to  himself  every  sin  and  failure 
that  has  marked  his  day's  life.  He  is  taught  to  enter  them 
all,  day  by  day,  in  a  register,  which  will  show  him  and  his 

1  JExerwtiat  Tertia  Hebdomada,  ii.  Contemplatio,  pp.  125,  126. 

3  lUd.  p.  121. 

*  J.  A.  Symonds,  The  Renaissance  in  Italy,  The  Catholic  Reaction,  i,  289. 


THE   SPIRITUAL   EXERCISES  543 

confessor  his  moral  condition  with  arithmetical  accuracy. 
But  during  his  own  period  of  spiritual  struggle  and  depression 
at  Manresa,  Ignatius,  in  spite  of  the  mental  anguish  which 
tore  his  soul,  had  been  noting  the  bodily  accompaniments 
of  his  spiritual  states ;  and  he  pursued  the  same  course  of 
introspection  when  rejoicing  in  the  later  visions  of  God  and 
of  His  grace.  The  Exercises  and  the  Directory  are  full  of 
minute  directions  about  the  physical  conditions  which 
Ignatius  had  found  by  experience  to  be  the  most  suitable 
for  the  different  subjects  of  meditation.  The  old  Buddhist 
devotee  was  instructed  to  set  himself  in  a  spiritual  trance 
by  the  simple  hypnotic  process  of  gazing  at  his  own  navel ; 
the  Ignatian  directions  are  much  more  complex.  The 
glare  of  day,  the  uncertainty  of  twilight,  the  darkness  of 
night  are  all  pressed  into  service ;  some  subjects  are  to  be 
pondered  standing  upright  motionless*  others  while  walking 
to  and  fro  in  the  cell,  when  seated,  when  kneeling,  when 
stretched  prone  on  the  floor ;  some  ought  to  be  meditated 
upon  while  the  body  is  weak  with  fasting,  others  soon  after 
meals ;  special  hours,  the  morning,  the  evening,  the  middle 
of  the  night,  are  noted  as  the  most  profitable  times  for 
different  meditations,  and  these  vary  with  the  age  and  sex 
of  the  disciple.  Ignatius  recognises  the  infinite  variety 
that  there  is  in  man,  and  says  expressly  that  general  rules 
will  not  fit  every  case.  The  Master  of  Exercises  is  therefore 
enjoined  to  study  the  various  idiosyncrasies  of  his  patients, 
and  vary  his  discipline  to  suit  their  mental  and  physical 
conditions. 

It  is  due  chiefly  to  this  use  of  the  conditions  of  the 
body  acting  upon  the  mind  that  Ignatius  was  able  to 
promise  to  his  followers  that  the  ecstasies  which,  had  been 
hitherto  the  peculiar  privilege  of  a  few  favoured  saints 
should  become  theirs.  The  Eeformation  had  made  the 
world  democratic  ;  and  the  Counter-Reformation  invited  the 
mob  to  shai*e  the  raptures  and  the  visions  of  a  St.  Catherine 
or  a  St.  Teresa. 

The  combination  of  a  clear  recognition  of  the  fact  that 
physical  condition  may  account  for  much  in  so-called 


544      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE   COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

spiritual  moods  with  the  use  made  of  it  to  create  or 
stimulate  these  moods,  cannot  fail  to  suggest  questions.  It 
is  easy  to  understand  the  Mystic,  who,  ignorant  of  the 
mysterious  ways  in  which  the  soul  is  acted  upon  by  the 
body,  may  rejoice  in  ecstasies  and  trances  which  have  been 
stimulated  by  sleepless  nights  and  a  prolonged  course  of 
fasting.  It  is  not  difficult  to  understand  the  man  who, 
when  he  has  been  taught,  casts  aside  with  disdain  all  this 
juggling  with  the  soul  through  the  body.  But  it  is  hard 
to  see  how  anyone  who  perceived  with  fatal  clearness  the 
working  of  the  machinery  should  ever  come  to  think  that 
real  piety  could  be  created  in  such  mechanical  ways.  To 
believe  with  some  that  the  object  Ignatius  had  was  simply 
to  enslave  mankind,  to  conquer  their  souls  as  a  great 
military  leader  might  master  their  lives,  is  both  impossible 
and  intolerable.  No  one  can  read  the  correspondence  of 
Loyola  without  seeing  that  the  man  was  a  devout  and 
earnest-minded  Christian,  and  that  he  longed  to  bring 
about  a  real  moral  reformation  among  his  contemporaries. 
Perhaps  the  key  to  the  difficulty  is  given  when  it  is 
remembered  that  Ignatius  never  thought  that  the  raptures 
and  the  terrors  his  course  of  exercises  produced  were  an 
end  in  themselves,  as  did  the  earlier  Mystics.  They  were 
only  a  means  to  what  followed.  Ignatius  believed  with 
heart  and  soul  that  the  essence  of  all  true  religion  was  the 
blindest  submission  to  what  he  called  the  "true  Spouse 
of  Christ  and  our  Holy  Mother,  which  is  the  orthodox, 
catholic,  and  hierarchical  Church/'  We  have  heard  him 
during  his  time  of  anguish  at  Manresa  exclaim,  "  Show  me, 
0  Lord,  where  I  can  find  Thee ;  I  will  follow  like  a  dog, 
if  I  only  learn  the  way  of  salvation ! "  He  fulfilled  his 
vow  to  the  letter.  He  never  entered  into  the  meaning  of 
our  Lord's  saying,  "  Henceforth  I  call  you  not  servants  .  .  . 
but  friends " ;  he  had  no  understanding  of  what  St.  Paul 
calls  "reasonable  service"  (\oyifcrj  \arpeia).  The  only 
obedience  he  knew  was  unreasoning  submission,  the 
obedience  of  a  dog.  His  most  imperative  duty,  he  believed, 
lay  in  the  resignation  of  his  intelligence  and  will  to 


IGNATIUS   IN   ITALY  545 

ecclesiastical  guidance  in  blind  obedience  to  the  Church. 
It  is  sometimes  forgotten  how  far  Ignatius  carried  this.  It 
is  not  that  he  lays  upon  all  Christians  the  duty  of  uphold- 
ing every  portion  of  the  mediaeval  creed,  of  mediaeval 
customs,  institutions,  and  superstitions;  or  that  the 
philosophy  of  St.  Thomas  of  Bonaventura,  of  the  Master 
of  the  Sentences,  and  of  "  other  recent  theologians,"  is  to  be 
held  as  authoritative  as  that  of  Holy  Writ ; l  but  "  if  the 
Church  pronounces  a  thing  which  seems  to  us  white  to  be 
black,  we  must  immediately  say  that  it  is  black."  2  This 
was  for  him  the  end  of  all  perfection ;  and  he  found 
no  better  instrument  to  produce  it  than  the  prolonged 
hypnotic  trance  which  the  Exercises  caused. 

§  4.  Ignatius  in  Italy. 

In  the  beginning  of  1537  the  ten  associates  found 
themselves  together  at  Venice.  A  war  between  that 
Eeptiblic  and  the  Turks  made  it  difficult  for  them  to  think 
of  embarking  for  Palestine ;  and  they  remained,  finding 
solace  in  intercourse  with  men  who  were  longing  for  a 
moral  regeneration  of  the  Church.  Contarini  did  much  for 
them;  Vittoria  Colonna  had  the  greatest  sympathy  with 
their  projects;  Caraffa  only  looked  at  them  coldly.  The 
mind  of  Ignatius  was  then  full  of  schemes  for  improving  the 
moral  tone  of  society  and  of  the  Church — daily  prayer  in 
the  village  churches,  games  of  chance  forbidden  by  law ; 
priests'  concubines  forbidden  to  dress  as  honest  women  did, 
etc.; — all  of  which  things  Contarini  and  Vittoria  had  at 
heart. 

After  a  brief  stay  in  Venice,  Ignatius,  Lainez,  and 
Faber  travelled  to  Borne,  and  were  joined  there  by  the 
others  in  Easter  week  (1538).  No  Pontiff  was  so 

1  These  and  other  declarations  of  a  like  kind  are  to  be  found  in  the  last 
chapter  of  the  EwircUia,  Spiritually  entitled  J&egulce  alfywt  servqndcc  ut 
cum  orthodox^  JScclesia  wre  sentiamus. 

2  Ibid.  "  Si  quid,  quod  oculis  nostris  apparet  album,  irigrum  ilia  (ecclosia 
catholioa)  ease  deiinierit,  debemus  itidem,  quod  nigrum  sit,  pronuntiare" 
(JRegula,  13,  p,  267). 


546      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE   COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

accessible  as  Paul  ni.,  and  the  three  had  an  audience,  in 
which  they  explained  their  missionary  projects.  But  this 
journey  through  Italy  had  evidently  given  Ignatius  and  his 
companions  new  ideas.  The  pilgrimage  to  Palestine 
was  definitely  abandoned,  the  money  which  had  been 
collected  for  the  voyage  was  returned  to  the  donors,  and 
the  associates  took  possession  of  a  deserted  convent  near 
Vicenza  to  talk  over  their  future.  This  conference  may 
be  called  the  second  stage  in  the  formation  of  the  Order. 
They  all  agreed  to  adopt  a  few  simple  rules  of  life — they 
were  to  support  themselves  by  begging ;  they  were  to  go 
two  by  two,  and  one  was  always  to  act  as  the  servant  for 
the  time  being  of  the  other ;  they  were  to  lodge  in  public 
hospitals  in  order  to  be  ready  to  care  for  the  sick ;  and 
they  pledged  themselves  that  their  chief  work  would  be  to 
preach  to  those  who  did  not  go  to  church,  and  to  teach  the 
young. 

The  Italian  towns  speedily  saw  in  their  midst  a  new 
kind  of  preachers,  who  had  caught  the  habits  of  the  well- 
known  popular  improvisator^  They  stood  on  the  kerb-stones 
at  the  corners  of  streets;  they  waved  their  hats;  they 
called  aloud  to  the  passers-by.  When  a  small  crowd  was 
gathered  they  began  their  sermons.  They  did  not  preach 
theology.  They  spoke  of  the  simple  commands  of  God  set 
forth  in  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  insisted  that  all  sins 
were  followed  by  punishment  here  or  hereafter.  They  set 
forth  the  prescriptions  of  the  Church.  They  described  the 
pains  of  hell  and  the  joys  of  heaven.  The  crowds  who 
gathered  could  only  partially  understand  the  quaint  mixture 
of  Italian  and  Spanish  which  they  heard.  But  throughout 
the  Middle  Ages  the  Italian  populace  had  always  been 
easily  affected  by  impassioned  religious  appeals,  and  the 
companions  created  something  like  a  revival  among  the 
masses  of  the  towns. 

It  war  this  experience  which  made  Ignatius  decide  upon 
founding  a  Company  of  Jesus.  It  was  the  age  of  military 
companies  in  Italy,  and  the  mind  of  Ignatius  always 
resphnded  to  anything  which  suggested  a  soldier's  life. 


IGNATIUS   IN   ITALY  547 

Other  Orders  might  take  the  names  of  their  founders ;  he 
resolved  that  his  personality  should  be  absorbed  in  that 
of  his  Crucified  Lord.  The  thought  of  a  new  Order 
commended  itself  to  his  nine  companions.  They  left  their 
preaching,  journeyed  by  various  paths  to  Eome,  each  of 
them  meditating  on  the  Constitution  which  was  to  be  drafted 
and  presented  to  the  Pope. 

The  associates  speedily  settled  the  outlines  of  their 
Constitution.  Cardinal  Contarini,  ever  the  friend  of  Loyola, 
formally  introduced  them  to  the  Pope.  In  audience, 
Ignatius  explained  his  projects,  presented  the  draft  Con- 
stitution of  the  proposed  new  Order,  showed  how  it  was  to 
be  a  militia  vowed  to  perpetual  warfare  against  all  the 
enemies  of  the  Papacy,  and  that  one  of  the  vows  to  be 
taken  was :  "  That  the  members  will  consecrate  their 
lives  to  the  continual  service  of  Christ  and  of  the 
Popes,  will  fight  under  the  banner  of  the  Cross,  and 
will  serve  the  Lord  and  the  Eoman  Pontiff  as  God's 
Vicar  upon  earth,  in  such  wise  that  they  shall  be  bound 
to  execute  immediately  and  without  hesitation  or  excuse 
all  that  the  reigning  Pontiff  or  his  successors  may  enjoin 
upon  them  for  the  profit  of  souls  or  for  the  propagation 
of  the  faith,  and  shall  do  so  in  all  provinces  whithersoever 
he  may  send  them,  among  Turks  or  any  other  infidels,  to 
the  farthest  Ind,  as  well  as  in  the  region  of  heretics, 
schismatics,  or  unbelievers  of  any  kind."  Paul  in.  was 
impressed  with  the  support  that  the  proposed  Order 
would  bring  to  the  Papacy  in  its  time  of  stress.  He  is 
reported  to  have  said  that  he  recognised  the  Spirit  of 
God  in  the  proposals  laid  before  him,  and  he  knew  that 
the  associates  were  popular  all  over  Italy  and  among  the 
people  of  Eome.  But  all  such  schemes  had  to  be  referred 
to  a  commission  of  three  Cardinals  to  report  before  formal 
sanction  could  be  given. 

Then  Loyola's  troubles  began.  The  astute  politicians 
who  guided  the  counsels  of  the  Vatican  were  suspicious 
of  the  movement.  They  had  no  great  liking  for  Spanish 
Mysticism  organised  as  a  fighting  forco ;  they  disliked  the 


548      IGNATIUS  LOYOLA  AND   THE   COMPANY  OF   JESU3 

enormous  powers  to  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  the  General 
of  the  "Company";  they  believed  that  the  Church  had 
suffered  from  the  multiplication  of  Orders  ;  eight  months 
elapsed  before  all  these  difficulties  were  got  rid  of. 
Ignatius  has  placed  on  record  that  they  were  the  hardest 
months  in  his  life. 

During  their  prolonged  audience  Paul  m.  had  recognised 
the  splendid  erudition  of  Lainez  and  Faber.  He  engaged 
them,  and  somewhat  later  Salmeron,  as  teachers  of 
theology  in  the  Eoman  University,  where  they  won 
golden  opinions.  Ignatius  meanwhile  busied  himself  in 
perfecting  his  Exercises,  in  explaining  them  to  influential 
persons,  and  in  inducing  many  to  try  their  effect  upon 
their  own  souls.  Contarini  begged  for  and  received  a 
MS.  copy.  Dr.  Ortiz,  the  Ambassador  of  Charles  v.  at  Eome, 
submitted  himself  to  the  discipline,  and  became  an  enthusi- 
astic supporter.  "It  was  then,"  says  Ignatius,  "that  I 
first  won  the  favour  and  respect  of  learned  and  influential 
men."  But  the  opposition  was  strong.  The  old  accusa- 
tions of  heresy  were  revived.  Ignatius  demanded  and 
was  admitted  to  a  private  audience  of  the  Pope.  He  has 
described  the  interview  in  one  of  his  letters.1  He  spoke 
with  His  Holiness  for  more  than  an  hour  in  his  private 
room;  he  explained  the  views  and  intentions  of  himself 
and  of  his  companions  ;  he  told  how  he  had  been  accused 
of  heresy  several  times  in  Spain  and  at  Paris,  how  he 
had  even  been  imprisoned  at  Alcala  and  Salamanca,  and 
that  in  each  case  careful  inquiry  had  established  his 
innocence;  he  said  he  knew  that  men  who  wished  to 
preach  incurred  a  great  responsibility  before  God  and 
man,  and  that  they  must  be  free  from  every  taint  of 
erroneous  doctrine  ;  and  he  besought  the  Pope  to  examine 
and  test  him  thoroughly.2  On  Sept.  27th,  1540,  the  Bull 


1  Cartas  de  San  Ignacio  de  Loyola,  fwndador  de  la  Compaftfa  de 
(Madrid,  1874,  etc.),  No.  14. 

2  Ignatius  was  fond  of  recalling  these  accusations  and  acquittals.    In 
a  celebrated  letter  to  the  King  of  Portugal  he  said  that  lie  had  been  eight 
times  accused  of  heresy  and  as  often  acquitted,  and  that  these  accusations 


THE   SOCIETY   OF   JESUS  549 

Regimini  militantis  ecdesice  was  published,  and  the  Company 
of  Jesus  was  founded.  The  student  band  of  Montmartre, 
the  association  of  revivalist  preachers  of  Vicenza,  became 
a  new  Order,  a  holy  militia  pledged  to  fight  for  the 
Papacy  against  all  its  assailants  everywhere  and  at  all 
costs.  In  the  Bull  the  members  of  the  Company  were 
limited  to  sixty,  whether  as  a  concession  to  opponents  or 
in  accordance  with  the  wishes  of  Ignatius,  is  unknown. 
It  might  have  been  from  the  latter  cause.  In  times  of  its 
greatest  popularity  the  number  of  members  of  full  standing 
has  never  been  very  large — not  more  than  one  per  cent, 
of  those  who  bear  the  name.1  The  limitation,  from 
whatever  motive  it  was  inserted,  was  removed  in  a 
second  Bull,  Injunctum  nobis,  dated  March  14th,  1543. 

§  5.   The  Society  of  Jesus. 

On  April  4th,  1541,  six  out  of  the  ten  original 
members  of  the  Order  (four  were  absent  from  Home)  met 
to  elect  their  General ;  three  of  those  at  a  distance  sent 
their  votes  in  writing ;  Ignatius  was  chosen  unanimously. 
He  declined  the  honour,  and  was  again  elected  on  April 
7th.  He  gave  way,  and  on  April  22nd  (1541)  he  received 
the  vows  of  his  associates  in  the  church  of  San  Paolo 
fuori  le  mura. 

The  new  Order  became  famous  at  once ;  numbers 
sought  to  join  it;  and  Ignatius  found  himself  compelled 
to  admit  more  members  than  he  liked.  He  felt  that  the 
more  his  Society  increased  in  numbers  and  the  wider  its 
sphere  of  activity,  the  greater  the  need  for  a  strict  system 
of  laws  to  govern  it.  All  other  Orders  of  monks  had 
their  rules,  which  stated  the  duties  of  the  members,  the 

had  really  arisen,  not  from  any  associations  lie  had  ever  had  with  schismatics, 
Lutherans,  or  Alumbrados  (heretical  Mystics),  but  from  the  astonishment 
caused  by  the  fact  that  he,  an  unlearned  man,  should  presume  to  speak 
about  things  divine  (Oartas'de  8<m  Ignacio,  etc.,  No.  52). 

1  At  the  time  of  Ignatius1  death  (1556),  "  the  Professed  of  the  Four  Vows, " 
who  were  the  Society  in  the  strictest  sense,  and  who  alone  had  any  share 
in  its  government,  numbered  only  thirty-five. 


550      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE    COMPANY  OF   JESUS 

mode  of  their  living  together,  and  expressed  the  common 
sentiment  which  bound  them  to  each  other.  The  Company 
of  Jesus,  which  from  the  first  was  intended  to  have  a 
strict  military  discipline,  and  whose  members  were  meant 
to  be  simply  dependent  units  in  a  great  machine  moved 
by  the  man  chosen  to  be  their  General,  required  such  rules 
even  more  than  any  other.  Ignatius  therefore  set  himself 
to  work  on  a  Constitution.  All  we  know  of  the  first 
Constitution  presented  by  the  ten  original  members  when 
they  had  their  audience  with  Pope  Paul  ill.,  is  contained 
in  the  Bull  of  Foundation,  and  it  is  evident  that  it  was 
somewhat  vague.  It  did  contain,  however,  four  features, 
perhaps  five,  if  the  fourth  vow  of  special  obedience  to  the 
Pope  be  included,  which  were  new.  The  Company  was 
to  be  a  fighting  Order,  a  holy  militia ;  it  was  to  work  for 
the  propagation  of  the  faith,  especially  by  the  education 
of  the  young ;  the  members  were  not  to  wear  any  special 
or  distinctive  dress ;  and  the  power  placed  in  the  hands 
of  the  General  was  much  greater  than  that  permitted  to 
the  heads  of  any  other  of  the  monastic  Orders.  At  the 
same  time,  constitutional  limitations,  resembling  those  in 
other  Orders,  were  placed  on  the  power  of  the  General. 
There  was  to  be  a  council,  consisting  of  a  majority  of  the 
members,  whom  the  General  was  ordered  to  consult  on  all 
important  occasions ;  and  in  less  weighty  matters  he  was 
bound  to  take  the  advice  of  the  brethren  near  him. 
Proposed  changes  tending  to  free  the  General  from  these 
limitations  were  given  effect  to  in  the  Bulls,  Licet  debitum 
pastorates  qfficii  (Oct.  18th,  1549)  and  JSovposcit  pastorates 
officii  (July  21st,  1550);  but  the  Bulls  themselves  make 
it  clear  that  the  Constitution  had  not  taken  final  form 
even  then.  It  is  probable  that  the  completed  Constitution 
drafted  by  Ignatius  was  not  given  to  the  Society  until 
after  his  death. 

The  way  in  which  he  went  to  work  was  characteristic 
of  the  man,  at  once  sternly  practical  and  wildly  visionary. 
He  first  busied  himself  with  arrangements  for  starting  the 
educational  work  which  the  Company  had  undertaken 


THE   SOCIETY    OF   JESUS  551 

to  do;  he  assorted  the  members  of  his  Society  into 
various  classes ;  *  and  then  he  turned  to  the  Constitution. 
He  asked  four  of  his  original  companions,  Lainez,  Salmeron, 
Broet,  and  Jay,  all  of  whom  were  in  Rome,  to  go  carefully 
over  all  the  promises  which  had  been  made  to  the  Pope, 
or  what  might  be  implied  in  them,  and  from  this  material 
to  form  a  draft  Constitution.  He  gave  them  one  direction 
only  to  guide  them  in  their  work :  they  were  to  see  that 
nothing  was  set  down  which  might  imply  that  it  was  a 
deadly  sin  to  alter  the  rules  of  the  Company  in  time  to  come. 
The  fundamental  aim  of  his  Company  was  different  from 
that  of  all  other  Orders.  It  was  not  to  consist  of  societies 
of  men  who  lived  out  of  the  world  to  save  their  own  souls, 
as  did  the  Benedictines ;  nor  was  it  established  merely  to 
be  a  preaching  association,  like  the  Dominicans;  it  was 
more  than  a  fraternity  of  love,  like  the  Franciscans.  It 
was  destined  to  aid  fellow-men  in  every  way  possible ;  and 
by  fellow-men  Ignatius  meant  the  obedient  children  of  the 
catholic  hierarchical  Church.  It  was  to  fight  the  enemies 
of  God's  Vicar  upon  earth  with  every  weapon  available. 
The  rules  of  other  Orders  could  not  help  him  much.  He 
had  to  think  all  out  for  himself.  During  these  months 
and  years  Ignatius  kept  a  diary,  in  which  he  entered  as  in 
a  ledger  his  moods,  of  mind,  the  thoughts  that  passed 
through  it,  the  visions  he  saw,  and  the  hours  at  which 
they  came  to  him.2  Every  possible  problem  connected 
with  the  Constitution  of  his  Company  was  pondered 
painfully.  It  took  him  a  month's  meditation  ere  he  saw 

1  The  Society  came  to  consist  of  (1)  Novices  who  had  been  carefully 
selected  (a)  for  the  priesthood,  or  (Z>)  for  secular  work,  or  (c)  whose  special 
vocation  was  yet  undetermined — the  Indifferents  ;  (2)  the  Scholastics,  who 
had  passed  through  a  noviciate  of  two  years,  and  who  had  to  spend  five 
years  in  study,  then  five  years  as  teachers  of,  junior  classes  ;  (3)  Coactfutors, 
spiritual  or  temporal — the  one  set  sharing  in  all  the  missionary  work  of 
the  Society,  preaching  or  teaching,  the  other  in  the  corresponding  temporal 
duties ;  (4)  the  Professed  of  the  Four  Vows,  who  were  the  elite  of  the  Society, 
and  who  alone  had  a  share  in  its  government.  Heads  of  Colleges  and 
.Residences  were -taken  from  the  third  class. 

a  This  diary  was  used  by  Vigilio  Nolarci  in  his  Oompendio  della,  Vita 
diS.  Ignatio  di  Loiola  (Venice,  2nd  ed.,  1687),  pp.  197-211. 


552      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND  THE   COMPANY  OF   JESUS 

how  to  define  the  relation  of  the  Society  to  property. 
Every  solution  came  to  him  in  a  flash  with  the  effect 
of  a  revelation,  usually  in  the  short  hour  before  Mass. 
Once,  he  records,  it  took  place  Cf  on  the  street  as  I  re- 
turned from  Cardinal  Carpi/'  It  was  in  this  way  that 
the  Constitution  grew  under  his  hands,  and  he  believed 
that  both  it  and  the  Exercises  were  founded  on  direct 
revelations  from  God. 

This  was  the  Constitution  which  was  presented  by 
Lainez  to  the  assembly  which  elected  him  the  successor 
of  Loyola  (July  2nd,  1558).  The  new  General  added  a 
commentary  or  Directorium  of  his  own,  which  was  also 
accepted.  It  received  papal  sanction  under  Pius  iv. 

In  this  Constitution  the  Society  of  Jesus  was  revealed 
as  an  elaborate  hierarchy  rising  from  Kovices  through 
Scholastics,  Coadjutors,  Professed  of  Four  Vows,  with  the 
General  at  its  head,  an  autocrat,  controlling  every  part, 
even  the  minutest,  of  the  great  machine.  Nominally,  he 
was  bound  by  the  Constitution,  but  the  inner  principle  of 
this  elaborate  system  of  laws  was  apparent  fixity  of  type 
qualified  by  the  utmost  laxity  in  practice.  The  most 
stable  principles  of  the  Constitution  were  explained  or 
explained  away  in  the  Directorium,  and  by  such  an 
elaborate  labyrinth  of  exceptions  that  it  proved  no  barrier 
to  the  will  of  the  General.  He  stood  with  his  hand  on 
the  lever,  and  could  do  as  he  pleased  with  the  vast 
machine,  which  responded  in  all  its  parts  to  his  slightest 
touch.  He  had  almost  unlimited  power  of  w  dispensing 
with  formalities,  freeing  from  obligations,  shortening  and 
lengthening  the  periods  of  initiation,  retarding  or  advancing 
a  member  in  his  career."  Every  member  of  the  Society 
was  bound  to  obey  his  immediate  superiors  as  if  they 
stood  for  him  in  the  place  of  Christ,  and  that  to  the  extent 
of  doing  what  he  considered  wrong,  of  believing  that  black 
was  white  if  the  General  so  willed  it.  The  General  resided 
at  Rome,  holding  all  the  threads  of  the  complicated  affairs 
of  the  Society  in  his  hands,  receiving  minute  reports  of  the 
secret  and  personal  history  of  every  one  of  its  members, 


THE   SOCIETY   OF  JESUS  553 

dealing  as  he  pleased  with  the  highest  as  well  as  the  lowest 
of  his  subordinates. 

"  Yet  the  General  of  the  Jesuits,  like  the  Doge  of  Venice, 
had  his  hands  tied  by  subtly  powerful  though  almost 
invisible  fetters.  He  was  subjected  at  every  hour  of  the 
day  and  night  to  the  surveillance  of  five  sworn  spies, 
especially  appointed  to  prevent  him  from  altering  the  type 
or  neglecting  the  concerns  of  the  Order.  The  first  of  these 
functionaries,  named  the  Administrator,  who  was  frequently 
also  the  confessor  of  the  General,  exhorted  him  to  obedience, 
and  reminded  him  that  he  must  do  all  things  for  the  glory 
of  God.  Obedience  and  the  glory  of  God,  in  Jesuit  phrase- 
ology, meant  the  maintenance  of  the  Company.  The  other 
four  were  styled  Assistants.  They  had  under  their  charge 
the  affairs  of  the  chief  provinces ;  one  overseeing  the  Indies, 
another  Portugal  and  Spain,  a  third  France  and  Germany, 
a  fourth  Italy  and  Sicily.  Together  with  the  Administrator, 
the  Assistants  were  nominated  by  the  General  Congregation 
(an  assembly  of  the  Professed  of  the  Tour  Vows),  and  could 
not  be  removed  or  replaced  without  its  sanction.  It  was 
their  duty  to  regulate  the  daily  life  of  the  General,  to 
control  his  private  expenditure  on  the  scale  which  they 
determined,  to  prescribe  what  he  should  eat  and  drink, 
to  appoint  his  hours  for  sleep,  and  religious  exercises,  and 
the  transaction  of  public  business.  .  .  .  The  Company  of 
Jesus  was  thus  based  upon  a  system  of  mutual  and  pervasive 
espionage.  The  novice  on  entering  had  all  his  acts,  habits, 
and  personal  qualities  registered.  As  he  advanced  in  his 
career,  he  was  surrounded  by  jealous  brethren,  who  felt  it 
their  duty  to  report  his  slightest  weakness  to  a  superior. 
The  superiors  were  watched  by  one  another  and  by  their 
inferiors.  Masses  of  secret  information  poured  into  the 
secret  cabinet  of  the  General ;  and  the  General  himself  ate, 
slept,  prayed,  worked,  and  moved  beneath  the  fixed  gaze  of 
ten  vigilant  eyes." l 

Historjans  have  not  been  slow  to  point  out  the  evils 
which  this  Society  has  wrought  in  the  world,  its  purely 
political  aims,  the  worldliness  which  deadened  its  spiritual 
life,  and  its  degradation  of  morals,  which  had  so  much  to 

1  Symonds,  The  Renaissance  in  Italy,  The  Catholic  Reaction  (London,, 
1886),  i.  293,  294. 


554      IGNATIUS  LOYOLA   AND  THE   COMPANY   OF  JESUS 

do  with  sapping  the  ethical  life  of  the  seventeenth  and  eight- 
eenth centuries.  It  is  frequently  said  that  the  cool-headed 
Lainez  is  responsible  for  most  of  the  evil,  and  that  a  change 
may  be  dated  from  his  Generalship.  There  seems  to  be  a 
wide  gulf  fixed  between  the  Mystic  of  Manresa,  the  revival 
preacher  of  Vicenza,  the  genuine  home  mission  work  in 
Borne,  and  the  astute,  ruthless  worldly  political  work  of 
the  Society.  Yet  almost  all  the  changes  may  be  traced 
back  to  one  root,  the  conception  which  Ignatius  held  of 
what  was  meant  by  true  religion.  It  was  for  him,  from 
first  to  last,  an  unreasoning,  blind  obedience  to  the 
dictates  of  the  catholic  hierarchic  Church.  It  was  this 
which  poisoned  the  very  virtues  which  gave  Loyola's 
intentions  their  strength,  and  introduced  an  inhuman 
element  from  the  start. 

He  set  out  with  the  noble  thought  that  he  would 
work  for  the  good  of  his  fellow-men;  but  his  idea  of 
religion  narrowed  his  horizon.  His  idea  of  "neighbour" 
never  went  beyond  the  thought  of  one  who  owed  entire 
obedience  to  the  Roman  Pontiff — all  others  were  as  much 
outside  the  sphere  of  the  brotherhood  of  mankind  as  the 
followers  of  Mahomet  were  for  the  earliest  Crusaders. 
Godfrey  of  Bouillon  was  both  devout  and  tender-hearted, 
yet  when  he  rode,  a  conqueror,  into  Jerusalem  up  the 
street  filled  with  the  corpses  of  slaughtered  Moslems,  he 
saw  a  babe  wriggling  on  the  breast  of  its  dead  mother, 
and,  stooping  in  his  saddle,  he  seized  it  by  the  ankle  and 
dashed  its  head  against  the  wall.  For  Ignatius,  as  for 
Godfrey,  all  outside  the  catholic  and  hierarchic  Church 
were  not  men,  but  wolves. 

He  was  filled  with  the  heroic  conception  that  his 
Company  was  to  aid  their  fellow-men  in  every  department 
of  earthly  life,  and  the  political  drove  out  all  other 
considerations ;  for  it  contained  the  spheres  within  which 
the  whole  human  life  is  lived.  Thus,  while  he  preferred  for 
himself  the  society  of  learned  and  devout  men,  his  acute 
Basque  brain  soon  perceived  their  limitations,  and  the 
Jesuit  historian  Orlandino  tells  us  that  Ignatius  selected 


THE   SOCIETY    OF   JESUS  555 

the  members  of  his  Company  from  men  who  knew  the 
world,  and  were  of  good  social  position.  He  forbade  very 
rightly  the  follies  of  ascetic  piety,  when  the  discipline  of 
the  Exercises  had  been  accomplished ;  it  was  only  repeated 
when  energies  flagged  or  symptoms  of  insubordination 
appeared.  Then  the  General  ordered  a  second  course,  as 
a  physician  sends  a  patient  to  the  cure  at  some  watering- 
place.  The  Constitution  directs  that  novices  were  to  be 
sought  among  those  who  had  a  comely  presence,  with  good 
memories,  manageable  tempers,  quick  observation,  and  free 
from  all  indiscreet  devotion.  The  Society  formed  to  fight 
the  Eenaissance  as  well  as  Protestantism,  borrowed  from  its 
enemy  the  thought  of  general  culture,  training  every  part 
of  the  mind  and  body,  and  rendering  the  possessor  a  man 
of  the  world. 

No  one  can  read  the  letters  of  Ignatius  without  seeing 
the  fund  of  native  tenderness  that  there  was  in  the  stern 
Spanish  soldier.  That  it  was  no  mere  sentiment  appears 
in  many  ways,  and  in  none  more  so  than  in  his  infinite 
pity  for  the  crowds  of  fallen  women  in  Eome,  and  in  his 
wise  methods  of  rescue  work.  It  was  this  tenderness  which 
led  him  to  his  greatest  mistake.  He  held  that  no  one 
could  be  saved  who  was  not  brought  to  a  state  of  abject 
obedience  to  the  hierarchic  Church;  that  such  obedience 
was  the  only  soil  in  which  true  virtues  could  be  planted 
and  grow.  He  believed,  moreover,  that  the  way  in  which 
the  "common  man"  could  be  thoroughly  broken  to  this 
obedience  was  through  the  confessional  and  the  directorate, 
and  therefore  that  no  one  should  be  scared  from  confession 
or*  from  trust  in  his  director  by  undue  severity,  §  In  his 
eagerness  to  secure  these  inestimable  benefits  for  the 
largest  number  of  men,  he  over  and  over  again  enjoined 
the  members  of  his  Society  to  be  very  cautious  in  coming  to 
the  conclusion  that  any  of  their  penitents  was  guilty  of  a 
mortal  sin.  Such  was  the  almost  innocent  beginning  of 
that  Jesuit  casuistry  which  in  the  end  almost  wiped  out 
the  possibility  of  anyone  who  professed  obedience  commit- 
ting a  mortal  sin,  and  occasioned  the  profane  description 


556      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND  THE   COMPANY    OF  JESUS 

of  Father  Bauny,  the  famous  French  director — "  Bauny  qui 
tollit  peccata  mundi  per  definitionem." 

The  Society  thus  organised  became  powerful  almost  at 
once.  It  made  rapid  progress  in  Italy.  Lainez  was  sent 
to  Venice,  and  fought  the  slumbering  Protestantism  there, 
at  Brescia,  and  in  the  Val  Tellina.  Jay  was  sent  to 
Ferrara  to  counteract  the  influence  of  Een^e  of  France,  its 
Duchess.  Salmeron  went  to  Naples  and  Sicily.  The  chief 
Italian  towns  welcomed  the  members  of  the  new  Order. 
Noble  and  devout  ladies  gave  their  aid.  Colleges  were 
opened  ;  schools,  where  the  education  was  not  merely  free, 
but  superior  to  what  was  usually  given,  were  soon  crowded 
with  pupils.  Kome  remained  the  centre  and  stronghold  of 
the  Company. 

Portugal  was  won  at  once.  Xavier  aud  Eodriguez 
were  sent  there.  They  won  over  King  John,  and  he 
speedily  became  their  obedient  pupil.  He  delivered  into 
their  hands  his  new  University  at  Coimbra,  and  the 
Humanist  teachers,  George  Buchanan  among  them,  were 
persecuted  and  dispersed,  and  replaced  by  Jesuit  professors. 

Spain  was  more  difficult  to  win.  The  land  was  the 
stronghold  of  the  Dominicans,  and  had  been  so  for  genera- 
tions; and  they  were  unwilling  to  admit  any  intruders. 
But  the  new  Order  soon  gained  ground.  It  was  native  to 
the  soil.  It  had  its  roots  in  that  Mysticism  which  pervaded 
the  whole  Peninsula.  Ignatius  gained  one  distinguished 
convert,  Francis  Borgia,  Duke  of  Candia  and  Viceroy  of 
Catalonia.  He  placed  the  University  he  had  founded  in 
their  hands.  He  joined  the  Order,  and  became  the  third 
General.  His  influence-  counterbalanced  the  suspicions  of 
Charles  v.,  who  had  no  liking  for  sworn  bondmen  of  the 
Vatican,  and  they  soon  laid  firm  hold  on  the  people. 

In  France  their  progress  was  slow.  The  University 
and  the  Parlement  of  Paris  opposed  them,  and  the  Sorbonne 
made  solemn  pronouncement  against  their  doctrine.  Still 
they  were  able  to  found  Colleges  at  St.  Omer,  Douai,  and 
Eheims. 

Ignatius  had  his  eye  on  Germany  from  the  first.     He 


THE   SOCIETY    OF   JESUS  557 

longed  to  combat  heresy  in  the  land  of  its  birth.  Boabdilla, 
Faber,  and  Jay  were  sent  there  at  once.  Boabdilla  won  the 
confidence  of  William,  Duke  of  Bavaria;  Jay  insinuated 
himself  into  the  counsels  of  Ferdinand  of  Austria,  and 
Faber  did  the  most  important  work  of  the  three  by  winning 
for  the  Society,  Petrus  Canisius.  He  was  the  son  of  a 
patrician  of  Nymwegen,  trained  in  Humanist  lore,  drawn 
by  inner  sympathy  to  the  Christian  Mysticism  of  Tauler, 
and  yet  steadfast  in  his  adherence  to  the  theology  of  the 
mediaeval  Church.  Faber  soon,  became  conscious  of  his 
own  deficiencies  for  the  work  to  be  done  in  Germany. 
His  first  appearance  was  at  the  Eeligious  Conference  at 
Worms,  where  he  found  himself  face  to  face  with  Calvin 
and  Melanchthon,  and  where  his  colleagues,  Eck  and 
Cochlseus,  were  rather  ashamed  of  him.  The  enthusiastic 
Savoyard  lacked  almost  everything  for  the  position  into 
which,  at  the  bidding  of  his  General,  he  had  thrust  himself. 
Since  then  he  had  been  wandering  through  those  portions 
of  Germany  which  had  remained  faithful  to  Bome,  seeking 
individual  converts  to  the  principles  of  the  Society, 
and  above  all  some  one  who  had  the  gifts  for  the 
work  Ignatius  hoped  to  do  in  that  country.  It  is  some- 
what interesting  to  note  that  almost  all  the  German 
Boman  Catholics  who  were  attracted  by  him  to  the  new 
Order  were  men  who  had  leanings  towards  the  fourteenth 
century  Mystics — men  like  Gerard  Hammond,  Prior  of  the 
Carthusians  of  Koln.  Faber  caught  Canisius  by  means  of 
his  Mysticism.  "He  met  him  at  Mainz,  explained  the 
JEscercttia  Spiritualia  to  him,  induced  the  young  man  to 
undergo  the  course  of  discipline  which  they  prescribed,  and 
won  him  for  Loyola  and  the  Company.  "  He  is  the  man," 
wrote  Faber  to  Ignatius,  "  whom  I  have  been  seeking — if 
he  is  a  man,  and  not  rather  an  angel  of  the  Lord" 

Ignatius  speedily  recognised  the  value  of  the  new 
recruit  He  saw  that  he  was  not  a  man  to  be  kept  long  in 
the  lower  ranks  of  the  Company,  and  gave  him  more  liberty 
of  action  than  he  allowed  to  his  oldest  associates.  Faber 
had  sent  him  grievous  reports  about  the  condition  of  affairs 


558      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE    COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

m  Germany.  "  It  is  not  misinterpretation  of  Scripture," 
he  wrote,  "  not  specious  arguments,  not  the  Lutherans  with 
their  preaching  and  persuasions,  that  have  lost  so  many 
provinces  and  towns  to  the  Roman  Church,  but  the 
scandalous  lives  of  the  ministers  of  religion."  He  felt 
his  helplessness.  He  was  a  foreigner,  and  the  Germans  did 
not  like  strangers.  He  could  not  speak  their  language,  and 
his  Latin  gave  him  a  very  limited  audience.  People  and 
priests  looked  on  him  as  a  spy  sent  to  report  their 
weaknesses  to  Eorne.  When  he  discoursed  about  the 
ISxercitw,  and  endeavoured  to  induce  men  to  try  them,  he 
was  accused  of  urging  a  "new  religion."  When  he 
attempted  to  form  student  associations  in  connection  with 
the  Company,  it  was  said  that  he  was  urging  the  formation 
of  "conventicles3'  outside  the  Church's  ordinances.  But 
the  adhesion  of  Canisius  changed  all  that.  He  was  a 
German,  one  of  themselves ;  his  orthodoxy  was  undisputed ; 
he  was  an  eminent  scholar,  the  most  distinguished  of  the 
young  masters  of  the  University  of  Koln,  a  leader  among 
its  most  promising  students.  Under  his  guidance  the 
student  associations  grew  strong ;  after  his  example  young 
men  offered  themselves  for  the  discipline  of  the  JSxercises. 
Loyola  saw  that  he  had  gained  a  powerful  assistant.  He 
longed  to  see  him  personally  at  Rome ;  but ,  he  was  so 
convinced  of  his  practical  wisdom  that  he  left  it  to  himself 
either  to  come  to  Italy  or  to  .remain  in  Germany.  Canisius 
decided  to  remain.  Affairs  at  Kbln  were  then  in  a  critical 
state.  The  Archbishop-Elector,  Hermann  von  Wied,  favoured 
the  Reformation.  He  had  thoughts  of  secularising  his 
Electorate,  and  if  he  succeeded  in  his  design  his  example 
might  be  followed  in  another  ecclesiastical  Electorate,  with 
the  result  that  the  next  Emperor  would  be  a  Protestant. 
Canisius  organised  the  people,  the  clergy,  the  University 
authorities  against  this,  and  succeeded  in  defeating  the 
designs  of  the  Archbishop.  When  his  work  at  Koln  was 
done,  he  went  to  Vienna.  There  he  became  the  confessor 
and  private  adviser  of  Ferdinand  of  Austria,  administered 
lie  affairs  of  the  diocese  of  Vienna  during  a  long  episcopal 


THE  SOCIETY   OF  JESUS  559 

interregnum,  helped  to  found  its  Jesuit  College,  and  another 
at  Ingolstadt.  These  Colleges  became  the  centres  of  Jesuit 
influence  in  Germany,  and  helped  to  spread  the  power  of 
the  Society.  But  with  all  this  activity  it  can  scarcely  he 
said  that  the  Company  was  very  powerful  in  that  country 
until  years  after  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  foreign  mission  activity  of  the  Jesuits  has  heen 
often  described,  and  much  of  the  early  progress  of  the 
Company  has  been  attributed  to  the  admiration  created  by 
the  work  of  Francis  Xavier  and  his  companions.  This  was 
undoubtedly  true;  but  in  the  earliest  times  it  was 
uhe  home  mission  successes  that  drew  most  attention 
and  sympathy;  and  these  have  been  too  often  left 
unmentioned. 

Nothing  lay  nearer  the  hearts  of  devout  persons  who 
refused  to  accept  the  Bef  ormation  than  the  condition  of  the 
great  proportion  of  the  Boinan  Catholic  priests  in  all 
countries,  and  the  depravity  of  morals  among  laity  and 
clergy  alike.  Ignatius  was  deeply  affected  by  both 
scandals,  and  had  resolved  from  the  first  to  do  his 
best  to  cure  them.  It  was  this  resolve  and  the  accompany- 
ing strenuous  endeavours  which  won  Ignatius  the  respect 
and  sympathy  of  all  those  in  Italy  who  were  sighing  for  a 
reform  in  the  moral  life  of  people  and  clergy,  and  brought 
the  Company  of  Jesus  into  line  with  Italian  Beformers  like 
Contarini,  Ghiberti,  and  Vittoria  Colonna.  His  system  of 
Colleges  and  the  whole  use  he  made  of  education  could  have 
only  one  result — to  give  an  educated  clergy  to  the  Boman 
Church.  It  was  a  democratic  extension  of  the  work  of 
Caraffa  and  Gsetatio  da  Thiene.  Ignatius  had  also  clear 
views  about  the  way  to  produce  a  reformation  of  morals  in 
Borne.  Like  Luther,  he  insisted  that  it  must  begin  in  the 
individual  life,  and  could  not  be  produced  by  stringent 
legislation ;  "  it  must  start  in  the  individual,  spread  to  the 
family,  and  then  permeate  the  metropolis."  But  mean- 
while something  might  be  done  to  heal  the  worst  running 
sores  of  society.  Like  Luther,  Ignatius  fastened  on  three 
— the  waste  of  child  life,  the  plague  of  begging,  and  what  is 


560      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA  AND   THE   COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

called  the  "social  evil";  if  Ms  measure  of  success  in 
dealing  with  the  evils  fell  far  short  of  Luther's,  the  more 
corrupted  condition  of  Italy  had  something  to  do  with  his 
failure. 

His  first  measure  of  social  reform  was  to  gather  Boman 
children,  either  orphans  or  deserted  by  their  parents.  They 
were  gratuitously  housed,  fed,  and  taught  in  a  simple  fashion, 
and  were  instructed  in  the  various  mechanical  arts  which 
could  enable  them  to  earn  a  living.  In  a  brief  time, 
Ignatius  had  over  two  hundred  boys  and  girls  in  his  two 
industrial  schools. 

How  to  cure  the  plague  of  beggars  which  infested  all 
Eoman  Catholic  countries,  a  curse  for  which  the  teaching 
of  the  mediaeval  Church  was  largely  responsible,1  had  been 
a  problem  studied  by  Ignatius  ever  since  his  brief  visit  to 
his  native  place  in  1535.  There  he  had  attempted  to  get 
the  town  council  of  Azpeitia  to  forbid  begging  within  the 
bounds  of  the  city,  and  to  support  the  deserving  and 
helpless  poor  at  the  town's  cost.  He  urged  the  same 
policy  on  the  chief  men  in  Rome.  When  he  failed  in  his 
large  and  public  schemes,  he  attempted  to  work  them  out 
by  means  of  charitable  associations  connected  with  and 
fostered  by  his  Society. 

Nothing,  however,  excited  the  sympathy  of  Loyola  so 
much  as  the  numbers  and  condition  of  fallen  women  in  all 
the  larger  Italian  towns.  He  was  first  struck  with  it  in 
Venice,  where  he  declared  that  he  would  willingly  give  his 
life  to  hinder  a  day's  sin  of  one  of  these  unfortunates.  The 
magnitude  of  the  evil  in  Rome  appalled  him.  He  felt  that 
it  was  too  great  for  him  to  meddle  with  as  a  whole. 
Something,  however,  he  could  attempt,  and  did.  In  Borne, 
which  swarmed  with  men  vowed  to  celibacy  simply  because 
they  had  something  to  do  with  the  Church,  prostitution 
was  frequently  concealed  under  the  cloak  of  marriage. 
Husbands  lived  by  the  sinful  life  of  their  wives.  Deserted 
wiyes  also  swelled  the  ranks  of  unfortunates.  Loyola 
provided  homes  for  any  such  as  might  wish  to  leave  their 
1  Of.  vol.  i.  p.  142. 


THE   SOCIETY   OF  JESUS  561 

degrading  life.  At  first  they  were  simply  taken  into 
families  whom  Ignatius  persuaded  to  receive  them.  The 
numbers  of  the  rescued  grew  so  rapidly  that  special  houses 
were  needed.  Ignatius  called  them  "Martha-Houses." 
They  were  in  no  sense  convents.  There  was,  of  course, 
oversight,  but  the  idea  was  to  provide  a  bright  home  where 
these  women  could  earn  their  own  living  or  the  greater 
part  of  it.  The  scheme  spread  to  many  of  the  large  Italian 
towns,  and  many  ladies  were  enlisted  in  the  plans  to  help 
their  fallen  sisters. 

Loyola's  associations  to  provide  ransom  for  Christian 
captives  among  the  Moslems,  his  attempts  to  discredit 
duelling,  his  institutions  for  loans  to  the  poor,  can  only  be 
alluded  to.  It  was  these  works  of  Christian  charity  which 
undoubtedly  gained  the  immediate  sympathy  for  the 
Company  which  awaited  it  in  most  lands  south  of  the 
Alps. 

Almost  all  earlier  monastic  Orders  provided  a  place  for 
women  among  their  organisation.  An  Order  of  Nuns 
corresponded  to  the  Order  of  Monks.  Few  founders 
of  monastic  Orders  have  owed  so  much  to  women  as 
Ignatius  did.  A  few  ladies  of  Barcelona  were  his  earliest 
disciples,  were  the  first  to  undergo  the  discipline  of  the 
Exercises,  then  in  an  imperfect  shape,  and  encouraged  him 
when  he  needed  it  most  by  their  faith  in  him  and  his  plans.1 
One  of  them,  Isabella  Eoser  (Eosel,  Eosell),  a  noble  matron, 
wife  of  Juan  Eoser,  heard  Ignatius  deliver  one  of  his  first 
sermons,  and  was  so  impressed  by  it,  that  she  and  her 
husband  invited  him  to  stay  in  their  house,  which  he  did. 
She  paid  all  his  expenses  while  he  went  to  school  and 
college  in  Spain.  She  and  her  friends  sent  him  large  sums 
of  money  when  he  was  in  Paris.  Ignatius  could  never 
have  carried  out  his  plans  but  for  her  sympathy  and 
assistance.  In  spite  of  all  this,  Ignatius  came  early  to  the 
conclusion  that  his  Company  should  have  as  little  as 

1  Many  of  Loyola's  letters  are  addressed  to  these  ladies :  Carlos,  i.  pp.  1, 
4,  23,  to  lues  Pascual ;  pp.  16,  63, 112,  279,  to  Isabella  Roscr  ;  pp.  34,  44, 
177,  to  Teresa  Rejadella  de  St.  Clara,  a  nun. 

16** 


562      IGNATIUS   LOYOLA   AND   THE   COMPANY  OF  JESUS 

possible  to  do  with  the  direction  of  women's  souls  (it  took 
so  much  time,  he  complained);  that  women  were  too 
emotional  to  endure  the  whole  discipline  of  the  Exercises ; 
and  that  there  must  never  be  Jesuit  nuns.  The  work  he 
meant  his  Company  to  do  demanded  such  constant  and 
strained  activity — a  Jesuit  must  stand  with  only  one  foot 
on  the  ground,  he  said,  the  other  must  be  raised  ready  to 
start  wherever  he  was  despatched — that  women  were  unfit 
for  it.  That  was  his  firm  resolve,  and  he  was  to  suffer 
for  it. 

In  1539  he  had  written  to  Isabella  Eoser  that  he 
hoped  God  would  forget  him  if  he  ever  forgot  all  that  she 
had  done  for  him ;  and  it  is  probable  that  some  sentences 
nonintentional  on  the  part  of  the  writer)  had  made  the 
lady,  now  a  widow,  believe  that  she  was  destined  to  play 
the  part  of  Clara  to  this  Francis.  At  all  events  (1  543) 
she  came  to  Eome,  accompanied  by  two  friends  bringing 
with  them  a  large  sum  of  money,  sorely  needed  by  Ignatius 
to  erect  his  house  in  Eome  for  the  Professed  of  the  Four 
Vows.  In  return,  they  asked  him  to  give  some  time  to 
advise  them  in  spiritual  things.  This  Ignatius  did,  but 
not  with  the  minuteness  nor  at  the  length  expected.  He 
declared  that  the  guidance  of  the  souls  of  the  three  ladies 
for  three  days  cost  him  more  than  the  oversight  of  his 
whole  Society  for  a  month.  Then  it  appeared  that  Isabella 
Eoser  wanted  more.  She  was  a  woman  of  noble  gifts,  no 
weak  sentimental  enthusiast.  She  had  studied  theology 
widely  and  profoundly.  Her  learning  and  abilities  im- 
pressed the  Cardinals  whom  she  met  and  with  whom  she 
talked.  She  desired  Ignatius  to  create  an  Order  of  Jesuit 
nuns  of  whom  she  should  be  the  head.  When  he  refused 
there  was  a  great  quarrel.  She  demanded  back  the  money 
she  had  given ;  and  when  this  was  refused,  she  raised  an 
action  in  the  Eoman  courts.  She  lost  her  case,  and 
returned  indignant  to  Spain.1  Poor  Isabella  Boser — she 
was  not  a  derelict,  and  so  less  interesting  to  a  physician  of 
souls ;  but  she  needed  comforting  like  other  people.  She 

1  Of.  Carfas,  i.  pp.  291,  470,  471. 


THE  SOCIETY   OF  JESUS  563 

forgave  her  old  friend,  and  their  correspondence  was  renewed. 
She  died  the  year  before  Ignatius. 

"When  the  Society  of  Jesus  was  at  the  height  of  its 
power  in  the  seventeenth  century,  another  and  equally 
unsuccessful  attempt  was  made  to  introduce  an  Order  of 
Jesuit  nuns. 

Ignatius  died  at  the  age  of  sixty-five,  thirty-five  years 
after  his  conversion,  and  sixteen  after  his  Order  had 
received  the  apostolic  benediction.  His  Company  had 
become  the  most  powerful  force  within  the  reanimated 
Roman  Church;  it  had  largely  moulded  the  theology  of 
Trent ;  and  it  seemed  to  be  winning  back  Germany.  It 
had  spread  in  the  swiftest  fashion.  Ignatius  had  seen 
established  twelve  Provinces — Portugal,  Castile,  Aragon, 
Andalusia,  Italy  (Lombardy  and  Tuscany),  Naples, 
Sicily,  Germany,  Flanders,  Prance,  Urazil,  and  the  East 
Indies. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT.1 
§  1.   The  Assembling  of  the  Council. 

THE  General  Council,  the  subject  of  many  negotiations 
between  the  Emperor  and  the  Pope,  was  at  last  finally 
fixed  to  meet  at  Trent  in  1545.2  The  city  was  the 

1  SOURCES  :  The  Canons  and  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent  (London, 
1851) ;  Theiner,  Actagenuina  Concilii  Tridentini  (1875)  ;  Dbllinger,  Unged- 
ruckte  Berichte  und  Tagebucher  zur  Geschichte  des  Concils  von  Trient  (Nord- 
lingen,  1876) ;  Grisar,  Jacobi  Lainez  Disputationes  Tridentince  (Innsbruck, 
1886) ;  Le  Plat,  Monumentorwm  ad  historiam  Concilii  Tridentini  potissimum 
illustrandum  spectantium  amplissima  collectio  (Louvain,  1781-87) ;  Palootto, 
Jicta  Concilii  Tridentini,  156%-68 ;  Planck,  Amcdota  ad  Historiam  concilii 
Tridenti'M, pertinentia  (Gottingen,  1791-1818);  Sickel,  "  Das  JBeformations- 
Libell  Ferdinands  i."  (in  Archivfiir  osterreickische  Geschichte,  xiv.,  Vienna, 
1871),  Qatechismus  fiomanus  (Paris,  1635);  Denzinger,  Enchiridion  (Wurz- 
burg,  1900). 

LATER  BOOKS:  Maurenbrecher,  "Tridentiner  Concil,  Vorspiel  und 
Einleitung  "  (in  the  Historisches  Taschensouch,  sechste  Folge,  1886,  pp.  147- 
256),  '*  Begriindung  der  katholischen  Glaubenslehre"  (in  the  Hist.  Tastfi. 
1888,  pp.  305-28),  and  "Die  Lehre  von  der  Erbsiinde  und  dor  Eochtforti- 
gung "  (in  the  Hist.  Tasch.  1890,  pp.  237-330) ;  Harnack,  History  of 
Dogma>  vii.  (London,  1899) ;  Loofs,  I*eitfaden  num  sfatdium  der  Doy- 
mengeschichte  (Halle,  1893) ;  E.  C.  Jenkins,  Fre-Tridentme  Doctrine 
(London,  1891)  ;  Froude,  Lectures  on  the  Council  of  Trent  (London, 
1896) ;  Sickel,  Zur  Geschichte  des  Concils  von  Trient  (Vienna,  1872), 
and  Die  Geschafts-ordnung  des  Concils  von  Trient  (Vienna,  1871) ; 
Milledonne,  Journal  de  Contile  de  Trente  (^aris,  1870)  ;  Braunsborgor 
ISntstehung  und  erste  EntwicMung  der  Katechismen  des  JPetrus  Cwvfahts 
(Freiburg  i.  B.  1893) ;  Dejob,  De  ^influence  di&  Concile  de  Trente  (PariK, 
1884) ;  Paolo  Sarpi,  History  of  the  Council  of  Trent  (London,  1619) ; 
Lettere  di  Fro,  Paolo  Sarpi  (Florence,  1863). 

3  For  an  account  of  these  negotiations,  and  for  the  false  start  made  on 
Nov.  1st,  1542,  see  \V.  Maurenbrechcr,  "  Tridentiuer  Oonoil,  Vorspiol  und 
^Einleituug,"  Historischts  Tctscheribuch,  Sechste  Folge,  1886,  pp.  147-256  ; 


THE  ASSEMBLING  OP  THE   COUNCIL  565 

capital  of  a  small  episcopal  principality,  its  secular  over- 
lord was  the  Count  of  the  Tyrol,  whose  deputy  resided  in 
the  town.  It  was  a  frontier  place  with  about  a  thousand 
houses,  including  four  or  five  fine  buildings  and  a  large 
palace  of  the  Prince  Bishop.  It  contained  several  churches, 
one  of  which,  Santa  Maria  Maggiore,  was  reserved  for  the 
meetings  of  the  Council.1  Its  inhabitants  were  partly 
Italian  and  partly  German — the  two  nationalities  living 
in  separate  quarters  and  retaining  their  distinctive  customs 
and  dress.  It  was  a  small  place  for  such  an  assembly,  and 
could  not  furnish  adequate  accommodation  for  the  crowd  of 
visitors  a  General  Council  always  involved. 

The  Papal  Legates  entered  Trent  in  state  on  the  13th 
of  March  (1545).  Heavy  showers  of  rain  marred  the 
impressive  display.  They  were  received  by  the  local 
clergy  with  enthusiasm,  and  by  the  populace  with  an 
absolute  indifference.  Months  passed  before  the  Council 
was  opened.  Tew  delegates  were  present  when  the  papal 
Legates  arrived.  The  representatives  of  the  Emperor  and 
those  of  Venice  came  early ;  Bishops  arrived  in  straggling 
groups  during  April  and  May  and  the  months  that  followed. 
The  necessary  papal  Brief  did  not  reach  the  town  till  the 
llth  of  December,  and  the  Council  was  formally  opened 
on  the  1 3th.  The  long  leisurely  opening  was  symptomatic 
of  the  history  of  the  Council.  Its  proceedings  were  spread 
over  a  period  of  eighteen  years: — -under  Pope  Paul  in., 
1545— 47,  including  Sessions  i.  to  x. ;  under  Pope  Julius 
TIL,  1551—52,  including  Sessions  xi.  to  xvi. ;  under  Pope 
Pius  iv.,  1562—1563,  including  Sessions  xvii.  to  xxv.2 

also  Cambridge  Modern  History,  ii.  660jf.  It  seems  to  be  pretty  certain 
that  the  fear  that  the  Germans  might  hold  a  National  Council  and  the 
possibility  that  there  might  result  a  National  Gorman  Church  independent 
of  Rome  on  the  lines  laid  down  by  Henry  vin.  of  England,  was  the  motive 
which  finally  compelled  Pope  Paul  in.  to  decide  on  summoning  a  General 
Oouucil ;  of.  i.  pp.  378,  379. 

1  Tho  church  now  contains  a  picture  on  the  north  wall  of  the  choir  of 
the  group  of  theologians  who  were  members  of  the  Council, 

*  Tho  Council  sat  at  Trent  from  the  13th  Dec.  1545  to  the  llth  March 
1547  (Soaaions  L-viii.)  ;  at  Bologna  from  the  21st  of  April  to  the  2ud  of 


566  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT 

The  Papal  Legates  were  Gian  Maria  Giocchi,  Cardinal 
del  Monte,  a  Tuscan  who  had  early  entered  the  service  of 
the  Eoman  Curia,  a  profound  jurist  and  a  choleric  man  of 
fifty-seven  (first  President) ;  Marcello  Cervini,  Cardinal  da 
Sante  Croce ;  and  Cardinal  Reginald  Pole,  the  Englishman. 
The  three  represented  the  three  tendencies  which  were 
apparent  in  ecclesiastical  Italy.  The  first  belonged  to  the 
party  which  stood  by  the  old  unreformed  Curia,  and 
wished  no  change.  Cervini  represented  the  growing 
section  of  the  Church,  which  regarded  Cardinal  Caraffa  as 
their  leader.  They  sought  eagerly  and  earnestly  a  reform 
in  life  and  character,  especially  among  the  clergy;  but 
refused  to  make  any  concessions  in  doctrines,  ceremonies, 
or  institutions  to  the  Protestants.  They  differed  from  the 
more  reforming  Spanish  and  French  ecclesiastical  leaders  in 
their  dislike  of  secular  interference,  and  believed  that  the 
Popes  should  have  more  rather  than  less  power.  Reginald 
Pole  was  one  of  those  liberal  Eoman  Catholics  of 
whom  Cardinal  Contarini  was  the  distinguished  leader. 
He  was  made  a  Legate  probably  to  conciliate  his 
associates.  He  was  a  man  whom  most  people  liked  and 
nobody  feared — a  harmless,  pliant  tool  in  the  hands  of  a 
diplomatist  like  Cervini.  The  new  Society  of  Jesus  was 
represented  by  Lainez  and  Salmeron,  who  went  to  the 
Council  with  the  dignity  of  papal  theologians — a  title 
which  gave  them  a  special  standing  and  influence. 

According  to  the  arrangement  come  to  between  the 
Emperor  and  the  Pope,  the  Bull  summoning  the  Council 
declared  that  it  was  called  for  the  three  purposes  of  over- 
coming the  religious  schism ;  of  reforming  the  Church ; 
and  of  calling  a  united  Christendom  to  a  crusade  against 
unbelievers.  By  general  consent  the  work  of  the  Council 
was  limited  to  the  first  two  objects.  They  were  stated  in 
terms  vague  enough  to  cover  real  diversity  of  opinion 
about  the  work  the  Council  was  expected  to  do. 

June  1547  (Sessions  ix.~x.) ;  at  Trent  from  the  1st  of  May  1551  to  the  28th 
of  April  1552  (Session  xi.-xvi.) ;  and  at  Trent  from  the  18th  of  Jan.  1562  to 
the  3rd  of  Deo.  1563  (Sessions  xvii.-xxv.). 


THE   ASSEMBLING   OF   THE   COUNCIL  567 

Almost  all  believed  that  the  questions  of  reforming 
the  Church  and  dealing  with  the  religious  revolt  were  in- 
separably connected  ;  but  the  differences  at  once  emerged 
when  the  method  of  treating  the  schism  was  discussed. 

Many  pious  Eoman  Catholics  believed  that  the 
Lutheran  movement  was  a  divine  punishment  for  the  sins 
of  the  Church,  and  that  it  would  disappear  if  the  Church 
was  thoroughly  reformed  in  life  and  morals.  They  differed 
about  the  agency  to  be  employed  to  effect  the  reformation. 
The  Italian  party,  who  followed  Cardinal  Caraffa,  main- 
tained that  full  powers  should  be  in  the  hands  of  the 
Pope;  non-Italians,  especially  the  Spaniards,  thought  it 
vain  to  look  for  any  such  reformation  so  long  as  the  Curia, 
itself  the  seat  of  the  greatest  corruption,  remained  unre- 
formed,  and  contended  that  the  secular  authority  ought  to 
be  allowed  more  power  to  put  down  ecclesiastical  scandals. 

The  Emperor,  Charles  v.,  had  come  to  believe  that 
there  were  no  insuperable  differences  of  doctrine  between 
the  Lutherans  and  the  Roman  Catholics,  and  that  mutual 
explanations  and  a  real  desire  to  give  and  take,  com- 
bined with  the  removal  of  scandals  which  all  alike  deplored, 
would  heal  the  schism.  He  had  never  seen  the  gulf  which 
the  Lutheran  principle  of  the  spiritual  priesthood  of  all 
believers  had  created  between  the  Protestants  and  mediaeval 
doctrines  and  ceremonies.1  He  persisted  in  this  belief  long 
after  the  proceedings  at  Trent  had  left  him  hopeless  of 
seeing  the  reconciliation  hek  had  expected  brought  about 
by  the  Council  he  had  done  so  much  to  get  summoned. 
The  Augsburg  Interim  (1548)  shows  what  he  thought 
might  have  been  done.2  He  was  badly  seconded  at  Trent. 
The  only  Bishop  who  supported  his  views  heartily  was 
Madruzzo,  the  Prince  Bishop  of  Trent ;  his  representative, 
Diego  de  Mendoza,  fell  ill  shortly  after  the  opening  of  the 
Council,  and  his  substitute,  Francisco  de  Toledo,  did  not 
reach  Trent  until  March  1546. 

1  It  was  enough  for  him  that  the  Protestants  held  the  Twelve  Articles 
(iho  ApQStM  Orfiod)  ;  of.  i.  264  n.  ;  and  ii.  517,  518. 
u  Of.  i.  390- 


568  THE   COUNCIL  OF   TRENT 

§  2.  Procedure  at  the  Council. 

The  ablest  of  the  three  Legates,  Cervini,  had  a  definite 
plan  of  procedure  before  him.  He  knew  thoroughly  the 
need  for  drastic  reforms  in  the  life  and  morals  of  the 
clergy  and  for  purifying  the  Eoman  Curia ;  but,  with  the 
memories  of  Basel  and  Constance  before  him,  he  dreaded 
above  all  things  a  conflict  between  the  Pope  and  the 
Council,  and  he  believed  that  such  a  quarrel  was  imminent 
if  the  Council  itself  undertook  to  reform  the  Curia.  His 
idea  was  that  the  Council  ought  to  employ  itself  in  the 
useful,  even  necessary  task  of  codifying  the  doctrines  of 
the  Church,  so  that  all  men  might  discern  easily  what  was 
the  true  Catholic  faith.  While  this  was  being  done, 
opportunity  would  be  given  to  the  Pope  himself  to  reform 
the  Curia — a  task  which  would  be  rendered  easier  by  the 
consciousness  that  he  had  the  sympathy  of  the  Council 
behind  him.  He  scarcely  concealed  his  opinion  that  such 
codification  should  make  no  concessions  to  the  Protestants, 
but  would  rather  show  them  to  be  in  hopeless  antagonism 
to  the  Catholic  faith.  He  did  not  propose  any  general 
condemnation  of  what  he  thought  to  be  Lutheran  errors ; 
but  he  wished  the  separate  points  of  doctrine  which 
the  Lutherans  had  raised — Justification,  the  authority  of 
Holy  Scripture,  the  Sacraments — to  be  examined  carefully 
and  authoritatively  defined.  In  this  way  heretics  would 
be  taught  the  error  of  their  ways  without  mentioning 
names,  and  without  the  specific  condemnation  of  individuals. 
He  expounded  his  plan  of  procedure  to  the  Council. 

His  suggestions  were  by  no  means  universally  woll 
received  by  the  delegates.  The  proposal  to  leave  reforms 
to  the  Pope  provoked  many  speeches  from  the  Spanish 
Bishops,  full  of  bitter  reproaches  against  the  Curia ;  and 
his  conception  of  codifying  the  doctrines  of  the  Church 
with  the  avowed  intention  of  irrevocably  excluding  the 
Lutherans  was  by  no  means  liked  by  many. 

A  great  debate  took  place  on  Jan.  1 8th,  which  revealed 
to  the  Legate  that  probably  the*  majority  of  the  delegates 


PROCEDURE  AT  THE  COUNCIL         569 

did  not  favour  his  proposed  course  of  procedure.  Madruzzo, 
the  eloquent  Prince  Bishop  of  Trent,  and  a  Cardinal,  made 
a  long  speech,  in  which  he  asserted  that  the  Council  should 
not  rashly  take  for  granted  that  the  Lutherans  were 
irreconcilable.  They  ought  to  acknowledge  frankly  that 
the  corrupt  morals  of  the  mediaeval  clergy  had  done  much 
to  cause  dissatisfaction  and  to  justify  revolt.  Let  them 
therefore  assume  that  these  evils  for  which  the  Church 
was  responsible  had  produced  the  schism.  Let  them 
invite  the  Protestants  to  come  among  them  as  brethren. 
Let  them  show  to  those  men,  who  had  no  doubt  erred  in 
doctrine,  that  the  Catholic  Church  was  sincerely  anxious 
to  reform  the  abounding  evils  in  life  and  morals,  and,  with 
this  fraternal  bond  between  them,  let  them  reason  amicably 
together  about  the  doctrinal  differences  which  now  separated 
them.  The  eloquent  and  large-minded  Cardinal  condensed 
the  recommendations  in  his  speech  in  one  sentence :  "  Cum 
corrupti  mores  ecclesiasticorum  dederint  occasionem  Luther- 
anis  confingendi  falsa  dogmata,  sublata  causa,  facilius 
tolletur  effectus;  subdens  optimum  fore,  si  protestantes 
ipsos  amicabiliter  et  fraterne  literis  invitaremus,  ut  ipsi 
quoque  ad  synodum  venirent,  et  se  etiam  reformari 
paterentur." l  We  are  told  that  this  speech  raised  great 
enthusiasm  among  the  delegates,  and  that  the  Legates  had 
some  difficulty  in  preventing  its  proposal  from  being 
universally  accepted.  At  the  most  th&y  were  able  to 
prevent  any  definite  conclusion  being  come  to  about  the 
procedure  at  the  close  of  the  sitting.  Cervini  saw  that  he 
could  not  get  his  way  adopted  He  agreed  that  proposals 
for  reform  and  for  the  codification  of  doctrine  should  be 
discussed  simultaneously,  his  knowledge  of  theological 
nature  telling  him  that  if  he  once  got  so  many  divines 
engaged  in  doctrinal  discussions  two  things  would  surely 
follow:  their  eagerness  would  make  them  neglect  every- 
thing else,  and  their  polemical  instincts  would  carry  them 
beyond  the  point  where  a  conciliation  of  the  Protestants 
required  them  to  come  to  a  halt.  So  it  happened.  The 

1  (Theiner)  Ada  ffenwina  ss.  cecumenici  concilii  Tridentim,  p.  40. 


570  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

Council  found  itself  committed  to  a  codification  and 
definition  of  Catholic  doctrine.  The  suggestion  of  the 
Bishop  of  Feltre  (Thomas  Campeggio)  was  adopted,  that 
the  discussion  of  doctrines  and  the  proposals  for  reform 
should  be  discussed  by  two  separate  Commissions,  whose 
reports  should  come  before  the  Synod  alternately.  The 
Legates  obtained  a  large  majority  for  this  course,  and  the 
protest  of  Madruzzo  was  unavailing. 

The  decision  to  attack  the  question  of  reform  was  very 
unacceptable  to  the  Pope.  He  went  so  far  as  to  ask  the 
Legates  to  get  it  rescinded ;  but  that  was  impossible,  and 
he  had  to  content  himself  with  the  assurances  of  Cervini 
that  no  real  harm  would  come  of  it. 

This  important  question  being  settled,  the  Council 
decided  upon  the  details  of  procedure.  The  whole  Synod 
was  divided  into  three  divisions  or  Commissions,  to  each  of 
which  allotted  work  was  given.  Each  question  was  first 
of  all  to  be  prepared  for  the  section  by  theologians  and 
canonists,  then  discussed  in  the  special  Commission  to 
which  it  had  been  entrusted.  If  approved  there,  it 
was  to  be  brought  before  a  general  Congregation  of  the 
whole  Synod  for  discussion.  If  it  passed  this  scrutiny, 
it  was  to  be  promulgated  in  a  solemn  session  of  the 
Council 

§  3.  Eestatement  of  Doctrines. 

It  ought  to  be  said,  before  describing  the  doctrinal 
labours  of  the  Council,  that  the  work  done  at  Trent  was 
not  to  give  Conciliar  sanction  to  the  whole  mass  of  mediaeval 
doctrinal  tradition.  There  was  a  thorough  revision  of 
doctrinal  positions  in  which  a  great  deal  of  theology  which 
had  been  current  during  the  later  Middle  Ages  was  verbally 
rejected,  and  the  rejection  was  most  apparent  in  that  Scotist 
theology  which  had  been  popular  before  the  Reformation, 
and  which  had  been  most  strongly  attacked  by  Luther. 
The  Scotist  theology,  with  its  theological  scepticism,  was 
largely  repudiated  in  name  at  least — whether  its  spirit  waa 


RESTATEMENT   OF   DOCTRINES  571 

banished  is  another  question  which  has  to  be  discussed 
later.  A  great  many  influences  unknown  during  the  later 
Middle  Ages  pressed  consciously  and  unconsciously  upon 
the  divines  assembled  at  Trent  and  coloured  their  dog- 
matic work.  Although  the  avowed  intention  of  the  theo- 
logians there  was  to  defeat  both  Humanism  and  the 
Reformation,  they  could  not  avoid  being  influenced  by  both 
movements.  Humanism  had  led  many  of  them  to  study 
the  earlier  Church  Fathers,  and  they  could  not  escape 
Augustine  in  doing  so.  They  were  led  to  him  by  many 
paths.  The  Dominican  theologians  had  begun,  quite 
independently  of  the  Reformation,  to  study  the  great 
theologian  of  their  Order,  and  Thomas  had  led  them  back 
to  Augustine.  The  Reformation  had  laid  stress  on  the 
doctrines  of  sin,  of  justification,  and  of  predestination,  and 
had  therefore  awakened  a  new  interest  in  them  and  con- 
sequently in  Augustine.  The  New  Thomism,  with  August- 
inianism  behind  it,  was  a  feature  of  the  times,  and  was 
the  strongest  influence  at  work  among  the  theologians  who 
assembled  at  Trent.  It  could  not  fail  to  make  their 
doctrinal  results  take  a  very  different  form  from  the 
theology  which  Luther  was  taught  by  John  Nathin  in  the 
Erfurt  convent.  Christian  Mysticism,  too,  had  its  revival, 
especially  in  Spain  and  in  Italy,  and  among  some  of  the 
reconstructed  monastic  orders.  If  it  had  small  influence 
on  the  doctrines,  it  worked  for  a  jnore  spiritual  conception 
of  the  Church.  What  has  been  called  Curialism,  the 
theory  of  the  omnipotence  of  the  Pope  in  all  things  con- 
nected with  the  Church's  life,  practice,  and  beliefs,  was  also 
a  potent,  factor  with  some  of  the  assembled  fathers.  But 
above  all  things  the  theologians  who  met  at  Trent  were 
influenced  by  the  thought  and  fact  of  the  Lutheran 
Reformation.  This  is  apparent  in  the  order  in  which 
they  discussed  theological  questions,  in  the  subjects  they 
selected  and  in  those  they  omitted.  All  these  things 
help  us  to  understand  how  the  theology  of  the  Council 
of  Trent  was  something  peculiar,  something  by  itself,  and 
different  both  from  what  may  be  vaguely  called  mediaeval 


572  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

theology  and  from  that  of  the  modern  Church  of 
Borne.1 

The  Council,  in  its  third  session,  laid  the  basis  of  its 
doctrinal  work  by  reaffirming  the  IsTiceo-Constantinopolitan 
Creed  with  the  fliogue  clause  added,  and  significantly 
called  it:  Symbolum  fidei  quo  sancta  ecclesia  Somana 
utitur.  This  done,  it  was  ready  to  proceed  with  the 
codification  and  definition  of  doctrines. 

On  the  18th  of  April  1546,  the  Commission  which 
had  to  do  with  the  preparation  of  the  subject  reported,  and 
the  Council  proceeded  to  discuss  the  sources  of  theological 
knowledge  or  the  Eule  of  Faith.  The  influence  of  the 
Reformation  is  clearly  seen  not  merely  in  the  priority 
assigned  to  this  subject,  but  also  in  the  statement  that  the 
"  purity  of  the  Gospel "  is  involved  in  the  decision  come 
•to.  The  opposition  to  Protestantism  was  made  emphatic 
by  the  Council  declaring  these  four  things : 

It  accepted  as  canonical  all  the  books  contained  in  the 
Alexandrine  Canon  (the  Septuagint),  and  therefore  the 
Apocrypha  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  did  so  heedless  of 
the  fact  that  the  editor  of  the  Vulgate  (afterwards  pro- 
nounced authoritative),  Jerome,  had  thought  very  little  of 
the  Apocrypha.  The  Reformers,  in  their  desire  to  go  back 
to  the  earliest  and  purest  sources,  had  pronounced  in  favour 
of  the  Hebrew  Canon;  the  Council,  in  spite  of  Jerome, 
accepted  the  common  mediaeval  tradition. 

It  declared  that   in   addition    to  the  books  of   Holy 

1  Loofs  in  his  Leitfaden  zmi  studiwn  der  DogmeiigcsMchte  (Hallo  a.  S. 
189S)  declares  that  the  following  tendencies  within  tho  Roman  Catholic 
Church  of  the  sixteenth  century  have  all  to  be  taken  into  account  as  in- 
fluencing the  decisions  come  to  at  the  Council  of  Trent :  The  reorganisation 
of  the  Spanish  Church  in  strict  mediaeval  spirit  ly  the  Crown  under  Isabella 
and  Ferdinand  j  the  revival  of  Thomist  theology,  especiallyiin  the  Dominican 
Order ;  the  fostering  of  mystical  piety,  especially  in  new  and  in  reconstructed 
Orders ;  the  ennobling  of  theology  by  Humanism,  and  its  influence,  direct 
and  indirect,  in  leading  theologians  back  to  Augustine  ;  the  strengthening 
of  the  Papacy  in  the  rise  of  Curialism ;  and,  lastly,  tho  ecclesiastical 
interests  of  temporal  sovereigns  generally  opposed  to  this  Curialism.  He 
declares  that  the  newly-founded  Order  of  the  Jesuits  served  as  a  meeting- 
place  for  the  first,  third,  fourth,  and  fifth  of  those  tendencies  (pp,  338-34). 


RESTATEMENT   OF   DOCTRINES  573 

Scripture,  it  "  receives  with  an  equal  feeling  of  piety  and 
reverence  the  traditions,  whether  relating  to  faith  or  to 
morals,  dictated  either  orally  by  Christ  or  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  preserved  in  continuous  succession  within  the 
Catholic  Church." l  The  practical  effect  of  this  declaration, 
something  entirely  novel,  was  to  assert  that  there  was 
within  the  Church  an  infallibly  correct  mode  of  interpret- 
ing Scripture,  and  to  give  the  ecclesiastical  authorities 
(whoever  they  might  be)  the  means  of  warding  off  any 
Protestant  attack  based  upon  Holy  Scripture  alone.  The 
Council  were  careful  to  avoid  stating  who  were  the 
guardians  of  this  dogmatic  tradition,  but  in  the  end  it  led 
by  easily  traced  steps  to  the  declaration  of  Pope  Pius  IX. : 
lo  sono  la  tradizione,  and  placed  a  decision  of  a  Pope 
speaking  ex  cathedra  on  a  level  with  the  Word  of 
God. 

It  proclaimed  that  the  Vulgate  version  contained  the 
authoritative  text  of  Holy  Scripture.  This  was  also  new, 
and,  moreover,  in  violent  opposition  to  the  best  usages  of  the 
mediaeval  Church.  It  cast  aside  as  worse  than  useless  the 
whole  scholarship  of  the  Kenaissance  both  within  and  out- 
side of  the  mediaeval  Church,  and,  on  pretence  of  consecrat- 
ing a  text  of  Holy  Scripture,  reduced  it  to  the  state  of  a 
mummy,  lifeless  and  unfruitful.2 

It  asserted  that  every  faithful  believer  must  accept  the 
sense  of  Scripture  which  the  Church  teaches,  that  no  one 
was  to  oppose  the  unanimous  consensus  of  the  Fathers — 
and  this  without  defining  what  the  Church  is,  or  who  are 

1  "Nee  non  tradition.es  ipsas,  turn  ad  fidem,  turn  ad  mores  pertinentes, 
tanquam  vel  oretenus  a  Christo,  vel  a  Spiritu  Sancto  dictates,  et  continua 
successione  in  Eeclesia  catholica  conservatas,  part  pietatis  affectu  ao  rever- 
entia  sascipit  et  veneratur."  The  references  to  the  decisions  of  Trent  have 
been  taken  from  Denzinger,  Enchiridion,  tiymbolorum  et  Definitionum  quce  de 
rebus  fidei  et  morum  a  conciliis  oecumenicis  et  wmnis  Pontificibus  emanarunt 
(WXirzburg,  1900),  p.  179. 

3  "Statnit  et  declarat,  ut  hsec  ipsa  vetus  et  vulgata  editio,  quse  longo 
tot  sseculorum  usu  in  ipsa  Eeclesia  probata  est,  in  publicis  lectionibus, 
disputationibus,  prsedicationibus  pro  autheutioa  habeatur;  et  ut  nemo 
illam  rejicere  querns  prsetextu  audeat  vol  prwsumat"  (Denzinger,  Enchiridion, 
etc.  p.  179). 


574  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

the  Fathers.1  The  whole  trend  of  this  decision  was  to  place 
the  authoritative  exposition  of  the  Scriptures  in  the  hands 
of  the  Pope,  although  at  the  time  the  Council  lacked  the 
courage  to  say  so. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  these  decisions  were 
reached  without  a  good  deal  of  discussion.  Some  members 
of  the  Council  would  have  preferred  the  Hebrew  Canon. 
Nacchianti,  Bishop  of  Chioggia,  protested  against  placing 
traditions  on  the  same  level  as  Holy  Scripture;2  some 
wished  to  distinguish  between  apostolical  traditions  and 
others ;  but  the  final  decision  of  the  Council  was  carried 
by  a  large  majority.  The  most  serious  conflict  of  opinion, 
however,  arose  about  the  clause  which  declared  that  the 
Vulgate  version  was  the  only  authoritative  one.  It  was 
held  that  such  a  decision  entailed  the  prohibition  of  using 
translations  of  the  Scripture  in  the  mother  tongue.  The 
Spanish  Bishops,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  translations  of  the 
Scriptures  into  Spanish  had  once  been  commonly  used  and 
their  use  encouraged,  would  have  had  all  Bible  reading  in 
the  mother  tongue  prohibited.  The  Germans  protested. 
The  debate  waxed  hot.  Madruzzo,  of  Trent,  eloquently 
declared  that  to  prohibit  the  translation  of  the  Scriptures 
into  German  would  be  a  public  scandal  Were  children 
not  to  be  taught  the  Lord's  Prayer  in  a  language  they 
could  understand?  A  Bull  of  Pope  Paul  II.  was  cited 
against  him.  He  replied  that  Popes  had  erred  and  were 
liable  to  err ;  but  that  the  Apostle  Paul  had  not  erred,  and 
that  he  had  commanded  the  Scriptures  to  be  read  by 
every  one,  and  that  this  could  not  be  done  unless  they 
were  translated.  A  compromise  was  suggested,  that  each 
country  should  decide  for  itself  whether  it  would  have 
translations  of  the  Scriptures  or  not.  In  the  end,  however, 
the  Vulgate  was  proclaimed  the  only  authentic  Word  of  God. 

1  "Nemo  .  .  .  contra  eum  sen  sum,  quern  teimit  et  tenet  sanota  mater 
Ecclesia,  onjus  est  judicare  de  vero  sensu  et  interpretatione  Soripturarum 
Sanctarum,  aut  etiam  contra  unanimem  consensum  Patrum,  ipsam  Scriptnram 
Sacram  interpretari  audeat "  (ibid.  p.  180). 

2  "ETon  possum  pati  synodum  pari  pietatis  aflectu  sxuscipere  tradition es 
et  libros  sanctos  :  hoc  enim,  ut  vere  dioam  quod  seutio,  impium  est.19 


RESTATEMENT    OF   DOCTRINES  575 

In  the  fifth  session  (June  17th,  1546)  and  in  the  sixth 
session  (Jan.  13th,  1547)  the  Council  attacked  the  subjects 
of  Original  Sin  and  Justification.  The  Eeformation  had 
challenged  the  Eoman  Church  to  say  whether  it  had  any 
spiritual  religion  at  all,  or  was  simply  an  institution 
claiming  to  possess  a  secret  science  of  salvation  through 
ceremonies  which  required  little  or  no  spiritual  life  on  the 
part  of  priests  or  recipients.  The  challenge  had  to  be  met 
not  merely  on  account  of  the  Protestants,  but  because 
devout  Eomanists  had  declared  that  it  must  be  done.  The 
answer  was  given  in  the  two  doctrines  of  Original  Sin  and 
Justification,  as  defined  at  the  Council  of  Trent.  They 
both  deserve  a  much  more  detailed  examination  than  space 
permits. 

The  Legates  had  felt  that  the  Council  as  constituted 
might  come  to  decisions  giving  room  for  Protestant  doctrine, 
and  pled  with  the  Pope  to  send  them  more  Italian  Bishops, 
whose  votes  might  counteract  the  weight  of  northern 
opinion  (June  2nd,  1546).  They  were  extremely  anxious 
about  the  way  in  which  the  Council  might  deal  with  those 
two  doctrines. 

The  first,  the  definition  of  Original  Sin,  seems  to  reject 
strongly  that  Pelagianism  or  Semi-Pelagianism  which  had 
marked  the  later  Scholasticism  which  Luther  had  been 
taught  in  the  Erfurt  convent.  It  appears  to  rest  on  and 
to  express  the  evangelical  thoughts  of  Augustine.  But  a 
careful  examination  shows  that  it  is  full  of  ambiguities — 
intentional  loop-holes  provided  for  the  retention  of  the 
Semi-Pelagian  modes  of  thought.  Space  forbids  our  going 
over  them  all,  but  one  example  may  be  selected  from  the 
first  chapter.  It  is  there  said  that  Adam  lost  the  holiness 
and  righteousness  in  whMi  Tie  had  been  constituted.  Why 
not  created  ?  The  phrase  may  mean  created,  and  all  the 
New  Thomists  at  the  Council  doubtless  read  it  in  that 
way.  By  the  Fall  man  lost  what  Thomas,  following 
Augustine,  had  called  increated  righteousness.  But  the 
phrase  in  qua  constitutus  fuerat  could  easily  be  interpreted 
to  mean  that  what  man  did  lose  were  the  superadded  dona 


576  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

supernaturalia  whose  loss  in  no  way  impaired  human 
nature;  and,  if  so  interpreted,  room  is  provided  for 
Pelagianism.1  Again,  while  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of 
the  Fall  seems  to  be  taught,  it  is  added  that  by  Original 
Sin  liberum  arbitrium  is  minime  extinctum  viribus  licet 
attenuatum,  which  is  Semi-Pelagian.2  The  whole  definition 
closes  with  a  statement  that  it  is  not  to  be  applied  to  the 
Blessed  Virgin,  the  doctrine  about  whom  has  been  expressed 
in  the  Constitutions  of  Pope  Sixtus  IV.  of  happy  memory.3 
The  statement  of  the  Doctrine  of  Justification  is  a 
masterpiece  of  theological  dexterity,  and  deserves  much 
more  consideration  than  can  be  given  it.  The  whole 
treatment  of  the  subject  was  the  cause  of  considerable 
anxiety  outside  the  Council.  On  the  one  hand,  the 
Emperor  Charles  V.,  who  was  greatly  disappointed  at  the 
course  taken  by  the  Council,  and  saw  the  chance  of 
conciliating  the  Protestants  diminishing  daily,  wished  to 
defer  all  discussion;  while  the  Pope,  bent  on  making  it 
impossible  for  the  Protestants  to  return,  desired  the 
Council  to  define  this  important  doctrine  in  such  a  way 
that  none  of  the  Reformed  could  possibly  accept  it.  The 
Emperor's  wishes  were  speedily  overruled;  but  it  was  by 
no  means  easy  for  the  Legates  to  carry  out  the  desires  of 
the  Pope.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  Evangelical  doctrine 
in  the  Eoman  Church  which  had  to  be  reckoned  with.  So 
much  existed  that  at  one  time  it  had  actually  been  pro- 
posed at  the  Vatican  to  approve  of  the  first  part  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  in  order  to  win  the  Protestants  over. 

1  "  Si  quis  non  confitetur,  primum  hominem  Adam,  cum  mandatum  Dei 
in  paradiso  fiiisset  transgressus,  statim  sanctificationem  et  justitiam,  in  qua 
constitutes  fuerat,  amisiase.  ,  .  .  Anathema  sit "  (Donzigner,  Enchiridion, 
etc.  p.  180). 

2  "Tametsi  in  eis  liberum  arbitrium  minime  extinctum  essot,  viribus 
licet  attenuatum  et  inclinatum  " ;  in  the  first  paragraph  of  the  decree  on 
Justification  (ibid.  p.  182). 

*  "Declarat  tarn  en  hsec  ipsa  sancta  Synodus,  non  esse  suea  intontionis 
comprehendere  in  hoc  decreto,  ubi  de  peccato  original!  agitur,  beatam  ot 
immacnlatam  Yirgiuem  Mariana,  Dei  genitricem ;  sed  observandas  conatitu- 
tiones  felicis  recordationis  Sixti  Papas  iv.  sub  poenis  in  eis  constitutionibus 
contentis,  quas  innovat "  (ibid.  p.  182). 


RESTATEMENT   OF   DOCTRINES  577 

The  day  for  such  proposals  was  past;  but  the  New 
Thomism  was  a  power  in  the  Church,  and  perhaps  the 
strongest  theological  force  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  had 
to  be  reckoned  with.  If  the  Protestant  conception  of 
Justification  be  treated  merely  as  a  doctrine, — which  it  is 
not,  being  really  an  experience  deeper  and  wider  than  any 
form  of  words  can  contain, — if  it  be  stated  scholastically, 
then  it  is  possible  to  express  it  in  propositions  which  do 
not  perceptibly  differ  from  the  doctrine  of  Justification  in 
the  New  Thoinist  theology.  At  the  conference  at  Kegens- 
burg  (Katisbon)  in  1541,  Contarini  was  able  to  draft  a 
statement  of  the  doctrine  which  commended  itself  to  such 
opponents  as  Calvin  and  Eck.1  Harnack  has  remarked 
that  the  real  difference  between  the  two  doctrines  appeared 
in  this,  that  "just  on  account  of  the  doctrine  of  Justifica- 
tion the  Protestants  combated  as  heretical  the  usages  of 
the  Eoman  Church,  while  the  Augustinian  Thomists  could 
not  understand  why  it  should  be  impossible  to  unite  'the 
two."  2  But  the  similarity  of  statement  shows  the  difficulty 
of  the  Legates  in  guiding  the  Council  to  frame  a  decree 
which  would  content  the  Pope.  They  were  able  to 
accomplish  this  mainly  through  the  dexterity  of  the  Jesuit 
Lainez. 

The  discussion  showed  how  deeply  the  division  ran. 
Some  theologians  were  prepared  to  accept  the  purely 
Lutheran  view  that  Justification  was  by  Faith  alone. 
They  were  in  a  small  minority, 'and  were  noisily  interrupted. 
One  of  them,  Thomas  de  San  Felicio,  Bishop  of  La  Cava, 
and  a  Neapolitan,  came  to  blows  with  a  Greek  Bishop. 
The  debate  then  centred  round  the  mediating  view  of  'the 
doctrine,  which  Contarini  had  advocated  in  his  Tractatus 
de  Justificatione,  and  which  may  be  said  to  represent'  the 
position  of  the  New  Thomists.  It  seemed  to  commend 
itself  to  a  majority  of  the  delegates.  The  leader  "of ,  the 
party  was  Girolamo  Seripando  (1493-1553),  since  1539 
the  General  of  the  Augustinian  Eremites,  the  Order  to 

1  Of.  above,  pp.  520,  521. 

*  History  of  Dogma  (English  translation),  vii.  67* 

**** 


578  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

which  Luther  had  belonged.1  He  distinguished  between 
an  imputed  and  an  inherent  righteousness,  a  distinction 
corresponding  to  that  between  prevenient  and  co-operating 
grace,  and  to  some  extent  not  unlike  that  between  Justifica- 
tion and  Sanetifieation  in  later  Protestant  theology.  In 
the  former,  the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ,  lay  the 
only  hope  for  man ;  inherent  righteousness  was  based  upon 
the  imputed,  and  was  useless  without  it.  The  learning 
and  candour  of  Seripando  were  conspicuous ;  his  pleading 
seemed  about  to  carry  the  Council  with  him,  when  Lainez 
intervened  to  save  the  situation  for  the  strictly  papal 
party.  The  Jesuit  theologian  accepted  the  distinction 
made  between  imputed  and  inherent  righteousness;  he 
even  admitted  that  the  former  was  alone  efficacious  in 
Justification ;  but  he  alleged  that  in  practice  at  least  the 
two  kinds  of  righteousness  touched  each  other,  and  that 
it  would  be  dangerous  to  practical  theology  to  consider 
them  as  wholly  distinct.  His  clear  plausible  reasoning  had 
great  effect,  and  the  ambiguities  of  his  address  are  reflected 
in  the  looseness  of  the  definitions  in  the  decree. 

The  definition  of  the  *  doctrine  of  Justification  which 
was  adopted  by  the  Council  is  very  lengthy.  It  contains 
sixteen  chapters  followed  by  thirty-three  canons.  It 
naturally  divides  into  three  divisions  —  chapters  i-ix. 
describing  what  Justification  is;  chapters  x.-xiii.  the 
increase  of  Justification ;  and  .  chapters  xiv.-xvi.  the 
restoration  of  Justification  when  it  is  lost.  Almost  every 
chapter  includes  grave  ambiguities. 

The  first  section  is  the  most  important.  It  begins 
with  statements  which  are  in  themselves  evangelical.  All 
men  have  come  under  the  power  of  sin,  and  are  unable  to 
deliver  themselves  either  by  their  strength  of  nature  or 
by  the  aid  of  the  letter  of  the  law  of  Moses.2  Our 

1  Seripando  was  made  a  Cardinal  in  1561  by  Pope  Pius  iv.,  who  also 
sent  him  to  the  Council  of  Trent  in  that  year  as  one  of  his  Legates. 

2  "Cum  omnes homines  in  prcevAricatione  Ada;  innocentiam  pcrdi  dissent 
facii  immnndi  .  .  .  ut  non  niodo  gentes  per  vim  uatnra,  sod  ne  Judcei 
quui  em  per  ipaam  etiam  Ktteram  -egis  Moysi,  inde  liberari  aut  surgore 
poasent"  (Denzinger,  Enchiridion,  etc,  182). 


RESTATEMENT   OF   DOCTRINES  579 

Heavenly  Father  sent  His  Son  and  set  Him  forth  as  the 
propitiator  through  faith  in  His  blood  for  our  sins.1  It  is 
then  said  that  all  do  not  accept  the  benefits  of  Christ's 
death,  although  He  died  for  all,  but  only  those  to  whom 
the  merit  of  His  passion  is  communicated ;  and  this  state- 
ment is  followed  by  a  rather  confused  sentence  which 
suggests  but  commits  no  one  to  the  Augustinian  doctrine 
of  election.2  This  is  followed  up  by  saying  that  Justifica- 
tion is  the  translation  from  that  condition  in  which  man  is 
born  into  a  condition  of  grace  through  Jesus  Christ  our 
Saviour;  and  it  is  added  that  this  translation,  in  the 
Gospel  dispensation,  does  not  happen  apart  from  Baptism 
or  the  wish  to  "be  baptized?  In  spite  of  some  ambiguities, 
these  first  four  chapters  have  quite  an  Evangelical  ring 
about  them ;  but  with  tjie  fifth  a  change  begins.  While 
some  sentences  seem  to  maintain  the  Evangelical  ideas 
previously  stated,  room  is  distinctly  made  for  Pelagian 
work-righteousness.  It  is  said,  for  example,  that  Justifica- 
tion is  wrought  through  the  gratia  prceveniens  or  vocatio  in 
which  adults  are  called  apart  from  any  merit  of  their 
own ;  but  then  it  is  added  that  the  end  of  this  calling  is 
that  sinners  may  be  disposed,  by  God's  inciting  and  aiding 
grace,  to  con/vert  themselves  in  order  to  their  own  justification 
by  freely  assenting  to  and  co-operating  with  the  grace  of 
God.4  This  was  the  suggestion  of  Lainez.  The  good 
disposition  into  which  sinners  are  to  be  brought  is  said  to 

1  "Hunc  proposuit  Deus  propitiatorem  per  fidem  in  sanguine  ipsius  pro 
peccatisnostris"  (Denzinger,  JKnchirijion,  etc.  p.  183). 

2<{Ita  nisi  in  Ohristo  renascerentur,  nunquam  justificarcntur,  cum  ea 
renascentia  per  raeritum  passionis  ejus  gratia,  qua  juati  fiunt,  illis  tribuatur ; 
pro  hoc  beneficio  Apostolus  gratias  nos  semper  agere  hortatur  Patri,  qui 
dignos  nos  fecit  in  partem  sortis  sanctorum  in  lumine,  et  eripuit  de  potestate 
tenobrarum,  transtulitque  in  regrmm  Filii  dilectionis  suee,  in  quo  habemus 
redemptionem  et  remissionem  peccatorum  "  (ibid.  183). 

8  "Translatio  ab  eo  statu  in  quo  homo  nascitur  .  *  .  in  statum  gratia* 
et  adoptionis  filiorum  Dei  per  .  .  .  Jesum  Christum,  salvatorem  nostrum ; 
qua  quid  em  translatio  post  Evangolium  promtilgatum  sine  lavacro  regenera- 
tioiiis,  aut  ejus  voto,  fieri  non  potest "  (ibid.  p.  183). 

4  "Ut,  qui  per  peccata  a  Deo  aversi  eraiit,  per  ejus  excittuitem  alque 
adjuvantom  gratiaxi  ad  oonvertendum  se  ad  suam  ipaorum  justificationem 
olden \  gratis  Hbere  assentiendo  et  co-operando,  dlaponantur  .  .  ." 


580  THE   COUNCIL   OF  TRENT 

consist  of  several  things,  of  which  the  first  is  faith — defined 
to  be  a  belief  that  the  contents  of  the  divine  revelation 
fire  true.  In  the  two  successive  chapters  faith  is  declared 
to  be  only  the  beginning  of  Justification ;  and  Justification 
itself,  in  flat  contradiction  to  what  had  been  said  previously, 
is  no  longer  a  translation  from  one  state  to  another ;  •  it 
becomes  the  actual  and  gradual  conversion  of  a  sinner  into 
a  righteous  man.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  pursue  the 
definitions  further.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  the 
theologians  of  Trent  do  not  seem  to  have  the  faintest  idea 
of  what  the  Eeformers  meant  by  faith,  and  never  appear  to  . 
see  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  religious  experience. 

The  second  and  third  sections  of  the  decree  treating  of 
the  increase  of  Justification  and  of  its  renewal  in  the 
Sacrament  of  Penance,  were  drafted  still  more  emphatically 
in  an  anti-evangelical  spirit,  though  here  and  there  they 
show  concessions  to  the  Augustinian  feeling  in  the  Church. 
The  result  was  that  the  Pope  obtained  what  he  wanted,  a 
definition  which  made  reconciliation  with  the  Protestants 
impossible.  The  New  Thomists  were  able  to  secure  a 
sufficient  amount  of  Augustinian  theology  in  the  decree  to 
render  Jansenism  possible  in  the  future ;  while  the  prevail- 
ing Pelagianism  or  Semi-Pelagianism  foreshadowed  its 
overthrow  by  Jesuit  theology. 

While  these  theological  definitions  were  being  discussed 
and  framed,  the  Council  also  occupied  itself  with  matters  of 
reform.  They  began  to  make  regulations  about  preaching 
and  •  catechising,  and  this  led  them  insensibly  to  the 
question  of  exemptions  from  episcopal  control.  The  Popos 
had  for  some  centuries  been  trying  to  weaken  the  authority 
of  the  Bishops,  by  placing  the  regular  clergy  or  monks 
beyond  the  control  of  the  Bishops  within  whose  diocese 
their  convents  stood,  and  this  exemption  had  been  the 
occasion  of  many  ecclesiastical  disorders.  The  discussion 
was  long  and  excited.  It  ended  in  a  compromise. 

When  the  decree  on  Justification  was  settled,,  tho 
Council,  guided  by  the  Legates,  proceeded  to  discuss  tho 
doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  with  the  intention  of  still  more 


SECOND   MEETING   OF   THE   COUNCIL  581 

thoroughly  preventing  any  doctrinal  reconciliation  with  the 
Protestants.  This  action  called  forth  remonstrances  from 
the  Emperor,  whose  successes  at  the  time  in  Germany 
were  alarming  the  Pope,  and  making  him  anxious  to  with- 
draw the  Council  from  Germany  altogether.  He  sent 
orders  to  the  Legates  to  endeavour  to  persuade  the 
members  at  Trent  to  vote  for  a  transfer  to  Bologna,  where 
the  papal  influence  would  be  stronger,  and  where  it  would 
be  easier  to  pack  the  Synod  with  a  pliant  Italian  majority. 
A  pretext  was  found  in  the  appearance  of  the  plague  at 
Trent;  and  although  a  strong  minority,  headed  by 
Madruzzo  of  Trent,  opposed  the  scheme,  the  majority  (3 8 
to  14)  decided  that  they  must  leave  Trent  and  establish 
themselves  at  the  Italian  city.  The  Spanish  Bishops, 
however,  remained  at  Trent  awaiting  the  Emperor's 
orders. 

Charles  V.  had  suffered  many  disappointments  from  the 
Council  he  had  laboured  to  summon,  and  this  action  made 
him  lose  all  patience.  He  ordered  the  Spanish  Bishops  not 
to  leave  Trent ;  the  Diet  of  Augsburg  refused  to  recognise 
the  prelates  who  had  gone  to  Bologna  as  the  General 
Council.  After  much  hesitation,  Pope  Paul  Hi.  felt 
compelled  to  suspend  the  proceedings  of  the  Council  at 
Bologna  (September  17th,  1549).  This  ended  the  first 
part  of  the  sittings  of  the  Council 

§  4.  Second  Meeting  of  the  Council. 

Pope  Paul  m.  died  November  10th,  1549.  At  the 
Conclave  which  followed,  the  Cardinal  del  Monte,  the 
senior  Legate  of  the  Council,  was  chosen  Pope,  and  took  the 
title  of  Julius  in.  (February  7th,  1550).  He  and  the 
Emperor  soon  came  to  an  agreement  that  the  Council 
should  return  to  Trent.  It  accordingly  reopened  there  on 
May  1st,  1551.  The  Cardinal  Marcello  Crescenzio  was 
appointed  sole  Legate,  and  two  assistants,  the  Archbishop 
of  Siponto  and  the  Bishop  of  Yerona,  were  entitled  Nuncios. 
The  second  meeting  of  the  Council  did  not  promise  well 


582  THE   COUNCIL   OF  TRENT 

The  Pope  had  agreed  that  something  was  to  be  done  to 
conciliate  the  Protestants,  and  that  it  should  be  left  an 
open  question  whether  the  preceding  decisions  of  the 
Council  might  not  be  revised.  But  before  its  assembly  the 
policy  of  the  Pope  again  ran  counter  to  that  of  the  Emperor, 
and  the  Protestants  had  ceased  to  expect  much.  The 
delegates  themselves  showed  little  eagerness  to  come  to  the 
place  of  meeting.  The  Council  was  forced  to  adjourn,  and 
it  was  not  until  the  1st  of  September  that  it  began  its 
work. 

The  earlier  proceedings  showed  that  there  was  little 
hope  of  conciliatory  measures.  There  was  no  attempt  to 
revise  these  former  decisions,  and  the  Council  began  its 
work  of  codifying  doctrine  and  reformation  at  the  place 
where  it  had  dropped  it. 

During  the  later  months  of  the  first  meeting,  the 
question  of  the  Sacraments  had  been  under  discussion,  and 
so  far  as  the  second  meeting  is  concerned  it  may  be  said 
that  the  whole  of  its  theological  work  was  confined  to  this 
subject. 

Little  pains  were  taken  to  conciliate  the  Protestants. 
The  decisions  arrived  at  pass  over  in  contemptuous  silence 
all  the  Protestant  contendings.  The  relations  of  the 
Sacraments  to  the  Word  and  Promises  of  God,  and  to  the 
faith  of  the  recipient,  are  not  explained.  The  thirteen 
Canons  which  sum  up  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments  in 
general,  and  the  anathemas  with  which  they  conclude,  arc 
the  protest  of  the  Council  against  the  whole  Protestant 
movement. 

This  did  not  prevent  the  Council  being  confronted  with 
great  difficulties  in  their  definitions — difficulties  which  arose 
from  the  opposition  between  the  earlier  and  more  Evangelical 
Thomist  and  the  later  Scotist  and  Nominalist  theology.  It 
would  almost  appear  that  the  fathers  of  Trent  despaired  of 
harmonising  the  multitude  of  Scholastic  theories  on  the 
•nature  of  the  Sacraments  in  general.  They  did  not  venture 
on  constructing  a  decree,  but  contented  themselves  for  the 
most  part  with  merely  negative  definitions.  They  declare 


SECOND   MEETING   OF   THE   COUNCIL  583 

that  there  are  seven  Sacraments,  neither  more  nor  fewer,  all 
positively  instituted  by  Christ.  They  sever  the  intimate 
connection  between  faith  and  the  Sacraments,  attributing 
to  them  a  secret  and  mysterious  power.  They  practically 
deny  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers  (Can.  10). 
Perhaps  the  most  important  Canon  is  the  last :  *  If  any 
one  shall  say  that  the  received  and  approved  rites  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  commonly  used  in  the  solemn  administra- 
tion of  the  Sacraments,  may  be  contemned,  or  without  sin 
omitted  at  pleasure  by  the  ministrants,  or  be  changed  by 
any  pastor  of  the  churches  into  other  new  ones  :  let  him  be 
anathema"  (Can.  13).  It  enables  us  to  see  how, while  not 
going  beyond  the  verbal  limits  of  the  definitions  of  the 
Thomist  theology,  the  Council  provided  room  for  subsequent 
aberrations  of  doctrine  by  raising  the  use  and  wont  of  the 
Eoman  Church  to  the  level  of  dogma. 

In  their  definitions  of  the  single  Sacraments  the 
Council  could  and  did  found  on  the  Decretum  pro  Armenia 
of  the  Council  of  Florence  (1439),  incorporated  in  the  Bull 
Exultate  Deo  of  Pope  Eugenius  iv.  The  real  substance  of 
the  definition  of  Baptism  is  found  in  that  Canon  (3),  which 
declares  that  "  the  Eoman  Church,  which  is  the  mother  and 
mistress  of  all  Churches,  has  the  true  doctrine  of  the 
Sacrament  of  Baptism."  The  common  practice  for  the 
Bishop  to  confirm,  an  historical  testimony  to  the  original 
position  of  Bishops  as  pastors  of  congregations,  is  elevated 
to  the  rank  of  a  dogma.  The  decree  and  canons  on  the 
Eucharist  are  a  dexterous  dove-tailing  of  sentences  making 
a  mosaic  of  differing  scholastic  theories.  One  detail  only 
need  concern  us.  Most  of  the  theologians  present  wished 
the  denial  of  the  cup  to  the  laity  to  be  elevated  into  a 
dogma,  and  a  decree  was  actually  prepared.  But  the 
secular  princes  and  a  widespread  public  opinion  made  the 
theologians  hesitate,  and  the  question  was  settled  in  a  late 
meeting  (Session  xxi.,  July  16th,  1562)  in  a  dexterously 
ambiguous  way.  It  was  declared  that  "  from  the  beginning 
of  the  Christian  religion  the  use  of  both  species  has  not  been 
unfrequent,"  but  it  was  added  that  no  one  of  the  laity  was 


584  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT 

permitted  to  demand  the  cup  ex  Dei  prcecepto,  or  to  believe 
that  the  Church  was  not  acting  according  to  just  and 
weighty  reasons  when  it  was  refused,  or  that  the  "  whole 
and  entire  Christ "  was  not  received  "  under  either  species 
alone."  Few  statements  have  been  made  in  such  defiance 
of  history  as  this  decree,  with  its  corresponding  canons, 
when  one  and  another  practice  of  the  mediaeval  Church  are 
said  to  have  existed  from  the  beginning. 

The  decree  on  Penance  is  one  of  the  most  carefully 
constructed  and  least  ambiguous.  It  is  a  real  codification 
of  Scholastic  doctrine.  On  one  portion  only  was  there  need 
for  dexterous  manipulation,  and  it  received  it.  The  immoral 
conception  of  attrition  was  verbally  abandoned  and  really 
retained.  Contrition,  which  is  godly  sorrow,  is  declared  to 
be  necessary ;  and  attrition  is  declared  to  be  only  a  salutary 
preparation.  But  the  real  distinction  thus  established  is 
at  once  cancelled  by  calling  attrition  an  imperfect  contrition, 
by  distinguishing  between  contrition  itself  and  a  more  per- 
fect contrition — contrition  perfected  by  love  ;  and  place  is 
provided  for  the  reintroduction  of  the  immoral  conceptions 
of  the  later  Scotist  theologians.1 

When  the  theological  decrees  and  canons  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  are  read  carefully  in  the  light  of  past 
Scholastic  controversies  and  of  varying  principles  at  work 
in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  of  the  sixteenth  century,  it 
is  scarcely  possible  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  while  the 
older  and  more  Evangelical  Thomist  theology  gained  a  verbal 
recognition,  the  real  victory  lay  with  the  Scotist  party  now 
represented  by  the.  Jesuits.  On  one  side  of  its  activity,  the 
general  tendency  of  Scotist  theology  had  been  to  produce 
what  was  called  "  theological  Scepticism" — a  state  of  mind 
which  was  compelled  to  dissent  intellectually  from  most  of 
the  great  doctrines  of  the  mediaeval  Church,  and  at  the 
same  time  to  accept  them  on  uhe  external  authority  of  the 
Church — to  show  that  there  wiero  no  leally  permanent 
principles  in  dogmatic,  and  that  there  was  need  every- 
where for  reference  to  a  permanent  and  external  source 

1  Cf, 


SECOND   MEETING  OF   THE  COUNCIL  585 

of  authority  who  could  be  no  other  than  the  Roman 
Pontiff. 

The  Curialist  position,  that  the  Universal  Church  was 
represented  by  the  Eoman  Church,  and  that  the  Roman 
Church  was,  as  it  were,  condensed  in  the  Pope,  was  not  con- 
fined to  the  sphere  of  jurisdiction  only.  It  had  its  theological 
side.  Scripture,  it  was  held,  was  to  be  interpreted  accord- 
ing to  the  tradition  of  the  Church,  and  the  Pope  alone  was 
able  to  determine  what  that  tradition  really  was.  Hence, 
the  more  indefinite  theology  was,  the  fewer  permanent 
principles  it  contained,  the  more  indispensable  became  the 
papal  authority,  and  the  more  thoroughly  religion  could  be 
identified  with  a  blind  unreasoning  submission  to  the 
Church  identified  as  the  Pope.  This  had  been  the  thought 
of  Ignatius  Loyola;  the  training  of  the  mind  to  such  a 
state  of  absolute  submission  had  been  the  motive  in  his 
Spiritual  Exercises]  and  the  Jesuit  theologians  at  the 
Council,  Lainez  and  Salmeron,  did  very  much  to  secure 
the  practical  victory  won  by  Scotist  theology,  in  spite  of 
the  fact  that  the  phrases  of  the  decrees  came  from  the 
theology  of  their  opponents. 

The  second  meeting  of  the  Council  of  Trent  ended  on 
April  28th,  1552.  The  Peace  of  Augsburg  (1555) 
showed  that  the  Protestants  had  acquired  a  separate  legal 
standing  within  the  Empire,  and  most  people  thought  that 
the  work  of  the  Council  had  been  wasted.  Things  were 
as  if  it  had  never  been  in  existence.  Pope  Paul  m.  died 
on  March  24th,  1555,  and  the  Conclave  elected  Cervini,  who 
took  the  title  of  Marcellus  II.  The  new  Pope  survived  his 
elevation  only  three  weeks.  He  was  succeeded  by  Cardinal 
Caraffa,  Paul  IV.,  and  the  Counter-Reformation  began  in 
earnest. 

Paul  iv.,  hater  of  Spaniards  as  he  was,  was  the  embodi- 
ment of  the  Spanish  idea  of  what  a  reformation  should  be. 
He  believed  that  the  work  of  reform  could  be  done  better 
by  the  Pope  himself  than  by  any  Council,  and  he  set  to 
work  with  the  thoroughness  which  characterised  him. 
There  was  to  be  no  tampering  with  the  doctrines,  usages,  or 


586  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

institutions  of  the  mediaeval  Church.  Heresy  and  Schism 
were  to  be  crushed  by  the  Inquisition,  and  the  spread 
of  new  ideas  was  to  be  prevented  by  the  strict  examina- 
tion of  all  books,  and  the  destruction  of  those  which  con- 
tained what  the  Pope  conceived  to  be  unwholesome  for  the 
minds  or  morals  of  mankind.  But  the  Church  needed  to 
be  reformed  thoroughly;  the  lives  of  the  clergy,  and 
especially  of  the  higher  clergy,  had  to  be  amended ;  and 
abuses  which  had  crept  into  administration  had  to  be  set 
right. 

For  some  time  any  real  reformation  was  retarded  by 
the  influence  of  his  nephews,  who  played  on  the  old  Pon- 
tiffs hatred  of  the  Spaniards,  and  easily  persuaded  him 
that  his  first  duty  was  to  expel  the  Spaniards  from  the 
Italian    peninsula.      But    the    evil    deeds    of    these   near 
kinsmen  gradually  reached  his  ears.     In  an  assembly  of 
the  Inquisition,  held  in  1559,  he  was  told  by  Cardinal 
Pacheco  that  "  reform  must  begin  with  v#"     The  old  man 
retired  to  his  apartments,  instituted  a  searching  inquiry 
into  the  conduct  of  his  nephews,  and  within  a  month  had 
deprived  them  of   all  their  offices  and  emoluments,  and 
banished  them  from  Borne.     Free  from  this  family  embar- 
rasment,  the  Pope  prosecuted  vigorously  his  plans  for  refor- 
mation.    The  secular  administration  of  the  States  of  the 
Church   was    thoroughly   purified.     A    Congregation    was 
appointed  to  examine,  classify,  and   remedy  ecclesiastical 
abuses.     Many   of   the  abuses   of   the  Curia  were  swept 
away.     The  Jesuits  taught  him,  although  he  had  no  great 
love  for  the  Order,  that  spiritual  services  should  not  be 
sold  for  money.     He  prohibited  taking  fees  for  marriage 
dispensations.     He  was  a  stern  censor  of  the  morals  of  the 
higher  clergy.     Under  his  brief  rule  Home  became  respect- 
able if  not  virtuous.     He  restored  some  of  the  privileges 
of  the  Bishops  which  had  been  absorbed  by  the  Papacy. 
All  the  while  his  zeal  for  purity  of  doctrine  made  him 
urge  on  the  Inquisition  and  the  Index  to  use  their  terrible 
powers.     He  spared  no  one.     Cardinal  Moroue,  one  of  the 
few  survivals  of  the  liberal  Eoman  Catholics,  was  imprisoned, 


THIRD   MEETING   OF   THE   COUNCIL  58? 

and    the    suppression    of    all   liberal    ideas    was    sternly 
prosecuted.1 

§  5.   Third  Meeting  of  the  Council. 

Paul  iv.  died  on  the  18th  of  August  1559.  He  was 
succeeded  by  Giovanni  de'  Medici  (Dec.  26th,  1559),  a 
man  of  a  very  different  type  of  character,  who  took  the 
title  of  Pius  IV.  The  new  Pope  was  by  training  a  lawyer 
rather  than  a  theologian,  and  a  man  skilled  in  diplomacy. 
He  recognised,  as  none  of  his  predecessors  had  done, 
the  difficulties  which  confronted  the  Church  of  Eome. 
The  Lutheran  Church  had  won  political  recognition  in 
Germany.  Scandinavia  and  Denmark  were  hopelessly  lost. 
England  had  become  Protestant,  and  Scotland  was  almost 
sure  to  follow  the  example  of  her  more  powerful  neigh- 
bour. The  Low  Countries  could  not  be  coerced  by  Philip 
and  Alva.  More  than  half  of  German  Switzerland  had 
declared  for  the  Reformation.  Geneva  had  become  a 
Protestant  fortress,  and  'Calvin's  opinions  were  gaining 
ground  all  over  Trench  Switzerland.  France  was  hopelessly 
divided.  Bohemia,  Hungary,  and  Poland  were  alienated 
from  Eome,  and  might  soon  revolt  altogether.  The  Pope 
was  convinced  that  a  General  Council  was  necessary  to 
reunite  the  forces  still  on  the  side  of  the  Eoinan  Catholic 
Church.  He  saw  that  it  was  vain  to  expect  to  do  this 
without  coining  to  terms  with  the  Eomanist  sovereigns.  It 
was  the  age  of  autocracy.  He  pleaded  for  an  alliance  of 
autocrats  to  confront  and  withstand  the  Protestant  revolu- 
tion. He  tried  to  persuade  the  Emperor  (now  Ferdinand), 
Francis  II.  of  France,  and  Philip  of  Spain  that  the  independ- 
ent rule  of  Bishops  was  one  side  of  the  feudalism  which 
was  hostile  to  monarchy,  and  that  the  Pope  and  the  Kings 

1  He  classed  Cardinal  Pole  among  heretics ;  Vittoria  Colonna  became 
suspect  because  she  was  "tilia  spiritualis  et  discipula  Cardinalis  Poll, 
hreretioi"  ;  and  the  nuns  of  St.  Catherine  at  Viterbo  were  noted  as  "sus- 
pectee"  from  their  intimacy  with  Vittoria  (Cartegyio  di  Victoria,  Colonna,  pp. 
438 /.  j  Turin,  1889). 


588  THE   COUNCIL   OJF   TRENT 

ought  to  work  together.  His  representations  had  SOB.Q 
effect  as  time  went  on. 

A  papal  Bull  (Nov.  29th,  1560)  summoned  a  Council 
at  Trent  on  April  6th,  1561.  Five  Legates  were  appointed 
to  preside,  at  their  head  Ercole  di  Gonzaga,  Cardinal  of 
Mantua.  They  reached  Trent  on  the  1 6  th  of  April  (1561), 
and  were  received  by  Ludovico  Madruzzo,  who  had  succeeded 
his  uncle,  the  Cardinal,  in  the  bishopric.  The  delegates 
came  slowly.  The  first  session  (xviith)  was  not  held  till 
Jan.  18th,  1562,  and  was  unimportant.  The  real  work 
began  at  the  second  session  (xviiith),  held  on  Feb.  26th 
(1562). 

The  Protestants  had  been  invited  to  attend,  but  it 
was  well  known  that  they  would  not ;  the  assembly  repre- 
sented the  Eoman  Catholic  Powers,  and  them  alone.  Its 
object  was  not  to  conciliate  the  Protestants,  but  to  organise 
the  Romanist  Church.  The  various  Koman  Catholic  Powers, 
however,  had  different  ideas  of  what  ought  to  be  involved 
in  such  a  reorganisation. 

The  Emperor  knew  that  there  were  many  lukewarm 
Protestants  on  the  one  hand  and  many  disaffected  Romanists 
on  the  other.  He  believed  that  the  former  could  be  won 
back  and  the  latter  confirmed  by  some  serious  modifications 
in  the  usages  of  the  Church.  His  scheme  of  reform,  set 
down  in  his  instructions  to  his  Ambassadors,  was  very 
extensive.  It  included  the  permission  to  give  the  cup  to 
the  laity,  marriage  of  the  priests,  mitigation  of  the  pro- 
scribed fasts,  the  use  of  some  of  the  ecclesiastical  revenues 
to  provide  schools  for  the  poor,  a  revision  of  the  service 
books  in  the  sense  of  purging  them  of  many  of  their  legends, 
singing  German  hymns  in  public  worship,  the  publication 
of  a  good  and  simple  catechism  for  the  instruction  of  the 
young,  a  reformation  of  the  cloisters,  and  a  reduction  of 
the  powers  of  the  Eoman  Pontiff  according  to  the  ideas  of 
the  Council  of  Constance.  These  reforms,  earnestly  pressed 
by  the  Emperor  in  letters,  had  the  support  of  almost  all  the 
German  Uoman  Catholics. 

The  French  Bishops,  headed  by  the  Cardinal  Lorraine, 


THIRD   MEETING    OF   THE  COUNCIL  589 

supported  the  German  demands.  They  were  especially 
anxious  for  the  granting  the  cup  to  the  laity,  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  Sacraments  in  Trench,  French  hymns 
sung  in  public  worship,  and  that  the  celebration  of  the 
Mass  should  always  be  accompanied  by  instruction  and  a 
sermon.  They  also  pressed  for  a  limitation  of  the  powers 
of  the  Pope,  according  to  the  decisions  of  the  Council  of 
Basel. 

The  Spanish  Bishops,  on  the  other  hand,  were  thoroughly 
opposed  to  any  change  in  ecclesiastical  doctrine  or  usages. 
They  did  not  wish  the  cup  given  to  the  laity ;  they  abhorred 
clerical  marriage ;  they  protested  against  the  idea  of  the 
services  or  any  part  of  them  in  the  mother  tongue.  But 
they  desired  a  thorough  reformation  of  the  Curia,  of  the 
whole  system  of  dispensations;  they  wished  a  limitation 
of  the  powers  of  the  Pope,  and  to  see  the  Bishops  of  the 
Church  restored  to  their  ancient  privileges. 

France  and  Germany  desired  that  the  Council  should 
be  considered  a  new  Synod ;  Spain  and  the  Pope  meant  it 
to  be  simply  a  continuation  of  the  former  sessions  at 
Trent. 

These  difficulties  might  well  have  daunted  the  Pope ; 
but  the  suave  diplomatist  faced  the  situation,  trusting 
mainly  to  his  own  abilities  to  carry  matters  through  to  a 
successful  issue.  He  knew  that  he  must  have  command 
of  the  Council,  and  to  that  end  several  resolutions  were 
passed  mainly  by  the  adroit  generalship  of  the  Legates. 
It  was  practically,  if  not  formally,  resolved  that  the  Synod 
should  be  simply  a  continuation  of  that  Council  which  had 
begun  at  Trent  in  1545.  This  got  rid  at  once  of  a  great 
deal  of  difficult  doctrinal  discussion,  and  provided  that  all 
dogmas  had  to  be  discussed  on  the  lines  laid  down  in 
previous  sessions.  It  was  decreed  that  no  proxies  should 
be  allowed.  This  enabled  the  Pope  to  keep  up  a  constant 
majority  of  Italian  Bishops,  who  outnumbered  those  of  all 
other  nations  put  together.  By  a  clever  ruse  the  Council 
was  induced  to  vote  that  the  papal  Legates  alone  should 
have  the  privilege  of  proposing  resolutions  to  the  Council, 


590  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

THs  made  it  impossible  to  bring  before  the  Council  any 
matter  to  which  the  Pope  had  objection. 

The  Pope  knew  well,  however,  that  it  mattered  little 
what  conclusions  the  Council  came  to,  if  its  decisions  were . 
to  be  repudiated  by  the  Roman  Catholic  Powers.  He 
therefore  carried  on  elaborate  negotiations  with  the 
Emperor  and  the  Kings  of  Spain  and  France  while  the 
Council  was  sitting,  and  arranged  with  them  the  wording 
of  the  decrees  to  be  adopted.  His  tactics,  which  never 
varied  during  the  whole  period  of  the  Council,  and  which 
were  finally  crowned  with  success,  were  simple.  He 
maintained  at  all  costs  a  numerical  majority  in  the  Synod 
ready  to  vote  as  he  directed.  This  was  done  by  systematic 
drafts  of  Italian  Bishops  to  Trent.  Many  of  the  poorer 
ones  were  subsidised  through  Cardinal  Simonetta,  whose 
business  it  was  to  see  that  the  mechanical  majority  was 
kept  up,  and  to  direct  it  how  to  vote.  His  Legates  had 
the  exclusive  right  of  proposing  resolutions ;  couriers  took 
the  proposals  drafted  by  the  various  Congregations  to  Borne, 
and  the  Pope  revised  them  there  before  they  were  laid 
before  the  whole  Council  to  be  voted  upon ;  spies  informed 
hjm  what  were  the  objections  of  the  French,  Spanish,  or 
German  Bishops,  and  the  Pope  was  diligent  to  bring  all 
manner  of  influences  to  bear  upon  them  to  incline  them,  to 
his  mind ;  if  he  failed,  he  prevented  the  proposals  being 
laid  before  the  Council  until  he  had  consulted  and  bargained 
with  the  monarchs  through  special  agents.  The  papal 
post-bags,  containing  proposed  decrees  or  canons,  went  the 
round  of  the  European  Courts  before  they  were  presented 
to  the  Council,  and  the  Bishops  spoke  and  voted  upon  what 
had  been  already  settled  behind  their  backs  and  without 
their  knowledge. 

In  spite  of  all  this  dexterous  manipulation,  the  Council, 
composed  of  so  many  jarring  elements,  did  not  work  very 
smoothly.  The  papal  diplomacy  sometimes  increased  the 
disturbances.  Men  chafed  under  the  thought  that  they 
were  only  puppets,  and  that  the  matters  they  had  been 
called  together  to  discuss  were  already  irrevocably  settled, 


THIRD    MEETING   OF   THE   COUNCIL  591 

"  Better  never  to  have  come  here  at  all/'  said  a  Spanish 
Bishop,  "than  to  be  reduced  to  mere  spectators/'  Few 
ecclesiastical  assemblies  have  seen  stormier  scenes  than 
took  place  during  these  later  sittings  of  the  Council  of 
Trent. 

In  the  end,  the  papal  diplomacy  prevailed.  His 
conciliatory  manner  helped  Pius  through  difficulties  in 
which  another  would  have  failed.  No  man  was  readier 
to  give  way  in  things  which  he  did  not  consider  essential, 
and  what  he  promised  he  scrupulously  performed.  The 
success  of  the  last  meeting  of  the  Council  was  due  to 
bargaining  and  dexterous  persuasion.  When  the  critical 
point  arrived,  and  it  seemed  as  if  the  Council  must  fall  to 
pieces,  his  agents,  Morone  and  Peter  Canisius,  the  great 
German  Jesuit,  won  Ferdinand  over  to  the  Pope's  side. 
Similar  persuasive  diplomacy  secured  the  influence  of 
the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine.  Even  Philip  of  Spain  was 
brought  to  see  that  the  Spanish  Bishops  were  asking 
too  much. 

It  must  also  be  remembered  that  while  Pius  iv.  refused 
to  tolerate  any  loss  of  papal  rights  or  privileges,  he  consented 
to  and  did  his  best  to  carry  out  numberless  salutary 
reforms;  and  that  the  Council  of  Trent  not  only  re- 
organised, but  greatly  purified  the  Eoman  Church.  Almost 
all  that  was  good  in  the  reformation  wrought  by  his 
predecessor  Paul  iv.  was  made  part  of  the  Tridentine 
regulations. 

The  special  matter  in  dispute  between  the  Pope  and 
the  great  majority  of  non-Italian  Bishops  concerned  the 
relations  in  which  the  Bishops  of  the  Catholic  Church 
stood  to  the  Bishop  of  Borne,  whom  all  acknowledged  as 
their  head.  The  Spanish,  French,  and  German  Bishops 
were  strongly  opposed  to  that  doctrine  of  papal  supremacy 
which  had  been  assiduously  taught  by  the  canonists  of  the 
Bornan  Curia  for  at  least  two  centuries,  and  which  was 
called  curialism.  Curialism  taught  that  the  Pope  was 
lord  of  the  Church  in  the  sense  that  all  the  clergy  were 
his  ttervants,  and  that  Bishops  in  particular  were  mere 


592  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT 

assistants  whom  he  had  appointed  for  the  purpose  ol 
oversight  to  act  as  his  vicars.  Whatever  powers  of 
jurisdiction  they  possessed  came  from  him,  and  from  him 
alone.  The  opposite  conception,  that  insisted  on  at  Trent 
by  the  northern  and  Spanish  Bishops,  that  maintained  at 
the  great  Councils  of  Constance  and  Basel,  was  that  every 
Bishop  had  his  power  directly  from  Christ,  and  that  the 
Pope,  while  he  was  the  representative  of  the  unity  of  the 
Church,  and  therefore  to  be  recognised  as  its  head,  was 
only  a  primus  inter  pares,  and  subject  to  the  episcopate  as 
a  whole  in  Council  assembled.  The  question  kept  cropping 
up  in  almost  all  the  discussions  in  the  Council  which 
turned  on  reform.  It  began  as  early  as  the  fifth  session 
(June  17th,  1546)  and  went  on  intermittently;  but  it 
positively  raged  in  the  later  sessions. 

The  question  was  raised  on  its  practical  side.  One  of 
the  standing  abuses  in  the  mediaeval  Church  was  the  non- 
residence  of  Bishops.  The  Council  was  passionately  called 
upon  by  the  Spanish  and  northern  Bishops  to  declare  that 
residence  was  a  necessary  thing,  and  unanimously  responded 
that  it  was.  Their  function  was  the  oversight  of  their 
dioceses,  and  this  could  only  be  done  when  they  were 
resident.  But  how  was  this  to  be  enforced  ?  To  compel 
the  Bishops  to  reside  within  their  dioceses  would  depopu- 
late the  Court  of  Borne,  and  make  it  very  much  poorer. 
Bishops  from  every  country  in  Europe  were  attached  to 
the  Eoman  Court,  and  -  their  stipends,  drawn  from  the 
countries  in  which  their  Sees  lay,  were  spent  in  Eomo,  and 
aided  the  magnificence  of  the  papal  entourage.  The 
reformers  felt  that  a  theoretical  question  lay  behind  the 
practical,  and  insisted  that  the  oversight  and  therefore  tho 
residence  of  Bishops  was  de  jure  dimno  and  not  merely  de 
lege  ecclesiastica — something  enjoined  by  God,  and  therefore 
beyond  alteration  by  the  Pope.  Behind  this  lay  the 
thought,  first  introduced  by  Cyprian,  that  every  Bishop 
was  within  his  congregation  or  diocese  the  Vicar  of  Christ, 
and  in  the  last  resort  responsible  to  Him  alone.  Thus  the 
old  conciliar  conception,  maintained  at  Constance  and  at 


<THIRD   MEETING    OF   THE    COUNCIL  593 

Basel,  faced  the  curial  at  Trent;  and  both  were  too 
powerful  to  give  way  entirely.  In  spite  of  his  Italian 
majority,  the  Pope  could  not  get  a  majority  for  a  direct 
negative  denying  the  de  jure  divino  theory.  At  the  final 
vote,  sixty-six  fathers  declared  for  the  de  jure  divino 
theory,  while  seventy-one  either  rejected  it  altogether  or 
voted  for  remitting  it  to  the  decision  of  the  Pope.  The 
Pope  dared  not  make  use  of  the  liberty  of  decision  thus 
accorded  to  him  by  a  majority  of  five.  If  he  did  he  would 
then  be  left  to  face  the  European  Eoman  Catholic  Courts 
of  Germany,  France,  and  Spain — all  of  whom  supported 
the  conciliar  view.  Thus  the  theoretical  question  was  left 
undecided  at  Trent,  but  the  papal  diplomacy  prevailed  to 
the  extent  of  creating  a  bias  in  favour  of  curialist  ideas, 
which  left  the  Pope  in  a  stronger  position  as  regards  the 
episcopate  than  any  other  General  Council  had  ever 
placed  him  in. 

The  prominence  given  to  the  Eoman  (i.e.  the  papal) 
Church  throughout  the  decisions  of  the  Council,  beginning 
with  the  way  in  which  the  Constantinopolitan  (Nicene) 
Creed  was  affirmed ;  x  the  insertion  of  the  phrase  His  own 
Vicar  upon  earth',*  the  injunction  that  Patriarchs, 
Primates,  Archbishops,  Bishops,  and  all  others  who  of 
right  and  custom  ought  to  be  present  at  a  provincial 
council  .  .  .  promise  and  profess  true  obedience  to  the 
Sovereign  Eoman  Pontiff  \ 8  the  1  Oth  clause  in  the  Professio 
Mdei  Tridentince :  "  I  acknowledge  the  holy  Catholic 
Apostolic  Eoman  Church  for  the  mother  and  mistress  of 
all  Churches ;  and  I  promise  and  swear  true  obedience  to 
the  Bishop  of  Borne,  successor  to  St.  Peter,  Prince  of 
Apostles,  and  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ " ;  the  way  in  which 
the  Council  at  its  last  session  (Dec.  4th,  1563)  left 
entirely  in  the  Pope's  hands  the  confirmation  of  its  decrees 
and  the  measures  to  be  used  for  carrying  them  out ;  and 

*  "  Symbolum  fidei  quo  sanota  Homana  Ecclesia  utitur." 
2  "Through  the  mercy  of  God  and  the  provident  care  ofJSisown 
upon  earth.1'    Session  vi.  de  reform,  c.  1* 
f  Session  xxv.  de  reform,  c.  2. 

38** 


594  THE  COUNCIL   OF  TRENT 

above  all  its  calm  acquiescence  in  the  Bull  Benedietus  Deus 
(Jan.  24th,  1564),  in  which  Pope  Pius  iv.  reserved  the 
exposition  of  its  decrees  to  himself l — all  testify  to  the 
triumph  of  curialist  ideas  at  the  Council  of  Trent.  The 
Eoman  Catholic  Church  had  become,  in  a  sense  never 
before  universally  accepted,  the  "  Pope's  House." 

This  Council,  so  eagerly  demanded,  so  greatly  pro- 
tracted, twice  dissolved,  buffeted  by  storms  in  the  political 
world,  exposed,  even  in  its  later  sessions,  to  many  a  danger, 
ended  in  the  general  contentment  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
peoples.  When  the  prelates  met  together  for  the  last 
time  on  the  4th  of  December  1563,  ancient  opponents 
embraced,  and  traces  of  tears  were  seen  in  many  of  the  old 


It  had  done  three  things  for  the  Eoman  Catholic 
Church.  It  had  provided  a  compact  system  of  doctrine, 
stript  of  many  of  the  vagaries  of  Scholasticism,  and  yet 
opposed  to  Protestant  teaching.  Romanism  had  an 
intellectual  basis  of  its  own  to  rest  on.  It  had  rebuilt  the 
hierarchy  on  what  may  be  called  almost  a  new  foundation, 
and  made  it  symmetrical.  It  had  laid  down  a  scheme  of 
reformation  which,  if  only  carried  out  by  succeeding 
Pontiffs,  would  free  the  Church  from  many  of  the  crying 
evils  which  had  given  such  strength  to  the  Protestant 
movement.  It  had  insisted  on  and  made  provisions 
for  an  educated  clergy  —  perhaps  the  greatest  need 
of  the  Eoman  Church  in  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century. 

All  this  was  largely  due  to  the  man  who  ruled  in  Eome. 
Pope  Pius  iv.,  sprung  from  the  shrewd  Italian  middle-class, 

1  "We by  apostolic  authority  forbid  all  persona  .  .  .  that  they  presume 
without  our  authority  to  publish  in  any  form  any  commentaries,  glosses, 
annotations,  scholia,  or  any  kind  of  interpretation  whatsoever  touching  the 
decrees  of  the  said  Council ;  or  to  settle  anything  in  regard  thereof  under 
any  plea  whatsoever.  .  .  .  But  if  anything  therein  shall  seem  to  any  one 
to  have  been  expressed  and  ordained  obscurely  .  .  .  and  to  stand  in  need  of 
interpretation  or  decision,  let  him  go  up  to  the  place  which  the  Lord  hath 
chosen,  to  wit,  to  the  Apostolic  See,  the  mistress  of  all  the  faithful,  whose 
authority  the  Holy  Synod  also  has  reverently  acknowledged." 


THIRD   MEETING   OF  THE   COUNCIL  595 

caring  little  for  theology,  by  no  means  distinguished  for 
piety,  had  seen  what  the  Church  needed,  and  by  deft 
diplomacy  had  obtained  it.  A  stronger  man  would  have 
snapped  the  threads  which  tied  all  parties  together;  one 
more  zealous  would  have  lacked  his  infinite  patience;  a 
deeply  pious  man  could  scarcely  have  employed  the  means 
he  continually  used.  He  was  magnificently  assisted  by 
the  new  Company  of  Jesus.  No  theologians  had  so  much 
influence  at  Trent  as  Lainez  and  Salrueron;  the  Council 
would  have  broken  down  altogether  but  for  the  aid 
given  by  Canisius  to  Morone  in  his  negotiations  with  the 
Emperor. 

Pius  rv.  was  not  slow  to  fulfil  the  promises  he  had 
made  to  sovereigns  and  Council.  The  Breviary  and  the 
Missal  were  revised,  as  Ferdinand  had  requested.  Ecclesi- 
astical music  was  purified.  Exertions  were  made  to 
establish  colleges  and  theological  seminaries.  But  a 
sterner  Pontiff  was  needed  to  guide  the  battle  against 
the  growing  Protestantism.  He  was  found  in  the  next, 
Pope  Pius  v. 

The  influence  of  Cardinal  Borromeo,  the  pious  nephew 
of  Pius  IV.,  was  powerful  in  the  Conclave,  and  was  exerted 
to  procure  the  election  of  Michele  Ghislieri,  Cardinal  of 
Alessandria,  who  took  the  name  of  Pius  v.  The  new 
Pontiff  had  entered  a  Dominican  convent  when  fourteen 
years  of  age,  and  had  given  himself  up  heart  and  soul  to 
the  strictest  life  his  Order  enjoined.  He  had  all  the  zeal 
for  strict  orthodoxy  which  characterised  the  Dominicans, 
an  asceticism  which  never  spared  himself,  and  a  detestation 
of  the  immoralities  and  irregularities  which  too  often 
disgraced  the  lives  of  ecclesiastics.  He  carried  the  habits 
of  the  cloister  with  him  into  the  Vatican.  He  never 
missed  attendance  at  the  prescribed  services  of  the  Church, 
and  in  his  devotion  there  was  no  trace  of  hypocrisy.  He 
was  a  Pope  to  lead  the  new  Konianism,  with  its  intense 
hatred  of  heresy,  its  determination  to  reform  the  moral  life, 
and  its  contempt  for  the  Kenaissance  and  all  its  works. 
Philip  II.  of  Spain  sent  a  special  letter  of  congratulation  to 


596-  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT 

Cardinal  Borromeo  to  thank  him  for  his  efforts  in  the 
Conclave. 

The  new  Pontiff  believed,  heart  and  soul,  in  repression. 
He  meant  to  fight  the  Reformation  by  the  Inquisition 
and  the  Index ;  and  these  two  instruments  were  unsparingly 
used. 


CHAPTER  VL 

THE  INQUISITION  AND  THE  INDEX.1 

§  1.   The  Inquisition  in  Spain. 

THE  idea  conveyed  in  the  term  Inquisition  is  the  punish- 
ment of  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical  offences  by  physical 
pains  and  penalties.  It  was  no  new  conception  in  the 
Christian  Church.  It  had  existed  from  the  days  of 
Constantine.  So  far  as  the  mediaeval  Church  is  concerned, 
historians  roughly  distinguish  between  the  Episcopal,  the 
Papal,  and  the  Spanish  Inquisitions.  In  the  half -barbarous 
Church  of  the  early  Middle  Ages,  in  which  a  curious  give- 
and-take  policy  existed  between  the  secular  and  civil 
powers,  a  seemingly  consistent  understanding  was  arrived 
at  between  Church  and  State,  which  may  be  summed  up 
by  saying  that  it  was  recognised  to  be  the  Church's  duty 
to  point  out  heretics,  and  that  of  the  State  to  punish  them 
— the  Church  being  represented  by  the  Bishops.  This 
episcopal  Inquisition  took  many  forms,  and  was  never  a 
very  effective  instrument  in  the  suppression  of  heresy. 

In  12Q3,  Pope  Innocent  ill.,  alarmed  at  the  spread  of 
heresies  through  southern  France  and  northern  Italy, 
published  a  Bull  censuring  the  indifference  of  the  Bishops, 
appointing  the  Abbot  of  Citeaux  his  delegate  in  matters 
of  heresy,  and  giving  him  power  to  judge  and 


1  Llorente,  Mstowe  critique  de  I' Inquisition  d'Espagne  (Paris,  1818) ;  Lea, 
A  History  of  the  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages  (London,  1888) ;  Beusch, 
Der  Index  der  Verbotener  Sucher  (Bonn,  1885) ;  Lea,  The  Spanish  Inguisi- 
tion  (London,  1906) ;  Symonds,  JKenaissanee  in  Italy,  The  Catholic  Reaction 
(London,  1886). 

697 


598  THE   INQUISITION   AND   THE   INDEX 

heresy.  This  was  the  beginning  of  the  Inquisition  as  a 
separate  institution.  It  was  an  act  of  papal  centralisation, 
and  a  distinct  encroachment  on  the  episcopal  jurisdiction. 
The  papal  Inquisition,  thus  started,  took  root.  It  did  not 
displace  the  old  episcopal  Inquisition ;  the  two  existed  side 
by  side ;  but  the  "  Apostolic  Tribunal  for  the  suppression 
of  heresy  "  was  by  far  the  more  effective  weapon.  It  was 
usually  managed  by  the  Dominican  and  Franciscan 

Orders, 

The  Spanish  Inquisition  took  its  rise  in  the  closing 
decades  of  the  fifteenth  century.  The  Popes  had  frequently 
desired  to  see  the  papal  Inquisition  introduced  into  Spain, 
and  leave  had  always  been  refused  by  the  sovereigns, 
jealous  of  papal  interference.  Pope  Sixtus  iv.  had  gone 
the  length  of  granting  to  his  Legate,  Mcolo  Franco,  "  full 
inquisitorial  powers  to  prosecute  and  punish  false  Christians 
who  after  baptism  persisted  in  the  observance  of  Jewish 
rites,"  but  Isabella  and  Ferdinand  did  not  allow  him  to 
exercise  them.  But  the  power  and  wealth  of  the  Con- 
verses— Jews  who  had  nominally  embraced  Christianity — 
had  made  them  detested  by  the  Spanish  people,  and  a  large 
section  of  the  clergy  were  clamouring  for  their  overthrow. 
Thomas  de  Torquemada,  the  Queen's  confessor,  eagerly 
pressed  the  Inquisition  upon  his  royal  penitent,  and  at  last 
the  sovereigns  applied  to  the  Pope  for  a  Bull  to  enable 
them  to  establish  in  Spain  an  Inquisition  of  a  peculiar 
kind.  It  was  to  differ  from  the  ordinary  papal  Inquisition 
in  this,  that  it  was  to  be  strictly  under  royal  control,  that 
the  sovereigns  were  to  have  the  appointment  of  the 
Inquisitors,  and  that  the  fines  and  confiscations  were  to 
flow  into  the  royal  treasury.  The  Bull  was  granted 
(November  1st,  1478),  but  the  sovereigns  hesitated  to  use 
the  rights  it  conveyed.  After  a  year's  delay,  two  royal 
Inquisitors  were  appointed  (September  17th,  1480),  and 
the  first  auto-da-ft,  at  which  six  persons  wore  burnt,  took 
place  on  February  6th,  1481.  The  succeeding  years  saw 
various  modifications  in  the  constitution  of  the  Holy  Ofiiee; 
but  at  last  it  was  organised  with  a  council;  presided  over  by 


THE   INQUISITION   IN  SPAIN  599 

an  Inquisitor-General,  Thomas  de  Torquemada.  He  was 
a  man  of  pitiless  zeal,  stern,  relentless,  and  autocratic  ;  and 
he  stamped  his  nature  on  the  institution  over  which  he 
presided.  The  Holy  Office  was  permitted  to  frame  its  own 
rules.  The  permission  made  it  practically  independent, 
while  all  the  resources  of  the  State  were  placed  at  its 
command.  When  an  Inquisitor  came  to  assume  his 
functions,  the  officials  took  an  oath  to  assist  him  to 
exterminate  all  whom  he  might  designate  as  heretics,  and 
to  observe,  and  compel  the  observance  by  all,  of  the 
decretals  Ad  abolendum,  JSxcommunicamiis,  Ut  officium 
Inguisitionis,  and  Ut  Inquisitionis  negotium — the  papal 
legislation  of  the  thirteenth  century,  which  made  the  State 
wholly  subservient  to  the  Holy  Office,  and  rendered 
incapable  of  official  position  any  one  suspect  in  the  faith 
or  who  favoured  heretics.  Besides  this,  all  the  population 
was  assembled  to  listen  to  a  sermon  by  the  Inquisitor,  after 
which  all  were  required  to  swear  on  the  cross  and  the 
Gospels  to  help  the  Holy  Office,  and  not  to  impede  it  in  any 
manner  or  on  any  pretext.  The  methods  of  work  and  pro- 
cedure were  also  taken  from  the  papal  Inquisition.  The 
Inquisitors  were  furnished  with  letters  'patent.  They 
travelled  from  town  to  town,  attended  by  guards  and  notaries 
public.  Their  expenses  were  defrayed  by  tstxes  laid  on  the 
towns  and  districts  through  which  they  passed.  Spies  and 
informers,  guaranteed  State  protection,  brought  forward 
their  inforniation.  The  Court  was  opened ;  witnesses  were 
examined ;  and  the  .accused  were  acquitted  or  found  guilty. 
The  sentence  was  pronounced ;  the  secular  assessor  gave  a 
formal  assent;  and  the  accused  was  handed  over  to  the 
civil  authorities  for  punishment.  When  Torquemada 
reorganised  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  a  series  of  rules  were 
framed  for  its  procedure  which  enforced  secrecy  to  the 
extent  of  depriving  the  accused  of  any  rational  means  of 
defence ;  which  elaborated  the  judicial  method  so  as  to  leave 
no  loop-hole  even  for  those  who  expressed  a'"wish  to  recant ; 
and  which  multiplied  the  charges  under  which  suspected 
heretics,  oven  after  death,  might  be  treated  as  impenitent 


600  THE   INQUISITION   AND   THE   INDEX 

and  their  property  confiscated.  The  Spanish  Inquisition 
differed  from  the  papal  in  its  close  relation  to  the  civil 
authorities,  its  terrible  secrecy,  its  relentlessness,  and  its 
exclusion  of  Bishops  from  even  a  nominal  participation  in 
its  work  Thus  organised,  it  became  the  most  terrible  of 
curses  to  unhappy  Spain.  During  the  first  hundred  and 
thirty-nine  years  of  its  existence  the  country  was  depopulated 
to  the  extent  of  three  millions  of  people.  It  had  become 
strong  enough  to  overawe  the  monarchy,  to  insult  the 
episcopate,  and  to  defy  the  Pope.  The  number  of  its  victims 
can  only  be  conjectured.  Llorente  has  calculated  that 
during  the  eighteen  years  of  Torquemada's  presidency 
114,000  persons  were  accused,  of  whom  10,220  were  burnt 
alive,  and  97,000  were  condemned  to  perpetual  imprison- 
ment or  to  public  penitence.  This  was  the  terrible 
instrument  used  relentlessly  to  bring  the  Spanish  people 
into  conformity  with  the  Spanish  Reformation,  and  to 
crush  the  growing  Protestantism  of  the  Low  Countries. 
It  was  extended  to  Corsica  and  Sardinia ;  but  the  people 
of  Naples  and  Sicily  successfully  resisted  its  introduction 
when  proposed  by  the  Spanish  Viceroys. 

§  2.  The  Inquisition  in  Italy. 

Cardinal  Caraffa  (afterwards  Pope  Paul  iv.),  the  relent- 
less enemy  of  the  Reformation,  seeing  the  success  of  this 
Spanish  Inquisition  in  its  extermination  of  heretics,  induced 
Pope  Paul  in.  to  consent  to  a  reorganisation  of  the  papal 
Inquisition  in  Italy  on  the  Spanish  model,  in  1542.  The 
Curia  had  become  alarmed  at  the  progress  of  the  Reforma- 
tion in  Italy.  They  had  received  information  that  small 
Protestant  communities  had  been  formed  in  several  of  the 
Italian  towns,  and  that  heresy  was  spreading  in  an  alarm- 
ing fashion.  Caraffa  declared  that  "the  whole  of  Italy 
was  infected  with  the  Lutheran  heresy,  which  had  been 
extensively  embraced  both  by  statesmen  and  ecclesiastics." 
Ignatius  Loyola  and  the  Jesuits  highly  approved  of  the 
suggestion,  and  thfcy  were  all-powerful  with  the  Cardinal 


THE  INQUISITION   IN   ITALY  601 

Borromeo,  the  pious  and  trusted  nephew  of  the  Pope.  In 
1542  the  Congregation  of  the  Holy  Office  was  founded  at 
Koine,  and  six  Cardinals,  among  them  Cardinals  Caraffa  and 
Toledo;  were  named  Inquisitors-General,  with  authority  on 
both  sides  of  the  Alps  to  try  all  cases  of  heresy,  to 
apprehend  and  imprison  suspected  persons,  and  to  appoint 
inferior  tribunals  with  the  same  or  more  limited  powers. 
The  intention  was  to  introduce  into  this  remodelled  papal 
Inquisition  most  of  the  features  which  marked  the 
thoroughness  of  the  Spanish  institution.  But  the  jealousy 
of  the  Popes  prevented  the  Holy  Office  from  exercising 
the  same  independent  action  in  Italy  as  in  Spain.  The 
new  institution  began  its  work  (it  once  within  the  States 
of  the  Church,  and  was  introduced  after  some  negotiations 
,into  most  of  the  Italian  principalities.  Venice  refused, 
until  it  was  arranged  that  the  Holy  Office  'there  should  be 
strictly  subject  to  the  civil  authorities. 

Although  modelled  on  the  Spanish  institution,  the  work 
of  the  Holy  Office  in  Italy  never  exhibited  the  same 
murderous  activity;  nor  was  there  the  sarne  need.  The 
Italians  have  never  showed  the  stern  consistency  in  faith 
which  characterised  the  Spaniards.  It  was  generally 
found  sufficient  to  strike  at  the  leaders  in-  order  to  cause 
the  relapse  of  their  followers.  Still  the  records  of  the 
Office  'and  contemporary  witnesses  recount  continuous  trials 
and  burnings  in  Bpiyie  and  in  other  cities.  In  Venice, 
death  by  drowning  was  substituted  for'  burning.  The 
victims  were  placed  on  a  board  supported  b^  two  gondolas ; 
the  bo&ts  were  rowed  apart,  and  the  unfortunate  martyrs 
perished  in  the  waterfc.  The  Protestant  congregations 
which  had  been  formed  in  Bologna,  Faenza,  Ferrara,  Lucca, 
Modena,  Naples,  Siena,  Venice,  and  Vicenza  were  dispersed 
with  little  or  no  bloodshed.  A  colony  of  Waldensep, 
settled  near  the  town  of  Cosenza  in  the  north-central  part 
of  Calabria,  were  made  of  sterner  stqff.  Nothing  would 
induce  .them  to  relapse,  and  they  were  exterminated  by 
sword,  by  hurling  from  the  summits  of  cliffl*,  by  prolonged  • 
confinement  in  deadly  prisons,  at  the  stakfc,  in  the  mines, 


602  THE   INQUISITION   AND   THE   INDEX 

in  the  Spanish  galleys.  One  hundred  elderly  women  were 
first  tortured  and  then  slaughtered  at  Montalto.  The 
survivors  among  the  women  and  children  were  sold  into 
slavery.  Such  was  the  work  of  the  Counter-Keformation 
in  Italy,  and  the  measures  to  which  it  owed  much  of  its 
success* 

§  3.  The  Index. 

Leaders  of  the  Counter-Keformation  in  Italy  like 
Popes  Paul  iv.  and  Pius  v.  were  determined  on  much  more 
than  the  dispersion  of  Protestant  communities  and  the 
banishment  or  martyrdom  of  the  missionaries  of  Evangelical 
thought.  They  resolved  to  destroy  what  they  rightly 
enough  believed  to  be  its  seed  and  seed-bed — the  cultiva- 
tion of  independent  thinking  and  of  impartial  scholarship., 
They  wished  to  extirpate  all  traces  of  the  Eenaissance.  In 
the  fifteenth  and  first  half  of  the  sixteenth  centuries,  Italy, 
had  been  "  the  workshop  of  ideas,"  the  officina  scientiarum 
for  the  rest  of  Europe.  The  Inquisition,  in  Italy  as  in  Spain, 
attacked  the  Academies,  the  schools  of  learning,  above  all 
the  libraries  in  which  the  learning  of  the  past  was  stored, 
and  the.  printing-presses  which  disseminated  ideas  day  by 
day.  They  had  the  example  of  Torquemada  before  them, 
who  had  burnt  six  thousand  volumes  at  Salamanca  in 
1490  on  pretence  that  they  taught  sorcery. 

It  was  no  new  thing  to  order  the  burning  of  heretical 
writings.  This  had  been  done  continuously  throughout 
the  Middle  Ages.  The  episcopal  Inquisition,  tho  Uni- 
versities, the  papal  Inquisition,  had  all  endeavoured  to 
discover  and  destroy  writings  which  they  deemed  to  be 
dangerous  to  the  dogmas  of  the  Church.  Aftto  the 
invention  of  printing  such  a  method  of  slaying  ideas  was 
not  so  easy;  but' the  ecclesiastical  authorities  had  tried 
their  best.  The  celebrated  edict  of  the  Archbishop  of 
Mainz  of  148  6;  prompted  by  the  number  of  Bibles  printed 
in ' the  vernacular:!,'  and  -trying  to  establish  a  censorship  of 
books,  may  be  taken  as  an  example.1 

1  It  ia  to  be  found  in  Gudenus,  Codex  Diplomaticus,  iv.  469. 


THE  INDEX  603 

Pope  Sixtus  IY.  in  1547  had  ordered  the  University 
of  Koln  to  see  that  no  books  (libri,  tractatus  aut  scripturce 
qualescunque)  were  printed  without  previous  licence,  and 
had  empowered  the  authorities  to  inflict  penalties  on  the 
printers,  purchasers,  and  readers  of  all  unlicensed  books. 
Alexander  vi.  had  sent  the  same  order  to  the  Archbishops 
of  Koln,  Mainz,  Trier,  and  Magdeburg  (1501).  In  a 
Constitution  of  Leo  x.,  approved  by  the  Lateran  Council  of 
1515,  it  was  declared  that  no  book  could  be  printed  in 
Rome  which  had  not  been  expressly  sanctioned  by  the 
Master  of  the  Palace,  and  in  other  lands  by  the  Bishop  of 
the  diocese  or  the  Inquisitor  of  the  district ;  and  this  had 
been,  homologated  by  the  Council  of  Trent.1  From  its 
reorganisation  in  1543  the  papal  Inquisition  in  Eome  had 
undertaken  this  work  of  censorship. 

Outside  the  States  of  the  Church  the  suppression  of 
books  and  the  requirement  of  ecclesiastical  licence  could 
only  be  carried  out  through  the  co-operation  of  the  secular 
authorities ;  and  they  naturally  demanded  some  uniformity 
in  the  books  condemned.  This  led  to  lists  of  prohibited 
books  being  drawn  up — as  at  Louvain  (1546  and  1550), 
at  Koln  (1549),  and  by  the  Sorbonne,  who  managed  the 
Inquisition  for  the  north  of  France  (1544  and  1551). 
Pope  Paul  iv.  drafted  the  first  papal  Index  in  1559.  It 
was  very  drastic,  and  its  very  severity  prevented  its 
success.2  It  was  this  Index  Lilrorum  Prohibitorum  which 

1  "Wishing  also  to  impose  a  restraint  .  .  .  upon  printers  .  .  .  who 
print  without  licence  of  ecclesiastical  superiors,  the  said  books  of  Sacred 
Scripture,  and  the  annotations  and  expositions  upon  them  of  all  persons 
indifferently  .  .  .  (this  Synod)  ordains  and  decrees,  that,  henceforth,  tlie 
Sacred  Scripture,  and,  especially  the  aforesaid  old  and  Vulgate  edition,  l>e 
printed  in  the  most  correct  manner  possible  ;  and  that  it  shall  not  be  lawful 
for  anyone  to  print,  or  cause  to  be  printed,  awy  "books  whatever  on  sacwd 
matters,  without  the  name.pf  the  author  ;  npr  to  sell  .them  in  future  or  even 
to  keep  them  by  them»  unless  they  shall  fame  been  first  examined  and 
approved  "by  the  ordinary  •  under  pain  of  anathema  and  fine  imposed  in  a 
canon  of  the  last  Lateran  Council"  (Sess.  iv.) 

3  The  original-  Index  <of  Pope  Paul  iv.  contained  va  Jist  of  no  less  than 
sixty-oriejpn?ifor$,  and  prohibited  the  reading  of  any  "book  printed  by  them. 
He  afterwards  withdrew  this  clause*  Bat  his  Index  gives  a  long  catalogue 
of  authors  all  of  whose  writings  are  prohibited*  It  is,  with  one  dis- 


604  THE   INQUISITION  AND   THE   INDEX 

was  discussed  by  the  Commission  appointed  at  the  Council 
of  Trent.1 

The  Commission  drafted  a  set  of  ten  rules  to  be 
followed  in  constructing  a  list  of  prohibited  books,  and 
left  the  actual  formation  of  the  Index  to  the  Pope.  This 
new  Index  (the  Tridentine  Index)  was  published  by  Pope 
Pius  iv.  in  1564.  His  successor,  Pius  v.,  appointed  a 
special  Commission  of  Cardinals  to  deal  with  the  question 
of  prohibited  books.  It  was  called  the  Congregation  of 
the  Index,  and  although  distinct  from  the  Inquisition, 
worked  along  with  it.  Its  work  was  done  very  thoroughly. 
Italian  scholarship  was  slain  so  far  as  the  peninsula  was 
concerned.  The  scholarship  of  Spain  and  Portugal  was 
.also  destroyed.  Learning  had  to, take  shelter  north  of  the 
Alps  and  the  Pyrenees.  So  thoroughly  was  the  work  of 
prohibition  carried  out,  so  many  difficulties  beset  even 
Roman  Catholic  authors,  that  Paleario  called  the  whole 
system  "  a  dagger  drawn  from  the  scabbard  to  assassinate 
all  men  of  letters  " ;  Paul  Sarpi  dubbed  it  "  the  finest  secret 
which  has  ever  been  discovered  for  applying  religion  to 
the  purpose  of  making  men  idiots  " ;  and  Latini,  a  champion 
of  the  Papacy,  declared  it  to  be  a  "  peril  which  threatened 
the  very  existence  of  books." 

The  rules  for  framing  the  Index,  drafted  by  the  com- 
mission of  the  Council  of  Trent,  are  curious  reading.  The 
writings  of  noted  Reformers,  of  Zwingli,  Luther,  and 
especially  of  Calvin,  were  absolutely  prohibited.  The 
Vulgate  was  to  be  the  only  authorised  version  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  the  only  one  to  be  quoted  as  an  inspired 
text.  Scholars  might,  by  special  permission  of  their 
ecclesiastical  superiors,  possess  another  version,  but  they 
were  never  to  quote  it  as  authoritative.  Versions  in  tho 
vernacular  were  never  to  be  quoted.  Bible  Dictionaries, 

tinguished  exception,  a  mere  list  of  names ;  but  it  contains:  "Desiderius 
Erasmus  Roterodamus  cum  universis  commentariip,  annotationibus,  scholiis, 
tlialogis,  epistolis,  censuris,  versionihus,  libris  et^criptis  suis,  etiam  «i  nil 
pcnitus  contra  religionem  vel  de  religione  continent." 

1  Session  xviii.— Decree  ai\eut  tho  choice  of  books  ;  Session  xxv,—  Anent 
the  Index  of  books,  the  Catechism,  Breviary,  and  Missal. 


THE   INDEX  605 

Concordances,  books  on  controversial  theology,  had  to  pass 
the  strictest  examination  at  the  hands  of  the  censors 
before  publication.  The  censors  were  directed  to  examine 
with  the  utmost  care  not  merely  the  text,  but  all 
summaries,  notes,  indexes,  prefaces,  and  dedications,  search- 
ing for  any  heretical  phrases  or  for  sentences  which  the 
unwary  might  be  tempted  to  think  heretical,  for  all 
criticisms  on  any  ecclesiastical  action,  for  any  satire  on  the 
clergy  or  on  religious  rites.  All  such  passages  were  to  be 
expunged. 

North  of  the  Alps  the  Index  had  small  effect.  It 
was  impotent  in  lands  where  the  Eeformation  was  firmly 
established ;  and  in  France,  papal  Germany,  and  north 
Italy  a  class  of  daring  colporteurs  carried  the  prohibited 
tracts,  Bibles,  and  religious  literature  throughout  the  lands. 

The  tremendous  powers  of  suppression  set  forth  in  the 
Tridentine  rules  could  not  avoid  doing  infinite  mischief  to 
thought  and  scholarship,  even  if  placed  in  the  hands  of 
qualified  and  well-intentioned  men.  But  the  censors  were 
neither  capable  nor  high-minded.  Scholars  refused  the 
odious  task.  Commentaries  on  the  Fathers  were  read  by 
men  who  knew  little  Latin,  less  Greek,  and  no  Hebrew. 
They  were  discovered  extorting  money  from  unfortunate 
authors,  levying  blackmail  on  booksellers,  listening  to  the 
whispers  of  jealous  rivals. 

So  effectually  was  learning  slain  in  Italy,  that  when 
the  Popes  at  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  century  strove  to 
revive  the  scholarship  of  the  Church  and  to  gather  together 
at  Eome  a  band  of  men  able  to  defend  the  Papacy  witjh 
their  pens,  these  scholars  had  to  work  under  immense 
disabilities.  Baronius  wrote  his  Annals,  and  Latini  edited 
the  Latin  Fathers,  both  of  them  ignorant  of  Greek,  and 
both  harassed  by  the  censorship. 

Some  of  the  more  distinguished  leaders  of  the  Counter- 
Eeformation  saw  the  dangers  which  lurked  in  this  system 
of  pure  suppression.  The  great  German  Jesuit,  Canisius, 
who  did  more  than  any  other  man  for  the  maintenance 
and  revival  of  the  -Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Germany, 


606  THE   INQUISITION   AND   THE    INDEX 

pointed  out  that  destruction  was  powerless  to  effect 
permanent  good.  The  people  must  have  books,  and  the 
Church  ought  to  supply  them.  He  laboured  somewhat 
successfully  to  that  end. 

§  4.   The  Society  of  Jesus  and  the  Counter-Reformation. 

Neither  the  Inquisition  nor  the  Index  account  for 
the  Counter-Keformation.  Repression  might  stamp  out 
Keformers  in  southern  Europe ;  but  faith,  enthusiasm,  un- 
selfish and  self-denying  work  were  needed  to  enable  the 
Eoman  Church  to  assume  the  offensive.  These  were 
supplied  to  a  large  extent  by  the  devoted  followers  of 
Ignatius  Loyola. 

Eoman  Catholicism  reached  its  ebb  during  the 
pontificate  of  Pius  iv.  It  stood  everywhere  on  the 
defensive,  seeing  one  stronghold  after  another  pass  into  the 
hands  of  a  victorious  Protestantism.  Pius  v.,  his  successor, 
was  the  first  fighting  Pope  of  the  new  Eoman  Catholicism. 
He  had  behind  him  the  reorganisation  effected  by  the 
Council  of  Trent ;  the  Eoman  Catholic  revival  of  mediaeval 
piety  of  which  Carlo  Borromeo,  Philip  Neri,  and  Francis 
de  Sales  were  distinguished  types ;  the  Inquisition  ,and 
Congregation  of  the  Index;  and,  above  all,  the  Company, 
of  Jesus.  Eomanism  under  his  leadership  boldly  assumed 
the  offensive. 

In  1564  it  seemed  as  if  all  Germany  might  become 
Protestant.  The  States  which  still  acknowledged  the  Papacy 
were  honeycombed  with  Protestant  communities.  Bavaria, 
the  Ehine  Provinces,  the  Duchy  of  Austria  itself,  were, 
according  to  contemporary  accounts,  more  than  half-Pro- 
testant. Nearly  all  the  seats  of  learning  were  Protestant. 
The  Eomanist  Universities  of  Vienna  and  Ingolstadt  wore 
almost  deserted  by  students.  Under  the  skilful  and 
enthusiastic  leadership  of  Peter  Canisius,  the  Jesuits  were 
mainly  instrumental  in  changing  this  state  of  things. 
They  entered  Bavaria  and  Austria.  They  appeared  there 
as  the  heralds  and  givers  of  education,  and  took  possession 


SOCIETY   OF   JESUS   AND   COUNTER- REFORMATION      607 

of  the  rising  generation.  They  established  their  schools  in 
all  the  principal  centres  of  population.  They  were  good 
teachers ;  they  produced  school-books  of  a  modern  type ; 
the  catechism  written  by  Canisius  himself  was  used  in  all 
their  schools  (it  transplanted  into  Eomanism  the  Lutheran 
system  of  catechising);  they  charged  no  fees;  they  soon 
had  the  instruction  of  the  Eoman  Catholic  children  in  their 
hands.  The  astonished  people  of  town  and  country  dis- 
tricts began  to  see  pilgrimages  of  boys  and  girls,  conducted 
like  modern  Sunday-school  treats,  led  by  the  good  fathers, 
to  visit  famous  churches,  shrines,  holy  crosses,  miraculous 
wells,  etc*  The  parents  were  induced  to  visit  the  teachers ; 
visits  led  to  the  confessional,  and  the  confessional  to  the 
directorate.  Then  followed  the  discipline  of  the  Spiritual 
Exercises,  usually  shortened  to  suit  the  capacities  of  the 
penitents.  Whole  districts  were  led  back  to  the  con- 
fessional— the  parents  following  the  children. 

The  higher  education  was  not  neglected.  Jesuit 
colleges  founded  at  Vienna  and  Ingolstadt  peopled  the 
decaying  universities  with  students,  and  gave  them  new 
life.  Student  associations,  on  the  model  of  that  founded 
by  Canisius  at  Koln,  were  formed,  and  were  affiliated  to 
the  Company  of  Jesus.  Pilgrimages  of  students  wended 
their  way  to  famous  shrines;  talented  young  men  sub- 
mitted their  souls  to  the  direction  of  the  Jesuit  fathers, 
and  shared  in  the  hypnotic  trance  given  by  the  course  of 
the  Spiritual  Exercises.  A  generation  of  ardent  souls  was 
trained  for  the  active  service  of  the  Eoman  Church,  and 
vowed  to  combat  Protestantism  to  the  death. 

The  Company  had  another,  not  less  important,  field 
of  work.  The  Peace  of  Augsburg  had  left  the  management 
of  the  religion  of  town  or  principality  in  the  hands  of  the 
ruling,  secular  authority.  The  maxim,  Guj us  regie  ejus 
religioy  placed  the. religious  convictions  of  the  population  of 
many  districts  at  the  mercy  of  one  mai|j  Many  Eomanist 
Princes  had  no  wish  to  -persecute,  still  J.ess  to  see  their 
principalities  depopulated  by  banishment.  Some  of  them 
had  given  guarantees  for  freedom  of  conscience  and  limited . 


COS  THE  INQUISITION   AND   THE   INDEX 

rights  of  worship  to  their  Protestant  subjects.  The  Jesuits 
set  themselves  to  change  this  condition  of  things.  They 
could  be  charming  confessors  and  still  more  delightful 
directors  for  the  obedient  sons  and  daughters  of  the 
Papacy.  They  were  invited  to  take  charge  of  the  souls  of 
many  of  the  Princes  and  especially  of  the  Princesses  of 
Germany.  They  set  themselves  to  charm,  to  command, 
and,  lastly,  to  threaten  their  penitents.  Toleration  of 
Protestants  they  represented  to  be  the  unpardonable  sin. 
They  succeeded  in  many  cases  in  inducing  Romanist  rulers 
to  withdraw  the  protection  they  had  hitherto  accorded  to 
their  Protestant  subjects,  who,  if  they  stood  firm  in  their 
faith,  had  to  leave  their  homes  and  seek  refuge  within  a 
Protestant  district. 

Thus  openly  and  stealthily  the  wave  of  Eomanist 
reaction  rolled  northwards  over  Germany,  and  district  after 
district  was  won  back  for  the  Papacy.  This  first  period 
of  the  Counter-Reformation  may  be  said  to  end  with  the 
sixteenth  century ;  the  second,  which  included  the  Thirty 
Years'  War,  lies  beyond  our  limit. 

The  savage  struggle  in  France,  culminating  in  the 
Massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  did  not  belong  to  the  New 
Roman  Catholicism,  and  lay  outside  of  what  may  be  called 
the  Counter-Reformation  proper.  The  force  of  this*  new 
aggressive  movement  was  first  felt  in  the  formation  of  the 
Holy  League,  which  had  for  its  object  to  prevent  Henry  of 
Navarre  from  ascending  the  throne  of  France.  The  League 
was  the  symbol  in  France  of  this  Counter-Reformation. 
The  Jesuits  never  attained  a  preponderating  influence  in 
that  country  until  the  days  of  Marie  de  Medici ;  but  lihey 
were  the  restless  and  ruthless  organisers  of  the  Holy 
League.  The  Jesuit  fathers,  Auger,  Henri  Saumier,  and, 
above  all,  Claude  Matthieu,  called  the  Oourner  de  la 
Ligue,  worked  energetically  on  its  behalf.  The  Company 
issued  tracts  from  their  printing-presses  asserting  the 
inalienable  rights  of  the  people  to  govern  and  therefore  to 
choose  their  rulers.  They  taught  that  while  God  had 
given  spiritual  power  into  the  hands  of  one  man,  the  Pope, 


SOCIETY   OF   JESUS    AND   COUNTER- REFORMATION      609 

He  had  bestowed  the  secular  power  on  the  many.  Kings, 
they  asserted,  do  not  reign  by  any  divine  right  of  hereditary 
succession,  but  by  the  will  of  the  people  and  of  the  Pope. 
Hence  all  Eomanist  France  was  justified  in  setting  aside 
the  King  of  Navarre  and  putting  in  his  place  the  Cardinal 
of  Bourbon,  his  uncle. 

The  arguments  they  laid  before  the  English  people 
were  based  on  principles  altogether  different,  even  contra- 
dictory. There  they  extolled  hereditary  and  legitimate 
succession.  Elizabeth  was  illegitimate,  and  Mary  of 
Scotland  had  divine  rights  to  the  throne  of  England.  It 
is  needless  to  relate  the  efforts  made  by  the  leaders  of  the 
Counter-Reformation  to  bring  England  back  to  the  Papacy 
— the  College  at  Douai,  the  English  College  at  Rome,  both 
erected  to  train  missionaries  for  service  against  the 
heretical  Queen ;  the  mission  of  the  Jesuits,  Parsons  and 
Campion.  The  student  of  history  can  scarcely  fail  to  note 
one  thing, — that  the  sailing  of  the  Spanish  Armada  marks 
the  flood-tide  of  the  first  period  of  the  Counter-Reforma- 
tion. After  the  ruin  of  the  great  fleet  the  first  wave  of 
the  reaction  seems  to  have  spent  itself.  The  League  failed 
in  France,  and  Henry  iv.  secured  the  rights  of  his  Protestant 
subjects  in  the  Edict  of  Nantes.  The  Hollanders  emerged 
triumphant  from  their  long  war  of  liberation.  Even  in 
Germany  the  defeat  of  the  Armada  dates  in  a  rough  way 
the  end  of  the  impetus  of  the  Romanist  reaction.  The 
German  Protestants  assumed  the  offensive  again,  and  an 
energetic  and  aggressive  Calvinism  redeemed  the  halting 
character  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation. 

Mr.  Symonds,  in  his  brilliant  sketches  of  the  forces  at 
work  to  make  the  Romanist  reaction,  thinks  that  the  part 
of  the  Jesuits  in  the  Counter-Reformation  has  rather  been 
exaggerated  than  insufficiently  recognised.  "  Without  the 
ecclesiastical  reform  which  originated  in  the  Tridentine 
Council ;  without  the  gold  and  sword  of  Spain ;  without  the 
stakes  and  prisons  of  the  Inquisition ;  without  the  warfare 
against  thought  conducted  by  the  Congregation  of  the 
Index, — the  Jesuits  alone  could  not  have  masterfully 
3')** 


610  THE   INQUISITION    AND   THE   INDEX 

governed  the  Catholic  revival." l  This  is  perhaps  true ; 
but  what  would  all  these  things  have  come  to  apart  from 
the  activity  of  the  Company  of  Jesus  ?  They  were  little 
better  than  the  mechanism  to  which  the  enthusiasm  and 
the  indomitable  work  bred  from  enthusiasm  gave  the  soul. 
Stern,  relentless,  savage  repression  can  do  much.  It  can 
make  a  desert  and  call  it  peace ;  but  it  cannot  requicken 
with  renewed  life.  The  gentle  piety  of  Carlo  Borromeo, 
the  sweet  languishing  tenderness  of  Francis  de  Sales,  the 
revived  mediaeval  mysticism  discernible  in  the  Eomanist 
reaction,  had  neither  the  religious  depth  nor  the  endurance 
needed  for  the  times.  Ignatius  breathed  the  Spanish 
spirit,  at  once  wildly  visionary  and  intensely  practical, 
into  his  Company,  and  they  transfused  it  throughout  the 
Church  of  the  Counter-Reformation — the  exalted  devotion, 
the  tenacity  which  no  reverses  could  wear  out,  and  the 
unquenchable  religious  hope.  They  ruled  it  as  the  soul 
governs  the  body. 

It  was  the  time  of  Spanish  domination.  Spain  grasped 
the  New  World  and  hoped  to  subdue  the  Old.  Her 
soldiers  were  the  best  in  Europe.  They  dreamed  of 
nothing  but  conquests.  The  Jesuits  brought  the  Spanish 
spirit  into  the  Church.  Others  might  scheme,  and  wish, 
and  wonder*  They  worked.  They  reaped  the  harvest 
which  hard  and  unremitting  labour  gathers  in  every  field. 
It  was  not  for  nothing  that  Adrian  and  other  papal 
statesmen  dubbed  Luther  another  Mahomet;  the  word 
kindled  ia  every  Spanish  breast  the  memory  of  their 
centuries  of  war  with  the  Moslems  and  its  victorious 
ending.  If  the  gold  and  sword  of  Spain  were  at  the 
service  of  the  Counter-Eeformation,  it  was  the  Spanish 
spirit  incarnate  in  the  Company  of  Jesus  that  made  such 
dry  bones  live. 

We  must  remember  that  In  the  first  period  of  the 

Eomanist  reaction  we  have  to  do  with  the  Jesuits  of  the 

sixteenth  century,  and  must  banish  from  our  minds  the  history 

of  the  Order  in  the  two  centuries  that  follow.     Its  worst 

1  Symonds,  The  JKenaissanee  in  Italy:  Tlw  Catholic  JReaction,  i,  801* 


SOCIETY   OF  JESUS   AND   COUNTER-REFORMATION      611 

side  had  scarcely  appeared.  Its  theory  of  Probabilisiu,  by 
which  directors  were  trained  to  transform  all  deadly  sins, 
even  murder,  adultery,  and  theft,  into  venial  offences,  and 
casuistry  became  a  method  for  the  entire  guidance  of  souls, 
belonged  to  a  later  period.  It  was  not  till  the  seventeenth 
century  that  the  forgiveness  of  sins  had  been  reduced  by 
them  to  a  highly  refined  art.  Their  shameless  neglect  of 
religion  and  morality,  when  the  political  interests  of  the 
Church  and  of  the  Society  seemed  to  require  it,  was  also 
later.  What  the  depressed  Eomanists  of  the  sixteenth 
century  saw  was  a  body  of  men  whom  no  difficulties  daunted, 
who  spent  themselves  in  training  boys  and  girls  and  in 
animating  them  with  religious  principles;  who  persuaded 
boys  and  youths  to  attend  daily  Mass,  to  resort  to  monthly 
confession,  to  study  the  articles  of  their  faith ;  who  elevated 
that  obedience,  which  for  generations  they  had  been  taught 
was  due  to  the  earthly  head  of  the  Church,  into  a  sublime 
religious  principle. 

All  this  the  Romanism  of  the  Counter-Eeformation 
owed  to  those  three  unknown  men,  who  crept  into  Borne 
through  the  Porto  del  Popolo  during  Easter  1538  to  beg 
Pope  Paul  ni.  to  permit  them  and  their  companions  to 
enroll  themselves  in  a  new  Order  for  the  defence  of  the 
faith. 

It  is  true  that  men  can  never -get  rid  of  their  personal 
responsibility  in  spiritual  things,  but  multitudes  will  always 
attempt  to  cast  the  burden  upon  others*  In  all  such  souls 
the  spirit  of  the  Counter-Eeformation  lives  and  moves  and 
has  its  being,  and  they  are  sustained,  consciously  or  un- 
consciously, by  that  principle  of  blind  obedience  which  its 
preachers  taught.  It  is  enough  for  us  to  remember  that 
no  weakened  sense  of  personal  responsibility  and  no 
amount  of  superstitious  practice  can  utterly  quench  the 
conscience  that  seeks  ibs  God,  or  can  hinder  that  upward 
glance  to  the  Father  in  heaven  which  carries  with  it  a 
living  faith* 


INDEX. 


The,  Swiss  river,  boundary 
between  the  Provinces  of  Mainz 
and  BesaiKjon,  23. 

Abjuration,  Act  of,  declaration  of 
Dutch  Independence,  267. 

Abjuration  of  Papal  Supremacy  by 
the  Church  of  England,  332. 

Act  of  Restraint  of  Appeals  (Eng- 
land), 329. 

Act  abolishing  Diversity  of  opinion 
(England),  348. 

Act  of  Uniformity  (Edward  vi.)»  The 
Mrat,  357,  360. 

Act  of  Uniformity  (Edward  vi.),  The 
tiecvnd,  363. 

Act  de  heretico  combnrendo,  374. 

Act  of  Uniformity  (Elizabeth),  390 jf., 
895,  401/.,  408,  419. 

Act  of  Supremacy  (Elizabeth),  890  jf., 
898/p  *97»  401,  408/. 

Acts  completing  England's  secession 
from  Home,  381, 

Acts  of  Henry  vm.  revived  by  Eliza- 
beth, 893  and  w. 

Adda,  The  (Val  Tellina),  50. 

Adrian  vi.,  his  ideas  of  the  need 
of  reformation,  496 ;  a  Dutch 
Ximouos,  497  ;  an  Inquisitor,  497 ; 
in  Homo,  497  ;  tries  to  reform  the 
Curia,  498  ;  the  martyr  of  the 
Spanish  Reformation,  499  :  failure 
in  Ufa,  success  after  death,  500 ; 
494,  610. 

Advertisement*  of  Archbishop  Parker, 
406,  41 8  n, 

Advoyw,  The,  the  chief  Magistrate 
of  Bom,  41  n. 

Agon,  Reformed  church  at,  166. 

Agrarian  troubles  in  England,  345, 
359,  887. 

Agrippa,  Cornelius,  64  n. 

A  We,  a  district  of  the  Pays  de  Vaud, 
67  ;  Fare]  at,  6?,  69, 


Albert  of  Brandenburg,  3. 

Alcala,  College  at,  491  /,  537. 

Alciat,  Andre,  lecturer  ir  Law,  95. 

Aleander,  Hieronymus,  Papal  Legate 
at  Worms,  in  the  Netherlands, 
229. 

Alencon,  The  Duke  of,  Francis,  till 
1574,  then  Duke  of  Anjou,  179  w., 
203. 

Alexander,  of  Aries,  Peter,  358. 

Alva,  Ferdiuando  Alvarez  de  Toledo, 
Duke  of,  193,  255/.,  259,  262. 

Amboise,  Town  of,  146,  310  ;  Con- 
spiracy of,  176  ;  Edict  of,  192. 

Ammonias,  Andreas,  Latin  secretary 
to  Henry  yni.,  316. 

Amsterdam,  236,  239. 

Anabaptists,  The,  outside  the  Peace 
of  Augsburg,  5 ;  in  Zurich,  35  ; 
in  the  Netherlands,  224/. ;  tlieir 
origin,  235,  423,  432jf.  ;  places  of 
refuge,  238,  451 ;  attempts  to  gain 
a  town  in  the  Netherlands,  238/. ; 
old  mood  of  describing,  430/., 
431  n. ;  connection  with  the  social 
revolt,  432 ;  with  the  Brethren, 
432 ;  their  organisation,  435  ;  their 
hymns,  435,  449 ff. ;  their  strong 
individuality,  487 ;  views  on 
Passive  Resistance,  438  ;  tlieir 
evangelists,  439  ;  repudiated  a 
State  Church,  442;  their  "  sepa- 
ration "  from  the  world,  443,  461 ; 
persecutions,  236 /.,  445  ;  in  Swit- 
zerland, 446/. ;  in  Minister,  459jf. ; 
polygamy  among,  463jf. ;  their 
views  on  Marriage,  464. 

Andelot,  Francis  de,  brother  of 
Admiral  Coligny,  172,  194. 

Anduze,  Huguenot  stronghold,  201. 

Angeles,  Francisco  delos,  and  Luther, 
495. 

Angers,  Reformed  church  at,  166. 


614 


INDEX 


Anhalt  becomes  Calvinist,  3. 
Anna  Eeinhard  and  Zwingli,  36. 
Annates  (England),  328,  331. 
Anne  of  Cleves,  342,  347,  349. 
Anti-Trinitarians,  4*22,  424/. 
Antoine  de  Bourbon,  titular  King  of 

Navarre,  20,   172,   175,  178,  181, 

186,  192.     See  Bourbon. 
Antwerp,  234,  '254  f. 
Apology,  The,  of  William  of  Orange, 

267. 
Apostles,    The    Twelve    (nickname), 

252. 
Apostolic     Tribunal     (Inquisition), 

The,  598. 
Appenzell  (Swiss   Canton),  22,   46, 

49. 
Aouila,   Bishop   of,  Ambassador  of 

Philip  II.,  386. 

Archeteles  (treatise  by  Zwingli),  33. 
Areopagitica,  The;  13. 
Armada,  Destruction  of  the  Spanish, 

212. 

Arran,  the  Earl  of,  281,  283,  298  n. 
Arthur,  Prince  of  Wales,  married  to 

Catharine  of  Aragon,  322. 
Articles  of  Geneva,  105 jf.,  124. 
Articles,  The  Ten,  333 JT. 
Articles,  The  Six,  348/.,  355,  358. 
Articles,  The  Forty-two,  363,  411. 
Articles,  The  Thirty-eight,  414  f. 
Articles,  The  Thirty-nine,  363, 411/., 

415,  418. 
Articles  of  the  order  and  government 

of  the  Church,  The,  417. 
Articles,     The    Twenty -one    (Ana- 
baptist), 459,  465. 
Articles,  The  Twelve  (The  Apostles' 

Creed),  518. 
Arundel,  the  Constitutions  of  Thomas, 

337. 
Assembly    of    Notables     (France), 

Attrition  and  Contrition,  as  denned 
at  the  Council  of  Trent,  584. 

Aubenas,  Huguenot  stronghold,  201. 

Aubigny,  Reformed  church  at,  166. 

Augsburg,  Peace  of,  Elizabeth's  desire 

'  to  take  advantage  of,  397,  40591., 
408,  414. 

Augsburg  Confession,  124,  341,  397, 
415,  576. 

Augsburg  Interim,  567  ;  20. 

Ausberger,  Jacob,  Reformer  of  Mrihl- 
hansen,  43. 

Aventuriers,  Les,  in  France,  144. 

Aytta,  Vigilius  van,  member  of  the 
Council  of  State  for  the  Nether- 
lauds,  243. 


BabyJonian  Captivity  of  the  Church 
of  Christ,  334,  494. 

Baden  (Switzerland),  Diet  at,  47. 

Bale,  John,  318. 

Band  subscri&it  by  the  Lords,  289. 

Baptism,  Ceremony  of,  according  to 
the  Reformed  rite,    69  ;    first  in 
stance  in  Geneva,  83  j  Aimbapti&t 
mode  of  administering,  435  ;  mode 
in  Munster,  461. 

Baptism,  Doctrine  of,  defined  at  the 
Council  of  Trent,  581. 

Barcelona,  Ladies  of,  Ignatius' 
earliest  disciples,  533,  561. 

Barlaymont,  Baron  de  (Netherlands), 
243,  250,  255. 

Barnes,  Dr.  Robert  (England),  18, 
340,  349. 

Barricades,  the  day  of  (France),  211. 

Barry,  Godfrey  de,  Seigneur  de  la 
Renaudie  (France),  175. 

Basel,  Bishopric  of,  23,  64. 

Basel,  Town  of,  the  Reformation  in, 
38  ;  accepts  Calvinism,  60  ;  regu- 
lation of  morals  in,  109 ;  22,  £5, 
122. 

Bastile,  The,  used  as  a  prison  for 
Protestants,  164. 

Bauny,  qui  tollit  peccata  mundi  per 
definitionem,  556. 

Bavaria,  48  ;  Anabaptists  in,  449. 

Bearnese,  The,  Henry  iv.  of  France, 
218. 

Beata,  Spanish  Mystics,  630. 

Beaton,  David,  Archbishop  of  Sfc. 
Andrews,  Cardinal,  282/.,  845  n. 

Beatus,  lihenauus,  Humanist,  18  71. 

Beda,  Noel,  leader  of  tlio  Romanist 
party  in  the  University  of  Paris, 
94,  535. 

Beggars,  The,  250/1  Soe  Wild- 
Beggars,  Sea-Beggars. 

Bclcantones  des  globcnp  tind  Ubenn  der 
getnein  Criste  zu  Monster,  464, 

Benedictines,  Reformation  among 
the,  509. 

Bentheim  Confession,  4  n. 

Ber,  Hans,  Anabaptist  evangelist, 
489. 

Bern,  The  Reformation  in,  40  ;  The 
Ten  Theses  of,  42,  45/.,  103 ; 
protects  Swiss  Protestants,  45,  68  ; 
seeks  to  evangelise  Western.  Swit- 

'  mi-land.  63,  66, 108/  j  Liturgy  of, 
in  UHC  iu  Frondi  Switzerland,  69, 
117,  118jp. ;  demands  a  Public 
Disputation  at  Lausanne,  70  ; 
Synod  at,  73  ;  protects  the  Evan- 
gelicals of  Geneva,  79/. ;  conquers 


INDEX 


615 


the  Pays  de  Vaud,  89  ;  regulation 
of  morals  in,  109  ;  commanding 
position  in  Western  Switzerland, 
116  ;  Consistory  of,  117  ff. ;  inter- 
cedes with  Geneva  on  Calvin's 
behalf,  121/. ;  22,  48,  113,  129. 

Bernard,  Jacques,  minister  at  Geneva, 
131%. 

Berquin,  Louis,  a  French  Lutheran, 
18,  143.  ' 

Besan9on,  Arcliiepiscopal  Province 
of,  23. 

Beze,  Theodore  de  (Beza),  95,  155, 
313;  atPoissy,  186/. 

Bible,  The  English,  335,  337/.,  389. 

Biel  or  Bienne  (Swiss  Canton),  46; 
becomes  Calvinist,  60. 

Bishops'  Book,  The,  10,  319,  336. 

Blaarer  (Blaucr),  Ambrose,  43,  47. 

Blandrata,  Giorgio,  Anti-Trinitarian, 
426. 

Blast  .  .  .  against  the  monstrous 
Regiment  of  Women*  292,  296. 

Blaurock  (Brother  Jdrg),  446/. 

Blois,  town  of,  146,  166. 

Bloody  Tribunal,  The,  255. 

Boabdilla,  Nicholas,  Jesuit,  537,  557. 

Bockelaon,  Jan  (Jan  of  Leyden), 
arrived  at  Minister,  459  ;  leader  in 
Miinster,  463  ff. ;  introduced  poly- 
gamy, 465/1 

Bocquet,  Christopher,  a  Dominican 
preacher  in  Geneva,  75  ;  called  a 
Lutheran  preacher,  75  n. 

Boekbinder,  Bartholomaeus,  disciple 
of  Jan  Matthys,  459. 

Boleya,  Anne,  324,  331. 

Bolsec,  Jerome  (Geneva),  130. 

Bormer,  Edmund,  Bishop  of  London, 
369,  374/.,  380/.,  389. 

Book  of  Common  Order,  The  (Scot- 
land), 306. 

Book  of  Communion,  The  (England), 
356, 

Book  of  Discipline,  The  First  (Scot- 
land), 307. 

Books,  Index  of  Prohibited.  See 
Index. 

Borgia,  Francis,  Duke  of  Candia,  a 
Jesuit,  556. 

Borromean  League  (Switzerland),  60. 

Borromeo,  Carlo,  Cardinal,  60,  595. 

Bourbon,  Antrim  de  (1518-1562), 
Duke  of  Vend6me,  and  through 
his  wife,  Jeanne  d'Albret,  titular 
King  of  "Navarre,  20,  172,  175, 
178.  181,  186,  192. 

Louis  de,  brother  of  Antoine, 
Priuoo    of    Condi*     (1530-1CC9), 


Bourbon  : 

married  (1)  EleVaore  de  Eoye,  (2) 
Francoiae  d'Orieans,  172,  175, 
178/1,  187,  190/ 

Charles  de,  brother  of  Antoine 
(1523-1590),  Cardinal  de  Bourbon, 
chosen  King  by  the  League  as 
Chsirles  x.,  209,  216,  212/. 

Henry,  son  of  Antoine  and 
Jeanne  d'Albret,  King  of  Navarre 
and  King  Henry  iv.  of  France 
(1163-1610),  recognised  as  leader 
of  the  Huguenots,  194  ;  married 
to  Marguerite  de  Valois,  197 ; 
becomes  heir  to  the  French  throne, 
206 ;  declared  by  the  Pope  in- 
capable of  succeeding,  208 ;  at 
Tours  with  Henry  m.,  214  ;  suc- 
ceeds as  Henry  iv.,  216 ;  hiss 
Declaration,  217  ;  becomes  a 
Koman  Catholic,  219/. ;  grants 
the  Edict  of  Nantes,  221. 

Henry  de  (1552-1588),  son  of 
Louis  of  Conde*  and  EleWore  de 
Boye,  195,  204,  208. 

Antoinette  de  (1494-1583),  aunt 
of  Antoine  de  Bourbon,  married 
Claude,  Duke  of  Guise,  the  mother 
of  the  Guises,  190. 

Bourg,  Antoine  du,  the  Chancellor, 
146  ;  the  martyr,  160,  170,  174/. 

Bourges,  Calvin  at,  95 ;  church  at, 
166  ;  249. 

Breda,  249. 

Brederode,  Henry,  Viscount,  249/. 

Bremen  becomes  Calvinist,  3. 

Bremen  Consensus,  4n. 

Bres,  Guido  de,  drafted  the  Belgic 
Confession,  272. 

Brethren,  The,  432/.,  434,  440,  445. 

Brethren,  of  the  Common  Lot,   The, 
226,  228. 

Brethren   and   Sisters   of  the   Free 
Spirit,  The,  441. 

Brigonnet,    Guillaume,     Bishop    of 
Meaux,  11,  141  and  n. 

Brile  (Briele)  taken    by   the    Sea- 
Beggars,  260. 

Broet,  Paul,  the  Jesuit,  537. 

Brooks,  James,  Bishop  of  Gloucester, 
378,  380. 

Bruno,  Giordano,  423. 

Bucer,  Martin,  Reformer  of  Strass- 
burg,  43,  73,  149,  358,  507,  519. 

Buchanan,  George,  281,  533  and  n., 
556. 

Bud6,  Guillaume  (Budteus),  12,  95. 

Buenzli  Gregory,  teacher  of  Zwingli, 
25, 


616 


INDEX 


Bullinger,  Henry,  successor  to 
Zwingli  in  Zurich,  on  ecclesiastical 
excommunication,  111  ;  influence 
in  England,  360,  364,  402  and  n., 
437 ;  60. 

Burgundy.     See  Charles  the  Bold* 
Busche,  Hermann  von  dem,  of  Mar- 
burg, 457. 

Cachi,  Jean,Eom.  Cath.  in  Geneva,  86. 

Caffard,  80. 

Cahiers,  list  of  grievances  presented 
to  the  States-General,  182,  185. 

Calvin  (Cauvin),  Jean,  "atrocious 
mysteries  of,'1  1  n.,  415  ;  doctrine 
of  the  Holy  Supper,  58/.,  412  f.  ; 
on  substance  &iia  presence,  59,  412  ; 
preachers  trained  by,  71 ;  youth 
and  education,  92  ff,  ;  at  the  Col- 
leges de  la  Marche  and  Montaigu, 
93 ;  at  the  College  Fortet,  95  ;  at 
Orleans  and  Bourges,  95  ;  conver- 
sion, 95,  97  ;  edition  of  Seneca's 
De  dementia,  12,  96 ;  knowledge 
of  the  Classics  and  of  Patristic,  96, 
104,  109;  joined  the  Protestant 
community  in  Paris,  97  ;  writes 
the  Discourse  on  Christian  Philo- 
sophy, delivered  by  Nicholas  Cop 
before  the  University  of  Paris,  98  ; 
in  Basel,  99;  in  Geneva  with 
Farel,  102  ff.  ;  at  the  Disputation 
at  Lausanne,  103  ;  aimed  at  restor- 
ing the  ecclesiastical  usages  of  the 
first  three  centuries,  109 ;  his  idea 
of  ecclesiastical  discipline,  108  ff.  ; 
believed  that  tbe  secular  power 
should  enforce  ecclesiastical  sen- 
tences, 110 ;  his  views  of  ecclesi- 
astical discipline  not  adopted  by 
Geneva,  112;  his  Catechisms,  113, 
306 ;  his  Confession  sworn  to  by  the 
Genevese,  115  ;  opposition  to,  in 
Geneva,  115  - 124 ;  accused  of 
heresy,  116  ;  and  the  ceremonies  of 
Bern,  llSff. ;  at  the  Synod  of 
Lausanne,  118/.  ;  banished  from 
Geneva,  74  n.,  120  ;  at  the  Synod 
of  Zurich,  122 ;  signs  the  Augs- 
Twrg  Confession,  124  ;  settles  at 
Strassburg,  124;  asked  to  return 
to-  Geneva,  125/.  ;  returns,  127 ; 
work  in  Geneva,  provides  a  trained 
ministry,  132 ;  plans  for  education, 
183;  influence  on  the  French 
Protestant  Church,  153  and  n., 
158  ;  fond  of  children,  154  ;  as  a 
writer  of  French  prose,  155  and  n. ; 
a  democrat,  155/.  ;  value  of  his 


theology  for  the  Reformation,  156  ; 
influence  on  the  organisation  of  the 
French  Church,  164 ;  discourages 
rebellion  in  France,  175,  writes 
against  iconoclasm,  183,  191  ; 
Reuan  and  Michelet  on,  159  ;  in- 
fluence on  the  Scottish  Church, 
305  j  at  the  Hegensburg  Conference, 
523 /.  ;  8 jr.,  12,  16,  27, 138,  147/., 
305,  514,  557,  577. 

Cambridge,  17,  276,  320. 

Campeggio,  Thomas,  Bishop  of  Feltre, 
a  Cardinal,  in  England,  323^.  ; 
proposed  that  the  Princess  Mary 
should  marry  her  half-brother,  the 
Duke  of  Richmond,  323 ;  at  the 
Council  of  Trent,  570. 

Canisius,  Peter,  a  Jesuit,  557 jf.,  591, 
595,  605/. 

Canon  Lawinthe  Elizabethan  Church, 
417/. 

Canus,  Alexandre,  Reformed  preacher 
in  Geneva,  79. 

Cany,  Madame  de,  158. 

Capistrano,  John  of,  a  revival  preacher 
in  the  Abruzzi,  502. 

Capito,  Wolfgang,  38,  43,  64  «.,  453, 
456. 

Capucins,  a  reformation  of  the  Fran- 
ciscans, 507/. 

Caraffa,  Giovanni  Pietro,  Cardinal 
and  later  Pope  Paul  IV.,  member 
of  the  Oratory  of  Divine  Love,  505  ; 
the  Theatines,  509/.  ;  character 
and  training,  515  ;  an  Inquisitor, 
601 ;  his  conduct  as  Pope,  585 /.  : 
510,545. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  on  the  Thirty 
Years'  War,  2. 

Caroli,  Pierre,  accuses  Calvin  of 
heresy,  116. 

Carvajal,  Juan  de,  Cardinal,  497. 

Cassel,  Confession  of,  3,  4  n. 

CastelHo,  Sebastian,  130. 

Catechism,  The  JRacovian,  473,  477. 

Catechism  of  the  Brethren,  The,  433. 

Catechisms  of  the  Reformed  Church, 
the  Heidelberg,  8,  4n.,  306; 
Calvin's,  113,  306 ;  Craig's,  806. 

Catharine  of  Aragon,  321  jfc,  824. 
330,  342,  888. 

Catherine  de'  Medici,  wife  of  Henry 
II.  of  France,  begins  to  reign,  178  ; 
her  children,  179  n.  ;  and  ladies* 
side  -  saddle,  180  n. ;  at  Poisay, 
186/. ;  leader  of  the  Romanist 
party  in  France,  192  ;  matrimonial 
policy,  196 ;  dies,  214  ;  178,  177, 
180,  195,  213,  818. 


INDEX 


617 


Cos  communes  and  cos  privilegies, 
162. 

Cauvin,  Gerard,  father  of  Calvin, 
92jf.  ;  95. 

Cecil,  Sir  William,  afterwards  Lord 
Bnrghley,  19,  292,  295,  297 ff.9 
311/.,  386/.,  396. 

Ceremonies  of  JSern,  The,  118  ff, 

Cervini,  Marcello,  Cardinal  de  Santa 
Croce,  Legate  at  the  Council  of 
Trent,  566,  568  ff. 

Ohablais,  District  of,  117. 

Chambery,  65. 

Chambre  Ardente,  The,  162,  169,  290. 

Chandieu,  Antoine  de,  minister  at 
Paris,  167. 

Chapuis,  Jean,  Romanist  in  Geneva, 
86. 

Chapuys,  Eustace,  Ambassador  of 
Charles  v.  in  England,  330,  369. 

Charles  v.,  Emperor  of  Germany, 
disapproved  of  the  Bern  Disputa- 
tion, 41 ;  how  he  inherited  the 
Netherlands,  225 ;  consolidates  the 
Netherlands,  226  jf, ;  establishes 
the  Inquisition  there,  229 ;  in- 
creasing severity  towards  Protest- 
ants, 231 ;  Lutherans  among  his 
family,  233  ;  abdicates  at  Brussels, 
240  ;  and  Philip  n.,  240/.  ;  per- 
suaded that  Protestants  and 
Romanists  may  be  re-united,  518, 
523,  567;  225,  327,  358,  868/., 
371,  377,  496/.,  581. 

Charles  IX.,  King  of  France,  178, 
186,  196,  198,  203/. 

"  Charles  XM"  the  League  King  of 
France.  See  Bourbon. 

Charles  the  Bold,  Duke  of  Burgundy, 
22/,,  26,  225. 

Chateaubriand,  Mid  of,  161/.,  169, 
296. 

Chatelet,  The  Grand  and  the  Petit, 
prisons  in  Paris,  164. 

Christian  Civic  League  (Protestant), 
48,  51. 

Christian  Philosophy,  Discourse  on, 
98. 

Christian  Union,  The  (Romanist),  48. 

Christiana  Religionis  Institutio.  See 
Institutio. 

Church,  Calvin's  Doctrine  of  the,  7, 
110,  129. 

Church,  Doctrine  of  the,  among  the 
Anabaptists,  445. 

Church,  Doctrine  of  the,  among  the 
Sooinians,  480/. 

Church,  Doctrine  of  the,  at  the  Re- 
gensburg  Conference,  521/. 


Classis,  ecclesiastical  court  in  Dutch 
Church,  271. 

Clement,  Jacques,  assassinates  Henry 
in.,  215/.  y 

Clement  vir.    See  Popes. 

Clergy,  dissolute  lives  at  Geneva, 
90  w.;  disliked  in  England,  319, 
326. 

Codure,  Jean,  The  Jesuit,  537. 

Cognac,  a  Hugueuot  stronghold,  194/". 

Colleges  in  Paris,  de  la  Marche,  93  ; 
de  Ste  Barbe,  98,  533  and  n.  ;  de 
Montaigu,  94/.,  533;  Fortet,  95  ; 
de  Navarre,  97  n. 

Colleges  founded  in  Spain  by 
Ximines,  491. 

Colleges,  French,  seed-beds  of  the 
Reformation,  151. 

Colet,  Dean,  319,  334. 

Coligny,  Gaspard  de,  Admiral  of 
France,  at  the  Assembly  of  Not- 
ables, 177 ;  at  the  States-General, 
182;  at  Poissy,  186;  in  La 
Rochelle,  194/.  ;  attempted  as- 
sassination of,  197  ;  murdered  by 
Guise,  199  ;  172,  184,  191,  196. 

Colloquy,  an  ecclesiastical  court  in 
the  French  Protestant  Church, 
168. 

Colloquy  at  Marburg,  50. 

Colloquy  at  Poissy,  20,  186  ff. 

Colonna,  Vittoria,  505/.,  508,  545, 
559,  587  n. 

Colporteurs,  French  Protestant,  152. 

Commentary  on  the  Psalms,  Calvin's, 
97,  101. 

Communism  among  the  Anabaptists, 
438,  457,  461/. 

Como,  Lake  of,  50. 

Company  of  Jesus,  The,  the  begin- 
nings of  the,  546,  548/,  ;  its 
constitution,  550/.,  551  and  n.  ; 
power  in  the  lianas  of  the  General, 
552/.  ;  limitations  to  his  power, 
553  ;  rapid  spread  of  the  Order, 
563  ;  and  the  Council  of  Trent, 
595 ;  and  the  Counter-Reformation, 
606 ;  and  education,  607. 

Compromise,  The  (Netherlands),  249. 

Compluteusian  Polyglot,  The,  492. 

Conciergerie,  Huguenot  Prison  in 
Paris,  164. 

Concordat.  The  Spanish,  of  1482, 
491.  ' 

Conference  at  Westminster,  20,  400/. 

Confession,  Augsburg,!,  341, 415, 576. 

Confesaionsof  the  Reformed  Churches, 
3,  4 w.,  On.  ;  Consensus  Tigurinus, 
60 ;  Confession  of  Geneva,  114 ; 


618 


INDEX 


Confession,  of  Waldenses  of  the 
Durance,  149 ;  the  JBelf/ic  Confes- 
sion, 272 /.  ;  the  Scots'  Confession, 
300,  302  f.  ;  the  Confession  of  the 
French  Church,  167/.  ;  Helvetic 
Confession  (Second),  413. 

Congregation,  The  (in  the  Scottish 
Reformation  Church),  289,  290, 
299/. 

Congregation,  The  (in  Western  Swit- 
zerland), 105  n. 

Congregation  of  the  Holy  Office,  The 
(Inquisition),  601. 

Congregation  of  the  Index,  The,  604/. 

ConsUiutn  .  .  .  de  emendenda  ecclesia, 
510. 

Consilium  .  .  .  super  reforinatione 
sanctcB  Romance  JScclesice,  511. 

Consistorial  ecclesiastical  organisa- 
tion, 4,  7. 

Consistory,  of  Bern,  117,  122;  of 
Geneva,  128/. ;  in  the  French 
Church,  165/.;  in  the  Dutch 
Church,  270^. 

Constance,  Bishop  of,  30/.,  33,  34, 
41,  47  ;  bishopric  of,  23  ;  City  of, 
47/.  ;  Lake  of,  48. 

Consulta,  the  confidential  advisers  of 
the  Kegent  of  the  Netherlands, 
243^. 

Contarini,  Casparo,  Senator  of  Venice 
and  Cardinal,  Member  of  the 
Oratory  of  Divine  Love,  505  ; 
character  and  training,  513  ;  and 
Calvin,  514 ;  sent  as  Legate  to 
Germany,  5l6jp. ;  at  the  Regens- 
burg  Conference,  519^.  j  returns 
to  Italy,  524. 

Continental  Divines  in  England,  358 
and  n. 

Convocation  (England),  327,  329/., 
355,  363/.,  390,  411,  416,  418. 

Cop,  Nicholas,  12,  95,  98,  145. 

Cope,  403/.  n.,  406  and  n.,  407. 

Coraut,  Elie,  the  blind  preacher  of 
Geneva,  74  n.{  119  and  ».,  120." 

Cordier,  Mathurin,  teacher  of  Calvin, 
93  and  n.,  94,  154. 

Cortese,  Gregorio,  Abbot  of  San 
Giorgio  Maggiore,  505,  509. 

Council  General  of  the  Union  of 
Catholics  (France),  213. 

Council  of  Sens  (France),  144. 

Council  of  Tumults,  or  the  Bloody 
Tribunal  (Netherlands),  255. 

Coutras,  Battle  of,  209. 

Covenants  in  Scottish  Church  History* 

288/.,  299. 
Cox,  Dr.,  Bishop  of  Ely,  390,  402  n. 


Cranmer,  Thomas,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  trial  and  martyrdom, 
37Sff.  ;  recanfatiotis  of,  380  ;  8, 
318,  329/.,  338,  349,  371,  379. 

Craw  (Crawar),  Paul,  in  Scotland,  277. 

Crescentio,  Mai  cello,  Cardinal,  sole 
Legate  at  the  second  meeting  of 
the  Council  of  Trent,  581. 

Cromwell,  Thomas,  Earl  of  Essex* 
332,  343,  347,  348. 

Curia,  The,  30,  495,  498,  503,  511, 
517,  586. 


585,  591  ;  its  triumph  there,  593. 
Cybo,  Caterina,  Princess  of  Camerino, 
506,  508. 

Dalbiac,  Charles,  French  Protestant 

minister,  181. 
Damasus,  Pope,  130. 
Danes,  Pierre,    *'  royal  lecturer"  in 

Paris,  96. 
Daniel,    Francis,    correspondent    of 

Calvin,  97  n. 
Danube,  River,  25. 
Dathenus,  Peter,  metrical  version  of 

the  Psalms  in  Dutch,  252, 
Dauphine*,  39  n.,  74. 
Daventer,  full  of  Anabaptists,  2S7,/. 
Davidis,  Francis,  An  ti-  Trinitarian, 

429. 

Declaration  ofJBremen,  The,  3. 
Declaration  of  the  Principal  Articles 

of  Religion  (England),  411. 
Decretals,  The,  78. 
Decretum  pro  Armenia,  used  at  the 

Council  of  Trent,  583. 
Defensor  Pocis,  The,  of  Marsiglio  of 

Padua,  434. 
Delft,  Town  of,  264. 
Democracy  and  autocracy  (Knox  and 

Mary),  813. 
Denck,  Hans,  Humanist  and  Ana- 

baptists, 424,  435/.,  442. 
Dendermonde,  255. 
Denti6re,  Marie,  wife    of  Froment, 

74  #. 

Device,  TJw  (England),  396. 
Diane  dePoitiors,  151,  173,  206. 
Dieppe,  John  Knox  at,  291. 
Die.1,  The  Swiss,  at  Luzern,  32  ;  at 

Baden,  47. 

Dilemburg,  The  Synod  of,  4  ?i. 
DistiplfoMde  Fexcommunicotion,  106. 
Discipline,  ecclesiastical,  108  /.,  805; 

opposition  to,  in  Geneva,  116  j  how 

exercised  in  Geneva,  129  ;  to  bo 

exercised  through  secular  authority, 

8/.,  111/.,  489. 


INDEX 


619 


Discipline    eccUsiastique    des    tylises 

refprmees  de  France,  168,  305. 
Discipline,  First  Booh  of  (Scotland), 

301,  304/. 
Disputation,  Public,  at  Zurich,  34/.  ; 

at  Basel,  39  ;  at  Bern,  40,  68  ;  at 

Geneva,  85  jf.,  88  ;   at  Lausanne, 

103  ;  at  Zurich  on  Baptism,  445  jfl  ; 

at  Munster,  454  ;  on  Baptism,  457  ; 

the  Leipzig,  495. 
Divara,    wife   of  Jan  Matthys,   467, 

469. 
Divorce,    The    (Henry    vm.),    324, 

330/.,  340. 

Dizennier,  office  in  Geneva,  115. 
Dogmatic   Tradition  and   the  Inner 

Light,  423. 
Dome,   John,  bookseller  in   Oxford 

(1520),  320. 
Dufour,  Louis,  citizen  of  Geneva  sent 

to  persuade  Calvin  to  return,  125. 
Dundee,  17,  279,  293. 
Dykes  in  the  Netherlands,  245,  263. 

Easter  Day  Communion  in  England, 


Ecclesiastical  organisation,  in  Geneva, 

128,   132  ;  in  France,   164^.  ;  in 

the  Netherlands,  270/.  ;  in  Scot- 

land,   307  /.  ;    among    the    Ana- 

baptists, 435. 
Eok,    Johann,    the    antagonist    of 

Luther.     See  Meyer. 
Economic  changes  in  England,  345/.  \ 

359,  387. 
Edicts,  French,  concerning  the  Re- 

formation, of  JFontainebleau,  147  ; 

of  Chateaubriand,  161/.,  169,  296  ; 

of  Compikgne,  163;  of  Mamorantin, 

177;  ofutfmtafe*  192/.;  of&rtit- 

Germains,  195  ;  of  Beaulien,  204  ; 

ofJBergerac,  206  ;  of  Nemours,  208  j 

oftfantcs,  19,  221  ff. 
Edinburgh,  293. 
Edinburgh,  University  of,  307. 
Edward  vi.  of  England,  20,  367/.  ; 

370,  389. 

EgliM  plants  and  cglise  drcmie,  165. 
Egmowt,   Lamoral,   Count  of,   243, 

247/.,  254/.,  258. 
Egmout,  Nicolas  van,  an  Inquisitor, 

280. 

Eidgcnots  of  Geneva,  62. 
Kinaiedeln,  28,  80. 
Elders    in    the    Scottish    Church, 

appointed    by   the    Congregation, 

200. 
Eleanors  de  Roye,  wife  of  Louis  of 

Cond<$»  172,  184. 


Elizabeth,  Queen  of  England,  threat- 
ened excommunication,  In.,  414/.; 
seizes  Spanish  treasure  ships,  259  • 
and  Knox's  Mast,  292,  296 ;  dis. 
likes  Calvin's  theology,  296  ;  care- 
fully watched  during  the  reign 
of  Mary,  369 ;  her  death  recom- 
mended by  Charles  v.,  371  ;  suc- 
ceeds to  the  crown,  385  ;  declares 
herself  a  Protestant,  386 /.  ;  looked 
on  as  a  bastard  and  a  heretic  by 
the  Romanist  powers,  387  ;  threat- 
ened with  the  fate  of  the  King  of 
Navarre,  388,  414  ;  first  Proclama- 
tion, 388  ;  exhibits  her  Protestant- 
ism to  her  people,  389  ;  difficulties 
of  her  government  in  the  alteration 
of  Religion,  390  ;  her  first  Parlia- 
ment, 391 ;  shelters  herself  under 
the  Peace  of  Augsburg,  397, 
405  n.,  414  ;  communicates  in  both 
"kinds,"  399  and™,  ;  406,  408, 
413,  415,  418,  420. 

Emclen,  meeting  of  the  Netherlands 
Protestants  at,  271. 

JSinden  C<riechism,  4  n. 

Episcopal  government  in  Switzer- 
land, 23. 

Eplscopus  Universal?  s,  332. 

Epistolce  obscurorum  virorum,  317. 

Erasmians,  the  Spanish,  492. 

Erasmus,  and  the  Reformed  Churches, 
Qff.,  152  ;,  on  Indulgences,  16  ;  25, 
27/.,  30,  96,  152,  226,  230,  316, 
320,  334,  337,  358,  478,  492,  513. 

Erasmus  circle  at  Basel,  436. 

JKrastians,  123,  129. 

Escadron  volant  de  la  Eeine,  203, 
309. 

Esch,  Johann,  martyr  in  the  Nether- 
lands, 224,  230. 

Kste,  Cardinal  Hippolito  de,  188. 

Estienne,  Robert,  Parisian  printer, 
93,  148. 

Excommunication.     See  Discipline. 

Excommunication  among  the  Ana- 
baptists, 443. 

Etoercitia  Spiritualia.  See  Spiritual 
Exercises. 

Exhorters  in  the  Scottish.  Church, 
305. 

Kaber,  Johann,  Archbishop  of  Vienna. 
See  Heigerlein,  Johann. 

Faber,  Peter,  the  Jesuit,  537,  545, 
548,  557. 

Face  of  a  Church,  the  "Congrega- 
tion "  assumes  the,  290. 

Fagius  (Buchlein),  Paul,  358. 


620 


INDEX 


Farel,  William,  at  Basel,  39 ;  early 
life,  39  n.  ;  called  a  Lutheran 
preacher,  16  n. ;  at  Aigle,  67/., 
69 ;  the  apostle  of  French-speak- 
ing Switzerland,  67 ;  baptized  his 
converts  from  Romanism,  68%.  ; 
organises  a  band  of  evangelists, 
71  and  n.  ;  at  Vallingen,  72 ;  sent 
by  Bern  to  Genera,  80 ;  in  Geneva 
daring  the  siege,  84 ;  attempt  to 
poison,  84  and  ns ;  preaches  in  the 
cathedral  at  Geneva,  86 ;  induces 
the  Council  of  Geneva  to  abolish 
the  Mass,  88  ;  struggle  against  the 
evil  morals  of  the  town,  90  ;  char- 
acter  and  marriage,  91 ;  joined  by 
Calvin,  102;  at  the  Lausanne 
Disputation,  103  ;  his  "congrega- 
tion," 10571.;  banished  from 
Geneva,  74  and  n.,  115-124 ;  12, 
45 «.,  97,  109,  118^.,  148. 

Feckenham,  Abbot  of  Westminster, 
40091. 

Ferdinand  of  Austria,  and  the  ex- 
communication of  Elizabeth,  In. ; 
on  the  Protestants  in  Vienna,  2  ; 
and  the  Anabaptists,  447,  449. 

Feria,  Count  de,  Ambassador  of  Philip 
of  Spain,  388,  400. 

Ferrar,  Robert,  Bishop  of  St.  David's, 
378. 

Ferrara,  Rene*e,  Duchess  of,  101,  505. 

Ferriere,  Sieur  de  la,  165. 

Ficino,  Marsiglio,  and  Marguerite  of 
Navarre,  137. 

Flag  of  the  Swiss  Confederacy,  21. 

Flying  Squadron.    See  Escadron. 

Fontainebleatt,  Edict  of,  147  ;  184/. 

Foxe,  Edward,  Bishop  of  Hereford, 
340/. 

Foxe,  John,  the  Martyrologist,  332. 

Francis  i.  of  France,  alternately  pro- 
tects and  persecutes  the  Reformers, 
143/.,  145,  147  ff. ;  Calvin's  letter 
to,  147;  founds  the  "Royal 
Lectureships"  at  Paris,  534/. 

Francis  of  Assisi,  506jf.,  527. 

Franciscans  and  the  Reformation, 
305. 

Franciscans,  reformation  among  the, 
508/. 

Frankfurt  congregation  of  English 
exiles,  287  ;  20. 

Frankfurt  Conference,  124. 

Frankfurt  Fair,  18. 

Frederick,  Elector  of  the  Palatinate, 
becomes  a  Calvinist,  3,  4  n. 

Fregoso,  Fred.,  Archbishop  of  Sal- 
erno, 505,  510. 


Freiburg,    Swiss    Canton,    strongly 

Romanist,   43,   65,  75  ?&.,  76,  84; 

21. 
Frenchman,  this  (iste    Gallus},   102 

and  7i.,  153. 
Friesland,  East,  an  Anabaptist  place 

of  refuge,  238. 
Forest  Cantons,  and  the  Reformation, 

41,  50 ;  at  war  with  Zurich,  49  ; 

22. 

Froben,  printer  at  Basel,  27. 
Froment,  Antoine,  at  Vallingen,  72  ; 

in     Geneva,     74/1  ;    his     wife    a 

preacher,  74  n. ;  contest  with  Fur- 

biti,   78/.  ;  during   the    siege  of 

Geneva,  84. 
Furbiti,  Guy,  Romanist  preacher  in 

Geneva,  78  ff. 

Gallars,  Nicholas  des,  minister  of 
French  Protestants  in  London, 
186. 

Gallon,  St.,  22,  47,  48,  60,  122,  437, 
440. 

Gardiner,  Stephen,  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester, 349,  352,  369,  371,  375. 

Geelen,  Jan  van,  an  Anabaptist 
leader,  239. 

Gemblours,  266. 

Geneva,  city  of,  history  and  con- 
stitution, 61  f.  ;  parties  in,  62  ; 
Bern  and  Freiburg,  63  ;  "  the  gate 
of  western  Switzerland,"  63,  89  ; 
town  councils  in,  63 ;  Luther's 
writings  in,  64  n.  ;  turbulent 
priests  in,  77  and  n.  ;  the  affair 
of  Furbiti  in,  78-82  ;  plot  to  seize 
the  town,  82 ;  besieged  by  the 
Bishop  and  the  Duke  of  Savoy, 
83  ;  attempt  to  poison  the  Re- 
formed preachers  in,  84  and  n. ; 
Public  Imputation  in,  8f>Jf.  ;  Mas« 
abolished  provisionally  in,  87 , 
completely,  89  ;  Disputation  before 
the  Council,  8tf  ;  becomes  an  in- 
dependent republic,  89 ;  motto 
Post  tenebras  lux,  89 ;  evil  living 
in,  90  and  n.  ;  the  Articles  of 
105jf. ;  adopts  the  ceremonies  of 
Bern,  118 jf. ;  banishes  Calvin  and 
Farel,  120jf.  ;  begs  Calvin  to 
return,  125Jf. ;  the  ecclesiastical 
ordinances  of,  128  ;  Consistory/  of, 
128/. ;  the  ministry  hi,  131/. ; 
what  Calvin  did  for,  130jf.  ;  a 
city  of  refuge,  184  ;  "  the  clogs  of 
Geneva,"  187;  sends  missionaries 
to  the  Netherlands,  233,  249  ;  6, 
8,  45,  152- 


INDEX 


621 


Geneva,  Bishop  of,  61/.,  77,  116/.  ; 

Amadeus    vm.    of    Savoy,     62 ; 

Pierre  de  la  Baume,  77,  82/.,  85, 

89. 

Geneva,  Vidpmne  of,  62,  117. 
Gentili,  Anti -Trinitarian,  426. 
German  National  Council  feared  by 

the  Pope,  5ti5  n. 
German  Protestant  opinion  of  Henry 

VIII.,  341. 

German  Vulgate,  434. 
Germany  and  the  Counter-Reforma- 
tion, 6C6/. 
Germany,  name  given  to  an  Inn  at 

Cambridge,  320,  330. 
Gex,  district  of,  117. 
Ghent,  city  of,  265,  267. 
Glapion,  confessor  to  Charles  v.  and 

Luther,  494. 
Glareanus    (Heinrich    Loriti).      See 

Loriti. 

Glarus,  a  Swiss  Canton,  22,  27/. 
Goch,  John  Pupper  of,  226,  230. 
Goderick,  English  lawyer,  and  his 

Advice,  389. 
Gonzaga,  Elenore,  Bach  ess  of  TJrbino, 

506* 
Gonzaga,    Ercoli    di,     Cardinal    of 

Mantua,  principal  Legate  at  the 

third  meeting  of  the  Council  of 

Trent,  588. 
Gonzaga,  Julia,  506. 
Grace,  pilgrimage  of,  346. 
Grandson,  in  the  Pays  de  Vaud,  43, 

67,  72. 
Granvelle,    Antoine    Perronet     de, 

Cardinal  and  Bishop  of  Arras,  243, 
'519,  521. 

Graphseus,  Cornelius,  230. 
Grassis,     Matteo,    founder    of    the 

Capuoins,  507/, 

Grauotinderi,  the  (Grisons),  22,  49/. 
Grebel,  Conrad,  Humanist  and  Ana- 
baptist, 486,  446/. 
Groy,  Lady  Jane,  371. 
Gribaldo,    Giovanni   Valentino,   an 

Anti-Trinitarian,  426. 
Griudal,  Edmund,  afterwards  Arch- 
bishop   of    Canterbury,    402  ft., 

404. 
Groot,  Gerard,  and  the  Brethren  of 

the  Common  Lot,  226,  228. 
Guest,  Edmund,  letter  to  Cecil,  398 

and  n. 

Gueux,  Les.    See  Beggars. 
Guipuzcoa,    the   district   in   which 

Loyola  was  born,  525. 
Guises,  the  family  of  the,  151,  173 

and  «,,  180,  209,  283,  295,  297, 


Guise,  Francis,  Duke  of,  170,  173, 
177/.,  187,  189,  191/.,  296. 

Charles,  brother  of  Francis, 
Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  163.  170, 
173,  177,  187,  312,  588. 

Louis,  brother  of  Francis,  Car- 
dinal of  Guise,  189,  213. 

Henry,  Duke  of,  son  of  Francis, 
198/.,  208,  212/. 

Charles,  Duke  of  Mayenne,  son 
of  Francis,  213/.,  218. 

Haarlem,  Town  of,  236/.,  261. 

Hagenau,  Conference  at,  124. 

Hague,  The,  236. 

Haller,  Berthold,  Reformer  of  Bern, 
40/.,  64w.,  68. 

Hamilton,  Patrick,  279/. 

Hanseatic  League,  279. 

Hapsburg  (the  place),  21. 

Heath,  Dr.,  Archdeacon  of  Canter- 
bury, 340/. 

Hegius  (Haag)  Alexander,  226. 

Heidelberg  Catechism,  3,  4n. 

Heigerlein,  Johann  (Faber),  26  and 
n.,  80,  34,  512. 

Helvetic  Confession,  First,  6n. 

Henry  11.  of  .France,  consistently 
persecutes  the  Protestants,  151. 

Henry  in.,  204,  214. 

Henry  iv.     See  JBourbon. 

Henry  vm.  of  England,  his  policy 
towards  Scotland,  282/. ;  had  de- 
fended curialist  claims,  321 ;  real 
doubts  about  the  validity  of  his 
marriage,  322/.  ;  security  of  the 
kingdom  demanded  a  male  heir, 
323  ;  expected  the  Pope  to  declare 
his  marriage  invalid,  324  ;  appeals 
to  the  Universities,  326  ;  Supreme 
Head  of  the  Church,  327  ;  uses  the 
annates  to  coerce  the  Curia,  328  ; 
separates  from  Rome,  330,/.  ;  and 
the  German  Protestants,  340 ff, 
347  ;  his  theological  learning,  347 , 
his  will,  352;  and  Zwingli,  10; 
315/.,  370,  417. 

Henry  of  Oonde".    See  Bourbon. 

Hesse  Caasel  becomes  Calvinist,  3. 

Hildegard  of  Bingen,  142  n. 

Hoen,  •  Cornelius  van  (sacramental 
controversy),  53. 

Hoffmann,  Melohior,  236/.,  438,  442, 
444,  458. 

Homilies,  The  Twelve  (England), 
353. 

Hoogstraten,  249. 

Hooper,  John,  Bishop  of  Gloucester, 
318,  853,  359,  364/.,  377/. 


622 


INDEX 


Hopital,  Michel  de  1',  Chancellor  of 

France,  177,  181,  186. 
Hopkins,  Thomas,  metrical  version 

of  the  Psalms,  355. 
Hiibmaier,    Balthasar,    Anabaptist, 

434/,,  442. 
Hulst,  Francis  Tan  de,   Inquisitor, 

230. 
Humanism      and      the     Reformed 

Churches,  9  ;  and  the  Italian  Re- 
formers, 504,  507. 
Humanism,  Christian,  319. 
Hus,  John,  81. 
Hussites,  92. 

Hut,  Hans,  Anabaptist,  439. 
Hymn-book  of  the  Brethren,   435, 

449/1 


Iconoclasm  in  Switzerland,  72,  87  ; 
in  France,  145,  183,  191  ;  in  the 
Netherlands,  253,  267;  in  Scot- 
land, 294  ;  in  Miinster,  453. 

Ignatius  Loyola,  family  and  early 
life,  525  ;  on  his  sick-bed,  527  ;  at 
Manresa,  527  ff.  ;  his  visions,  527. 
529,  532,  552  ;  and  Luther,  529, 
532,  559  ;  his  mysticism,  530  ;  at 
school  at  Barcelona,  532  ;  im- 
prisoned for  heresy,  533  ;  in  Paris, 
533/.  ;  considered  doctrines  as 
military  commands,  536';  in  Italy, 
545/1  ;  his  preachers  in  Italy, 
546  ;  Society  of  Jesus  founded, 
548/.  ;  elected  General,  549/.  ; 
seeks  to  win  back  Germany,  55  6/.  ; 
his  home  mission  work,  559  ;  an 
educated  clergy,  5$9. 

lies  de  Saintonge,  Church  at,  166. 
See  Saintonge. 

Illiteracy  of  English  clergy,  353/. 

Images,  miraculous,  destroyed,  3 
and  n.  ;  352,  409. 

Index  of  Prohibited  Books,  602/.  ; 
practice  of  burning  boojcs,  602/.  ; 
various  list  of,  603;  231/.  ;  effect 
on  learning,  605. 

Indulgence,  in  Geneva,  64  ;  long  ob- 
jected to  in  the  Netherlands,  228  ; 

.    16,  28. 

Injunctions   in    England,    of    1536 
(Henry  rm.),  834,  839  ;  of  1538 
(Henry  Tin.),  835,  340  ;  of  1547 
(Edward  vi.),  352  ;  of  J554  (Mary), 
374;  of  Elizabeth,  '407,  410. 
Inner  Light,  The,  423/.,  456. 
Inquisition,  three  types  of,  597  ;  the 
Spanish,  598  ;  proposed  in  France, 
163,  109  ;  in  the  Netherlands,  229, 


344 


256  ;  in   Italy,  470,  600/,  ;  489, 

492,  497,  531. 
Institiriio,      Chriitiance     Religions, 

based  on  the  Apostles1  Creed,  100  ; 

on  ecclesiastical  government,  129  ; 

what  it  did  for  the  Reformation, 

156/.  ;  99/.,  147,  156,  159,  30f>, 

514. 

Instruction,  Zwingli's,  35. 
Interim,  The  Augsburg,  567. 
Irish    missionaries    in    Switzerland, 

23. 
Isabella  of  Castile  and  the  Spanish 

Reformation,  490. 
Isoudun,  166. 

Italian  heretic  Friars,  386  n. 
Italy,  religious  condition  of,  501  f.  • 

the  peasants,  501 ;  in  the  towns, 

503. 
Ivry,  Battle  of,  218. 

James  v.  of  Scotland,  281. 
Jarnac,  Battle,  194. 
Jay,  Claude,  Jesuit,  537,  556,  557. 
Jeanne  d'Albret,  daughter  of  Margaret 

of  Navarre,   wife  of  Antoine  de 

Bourbon  and  mother  of  Henry  iv. 

of  France,  declares  herself  a  Pro- 
'  testant,  185 ;  in  La  Rochelle,  194 ; 

consents  to  the  marriage  of  her 

son  with  Marguerite  de  Valois,  the 

daughter  of  Catherine  do'  Medici, 

197 ;  172,  189,  195. 
Jeanne  de  Jussie,  chronicler  nun  of 

Geneva,  65  n.  ;  74  n.,  79  and  n., 

SZn.-,  117. 

Jesuits.    See  Company  of  Jesus. 
Jesuits  in  France,  608  ;  in  Germany, 

606. 
Jewel,   John,   Bishop  of  Salisbury, 

391,  40291.,  404,  407,  418  and  u. 
John  Caaimir  in  the  Netherlands, 

266. 
John    Frederick    of    Saxony    and 

Henry  vni.,  840,  847. 
John  George  of  Anhalt,  8. 
Joinville,  Chateau  of,  190 ;  Treaty 

of,  207  ;  Prince  of,  213. 
Jon,  Francis  du,  249. 
Joyeuse  entree  of  Brabant,  246. 
Jud,  Loo,  111. 
Jurisdictionis  jpote$ta$>  382. 
Jus  episcopate  of  Civil  Rulers,  9. 
Justification  of  the  Prince  of'  Orange, 

258. 
Justification,  The  Doctrincty,  at  the 

Regerisburg    Conference,    519,/f., 

577  ;  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  668, 

676/. 


INDEX 


623 


Knipperd 


i  Peace  of,  49  ;  Second 
*  Battle  of,  51 ;  Charter 

i,  434. 

Gerard,    Anabaptist 
\  of  Minister,  460. 
the   communion    in 
of  Protestantism,  20, 

s,  10,  337,  349. 
[range,  Sir  William, 

i,4  ecclesiastical  court  in 
L  Church,  308. 
25. 

ng,  Bernhardt,  Anabap- 
tist, burgomaster  of  Munster,  460 ; 
425,  454  and  n.,  468. 

Knox,    John,    early   history,    285 ; 

1  galley  -  slave  in  France,  286 ; 
preaches  in  -England,  286/.,  360, 
362 ;  in  Switzerland  and  Germany, 
287  ;  marries  Marjory  Bowes,  288 ; 
in  Scotland,  293;  in  Edinburgh, 
299,#".  ;  rapidity  of  his  work,  308  ; 
and  Queen  Mary,  309 jf.  ;  and  the 
Duko  01  Somerset,  35U. 

Kolb,  Francis,  preaches  in  Bern, 
42. 

Krakau  (Cracow),  a  Socinian  centre, 
471 

Kuiper,  Willem  de,  a  disciple  of  Jan 
Matthys,  459. 

Laine?!,  Diego,  Jesuit,  188,  537,  455, 
548,  552,  556,  577/.,  595. 

Lambart.  Francis,  64  n. 

Lasco,  John  a,  Polish  refugee  in 
England,  358. 

Latimer,  Hugh,  Bishop  of  Worcester, 
371,  378,  382. 

Laud,  Archbishop,  355. 

Lausanne,  Bishop  of,  refuses  to  come 
to  the  Bern  Disputation,  41,  44. 

Lausanne,  Bishopric  of,  23,  67,  70. 

Lausanne,  part  of  the  Pays-de-Vaud, 
67, 113,  116,  152 ;  reformation  in, 
70,  89,  125. 

League,  The  Perpetual  (Forest  Can- 
tons), 21 ;  of  Brwrmen,  21  ;;of  the 
ffouse  of  &od  (Rhsetia),  22 ;  The 
Qrey  (Orisons),  22 :  of  the  Ten 

,  Jurisdictions,  22 ;  The  three  per- 
petual, of  tihcetia,  22 ;  Christian 
Civic>  48 ;  JRorromean,  60 ;  The 


League  against  the  Huguenots, 
how  it  arose,  205  /f.  ;  becomes  dis- 
loyal, 207,  209/212,  608;  The 
Lenyu,e  of  Pans,  207  ;  the  Sixteen, 
210. 

Leclerc,  Jean,  French  Protestant 
martyr,  143. 

Leclerc,  Pierre,  Minister  at  Means. 
150. 

Lecturers,  Royal.     See  Royal. 

Leievre  cl'  Staples,  Jacques  (Faber 
Stai>ulensii)  and  Humanism,  11  ; 
and  Luther,  16,  74,  97  ;  wishes  to 
restore  the  practices  of  the  Church 
of  the  first  three  centuries,  109  ; 
inspired  the  "group  of  Meaux," 

141  ;    anticipated    Luther,    141  ; 
translated  the  Bible  into  French, 

142  ;  a  mystic,  142?i. 

Leib,  Kiliau,  Salzburg  chronicler, 
and  the  Anabaptists,  448. 

Leith,  17,  279. 

Lenten  Fasting,  31. 

Lesley,  Norman,  284. 

Lethington,  William  Maitland  of. 
See  Maitland. 

Leyden,  Anabaptist  attempt  on,  239; 
siege  of,  263  ;  University  of,  264. 

Leyden,  Jan  of.     See  JBockelson. 

Libertines  in  Geneva,  116. 

Li  ml  a  u,  48. 

Lindsay,  Sir  David,  Scottish  satirist, 
278. 

Lollards,  in  England,  316/.,  374; 
and  Anabaptists,  440/. 

Lords  of  the  congregation  (Scotland), 
289,  293;  299,  420. 

Loriti,  Heinricli  ofGlarus(Glareanns), 
Swiss  Humanist,  18  n.,  25  n,,  29. 

Lorraine,  The  Cardinal  of.  See  Gfuntc. 

Louis  of  Cond6.     See  Bourbon. 

Louis  of  Nassau.     See  Nassau. 

Louise  of 'Savoy,  mother  of  Francis  I., 

.   '137,  144. 

Louvain,  University  of,  and  list  of 
Prohibited  Books,  603. 

Loyola,  Ignatius.    See  Ignatius. 

Lupulus.    See  IVolflein. 

Luther, 'on  clerical  marriage,  37  ;  in- 
•fluence  on  the  Reformed  Churches, 
IBff.  ;  anticipations  of  his  teach- 
ing, 15,  141;  and  Zwingli,  27, 
50 ;  theory  of  the  Eucharist,  66, 
412/ ;  16/.,  24,  53,  124,  141, 
148,  154,  841,  354,  405 w.,  421, 
452,  473,  493,  507,  529,  570,  578. 

Luther's  writings  known  in  France, 
142  ;  in  England,  320  ;  in  Geneva, 
649i.;  in  Scotland,  279, 


624 


INDEX 


Lutheran  theologians  invited  to 
France,  146. 

Lutheran,  a  name  applied  to  all  Pro- 
testants, 16  and  n.,  65,  79  w.,  150, 
330,  600. 

Lutherans  lost  part  of  Germany  to 
the  Reformed,  3. 

Lutzern,  22,  47/. ;  Diet  at,  32. 

Lyons,  Church  at,  166. 

Ma$on,  Jean  le,  first  Protestant 
minister  in  Paris,  166. 

Macronius,  Martin,  364. 

Madruzzo,  Bishop  of  Trent  and  Car- 
dinal, 567/.,  574,  581. 

Madruzzo,  Ludovico,  Bishop  of  Trent, 
588. 

Mainz,  Archiepiscopal  Province  of, 
23. 

Maitland,  William,  of  Lethington, 
19,  304,  310,  312. 

Mamelukes  (in  Geneva),  62. 

Mangin,  fitienne,  of  Meaux,  150. 

Manresa,  Dominican  Convent  at, 
527  ;  Ignatius  Loyola  at,  528. 

Mantes,  Assembly  of  French  Pro- 
testants at,  221. 

Manuel,  Nicholas,  artist  in  Bern,  40. 

Manz,  Felix,  Swiss  Anabaptist  mar- 
tyr, 446/. 

Marais- Saint-Germain,  Rue  de,  174. 

Marburg  Colloquy,  the,  50. 

Mai  court,  Antoine,  author  of  the 
Placards,  146. 

Margaret  of  Parma,  242,  248,  250, 
252,  257. 

Marguerite  d'AngoulSme,  sister  of 
Francis  I.,  married  the  '.King  of 
Kavarre,  education  and  character, 
136j?:  ;  her  Christian  Platonism, 
137 ;  relations  with  Briponhet,  138 ; 
•with  Luther  and  Calvin,  138 ; 
the  Heptwneron,  140 ;  accused  of 
heresy,  145 ;  11,  747*.,  97 n.,  136?t., 
143,  505/.,  534/. 

Marguerite  de  Valois,  daughter  of 
Catherine  de'  Medici,  married  to 
Henry  iv.,  197. 

Marignano,  Battle  of,  28. 

Marnix,  John  de,  254, 

Marot,  Clement,  his  French  Psalms 
in  Geneva,  106  n.,  148;  in  Paris, 
172  ;  93,  146. 

Marriage,  regulations  for,  in  Geneva, 
105/. ;  of  the  clergy,  355  ;  "  cleri- 
cal," 36  ;  33,  42. 

Marsiglio  Ficino,  137. 

Marsiglio  of  Padua,  454. 
Martha  Souses  (Jesuit),  561. 


Maximilian, 
ter  of 


Martyr  Vermigli,  Pet*  600' 
Martyrs,  in  England,  ' 

Mary  376/1  ;  in  tfafc 

224,  230/.  ;  in  Sof 

in  France,  IbSff.  jrnm 
Mary  of  Burgundy,  rR 

Charles  the  Bold  ante, 

of  Charles  v.,  wife  <f 

Mary  of  Guise  or  LorJ 
Francis  Duke  of  Gu[  Swl,*0  >  ™  Queen 
of  James  v.  of  Sec/      *land»  20,  290, 
293/.,  386.  J  tit*        .     , 

Mary  of   Hungary,  f      *»*    of  the 
Netherlands,  233,  /      *!°' 

Mary,  Queen  of  En§86ran?» 
under,  868/.  ;  ™™- 
prince  of  Spain  ;  Papal 
restored,  373  ;  Romanist  legisla- 
tion, 373/.  ;  scruples  about  pos- 
session of  ecclesiastical  lands,  382  : 
death,  383jf.  ;  292,  346,  880.  . 

Mary,  Queen  of  Sc-otland,  educated 
in  France,  283  ;  "the  little  Queen," 
283  ;  refuses  to  ratify  the  acts  of 
the  reforming  Estates,  309  ;  •  in 
Scotland,  309  jf.  ;  her  coming 
dreaded,  309  ;  281,  292,  310. 

Massacres,  at  Vassy,  190;  at  Sens, 
190  ;  at  Toulouse,  190  ;  at  Rouen, 
190  5  at  Paris,  190  ;  of  St.  Bar- 
tholomow,  198/.,  261,  008;  at 
Zutphen,  261  ;  at  Haarlem,  261. 

Matthew,  Thomas,  of  Matthew's 
Bible,  339. 

Maubert,  Place,  whore  the  Protest- 
ants wore  burnt,  148. 

Mayonne,  Duke  of.    Soo  Gwtoe. 

Meaux,  The  group  of,  ll/.,  67,  97, 
109,  137/.,  145. 

Meaux,  the  fourteen  of,  148,  150. 

Meaux,  Protestant  Cliurch  in,  165/. 

Mechlin  burnt  by  the  Spaniards, 
261. 

Medici,  Giovanni  Giaoomo  do',  a 
condottiero,  50. 

Meersborg,  47. 

Melauchthon,  4w,,  148,  154,  340, 
507,  519/.,  567. 

Mekhiorites,  The,  488  ;  in  Mttnater, 
458  ;  on  separation,  465. 

Mendoza,  Pedro,  Archbishop  of 
Toledo  and  Cardinal,  490. 

MerMol,  Arrfafa,  U0. 

Merlin,  Jean  Raymond,  184* 

Mayor,  Johann,  of  Eck,  26. 

Meyer,  Scbaatian,  Kflformor  of  Bettt, 
40, 

Mioholet,  Ji\leH,  on  Calvin,  169. 


INDEX 


625 


Milhaud,  a  Huguenot  stronghold,  201. 

Milton,  John,  13. 

Ministry  in  the  Reformed  Churches, 

181. 
Mirabel,    a    Huguenot    stronghold, 

201. 

Miroir  de  VA me  p&heresse,  97  ?&.,  98. 
Molard,  The,  in.  Geneva,  77. 
Monasteries,  The  dissolution  of  the, 

'343. 

Moncontour,  Battle  of,  195. 
Monnikendam,  237. 
Montauban,    Huguenot    stronghold, 

195,  201/.,  223. 
Monte  Oassino,  509. 
Monte,  Gian  Maria  Giocchi,  Cardinal 

del,  later  Pope  Julius  in.,  566, 

581* 
Montmor,  The  family  of,  with  whom 

Calvin  was  educated,  92. 
Montmorency,  The  Constable  de,  151, 

170,  173,  178,  189,  191,  193. 
Montpellier,   Huguenot   stronghold, 
..223. 
M*mtpensier,  Duchess  of,  a  Leaguer, 

210,  216. 
Montrose,  279. 

Morals,  municipal  legislation   con- 
,  cerning,  108, 123n.,  129 ;  standard 

of,  low  in  Western  Switzerland, 

113. 
Morat,  part  of  the  Pays  de  Vaud,  43, 

.47. 
Moray,  James  Stewart,  Earl  of,  291, 

810.      . 
More,   Sir  Thomas,   817,  319,  321, 

825,  337/. 

Morel,  minister  in  Paris,  186. 
Morgarten,  .the  battle  of,  21,  26. 
Mornay  du  Plessis,   Madame,   way 

'  she  dressed  her  hair,  168  %. 
Morone,  Giovanni  de  Cardinal,  512, 

516,  524,  586,  591,  595. 
Mortal  sin,  Jesuits  wary  of  charging 
;  their  penitents  with,  555. 
Muete,  Gue"rin,  a  leading  evangelical 
*  in  Geneva,  76. 
Mtthlhausen,  48,  60,  122. 
Miiller,  Hans  of  Medikon,  Anabap- 

tist,  441. 
Mundt,  Dr.  Christopher,  Cecil's  agent 

in  Germany,  296  and  n. 
Municipal  life  in  .the  Netherlands, 

225.  . 

MUnflter,  Bishop  of,  453,  454.      . 
J^ttnater,  city  of,   enrolled    in   the 

Schmalkald  League,  455  :  besieged 

during  the  whole  period  of  Ana- 
baptist rule,  462  ;  fall  of,  468, 


Miiwter,  Kingdom  tif  God  wi,  431, 

438,  451  f. 
Mysticism,  Spanish,  490,"  530/.,  547, 

571. 

Nacchianti,"  Bishop  of  Chioggia,  on 
Tradition  and  Scripture,  574. 

Nancy,  207. 

Nantes,  Edict  of,  19,  221  ff. 

Nassau  Confession,  ±n. 

Nassau,  William  of,  Prince  of  Orange, 
at  the  abdication  of  Charles  v., 
240  ;  member  of  the  Council  •  of 
State  for  the  Netherlands,  243; 
protests  against  the  treatment  of 
.the  Netherlands,  247 ;  not  deceived 
by  Philip's  duplicity,  253;  his 
Justification,  258-;  chosen  Stadt- 
holder,  260 ;  Governor  of  the 
Seventeen  Provinces,  266  ;  reward 
ottered  for  his  assassination,  267 ; 
his  Apology;.  267;  assassinated, 
268  ;  how  he  acquired  the  Prin- 
cipality of  Orange  -  Chalons,  268 
and  n.  ;  his  wives,  269  n. ;  his 
character,  268/. 

Louis  of,  249,  252,  260,  263. 

Nossouwen,  Wilhelmus  von,  261. 

National  characteristics  reappear  in 
the  various'  Reformed  Churches, 
19. 

Nemours,  Duchess  of,  216. 

Nerac,'  capital  of  French  Navarre, 
139,  1"8&. 

Nsuchatel',  43,  78,  89,  125,  146. 

Neuville,  89. 

Hew '  Learning,  The,  26,  187,  141, 
359,  492;,  515. 

Nfrene  Creed,  130 ;  at  the  Council 
of  Trent,  593* 

Nimes,  165,  201,  202. 

Nisbefc,  Murdoch,  translated  the-New 

i    Testament  into  Scots,  277  w. 

Northumberland,  John  *  Dudley, 
Duka  of,  '859. 

Notables,- Assembly  of  (France),  177. 

Notables,  Assembly  of  (England), 
326. 

Novara,  Battle  of,  28. 

Noyon,  Birthplace- of  Calvin,  92. 

Nuns,  in  Geneva,  90 ;  none  among 
the  Jesuits,  561. 

Ochino,  Bernardino,  858. 

Oebli,  Hans,  Landamaun  'of  Glarus, 
49.  . 

Oecolampadius,  Johannes  (Hcusgfti), 
at  Basel,  39  ;  on  excommunica- 
tion, 112;  149,  320 


626 


INDEX 


Oldenbarneveldt,  John  of,  269. 

Olevian,  Caspar,  4%. 

Olive'tan,  Pierre  Robert,  translator  o: 
the  Bible  into  French,  95. 

Ollon,  part  of  the  Pays  de  Vaud,  67. 

Orange,  Prince  of.    See  Nassau. 

Orange,  Principality  of  Orange- 
Chalons,  268?i. 

Oratory,  Chambers  of  (Netherlands), 
226. 

Oratory  of  Divine  Love.  The,  505, 
509/. 

Orhe,  part  of  the  Pays  de  Vaud 
67. 

Ordinis  Potestas,  332. 


de  Gen&ve,  107,  128/.,  131. 
Orleans,  Calvin  at,  95 ;  church  at, 

166';  146,  181. 
Ormonts,  part  of  the  Pays  de  Vaud, 

67. 
Oxford,  17,  276,  320. 

Pacification  of  Ghent,  265/.,  267. 
Palatinate,  becomes  Calvinist,  3. 
Pampeluna,  Ignatius  Loyola,  at  the 

siege  of,  526. 

Pane,     Boletus    de,    Romanist    in 
,  Geneva,  88. 

Pantheist  Mysticism,  422,  424. 
Paraphrases,  Erasmus',  in  the  Church 

of  England,  353. 

Paris,  Luther's  writings  in,  18  and 

7i. ;    affair  of  the  Placards,  145  ; 

prisons  in,  164 ;  League  of,  207./. 

Paris'  students  songs,  535/. 

Parker,  Dr.  Matthew,  Archbishop  of 

Canterbury,  404,  409,  417. 
Parkhurst,  John,  Bishop  of  Norwich, 

402  7i.',  416." 

Parlement,  of  Paris  and  the  Beforma- 
ttoni*142/.,  144,  146,  160,  162/., 
169,  170,  171,  174,  185,  213,  220, 
535,'  556. 

farlement,  of  Aix,  147,149;  of  Bor- 

deaux,  147, 217  ;  of  Dijon,  176  ;  of 

Rouen,  147  ;  of  Toulouse,  147, 171. 

Partements,  French,  163^.,  217. 

Parliament  for  the  enormities  of  the 

Clergy,  326,  327. 
Parma,  Alexander  Famese,  Duke  of, 

218,  220,  249,  266. 
Parma,  Margaret  of.    See  Margaret. 
Patrick's  Place*,  280  n. 
Patrimony  of  the  Kirk,  806. 
Paul  iv.,  Pope,  In.,  163,'  169.    See 

Oaraffa. 

P<Mil,  Martin,  of  the  Grabunden,  60. 
Paycine,  64,  89. 


Pays  de  Vaud,  66,  84,  89,  103,  109, 

116/. 

Peace  of  Monsieur,  204. 
Peasantry,  Italian,  religious  condi- 
tion, 501  ;  devotion  to  Francis  ot* 
Assisi  and  his  imitators,  502. 
Peasants'  War,  The,  54. 
Penance,  Doctrine  of,  at  the  Council 

of  Trent,  584* 
Penney,  117. 
Penz,  Jorg,  pupil  of  Albrecht  Diirer, 

Anabaptist,  436. 
Picards,  11,  92. 

Picardy,  character  of  the  people,  92. 
Pictures  in  Churches  (Zurich),  35,  42. 
Philip  of  Hesse  and  the  Anabaptists, 

447,  455,  458  ;,  58. 
Philip  II.  of  Spain,  compared  with 
Charles  v.,  240/;  policy,  of  extir- 
pation of  Protestants,  241  ;  minute 
knowledge  of  Netherlands'  affairs, 
2437».*,  244. 
Piusv.,  196,  595. 

Placards  (manifestoes)  in  Geneva, 
64/.  ;  in  Paris,  about  the  Mass1, 
145. 

Placards  (Government  proclamations 
against  the  Protestants)  in  the 
Netherlands,  242,  245,  247,  256, 
265. 

Platonism,  Christian,  11,  137. 
Poissy,  Colloquy  of,  20,  186jf.,  813  ,- 
Conference  at,  188  ;  Edict  of,  188. 
Poitiers,'  Church  at,  166/. 
Pole,  Reginald,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury,  Cardinal,   member   of  the 
Oratory    of    JHvine    Low,    505  j 
Legate,  at  the  Council  of  Trent,1 
566;  372,  377,   381/.,  510,  524, 
587  n. 
Politiques,  Les>  203. 
Polonorum,  JBibliotheea  Fratrum,  472. 
Polygamy,  in  Mtinster,  468  jf. 
Post  tenebras  lux,  89. 
Pope,  the  Primacy  of  the,  33,  492  j 
„    Swiss    Bodyguard*  of    ther    2$;: 
power  limited   by  the   Peace  of 
Augsburg,   1  and  n,y  405,   414; 
and  Bishops   at   the  Council  of 
Trent,  592/.     Soo  Curialism. 
Popes  mentioned  : 

Innocent  in.  (1198-1216),  597. 
Julius  n.  (1503-1521),  822,  871* 
Leo  x.  (1513-1628),  180,  SlP/l 
Adrian   vi*   (1522-1628),    494/ 


Clement  vir.  (1528-1584),  64, 
824  j*  adviaea  Henry  vm,  to 
bigamy,  825,  510, 


INDEX 


627 


Popes  mentioned : 

Paul  in.  (1534-1549),  Reforms 
under,  510,  512 ;  345,  357, 
470,  500,  510,  548,  550,  581  ; 
and  the  Council  of  Trent,  565 
and  n.,  581. 

Julius*  in.  (1550-1555),  Council 
of  Trent  under,  565  and?i.,  581. 
Marcellus  IL,  (1555),  585. 
Paul  iv.    (1555-1559),    Council 
of  Trent  under,  565  and  w., 
591,  594  ;  245. 
Pius  iv.  (1559-1565),  his  policy 

of  reformation,  595. 
Pius  V.  (1566-1572),  196. 
Sixtus  v.  (1580-1590),  208. 
Prcemunire,  Statutes  of,  325. 
Pragmatic  Sanction  of  Bourges,  183. 
Prayer-Book  of  King  Edward  VI., 

The  First,  356/.,  361,  403 n. 
Prayer-Book  of  King  Edward  F/., 
The  Second,  287, 290  and  n.,  361/., 
395/.,  398,  401,  403  and  n.,  406. 
Prayer-Boole   of   Elizabeth,    396/., 

401,  404,  419. 
Praying  Circles  or  Headings  among 

the  Brethren,  433,'   ' 
Pre-auw-clercs,    Th&,    Psalm-singing 

at,  172,  183  ;  165. 
Presence  of  the  Body  of  Christ  in  the 

Sacrament  of  the  Supper',  41  Iff. 
Privas,  a  Huguenot  stronghold,  201. 
Privileges  of  Nobles  in  France  in  the 

Sixteenth  Century,  171. 
Processions  expiatory,  in  Paris,  146. 
Proclamations    about    religion^    by 

Mary,  370  ;  by  Elizabeth,  388.    • 
Psalms,  Calvin'*  Commentary  on  the, 

07,  101. 

Psalms,  Singing  of  the,  in  the  ver- 
nacular, 106  and  n.,  188,  251/. ; 
in  the  Netherlands,  <  251 ;  in 
England,  855  ;  Clement  <  Marot's, 
172  and  n.,  252* 
Psc.aumai  included  religious  canticles, 

107  n. 

Purgatory,  Tlie  Doctrine  of,  attacked, 
81,  33,  42.  '  •  *       ' 

Puritanism,  the  beginnings  of,  364. 
Pay,  Cardinal 'du,   Prefect* of  the. 
inquisition,  87&     •  •  , 

Quern,  The  liftU,  282/,  •    ;  *         < 
<5uigno»,  Cardinal,  a  liturgtat,  357.' " 
Ouifltiij,  Dr.,  speaker  fov  the  clergy 
at  the  Statea-Gonoral  of  1560, 182." 

Kandolph,  Sir  Thomas,  Elizabeth1* 
Ambassador  in  Scotland,  303,  811. 


Ratisbon.     See  Regensburg. 
Headers  in  the  Scottish  Church,  305. 
Headings,  433. 
Re-baptism,  68  n.  ;  424,  447. 
Reformation  of  the  Mediaeval  Church 

demanded  by  all,  484. 
Reformed    Churches,    Confraternitv 

among  the,  20  ;  Confessions.     See 

Confessions. 

Reformers  in  Italy,  503/. 
Regensburg,     The     Conference     at, 

51  Qjf.  ;   was  the  parting  of  the 

ways,  523. 
Regents  in  the  Netherlands,  Margaret 

of  Austria,  225 ;  Mary,  widowed 

Queen    of    Hungary,    233,    242; 

Margaret  of  Parma,  242,  248,  250, 

252,  257  ;  the  Duke  of  Alva,  see 

Alva.\   Alexander  Farnese,  Duke 

of  Parma,  see  Parma. 
Relics  destroyed  in  England,   343, 

344  and  n. 

Religion,  Those  ofthe9  160. 
Religion,  The  alteration  of,  896. 
Renaissance,  The,  6,  8. 
Renan,  Ernest,  on  Calvin,  159. 
Renard,  Simon,  envoy  of  Charles  v. 

in  England,  377. 
Renato,  Camille,  426. 
Renaudie,  Godefroy  de  Barry,  Seig- 
neur de  la,  175. 
Renee,    Duchess    of   Ferrara.      See 

JFerrwra. 

Requeseiis-y-Zimiga,  Don  Louis,  262. 
Bequest,  The  (Netherlands),  250. 
Rfservatio  ecclesiastics,  2. 
Restitution,  The,  defends  polygamy 

in  Minister,  467. 
Rhtetia,  22. 
Richmond,  Henry  Fitzroy/  Duke  of, 

323. 
'Ridley,  Nicholas,  Bishop  of  London,' 

318,   859,   360,   364/.,  371,  378, 

382. 

Riots  in  Geneva,  81,  87. 
Rocco  di   Mussb, '  on  the  Lake  of 

Como,  50. 
Rocheblond,  Sieur  de  la,  founder  of 

th«  Paris  League,  -207/.   .    • 
IRochelle,  La,  Huguenot  stronghold, 
j     104/<,  201,  223. 
'Rodriguez,  Simon,  Jesuit,  537,  556. 
Rogers,  John,  339,  377* 
Rofi,  Heinrich,  Anabaptist,  456; 
Roman  Civil' Law  and  ecclesiastical 

rule,  8. 

Romanist  reaction  in  Europe, r  887. 
Roser,  Isabella,  arid  Ignatius  Idvola, 

50 land^.,  66-2. 


628 


INDEX 


Rothmann,  Bernhard,  Anabaptist 
leader  in  Munster,  452/1  ;  his 
These*,  454 ;  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Supper,  455/.  ;  accepts  polygamy 
with  difficulty,  465/1  ;  death,  468. 

Rotterdam,  11. 

Rotuli  Scotice,  The,  276. 

Eoubli,  William,  first  Swiss  priest  to 
marry,  37. 

Rouen,  Church  at,  166. 

Rough,  John,  Scottish  preacher,  285. 

Roussel,  GeiarU,  97,  109. 

Jtoyal  Lecturers  in  Paris,  95,  98. 

Rubric,  The  Black,  on  kneeling  at 
the  Lord's  Supper,  362,  405  ?i. 

Jlubric,  Omantentft,  of  1559,  405 
and  n. 

Rule  of  Faith,  Doctrine  oftJie,  at  the 
Council  of  Trent,  568,  572/1 

Ruysbroec,  Jan  van,  the  Mystic,  226. 

Sacrament  of  the  Holy  Supper, 
ought  to  be  celebrated  weekly,  105 
andw.  ;  both  "kinds'*  partaken, 
355,  394;  discussed  at  the  Regens- 
burg  Conference,  522/.  ;  Doctrine 
of,  defined  at  the  Council  of  Trent, 
568,  582/1 

Sacramental  Controversy,  Bern 
Theses  and  the,  52 ;  in  the  Nether- 
lands and  the  Rhine  Provines,  52  ; 
Carlstadf  s  views,  53  ;  Zwingli's 
views  permeate  German  cities,  53  ; 
controversy  complicated  by  politi- 
cal ideas,  54;  common  thoughts 
about  the  Sacrament  of  the  Holy 
Supper,  54 ;  Eucharist  and  Mass, 
55  ;  Zwingli's  theory,  55  ;  Luther's 
theory,  56 ;  Calvin's  theory 
accepted  in  Switzerland,  59  ;  and 
in  part  of  Germany,  60. 

Sacramentarians,  name  given  to  the 
followers  of  Zwingli,  14.6. 

Sadoleto,  Giacomo,  Cardinal,  507, 
510. 

Saint- Andre4,-  Marshal,  184, 190,  192. 

Saint  Andrews,  285.  < 

Saint  Bartholomew,  Massacre  of, 
198 ;  medal  struck  in  Rome  in 
honour  of;  200  and  n. 

Saint  Denis,'  Henry  IT.  received  into 
the  Roman  Church  at,  219  ;  battle 
of,  193. 

Saint  Germains,  185. 

Saint  Jacques,  Rue  de,  in  Paris,  167, 

Saint  Omers,  254.  ' 
Sainte  Aldegonde,  Philip  de  Manrix, 
lord  of,  249. 


St.  Gallen.     See  Oallen. 

Salamanca,  University  of,  491. 

Salic  Law,  in  France,  206  ;  believed 
to  hold  in  England,  323. 

Salmeron,  Alonzo,  Jesuit,  537,  548, 
556,  566,  595. 

Salzburg,  Anabaptists  in,  448  ;  48. 

Sam,  Conrad,  of  Ulm,  53. 

Samson  or  Sanson,  Bernhard,  a  seller 
of  Indulgences,  29. 

Sancerre,  Huguenot  stronghold,  201. 

Sandilands,  Sir  James,  291. 

Sandys,  Edwin,  Archbishop  of  York, 
404. 

Saimier,  Antoine,  Swiss  evangelist, 
82  n. 

Savoy,  48  ;  Duke  of,  62,  64,  66,  77, 
89,  116. 

Schaffhausen,  Swiss  Canton,  22,  46, 
43,  48,  60,  122. 

Scliifanoya,  H,  Venetian  agent  in 
England,  392,  399  and  n. 

Schmalkald,,340,  347. 

Schmalkald,  Defender  of  the,  341. 

Schmalkald  League,  The,  and  Mtin- 
ster,  455. 

Schroder,  Johann,  Anabaptist 
preacher  in  Munster,  459. 

Schwenkfeld,  Caspar,  423,  453,  456. 

Schwyz,  Forest  Canton,  burnt  Pastor 
Kaiser  of  Zurich  as  a  heretic,  49  ; 
21/.,  48. 

Scot,  Bishop,  40091. 

'Scotland,  and  Seidelbwrg  Catechism, 
4n.  ;  preparation  for  the  Reforma- 
tion, 275  ;  influence  of  old  Celtic 
Church,  275/. ;  Lollardyin,  27 6/.; 
Acts  of  Parliament  to  suppress. 
Reformation,  281 ;  French  or 
English  alliance,  281/1,  294; 
place  in  the  European  situation, 
295  ;  English  invasion,  298  ;  flbw- 
fewon  of  Faith,  Book  of  Discipline, 
'Book  of  Common  Order,  302.//'. 

Scoto-Belagian  Theology,  474,  570. 

Scottish  Church  and  Civil  supremacy, 
.  8. 

Scottish  Liturgy  and  English  alliance, 
'£98  ;  30.6. 

Scripture,  Holy.     See  Rule  of  Fatth. 

Se'a-Beggars,  The,  capture  Brill,  260  ; 
defeat  'Spanish  fleet,  261,  263 ; 
•relieve  Leyden,  264  j  201, 

Secular  control  over  ecclesiastical 
Imatters,  8,  129  ;  in  Spain,  489. 

S&mpach,,.Battle  of,  26. 

Seneca,  DtOlffnwdify  12,  96. 

Bfcnlia,  Battle  of,  214. 

Sens,  Th6  Frouah  Council  of,  144. 


INDEX 


629 


Seripando,  Giorlamo,  General  of  the 
Augiiatinian  Eremites,  on  the 
Doctrine  of  JusVjiecttion,  578. 

Servede  (Servetus)  Miguel  <le,  monu- 
ment cxpiatoire  to,  130/.  ;  424 
and  n.,  471. 

Seville,  College  at,  491. 

Signa  exfiibitiva  and  representative!,, 
59. 

Simon,  Preacher  at  Aigle,  69. 

Simonetta,  Luigi,  Cardinal,  duti<s 
at  Trent,  590. 

Simons,  Menno,  organised  Baptist 
Churches,  422,  469, 

Sin,  'Doctrine  of,  at  the  Regeiisburg 
Conference,  519/.  ;  at  the  Council 
of  Trent,  575/. 

Singing,  congregational,  105. 

Sion,  The  Bishop  of.  68. 

ftixteen,  The,  211,  213,  218. 

Sixtus  v.,  Pope,  20S/. 

Socinianisra  began  with  a  criticism 
of  doctrines,  473  ;  and  Humanism, 
474  ;  and  Scotist  theology.  474 ; 
its  idea  of  Faith,  475  ;  of  JS&rijJtwe, 
476 ;  God  is  Dominium  Absolutum, 
477  ff, ;  the  Atonement  superfluous, 
478 ;  doctrine  of  the  Church, 
480/. 

Socinians  called  the  Polish  Brethren. 

478. 
'Solexire,  73. 

Solothurn,  Swiss  Canton,  22. 

Somerset,  Edward  Seymour,  Dulse  of, 
Lord-  Protector  of  England,  283, 
299,  352,  359. 

Sommieres,  Huguenot  stronghold, 
201. 

Sorbonne,  The,  the  theological 
faculty  in  the  University  of  Paris, 
drafts  a  series  of  articles  against 
Calvin's  Imtitutio,  147  ;  its  list  of 
Prohibited  Books,  148,  603;  95, 
139,  142,  144/.,  146. 

Somni,  Fausto,  founder  of  the 
Socinian  Church,  422,  429,  471 ; 
found  that  the  Polish  Unitarians 
were  Anabaptists,  472. 

Somni,  Lelio,  427  and  n,9  470/., 
478. 

ftpaco,  Prmnve  in,  57,  59,  41 2/. 

Hpuniai-da  and;JUither,  18,  49U/. 

fytanwh  Pury,  The,  265... 

Spanish  treasure  ships  seized  by 
Queen  Elizabeth,  259. 

Spanish  troops  in  the  Netherlands, 
246,  265, 

Spanish  idea  of  a  reformation,  488 ff. 
r,  41. 


Spiritual  Exercises,  The,  532,  537, 
538-545,  548,  555,  561,  585. 

Stabler  mStaffmen,  The,  Anabaptists, 
441. 

Stadt,  Karl,  on  the  sacramental 
controversy,  53. 

Staffort  Book,  The,  4  n. 

Staprade,  Anabaptist  preacher  in 
Munster,  456. 

States  General,  The,  of  France,  177, 
180.^.,  185/.,  206,  212;  of  the 
Netherlands,  241,  266. 

Stipends  of  clergy,  69. 

Stoicism  and  the  Reformed  theology 
13. 

Straelen,  Anthony  von,  255. 

Strassburg,  20,  43,  48,  60,  101, 124/.r 
129,  144,  152,  453. 

Submission  of  the  Clergy  (England), 
327. 

Substance  and  Presence,  59,  412/. 

Superintendents  in  the  Scottish 
Church,  305,  308. 

Supper,  Doctrine  of  the  Holy,  at  the 
Regensburg  Conference,  522/.,  at 
the  Council  of  Trent,  583. 

Supreme  Governor  of  the  Church 
(England),  393,  418/. 

Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  (Eng- 
land), 327,  331,  393  and  n. 

Swiss  soldiers,  23/.,  32. 

Switzerland,  political  condition,  21/". , 
how.  Christianised,  23  ;  religious 
war  in,  49. 

Synod  of  the  Brethren,  435. 

Synod  .of  the  Socinians  at  Krakau, 
472. 

Synods  of  the  Reformed  Churches,  at 
Bern,  73,  118  ;  at  Lausanne,  118  ; 
at  Zurich,  121 ;  in  the  French 
Protestant  Church,  167,  168  ;  at 
Mantes,  221 ;  in  the  Dutch  Church, 
271 ;  difficulties  in  .the  way  of  a 
N&twMtl  Dutch  Synod,  272;  in 
Scotland,  304. 

Talavera,  Fernando  de,  Confessor  to 
Isabella  of  Castile,  490. 

Temples  (qhurch,es),  184... 

Ten  Articles,  The,  of  .the, English 
Church,  10,  333/1  . ,  . 

Teresa,  Saitft,  506,  531,  543. 

Testament  owd  Complaynt  of  the  Pa* 
yyngo,  278. 

Theatre,  French,  and  the  .Reforma- 
tion, 151. 

Theses,  JZwingli's  tihijwvw.,  33. 

Theses  of  Bern,  The  Ten,  4ii,  45/. 

Theses  evang&iyncs  de  Geneve,  The,  85, 


630 


INDEX 


Theses,  toang&iques  of  Lausanne,  103. 

Theses,  Luther's,  17. 

Theses,  Kothmann's,  454. 

Thirty -eight  Articles,  The.  See 
Articles. 

Thirty-nine  Articles.     See  Articles. 

Thirty  Years'  War,  2. 

Thomas  Aquinas,  St.,  78,  82,  491, 
575. 

Thomas  of  Canterbury,  St.,  345. 

Thomism,  The  New,  arose  in  Spain, 
491/.  ;  at  the  Council  of  Tirnt, 
571,  577,  580,  582. 

Thorens,  Seigneur  de,  his  house  used 
in  Geneva  by  the  Evangelicals,  83  n. 

Throckmorton,  Sir  Nicholas,  Eliza- 
beth's Ambassador  in  Paris,  296/. 

Thyez,  The  people  of,  and  secular 
excommunication,  11 2  n.  ;  117. 

Tiger  of  France,  Epistle  sent  to  the, 
176. 

Tithes,  attacked,  31,  446. 

Toggenburg  Valley,  24. 

Toledo,  College  at,  491. 

Torquexnada,  Thomas  de,  Inquisitor, 
598/. 

Tournelle,  La,  criminal  court  of  the 
Parletnent  of  Paris,  170. 

Tournon,  Cardinal  de,  149,  187. 

Tours,  Church  at,  166 ;  Battle  at, 
214 ;  Henry  iv.  at,  214,  216,  220. 

Tradition,  Dogmatic,  423,  573/. 

Transubstantiation,  333,  412.  * 

Trent,  City  of,  564/. 

Trent,  Council  of;  First  Meeting, 
564-581 ;  papal  legates  at,  565/.  ; 
differences  among  the  Romanist 
powers  at,  566/.  ;  debates  on  pro- 
cedure, 568 ff. ;  Second  Meeting, 
581-587 ;  definition  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  Sacraments,  582jf. ;  Third 
Meeting,  587  jf.  ;  varying  views 
about  the  reorganisation  of  the 
Church,  58SJf. ;  was  to  be  a  con- 
tinuation of  the  former  Council, 
589  ;  procedure  at,  589/. ;  work  of 
Cardinal  Simonetta  at,  590  ;  what 
the  Council  did  for  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  594 ;  its  list  of 
prohibited  books,  604;  211,  247/., 
416,  517. 

Triumvirate,  The,  Montmorency,  St. 
Andre*  and  Guise,  184,  190,  193. 

Tschudi,  Peter,  a  Humanist,  18  n, 

Tulchan  Bishops,  860  and  n, 

Tunstall,  Cuthbcrt,  Bishop  of  Dur- 
ham, 371,  373. 

Twelve  Articles,  The  (The  Apostles' 
Creed),  518. 


Twenty -one  Articles,  The,  of  the  Ann- 
baptists,  459,  465. 

Tyndale,  William,  279,  317,  319, 
337/.,  377. 

Ubiquity ,  Doctrine  of,  4,  7,  57,  412/. 

Udall,  Nicholas,  translated  into  Eng- 
lish the  Paraphrases  of  Erasmus, 
353. 

Ulm,  53. 

Uniformity.     See  Act  of . 

Untenvalden,  a  Forest  Canton,  21/., 
47. 

Uii,  a  Forest  Canton,  21/.,  47. 

Ursinus,  Zachary,  4w. 

Utrecht  protests  against  Alva's  taxa- 
tion, 259. 

Vadianus.     See  Watt. 

Valais,  The,  22,  48 ;  the  Bishop  of 

the,  41. 

Valladolid,  University  of,  491. 
Val  Tellina,  The,  50. 
Vargas,  Juan  de,  255, 
Vassy,  Massacre  at,  189/. 
Vatable,  Francis,  a  royal  lecturer  in 

Paris,  96. 
Vax,   Anton ia,   attempts  to  poison 

Farel  and  others,  84  and  n. 
Vermigli,  Peter  Martyr,  358. 
Vestments  (Ornaments),  Controversy 

about,  364,  403,  405  and  n. 
Vicar-General  (England),  332. 
Vidonine  of  Geneva,  62,  117. 
Vienna,  University  of,  25,  607. 
Viret,  Pierre,  in  Geneva,  81  jf.,  112. 
Visitation,  Spanish  Crown  had  the 

right  of  ecclesiastical,  491. 
Visitations  of  the  Church  in  England, 

332  ;  353,  407,  410. 
Vlissingen  (Flushing),  seized  by  the 

Sea-Beggars,  260. 

Voes,  Heinrich,  martyr  in  the  Nether- 
lands, 224,  230. 
Volkertz,   Jan,   Anabaptist  martyr, 

236. 
Vulgate,  The  Latin,  and  the  Council 

of  Trent,  573/, 

Wagner,  Sebastian,  43  and  n. 

Walcheren,  Island  of,  254,  260, 

Waldenses,  92,  148. 

Waldshut,  The  brethren  mot  at,  484, 

Wallen,  Jan,  Anabaptist  martyr,  286. 

"War  of  Public  Weal  in  France,  19  ; 
Religious  wars  in  France,  191/1 ; 
in  Switzerland,  49,/f. ;  of  the  Moors 
and  Chmtians  in  Spain,  488* 


INDEX 


631 


Warham,    William,   Archbishop    of 

Canterbury,  18,  317,  320,  322,  329 

338. 
Watt,    Joachim    de    (Vadianus),    a 

Humanist,  25%.,  47. 
Watte ville,  M.  de,  Advoyer  of  Bern, 

44  ;  Nicholas  de,  45  and  n.  ;  J.  J. 

<le,  Advoyer  of  Bern,  45  n.9  73. 
Weekly  Exercise,  The  (Scotland),  308. 
Welches,  La,  Dispute  de,  44. 
Werly,  Pierre,  a  turbulent  canon  of 

Geneva,  65,  76  and  w.,  77  n. 
Wesen,  25. 

Wessel,  John  of,  15,  226. 
Westminster,     Conference    at,     20, 

400/. 
Wiclif,  19,  317/. ;  influence  in  Scot- 

land,  277. 
Wiclifites,  92,  317. 
Wieck,  van  <ler,  Lutheran  Syndic  of 

Munster,  456/.,  460. 
Wied,  Hermann  von,  Archbishop  of 

Koln,  3,  558. 
Wild-Beggars,  Tlie,  257. 
Wildermuth,  a  soldier  of  Bern,  91. 
Wildhaus,  Zwingli's  birthplace,  24, 
Wilhelmus  van  Naxsouwen,  261. 
Willebiock,  255. 

William  of  Orange.     See  Naxsau. 
Wihhart,    George,    Scottish  martyr, 

284.  ' 

Wittenberg,  6,  11,  453. 
Wittenberg  Articles,  The,  341. 
Wittenberg  Concord,  60. 
Waiflein,  Heinrich  (Lupulus),  25. 
Wolmar,  Melohior,  taught  Calvin  at 

Bourges,  95. 
Wolsey,  Cardinal,  18,  319,  320,  324, 

325,  343. 

Works,  Merit  in,  33. 
Worms,  Conference  at,  124, 125, 126. 


Worms,  Diet  of,  three  forces  met  at, 

495. 

Wurtemburg,  48. 
Wyatt,  Sir  Thomas,  371. 
Wyttenbach,  Thomas,  10,  27,  38,  46. 

Xavier,  Francis,  537,  556,  559. 
Ximenes    de    Cisneros,     Francesco, 
Cardinal,  490  ff.,  493,  497,  530. 

Yaxley,  Francis,  agent  of  Mary  of 

Scotland,  420  n. 
Ypres,  254. 

Zug,  Swiss  Canton,  22,  47. 

Zurich,  Great  Council  in,  29,  33  jf.  ; 
Public  Disputations  in,  34/.  ;  at 
war  with  the  Forest  Cantons,  49  ; 
Consensus^  of,  60  ;  synod  at,  122  ; 
ecclesiastical  discipline  in,  129 ; 
Anabaptists  in,  441. 

Zutphen  burnt  by  the  Spaniards,  261. 

Zutphen,  Hendrick  of,  228,  230. 

Zwickau  Prophets,  431. 

Zwingli,  Bartholomew,  Dean  of 
Wesen,  25/. 

Zwingli,  Huldreich,  the  Elder,  25. 

Zwingli,  Huldreich,  youth  and  edu- 
cation, 24  ;  moral  character,  37  ; 
Humanism  and,  10,  37 ;  and 
Luther,  27,  55/.;  comes  to  Zurich, 
*2&Jf. ;  bin  Sixty-seven  Theses,  6n., 
33  ;  and  Anna  Keinhard,  36  ; 
theory  of  civil  control  over  the 
Church,  8,  111,  132,  129  ;  on  In- 
dulgences, 16;  views  on  the,  Sacra- 
ment of  the  Holy  Supper,  55  ; 
on  ecclesiastical  excommunication, 
111/.,  129  ;  and  the  Anabaptists, 
445. 

Zwinglianism,  411. 

Zwolle,  full  of  Anabaptists,  237* 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  THEOLOGICAL  LIBRARY 

A  History  of  the  Reformation 

I.   THE  REFORMATION  IN  GERMANY 

By  THOMAS  M.  LINDSAY,  H.A.,  D.D. 

Principal  of  the  United  Free  Church  College,  Glasgow 


Crown  8vo,  544  pages.    $2.50  net  (postage  21  cents) 


"This  volume  is  marked  by  high  scholarship  and  considerate  frankness 
in  the  treatment  of  debatable  questions." — The  Universalist  Leader. 

"The  arrangement  of  the  book  is  most  excellent,  and  while  it  is  a  worthy 
and  scholarly  account  it  is  so  arranged  that  for  the  student  of  the  Reforma- 
tion it  is  almost  encyclopaedic  in  its  convenience  and  conciseness.  It  is  a 
book  no  library,  public  or  private,  can  really  be  without."— -Record  of  Chris- 
tian Work. 

"Np  previous- history,  we  believe,  has  given  so  full  and.  graphic  a  por- 
traiture of  the  intellectual,  social  and  religious  life  of  the  age  which  gave 
birth  to  the  Reformation,  or  exhibited  so  clearly  the  intimate  connection 
of  the  evangelical  revival  under  Luther  with  the  family  religion  present  and 
taught  in  German  homes  from  medieval  times." — The  Christian  Intelligencer. 

"  The  book,  as  a  whole,  is  one  of  rare  value.  It  is  full  of  pictures  as  vivid 
as  if  they  were  drawn  from  life.  In  a  sense  they  were,  for  Dr.  Lindsay  has 
succeeded  in  thinking  himself  into  the  life  and  point  of  view  of  the  era  of 
which  he  writes,  to  a  remarkable  degree.  The  reader  who  completes  this 
intensely  interesting  volume,  will  look  forward  eagerly  to  the  next."— 
Christian  World. 

"The  good  balance  of  naterial,  which  Principal  Lindsay  has  attained  by 
a  self-denying  exclusion,  as  well  a's  by  much  research  and  inclusion  of  fresh 
material,  makes  the  work  a  real  addition  to  our  materials  for  study."— TJte 
Congregationalism 

"Every  intelligent  layman  can  enjoy  the  book  thoroughly,  while  its  foot- 
notos  and  bibliographies  give  it  interest  and  value  for  the  special  student."— 
New  York  Observer. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  THEOLOGICAL  LIBRARY 

Theology  of  the  New  Testament 

By  GEORGE  B.  STEVENS,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Professor  of  Systematic  Theology,  Yale  University 

Crown  8vo,  638  pages.    $2.50  net 

''In  style  it  is  rarely  clear,  simple,  and  strong,  adapted  alike  to  the  gen- 
eral reader  and  the  theological  student.  The  former  class  will  find  it  read- 
able and  interesting  to  an  unusual  degree,  while  the  student  will  value  its 
thorough  scholarship  and  completeness  of  treatment.  His  work  has  a  sim- 
plicity, beauty,  and  freshness  that  add  greatly  to  its  scholarly  excellence  and 
worth." — Christian  Advocate. 

"It  is  a  fine  example  of  painstaking,  discriminating,  impartial  research 
and  statement." — The  Congregationahst. 

"It  will  certainly  take  its  place,  after  careful  reading,  as  a  valuable 
synopsis,  neither  bare  nor  over-elaborate,  to  which  recourse  will  be  had  by 
the  student  or  teacher  who  requires  within  moderate  compass  the  gist  of 
modern  research." — The  Literary  World. 


The  Ancient  Catholic  Church 

Prom  the  Accession  of  Trajan  to  the  Fourth 
General  Council  (A.  D.  98-451) 

By  ROBERT  RAINY,  D.D. 

Principal  of  the  New  College,  Edinburgh 


Crown  8vo,  554  pages.    $2.50  net 


"This  is  verily  and  indeed  a  book  to  thank  God  for;  and  if  anybody  has 
been  despairing  of  a  restoration  of  true  catholic  unity  in  God's  good  time,  it 
is  a  book  to  fill  him  with  hope  and  confidence." — The  Church  Standard. 

"Principal  "Rainy  has  written  a  fascinating  book.  He  has  the  gifts  of  an 
historian  and  an  expositor.  His  fresh  presentation  of  so  intricate  and  time- 
worn  a  subject  as  Gnosticism  grips  and  holds  the  attention  from  first  to  last. 
Familiarity  wftfli  most  of  the  subjects  which  fall  to  be  treated  within  the«c 
limits  of  ChrfeaSan  history  had  bred  a  fancy  that  we  might  safely  and  profit- 
ably skip  some  of  the  chapters,  but  we  found  ourselves  returning  to  close  up 
the  gaps;  we  should  advise  those  who  are  led  to  read  the  book  through  this 
notice  not  to  repeat  our  experiment.  It  is  a  dish  of  well-cooked  and  well- 
seasoned  meat,  savory  and  rich,  with  abundance  of  gravy;  and,  while  no 
one  wishes  to  be  a  glutton,  he  will  miss  something  nutritious  if  he  docs  not 
take  time  to  consume  it  all." — Methodist  Review. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  THEOLOGICAL  LIBRARY 

History  of  Christian  Doctrine 

By  GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.DM  LL.D. 

Titus  Street  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  Yale  University 

Crown  8vo,  583  pages.    $2.50  net 

"Intrinsically  this  volume  is  worthy  of  a  foremost  place  in  our  modern 
literature.  .  .  .  We  have  no  work  on  the  subject  in  English  equal  to  it,  for 
variety  and  range,  clearness  of  statement,  judicious  guidance,  and  catholicity 
of  tone." — London  Nonconformist  and  Independent. 

"It  is  only  just  to  say  that  Dr.  Fisher  has  produced  the  best  History  of 
Doctrine  that  we  have  in  English." — The  New  York  Evangelist. 

"It  meets  the  severest  standard;  there  is  fullness  of  knowledge,  thorough 
research,  keenly  analytic  thought,  and  rarest  enrichment  for  a  positive, 
profound  and  learned  critic.  There  is  interpretative  and  revealing  sympathy. 
It  is  of  the  class  of  works  that  mark  epochs  in  their  several  departments." — 
The  Outlook.  

Christian  Institutions 

By  ALEXANDER  V.  G.  ALLEN,  D.D, 

Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School  in 

Cambridge 


Crown  8vo,  577  pages.    $3.50  net 


'*  Professor  Allen's  Christian  Institutions  may  be  regarded  as  the  most 
important  permanent  contribution  which  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
of  the  United  States  has  yet  made  to  general  theological  thought" — The 
American  Journal  of  Theology. 

"It  is  an  honor  to  American  scholarship,  and  -will  be  read  by  all  who 
wish  to  be  abreast  of  the  age." — The  Lutheran  Church  Review. 

"It  is  a  treasury  of  expert  knowledge,  arranged  in  an  orderly  and  lucid 
manner,  and  more  than  ordinarily  readable.  ...  It  is  controlled  by  the 
candid  and  critical  spirit  of  the  careful  historian  who,  of  course,  has  his 
convictions  and  preferences,  but  who  makes  no  claims  in  their  behalf  which 
the  facts  do  not  seem  to  warrant."— The  Congregationalist. 

"He  writes  in  a  charming  style,  and  has  collected  a  vast  amount  of  im- 
portant material  pertaining  to  his  subject  which  can  be  found  in  no  other 
work  tn  so  compact  a  form." — The  New  York  Observer. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  THEOLOGICAL  LIBRARY 

Apologetics 

.    Or,  Christianity  Defensively  Stated 

By  ALEXANDER  BALMAIN  BRUCE,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Apologetics  and  New  Testament  Exegesis,  Free  Church  College, 
Glasgow;  Author  of  "The  Training  of  the  Twelve,"  "The  Humilia- 
tion of  Christ,"  "The  Kingdom  of  God,"  etc. 


Crown  8vo,  528  pages.    $2.50  net 

"The  book  is  well-nigh  indispensable  to  those  who  propose  to  keep 
abreast  of  the  times." — Western  Christian  Advocate. 

"In  a  word,  he  tells  precisely  what  all  intelligent  persons  wish  to  know, 
and  tells  it  in  a  clear,  fresh  and  convincing  manner.  Scarcely  anyone  has 
so  successfully  rendered  the  service  of  showing  what  the  result  of  the  higher 
criticism  is  for  the  proper  understanding  of  the  history  and  religion  of 
Israel." — Andover  Review. 

"We  have  not  for  a  long  time  taken  a  book  in  hand  that  is  more  stimulating 
to  faith.  .  .  .  Without 'commenting  further,  we  repeat  that  this  volume  is 
the  ablest,  most  scholarly,  most  advanced,  and  sharpest  defence  of  Chris- 
tianity that  has  ever  been  written.  No  theological  library  should  be  with- 
out it."— Zioris  Herald. 


Christian  Ethics 

By  NEWMAN  SMYTH,  D.D.,  New  Haven 
Crown  8vo,  508  pages.    $3.50  net 


"As  this  book  is  the  latest,  so  it  is  the  fullest  and  most  attractive  treat- 
ment of  the  subject  that  we  are  familiar  with.  Patient  and  exhaustive  in 
its  method  of  inquiry,  and  stimulating  and  suggestive  in  the  topic  it  handles, 
we  are  confident  that  it  will  be.  a  help  to  the  task  of  the  moral  understanding 
and  interpretation  of  human  life." — The  Living  Church. 

"This  book  of  Dr.  Newman  Smyth  is  of  extraordinary  interest -and  value. 
It  is  an  honor  to  American  scholarship  and  American  'Christian  thinking. 
It  is  a  work  which  has  -been  wrought  out  with  remarkable  gtasp  of  con- 
ception, and  power  of  just  analysis, ,  fullness  of  information,  richness  of 
thought,  and  affluence  of  apt  and  luminous  illustration.  Its  style  is  singu- 
larly clear,  simple,  facile,  and  strong.  Too  much  gratification  can  hardly 
be  expressed  at  the  way  the  author  lifts' the  whole  subject  of  ethics  up  out 
of  the  slough  of  mere  naturalism  into  its  own  place,  where  it  is  seen  to  be 
illumined  by  the  Christian -revelation,  and  vision,"— The  Advance 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  THEOLOGICAL  LIBRARY 


The  Theology  of  the  Old  Testament 

By  A.  B.  DAVIDSON,  D.DM  LL.DM  D.Litt 

Professor  of  Hebrew  and  Old  Testament  Exegesis,  New  College,  Edinburgh 
EDITED.  FROM  THE  AUTHOR'S  MANUSCRIPTS 

By  5.  D.  P.  SALMOND,  D.D.,  F.E.I.5. 

Principal  of  the  United  Free  Church  College,  Aberdeen 


Crown  8vo,  568  pages.    $2.50  net 


"We  hope  every  clergyman  will  not  rest  content  till  he  has  procured. and 
studied  this  most  admirable  and  useful  'book.  Every  really  useful  question 
relating 'to  man — his  nature,  his  fall,  and  his  redemption,  his  present  life  of 
grace,  his  life  after  death,  his  future  life — is  treated  of.  We  may  add  that  the 
most  conservatively  inclined  believer  in  the  Old  Testament  will  find  nothing 
in  this  book  to  startle  him,  while,  at  the  same  time,  the  book  is  fully  cogni- 
zant of  the  altered  views  regarding  the  ancient  Scriptures.  The  tone  is 
reverent  throughout,  and  no  one  who  reads  attentively  can  fail  to  derive  fresh 
light  and  benefit  from  the  exposition  here  given." — The  Canadian  Church- 
man. 

"We  commend  this  book  with  a  special  prayer,  believing  that  it  will  make 
the  Old  Testament  a  richer  book;  and  make  the  foundation  upon  which  the 
teachings  of  the  New  Testament  stand  more  secure  to  every  one  who  reads 
it."— r/wj  Heidelberg  Teacher. 


A  HISTORY  OF 

Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age 

By  ARTHUR  CUSHMAN  McdlFFERT,  Ph.D.,  D.D, 

Washburn  Professor  of  Church  History  in  the  Union  Theological  Seminary, 

New  York 


Crown  8vo,  681  pages.    $3.50  net 

"There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  is  a  remarkable  work,  both  on  account 
of  the  thoroughness  of  its  criticism  and  the  boldness  of  its  views." — The 
Scotsman, 

"Dr.  McGiffert  has  produced  an  able,  scholarly,  suggestive,  and  con- 
structive work.  He  is*in  thorough  and  easy  possession  of  his  sources^and 
materials,  so  that  his  positive  construction  is  seldom  interrupted  by  citations, 
the  demolition  of  opposing  views,  or  the  irrelevant  discussion  of  subordinate 
questions.1' — The  Method™*  Review. 

"*ftie  .clearness,  self-consistency,  and  force  of  the  whole  impression  of 
Apostolic  Christianity  with  which  we  leave  this  book,  goes  far  to  guarantee 
its  permanent  value  and  success."— '/Yw  Expositor. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  .THEOLOGICAL  LIBRARY 

AN  INTRODUCTION  TO 

The  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament 

By  Prof.  5.  R.  DRIVER,  D.D.,  D.Litt. 

Canon  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford 
New  Edition  Revised 


Crown  8vo,  558  pages.    $3.50  net 


"His  judgment  is  singularly  fair,  calm,  unbiassed,  and  independent.  It 
is  also  thoroughly  reverential.  .  .  .  The  service,  which  his  book  will  render 
in  the  present  confusion  of  mind  on  this  great  subject,  can  scarcely  be  over- 
estimated."— The  London  Times. 

"...  Canon  Driver's  book  is  characterized  throughout  by  thorough 
Christian  scholarship,  faithful  research,  caution  in  the  expression  of  mere 
opinions,  candor  in  the  statement  of  facts  and  of  the  necessary  inferences 
from  them,  and  the  devout  recognition  of  the  divine  inworking  in  the  religious 
life  of  the  Hebrews,  and  of  the  tokens  of  divine  inspiration  in  the  literature 
which  records  and  embodies  it." — Dr.  A.  P,  PEABOPY,  in  the  Cambridge 
Tribune. 

Old  Testament  History 

By  HENRY  PRESERVED  SrtlTH,  D.D. 

Profeissor  of  Biblical  History  and  Interpretation,  Amherst  College 


Crown  8vo,  538  pages.    $3.50  net 


"Professor  Smith  has,  by  his  comprehensive  and  vitalized  history,  laid 
all  who  care  for  the  Old  Testament  under  great  obligations."— The  In- 
dependent. 

"The  volume  is  characterized  by  extraordinary  clearness  of  conception 
and  representation,  thorough  scholarly  ability,  and  charm  of  style,'* — The 
Interior. 

"We  have  a  clear,  interesting,  instructive  account  of  the  growth  of  Israel, 
embodying  a  series  of  careful  judgments  on  the  countless  problems  that  face 
the  man  who  tries  to  understand  the  life  of  that  remarkable  people.  The 
'History'  takes  its  place  worthily  by  the  side  of  Driver's  Introduction. 
The  student  of  to-day  is  to  be  congratulated  on  having  so  valuable  an  ad- 
dition made  to  his  stock  of  tools,"— The  Expository  Times, 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  THEOLOGICAL  LIBRARY 


The  Christian  Doctrine  of  Salvation 

By  GEORGE  B.  STEVENS,  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

D  wight  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology  in  Yale  University 


Crown  8vo,  558  pages.    $2.50  net  (postage  aa  cents) 

"The  book  is  a  great  work,  whatever  one's  own  dogmatic  opinions  may 
be,  or  however  one  might  wish  to  criticize  some  of  the  positions  taken  by 
Dr.  Stevens.  It  shows  mastery  of  the  subject,  breadth  of  view  combined 
with  the  minutiae  of  scholarship,  that  is  admirable.  Tt  should  have  a-  wide 
reading,  and  it  can  do  much  for  this  transitional  time  of  ours,  when  nothing 
is  more  needed  than  the  reinterpretation  of  the  old  formulas  in  the  life  of 
to-day."— The  Examiner. 

"Professor  Stevens  has  performed  a  task  of  great  importance,  certain 
to  exert  wide  and  helpful  influence  in  settling  the  minds  of  men.  He  has 
treated  the  subject  historically  and  has  given  to  Christ  the  first  place  in 
interpreting  his  own  mission." — Congregationalism  and  Christian  World. 


The  Christian  Pastor  and  the  Working  Church 

By  WASHINGTON   GLADDEN,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Author  of  "Applied  Christianity,"   "Who  Wrote  the  Bible?"  "Ruling 
Ideas  of  the  Present  Age,"  etc. 


Crown  8vo,  485  pages.    $2.50  net 


'Tacked  with  wisdom  and  instruction  and  a  profound  piety.  ...  It  is 
pithy,  pertinent,  and  judicious  from  cover  to  cover.  ...  An  exceedingly 
comprehensive,  sagacious,  and  suggestive  study  and  application  of  its 
theme." — The  Con grc Rationalist. 

"We  have  here,  for  the  pastor,  the  most  modern  practical  treatise  yet 
published— sagacious,  balanced,  devout,  inspiring."— The  Dial. 

"A  comprehensive,  inspiring,  and  helpful  guide  to  a  busy  pastor.  One 
finds  in  it  a  multitude  of  practical  suggestions  for  the  development  of  the 
spiritual  and  working  life  of  the  Church,  and  the  answer  to  many  problems 
that  arc  a  constant  perplexity  to  the  faithful  minister."— The  Christian 
Intelligencer. 


The  International 

Critical  Commentary 

un  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments 


EDITORS'    PREFACE 

THERE  are  now  before  the  public  many  Commentaries, 
written  by  British  and  American  divines,  of  a  popular 
or  homiletical    character.     The    Cambridge   Bible  for 
Schools,  the  Handbooks  for  Bible  Classes  and  Private  Students, 
The  Speaker's  Commentary,  The  Popular  Commentary  (Schaff), 
The   Expositor's  Bible,  and   other  similar  series,   have  their 
special  place  and  importance.     But  they  do  not  enter  into  the 
field  of  Critical  Biblical  scholarship  occupied  by  such  series  of 
Commentaries  as  the  Kurzgefasstes  exegetisches  Handbuch  zum 
A.   T.  /   De  Wette's  Kurzgefasstes  exegetisches  Handbuch  zum 
N*  T. ;    Meyer's  Kritisch-exegetischer  Kommentar;    Keil   and 
Delitzsch's   Biblischer   Commentar  iiber  das  A.  T.;    Lange's 
.  Theologisch-homiletisches  *  Bibelwerk  ;  Nowack's  Handkommentar 
zum  A.  T.  /  Holtzmann's  Handkommentar  zum  N*  T.      Several 
of  these  have  been  translated,  edited,  and  in  some  cases  enlarged 
and  adapted,  for  the  English-speaking  public;    others  are  in 
process  of  translation.     But  no  corresponding  series  by  British 
or  American  divines  has  hitherto  been  produced.     The  way  has 
been  prepared  by  special  Commentaries  by  Cheyne,  Ellicott, 
Kalisch,   Lightfoot,  Perowne,  Westcott,  and  others ;   and  the 
time  has  come,  in  the  judgment  of  the  projectors  of  this  enter- 
prise, when  it  is  practicable  to  combine  British  and  American 
scholars    in    the    production    of    a    critical,    comprehensive 
Commentary  that  will  be  abreast  of  modern  biblical  scholarship, 
and  in  a  measure  lead  its  van. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY 

Messrs.  Charles  Scribner's  Sons  of  New  York,  and  Messrs. 
T.  &  T.  Clark  of  Edinburgh,  propose  to  publish  such  a  series 
of  Commentaries  on  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  under  the 
editorship  of  Prof.  C.  A.  BRIGGS,  D.D.,  in  America,  and  of 
-Prof.  S.  R.  DRIVER,  D.D.,  for  the  Old  Testament,  and  the 
Rev.  ALFRED  PLUMMER,  D.D.,  for  the  New  Testament,  in 
Great  Britain. 

The  Commentaries  will  be  international  and  inter-confessional, 
and  will  be  free  from  polemical  and  ecclesiastical  bias.  They 
will  be  based  upon  a  thorough-  critical  study  of  the  original  texts 
of  the  Bible,  and  upon  critical  methods  of  interpretation.  They 
are  designed  chiefly  for  students  and  clergymen,  and  will  be 
'written  in  a  compact  style.  Each  book  will  be  preceded  by  an 
Introduction,  stating  the  results  of  criticism  upon  it,  and  discuss- 
ing impartially  the  questions  still  remaining  open.  The  details 
of  criticism  will  appear  in  their  proper  place  in  the  body  of  the 
Commentary.  Each  section  of  the  Text  will  be  introduced 
with  a  paraphrase,  or  summary  of  contents.  Technical  details 
of  textual  and  philological  criticism  will,  as  a  rule,  be  kept 
distinct  from  matter  of  a  more  general  character ;  and  in  the 
Old  Testament  the  exegetical  notes  will  be  arranged,  as  far  as 
possible,  so  as  to  be  serviceable  to  students  not  acquainted  with 
Hebrew.  The  History  of  Interpretation  of  the  Books  will  be 
dealt  with,  when  necessary,  in  the  Introductions,  with  critical 
notices  of  the  roost  important  literature  cif  the  subject.  Historical 
and  Archaeological  questions,  as  well  as  questions  of  Biblical 
Theology,  are  included  in  the  plan  of  the  Commentaries,  but 
not  Practical  or  Homiletical  Exegesis.  The  Volumes  will  con- 
stitute a-uniform  series* 


The  International  Critical  Commentary 

ARRANGEMENT  OF  VOLUMES  AND  AUTHORS 

THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

GENESIS.  The  Rev.  JOHN  SKINNER,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Old  Testament 
.Language  and  Literature,  College  of  Presbyterian  Church  of  England, 
Cambridge,  England. 

EXODUS.  The  Rev.  A.  R.  S.  KENNEDY,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Hebrew, 
University  of  Edinburgh. 

LEVITICUS.    J.  F.  STENNING,  -M.A.,  Fellow  of  Wadham  College,  Oxford. 

NUM  BERS.  The  Rev.  G.  BUCHANAN  GRAY,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Hebrew, 
Mansfield  College,  Oxford.  {Now  Ready. 

DEUTERONOMY.  The  Rev.  S.  R.  DRIVER,  D.D.,  D.Litt.,. Regius  Pro- 
fessor of  Hebrew,  Oxford.  ,  ,  ,  [Now  Ready. 

JOSHUA.  The  Rev.  GEORGE  ADAM  SMITH,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of 
Hebre*w,  United  Free  Church  College,  Glasgow. 

JUDGES.  The  Rev.  GEORGE  MOORE,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Theol- 
ogy, Harvard  University,  Cambridge,  Mass.  [Now  Ready. 

SAMUEL.  The  Rev.  H.  P.  SMITH,  D.D.,  sometime  Professor  of  Biblical 
History,  Amherst  College,  Mass,  [Now  Ready. 

KINGS.  The  Rev.  FRANCIS  BROWN,  D.D.,  D.Litt.,  LL.D.,  Professor 
of  Hebrew  and  Cognate  Languages,  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New 
York  City. 

CHRONICLES.  The  Rev.  EDWARD  L.  CURTIS,  D.D.,  Professor  of 
Hebrew,  Yale  University,  New  Haven,  Conn. 

EZRA  AND  NEHEMIAH.  The  Rev.  L.  W.  BATTEN,  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  Rector 
of  St.  Mark's  ChurcH,  New  Ybrk  City,  sometime  Professor  of  Hebrew, 
P.  K.  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia. 

PSALMS.  The  Rev.  CHAS.  A.  BRIGGS,  D.D.,  D.Litt,  Professor, of  Theo- 
logical Encyclopadia  arid  Symbolics,  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New 
York.  [2  vok-  N°w  Ready. 

PROVERBS*  The  Rev.  C.  H.  Toy,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Hebrew, 
Harvard  University,  Cambridge,  Mass.  '  [Now  Ready. 

JOB.  The  Rev.  S.  P.  DRIVER,  D.D.,  D.Litt.,  Regius  Professor  of  He- 
brew, Oxford, 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY 


ISAIAH.  Chaps.  I-XXXIX.  The  Rev.  G.  BUCHANAN  GRAY,  D.D., 
Professor  of  Hebrew,  Mansfield  College,  Oxford, 

ISAIAH.  Chaps.  XL-LXVI.  The  Rev.  S.  R.  DRIVER,  D.D.,  D.Litt., 
Regius  Professor  of  Hebrew,  Oxford. 

JEREMIAH.  The  Rev.  A.  F.  KIRKPATRICK,  D.D.,  Dean  of  Ely,  sometime 
Regius  Professor  of  Hebrew,  Cambridge,  England. 

EZEKfEL.  The  Rev,  G.  A.  COOKE,  M.A.,  sometime  Fellow  Magdalen 
College,  and  the  Rev.  CHARLES  F.  BURNEY,  D.Litt.,  Fellow  and  Lecturer 
in  Hebrew,  St.  John's  College,  Oxford. 

DANIEL.  The  Rev.  JOHN  P.  PETERS,  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  sometime  Professor 
of  Hebrew,  P.  E.  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia,  now  Rector  of  St. 
Michael's  Church,  New  York  City. 

AMOS  AND  HOSEA.  W.  R.  HARPER,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  sometime  Presi- 
dent of  the  University  of  Chicago,  Illinois.  [Now  Iteady. 

MICAHTO  HAGGAI.  Prof.  JOHN  P.  SMITH,  University  of  Chicago; 
Prof.  CHARLES  P.  FAGNANI,  D.D.,  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New- 
York;  W.  HAYES  WARD,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Editor  of  The  Independent,  New 
York ;  Prof.  JULIUS  A.  BEVER,  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York, 
and  Prof*  H.  G.  MITCHELL,  D.D,,  Boston  University, 

2ECHARIAH  TO  JONAH.  Prof.  H.  G.  MITCHELL,  D.D.,  Prof.  JOHN 
P.  SMITH  and  Prof.  J.  A.  BEVER. 

ESTHER.  The  Rev.  L.  B.  PATON,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Hebrew,  Hart- 
ford Theological  Seminary. 

ECCLESIASTES.  Prof.  GEORGE  A.  BARTON,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Bibli- 
cal Literature,  Bryn  Mawr  College,  Pa. 

RUTH,  SONG  OF  SONGS  AND  LAMENTATIONS.  Rev.  CHARLES  A. 
BRIGGS,  D.D.,  D.Litt,  Professor  of  Theological  Encyclopaedia  and  Sym- 
bolics, Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 

8T.  MATTHEW.    The  Rev.  WlLLOUGHBY  C.  ALLEN,  M.A.,  Fellow,  an4 
Lecturer  in  Theology  and  Hebrew,  Exeter  College,  Oxford,          \Ih  Press. 

ST.  MARK.    Rev.  E.  P.  GOULD,  D.D.,  sometime  Professor  of  New  Testa- 
ment Literature,  P.  E,  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia.       '    ,  [Now  Ready. 

ST.  LUKE.   The  Rev.  .ALFRED  PLUMMER,  D.D.,  sometime  Master  of 
University  College,  Durham. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY 


ST.  JOHN.  The  Very  Rev.  JO?N  HENRY  BERNARD,  D.D.,  Dean  of  St. 
Patrick's  and  Lecturer  in  Divinity,  University  of  Dublin. 

HARMONY  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  The  Rev.  WILLIAM  SANDAY,  D.D., 
LL.D.,  Lady  Margaret  Professor  of1  Divinity,  Oxford,  ana  the  Rev.  WIL- 
LOUGHBY  C.  ALLEN,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  Lecturer  in  Divinity  and  Hebrew, 
Exeter  College,  Oxford.  -  , 

ACTS.  The  Rev.  C.  H.  TURNER,  D.D.,  Fellow  of  Magdalen  College, 
Oxford,  and  the  Rev.  H.  N,  BATE,  M.A.,  Examining  Chaplain  to  the 
Bishop  of  London. 

ROMANS.  The  Rev.  WILLIAM  SANDAY,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Lady  Margaret 
Professor  of  Divinity  and  Canon  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  and  the  Rev. 
A.  C.  HEADLAM,  M.A.,  D.D.,  Principal  of  King's  College,  London. 

[Now  Ready. 

CORINTHIANS.  The  Right  Rev.  ARCH.  ROBERTSON,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Lord 
Bishop  of  Exeter,  and  DAWSON  WALKER,  D.D.,  Theological  Tutor  in  the 
University  of  Durham. 

GALATIANS.  The  Rev.  ERNEST  D.  BURTON,  D.D.,  Professor  of  New 
Testament  Literature,  University  of  Chicago. 

EPHESIANS  AND  COLOSSIANS.    The  Rev.   T.   K.   ABBOTT,  B.D.,  . 
D.Litt.,  sometime  Professor  of  Biblical  Greek,  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  now 
Librarian  of  the  same.  [New  Ready. 

PHILIPPIANS  AND  PHILEMON.  The  Rev.  MARVIN  R.  VINCENT, 
D.D.,  Professor  of  Biblical  Literature,  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New 
York  City.  {Now  Ready. 

THESSALONIANS.  The  Rev.  JAMES  E.  FRAME,  M.A.,  Professor  of 
Biblical  Theology,  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 

THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES.  The  Rev.  WALTER  LOCK,  D.D.,  Warden 
of  Keble,  College  and  Professor  of  Exegesis,  Oxford. 

HEBREWS,  The  "Rev.  A.  NAIRNE,  M.  A.,  Professor  of  Hebrew  in  King's 
College,  London. 

ST.  JAMES.  The  Rev.  JAMES  H.  ROPES,  D.D.,  Bussey  Professor  of  New 
Testament  Criticism  in  Harvard  University. 

PETER  AND  JUDE.  The  Rev.  CHARLES  BIGG,  D.D.,  Regius  Professor 
of  Ecclesiastical  History  and  Canon  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  \NowReady; 

THE  EPISTLES  OF  ST.  JOHN.  The  Rev.  E.  A.  BROOKE,  B.D.,  Fellow 
and  Divinity  Lecturer  in  King's  College,  Cambridge: 

REVELATION.  Th*,Rev.  ROBERT  H.  CHARLES,  M.A.,  D.D.,  Professor 
of  Biblical  Greek  in  the  University  of  Dublin. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY 


VOLUMES  NOW  READY; 


Deuteronomy 


By  the  Rev.  S.  R.  DRIVER,  D.D.,  D.Litt. 

Regius  Professor  of  Hebrew  and  Canon  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford 


Crown  8vo*    Net,  $3.00 


"  It  is  a  pleasure  to  see  at  last  a  really  critical  Old  Testament  commentary 
in  English  upon  a  portion  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  especially  one  of  such 
merit.  This  I  find  superior  to  any  other  Commentary  in  any  language  upon 
Deuteronomy." — Professor  E.  L.  CURTIS,  of  Yale  University. 

"This  volume  of  Professor  Driver's  is  marked  by  his  well-known  care  and 
accuracy,  and  it  will  be  a  great  boon  to  every  one  who  wishes  to  acquire  a 
thorough  knowledge,  either  of  the  Hebrew  language,  or  of  the  contents  of 
the  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  and  their  significance  for  the  development  of  Old 
Testament  thought.  '  The  author  finds  scope  for  displaying  his  well-known 
wide  and  accurate  knowledge,  and  delicate  appreciation  of  the  genius  of  the 
Hebrew  language,  and  his  readers  are  supplied  with  many  carefully  con- 
structed lists  of  words  and  expressions.  He  is  at  his  best  in  the  detailed 
examination  of  the  text." — London  Athenceum. 


Numbers 


By  the  Rev.  Q.  BUCHANAN  GRAY,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Hebrew,  Mansfield  College,  Oxford 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $3.00 


"Most  Bible  readers  have  the  impression  that  'Numbers'  is  a  dull  book 
only  relieved  by  the  brilliancy  of  the  Balaam  chapters  and  some  snatches 
of  old  Hebrew  songs,  but,  as  Prof.  Gray  shows  with  admirable, skill  and 
insight, -its  historical  and  religious  value  is -not  that  which  lies  on  the  surface. 
Prof.  Gray's  Commentary  is  distinguished  by  fine  scholarship  and  sanity 
of,  judgment;  it  is  impossible,  to  commend  it  too  vr&rmty"<~-Satttrday  Rtvfav 
(London). 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY. 

Judges 

By  Dr.  GEORGE  FOOT  MOORE,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Theology,  Harvard  University 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $3.00 


"  Professor  Moore  has  more  than  sustained  his  scholarly  reputation  in  this 
work,  which  gives  us  for  the  first  time  in  English  a  commentary  on  Judges 
not  excelled,  if  indeed  equalled,  in  any  language  of  the  world." — Professor 
L.  W-  BATTEN,  of  P.  E.  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia. 

"Although  a  critical  commentary,  this* work  has  its  practical  uses,  and  by 
its  divisions,  headlines,  etc.,  it  is  admirably  adapted  to  the  wants  of  all 
thoughtful  students  of  the  Scriptures.  Indeed,  with  the  other  books  of  the 
series,  it  is  sure  to  find  its  way  into  the  hands  of  pastors  and  scholarly  lay- 
men."— Portland  Zion's  Herald. 

"Like  its  predecessors,  this  volume  will  be  warmly  welcomed — whilst  to 
those  whose  means  of  securing  up-to-date  information  on  the  subject  of  which 
it  treats  are  limited,  it  is  simply  invaluable."—' ^Edinburgh  Scotsman. 


The  Books  of  Samuel 

By  Rev.  HENRY  PR^ERVED  SMITH,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Biblical  History  and  Interpretation  in  Amherst  College 

Crown  Svo.    Net,  $3.00 


"Professor1  Smith's  Commentary  will  for  some  time  be  the  standard  work 
on  Samuel,  and  we  heartily  congratulate  him  on  scholarly  work  so  faith-' 
fully  accomplished."— The  Athenasum. 

"The  literary  quality  of  the  book  deserves  mention.  We  do  not  usually 
go  to  commentaries  for  models  of  English 'style.  But  tfeis  book  has  a  dis- 
tinct, though  unobtrusive,  literary  flavor.  It  is  delightful  reading.  The 
translation  is  always  felicitous,  and  often  renders  further  comment  need- 
less,"—r&e  Evangelist. 

"The  author  exhibits  precisely  that  scholarly  attitude  which  will  com- 
mend his  work  to  the  widest  audience."— The  Churchman. 

"The  commentary  is  the  most  complete  and  minute  hitherto  published 
by  an  English-speaking  scholar."— Literature. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY 


The  Book  of  Psalms 

By  CHARLES  AUGUSTUS  BRKKIS,  D.D.,  D.Lltt. 

Professor  of  Theological  Encyclopaedia  and  Symbolics,  Union  Theological 
Seminary,  New  York 

and 
EMILIB  GRACE  BRIGGS,  B.D. 


a  volumes.    Crown  8vo.    Price,  $3.00  net  each 
Postage  additional 


"Christian  scholarship  seems  here  to  have  reached  the  highest  level  yet 
attained  in  study  of  therbook  which  in  religious  importance  stands  next  to 
the  Gospels.  His  work  upon  it  is  not  likely  to  be  excelled  in  learning,  both 
massive  and  minute,  by  any  volume  of  the  International  Series,  to  which  it 
belongs."— The  Outlook. 

"We  have  in  this  work  what  we  should  expect,  extreme  thoroughness, 
scholarly  precision  and  depth  of  insight." — The  Churchman. 

"Dr,  Briggs  writes-  after  forty  years  of  close  study  of  his  subject,  and 
possesses  a  wealth  of  information  which  is  positively  astounding." — Episcopal 
Recorder. 

"It  is  scarcely  too  much  to  say  that  we  have  here  in  compact  fdrxn  the 
best  available  commentary  -upon  the  first-  book  of  the  Psalter.  It  is  not 
simply  grammatical  and  lexical,  but  it 'embodies  the  best  results  of  the 
author's  study  'of  Biblical  theology.  These  serve  to  bring  out  doubly  the 
significance  and  import  of  these  hymns  of  worship  of  ancient  Israel/'*— The 
Westminster*  •  . ,  , 

"It  is  a  marvel  of  minute  scholarship,  a  monument  to  the  patient  pains- 
taking assiduity  and  ripe  scholarship  of  the  author,"— Rev.  LYMAN  ABBOTT, 
D.D. 


THE.  INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY 


Proverbs 

By  the  ReV.  .CRAWFORD  H.  TOY,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Professor  of  Hebrew  in  Harvard  University  • 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $3.00 


"Professor  Toy's  commentary  on  Proverbs  maintains  the  highest  standard 
of  the  International  Critical  Commentaries.  We  can  give  no  nigher  praise. 
Proverbs  presents  comparatively  few  problems  in  criticism,  but  offers  large 
opportunities  to  the  expositor  and  exegete.  Professor  Toy's  work  is 
thorough  and  complete." — The  Congregationalist. 

"A. first-class,  up-to-date,  critical  and  exegetical  Commentary  on  the  Book 
of  Proverbs  in  the  English  language  was  one  of  the  crying  needs  of  Biblical 
scholarship.  Accordingly,  we  may  not  be  yielding  to- the  latest  addition  to 
the  International  Critical  Series  the  tribute  it  deserves,  when  we  say  that  it 
at  once  takes  the  first  place  in  its  class.  That  place  it  undoubtedly  deserves, 
however,  and  would  have  secured  even  against  much  more  formidable  com- 
petitors than  it  happens  to  have.  It  is  altogether  a  well-arranged,  lucid 
exposition  of  this  unique  book  in  the  Bible,  based  on  a  careful  study  of  the, 
text  and  the  linguistic  and  historical  background  of  every  part  of  it." — The 
Interior. 


Amos  and  Hosea 

By  WILLIAM  RAINEY  HARPER,  Ph.D.,  LL.D. 

Professor  of  Semitic  Languages  and  Literatures  in  the  University  of  Chicago 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $3.00 


"I  shall  have  pleasure  in  recommending  it  to  all  students  in  our  Seminary. 
This  book  fills,  in  the  most  favorable  manner,  a  long-felt  want  for  a  good 
critical  commentary  on  two  of  the  most  interesting  books  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment,"— Rev.  LEWIS  B.  PATON,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Hebrew,  Etartford 
Theological  Seminary. 

"He  has  gone,  with  characteristic  minuteness,  not  only  into  the  analysis 
and  discussion  of  each  point,  endeavoring  in  every  case  to  be  thoroughly 
exhaustive,  but  also  into  the  history  of  exegesis  and  discussion.  Nothing  at', 
all  worthy  of  consideration  has  been  passed  by.  The  consequence  is  that' 
when  one  carefully  studies  what  has  been  brought  together  in  this  volume/ 
cither  upon  some  passage  of  the  two  prophets  treated,  or  upon  some  question 
of  critical  or  antiquarian  importance  in  the  introductory  portion  of  the' 
volume,  one  feels  that  he  has  obtained  an  adequately,  exhaustive  view  of  the 
subject"—- The  Interior, 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  CRI^  ;.    -COMMENTARY 


St.  Mark 


(By  the  Rev.  E.  P.  GOULD,  .D.D. 

Late   Professor   of   New   Testament-  Exegesis,    P.    E.    Divinity   School. 

Philadelphia 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $3*50 

"The  whole  make-up  is  that  of  a  thoroughly  helpful,  instructive  critical 
study  of  the  Word,  surpassing  anything  of  the  kind  ever  attempted  in  the 
English  language,  and  to  students  and  clergymen  knowing  the  proper  use  of 
a  commentary  it  will  prove  an  invaluable  aid." — The  Lutheran  Quarterly. 

"Professor  Gould  has  done  his  work  well  and  thoroughly.  .  .  .  The 
commentary  is  an  admirable  example  of  the  critical  method  at  its  best.  .  .  . 
The  Word  study  .  .  .  shows  not  only  familiarity  with  all  the  literature  of 
the  subject,  but  patient,  faithful,  and  independent  investigation.  -  .  .  It 
will  rank  among  the  best,  as  it  is  the  latest  commentary  on  this  basal  Gospel." 
— The  Christian  Intelligencer. 

"Dr.  Gould's  commentary  on  Mark  is  a  large  success,  .  .  .  and  a  credit 
to  American  scholarship.  ...  He  has  undoubtedly  given  us  a  commentary 
on  Mark  which  surpasses  all  others,  a  thing  we  have  reason  to  expect  will 
be  true  in  the  case  of  every  volume  of  the  series  to  which  it  belongs." — The 
Biblical  World.  

St.  Luke 

By  the  Rev,  ALFRED  PLUHHER,  D.D. 

Master  of  University  College,  Durham ;  formerly  Fellow  and  Senior  Tutor 
of  Trinity  College,  Oxford 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $3.00 


"It  is  distinguished  throughout  by  learning,  sobriety  of  judgment,  and 
sound  exegesis.  It  is  a  weighty  contribution  to  the  interpretation  of  the,, 
Third  Gospel,  and  will  take  an  honorable  place  in  the  series  of  which  it 
forms  a  part." — Prof.  D.  D.  SALMOND,  in  the  Critical' Review. 

"We  are  pleased  with  the  thoroughness  and  scientific  accuracy  of  the  in- 
terpretations. ...  It  seems  to  us  that  the  prevailing  characteristic  of  the 
book  is  common  sense, 'fortified  by  learning  and  piety." — The  Herald  and 
Presbyter. 

"It  is  a  valuable  and  welcome  addition  to  our  somewhat  scanty  stock  of 
first-class  commentaries  on  the  Third  Gospel.  By  its  scholarly  thorough* 
ness  it  well  sustains  the  reputation  which  the  INTERNATIONAL  SERIES  has 
already  won."-— Prof.  J.  H.  THAYER,  of  Harvard  University, 


THE   INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY 

Romans 

By  the  Rev.  WILLIAM  SANDAY,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Lady  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity  and  Canon  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford 

.  and  the 

Rev.  A.  C.  HEADLAM,  M.A.,  D.D. 
Principal  of  King's  College,  London 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $3.00 

"We  do  not  hesitate  to  commend  this  as  the  best  commentary  on  Romans 
yet  written  in  English.  It  will  do  much  to  popularize  this  admirable  and 
much  needed  series,  by  showing  that  it  is  possible  to  be  critical  and  scholarly 
and  at  the  same  time  devout  and  spiritual,  and  intelligible  to  plain  Bible 
readers." — The  Church  Standard. 

"A  commentary  with  a  very  distinct  character  and  purpose  of  its  own, 
which  brings  to  students  and  ministers  an  aid  which  they  cannot  obtain  else- 
where. .  .  .  There  is  probably  no  other  commentary  in  which  criticism  has 
been  employed  so  successfully  and  impartially  to  bring  out  the  author's 
thought." — N.  Y.  Independent. 

"We  have  nothing  but  heartiest  praise  for  the  weightier  matters  of  the 
commentary.  It  is  not  only  critical,  but  exegetical,  expository,  doctrinal, 
practical,  and  eminently  spiritual.  The  positive  conclusions  of  the  books 
are  very  numerous  and  are  stoutly,  gloriously  evangelical.  .  .  .  The  com- 
mentary does  not  fail  to  speak  with  the  utmost  reverence  of  the  whole  word 
of  God." — The  Congregationalism 


Ephesians  and  Colossians 

By  the  Rev.  T.  K.  ABBOTT,  B.D.,  D.Litt. 

Formerly  Professor  of  Biblical  Greek,  now  of  Hebrew,  Trinity  College, 

Dublin 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $2.50 

"The  exegesis  based  so  solidly  on  tho  rock  foundation  of  philology  is 
argumcntatively  and  convincingly  strong.  A  spiritual  and  evangelical  tenor 
pervades  the  interpretation  from  first  to  last.  .  .  .  These  elements,^ to- 
gether with  the  author's  full-orbed  vision  of  the  truth,  with  his  discrimina- 
tive judgment  and  his  felicity  of  expression,  make  this  the  peer  of  any  com- 
mentary on  these  important  letters."— The  Standard. 

"An  exceedingly  careful  and  painstaking  piece  of  work.  The  inlroduc- 
tory  discussions  of  questions  bearing  on  the  authenticity  and  integrity  (of 
the  epistles)  are  clear  and  candid,  and  the  exposition  of  the  text  displays  a 
fmc  scholarship  and  insight."— Northwestern  Christian  Advocate. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  CRITICAL  COMMENTARY 


Philippians  and  Philemon 

By  the  Rev.  MARVIN  R.  VINCENT,  D.D. 
Professor  of  Biblical  Literature  in  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $2.00 


"Of  the  merits  of  the  work  it  is  enough  to  say  that  it  is  worthy  of  its 
place  in  the  noble  undertaking  to  which  it  belongs.  It  is  full  of  just  such 
information  as  the  Bible  student,  lay  or  clerical,  needs;  and  while  giving  an 
abundance  of  the  truths  of  erudition  to  aid  the  critical  student  of  the  text,  it 
abounds  also  in  that  more  popular  information  which  enables  the  attentive 
reader  almost  to  put  himself  in  St.  Paul's  place,  to  see  with  the  eyes  and  feel 
with  the  heart  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles." — Boston  Advertiser. 

"  Throughout  the  work  scholarly  research  is  evident.  It  commends  itself 
by  its  clear  elucidation,  its  keen  exegesis  which  marks  the  word  study  on 
every  page,  its  compactness  of  statement  and  its  simplicity  of  .arrangement." 
World. 


St.  Peter  and  St.  Jude 

By  the  Rev.  CHARLES  BIQG,  D.D. 

Regius  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  the  University  of  Oxford 


Crown  8vo.    Net,  $2.50 


"His  commentary  is  very  satisfactory  indeed.  His  notes  arc  particularly 
valuable.  We  know  of  no  work  on  these  Epistles  which  is  so  full  and  satis- 
factory."—^ Living  Church. 

"Canon  Bigg's  work  is  pre-eminently  characterized  by  judicial  open- 
mindedneas  and  sympathetic  insight  into  historical  conditions.  His  reulintic 
interpretation  of  the  relations  of  the  apostles  and  the  circumstances  of  the 
early  church  renders  the  volume  invaluable  to  students  of  these  themes. 
The  exegetical  work  in  the  volume  rests?  on  the  broad  basis  of  careful  lin- 
guistic study,  acquaintance  with  apocalyptic  literature  and  the  writings  of 
the  Fathers,  a  sane  judgment,  and  good  sense." — American  Jcurnal  of 
Theology, 


126264