At its commencement, and for the first fourteen or fifteen days, Servetus showed no lack either of moderation or skill, although both attack and defence were sharp and keen. He openly assailed Calvin as his personal and hateful enemy, but was careful not to fall into violent abuse of him. He maintained the truth of the doctrines asserted in his own works, but was most anxious to show that they were not contrary to the Christian religion, that he had never wished to separate himself from the Church, and that his aim was to restore Christianity, not to abolish it. The trial was soon transformed into a theological controversy, turning upon points of doctrine; and after the 17th of August Calvin himself took part in it, declaring that he had no intention of screening himself behind those who had commenced or were carrying it on, and that he was prepared to take the prosecution of the prisoner upon himself. He was authorized by the Council to be present at the examinations and take part in the debates, 'either for the purpose of trying to reclaim Servetus, or in order that he might point out his errors more clearly to him.' The scene became more exciting, and gave promise of wider development. Servetus offered 'to show Calvin his own errors and faults before the whole congregation, proving them by arguments drawn from the sacred Scriptures.' Calvin eagerly accepted this offer, declaring that 'there was nothing he desired so ardently as to conduct this trial in the church and before all the people.'

But the Council refused; they wished as a matter of prudence to keep the decision of such matters in their own hands; they were also probably influenced by the wishes of the friends of Servetus, who had every reason to expect that Calvin's words would have much more weight with the people than those of the Spaniard. The discussion between the two adversaries was carried on sometimes by written and sometimes by spoken arguments. For a long time Calvin's keen insight had shown him that the works of Servetus were pantheistic, and that pantheism must destroy historical and dogmatic Christianity. He pressed Servetus closely upon this point, and the Spaniard imprudently acknowledged his doctrine: 'All created things,' he said, 'are of the substance of God.' 'How, wretch!' said Calvin; 'if any one was to strike this pavement with his foot and to tell you that he was treading on your God, should you not shrink with horror at having subjected the Majesty of God to such an indignity?' 'I do not doubt,' answered Servetus, 'that this bench and this table and everything that we see is essentially God.' Again, when it was objected that, according to his views, the devil must be a manifestation of God, he laughed, and answered boldly: 'Do you doubt it? As for me I hold it to be a fundamental maxim that all things are a part and portion of God, and that the collective universe is itself the Deity.'

The Council was both shocked and embarrassed. There were warm partisans of Calvin in its ranks, and eager protectors of Servetus—among others the principal Libertine leaders, Ami Perrin and Berthelier; but there were also some impartial members who were sorry to see Calvin take such a prominent place in the prosecution, and who had no desire to become judges in a trial for heresy. Still they recognised the danger to Christianity of the Spaniard's pantheism, and refused at any cost to appear to sanction it. Moreover, they disliked and suspected Servetus. He was sincere enough in his adhesion to his own views, but on other points they found him frivolous, vain, arrogant, irresolute, and untruthful. He denied any connexion, even the most indirect, not only with the Libertines of Geneva, but with their agent Gueroult at Geneva, who had corrected the proofs of his book. The falsehood of these disavowals was so obvious, that even those magistrates who hesitated to condemn him, could no longer place any confidence in him. It seems strange that they should have been ignorant of the sentence passed upon him on the preceding 17th of June, after his escape from Vienne, by which he was condemned to be burnt alive; but either they were really ignorant of it, or they wished to appear to be so, for the Protestant Council of Geneva wrote to the Catholic judges of Vienne to ask for 'information as to the crimes which had caused the imprisonment of Servetus in their city, both believing and hearing,' says the letter, 'that it was not without cause, and that you have certain information and charges against him for which he deserves punishment.' It was no doubt by the advice of his supporters that Servetus demanded that the principal reformed churches in Switzerland—Berne, Zurich, Schaffhausen, and Basle—should be consulted on his case; since on similar occasions they had always shown themselves far more moderate than Calvin. The Council granted this request, and Calvin did not oppose it. There can be no doubt that the majority of the Genevese magistrates desired to a certain extent to modify the character of the trial, and make its personal animosity less apparent; they wished to appear the defenders of Christianity rather than the enemies of any special theological system. They adjourned the trial several times, and put off the final decision as if they dreaded to pronounce it.

But there is a time for procrastination and a time for prompt action, a time for courage and a time for prudence. The crisis of the two struggles in which this small state was engaged had arrived, and the great issues involved in them had to be decided. Between Calvin and Servetus, between Calvin and the Libertines—that is to say, between Christianity and Pantheism, between tyrannical austerity and licentious anarchy—there was no longer any possibility of either reconciliation or truce. With the instinct of the man of action, Calvin felt this, and unhesitatingly adopted the most energetic measures in both cases. On the 27th of August, 1553, he uttered the severest censures from the pulpit upon the conduct of Servetus; and on the 3d of September following, as I have previously related, he solemnly refused to administer the communion to the leader of the Libertines, who—in spite of the decision of the Council of State—had been pronounced unworthy of it by the Church. In both cases he thus made a direct appeal to the general body of believers. The trial of Servetus, which was going on at the time of this double excitement, suddenly changed its whole character. All moderation, all prudence were cast aside by the prisoner; led away by the hope of overwhelming an enemy who was fiercely attacked and in danger elsewhere, Servetus became the vehement accuser of Calvin, even unto death. Small pamphlets sometimes took the place of judicial debates. 'Miserable wretch,' said Servetus, 'you do not know what you are saying; you endeavour to condemn things which you do not understand! Do you think, O dog! that you can deafen the ears of the judges by your howls? Your mind is so confused that you cannot see the truth! … You cry out like a blind man in the desert, because the spirit of vengeance consumes your heart. You have told lies, you have told lies, you have told lies, ignorant slanderer!' Servetus did not confine himself to abuse, but, on the 22d of September, demanded that his adversary should be committed for trial, giving a list of the subjects 'on which Michael Servetus demands that John Calvin shall be interrogated. I demand, gentlemen, that my false accuser shall be punished by the law of retaliation, that his property shall be handed over to me as a compensation for my own, which by his means I have lost, and that he shall be kept in prison as I am, until the trial shall be ended by the condemnation to death of one of us two, or by some other punishment.'

Calvin, in spite of his own violence, was at first overwhelmed by this outburst of passion. He says, 'I was timorous and dismayed before him, as if I had been the prisoner, and had been called upon to answer for my doctrine. In truth, I am afraid that good men will accuse me of too great meekness.' Servetus soon discovered that his hopes had entirely deceived him, and that the position of his adversary was much stronger than he had imagined it to be. All that the Libertines were able to do for the promotion of their own cause, was, to prolong for sixteen months, the indecision of the civil power on the question of the right of excommunication; but at the end of that time, on the 24th of January, 1555, the civil authorities decided that the right belonged to the Consistory. And as to the unfortunate Servetus, the Libertines who had urged him on, and compromised him in every way from the time of his arrival at Geneva, gave him but feeble support when they saw that the final crisis was at hand. His violent attack on Calvin was not even noticed. On the 19th of September the Council decided to apply officially to the pastors and magistrates of the four churches of Berne, Zurich, Schaffhausen, and Basle for their opinion of the trial. Calvin did not approve of this step, but he had not opposed it; he had, however, written to some of his friends in the cantons, among others to Bullinger at Zurich, and to Sulzer at Basle, in order to point out the very serious nature of the advice for which they had been asked; and it was well known throughout Geneva that his letters would not fail to influence the answers from the cantons. From that time the passionate excitement of Servetus gave place to dejection and anguish, He was in prison, sick and forsaken. On the 10th of October, 1553, he wrote to the Council: 'Most noble lords, for the last three weeks I have implored you to grant me an audience, but have not been able to obtain it. I beseech you, for the love of Christ, not to refuse that which you would not refuse to a Turk who demanded justice at your hands. I have very important things to tell you, which you ought to know. As to the orders which you issued that something should be done towards keeping me clean, nothing has been done, and I am in a more wretched condition than ever. Moreover, the cold torments me greatly, on account of the colic and my other maladies, which give rise to infirmities of which I should be ashamed to write to you. It is a great cruelty that I am not permitted to speak, when I only want to ask that my wants may be supplied. For the love of God, gentlemen, grant this, either out of mercy or justice!' The Council sent two of its members to the prison 'with orders,' says M. Rilliet, 'to cause the necessary clothing to be given to the prisoner, so as to remove the hardships of which he complained. But there is no other trace of the result of this interview between the prisoner and the deputies of the Council. Probably it was occupied with topics which Servetus had previously discussed; and that his object was to obtain some influence over the minds of the magistrates rather than to give them any fresh information.' But the appeal which he had made for compassion was of no more use than his violence.

On the 18th of October, 1553, the messenger returned to Geneva, bearing the answers of the four cantons. They were all cautious and guarded, though in different degrees, and at the same time sorrowful in tone, but they were unanimous in the nature of their advice. 'We pray the Lord,' said the Bernese letter, 'that he will give you a spirit of wisdom, prudence, and courage, so that you may secure your own church as well as other churches from so great a danger; and that at the same time you may do nothing that will appear unseemly in Christian magistrates.' 'We are persuaded,' wrote the church of Basle, 'that you will not fail either in Christian prudence or in holy zeal, but will find a remedy for the snare which has already led away many souls to destruction.' The language of the letter from Zurich was much more definite: 'You must not allow the wicked and false attempts of the said prisoner to prevail, for they are quite contrary to the Christian religion, and cause our churches to be in bad repute.' Schaffhausen gave the same advice as Zurich. There can be no doubt that the four churches recommended severity, although they added a few words so that they might not be charged with the entire responsibility of the decision.

The Council met again on the 23d of October, 1553, and after having read the answers from the Swiss churches, once more adjourned so as to avoid coming to a final decision. Several of the members who were favourable to Servetus had absented themselves, amongst others, the first syndic, Ami Perrin, no doubt in order to necessitate an adjournment. Another meeting was fixed for the 26th of October; and again, when the day arrived, several of the supporters of Servetus did not appear. But Ami Perrin was true to him; he formally demanded that the accused should be acquitted of the charge, and declared innocent; and ultimately moved that the case should be referred to the Council of Two Hundred. Both propositions were rejected. The majority of the Council passed a resolution which was entered in their register in words to the following effect:—'That,—considering the summary of the trial of the prisoner, Michael Servetus, the report of those who have been consulted, and his great errors and blasphemies,—it is decreed that he be led to Champel and there burnt alive, and he shall be executed to-morrow, and his books burnt with him.'

At that period there was no hesitation on account of the atrocious torture of such a punishment, and no scruple as to the right of inflicting it. Heresy was a crime, and the stake was the penalty of heresy. In that very year 1553, at Lyons, not far from Geneva, several reformers had suffered martyrdom; among others, five young French students from the theological Institute at Lausanne. The Catholic judges at Vienne had condemned Servetus to the stake. Save for some scattered protests which saved the honour of the human conscience, in the sixteenth century the burning of heretics at the stake was looked upon as the common right of Christianity.

During the whole course of the trial Calvin had never concealed his feeling as to what the sentence ought to be. On the 20th of August, after it had commenced, he wrote to Farel: 'I hope that he will be condemned to death; but I trust that there may be some mitigation of the frightful torture of the penalty.' After the execution of the sentence, he wrote: 'When Servetus had been convicted of heresy, I did not say a word concerning his execution: not only will all good men bear witness to this, but I authorize the bad to speak if they have anything to say.' On the 26th of October, the very day on which sentence was passed, he wrote to Farel: 'The wretch has been condemned by the Council without a division. Tomorrow he will be led to the stake. We made every effort to change the manner of his death, but in vain.' Farel hurried to Geneva; he had taken the warmest interest in the case, and had urged great severity; but he was not incapable of sympathetic emotion, and was a man of very strong religious feeling. When Servetus heard of his condemnation, he fell into the deepest despair; he wept, entreated, implored, and cried, 'Mercy! mercy! Farel hoped to bring him to repentance, and save his soul, whilst at the same time his recantation might lead to a mitigation of his sentence. He pressed him to see Calvin; Servetus was not disinclined; Calvin also consented, and obtained permission for the interview from the Council, who sent two of its own members to accompany him on his visit to the condemned prisoner. When asked what he had to say to Calvin, Servetus replied that he wished to solicit his forgiveness. Then Calvin said: 'I protest that I have never carried out any private animosity against you. You must remember that sixteen years ago, being at Paris, I did not spare myself in my efforts to win you for our Lord, and if you would have listened to reason, I would have done everything in my power to reconcile you with all the faithful servants of God. You ran away from the conference, and yet I did not cease to exhort you by letters; but all has been useless, and you have assailed me not so much with anger as with fury. And now I have done with all that concerns myself personally. Ask pardon, not of me, but of that God whom you have blasphemed by trying to disprove the existence of three Persons in one God; ask pardon of the Son of God, whom you have debased and denied as your Saviour.' These words were more likely to wound Servetus than to convince him; they probed his wounds but did not heal them; he remained silent. The repeated exhortations of Farel were of no avail, and Calvin withdrew, following, he says, the rule of St. Paul: 'A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.' [Footnote 123]

[Footnote 123: Epistle of Paul to Titus, iii. 10, 11.]

Servetus was willing to ask pardon, but he would not disavow his opinions. Even in the depths of his despair he preserved all the pride of honest conviction; and although he entreated that his life might be spared, he would not consent to dishonour it by a false recantation. Farel, who accompanied him to the stake, in vain renewed his severe, but at the same time compassionate exhortations up to the very last moment. The dignity of the philosopher triumphed over the weakness of the man, and Servetus died heroically and calmly at that stake, the very thought of which had at first filled him with terror.

Chapter XIX.
The Two Opponents.
Calvin's Letter To Socinus.

This celebrated trial has become a great historical event, and I have followed its different stages with scrupulous care. I have endeavoured to disentangle its philosophical, social, and political aspects, and to describe them accurately. I have been anxious truthfully to delineate the character, opinions, passions, and attitude of the two opponents. It was their tragical destiny to meet each other and to enter into mortal combat as the champions of two great causes. It is my profound conviction that Calvin's cause was the good one, that it was the cause of morality, of social order, and of civilization. Servetus was the representative of a system false in itself, superficial under the pretence of science, and destructive alike of moral dignity in the individual, and of moral order in human society. In their disastrous encounter, Calvin was conscientiously faithful to what he believed to be truth and duty; but he was hard, much more influenced by violent animosity than he imagined, and devoid alike of sympathy and generosity. Servetus was sincere and resolute in his conviction, but he was a frivolous, presumptuous, vain, and envious man, capable, in time of need, of resorting both to artifice and untruth. In an age full of martyrs to religious liberty, Servetus obtained the honour of being one of the few martyrs to intellectual liberty; whilst Calvin, who was undoubtedly one of those who did most towards the establishment of religious liberty, had the misfortune to ignore his adversary's right to liberty of belief.

I do not think that Calvin ever felt any hesitation or regret as to his own conduct during the trial of Servetus. He believed in his right and duty to suppress heresy in this manner, as sincerely as Servetus believed in the truth of his own opinions; and his most intimate friends, instead of trying to soften him, endeavoured to confirm his severity. Farel wrote, on the 8th of September, 1553: 'You desire to mitigate the severity of his sentence, and in so doing you would act the part of a friend towards him who is your greatest enemy. But I beseech you to proceed in such a manner that hereafter no one shall seek to promulgate new doctrines with impunity and throw all into confusion as Servetus has done. It is absurd to conclude that because the Pope accuses faithful believers of the crime of heresy, and infuriated judges condemn these innocent victims to tortures reserved for heretics, that therefore we must never put heretics to death for the sake of ensuring the safety of true believers. For my own part, I have often said that I was ready to suffer death if I taught anything contrary to true doctrine; and I have added that I should deserve the most frightful torments if I turned any away from faith in Christ.' Even the most advanced advocates of liberty did not go so far as to say that honest error could not be crime. Servetus himself, when he was accused of saying that the soul was mortal, exclaimed, 'If ever I said that, and not only said it but published it and infected the whole world, I would condemn myself to death.' Nevertheless, either from instinctive justice or influenced by the caution which their position required, many, even of those reformers who were strongly attached to the Calvinistic doctrines, were averse to the capital punishment of heretics; and would not tolerate the reproduction, in their own church, of the cruelty which they protested against in the Church of Rome. These honest scruples were supported by the authority of some of their most illustrious leaders. At the very commencement of the struggle, Luther had said: 'The burning of heretics is contrary to the will of the Holy Spirit.' Calvin himself, not long before the trial of Servetus, reproved a young Italian refugee towards whom he entertained very friendly feelings, for holding opinions which in many respects resembled those of the Spanish physician, but he expressed his disapprobation with almost paternal tenderness. It is not without surprise that I have found among his letters one which, in 1551, he wrote to Lælius Socinus, [Footnote 124] of Siena, uncle of that Faustus Socinus who, at a later period, founded the Socinian heresy.

[Footnote 124: Sozzini.]

Lælius Socinus was a young man of great intellectual power, with a strong leaning towards philosophical speculation, and he had passed several years in Germany and Switzerland on friendly terms with all the principal reformers. Calvin wrote to him at Wittenberg: 'You are mistaken in your impression that Melancthon does not agree with us in holding the doctrine of predestination. I told you in a few words that I had received a letter from him in which he acknowledges that his opinion is the same as mine. But I can well believe all that you tell me, since it is no new thing for him to avoid speaking plainly on that subject, if for no other reason than to escape troublesome questions. Certainly no one can have a greater objection to paradoxes than I have, and I do not take the slightest pleasure in mere intellectual puzzles. But nothing shall prevent me from openly avowing those things which I have learnt from the Word of God, for he is a master in whose school we learn nothing that is not useful. The Bible is my only guide, and I shall always endeavour to order my life in accordance with its pure doctrines. I earnestly desire, my dear Lælius, that you may learn to govern your faculties with the same moderation. Do not expect any answer from me so long as you put forward such strange questions. If it gives you any pleasure to float in the ether of speculation, pray do so; but you must allow me—a humble servant of Christ—to confine my meditations to those points which may help to establish or confirm my faith. From henceforward I will pray for you in silence, and will importune you no further. But truly I am deeply afflicted that the fine talents which God has given you should not only be employed in vain and barren researches, but debased and destroyed by pernicious speculations. I repeat with all earnestness that which I told you long ago: if you do not try to subdue your passion for investigation and speculative inquiry, it is to be feared that you will bring upon yourself bitter misfortune. It would be great cruelty towards you if I treated with apparent indulgence that which I look upon as a most dangerous error. I would rather pain you a little now by my sincerity, than leave you, without any protest, to be led into danger by your over-inquisitive mind. I hope that the time may yet come when you will be glad that you received such a harsh warning. Farewell, my very dear and greatly honoured brother; and if my strictures seem more severe than they have any right to be, you must remember that they arise from my love towards you.' [Footnote 125]

[Footnote 125: Calvin's Letters, published by M. Jules Bonnet and translated into English, ii. 330. (Philadelphia, 1858.)]

Assuredly no orthodox theologian could have spoken with more affectionate earnestness, or more forbearance, to a man who was incessantly expressing doubts as to the divinity of Christ, the truth of redemption, expiation, original sin, and the majority of the Christian doctrines. It is true that Lælius Socinus was young; he had published nothing; and he showed very great respect for Calvin, who had never been called upon to enter into any controversy with him.

Nothing is more easy, and at the same time more vulgar and unworthy, than to speak with irony and contempt of the inconsistencies of even the greatest among men. We ought rather to congratulate ourselves on these inconsistencies, as an involuntary homage paid to truth. They show that truth is so deeply rooted and so powerful in the human mind, that it keeps or makes a place for itself even when we might expect it to be destroyed by the most noxious errors. Man often creates the gloom which darkens his own soul, but it is not in his power to shut out altogether the light which comes from God.

At length, to the honour of humanity and the promotion of its moral and social well-being, rays of divine light have shown us the right of the human conscience to liberty of belief. In that very city of Geneva where, three hundred years ago, the fire was kindled for Servetus, the members of that same reformed religion which Calvin then established, met together, not long ago, [Footnote 126] in the various churches of the city, to commemorate the three hundredth anniversary of the death of the great reformer.

[Footnote 126: On the 27th of May, 1864.]

One of the most eloquent and pious speakers present, M. le pasteur Coulin, alluded to the trial and execution of Servetus, and pronounced a just and righteous sentence upon that lamentable act. He said: 'Even if Calvin's system had been exempt from any possible error, if it had been, as he sincerely believed that it was, truth itself, he should not have attempted to compel men to accept it. He forgot that those around him did not understand, or reason, or form conclusions as he did. That was his mistake, and it is a very grave one. Assuredly truth is the queen of the intellect, and whosoever believes in truth is a champion bound to promote the establishment of her reign. But man is so constituted that truth can and will consent to govern him, only on condition of his own free adhesion to her rule. God has placed a something inviolable within us for the reception of truth, which most shows our own greatness when we maintain the supremacy of truth. If truth is a queen, conscience is her throne. This is why that which has truly been called liberty of conscience is the essential condition of the reign of truth. Seek truth, show it, prove it; exhibit in turns the splendour of its beauty, the majesty of its strength, the charm of its excellence. Urge all around you to bow before truth, and pay homage as to a queen. But if you cannot prevail with them, then, in the name of truth and of the most sacred interests of the glory of truth, remember that there are still two things even in the most bitter enemy—a free conscience which ought to be respected, an erring brother who may be loved. These two things Calvin did not recognise; in his blind zeal he wished the conscience either to acquiesce or to abdicate its function. It is impossible to assert too strongly that every outrage upon the liberty of conscience of the individual, is a blow that truth receives upon the face, which dishonours her. Make every allowance for the spirit of the age, for the prevailing prejudices which not even a man of genius can altogether escape; make allowance for all the necessities of the time and the pressure of circumstances; make allowance for whatsoever you choose: but the fact still remains that the laws and measures by means of which Calvin endeavoured to ensure unity of conviction in Geneva are a stain upon his memory, an element condemned beforehand in his work, upon which time ought to pass a just sentence.'

Chapter XX.
Calvin's Influence Over The Reformed Churches.
His Presbyterianism.

After the termination of the trial of Servetus in 1553, and of the contest with the Libertines in 1555, Calvin obtained, not repose, but victory and unopposed supremacy. He had need of it, for his health, which was naturally weak, had become exceedingly infirm. He had frequent attacks of quartan fever, violent headaches, disease of the liver, attacks of gout, and he was threatened with consumption. There was no longer any one in his home to watch over him with that tender assiduity which is almost as necessary for the health of the soul as for that of the body. He had lost his wife, Idelette de Bure, on the 6th of April, 1549. She had borne him three children, but they all died young, and in their conjugal solitude she had shown that entire and unselfish devotion which gives everything, and asks for nothing in return. She had three children by her first husband, Störder; when she was very ill, one of her friends urged her to speak to Calvin about them: 'Why should I?' said she; 'that which concerns me is to have them virtuously brought up: if they are virtuous, he will be a father to them; if they are not, of what use is it for me to commend them to his care?' But Calvin anticipated her maternal solicitude, and without waiting until she spoke, he promised to treat them as if they were his own children: 'I have already commended them to God,' she said. 'That does not prevent me from also taking care of them,' said Calvin. She answered: 'I know well that you will never forsake those whom I have confided to the Lord.' She died as she had lived, showing pious and tender confidence in God and her husband. In the letters written during his lifetime to his two most intimate friends, Farel and Viret, Calvin often spoke of her, briefly but affectionately, and with entire satisfaction. When she died he spoke of his grief more openly than he had ever done of his happiness. He wrote to Viret: 'I have lost the excellent companion of my life, who would never have forsaken me, either in exile, poverty, or death. So long as she lived she was my faithful assistant; she took no thought for herself, and was never either a trouble or a hindrance to her husband. I control my sorrow as far as it is in my power; my friends also do their duty; but it is of very little use either for them or me. You know the tenderness—not to say the weakness—of my heart. I should give way utterly if God had not stretched out his hand to hold me up. It is he who heals the broken-hearted, who consoles the wounded spirit, who strengthens the trembling knees.' [Footnote 127]

[Footnote 127: Henry, i. 416-423; Bulletin de la Société de L'Histoire du Protestantisme Français, iv. 644-649.]

From the time that he lost his wife until his own death, that is from 1549 to 1564, Calvin lived alone in his little house at Geneva. He had been deprived of that domestic happiness which is a rest alike to body and soul; he took no part in any ordinary pleasures, but gave himself up entirely to the duties which he had undertaken, and to the work to which he was devoted. These duties and labours extended far beyond the narrow bounds of the city in which he lived. His ambition was loftier than that of the most mighty princes, and his proposed sphere of action more vast than that of the most extended kingdom. His ruling passion, the strongest desire of his soul, was the re-establishment and organization of the Christian Church in accordance with the intention of its divine author, and on the foundation laid by the apostles. He wished to build up a Christian Church, free and independent in its evangelical unity and universality. He believed that neither the separation of nations, nor diversity of origin and language, nor difference of political rule, ought to affect the great Christian society. For Calvin, as for St. Paul, there was no longer either Jew, or Greek, or Barbarian; either Swiss, or French, or Italian, or English, or Slave. He saw only the human being, called to become a faithful Christian and to live in close relation to Christ, keeping his faith and fulfilling his law. Calvin was convinced that Christ had revealed in the Gospel all the essential principles of Christian society, that is of the Christian Church; and he believed that these essential principles were three in number:

I. The union and united action of ecclesiastics and laymen within the Church, and in its internal government; no human theocracy and no ecclesiastical tyranny.

II. The mutual independence and limited alliance of Church and State. The Church perfectly free in her spiritual rule, but at the same time acknowledging and supporting the temporal rule of the State.

III. The spiritual and moral authority of the Church over the religious and moral life of its members, to be maintained, if necessary, by the power of the State.

The application and development of these principles was to be found, according to Calvin's views, in the self-government of the Church by a mixed body consisting of pastors and members. There would then be the mutual and valuable influence of the Church in the State, and of the State in the Church, each according to the nature of its own power, and within the limits of its own rights.

He believed that such a system was in harmony on the one hand with the Gospel, and on the other with the condition and requirements of European society in the sixteenth century. He saw in it the abolition of abuses, which time, and the crimes or follies of men, had introduced into the Christian religion; and he hoped by means of it to restore the spirit as well as the spontaneous organization of the early Christian Church. He expected to introduce into this system the degree of freedom and of restraint necessary to accomplish the great aim of Christianity, namely the discipline and salvation of the human soul.

This was the Reformation according to Calvin's view, and he endeavoured to realize it in the system known as Presbyterianism.

He watched its establishment in Switzerland, France, Holland, England, Scotland, Germany, and Poland with inexhaustible interest and unshaken fidelity. He had abundant means of knowing all that was going on throughout Europe in reference to the Reformation. Numerous refugees had sought a place of safety in Geneva; he himself had made many expeditions into France, Germany, and Italy; and the friendships which he had formed, and his numerous correspondents had brought him into close connexion with many foreign reformers. He knew how far the Reformation had succeeded in different countries, what progress it was making, and what obstacles it had met with, so that he could modify his course of action according to circumstances. Where there was no band of reformers ready to unite and openly proclaim themselves a religious society, as for example in Italy, Calvin endeavoured, in his letters and by his advice, to sow the first seeds of the Reformation; and to make known the fundamental doctrines of the reformed faith. 'Wherever he found the rudiments of a Christian association and a reformed church, he endeavoured to promote its organization in accordance with the principles of the system established at Geneva. As a mother country provides for the early wants of her colonies, so he sent models for confessions of faith and rules of discipline, as well as founders and preachers for the distant churches; and he watched over the progress of these local works with paternal solicitude. Many of the French churches were originally organized by Calvin, and received their first pastors from him. Letters reached him from all parts asking for light or guidance in the prevailing religious fermentation. M. de Beaulieu wrote to Farel from Geneva on the 30th of October, 1561, saying: 'I cannot tell you how many persons there are in this city who have come from Lyons, Nismes, Gap, Orleans, Poitiers, and elsewhere, and who are asking for labourers in the new harvest. Many have told me that if four or five thousand pastors could be sent out, there would be no lack of work for them.' [Footnote 128]

[Footnote 128: Henry, iii. 483.]

In the midst of the stormy vicissitudes of the Reformation in England and Scotland, Calvin's influence was also felt. He wrote to the young king of England, Edward VI., to Queen Elizabeth, and to all the most important persons in the kingdom, political or ecclesiastical. He addressed the prudent and versatile Cranmer, as well as the fiery and intractable Knox, and to each he gave the advice best calculated to promote the general interests of the Reformation. After Knox had been banished from Frankfort in 1555, he went to Geneva, where he was appointed pastor, and remained until 1559, making himself fully acquainted with the doctrine and discipline of the Presbyterian Church. In this vast and varied exercise of his influence, Calvin was never led astray by political bias or prejudice in favour of any system or sect. He thought Knox took too prominent a part in the struggles of the nobles and people in Scotland; that he was unduly hostile to the Anglican Church, its liturgies and forms of worship: 'I hope,' he wrote, 'that in those things which concern ceremonies, your severity, which is displeasing to so many persons, is somewhat abated. No doubt we must take care that the Church is purged from all those evils which have been introduced by error and superstition. We must take heed lest the divine mysteries be changed into childish mummery; but when that is done, you are well aware that there are many things which, without being approved, may yet be tolerated. I am profoundly grieved at the dissensions of your nobles.' [Footnote 129 ]

[Footnote 129: Calvini Epistolæ, ix. 150. (Amsterdam, 1667.)]

John Knox, the Scotch reformer, was one of the most eminent and influential of Calvin's allies, and, I do not say disciples but coadjutors. By character, as well as position, Knox was a master, not a disciple. He was four years older than Calvin, and like Calvin he had been drawn towards the Reformation in early life; but when he began to play an important part in it, he was led by the state of public feeling, and probably by his own inclination also, to take part in the political as well as the religious struggles of his age and country. He was the champion of a party as well as of a cause, and was quite as eager to subdue his enemies in the State as to insure the predominance of his doctrines in the Church. Often active and influential in his own country, at other times proscribed and wandering on the continent of Europe, he was tossed to and fro by divers fortunes. He became personally acquainted with Calvin, and understood and admired him from the very first. One of those close and intimate friendships sprang up between them which unite men of the same temperament, whatever may be their difference of disposition and habit. Whenever Knox was compelled to leave Scotland, he sought refuge in Geneva; he took the warmest interest in the labours, the trials, and the struggles for success in which Calvin was engaged, and watched his skilful organization of the reformed Genevese Church. When he returned to Scotland, he corresponded constantly with Calvin, consulted him on numerous occasions, and set great store by his advice, although he always preserved his own independence of thought and action. Knox was as resolute and persevering as Calvin, but more fiery, more violent, and without that respect and consideration for established authority which was so characteristic of Calvin even when he was opposing it. And yet, with all their difference of predilection and method, the work of the two reformers was essentially the same. Although he was no less independent than his great ally, Knox was powerfully influenced by Calvin's example, and he transported the presbyterian system to Scotland, which, after three centuries of trial, still flourishes there as it does in Geneva. The Scotch Church has lately passed through the severe ordeal of division into a Free and an Established Church, and, to its great honour, without danger to the State or to religion.

But to return to Calvin: in France his moderation and liberality were carried very far. He aimed at establishing the reformed churches on the presbyterian basis, but he expressly warned their members never to take the initiative in appeals to force or insurrection. His correspondence with the principal French reformers was a constant exhortation to prudence, patience, submission to the civil powers and religious independence. He desired to see neither aggression nor vengeance on the part of the Protestants. He strongly condemned the conspiracy of Amboise, [Footnote 130] and the sanguinary reprisals of the Baron des Adrets. [Footnote 131]

[Footnote 130: The conspiracy of Amboise was planned among the French Reformers in 1559 and 1560, and carried on by a gentleman of Perigord, named Godefroi de la Renaudie, in the name of the principal Protestant leaders, especially that of the Prince de Condé. Its object was to take all power from the hands of the Guises, to 'have them punished by law,' and to secure for the reformers, not only religious liberty, but the chief power over Francis II. in the government of France. It was discovered in March 1560, and repressed and punished with great severity.]

[Footnote 131: The Baron des Adrets (Fraçois de Beaumont) was a Protestant gentleman of Dauphiné, who lived from 1513 to 1586, and who was notorious at that period for his cruel reprisals upon the Catholics in the religious wars of France.]

No doubt the precepts and practice of St. Paul were always present to his mind, and that he both preached and practised obedience to the powers that be, in things that did not interfere with faith in Christ and the will of God. In all that concerned religion no innovator was ever bolder than Calvin, and at the same time less revolutionary. None was ever more scrupulously indifferent to all other aims than the propagation of the Gospel, the organization of the evangelical Church, and the reformation of man's moral nature. I do not know how far his logical forethought was able to penetrate the future, or if, whilst he was prosecuting his work of religious emancipation, he foresaw that what he was doing would bring forth, as a natural consequence, such immense political and social changes. I am inclined to believe that he did not concern himself about it in any way, that his essentially judicious and practical mind was 'exclusively occupied by his mission and by the immediate present, and that he did not seek to penetrate the darkness of future centuries, and the far-off designs of God.

Calvin's conscientious conviction of the necessity of submission was so great that he would sometimes say a man ought not to employ force even to effect his escape from prison and to save himself from martyrdom. After all, he said, it was martyrdom which had contributed so powerfully to the triumph of the early Christian Church; and when the cause of God had need of martyrs, it was man's duty to submit.

This excessive severity and pious enthusiasm did not, however, prevent him from using all the influence which he possessed, and exerting all his power, both moral and political, in behalf of those reformers who were persecuted, imprisoned, and on the eve of martyrdom. He was not satisfied with doing all that was in his own power, writing, preaching, importuning and harassing the persecutors; he induced all those governments that were favourable to the reformers, and able to exert influence which would be beneficial to them, to intercede on their behalf. He sent agents, legal help, indirect protectors, money and assistance of all kinds. And when he had been unable to succeed in averting persecution or diminishing its severity, when the day of martyrdom arrived, he employed all his Christian zeal in sustaining the courage of the victims, lavishing upon them proofs of his own sympathy, and teaching them to put their trust in God and his Divine justice. The persecuted reformers at Nismes in 1537; the Waldenses, cruelly ill-treated and tortured in Provence and Dauphiné in 1545; the martyrs of Lyons in 1552; the church of Paris and the victims of the attack upon the reformers in the Rue St. Jacques in 1556 and 1557; and in many other places and on many other occasions, the fugitives and martyrs of the French reformation received warm help and fraternal consolation from Calvin. We may say that he changed the words of Dante, and that, when he had been unable to save those for whom he had laboured, he opened the doors of the eternal future, saying to them, 'Do not lose all hope, ye who enter here!'

But Calvin's solicitude was not confined to the fugitives only, and to the patent and manifest sufferings of the French reformers. He had too deep a knowledge of human nature and the world not to know the secret aspiration, hidden grief, and ignoble strife which vex and torment the soul, and are found in every social condition, the most exalted as well as the most humble. In many such cases his watchful care and influence were also felt. The Duchess Renée of Ferrara was not the only woman nor the only great lady with whom he kept up a zealous correspondence through life. He wrote numerous letters to important personages, renowned leaders or vacillating friends of the Reformation; to the King of Navarre, Admiral de Coligny, the Duke de Longueville, M. de Soubise, and the Baron des Adrets. In addition to these, the numerous published collections of Calvin's letters, and the repositories which contain those that are still unpublished, are full of others addressed to M. and Mme. de Falais, M. and Mme. de Budé, Mme de Cany, Mme de Rentigny, the Marchioness of Rothelin, Mlle. de Pons, Mme. de Grammont, and a host of other persons who were important or interesting in his eyes. Some of them were more or less closely connected with the great cause which he had at heart; to others he was drawn by their spiritual condition, and by the value which he set upon their faith, conduct, and salvation. Calvin was one of those rare great men who are rich both in heart and intellect, who can no more look with indifference at the fate of an individual than at that of a kingdom, and who feel for the joy and sorrow of the human heart, as well as for the storms which agitate a nation. He was as deeply interested in the faith and sorrows of one simple woman as in those of all Christendom, and could apply himself as eagerly to the enlightenment of a single conscience as to the moral reformation of a whole city. Moreover, he knew that sooner or later, far or near, the influence which he thus acquired over single individuals would be so much gained for the authority which he desired to exercise over the general cause of the Reformation, and thus the sympathetic zeal of the Christian helped the social mission of the founder of a church.