Distinct but not Separate

…in the sixteenth century it took enormous ingenuity to pioneer a political-ecclesiastical system that preserved the independence of clerical authority and still garnered the support of the magistrates.

The Reformation as Renewal: Retrieving the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, by Matthew Barrett

Martin Bucer

As has been clear to this point, establishing the Reformation was almost impossible without the support of civil authority, whether the king, the prince, or the local magistrate.  When Martin Bucer arrived in Strasbourg, he would position evangelical subservience to the local rulers over and against subordination to the papacy.  It was clearly a strategic move.  In 1529, this alignment would result in a respite over the Roman Mass; yes, only a suspension, but the writing was on the wall.

Bucer would also work to persuade fellow Reformers to work together.  With each major disputation, he would try to find common ground.  We saw this previously, in his efforts to bring common ground to the understanding of the Lord’s Supper.  Secondary and tertiary matters should not divide those who are in any case struggling to survive the attacks of Rome.  He would write:

“If you immediately condemn anyone who doesn’t quite believe the same as you do as forsaken by Christ’s Spirit, and consider anyone to be the enemy of truth who holds something false to be true, who, pray tell, can you still consider a brother?”

The Reformation would, then, consist of countless “parties of one.”  We know this: probe deep enough into the doctrinal beliefs of even your closest Christian friends, those who attend the same church as you and have done so for years, and you will find disagreement.  But what gain is there from this?

Where Bucer would receive scathing criticism from Luther, he would reply with patience.  He has been labeled many things, but the one title deserved above all is the pastor of the Reformation.  He was pastor to the laity, to other pastors, and even to theologians.  He would support Calvin with encouragement and mentorship when the latter was first expelled from Geneva, for example.

As for the Catholic Church, Bucer saw that it was Rome that had departed from truth, not the Reformers.  It was Rome that took away unity.  For Bucer, unity was not to be found in externals: the various ceremonies and outward practices; instead, unity was to be found where there was obedience to the true gospel and the right use of the sacraments.  Of course, there was the rub….

Bucer did not picture himself or the Lutherans as obstinate, nor as deviants bent on leaving the church or dividing the church.

He looked to ancient councils, which saw that proper authority came from a fear of God.  This fear of God was lacking in the pope, in the cardinals, and in the bishops – according to Bucer. 

In other words, Bucer and the Reformers were faithful adherents to the church catholic, not a sect formed out of schism and apostasy.

John Calvin

Unlike Luther, who was an open book, John Calvin said little about himself.

His personal story is very dynamic, yet Calvin said little about his feelings or views on this topic.  He was born in 1509 and raised north of Paris.  His father made many connections; these afforded him with a variety of local opportunities – including with the church. 

His father would secure financial backing such that John could attend university, the intention being preparation for the priesthood.  Calvin would improve his Latin, study humanism, learn the art and craft of writing well.  He would later be introduced to Scholastic authors and their works. 

Had the ideas of Luther made their way into France by the time Calvin was a student?  Yes, but they were not as influential in France as they were in Germany.

Luther’s devotional writings made some headway, but not so his polemical writings.  In 1523, the Sorbonne would take action against French evangelicals.  The writings of German Reformers were condemned; translations of the Bible into French, Hebrew, and Greek were censured.  These actions were merely a hint of what was yet to come.

Where Calvin stood at this time isn’t clear.  He would soon enough change his studies to law.   In 1528, at the age of eighteen, he acquired his master of arts degree.  Calvin was a workhorse, researching late into the night when others went to bed.  In the morning, he would reflect on that which he studied the night before – committing everything to memory.

This work ethic continued even after he completed his formal education.  He later studied Greek and the classics.  His humanist interests became irrepressible, in the face of his demands in law. 

Calvin’s father died in 1531.  By this point, his father was not in good standing with the church.  His dispute was so fierce that he was excommunicated.  Therefore, no final blessing, no absolution after confession, no Communion, no last rites.  The worst state in which a sinner could perish.

Around 1533 / 1534, Calvin converted.  Calvin would later write of this time that he knew he was a wretched sinner, yet he was subdued by God Himself.  He was enflamed with the desire to pursue evangelical godliness.

Calvin’s conversion was a shift away from Rome to the Scriptures, from papal authority to biblical authority.

Such a conversion was a precarious endeavor, especially in France.  Francis I, while an advocate of the Renaissance, was not a fan of the evangelical cause.  Yet he favored Protestant princes in Germany – but not for religious reasons, instead due to his rivalry with Charles V.  Charles was elected Holy Roman Emperor against Francis; Francis would then support the Schmalkaldic League against Charles.

Francis would turn his attention to Protestants in France.  Nicolas Cop gave a lecture in Paris sympathetic to Luther.  The response to this lecture was hostile, both from the university and from Francis.  Cop and Calvin fled the city right away.

Calvin would take refuge in southwest France.  He would study the church fathers whose works were housed locally.  He would use this effort to strong effect when defending the catholicity of the Reformation in Geneva against its Roman opposition.

Michael Servetus – his theology was far more radical than that of the Reformers, even heretical (e.g., his idea of “soul sleep”).  Calvin would write against these.  He agreed to meet Servetus in Paris in 1534; Calvin showed up, Servetus didn’t.  Of course, one day they would meet face-to-face, under far more austere circumstances.

Paris would heat up once again, in 1534 – the Placards Affair.  Tracts and placards that condemned the Catholic Mass were posted, receiving traction among the laity.  Francis would wake up to find a placard posted on the door of his own room!  A second set of placards would appear a few months later, in January 1535.  Evangelicals were hunted down and executed in the months that followed.

It isn’t clear if Calvin played any part in this.  Nevertheless, the situation was inherently far more dangerous for him.  He would adopt an alias and travel to Strasbourg and then Basel.  Here he would continue to write and publish. 

Basel was home to both Reformers and humanists, yet it did not want to break ties with the Holy Roman Empire.  It was home to some of the most ambitious printing presses in Europe, and Calvin took advantage of the work that was produced, much of it from Erasmus. 

While in Basel, three key developments materialized: the debate between the Lutherans and Zwinglians over the Lord’s Supper reached its summit; Calvin became a public apologist for Bible translations; he had the opportunity to see through his first edition of the Institutes.  Calvin would further write an apology addressed to Francis regarding the Reform and against the idea of lumping the evangelicals with the Anabaptists.

He was only twenty-five years old when this first edition of the Institutes was published, a marker of his tireless efforts and studies until that point; he had no formal training in theology or biblical studies.  He would deal with both Christian doctrine and Christian practice.  He claimed that evangelicals were the promoters of true worship.

In 1536, Calvin, his half-sister, and his brother would leave France for the last time.  He would go, again, to Swiss territory.  He was told by Guillaume Farel that God would curse all of Calvin’s writings if Calvin did not stay in Geneva to teach.  This troubled Calvin.  He stayed.

Calvin would advance the Reformation by quoting from various Church Fathers; his knowledge in this area – even committed to memory – was extensive.  While in Geneva, he would write the Geneva Confession (1536) and Geneva Catechism (1537).  The doctrine of justification played a leading role in these. 

Conclusion

By 1537, Calvin was convinced that Protestants must make a clean break with Rome.  In his Geneva Confession, he wrote that before taking the Lord’s Supper, Christians should take an oath of allegiance to this confession; absent this, they would be excommunicated.  The magistrates denied these petitions; they would not risk to cause such an uproar in the city on the word of a foreigner. 

Calvin saw this as a restriction on pastoral authority.  On Easter Sunday, Calvin and Farel forced the issue.  The magistrates should not dictate pastoral responsibilities.  They barred the congregation from the table – and this, on Easter Sunday, of all days.

They were finished in Geneva – pack your bags!  A crisis point for Calvin, as his understanding of magistrate and minister did not match that of the magistrate. 

“At the heart of the problem was Calvin’s desire to establish a relatively autonomous church distinct – though not separate – from the commonwealth.”

An ideal balance, and in Calvin’s view most consistent with Scripture, but one not easily achieved given how interwoven the two were in Christendom at the time. 

Epilogue

Why was the Reformation so tenuous in France as opposed to Germany?  In Germany, an evangelical would enjoy protection if the local prince or magistrate offered it.  In France, all authority resided with the king.  “One king, one law, one faith!” 

Centralized authority demanded Christian unity.  Reforms and divisions would not serve the king’s purposes.