Title: John Calvin's Writings - Footnotes
Author: John Calvin
Language: English

The Tonsure in the Romish Church may be received after the age of seven years. It is the first
part of the ceremony of ordination. The candidate presents himself in a black cassock before the
Bishop, with a surplice on his right arm, and a lighted taper in his hand. He kneels, and the
Bishop, standing covered with his mitre, repeats a prayer and several verses from the Scripture.
The Bishop then sitting, cuts five different parcels of hair from the head of the candidate, who
repeats these words —The Lord is my inheritance. Putting off his mitre, the Bishop then says a
prayer over the person tonsured—an anthem is sung by the choir; then a prayer, in the middle of
which the Bishop puts the surplice on the candidate for orders, and says, may the Lord clothe
thee with thy new name. The ceremony is closed by the candidate’s presenting the wax taper to
the Bishop, who gives him his blessing. Dr. Hurd’s Rites and Cerem. p. 282. Calvin, in his
Epistle prefatory to his Commentaries on the Psalms, gives the following account of the change
of mind here spoken of: “As David was raised from the sheepfold to the highest dignity of
government, so God has dignified me, derived from an obscure and humble origin, with the high
and honorable office of Minister and Preacher of the Gospel. My father had destined me, from
my childhood, for theology. But, observing how extensively the science of the law enriched its
professors, he suddenly changed his purpose, and recalled me from the study of philosophy to
that of jurisprudence. In this I obeyed the will of my father, and endeavored to give faithful
attention. God, however, with the reins of his secret Providence, eventually turned my course in
a different direction. At my first entrance on that study, I was indeed too pertinaciously addicted
to the superstitions of the Papacy, to be easily drawn out of such deep mire; and my mind too
firmly rooted in those habits, to yield with docility to a change in my studies so entire and
unexpected. At length, however, having experienced some taste of the pure doctrines, I was
inflamed with such zeal to progress farther, that, although I did not reject my other studies, yet I
pursued them only in a cold and indifferent manner. One year had not elapsed, before all those,
who were desirous of the knowledge of the purer doctrines, flocked to me for instruction, while
as yet I was myself a mere beginner in that school.” * Taken from Vol. 1 Selected Works Bayle,
in his Dictionary, says that Beza is mistaken as to the age of Calvin when he published his
Commentary on Seneca’s Epistle. Bayle says the Epistle Dedicatory is dated from Paris, April
4th 1532, and therefore, that Calvin was but twenty-three, and not twenty-four years old, as Beza
states, Maimbourg, in his History of Calvinism, p. 58, states that “the Lieutenant Morin, went
well accompanied to Cardinal le Moine’s College, where Calvin lodged, to seize him: but
coming into his chamber, they found he had escaped out at the window by the help of his sheets,
which were left tied to it.” On this Bayle remarks that “if this account were true, (which appears
to be founded on Papyrius Masso’s Life of Calvin, p. 414,) Beza would be a very ill historian;
for he says only that Calvin happened to be then abroad, quo forte domi non reperto. Varilla’s
account is the same with Maimbourg’s, and he accompanies it with abundance of
circumstances.” The name of this friend of Calvin, was Lewis du Tillet. He was a brother to John
du Tiller, Register of the Parliament of Paris, and also to another Du Tillet, Bishop of Meaux.
Bayle—Drelincourt’s Defense of Calvin. p. 40. Calvin, in his preface to his Commentary on the
Psalms, thus states his reason for publishing his Institutes. “While I lived unknown and secluded
at Basil, the burning of many pious men in France excited, throughout Germany, severe
indignation.

In order to remove these resentments, wicked and false pamphlets were dispersed, in which it
was asserted, that those, who were thus cruelly burnt, were only Anabaptists, and some turbulent
persons who, by their perverse conceits, were attempting to overthrow not only religion, but the
whole order of civil government. Perceiving that, by this artifice, the crafty courtiers of Francis
designed to cover the crime of shedding innocent blood, and to cast a false reproach on those
holy martyrs, and also from that time to secure to themselves, under this pretense, the privilege
of persecuting the Reformers, even to death, without the hazard of exciting the resentment or
compassion of any on account of their sufferings, I determined that my silence could not be
excused from perfidy; and that it was my duty to oppose those proceedings with all my power.

The reasons for my publishing the INSTITUTES were:—First, that I might vindicate, from
unjust reproaches, those brethren whose death was precious in the sight of the lard. Secondly,
because similar punishments threatened many defenseless and oppressed persons, for whom I
was anxious to excite, at least, some compassion and solicitude among foreign nations. This
work was not then so full and laborious as it now is, sed breve duntaxat Enchiridion tunc in
lucem prodiit, but a short Manual only was then published, having solely in view, to testify the
faith of those whom I saw wickedly put to death, by the impious and perfidious courtiers of the
king. Besides, that I by no means sought to increase my own fame, is evident from my
immediate departure from Basil, when as yet no one in that city knew me to be the author. This I
continued to conceal, as it was my determined purpose to be unknown, until I was retained at
Geneva, not so much by counsel and entreaty, as by the formidable and solemn injunction of
William Farel, which arrested me, not otherwise than if God from Heaven had laid his powerful
hand upon me.”

Calvin embraced this opportunity to show that the doctrines of the Reformation were not those
taught and held by the Anabaptists; and also, that it was not against these fanatics alone that the
persecution of Francis was directed.

Although most of the editions of this work have the date August 1, 1536. Yet Bayle, who
examined the matter carefully, says, with Dupin, that the first edition was published at Basil,
August 1, 1535.

Calvin’s own statement accords with this date. And it appears that the custom of booksellers
was, to put the date of the next year to a work printed off toward the end of August. The first
edition was but a rough sketch or outline of what the author afterwards produced. The second
edition appeared in 1536, at Strasburgh, in folio, and was both larger and more correct than the
first. The third edition was printed at the same place, in 1543, and was still more complete. A
fourth edition also came out at Strasburgh, with considerable improvements. A fifth edition in
4to was published at Geneva, in 1550, corrected in many places, and having two indexes. In
1558, both the Latin and French editions received the author’s last revision. Since that period,
the work has gone through a vast number of editions, and has been translated into almost all the
modern languages; a circumstance which alone is sufficient to demonstrate its real excellence.
Here we find that a Presbytery existed in Geneva, before Calvin went there; yet it is asserted by
some violent advocates of prelacy, that Presbyterianism originated with Calvin. But it is a fact
that Presbyterianism was introduced into Geneva, long before Calvin ever saw that city, and
when he was not more than nineteen years of age.

Dr. Heylin, in his History of Presbyterianism, p. 4-9, and who was a very zealous and high-toned
Episcopalian, says that after the religious system of Berne had been altered, two men
exceedingly studious of the Reformation, namely, Viret and Farel, labored to effect the same
changes in Geneva, which they did, after the expulsion of the Bishop of Geneva; and that Calvin,
when he came to Geneva, heartily approved of what they had done.

Calvin, in his letter to Cardinal Sadolet, says, that the religious system of Geneva had been
instituted, and its ecclesiastical government reformed, before he was called thither. But what had
been done by Farel and Viret, he heartily approved, and strove, by all means in his power, to
preserve and establish.

It is equally clear, from the above statement of Beza, that the settlement of a minister was
considered as a proper act of the Presbytery. It may be presumed that when Beza wrote the
account of Calvin’s entering on the ministerial office, he did not even dream that any one, either
from ignorance or effrontery, would call in question or deny Calvin’s ordination. But what Beza
did not probably even dream of, two doctors in America, after about two centuries and a half,
have called in question, and it seems denied. Dr. Leaming may be excused for not construing the
Latin of Beza; but Dr. Bowden, unless by choosing to lose himself in his own prejudices, he has
passed beyond the limits of common testimony, and escaped out of the entire dominion of
argument, may be requested to read in the original Latin, Beza’s Life of Calvin, Anno 1536. Let
him examine also Calvin’s Preface to his Commentary on the Psalms, and his answer to Sadolet,
a short extract from which shall be here given in a fair translation.— “When I was called to
Geneva, the reformed religion was already established, and the order of the Church corrected. I
not only approved by my voice of those things which had been done by Farel and Viret, but as
much as I was able, I labored to preserve and confirm that cause in which I was by necessity
united with them. I could have easily forgiven you any personal injury, out of respect to your
office and literature; but when I see my ministry, which I doubt not was founded and sanctioned
by the vocation of God, wounded through my side, it would be perfidy and not patience, if I
should remain silent and dissemble in such a case. I discharged first the Office of Professor and
afterwards that of Pastor in that Church. And I contend that I accepted of that charge having the
authority of a lawful vocation. With how great fidelity and reverential fear I performed my duty,
I have no occasion now to testify in detail. I will not arrogate to myself any peculiar
discernment, erudition, prudence, address or even diligence. I am, however conscious, before
Christ my judge, and all his Angels, that I walked in that church with the sincerity which is
becoming in the work of the Lord. On this point, all good men will give me the most luminous
testimony. Since then this ministry has been established by the Lord, if I should silently suffer it
to be slandered and abused by you, who would not reprobate such silence as a prevarication?
Every one sees, that I am now pledged by the high responsibility of my office, and that I cannot
escape the obligation which binds me to defend myself against your criminations, unless I
deliberately, and with open perfidy, abandon and betray the work which the Lord has committed
to my charge. But though I am, at present, freed from the pastoral charge of the Genevese
church, still this is no reason why I should not embrace it with paternal affection, since God once
put me in authority over it, and bound me to it in a perpetual covenant.” Cardinal Sadolet did not
deny Calvin’s ordination. Opuscula Calvini, p. 105. Bellarmin, another Cardinal, who was
twenty-two years of age when Calvin deceased, says that none but the Popes could create
Bishops and Presbyters—and that neither LUTHER nor ZUINGLIUS, nor CALVIN were
BISHOPS, but only PRESBYTERS—sed tantum Presbyteri. It may be fairly left with the doctor
to determine the question, how Calvin could be a Presbyter without ordination.

Francis Junius, in his animadversions upon Bellarmin, says that Luther and Zuinglius received
ordination in the Roman Church—that Calvin was ordained by those who preceded him —qui
antecesserunt, cumque ordinaverunt.—Farel and Couraut, who received ordination in the
Romish Church, preceded Calvin at Geneva; and Beza states, that they were colleagues with
Calvin in the church in that city. The letter of Bucer to Calvin, dated Strasburg, November 1,
1536, is unanswerable testimony, that Calvin was at this time a minister of the church of Geneva,
or Bucer would not have spoken of his ministry, nor called him my brother and fellow minister.
This designates the time before which Calvin must have received ordination and the charge of
that church.—For other proofs of Calvin’s ordination, see the able and elegant letters of Dr.
MILLER, vol. 2, Continuation of letters concerning the constitution and order of the Christian
ministry, addressed to the members of the Presbyterian churches in the city of New York, 1809.

Lett. 7, p. 306.—Waterman. Calvin, according to Spon, had borne his own expenses without
receiving any salary.—Tr. As the Reformers married to prove their conversion from the Papists,
the latter reproached them, as if they warred against Rome, in the same reasons that the Grecians
warred against Troy. “Our adversaries,” says Calvin,” pretend that we wage a sort of Trojan war
for a woman. To say nothing of others at present, they must allow myself at least to be free from
this charge. Since I am more particularly able, in my own case, to refute this scurrilous
reflection. For notwithstanding, I was at liberty to have married under the tyranny of the Pope, I
voluntarily led a single life for many years.” Calvin was full thirty years old when he married
Idolette de Bure. She was an Anabaptist, whom he was the means of converting. He married her
at Strasburg, in 1540. Before this, Calvin wrote to Farel thus, “Concerning my marriage, I now
speak more openly. You know very well what qualifications, I always expected in a wife. I am
not of that passionate race of lovers, who, when once captivated with the external form, embrace
also with eagerness, the moral defects it may cover. The person who would delight me with her
beauty, must be chaste, frugal, patient, and afford me some hope that she will be solicitous for
my personal health and prosperity.” —Strasburg, May 29, 1539.

This lady whom Calvin married had children by her former husband, and also brought Calvin a
son, who died before his father. This son was Calvin’s only child, and he died in 1545. Calvin at
the close of a letter to Viret, dated August 19th of that year, says, “The Lord has certainly
inflicted a heavy and severe wound on us, by the death of our little son, but He is our Father, and
knows what is expedient for his children.” James Bernard, one of the ministers of Geneva, wrote
a letter to Calvin, which he received while on his way to the Diet of Ratisbon, from which the
following is an extract: “The next day, the Council of two hundred convened and called for
Calvin. The following day, a general meeting assembled. All exclaimed, we demand the return
of Calvin, the honest man, the learned minister of Christ. When I heard this I praised God, who
had done what was marvelous in our eyes, in making the stone which the builders rejected
become the head of the corner. Come then, my venerable father in Christ. All sigh after you.
Your estimation in the hearts of this people will be testified by their affectionate reception of
you. You will find me not an opposer, according to the representations of some, (may God
forgive them,) but a faithful and sincere friend, devoted to your wishes in the Lord. Come then to
Geneva, to a people renovated, by the grace of God, through the labors of Viret; and may the
Lord hasten your return to our church, whose blood he will require at your hands, for he has set
you a watchman unto the house of our Israel. Farewell. BERNARD.

GENEVA, February 6, 1541. That Calvin was not greedy of gain, is the testimony of friends and
foes. This would abundantly appear from a perusal of his will. But in addition it may be stated
that he publicly renounced all fellowship with the Romish church, by resigning on the 4th of
May, 1531, the benefices of the Chapel of La Gesine, and the Rectory of Point l’Eveque. By a
covert conduct, he might still have enjoyed the annual emolument of these livings under the
Papacy. In throwing himself, therefore, poor and unpatronized, upon the hand of his Divine
Master, he demonstrated the firmness of his principles, and the purity of his motives. When
Calvin came back, in 1541, from Strasburg to Geneva, in consequence of the Council’s
revocation of their own sentence of exile, he thus addressed his auditory:— “If you desire to
have me for your pastor, correct the disorder of your lives. If you have with sincerity recalled me
from my exile, banish the crimes and debaucheries which prevail among you. I certainly cannot
behold, without the most painful displeasure, within your walls, discipline trodden under foot,
and crimes committed with impunity. I cannot possibly live in a place so grossly immoral.
Vicious souls are too filthy to receive the purity of the Gospel, and the spiritual worship which I
preach to you. A life stained with sin is too contrary to Jesus Christ to be tolerated. I consider the
principal enemies of the Gospel to be, not the pontiff of Rome, nor heretics, nor seducers, nor
tyrants, but such bad Christians; because the former exert their rage out of the church, while
drunkenness, luxury, perjury, blasphemy, impurity, adultery, and other abominable vices
overthrow my doctrine, and expose it defenseless to the rage of our enemies. Rome does not
constitute the principal object of my fears. Still less am I apprehensive from the almost infinite
multitude of monks. The gates of hell, the principalities and powers of evil spirits, disturb me not
at all. I tremble on account of other enemies, more dangerous; and I dread abundantly more those
carnal covetousness, those debaucheries of the tavern, of the brothel, and of gaming; those
infamous remains of ancient superstition, those mortal pests, the disgrace of your town, and the
shame of the reformed name. Of what importance is it to have driven away the wolves from the
fold, if the pest ravage the flock? Of what use is a dead faith without good works? Of what
importance is even truth itself, where a wicked life belies it, and actions make words blush?
Either command me to abandon a second time your town, and let me go and soften the bitterness
of my afflictions in a new exile, or let the severity of the laws reign in the church. Re-establish
there the pure discipline. Remove from within your walls, and from the frontiers of your state,
the pest of your vices, and condemn them to a perpetual banishment.” Mackenzie, pp. 163, etc.
The London Christian Observer, in the review of Mackenzie’s life of Calvin, has remarked that
Calvin was “a model of industry unwearied by toil; of perseverance undaunted by the opposition
of an enemy, or disheartened by the timidity or languor of wavering and inefficient friends. With
far greater fidelity than the author, (Johnson,) whose well-known language we adopt, could he
assert, that his almost incredible labors were pursued ‘with little assistance of the learned, and
without any patronage of the great; not in the soft obscurities of retirement, or under the shelter
of academic bowers, but amidst inconvenience and distraction, in sickness and in sorrow’—An
exile from his native soil, and living in an age when the mingled storms of controversy and
persecution beat against the Church, he had his ‘gloom of solitude;’ gloom darkened by the
deepest shades of public and spiritual calamity, ‘without were rightings, within were fears.”—
Ch. Observer 1817, p. 441-5.

It may be well to observe in this place, as exhibiting another department of Calvin’s labor, as
well as another object of his solicitude, that the instruction of youth, was, in his estimation, an
object of primary interest to the welfare of civil society, and the cause of religion. He therefore,
revised and enlarged the Catechism which he first published in 1537. This judicious and popular
work was composed after the order of his Institutes, embracing doctrines, duties, and the means
of grace. He published it in French and in Latin. It was noticed with unparalleled applause, and
soon translated into many languages, as Beza states.— And the Assembly of Divines at
Westminster, in 1648, made it the model of the Catechism which is so justly esteemed among all
the Presbyterian churches. “Ubi quum Pastoris constantis et seduli opera requireretur. Beza has
used the word Pastor in a manner too loose for a historian, and has misled some learned writers,
who, from this expression, have concluded that Sebastian Castalio was a Pastor of the Church.
But this is not the fact. Castalio was never in the ministry. Calvin first patronized him by
introducing him as a teacher of the languages in the Divinity school at Strasburg, about 1540 or
1541. After Calvin returned to Geneva, he invited Castalio to take the charge of the grammar
school in this city. He soon discovered his obscene taste and heretical opinions. Castalio was
excluded by the Senate from Geneva in 1544. The following is a part of the certificate which
Castalio states was given him at that time, written by Calvin: “We testify, in a brief manner, that
he so conducted himself with us that by our united consent he was already designed for the
pastoral office. Lest, therefore, any one should suspect, that it was for some other reason that
Sebastian went away from us, we would give this testimony wherever he shall come:—he left of
his own accord the mastership of the school.

In that employment he so conducted himself, that we judge him worthy of the holy ministry; and
to this he would have been received had it not been for some spots on his life, and some profane
opinions which he advanced against the articles of our faith. These were the only reasons which
prevented.” This is full evidence that Castalio was never in the Ministry, and of course not
deposed from it, as Spon and others have asserted. Calvin’s conduct in this instance appears
candid and dignified towards Castalio, who did not cease, in a covert and hypocritical way, to
injure and involve him in difficulties, by aiding the factious at Geneva. Castalio spent his time
subsequently at Basil, where he instructed in the languages. He died poor and unpatronized,
December 29, 1503, aged 48. Bayle Art. Cast.”—Waterman.

The name of Castalio deserves a remark. He once addressed Calvin as follows: “When I was at
Lyons, before I went to you at Strasburg, some one, by mistake, called me Castalio instead of
Castellio. I was pleased with it, remembering the fountain Castalius consecrated to the Muses:
this made me in love with that false name. I preferred it before that of my family, and adorned
myself with it at the beginning of a book.” In his defense, he says, “throwing off this Greek
vanity, and meeting with an opportunity, which I had long wished for, of making the change, I
desire that I may be again called by my paternal name, Castellio.”

Bayle Art. Cast. Pyghius was a Dutch divine, and was remarkable for his extreme ugliness, and
dissonant voice. But he was reputed the greatest sophist of his time. The pope rewarded him with
the provostship of St. John, at Utrecht, for defending his bull to the General Council in 1539.
The Cardinals Sadolet and Cervinus were his patrons. The former assured him that he would
recommend him to the pope and cardinals. The latter wrote to him on the 27th October, 1542, in
these words: “As to your debts, were it in my power to pay them, you should be in no distress:
and although his holiness, at present, is put to vast charges on many accounts, I will not fail to
represent your services and wants, and to assist you as much as I can.”

Pyghius was a Pelagian, and was stigmatized as such by several learned Catholics; and
particularly by a Jansenist, who said he was full of Pelagian errors on the subject of original sin;
and that he spoke against Divine predestination, and the doctrine of efficacious and free grace,
with great indiscretion and ignorance.

Some say that the reading of Calvin’s works made Pyghius heretical with respect to the merit of
good works, and the justification of sinners. Others affirm that Pyghius examined the works of
Calvin with so great a desire of refuting them, that he ran into the extreme of Pelagius. Bucer, in
a letter to Calvin, dated Strasburg, October 28, 1542, says: “Our literary school is well supplied;
a man has arrived here from Italy, learned in Greek, Hebrew and Latin, happily versed in the
scriptures, 44 years of age, with good talents and a penetrating genius; his name isPETER
MARTYR. He was President of the Canons of Lucca in Lombardy.

Martyr continued at Strasburg, until, at the invitation of Cranmer in the King’s name, he went
over to England, in November 1547. In 1549, he was appointed divinity Professor at Oxford, by
Edward VI. He married at Strasburg a nun who, like himself, had escaped from the superstitions
of a convent. She died during his residence at Oxford. On the accession of Queen Mary in 1553,
after Martyr returned to Strasburg, during the Marian persecution, the bones of his wife were dug
up by the virulent Papists, and buried in a dung hill. Martyr was, for the seven last years of his
life, Professor at Zurich. He was at the Convention at Poissy, in 1561, with Theodore Beza, and
died soon after his return in 1562, aged 63. He was learned, zealous, sincere and humble. He
wrote Commentaries on the Scriptures, and against the Papists, and on the Lord’s Supper, in
reply to Gardner, Bishop of Winchester Burnet, vol. 2, p. 50. To allay the increasing evils, this
council of two hundred were convoked to meet on the 16th day of September, 1547. On the
preceding day, Calvin informed his colleagues, that tumults would probably be excited by the
factious, and that it was his intention to be present at the meeting. Accordingly, Calvin
accompanied by his colleagues, proceeded to the Council house, but arrived before the appointed
time. Seeing many persons walking about the door, they retired through an adjoining gate, and
were unnoticed. They had not been long in this retreat, before they heard loud and confused
clamors, which instantly increased with all the signs of sedition. Calvin ran to the place, and
though the aspect of things was terrible, he advanced into the midst of the violent and noisy
crowd. His presence struck them with astonishment; his friends pressed around him as a defense;
he raised his voice, and solemnly declared, that he came to oppose his body to their swords, and
if they were determined to shed any blood, he exhorted them to begin with his. The heat of the
sedition abated.

On entering the Senate chamber, he found a more violent contest. He pressed between the
parties, when they were upon the point of drawing their swords for mutual slaughter, in the very
sanctuary of Justice. Like an angel of peace, he arrested the fury of the faction, and having
brought the assembly to their seats, he addressed them in a continued and impressive oration. He
pointed out to the seditious their crimes, and the public evils which must inevitably follow upon
indulging in such immoralities and factions; and denounced upon them the judgments of God, if
they should persist in such iniquity. The effects of this address were so deeply felt by the
seditious themselves, that they commended him for his interposition, which had arrested their
bloody attack upon the senate.—See Calvin’s letter to Viret, dated, September 17th, 1547. The
companion of Calvin, who had for about nine years cherished him in the most affectionate
manner, was removed by death in March, 1549. She was comely in her person, [Bayle] amiable
in her manners, and devoutly humble in her religious duties; and her death was to Calvin, amidst
his labors and infirmities, an irreparable loss. His strong and habitual faith, however, enabled
him to submit, with exemplary calmness and constancy, to this chastising stroke from the hand
of divine sovereignty. On this interesting occasion, he shall speak for himself. “CALVIN TO
FAREL. “The report of the death of my wife has doubtless reached you before this. I use every
exertion in my power not to be entirely overcome with heaviness of heart. My friends, who are
about me, omit nothing that can afford any alleviation to the depression of my mind. When your
brother left us, we almost despaired of her life. On Tuesday, all the brethren being present, we
united in prayer. Pouppinus then, in the name of the rest, exhorted her to faith and patience. In a
few words, (for she was very feeble,) she gave evidence of the state of her mind.

After this I added an exhortation, such as I thought suitable to the occasion. As she had not
mentioned her children, I was apprehensive that from delicacy she might cherish in her mind an
anxiety more painful than her disease; and I declared before the brethren, that I would take the
same care of them as if they were my own. She answered, I have already commended them to the
Lord. When I observed that this did not lessen my obligation of duty to them, she answered
immediately, If the Lord takes them under his protection, I know they will be entrusted to your
care. The elevation of her mind was so great that she appeared to be raised above this world. On
the day when she gave up her soul to the Lord, our brother Borgonius, a little before 6 o’clock,
opened to her the consolations of the Gospel, during which she frequently exclaimed, so that we
all perceived that her affections were on things above. The words she uttered were, O glorious
resurrection!— God of Abraham, and of all our fathers!—The faithful have, for so many ages,
hoped in thee, and not one has been disappointed—I will also hope. These short sentences she
rather ejaculated, than pronounced with a continued voice. She did not catch them from others.
But by these few words she manifested the thoughts which exercised her mind, and the
meditations which she cherished in her own heart. At 6 o’clock I was compelled to leave home.
After seven they shifted her position, and she immediately began to fail. Perceiving her voice
beginning to falter, she said, Let us pray—Let us pray—Pray for me, all of you.— At this time I
entered the house. She was unable to speak, but gave signs of an agitated mind. I said a few
things concerning the grace of Christ, the hope of eternal life, our domestic intercourse and
fellowship, and our departure from this society and union. I retired to pray. She was attentive to
the instruction, and heard the prayers with a sound mind. Before 8 o’clock she breathed her last
so placidly, that those present could not distinguish the moment which closed her life. I now
suppress the sorrow of my heart, and give myself no remission from my official duties. But the
Lord still exercises me with other troubles. Farewell, dear and faithful brother. May the Lord
Jesus strengthen you by his spirit, and me also in this so great calamity, which would inevitably
have overpowered me unless from heaven he had stretched forth his hand, whose office it is to
raise the fallen, to strengthen the weak, and to refresh the weary. Salute all the brethren and your
whole family. “Yours, JOHN CALVIN. “GENEVA, April 11, 1549.” “CALVIN TO VIRET.
“Although the death of my wife is a very severe affliction, yet I repress, as much as I am able,
the sorrow of my heart. My friends also afford every anxious assistance, yet with all our
exertions we effect less, in assuaging my grief than I could wish; but still the consolation which I
do obtain I cannot express. You know the tenderness of my mind, or rather with what effeminacy
I yield under trials; so that without the exercise of much moderation, I could not have supported
the pressure of my sorrow.

Certainly it is no common occasion of grief. I am deprived of a most amiable partner, who,
whatever might have occurred of extreme endurance, would have been my willing companion,
not only in exile and poverty, but even in death. While she lived she was indeed the faithful
helper of my ministry, and on no account did I ever experience from her any interruption. “For
your friendly consolation I return you my sincere thanks.

Farewell, my dear and faithful brother. May the Lord Jesus watch over and direct you and your
wife. To her and the brethren express my best salutation. “Yours, JOHN CALVIN. “April 7,
1549.” Martin Bucer, Professor of Theology in the University of Cambridge, closed his learned
and useful career, February 28, 1551. As he had been highly respected by Edward VI his remains
were interred with distinguished funeral honors. See Bucer, volume 2, p. 155.

In the Marian persecution, the tomb of Bucer was demolished, and his body burnt; but the tomb
was afterwards rebuilt by order of Queen Elizabeth.

The death of Bucer occurred at the critical moment when the Liturgy of the English Church was
undergoing a reform. The loss of his influence in that work, and the close of a long and most
confidential intimacy and correspondence, so deeply affected Calvin, that in his letter to Farel,
he forbore dwelling on the painful subject; and says, “When I reflect with myself, how great a
loss the Church of God has sustained in the death of this man, it cannot be but that I should be
tortured with fresh sorrow, his influence was great in England. And from his writings, I cannot
but indulge the hope, that posterity will be benefited in a still more extensive degree. It may be
added, that the Church appears to be deprived of faithful teachers.” Calvin proceeds to mention
in the same letter, the death of his friend, James Vadian, consul of St. Gal, a civil magistrate
valuable for his learning and piety, the weight of whose influence was very great in the civil and
religious concerns of the Helvetians. See Calvin’s letter to Farel, dated June 15, 1551, and to
Viret, dated May 10, 1551.

Bucer was born 1491, at Schelestadt, in the province of Alsace. He entered the order of
Dominicans at the age of seven years. In 1521, he had a conference with Luther. Having
previously perused the writings of Erasmus and of Luther, he was prepared to unite with the
German Reformers. He settled at Strasburg, and officiated there both as Minister and
Theological Professor for 20 years; and, with Capito, was the chief instrument of the early
reformation in that city. When the troubles about the Interim arose, he gladly accepted the
invitation of Cranmer, and went to England, 1549. This excellent prince was the son of Henry
VIII and Jane Seymour, who was delivered of him at Hampton Court, October 12, 1537, but not
without the cesarean operation, of which she died in a few days after. During this young king’s
last illness, a few hours before his death, with his eyes closed, and judging that no one heard
him, he offered up the following prayer. “Lord God, deliver me out of this miserable and
wretched life, and take me among thy chosen. Howbeit, not my will, but thine be done. Lord I
commit my spirit to thee. O Lord, thou knowest how happy it were for me to be with thee; yet
for thy chosen’s sake, send me life and health, that I may truly serve thee. O my Lord God, bless
thy people, and save thy inheritance. O Lord God, save thy chosen people of England. O my
Lord God, defend this realm from papistry, and maintain thy true religion, that I and my people
may praise thy holy name, for thy Son Jesus Christ his sake.” His last words were, “I am faint,
Lord have mercy upon me, and take my spirit.” Thus died this blessed king—this young Josias,
July 6, 1553, aged 17.

Mr. Bradford, the martyr, said of this excellent prince, that he judged him to be the holiest and
godliest man in the realm of England.

In the beginning of his reign, Charles I, emperor of Germany and king of Spain, requested that
leave might be given to Lady Mary (afterwards Queen Mary) to have mass said in her house.
Bishops Cranmer and Ridley were sent by the Council to entreat the young king on this behalf.
They plead for it as a matter of state policy. But the young king answered them from Scripture
with such gravity and force, that they could not reply. They however pressed their suit, but the
king told them to be satisfied, and said that he was resolved rather to lose his life, and all that he
had, than agree to that which he knew with certainty to be against the truth. Notwithstanding all
this, the bishops continued their intercessions, when the king burst into tears, through tenderness,
love, and zeal for the truth; which the bishops no sooner observed than they wept also and
withdrew. On their return to the Council, they met Mr. Cheek, who had a great share in the
king’s education. Cranmer took him by the hand, and said “Ah, Mr. Cheek, you may be glad all
the days of your life, that you have such a scholar; for he hath more divinity in his little finger,
than we have in our whole bodies.” The Edinburgh Encyclopaedia says, this even occurred in
1551. So also says Bayle. Geneva, though formerly an imperial city, had for some years been
under the immediate government of the bishop, who had the title of prince of the town and
adjacent country. The Dukes of Savoy had long contended with the bishop of Geneva, for the
government of that city.

The form of its internal constitution was purely republican. The people annually elected four
syndics, twenty-five senators, and a council of two hundred, for the management of their affairs.

The citizens, who were attached to the popular form of their government, had always been firm
in their opposition to those who supported the Episcopal or ducal prerogatives.

The bishop and the duke dropped their contending claims, and from policy, united their strength
against the common enemy—the people and the reformation. The bishop having offended both
the duke and the people, made a precipitate retreat from Geneva. The duke was defeated by the
citizens, and they extended their authority over the neighboring castles, and eventually
established their independence on the republican basis. This free and independent city
progressed under the benign influence of the reformed doctrines, to a degree of consideration,
wealth, and influence, which was for a long period of momentous import to the civil and
religious concerns of Europe.— Dupin, 16 Cent. page 179. Rob. Chapter 5 volume 3 page 117.
Rees’ Cyclop. Art. Geneva. Here is the humble and candid confession of a Christian. Calvin was
a man of ardent feelings, and they may at times have betrayed him into angry and hasty
expressions. And “amidst the incessant and violent attacks which he received, and the
uninterrupted warfare which he had to carry on with the advocates of error, he must have been
more than mortal, if he had never spoken hastily or harshly. But a few incidental actions,
contrary to a man’s general conduct, do not constitute character: and after every thing of this
kind which can be mustered, it will still be true that characteristically Calvin was not a traducer
or calumniator, but the possessor of a meek spirit, a governed tongue, and a guarded pen. He
must, on the whole, be ranked not only among the greatest but the best of men.”—Rees’ New
Encyclop. Am. Ed.

Middleton quotes Toplady as saying that “Calvin has been taxed with fierceness and bigotry. But
his meekness and benevolence were as eminent as the malice of his traducers is shameless. I
shall give one single instance of his modesty and gentleness. While he was a very young man,
disputes ran high between Luther and some other Reformers, concerning the manner of Christ’s
presence in the holy sacrament. Luther, whose tempter was naturally warm trod rough, heaped
many hard names on the divines who differed from him on the article of consubstantiation, and,
among the rest, Calvin came in for his dividend of abuse. Being informed of the harsh
appellations he received he meekly replied in a letter to Bullinger, “It is a frequent saying with
me, that if Luther should even call me a devil, I hold him notwithstanding in such veneration,
that I shall always own him to be an illustrious servant of God; who, though he abounds in
extraordinary virtues, is not without considerable imperfections.”

This letter to Bullinger, which was written to allay the exasperated feelings of those whom
Luther had provoked by his asperity, is as follows. “I hear that Luther has at length burst forth,
with atrocious invectives, not only against you, but against us all. Now I scarcely dare beg of you
and your colleagues to be silent, because it is not just that the innocent should be thus abused,
and not be allowed to defend themselves; and besides, it is difficult to determine whether it is
expedient. I wish you to recall these things to your mind: how great a man Luther is, and with
how great gifts he excels; also with what fortitude and constancy of mind, with what efficacy of
learning, he hath hitherto labored and watched to destroy the kingdom of Antichrist, and to
propagate, at the same time, the doctrine of salvation. I often say, if he should call me a devil, I
hold him in such honor, that I would acknowledge him an eminent servant of God. 24a But as he
is endowed with great virtues, so he labors under great failings. I wish he had studied more
effectually to restrain his impetuosity of temper, which breaks forth in every direction; that he
had always turned his vehemence, which is so natural to him, against the enemies of the truth,
and not equally brandished it against the servants of God; and that he had given more diligent
labor to search out his own faults. He has been surrounded by too many flatterers, seeing he is
also too much inclined by nature to indulge himself. It is our duty to reprehend what is evil in
him, in such a manner as to yield very much to his excellent qualities. Consider, I beseech you,
with your colleagues, in the first place, that you have to deal with a chief servant of Christ, to
whom we are all much indebted. And then, that by contending, you will effect nothing, but a
pleasure to the impious, who will triumph not so much over us as over the gospel. For reviling
one another, they will give us more than full credit. But when we preach Christ with one consent
and one mouth, they pervert this union, to diminish our faith, by which they disclose, more than
they would, the importance of our united labors. I wish you to examine and reflect upon these
things, rather than dwell on what Luther has merited by his intemperate language. Lest that
befall us, therefore, which Paul denounces, that by biting and devouring one another we should
be consumed; however he may have provoked us, we must rather abstain from the contest, than
increase the wound, to the common injury off the church.”

This letter fully shows that Calvin’s disposition was tender and affectionate, and that his temper,
perhaps naturally irritable, was under the restraint of a Christian spirit. ft24a Luther, in his
asperity against the Zuinglians, Bullinger, and others, had used harsh language; and Calvin, who
was anxious to prevent the controversy, states his own feelings, supposing Luther should call
him a devil, etc., to allay the resentment of Bullinger and the other pastors of Zurich. Francis
Junius, in his animadversions upon Bellarmin, says that he was at Geneva when Calvin closed
his life; but that he never saw, heard, knew, thought, or even dreamed of the blasphemies and
curses which the papists said he uttered at his death. ft25a Middleton says there are many among
the Roman Catholics who would do justice to Calvin, if they durst speak their thoughts. Guy
Patin has taught us to make this judgment; for he observes that Joseph Scaliger said that Calvin
was the greatest wit the world had seen, since the Apostles. He acknowledged that no man ever
understood ecclesiastical history like Calvin, who at the age of twenty-two, was the most learned
man in Europe. And he tells us that John de Monluc, bishop of Valence, used to say that Calvin
was the greatest divine in the world. Patin caused the life of Calvin, written by Papyrius Masso,
to be made public. This life has done a great deal of mischief to the copies of Bolsec; for who
can read it without laughing at those who accuse this minister of loving good wine and cheerful
company? The papists, at last, have been obliged to acknowledge the falsity of these infamous
calumnies published against the morals of Calvin. Their best pens have been contented to say,
that though he was free from corporeal vices, he was not so from spiritual ones, such as slander,
passion, avarice and pride.—2 Middleton, 57,58. Which gives a light to every age.

Which gives, but borrows none. Our Reformer thus writes on the death of Bucer, “I feel my heart
to be almost torn asunder, when I reflect on the very great loss which the church has sustained on
the death of Bucer, and on the advantages that England would have derived from his labors had
he been spared to assist in carrying on the Reformation in that kingdom.—Tr . “They mourn the
dead, who live as they desired.”—YOUNG. The Revelation Andrew Fuller commenced writing
his excellent treatise, “Calvinism and Socinianism compared,” as a means of solacing his grief
for the loss of a beloved partner.—Tr . The steady performance of our various duties, domestic,
social, professional, and Christian, is one of the most powerful and certain means, with the joy
and consolation of the Spirit of God, to enable us to bear up under any bereavements.—Tr . The
following extract from a letter of the mild Melancthon to Calvin, proves what his opinions were
concerning persecution. “I have read your clear refutation of the horrid blasphemies of Servetus,
and I thank the Son of God who awarded you a cross of victory in this combat.

The church owes you a debt of gratitude even at the present moment, and will owe it to the latest
posterity. I perfectly assent to your opinion. Your magistrates did right in punishing, after a
regular trial, this blasphemer.” In this very letter Melancthon speaks of Calvin “as a lover of
truth and as having a mind free from hatred and other unreasonable passions.” Melancthon, in a
letter to Bullinger, writes, “I wonder at those who disapprove of the severity of the sentence of
the Genevese senate against Servetus, for they were perfectly right since he could never cease
blaspheming.”—Tr . It is truly gratifying to learn that the duke of Wellington is doing his utmost
to destroy its ravages among our soldiers. Should he, in any measure, conquer this horrid vice, he
will be a greater benefactor to his country, than even by his glorious achievements at
Waterloo.—Tr. He exhibited both these characters in the trial of Servetus. Promptness induced
him to have this heresiarch arrested on a Sunday; Calvin’s calumniators and revilers have falsely
stated, when Servetus was at church. Our reformer maintained with all the leading pillars of the
reformation, contrary to the character, and principles, and Spirit of the Lamb of God, the Savior
of sinners, that blasphemy ought to be punished by the civil magistrate, and, as a freeman of
Geneva, considered himself bound to impeach Servetus. Sincerity, and an earnestness of zeal to
prevent the spread of erroneous principles, led him, therefore, to have Servetus arrested and tried
by the magistrates, but Calvin never uttered a word concerning his punishment. Sufficient time
was granted the Spanish physician for carrying on his trial, but, contrary to the voice of humanity
and of justice, no advocate was allowed by the senate of Geneva, and his jail exhibited a mass of
squalid filth, which Howard alone could have assisted to remove; for he is the only Christian,
since the days of the apostles, who seems to have fully entered into the glorious practice of
visiting the prisoner in his abodes of the deepest wretchedness and destitution. Servetus, on his
trial condemned by the natural standing court of his own conscience, and declared guilty by its
verdict, acknowledged his hypocrisy in attending mass when at Vienne, although he at that time
considered the pope to be Anti-Christ. The torments of the flames, with all their horrors, the
entreaties and admonitions of Calvin, whose pardon Servetus begged only two hours before his
death, never induced him to think he was in an error; but he died in the same sincere conviction
of the truth of his opinions, as he had lived. Had all the reformers attended mass, like Servetus,
the Roman hierarchy would never have been shaken; and had the first reformers understood the
nature, enlarged the dimensions and beheld the real deformities, and monstrous stings of
persecution, they would have never been disgraced, or become a stumbling-block to others, by
the scheming goodness of this principle which Christ utterly loathes. May the writer and readers
of this note be enabled to understand that heavenly wisdom of divine love, which is pure,
peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and
without hypocrisy; and to practice its dictates with promptness and sincerity, guided by the voice
of a truly enlightened, and, in every respect, Christian conscience.—Tr. Every reader of
Melancthon’s Letter to Henry the Eighth must feel thoroughly convinced that his heroic feelings
were entirely Christian.—Tr. Whoever is at all versed in the history of the foreign Protestant
Churches, cannot be ignorant of the great abilities, piety, and learning, which ornamented great
numbers of their divines, and particularly in the French Protestant Church. But what said the
judicious Hooker, a man who may justly be considered as having well weighed every assertion
which he made? Speaking of this very Calvin, he writes, ‘whom, for my own part, I think
incomparably the wisest man that ever the French Church did enjoy since the hour it enjoyed
him. His bringing up was in the study of the civil law. Divine knowledge he gathered not by
hearing or reading so much as by teaching others. For though thousands were debtors to him, as
touching knowledge in that kind, yet he to none but only to God, the author of that most blessed
fountain, the Book of Life, and of the admirable dexterity of wit, together with the helps of other
learning which were his guides.’ (Pref. to Hook. Ecclesiastical Polity.) Such an opinion, so
delivered, and by such a man, surely deserves some attention from those who consider Calvin as
a vile utterer of blasphemy and nonsense. Once more let the venerable author of the
Ecclesiastical Polity bear his testimony. ‘We should be injurious to virtue itself, if we did
derogate from them whom their industry hath made great. Two things of principal moment there
are which have deservedly procured him honor throughout the world; the one, his exceeding
pains in composing the Institutions of the Christian Religion; the other, his no less industrious
travails for exposition of Holy Scripture according unto the same institutions.’ (Ibid.) Surely the
venerators of Hooker must feel some portion of esteem for him whom Hooker thus venerated,
and expressly calls ‘a worthy vessel of God’s glory.’

Few names stand higher, or in more deserved pre-eminence amongst the wise and pious
members of the English Church, than that of Bishop Andrews; his testimony to the memory of
Calvin is, that ‘he was an illustrious person, and never to be mentioned without a preface of the
highest honor.’

Of the high opinion entertained of Calvin by Archbishop Cranmer and his associates in the
English Reformation, there cannot be a higher proof; than that he expressly wrote to him,
intimating his desire ‘that learned and godly men, who excel others in learning and judgment,
might meet to handle all the heads of ecclesiastical doctrine, and agree not only as to things
themselves, but also as to words and thrums of speaking.’ He then entreats Calvin, that he and
Melancthon and Bullinger would deliberate among themselves how such a synod might be
assembled. The Archbishop also expressly writes to Calvin, admonishing him, that he could not
do any thing more profitable than to write often to the king. It is an additional argument of the
deference paid to his opinions, that the liturgy underwent an entire alteration in compliance with
the objections which Calvin made to it as it previously stood. Bishop Hooper so highly valued
Calvin, that he wrote to him from prison, addressing him by the title of Vir praestantissime;
earnestly begging the prayers of his Church, and subscribing himself tuae pietatis studiosissimus.
Many more proofs might be given of the high veneration with which he was treated by his
contemporaries. Whoever examines into the sermons, writings, etc. of English divines, in the
reign of Elizabeth and James the First, will continually meet with the epithets of honor with
which his name is mentioned: the ‘learned,’ the ‘wise,’ the ‘judicious,’ the ‘pious’ Calvin, are
expressions every where to be found in the remains of those times.

It is well known, that his Institutes were read and studied in the universities by every student in
divinity, For a considerable portion of a century; nay, that by a convocation held at Oxford, that
book was recommended to the general study of the nation. So far was the Church of England and
her chief divines from countenancing that unbecoming and absurd treatment, with which the
name of this eminent Protestant is now so frequently dishonored, that it would be no difficult
matter to prove, that there is not, perhaps, a parallel instance on record, of any single individual
being equally and so unequivocally venerated for the union of wisdom and piety, both in
England and by a large body of the foreign churches, as John Calvin. Nothing but ignorance of
the ecclesiastical records of those times, or resolute prejudice, could cast a cloak of concealment
over this fact; it has been evidenced by the combined testimony both of enemies and friends to
his system of doctrines.

As one more additional, and no inconsiderable proof, that the name and authority of Calvin was
highly esteemed by the governors of the English Church at a former period, we find, from
Bishop Overal’s Convocation Book, containing the Acts and Canons which were passed by the
Convocation first called, AD 1603, 1mo. Jac. and continued by adjournments and prorogations to
1610, that the name of Calvin is formally mentioned in the preamble to the eighth canon of the
second book, thus—“The Cardinal (Bellarmine) is so far driven by a worthy man, and some
others of our side,” etc. In the margin the reference is made to Calvin’s Institutes. The deliberate
introduction of the name and its epithet into the acts of a convocation of the Church of England,
appears to be well worthy of notice in our present inquiry. 35a From such data, though they will
leave every man to a liberty of conscience as to his approbation of Calvin’s system, yet it
certainly does not leave him at liberty to consign his memory to opprobrium and obloquy,
without incurring the imputation of presumption, pride, or ignorance. ft35a Witness also the
exalted testimonies given of him by Bishop Bilson, Bishop Morton, Bishop Stillingfleet, Dr.
Hoyle, who wrote under the patronage of Archbishop Usher, and many others cited by Dr. John
Edwards, in his Veritas redux. The Life of Calvin, by the Rev. Mr. Scott, is written with much
judgment and impartiality. Professor Stuart’s Critical Remarks on the Epistles to the Romans and
the Hebrews are truly valuable.—Tr . Dr. Hodge’s Commentary on the Romans, is invaluable, as
a masterly and orthodox exposition of the sacred text.—Am. Ed. See Dr. M’Crie’s excellent
History of the Progress and Suppression of the Reformation in Italy.—Tr. Yet Robinson adopts
as a motto—“Let every thing said or written against truth be unsaid and unwritten.”—Tr .
Bishop Watson. The whole amount of spirit and wine-merchants, taverns, inns, beershops, etc.,
in London consisting of 1,500,000 inhabitants, is nearly 6000, while the places of worship do not
much exceed 600. Can government be said to do its utmost for religion under such
circumstances, when the active operations of the ministers of the gospel, compared with those of
the venders of wine, spirits, ale, etc., can only be as one to ten?—Tr . The Conference at Worms
was appointed to be opened on the 28th of October, 1540. From this time, nothing was effected
till the 13th of January, 1541. On this day, they agreed upon a colloquy. This was after the
Emperor; by Granville, his prime minister, had published his determination to hold a Diet at
Ratisbon, in March. The dispute commenced upon the doctrine of original sin. Eckius and
Melancthon were the only collectors appointed. On the third day, Granville dismissed the
conference.—Dupin. The advocates to manage the business in the Diet, appointed by the
Emperor, were for the Catholics, Julius Pflugius, John Eckius, and John Grophar—for the
confederates, Philip Melancthon, Martin Bucer, and John Pistorius. Dupin, 16th cent. book 2, p.
162. His institutes. See particularly his Dedication. A Catholic collier was once asked, “What do
you believe?” What the church believes. “And what does the church believe ?’ What I believe.
“And what do you both believe?” Why we both believe the same thing.

Hence the expression fides carbonaria. Opuscula p. 356 et 374. In argumento Genesis. Volume 1,
ejus operum. Passages might be multiplied, from the writings of Calvin, to show that he totally
rejected the impious dogma— That God is the author, or the efficient cause of sin—a single
passage in which he quotes Augustine, may here be appropriate—Men are the work of God, says
Augustine, as they are men; but they are in subjection to the devil, as they are sinners, until they
are delivered from that state by Christ. “Therefore,” adds Calvin,” the good are of God; the
wicked, a seipsis, from themselves.” Opuscula Calvini, page 126—see also in his tracts, in p.
627-629—“Nego Deum esse man authorem.” Cal. in Acts 2:23. “Neque tamen malorum author
sit Deus.” Cal. Lib. de praedestinat, et passim. President Edwards says—I utterly deny God to be
the author of sin; rejecting such an imputation on the Most High, as what is infinitely to be
abhorred; and deny any such thing to be the consequence of what I have laid down.— Freedom
of the will, Part IV. Sec. IX. II. It may be modestly suggested, whether some have not
re-preached the writings of Augustine, Calvin and Edwards, who still never read them, the sum
total of whose knowledge of the works of these great men is picked up from mutilated scraps,
selected for the sole purpose of prejudicing the minds of common readers against them; and
whether others professedly, and doubtless in some instances, real friends to religion, have not
been prompted by a desire for distinction, to make the world believe, that they could see farther
and clearer on those speculative points, than Calvin; and thus plunging, with metaphysical
enthusiasm, into the darkness of that double labyrinth which will bewilder many unweary minds
into skepticism and infidelity. Jottin, more than once, calls Augustine a fatalist. Ref. in Italy, p.
151. Non quia falsa sunt, sed quia imperfecta, et tanquam a parvulo parvulis scripta. Niceron.
Mem. des Hommes III. 2:235. Beza Hist. des Ecc. Ref. T. 19.—Vit. Calv. Vie de Calv. p. 9, ed.
1664, apud Chauffpie. Opuscul. min. p. 517, ed. 1667. Senebier. I. 205. Calv. Op. 8:517. Scott’s
Continuation of Milner, volume 3. 437. Socinus procured the death of Francis David, because
the latter denied that Christ should be worshipped. See the whole account in Chauffpie, note BB.
also Bi. Brit. volume 4, page 66. Murdock’s Mosheim, Volume 3. 269, n. (80). 275. And
Servetus himself shows what was the opinion of the age, in his request of August 22d, 1553, in
which he acknowledges, as we shall see, that heretics might be banished. Chap.

Chauff supra. Guerike. Hand. d. allgemeiner Kirchengeschichte. II. p. 959. Some of his own
expressions are: Ignis ille ab aeterno paratus est ipsemet Deus qui est ignis. Si hoc bene
intellexisset Origenes, non dixisset daemones salvandos, eoquod essen, ad suum principium
redituri; redibunt quidem, et euntes in ignem ad ipsumet Deum ibunt.

Chauffpie, note W. For the propositions in full, see Natalis Alexandri Hist. Ecc. 9. 163, ed.

Lucca. fol. 1734. Calvin. Tract. Theol. p. 590. sqq. Also consult EpiSt. Philippi Melancthonis, p.
152, 708, 710, fol. Lond. 1642. Calvin to Farel, Oct. 27, 1553. Declaratorie, p. 11, apud
Chauffpie. Blackstone, vol. 4, p. 355, note 8. Even at the time Calvin complained that he was
made responsible for every thing: “Quicquid a senatu nostro actum est, mihi passim ascribitur.”
The statement of the text will be confirmed by reference to Scott, vol. 3. p. 432, 439, 442, and
Waterman’s Calvin, p. 124. In the Encyclopaedia Americana, Art. “Calvin,” the compiler of a
hasty and disingenuous sketch, without citing a angle authority, pretends to give certain acts of
the commonwealth, “to prove,” forsooth, “the blind and fanatical zeal which he [Calvin] had
infused into the magistracy of Geneva.” As if the penal statutes against heresy had not been for
ages a part of their code! See Chauffpie, notes S. and Z., and la Chapelle, Bib. Raisonn. vol. 2, p.
139, 141. Chauffpie, note 2. “Historia Michelis Serveti.” Helmstadt, 1727. This work was
written under the superintendence of Dr. Mosheim. Every reader of Maclaine’s notes has learned
to be on his guard against this learned man, whenever the question lies between the Lutherans
and the Reformers. Bibl. Raison. n. 2. p. 173. Chauff. note Y. and, as there cited, Bi. Angl. n. 2.
p. 163. Multa ergo fide et diligentia contra hunt opus esse judicamus, praesertim cum ecclesim
nostrae apud exteros male audiant, quasi haereticae sint et haereticis foveant. Obtulit vero in
praesenti sancta Dei Providentia occasionem repurgandi vos, simul ac nos a pravi mali hujus
suspicione: si videlicet vigilantes fueritis, diligenterque caveritis ne veneni hujus contagio, per
hunc serpat latius. Id quod facturos A.V. nil dubitamus. Inter. Ep. Calv. Neque dubitamus quin
vos pro insigni prudentia vestra ipsius conatus repressuri sitis, ne blasphemiae ipsius tanquam
cancer latius depascantur Christi membra. Nam longis rationibus avertere ipsius deliramenti;
quid aliud esset quam cum insaniente insaniri?—ib. Verum si insanabilis in concepta semet
perversitate perst et, sic pro officio vestro potestateque a Domino concessa coerceatur, ne dare
incommodum queat ecclesiae Christi, neve fiant novissima primis deteriorari.—ib. Bi. Ang. in
Chauff. u. supra. Waterman’s Life of Calvin, 117. The Champel was a small eminence, about a
quarter of a mile from the walls of Geneva. Life of Servetus, London edit. 1774. See Tractatus
Theologici Calvini, p. 511-597. Ep. Cal. Farello. 71. Opusc. 8. 511. As a specimen of his
petuleuce, the Latin reader may take the following phrases:—Jam pudet toties respondere
bestialitati hominis— Ridiculus mus—Impudentissime—Monstrum horrendum— Tu teipsum
non intelligis—Sycophanta imperitissime—Tu plasquam pessimus— Ignoras miser—Abusor
futilis et impudens Deliras—O nebulonem excoecatissimum—Sceleratus—Simon Magus —
Mentiris imo ab aeterno. —Tract. Theol. p. 592, sqq. Restitutio Christianismi, hoc est totins
ecclesiae apostoliae ad sua limina vocatio: in integrum restituta cognitione Dei, fidei Christianae,
justificationis nostrae, Regenerationis, Baptismi, et Coenae Domini manducationis; restituto
denique nobis regno coelesti, Babylonis impia captivitate soluto, et and-christo cure suis penitus
destructo.’—This book is extremely scarce; all the copies were burned at Vienne and Frankfort:
it has been long doubted whether there were any remaining; but it appears certain that Doctor
Mead possessed a copy, which found its way into the library of the Duke de la Valiere. One of
the most celebrated commentators of the 14th century. Whether the accusations were proved, and
if proved, whether he was guilty of blasphemy. Rees’ Cyclopaedia, Art. Eras. and Bayle. Beza de
Haereticis a magistratu puniendis. Tract. Theol. p. 95. Chauff. Servetus, note BB. If we except
the case of Luther, perhaps the earliest toleration that was practiced after popery had introduced
the reign of persecution, was settled upon the basis of doctrines decidedly Calvinistic. We mean
the decree of Berne, in November, 1584.—Scott, 3. p. 245. Le Bas’ Life of Cranmer, volume 1,
p. 272. Harper’s stereotype edition. See also a no less uncalled for taunt in Hallam’s ConSt.
History of England, volume 1. p. 131. Burnet’s Hist. Ref. vol. 2. 112. Gilpin’s Lives of
Reformers, 2. 99. Le Bas’ Cranmer, vol. 1. p. 270. Life of Calvin, p. 122. Here is given the
sentence cited above. Table Talk, p. 143. See also a fair discussion of the case in Sir David
Brewster’s Encycloptedia, Art. “Calvin.” Page 230. Christian Observer for 1827, p.
622.—“Declaration of Arminius.”

Ibid. 1807, p. 179. Scott’s Milner, 3. 490. Calvin was not alone in his exceptions against the
Liturgy, for Cranmer “Fatebatur multa detracts oportere superflus, et ardentibus votis cupiebat ea
in melius correcta.”—Cranmer confessed that there were many superfluous things in the Book,
that ought to be taken out, and earnestly wished that it might have some further amendment.
Pierce’s Vindic. p. 12, 13, quoted by Neal, Vol. 1. Quarto Ed. Appendix, p. 895. The American
editor would take this opportunity to acknowledge his indebtedness to this author, for much of
the matter of his notes. See Waterman’s Life of Calvin, p. 336, and 333, where Calvin gives his
approbation to the Homilies, the Apostles’ Creed, Lord’s Prayer, and Ten Commandments, as set
forth by Cranmer, and published by Somerset, 1547. Burnet, vol. 2. p. 25.—And Wood’s Athen.
Oxon. vol. 1. fol. p. 72. A copy of the Protector’s translation is in Harvard library, first ed. 1550.
Hist. Reform. vol. 3. p. 214. fol. King Edward’s Catechism appears to be published at large in
the first vol. of the Christian Observer. Dr. Heylin says that bishops Jewel, Bentham, Alley, and
Davis, were the four who reviewed Nowell’s Catechism, February 25, 1562. HiSt. Reform. p.
332. See Burner, vol. 3. p. 303. And archbishop Wake’s state of the church, fol. p. 602. ft104a
Cal. Instit. Lib. 3, chapter 24. ~. 5, et Lib. 1, chap. 87. ~. 5, and Christian Observer, vol. 3, p.
433. Christian Obser. vol. 1. p. 9, 10, for 1802. Vita Jewelli, p. 236, ed. 1573. Jewell’s defense of
his Apology, published 1564. See Christian Observer, vol. 3, p. 629. Calvin drew up the
confession of the French churches—Vide Harm.

Confess. Catal. Confess. Vita Jewelli, p. 177. Cent. 16. sect. 2. part 2. Cent. 17. sect. 2. part 2.
See Bayle, Art. Schultingius. When Laud was archbishop of Canterbury, he was charged with
popish inclinations. A lady who had turned papist, being asked by the archbishop the cause of
her changing her religion, tartly replied, My Lord, it was because I ever hated a crowd. He
requested her to explain. I perceived, said she, that your Lordship and many others were making
for Rome with all speed, and to prevent a press, I went before you.— Bayle. These were the
followers of Zuinglius, of the church of Zurich, between whom and the followers of Luther there
was a wide difference of opinion, about the manner of the presence of Christ in the sacrament.
These were the Pope’s agents, as appears from Seckendorf, vol. 2, anno 1539. Mabillon says, it
was an ancient custom to ring the bells for persons about to expire, to advertise the people to
pray for them; whence was derived the passing-bells, the use of which was connected with other
superstitions; as was the bell at the festivals, masses, etc. See Rees’ Cycloptedia, Art. Bell and
Funeral. This undoubtedly refers to the sermon which Cop, the Rector of the University of Paris,
preached on All Saints’ day, which it is said Calvin composed in part at least. It was the danger
to which Calvin was then exposed, that brought him first acquainted with the Queen.
Chrism—Oil consecrated by the bishop, and used in the Romish church in the administration of
baptism, confirmation, ordination, and extreme unction. This last is called, in that church, a
sacrament; and the oil is applied to the eyes, ears, nostrils, mouth, hands, feet, etc. of persons
supposed to be near death.—When the oil is applied to those parts, this prayer is used. “By this
holy unction, and his own most pious mercy, may the Almighty God forgive thee whatever sins
thou hast committed, by the eyes, by the hearing, smelling, tasting, etc., etc.” It is not considered
so essential to salvation as baptism, and is not administered to children who are not capable of
actual sin. Lexici Theologici novi, etc. p. 1756 and 1757. By this, the spiritual infirmities and
actual sins are supposed to be taken away, as original sin is by baptism. Matthias Flacius
Illyricus left Wittemberg, and went to Magdeburg, in April, 1549, where he began writing
against the Wittemberg Divines, (Melancthon, etc.) This was the first introduction to that
religious war, which opened the door for many evils, the termination of which, says Bucholtzer,
in 1610, we have not yet seen. Bucholtzer Chronologia, anno 1549. Nicholas Amsdorf died in
1541. He was a rigid adherent of Luther, and extravagantly asserted, that good works were an
impediment to salvation. He was distinguished for his opposition to the Papists, and his
controversy with Melancthon, who labored to check this violent man, and to set the truth about
good works in a proper light. Rees’ Cyclopedia. The Helvetic churches, Zurich, etc. Mosheim
states, that arrogance and singularity were the principal lines in Osiander’s character.
Melancthon, in his letter to Calvin, calls him a Gorgon, who had dangling vipers for hair, and
petrified others by his aspect. He treated Melancthon with the grossest language of satire and
illiberality. Melancthon’s letter to Calvin is dated October 1, 1552.

Osiander died October 17, but Calvin had not heard of his death when he wrote the above letter
in November. Calvin’s Treatise, concerning the eternal election of God was published in 1551.
See Tract. Theol. Cal. p. 593. Calvin here alludes to an apprehension which Melancthon had of
being driven into exile. This period embraces the persecuting reign of queen Mary, who
succeeded Edward VI October, 1553, and died November, 1559. Cecil was first promoted by the
duke of Somerset, and became a distinguished lawyer; and by his moderate and temporizing
conduct, during Mary’s bloody reign, he escaped punishment, and continued in England, till, on
the accession of Elizabeth, he was made secretary of state. Gaspar Olevianus, of Treves, first
studied jurisprudence; but in attempting to save from drowning some rash young men, who had
upset their boat, he fell into extreme danger, and made a vow, that if God would deliver him, he
would, if called to it, preach the gospel, he escaped, and began first to read the Commentaries of
Calvin; he then went to Geneva, and studied theology under the instruction of that eminent
divine. In 1560, he was professor at Heidleberg, in the University of Wisdom, from which place
he wrote to Calvin for the laws of the Genevese Consistory. The above letter is the answer of
Calvin. Olevianus died minister of Herborn in Germany, 1587, aged 57.

Melchior Adams, in Vita Oleviaui, p. 590. St. Augustine, who died A.D. 430, says that this
custom was adopted in the church, on account of infant slaves presented by their masters; of
infants whose parents were dead; and of those whom their parents abandoned. In all ordinary
cases, parents answered for their children.

Wall’s Hist. Bap. vol. 1. In the reformed churches, as there was no commandment from God for
sureties at baptism, they made no rule to bind parents to have them, except in cases where one or
both parents were Papists, or when children of Saracens, or or the gypsies, were offered. So also
it was required, that a mother, or a woman, in presenting a child, should have a surety, to secure
the religious education of the child. The Presbyterian and Congregational churches now consider
the church, which receives a child, to be the surety, together with the parent or presenting
person, for the religious education of the child. See Quick’s Synod. vol. 1. p. 45


Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.