The plague at Geneva--conduct of the ministers in these
circumstances--Italian refugees--the question of the
ecclesiastical property examined.
[GENEVA, _October 1542_.]
Your letter, in which you requested that I would write somewhat
about the ecclesiastical property, was delivered to me on Monday,
while I was engaged upon the relics of the wedding. Although that by
no means had prevented me from writing, yet since that time I have
not had a single moment of leisure.
The pestilence also begins to rage here with greater violence,
and few who are at all affected by it escape its ravages.[381]
One of our colleagues was to be set apart for attendance upon the
sick. Because Peter offered himself, all readily acquiesced.[382]
If anything happens to him, I fear that I must take the risk upon
myself, for as you observe, because we are debtors to one another,
we must not be wanting to those who, more than any others, stand in
need of our ministry.[383] And yet it is not my opinion, that while
we wish to provide for one portion we are at liberty to neglect the
body of the Church itself. But so long as we are in this ministry,
I do not see that any pretext will avail us, if, through fear of
infection, we are found wanting in the discharge of our duty when
there is most need of our assistance. In what concerns yourselves
I have already told you what occurred to me.[384] Now, since that
colleague has been removed, you must seek for some one else to be
put in his place. If no such person can be found, you must devise
some plan, but with the common advice of the brethren.
[381] "The plague having made its appearance in several
houses of the town, the Plague Hospital was supplied with
officers."--_Registers of Council_, 25th September 1542.
[382] "Peter Blanchet, minister, having offered to attend and offer
consolation to the poor affected with the plague, who are at present
in the Plague Hospital, his offer is accepted."--_Ibid._, 23d
October 1542.
[383] According to the testimony of Michael Roset and of Savion,
contemporaries of Calvin, the Reformer offered himself at the same
time with Blanchet to visit the sick. But the Seigneury of Geneva
refused his offer, "on account of the great need which the Church
had of his services."--_Registers of Council_, 1st June 1545.
_Chronique_ de Roset, iv. fol., and Savion, 60.
[384] The plague prevailed equally at Lausanne.
Our friend Bernardino[385] has been assailed by strange manœuvres
to induce him to leave us. He remains constant, however; and in a
great measure, he has so broken with Antichrist, that they need not
think of troubling him for the future. He has written a volume of
sermons, at the end of which he professes that he entirely, and,
without any exception whatever, goes along with us--thinks as we
do. Many of the Italians visit him; and we have already two other
preachers. Those who have known him, consider that the kingdom of
Christ has got no small addition in that single individual. In the
meantime, as you may conceive, I need to have all my wits about me.
The more attentively I observe him, the more highly do I esteem
him. He acknowledges, however, that he has been greatly helped and
relieved by me, so as to be less easily shaken. The Senate has
already granted allowance for his preaching as often as he thinks
proper.[386] We have here at present Julio Camillo,[387] whose
manifold tergiversations are somewhat suspicious; for although he
talks boastingly of the Gospel, yet, because he has something of a
secret purpose, which, even although unknown to us, we do not like,
we have reason to be upon our guard with him. It is well, however,
that Bernardino is on his guard, and dreads him as an enemy.
[385] Ochino.--See Note 2, p. 355.
[386] "Bernardin de Sesnaz, of Sienna, an Italian minister, having
asked permission to preach in that language, resolved to grant
it to him, and that he shall preach in the chapel of Cardinal
d'Ostie."--_Registers of Council_, 29th October 1542.
[387] Julio Camillo, better known under the name of Renato, which he
had adopted on embracing Protestantism. Originally from Sicily, he
left his native country in early youth, for Paris, where he was long
devoted to the study of the Cabala. Having left Paris for Geneva,
he preached the Reformation in the Valteline, and joined the sect
of the Anti-trinitarians.--Bock, _Hist. Anti-trinit._, tom. ii. p.
482. His solemn and taciturn manner appeared to conceal heterodox
opinions; Calvin's clear sight did not deceive him.
Now, however, I return to that request of yours about the
ecclesiastical property; for you remind me of it again in your last
letter. I beg, however, that you may pardon me; for you are aware
that the nature of this question is of a kind that requires both
time and leisure, a composed mind, and no little diligence. When
we were at Ratisbon I lent a hand to Bucer in collecting those
materials which he published among the acts of the conferences;
but as the question was there only incidentally brought under
discussion, what was written there at that time will not suffice for
the present exigency. Some little insight, however, may be derived
from it. To me it seems twofold. The case seems to me to divide
into two heads. In the first place, that you may declare that this
alienation will occasion stumbling and causes of offence, and, in
the next place, you may demonstrate that it is not lawful.
The occasions of stumbling are readily stated. Because that on that
account the Papists defame the Gospel, and they have begun to do so
even at a time when they had not such a specious pretext for doing
so. Formerly, therefore, they took advantage of these calumnies;
they will now have a just ground of accusation when they talk about
the plunder of Church property. In the next place, because the
common people throughout the whole canton dare not speak out openly,
they complain about it everywhere in corners, and the ministers have
not a word to answer. For after having cried out without ceasing
against the sacrilege of the Pope and the whole of the Popish
priesthood, with what face can they defend the sale of property
which entirely strips the Church bare, and may leave her naked,
while they could not even submit to any abuse or misapplication
of the revenues? In the third place, because they afford the very
worst precedent to other states and rulers. They are more eager
than enough to seize upon church property without having further
inducement from any other quarter presented to them, but now, if
they shall transgress in this respect, one half of the blame will
lie upon those who set them the example. Fourthly, that they are
not aware, and have no means of knowing, what posterity will do
in this matter; for it may so happen, that when the Church has
been plundered of everything of her own, she may be left entirely
helpless and destitute.
With reference to that second head which is above stated, keep in
mind that argument on which the chief hinge of the whole question
turns, that what has once been devoted to Christ and the Church, is
not the property of the magistrate. And here it will be necessary to
put them in mind of that law and ancient method, by which rule of
appropriation property of this kind was to be dispensed. You must,
therefore, insist upon it that those ungodly paunches have taken
possession of what had been solemnly set apart to the service of
the Church, that it is clear enough what is a lawful application of
Church property, and that appropriation ought now to be adopted;
that the alienation is liable to anathema and to the curse, because
it profanes that which is sacred. In the meantime all suspicion will
need to be taken off, that they may not think you have a hankering
desire after the property. It will need to be demonstrated to them,
however, that the rule of reformation which King Josiah prescribed
is the best, that the magistrates may have a power of inspection,
and that the deacons be the administrators. You can testify,
however, that you are content that the magistrate may have the full
power of administration, provided he faithfully dispenses the annual
income, and neither diminishes nor dilapidates the property.
You perceive how confusedly and hurriedly I have run over these
few heads. I make no apology, however; with you especially, who
are so well aware that I do not, on so grave a matter, babble with
carelessness and rashness whatever comes uppermost, but am forced,
by the urgency of the case, to launch forth at once what I would
willingly elaborate had I more leisure. Adieu, my excellent and very
dear brother. We shall see to the relative of Cordier. The brethren
salute you,--my wife and the whole household. Again, farewell. May
the Lord preserve you and other good men. I am very glad that you
have at length removed to another house, which, if you had not done,
I would have turned you out of the old one by my abuse. Farewell;
may the Lord always guide you by the counsel of his own Spirit, and
protect you by his strength from on high.--Yours,