De Boer, EA
University of the Free State

Bible Study in Geneva: Theological Training for the Preachers to the People1

I know there are pious men here who, having no reason to be humble about their learning, would rather miss two sermons than one exposition of Scripture such as are being heard. 2John Calvin

ABSTRACT

This article argues the historical situation, the purpose, the contents and the functions of the ecclesiastical institution called la congrégation in Calvin’s Geneva. In doing this primary sources are consulted and a comprehensive view of this significant body is offered. In the critical assessment of these sources it became clear that both the interpretation (study) of Scripture and the formulation of doctrine were the focus of the congrégation. Exposition and discussion were essentially connected. As a matter of fact, these Bible studies were intended for ongoing training of the ministers. The purpose of the meetings was indeed to preserve purity and concord in doctrine. This was achieved by the exegeses of Biblical books, homiletically training, related disputations of propositions with a strong accent on doctrine and brotherly censure according to the standards of orthodoxy. The article shows that the congrégations also effectuated Calvin’s choice of Biblical books to be explained in commentaries, it served as an instrument of instructing lay people (who regularly attended the meetings), the examination of candidates for the ministry and the formulation of doctrine.

1. INTRODUCTION

Ad Fontes, the ‘Festschrift’ in honour of prof. L.F. Schulze in Potchefstroom, offered the opportunity to highlight the so-called Genevan Consensus on Divine Election of 1551, as it was established in one of the weekly Bible study meetings of the ministers in Geneva with John Calvin presiding as moderator.3 That special meeting of Friday 18 December 1551 was, however, so unique in its pointed doctrinal focus (in refutation of Jerome Bolsec’s heterodox position) that it might leave the reader with a totally false idea of what the congrégation – the Friday morning Bible study – really was. History can be distorted by an incident which is so well recorded in documents, especially because it was an out of the ordinary event, caused by an uncommon incident. But the normal routine of each and every week must be known, both to give an accurate account of the ecclesiastical practice of the congrégations and to highlight the background which shows that incident as unique.

The purpose of this study is to define the nature, contents, and functions of the ecclesiastical institution called la congrégation in Geneva, and, along the way, to compare its character to similar institutions in the Reformation, such as the Prophezei in Zurich. The purpose of the congrégation is described in the Genevan church order as “to maintain purity and unity in doctrine” (pour conserver pureté et concord de doctrine). The method of working in the congrégation seems, when we look at the documents, to be no more than training in exegesis. In the following historical description of the congrégations in Geneva I try to answer the question: how does the emphasis on doctrine correspond to the working method of expounding biblical books? Or, to narrow my question down to one word: is my translation of the term congrégations as “Bible study meetings” accurate?

The secondary literature on the Genevan Reformation and on Calvin’s life and work offers every now and then a glimpse of the nature of the congrégations, especially when the case against Jerome Bolsec (1551) is considered. Two publications in the early 1960s stimulated further research into this unique institution: the edition of the Registers of the Company of Pastors4 and of Calvin’s Deux congrégations et exposition du Catéchisme. The Strasbourg scholar Rodolphe Peter pulled this ecclesiastical institution out of its obscurity by the publication of a 16th century edition of two of Calvin’s contributions on Galatians. It is preceded by a lucid introduction of twelve pages which summarizes our knowledge of the Bible study meetings at that time.5 It is my purpose to study this ecclesiastical institution in close detail.

How accurate is the picture of the congrégations presented in the secondary literature? We find some very unclear definitions of biblical studies. Robert M. Kingdon labelled it as “a type of adult Bible class.”6 Other authors regard the congrégations as a kind of church service (Heyer, Holtrop) in which a sermon was presented (Neuser).7 Bernard Cottret gives the following definition: “These congregations involved preaching and what we would call today a Bible-reading society, permitting an exchange of views.”8

Statements like this indicate that a fuller study of the congrégations in the manner of Rodolphe Peter may have its merits. The present essay may serve as an introduction to a future, more comprehensive study.

2. BIBLE STUDIES OR PROPHECY?

When the former bishop, Pier Paolo Vergerio, visited Geneva in 1550, he wrote a report of his impressions of the reformed city. This “letter” was published by Conrad Badius, the printer whom Vergerio may have met in the biblical studies. One of the jubilant passages concerns his attendance of the congrégation in St. Pierre and reads as follows:

Every week, on Fridays, a conference is held in the largest church [St. Pierre] in which all their ministers and many of the people participate. Here one of them reads a passage from Scripture and expounds it briefly. Another speaks on the matter what to him is according to the Spirit. A third person gives his opinion and a fourth adds some things in his capaci- ty to weigh the issue. And not only have the ministers done so, but everyone who has come to listen. Thus is being followed what Paul found in the Church of Corinth, and on which he said that, when the brothers gathered, every one of them could say what the Spirit revealed to him; then he was silent, sat down and another began to speak [1 Cor. 14:29-30].

Several elements of this impression of the congrégation are worth noting. The first is the prominence of the ministers and their various contributions. The second is the participation of lay members in these Bible studies. A third element to be noted is the clear allusion to Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians, Chapter 14, and to the gift of prophecy. Did Vergerio present an adequate impression of these Genevan Bible studies?

A. The Prophezei

I find Vergerio’s allusion noteworthy because the Genevan form of Bible study was called the congrégation, conférence des Escriptures, or colloque, but never la prophétie. In Zurich, in 1525, the Prophezei was instituted.9 The name of this institution is derived from 1 Corinthians 14:29-32.

According to Huldrich Zwingli every preacher has the task of a prophet. Knowledge of the biblical languages was deemed necessary to expound and apply the Scriptures prophetically.10 In German the word Offenbarung is used for “preaching.” The Prophezei evolved into the theological faculty.

In Strasbourg Martin Bucer and his colleagues instituted a related form of Bible lectures. In 1526, Bucer proposed to the magistrate that the canonical services be transformed into a Prophezei. That is why some form of service around the biblical lectures was maintained. Every morning and evening a service was held with half an hour of singing the Psalms and half an hour of prophecy or christliche Ubung and prayer.11 The place of the canons in these services was taken by preachers, schoolmasters, kirchenpfleger, and pious people who wanted to be taught the Scriptures. The synod of 1533 and the ordonnance of 1534 codified the Convent ecclesiastique.12 During Calvin’s years in Strasbourg these Bible studies were poorly attended.13 But the name, which in the French speaking congregation must have been la prophétie, was not transferred to the Bible studies held in Geneva.

B. 1 Corinthians 14

When Vergerio made the connection between the Bible studies which he witnessed in Geneva, and the passage on prophecy from 1 Corinthians 14, he also must have had some knowledge of this institution as it was established in Zurich through Bullinger or in Strasbourg. Did the ministers of Geneva also apply this passage to their Bible studies? The Ordonnances ecclésiastiques do not mention 1 Corinthians 14 or reflect its wording.

I know of only one instance in which an allusion to 1 Corinthians 14:29-32 was made: in the case of censure against Philippe d’Ecclesia, one of the Genevan ministers. In 1549 a dossier on D’Ecclesia was opened. He was reprimanded for having raised unedifying issues and senseless questions. A file of such lapses had been kept and D’Ecclesia was confronted with it. The Registers tell us that his colleagues decided “that he should be warned not to speak at the Bible studies at all, neither after the one who had expounded, nor when his own turn came round to expound, until the next day of censures.” In a marginal note the secretary of the Company of Pastors added: “The ground [for this] was cited to him from St. Paul: that he who brings nothing of edification ought to keep silent in the church.”14 This note clarifies that the ministers saw a connection with the Pauline prescriptions regarding prophecy. Still, it considers only the negative part, that is, the imposition of silence. A positive application of 1 Corinthians 14 with regard to the congrégation is missing.

What was Calvin’s understanding of prophecy as one of the New Testament gifts of the Spirit to the Church? With regard to the Bible study meetings it is necessary to include the Reformed view of the gift of tongues. Both the Zurich and Genevan theologians saw the Pentecost miracle of Acts 2 as the gift of communicating the Gospel in foreign languages.15 It was applied to the situation of the Church in the 16th century and the knowledge of the newly discovered biblical languages, Hebrew and Greek. In his commentary on 1 Corinthians (1546) Calvin explained 14: 29-32 without any reference to the Bible studies in Geneva. However, he did apply some features of the text to the situation of the church. On verse 27 he remarks that “the Church can do without tongues and suffer no inconvenience, except where they are helpful for prophesying, as for example Hebrew and Greek are today.” On verse 29 Calvin said, commenting on the limitation of the number of people prophesying: “In the discourse, the interpreter took the place of the prophet, and so that was the chief, and the more frequent, way in which languages were employed.”16 The interpretation of “language” is the interpretation of prophecy.

What then is the character of prophesy after the time of the New Testament church? Calvin comments: “I bracket revelation and prophesying together, and I think that prophesying is the servant of revelation.” Teaching, however, is associated with knowledge: “Teaching is the way to pass on knowledge.” Calvin’s definition of prophecy states: “prophesying does not consist in the simple and bare interpretation of Scripture, but also includes the knowledge for making it apply to the needs of the hour, and that can only be obtained by revelation and the special influence of God.”17 According to Calvin prophecy begins as interpretation of Scripture, but only rises to the level of New Testament prophecy in the inspired application to the situation of the church. In Calvin’s view of biblical prophecy the element of predicting future events is also an essential part. But this feature reached its fulfilment in the coming of Christ who was the greatest prophet of God.18

Thus Calvin would stress “that teachers, in their interpretation of Scripture, should focus on the preservation of sound doctrine, while prophets have the task of applying Scripture to the present situation.”19 This may explain why in Geneva the phrase conférence des Escriptures was favoured, and not la prophétie. Both the interpretation of Scripture and the formulation of doctrine were the focus of the congrégation.

3. REGULATIONS AND STRUCTURE

The Bible study meetings are poorly documented in the sources, although their aim has been clearly described in the church order. However important the first two volumes of the Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs are, they do not contain any direct information on or documentation of the Bible studies. That should not surprise us, since a weekly procedure of oral discussion soon became a normal feature in the Company of Pastors, leaving hardly any written traces. It is only when the weekly routine is broken by an incident that the congrégation as such and the issues discussed surface in the records and correspondence.

There are also very few transcripts of the contents of the Bible studies. Since the recording of Calvin’s lectures and sermons started in 1549, the scribe, Denis Raguenier, also seems to have seen it as his task to make a verbatim report of the congrégations, just as he was hired to preserve Calvin’s sermons in writing. On the basis of such transcripts four texts were published in the 16th century (one on John 1, two on Galatians 2, and one on election), while the manuscripts of five full expositions survived (four by Calvin on Exodus 1:1-8; Joshua 1:1-5; Joshua 11, Is. 1:1-3; one on Joshua 1:6-11 by Michel Cop), together with a body of nineteen texts on Joshua on which Calvin and Beza gave additional comments in the Bible studies. That gives us a total of twenty- eight texts for a period of fifteen years. In the course of fifteen years the ministers would have held some 780 study meetings. The fact that less than thirty texts survive means that we only have a partial transcript of one in every thirty meetings. And even that average number is highly misleading, since the body of texts on the book of Joshua account for twenty-one of the manuscripts (that is, three full expositions and eighteen additional comments), all of which were recorded in the eight months between June 1563 and January 1564.

The first impression in investigating these Bible studies in Geneva is that the role of John Calvin, the moderator of the Company of Pastors, seems to have been dominant. The texts—some in print, more in manuscript—are almost all transcripts of Calvin’s spoken words. The Vita Calvini paints the following picture. The first version by Theodore de Bèze (1564) describes Calvin’s role in the Bible studies, within the contexts of his weekly activities, in one dash of the pen: “he presented … nearly a full lecture on every Friday in the conference on Scripture, which we call the Congrégation, and has so kept up this routine without interruption until his death that he never failed to be there one single time, except when extremely ill.”20 Beza wrote this in the preface of the commentary on Joshua shortly after Calvin’s death. The gaps in the series of congrégations on Joshua in 1563 tell us of Calvin’s absence.

This general impression is elaborated in some detail in Beza’s second Vita, in which he used information from Nicolas Colladon. He is more accurate in describing Calvin’s part in the Bible studies, again in the context of the reformer’s workload: “on every Friday in the conference on Scripture, which we call la Congrégation, what he added in explanation after the expositor was like a lecture.”21 Beza proceeds a few pages further, when he tells of the beginning of the recording of Calvin’s sermons and lectures in 1549: “That is why here after I will point out, following the order of time, what books he explained in lectures or sermons, next to what he composed either in the form of a commentary or otherwise, and also what was treated in the congrégations on Friday.”22

It is through this source that we know the sequence of biblical books which were studied by the Company of Pastors since 1549, starting with Hebrews. Beza’s source must have been Colladon. Together with his parents and uncle Nicolas Colladon arrived in Geneva in 1550. 23 As a student at the Collège de Rive he was present in the congrégation of 16 October 1551, in which the Bolsec affair on predestination started. As a devoted student and, later, a trusted colleague of Calvin, he may have kept his own notes on the Bible studies. But the context of this passage on the sequence of biblical books, treated on Friday mornings, points to the work of Denis Raguenier, the scribe of Calvin’s sermons. Colladon may have checked the records of the scribe to verify his information.24 While Beza’s praise of Calvin’s contribution to the biblical studies is general, Colladon’s account seems a detailed and reliable source. They both testify that Calvin’s contribution, even if he did not present the exposition proper, was “like a lecture.”

Another eye witness testimony to the congrégations comes from Conrad Badius. The printer- publisher, who was probably a regular visitor at the Bible studies, gave the following description of these meetings in the preface of the volume Plusieurs sermons in 1558. The congregation is

a certain assembly of the Church which takes place on one of the weekdays, where each one of the ministers, in turn, explains some passage of Scripture, more by way of a lecture than a sermon. This being done, if there is one of the other ministers to whom the Spirit of God has revealed something which contributes to the understanding and clarification of what had been set forth, he is free to speak.25

While Beza highlighted Calvin’s prominence, Badius concentrated his description of the congrégations on the role of the ministers. In fact, all ministers, including Calvin, had an equal obligation to speak in these Bible studies, so that each colleague had a turn approximately every three months.

A. The Genevan Practice

The first indication of the institution of the Bible studies is dated November 1536.26 The Genevan ministers wrote to Lausanne, to the north of Lac Leman: “Through Christ we have established colloquies.” 27 The neighbouring colleagues from the Pays de Vaud were invited to participate on the basis of full equality. The common cause of reformation led to the plan of a broad platform of regular meetings and discussions, in which unity of doctrine was the primary aim.

I suggest that it was through the influence of Guillaume Farel that the idea of Bible studies, as they were practiced in Zurich, was transported to Geneva. Farel’s letters to Christoph Fabri (also called Libertet, a colleague in Thonon) inform us of some events related to the early phase. A man by the name of Dionysius (identified by A.-L. Herminjard as Denis Lambert), also nicknamed “Bacchus” for his diet of wine, disturbed the Bible conferences. A former monk, Lambert had become a pastor in the Bernese territories and demanded to be recognized as such in Geneva. However, he was asked to resign because of undignified behaviour towards his colleagues. “He was admonished by Calvin and asked in the name of the brethren to leave the ministry.”28 This Dionysius even took his wife, who was not without reproach either, to the congrégation to plead for her husband.

These Bible studies developed in the surrounding Bernese territories as well. The second synod of Lausanne, held on 14 May 1537, stipulated that the ministers of each of the seven classes should meet once a week for mutual exhortation and Bible study.29 The structure and terminology are very similar to the Genevan practise. In early 1538, Bern managed to sever relations between Geneva and Lausanne: “Our colloquies are forbidden to the brethren and theirs to us,” as Farel wrote.30 The crisis of 1538, resulting in the dismissal of Farel and Calvin, was building. “Bacchus” seems to have played a role in disturbing the relations between Geneva and Lausanne.31 From that date participation in the Bible studies was confined to Geneva and its territories.

The Church Order of Geneva

The Ordonnances ecclesiastiques of 1541 (following the draft of John Calvin) contain the following paragraph, connected with the oath of office of newly elected ministers:

Now as it is necessary to examine the ministers well when they are to be elected, so also it is necessary to have the right order to keep them in their duty. To this end it will be expedient in the first place that all ministers, in order to preserve purity and concord of doctrine among themselves, gather on a set day of the week to hold a conference on the Scriptures.

The following paragraph concerns attendance:

No one should be absent without a legitimate reason. If anyone is negligent in this respect, let him be admonished. As for those who preach in the villages, subordinate to the Seigneury, they are to be exhorted [1561: our ministers of the city should go and exhort them] to come as often as they can. However, if they de- fault an entire month, it is to be regarded as a very great negligence, unless it is a case of illness or another legitimate hindrance.

In the revision of 1561 a passage was inserted on the conference as a means of keeping an eye on each colleague and his duty to study the Scriptures:

In order to recognize how diligent everyone is in his studies and that no one grows lax, each member shall expound by turns the passage from Scripture that comes next [1576: on the day of the Congregation]. When finally the ministers have retreated [1576: separately to the place where they meet],32 each member of the Company shall admonish the one who propounded on what needs contradiction, so that such critique serves him as correction.

The prescriptions of 1541 proceed with a final paragraph – maintained of course in 1561 – on conflicts over doctrine. A closed session of the Compagnie des Pasteurs, following a conference, is the first platform to deal with such cases:

If there appears a difference in doctrine, let the ministers come together to discuss the matter. Afterwards, if need be, let them call the elders and those commissioned by the Seigneury to assist in composing the contention. Finally, if they are unable to come to friendly agreement because of the obstinacy of one of the parties, let the case be referred to the magistrate to be put in order.33

A few remarks on terminology are in order. The word congregation, a gathering or meeting, is rather vague. A more adequate term for these Bible studies, conférence des Escriptures, is seldom used. In some letters, we encounter the term colloque34 or, in Latin, colloquium. When congregation had become an established term, Beza referred to Bolsec’s appearance in congregationis coetu.35 The term congregation is also used in the transcripts as the title of the introductory expositions and in the few samples that were published in the 16th century. In these instances the meaning of congregation is the written or published text of la proposition (here rendered as “exposition”).

The conference for Bible study, where interested members of the Church were present, was followed by a closed session of the ministers in which they discussed various practical matters of ministry. This session is most frequently also called la congregation in the minutes of the Compagnie des Pasteurs.36 Censure of doctrine and morals had a place in the quarterly sessions which were called congregations generalles 37(held before each celebration of the Lord’s Supper 38). It should not surprise us that the ministers did not always make a clear distinction between the Bible studies and the following session of the Company of Pastors. In general, the term congregation could be used as an equivalent of the Company of Pastors itself. Following the transcript of the Church order of 1541, the first volume of the Registers begins with a list of regulations from 1546. All ministers signed the document, following the line: Passé par la congregation des freres assemblee le vendredi …39

C.The Lausanne Classis

The neighbouring Lausanne classis (a regional assembly of Churches), in the Pays de Vaud, also had weekly colloquies for the ministers and the people, held on Wednesdays. The Synod of 1537 had instituted the various classes in the territory of Bern, which were subdivided into colloquiesin 1539.40 In the second half of 1549 a huge conflict arose between the ministers of Lausanne and the Council of Bern on the effect of these colloquies. Conflicts, in which Viret and Zebedee were the main persons, seem to have annoyed the Bernese Council so much that they decided to restrict the colloquies to four times per year.41

At Viret’s request, Calvin wrote to Wolfgang Musculus on the matter and strongly advocated the reinstitution of weekly colloquies because every one of the preachers is heard, stimulated, and corrected so that he is equipped to explain the Scriptures to the people: “This is also the best bond to retain consensus in doctrine.42” Furthermore, interested laymen were now deprived of a most cherished possibility of studying the Bible. This letter is a unique defence of the Genevan practice from Calvin’s perspective. In November the measure was softened; the colloquies in the Lausanne classis were permitted again, probably because of the Academy and its students.43 The frequency could be increased again, but the persons permitted to speak were restricted to one, plus the professors of Hebrew and Greek.44 Once again Calvin warned Musculus of the danger of having no colloquies in the other classes of Bern: “Now, the less communication in doctrine, the greater will be the danger of destructive instruction.”45

Sometime during this conflict Calvin addressed a memorandum on the “conferences of the pastors on Holy Scripture” to the Council of Bern.46 He was invited to do so by Viret and the Lausanne ministers.47 This document offers the most extensive description of the Genevan institution in Calvin’s hand. We present it in the following translation, because it reflects the fullest and most coherent description of the congregation in Geneva:

“Advice on the Conferences of the Pastors on Holy Scripture”

The response which pleased [you,] our renowned Sirs, to give us in writing regarding the conference on Scripture, which we are accustomed to hold weekly, does not correspond at all with what the Bernese preachers said to our brother, Master Pierre Viret.48 And also because there are in the same response some passages dubious to us, we have thought it best – so as not to undertake anything that does not correspond with the intentions of our Sirs, but instead to follow what you have regarded as good and useful for the up building of the Church – to put in writing point by point the form which we want to keep in our so called conferences, so that – when it is approved by you, our Sirs, as we hope – it will be observed without difficulty and that no one will be permitted to go against it. [Material regulations]

First, that in the Lausanne classis, considering the distance between the places, there be three separate colloquies, so organised that the distance causes no trouble to anyone.

• That each colloquy choose a book of Scripture – one that will be the most useful – to expound.

• That the passage to be treated shall be defined by agreement a week earlier, so that they work on the text ably and no more or less than is deemed good, both for the instruction and the convenience of the brethren.

• That each of the ministers and professors [of the Academy of Lausanne] be bound to take his turn in expounding the passage assigned to him. The aim is to see how diligent each one is in his studies and in what way they explain the Holy Scripture for the edification of the people.

• That he who has put forth his exposition in that capacity shall be admonished personally among the brethren about the faults which have been noted in him, such as if he has made a wrong argument on or exposition of Scripture, or that he does not have the gift of teaching, or that there is another vice that needs reproach.

[Formal Restrictions]

After the passage is expounded by the one whose turn it is, the matter as presented is not to be repeated in order to eliminate all redundancy, but only what has been omitted shall be added by those to whom God has given the grace to do so.

• No matter of discontent which causes debate or dissension shall be stirred up, but they must discuss peacefully what is relevant to the understanding of the passage and to the doctrine which can be deduced. When such a situation occurs, let the dean interfere by imposing silence on the dissenters.

• No topic shall be brought forward against the established reformation.49 The one who

• tries to do so must be reprimanded by the authority of the dean.50

• If anyone raises a question on the [doctrinal] consequence of the passage, he shall speak modestly of what God has given him on the subject or wait for the statement on the matter by him who will be chosen by the classis as the most able one.

[General Observations]

However, no one shall be forced to attend every week under all circumstances.51 Yet all shall be admonished to be present, except when they have a legitimate reason for their absence, both to profit personally and to censure the one expounding, if necessary. Everything shall serve to attain a pure and simple understanding of Scripture and to draw maximum profit from it for the instruction of all, without sophisticated cleverness and without any dispute and even less controversy.”

This document recalls the history of a conflict in the Bernese territories, but at the same time it reflects the practice and experience of the Genevan ministers. It is written from the perspective of their colleagues in the Lausanne area, but in case they chose to use this document, Calvin’s name or person cannot be detected. It is not clear whether the Lausanne ministers submitted this “Advice” to the Council of Bern or not. It could have been incorporated in the extensive memorandum written by Viret in the name of all the Lausanne ministers.52 This memorandum is important, because it was Pierre Viret who worked in Geneva during the early years of the reformation. The colloquies in Lausanne and the congregations in Geneva were almost identical up to the crisis of 1549.

D. Time and place

The time of day when the Bible studies begin is given in the historiography as 7.00 a.m,53 or 9.00a.m.54 without reference to a source. It must have been following the dawn service on weekdays

(which took place at 6.00 a.m. in the summer and at 7.00 a.m. during the winter). Giving the ministers and the people time to assemble after the morning service, the starting time must have been 8 a.m. in summer and 9 a.m. in winter. On one occasion it is reported during the summer period that the Bible studies could last until around 10.00 a.m.55 The sounding of the church bell was the customary summons to assemble.

Following the Bible studies, the Company of Pastors held their closed meeting for business matters. Sometimes this meeting had to be adjourned à midi aprez disner (until midday after dinner).56 Thus the whole Friday morning after the early service was reserved for the Bible studies and the deliberations of the Company of Pastors.

Where did these meetings take place? In the early years a note in the records of the Council announced: “Regarding the congregation, [it is decided] that it shall not take place in St. Pierre, but at Calvin’s or at [the school of] Rive (whichever one wishes) and to ring the bell, as customary.”57 This regulation, half a year before Calvin’s banishment in 1538, did not last long.

After his return, the meeting place was St. Pierre again. Doumergue points to le temple de l’Auditoire that is the small church Nôtre-Dame-la-Neuve; this could be the case for the year 1557 and following. In 1556, that chapel, which had been closed in 1536, was used as a church again, especially by the Italian and English- speaking refugees. Before that time, St. Pierre was used as a meeting place for the pastors’ Bible studies.58

In the early 17th century the congregation was reorganized and placed “at the time of the early morning] service and in the pulpit of St. Pierre”.59 The Auditoire, used as a place of gathering since 1557, was replaced again by St. Pierre. Since the adjacent Chapel of the Maccabeus60 was used as a storeroom, we may assume that the Bible studies took place in the main Church building. The place of the Bible studies was thus easily accessible to the people who had attended the early morning service in the church.

E.Structure or Liturgy?

Bible study meetings such as the Prophezei in Zurich and the christliche Übung in Strasbourg were instituted to replace the canonical hours. The study of Scripture was held at the traditional hour of the day, and therefore some form of liturgy was maintained. But in Geneva and the Swiss territories the Bible studies were held only once a week. Was it regarded as a form of Church service?

Every meeting was opened by this formulaic prayer:

We will invoke our good God and Father, asking him that he will pardon all our faults and sins and illumine us by his holy Spirit so that we have the true understanding of his holy Word, giving us grace so that we can study it purely and faithfully, to the glory of his name, to the edification of his Church, and to our salvation. This we ask him in the name of his only and beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.61

The prayer at the beginning of the Prophezei in Zurich had the following wording:

Almighty, eternal, and merciful God, whose Word is a lamp to our feet and a light on our paths, open and enlighten our minds, so that we may understand your pure and holy Word and in that which we have rightly understood may we be transformed so that in no way might we displease your majesty, through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.62

The Zurich and Genevan prayers both concentrate on the understanding of the Word in the Bible study meeting.

Next in the order of the congregation was the reading of the chapter or passage of the Bible chosen for that morning. Surely it was read in French, but we do not know if the Hebrew or Greek text was read as well, as was the practice in Zurich. After the reading from Scripture, the designated minister explained the passage (la proposition). The text, written by the scribe, is always headed by the phrase: Congregation faicte par … (and followed by the date). The exposition was not regarded as a sermon. Often it is stated that this exposition resembled a lecture, as they knew it from the school and, later, the Academy.

The proposant always ended his exposition by inviting his colleagues to add their comments. For example, Calvin said at the end of his introductory exposition to his projected Harmony of Exodus – Deuteronomy: “I have not expounded the matter as it really deserves, but the brethren to whom God has given more gifts can add to it according to what they perceive to be for the edification of the whole Church.”63 Such a statement might sound obligatory, but it summarizes beautifully the purpose of the Bible study meetings: a collective study of Scripture and recognition of the spiritual gifts, distributed among the ministers. A similar statement is found in the only congregation, surviving in manuscript, by a minister other than Calvin. Michel Cop said at the end of his exposition of Joshua 1:6-11: “This is what God has given me to say briefly on this passage. This passage is really rich and broad and contains grand teaching. Therefore, I beg the brethren to whom God has given much greater gifts than to me to supplement my deficiency, and I ask for assistance as it pleases Him to help me.”64

Following the introductory exposition, the discussion began. One of the leading ministers gave the first critique. For example, in October 1551, Jean de St. André gave the exposition, and Farel, on a visit in Geneva, responded. After that, the other ministers and people present could take part in the discussion.

We know very little about these discussions. The few transcriptions reveal only a glimpse of the contributions. Only on the exposition of the book of Joshua is a collection of material preserved. The reactions of the other ministers to the introductory exposition are described in va- rious ways. We find: ce qui a esté adjoust’ or recite. Since an Addition by Beza (probably because of Calvin’s absence) has been taken down only twice, we cannot say if such descriptions only apply to the reactions by various ministers or also to the closing statements, which were followed by the final prayer. We have transcripts only of Calvin’s closing statements. These are called Resolution ou conclusion, Repetition, Sommaire, or Conclusion. Even when the adjectives briefve or sommaire are used, the additional exposition is always approximately the same length. Therefore, it seems that the terms are synonymous.

The Bible study meeting was closed by a prayer, most often by Calvin. In all texts, printed and in manuscript, which contain congregations or only additions, this final prayer is preserved. The prayer started in a customary way: “We thank our good God for the grace he has given us, when it pleased him to bring us to the knowledge of his Gospel, praying …” The rest of the prayer reflects the contents of the biblical passage. Nearly all prayers end with a passage of intercession for the oppressed churches in France.

Although some form of liturgy was maintained, the Bible studies were not meant to be a church service. Exposition and discussion were essentially connected. Although these Bible studies were intended primarily for the ongoing training of the ministers, the presence and participation of lay people were valued.

4. ONE PURPOSE, VARIOUS MEANS

According to the Ordonnances, the Bible study meetings had a single purpose: “to preserve purity and concord in doctrine” among the ministers of the Word. However, this overall purpose was achieved by various methods and means: A) exegesis of biblical books in lectio continua; B) homiletical training; C) related disputations of propositions with a strong accent on doctrine; and D) brotherly censure of the exposition in the following session according to the standards of orthodoxy. These aspects must be treated here briefly, but deserve fuller attention.

A. Exposition of Biblical Books

The method chosen to achieve the aim of the congregations, that is, to preserve purity and unity of doctrine, was the study of the Bible—not primarily doctrinal topics. In this respect Geneva followed the lead of Zurich. As in the Prophezei, biblical books were studied in lectio continua. For the last fifteen years of Calvin’s work in Geneva we know from Colladon’s Vie de Calvin the order followed in Geneva: in 1549, Hebrews; from 1549 to 1550, the Catholic Letters; 1550-1553, the Gospel of John; 1553-1555, the synoptic Gospels; 1555-1559, the book of Psalms; 1559-1562, the Harmony of the last four books of Moses; 1562-1563 Galatians; 1563-1564 Joshua; 1564 and following years, Isaiah.65

Systematic exposition of entire books of the Bible was an effective method to keep the issue of doctrine close to its source, the Scriptures. It forced every minister to prepare himself for his turn at the exposition, to read Hebrew and Greek on a regular basis, and to explain the biblical text by consulting other exegetical works. In concentrating on one biblical book for a period of, in some cases, several years, they heard each other’s exposition and had an opportunity to advance their knowledge of the texts. The fact that John Calvin was the Moderator did not reduce the input of the other participants. The fact that some of the colleagues, and especially Calvin, were considered more gifted expositors, gave the others a chance to learn from week to week.

The only complete congregation by a minister other than Calvin, which has been both transcribed and preserved, is by Michel Cop (on Joshua 1:6-11), who came to Geneva in 1545. When he died in 1566, the secretary wrote a eulogy on Cop in the Register and mentioned that “among other things, he had helped to form Mr. Calvin in the Hebrew language.”66 There were other gifted colleagues from whom even Calvin could learn. In 1560 Nicolas des Gallars published the first of his biblical commentaries, In Exodum, qui secundus est liber Mosis, commentarii (Genève: Jean Crespin, 1560) . On 22 August 1559, a week before the Company of Pastors started their study of Exodus, permission to print had already been requested by Crespin . Des Gallars was still working in Geneva when his book came out; in April 1560, he was assigned to a new task in London. He thus participated in the phase of the congregations when they studied the historical part of Exodus. His expository insights, set down in his commentary, could have contributed both to the Bible studies and to Calvin’s own Harmony. Des Gallars offered a complete and running commentary on Exodus. This may have influenced Calvin’s suggestion to the Company to take the alternative approach of a Harmony.

It is a pity that hardly any expositions by the other ministers were recorded. For they all had equal obligations and opportunities to expound the Bible in the company of their colleagues. Whatever the personal relations between the colleagues were, their common undertaking of concentrating on the biblical text provided for a weekly chance to meet in spiritual unity. The congregations as Bible studies must have been the core of the sessions held by the Company of Pastors of Geneva and its territories.

B. Homiletical Training

It is clear that the Bible study meetings were closely connected to the task of preaching. The mere fact that the ministers assembled on Fridays following the early morning service suggests such a connection. Colleagues in Geneva regularly heard one another in the pulpit and could thus evaluate each other’s sermons from an exegetical and homiletical viewpoint. When they came out of church, the memory of the morning’s sermon was still fresh.

Other opportunities to hear and evaluate each other’s sermons were provided by the visitations to the parishes in the country by colleagues from the city.67 From the Registers it is clear that a position in the city required more talent. For example, when Claude Baudel was elected as minister in 1556, it was noted “that they are afraid that his voice is much too weak to preach in the city …,” and therefore the parishes of Russin and Dardagny are assigned to him.68

The distance of the villages to the city made it more difficult to be present in the congregations, which put the village ministers at a disadvantage. Especially during the winter it could be hard for the ministers “from the country” (les freres de champs) to travel to the city. On 23 December 1552, the Registers note that a session for censure is postponed until January 1553, “because brothers from the country cannot assemble, owing to the [Christmas] celebration of the [Lord’s] Supper and to the glazed frost, which is very heavy.”69 Picture Geneva and the mountain roads covered in snow and ice! But since their preaching obligations did not involve as many weekday sermons, they could attend the Bible studies as often as required.

The exposition at the beginning of the congregation was not a sermon. However, the fact that Theodore de Bèze noted the manuscripts of the Bible studies in the first catalogue of John Calvin’s works as “sermons” proves that this was the category most similar to the Bible studies.70

The studies were certainly meant to help the ministers prepare for their task of preaching. The exposition of biblical books in lectio continua may have resulted in series of sermons on the book which was being expounded in the Bible studies. Since no record of preaching by other ministers was kept, this suggestion remains a hypothesis. The texts, either in print or in manuscript, every now and then contain a reference to preaching. An early remark by Calvin may suffice for the moment to illustrate this. In a letter to the church in Lyon Calvin wrote: “… of our conference, in which a text of St. Paul was read, containing beautiful and rich material, which should be well- known to all those who preach on it, because it is the epistle for the first Sunday of Advent’ (Rom.13:11-14).71

The passage in the Church Order, stipulating the institution of the bible study meetings, is introduced by the following line: “Further, just as it is necessary to examine the ministers carefully when they are to be elected, it is also necessary to have the right order to keep them in their duty.”72 That duty is first and foremost the exposition of Scripture in their main task of preaching. Following the paragraph on the Bible studies, the Ordonnances ecclésiastiques speak of necessary censure. In the category of tolerable, but reproachable sins we find: “Strange ways of treating Scripture which result in scandal; curiosity in searching out empty questions; the propagation of some doctrine or custom not accepted in the Church; negligence in studying and especially in reading the Holy Scriptures.” After the section on censure, the number, times and places of the sermons are fixed. This all indicates that the Bible study meetings were also intended as a stimulus for the ongoing task of preaching.73

C. Brotherly Censure

When a minister finished his exposition, his colleagues could add their thoughts. Most often a senior minister from Geneva took the lead in this, while others could react in second and third place. The manuscripts of the congregations do not disclose any critique, but only additional expository remarks. In the session following the Bible study meeting, the colleagues were expected to express their critique of the exposition which had been given by the leading minister.

Not many cases of censure are noted in the Registers. It is possible that the dismissal of ministers in 1545 (Aimé Champerau, Pierre Delecluse, Simon Moreau) and again in 1546 (Henri de la Mare, Aimé Megret), all before the Company started the Register, was in some measure (apart from the ethical issues) the result of the testing of competence and soundness in doctrine. The case of Philippe d’Ecclesia is the only instance in which we see how the relation between the Bible studies, brotherly criticism, and steps of censure in the following session operated.74 It is also the only documented case in which doctrinal deviation played a major role.

When d’Ecclesia became the subject of serious discussion, his colleagues must have been annoyed already for some time. A compilation of erroneous statements during the Bible study meetings had been made (but not noted in the Register): he “maintained various opinions which were not edifying, and he raised futile questions, often turning around or obscuring what had been well declared.” The wording reflects the lines in the church order regarding correctible faults. These statements were read to him, apparently in extenso. The Register informs us that “he had frequently been warned in the past to desist from such statements and to speak in a more edifying manner.”75 The phase of brotherly criticism, on which we would like to have been informed, is summarized in a few lines.

Then a course of corrective action was chosen: d’Ecclesia was forbidden both a turn in expounding Scripture in the congregation and participating in the discussion. This sanction was to last until the next day of censure that is for three months. If he did not comply, the matter would be brought before the Council. Philippe d’Ecclesia accepted this sanction, but asked his colleagues to keep it quiet (which they promised to do). All parties thus agreed to keep the matter within the bosom of the Company of Pastors.

In fact, this censure isolated d’Ecclesia from his circle of colleagues. It comes as no surprise when we read of his complaints. The ministers decided “that the Company should be purged of him” and to inform the Council.76 But the Council did not give in to their wish, but urged reconciliation; however, the ministers set the stakes high by stating “that Master Philippe should not be accepted as a brother or minister in the congregation.” He was now also excluded from the sessions of brotherly censure. In response to his appeal, the decision was reaffirmed that he should not take his turn in presenting an exposition in the Bible study meetings. Still, on order of the Council, d’Ecclesia retained his post as minister of Vandoeuvre. This case of early 1549 died down until after the affair against the physician Jerome Bolsec.

It is in 1551 that a new procedure against d’Ecclesia starts. This time there are ethical charges against him: he did not live up to a promise of marriage and, later, he is charged with usury.77 But he is also accused of social contact with the condemned Bolsec. At the same time we observe that d’Ecclesia had been admitted as a full member of the Company again, because he spoke in public in the special congregation of 18 December 1551 on the doctrine of predestination and co-signed the circular letter, written to the Swiss Churches in the Bolsec case. In 1552, the contact with Bolsec is held against him. D’Ecclesia admitted his social contact, but also stated that he did not agree with Bolsec in his stand on election. Then d’Ecclesia was confronted with the testimony of a witness to whom d’Ecclesia is to have said “that in the congregation, when he stated his opinion on the issue of predestination, he had not said everything” (d’Ecclesia denied making the statement).78 This is an important point: the ministers expected each other to be honest and to express their individual thoughts. That a heterodox view could not be held is, in the end, the consequence of the desire to achieve doctrinal unity.

In the second phase of charges against Philippe d’Ecclesia, the Council again tried to order reconciliation. But this time the magistrates had to give in to the Company, and d’Ecclesia was deposed from the ministry in January 1553. One additional point should be noted. In connection with this case the Company decided “that henceforward any of the ministers who speaks after the one who gave the exposition shall himself also be censured if necessary, as it applies to him who expounded.”79 The critique should be both strict and mutual.

D. Related Disputations

Following the public congregation, the discussion was evaluated in closed session by the Company. This was the time and place for brotherly censure. From 1545 to 1552, however, the ministers also had theological disputations during these sessions.80 Questions on doctrine, ethics and ecclesiastical policy were discussed on the basis of Latin propositions. In this method of working, the accent on “purity and concord of doctrine,” the main goal of the Bible study meetings, was more central. Among the forty sets of propositions we find the names of sixteen of the twenty-two ministers for those years. John Calvin’s name is not among those listed, but ten sets are anonymous. These propositions testify to the desire of the Genevan ministers to stand together and formulate their theological position on a wide range of subjects.

We do not know how the topics for discussion were chosen. Ethical questions arose in the course of day-to-day pastoral ministry. But it is also possible that doctrinal issues, which came up in the course of the congregations, were noted for further discussion. In any case, the decision to hold such disputations was closely connected to the overall goal of the Bible studies, as noted in the Ordonnances ecclésiastiques. The study of Scripture is to lead to doctrinal unity.

5. MULTIPLE FUNCTIONS

The four means which we have just described had side effects. These are nowhere formally laid down, but can be observed in the sources as accepted and maybe even envisaged functions of the Bible studies. The numbering and topics of the paragraphs in this fourth section correspond with those in the section above. The functions or side effects are: A) the sequence of biblical books expounded in the congregations coincided with Calvin’s program of writing commentaries on the Old Testament; B) a number of lay visitors frequented the meetings; C) candidates to the ministry were involved; and D) theological disputations may have served to advance doctrinal formulation.

A. A Trial-run for Calvin’s Written Commentaries

When we look at the order of biblical books studied in the congregations, it is noteworthy that Calvin’s commentaries on those books were published following their treatment in the circle of the Company. The only exception is Galatians, on which Calvin’s commentary had already appeared in 1548. It appears that in 1562 the ministers wanted a New Testament book to interrupt a long series of years in which only Old Testament books had been studied. This interlude provided Calvin with time to finish his commentary on the Harmony, studied in the congregations until 1562 (which appeared in 1563).

The following facts can be deduced from the few sources. The first is that Calvin provided the introduction to each biblical book chosen for study. Among the few transcripts are the introductions to the exposition of the Gospel of John (1550), to the Harmony of Exodus through Deuteronomy (September 1559), to Joshua (1562), and to Isaiah (January 1564). The very fact that Calvin introduced each series indicates that it was he who suggested which book to expound next in the congregations.81 Moreover, the introduction to the Harmony of the last four books of Moses shows that Calvin prepared the work plan that divided the sections of these four biblical books and presented the model of a Harmony. When the Harmony on the last four books of Moses was granted permission to be printed, the minutes of the Council record this work as “la concordance des livres de Moïse laquelle a esté traictée en la congregation.”82 The relation between the Bible studies and the commentary was noted. The conference des Escriptures produced an important fruit in these commentaries. On 30 November 1563, Calvin wrote: “The brethren have urged me to expound the book of Joshua.” He reported that he had only gotten as far as Chapter 3 [that is, in the process of writing],83 while in the Bible studies Calvin and his colleagues had already reached Chapter 21 at that date.

These facts lead to the conclusion that Calvin’s colleagues accommodated his program of writing commentaries or, at least, that Calvin used the ongoing study of each biblical book in the congregation to stimulate his own studies.84 To be more accurate: the interaction was mutual. In the

course of the Bible studies in which all colleagues participated, Calvin could on the one hand profit from their exegesis, and on the other present his own thoughts on the text to his colleagues and confront himself with their critique. It is for this reason that we described the Company’s program of exposition first, and only now Calvin’s projected work on his commentaries as a secondary function. True, the commentaries are Calvin’s work, but at the same time a fruit of the Company’s work.

The following parallel suggests itself: Conrad Pellikan published his Commentaria Bibliorum in the 1530’s on the basis of his expositions in the Prophezei in Zurich. John Calvin’s work on a series of biblical commentaries resembles Pellikan’s magnum opus in that it was also a study project of the congregations of the Company of Pastors.

B. Instruction of Lay People

The ministers of Geneva and, after 1559, the professors of the Academy85 were obligated to attend the Bible studies. Also, student, such as Nicolas Colladon in 1551, may often have been regular participants.86 However, a number of lay members also frequented these Friday morning meetings. It seems that in the early years (1536-1541) the colloques were intended for ministers only,87 but it is clear that after 1541 a wider circle of people met in the congregations. On two occasions the number of people present can be fixed at around fifty or sixty, including both ministers and lay- members; but the number may often have been larger. The number sixty is mentioned in a letter by Calvin. Writing about the congregation of Friday 30 May 1544, Calvin reported to Farel on the demeanour of Sebastian Castellio and noted: “Yesterday there were around sixty people present when the Scripture was studied in the meeting.”88 The number fifty or more can be established by studying the list of witnesses of Jerome Bolsec’s critique during the congregation of 16 October 1551. The names of thirty-one lay-members are listed.89 In that year there were eight ministers in the city and ten in the country-side,90 which gives a total of almost fifty participants.

The ministers tried to accommodate the many lay participants. When the study of the last four books of Moses was organized “in the form of a Harmony” in 1559, Calvin defended his own composition and laid down a working plan for his colleagues:

Because the topics are so intertwined, it seemed right to our Company to follow a clear order. It is not that we tried to change anything in what Moses said by the Holy Spirit, but it is in order that they who in the following may frequent the Bible studies may have a clear ease and learn better how they should read both the histories and the doctrine, which are so intertwined.91

The fact that twice in the preceding years the lay members had asked for their own forum of Bible studies, in which they could take a more active part, may have prompted the Company of Pastors to accommodate the regular visitors.92

Calvin knew that lay members valued the weekly Bible studies. In relation to the trouble in the Bernese territories on the colloquies he wrote in one of his letters to Musculus:

And not only for the ministers is such training useful, but a number of the people who are lead by an outstanding zeal to understand the Scripture experience part of its usefulness. Maybe there are only a few of those in Lausanne, but because the decree [to suppress the colloquies] is general, I speak of the whole region. I know there are here pious men, who have no reason to be humble about their learning, who would rather miss two sermons than one exposition of Scripture such as they are being heard.93

A rather stunning statement from Calvin who always hammered home the idea that no one should miss a sermon!

Among the lay members of the Bible studies we find a variety of citizens: some born in Geneva and many refugees, doctors and lawyers, schoolmasters (such as Sebastian Castellio) and printers (Conrad Badius, Jean Crespin, Robert I. Estienne), but also artisans.94 The congregations seem to have provided for meeting and social contacts for all who wanted to advance their learning and express their dedication to the Reformed faith. Visitors, like the former bishop Pier Paolo Vergerio, found their way to the Bible studies.

The fact that the Bible studies were open to the public also accounts for conflicts in doctrine, which in turn resulted in the writing of reports which pull the congregation from its historical obscurity. The cases of the teacher Sebastian Castellio, who also wanted to become a minister (1544), and the physician Jerome Bolsec (1551) exploded in the context of the Bible studies. Especially in the early years, men with a mission seem to have regarded the congregation as a platform to advance their religious ideas. In his Contre le secte phantastique of 1545, Calvin gives an example of sectarians who presented themselves as ministers of the Word and tried to influence the people. He recalls an Antoine Pocquet who bout two years ago [in 1543], having lived in this city for a while and spread his wicked thinking, so acted from the start and sought by subtle means to gain my endorsement in order to advance himself among those who defer in some authority to me, as if I approved of his diabolical errors. Now he did not act his part so well that I was unable to recognize him for a dreamer and madman, as I proved him to be in our congregation …95

When brotherly censure among the ministers was in order, the Bible studies, as places of public discussion, were also the platforms to refute erroneous doctrine in the presence of the people.

C. Examination of Candidates

The election and examination of candidates for the ministry provides the context of the passage on the congregation in the Genevan church order. The selection and nomination was made by the Company of Pastors. After the Council approved their choice, the candidates were examined. Therefore, we can expect to find a connection between the Bible studies and the theological training and examination of candidates for the ministry. Candidates were instructed to make two presentations before the Company of Pastors.96 Close reading of the Registers informs us that the first presentation was always an exposition, the second a predication. For example, Jean Fabri (although he had already been a minister in Lyon) was instructed to prepare an exposition of 1 John 5:7 for the next day, “à l’heure du midi,” that is, in the session of the Company.97 At the end of 1549, the ministers studied the Catholic Epistles in the congregations.98 The first text, from 1 John, that Fabri was to expound could fit into the series of epistles studied in the congregations. Fabri’s second presentation was a sermon on John 5:24, to be preached before the brethren one week later. During that week Fabri was also examined on doctrine. Finally he was presented to the people in St. Pierre as “minister of the Word.”

It seems that the distinction between exposition and sermon was deliberate. It shows how the Bible studies as such differed from the task of preaching. That distinction also explains why the text chosen for the candidate’s exposition could be chosen from the biblical book which they were discussing in the course of the Bible studies.

Other examples corroborate these conclusions. In 1552, Jean Macar was ordered to expound Psalm 110 and to deliver a sermon on Ephesians 4.99 In 1557, Matthieu Grandjean’s text for his exposition was Acts 15, for his sermon 1 Peter 2. Claude du Pont was ordered to deliver an exposition of Psalm 82 (the text of his sermon is not noted), while François Morel, Sieur de Coulogne, expounded Psalm 125 and preached on Ephesians 6100. The ministers studied the book of Psalms from 1555 to 1559.101

This procedure of examination is constant throughout the years. In January 1564, the pastors started the exposition of Isaiah, for which Calvin delivered the introductory exposition during the last months of his life. On 10 November 1564, the ministers had probably reached Chapter 29 in their regular exposition of Isaiah. Two candidates for the ministry, Charles Perrot and Jean-François Salvart, were instructed to prepare an exposition (pour exposer en maniere de leçon and proposer) of the first verses of Isaiah 29.102 Apparently the first text was chosen from the Old Testament book they were studying, while the text for the sermon was from the New Testament. The public in the Bible studies also consisted of a number of possible candidates for the ministry. The principal of the Collège de Rive, Louis Enoch, was elected as minister in 1554 (St. Gervais).103 The tutor of the children of Germain Colladon, Mathieu Grandjean, was promoted to the ministry in 1557.104 In 1563, Jacques des Bordes, “who held the position of lecturer in philosophy, was ordered to preach in the absence of Monsieur d’Anduze.”105 In his position as professor of the Academy, des Bordes was obliged to partake in the Bible studies. Now he became assistant preacher. One of the manuscripts from the Joshua series has the heading “Summary of the congregation, presented by Monsieur <des> Bordes on Chapter 23, by Mr. Calvin.” Alas, only Calvin’s closing statements in the congregation, and not des Bordes’ presentation from December 1563 were noted.106

It seems that it was only in 1564 that des Bordes became minister (at St. Gervais).

The Registers contain a number of testimonies of good Christian conduct, asked of and given by the Company. One such letter concerns Antoine Herault; it provided him with a positive recommendation at the request of the ministers of Neuchâtel (November 1551). The testimony was unanimous: “Heraldus has lived among us in a manner befitting a Christian man. He has been a frequent attendee at the sermons and lectures (in concionibus et lectionibus), and has devoted himself to the other exercises of piety.”107 Does this include a regular attendance at the Bible studies? Having received this letter of recommendation from the Company, Antoine Herault was installed as minister of Valengin, a village in the Neuchâtel area, four months later.

D.Confessional Formulations

We saw that theological discussion of doctrinal propositions was an important part of the congregations. Connected to this function of doctrinal formulation were the various efforts to formulate consensus on the most debated issues between the churches. The fact that such articles on doctrine were written in extenso in the Register testify to the importance of these discussions on doctrine in the bosom of the Company of Pastors in Geneva.

In 1549 a set of twenty articles on the sacraments was sent to Bern. There should be doctrinal unity between the churches because, as the Genevan ministers wrote, “some men from our Company are actually serving in churches on Bernese territory, just as on the other hand several of your men are in charge of churches within the dominion of Geneva.” Ministers in remote villages especially suffered from the tensions between Bern and Geneva, as the Registers regularly testify. The articles on the sacraments were signed by all the ministers of Geneva.108

The most well-known example of doctrinal unity is the Consensus Tigurinus, created by Calvin and Bullinger. The Consensus is written in the Register and thereby incorporated in the doctrinal standard of Geneva.109 A final, but less known example of doctrinal consensus arose out of the doctrinal dealings with Jerome Bolsec (already mentioned in the introduction of this study). The full theological dossier is incorporated in the Registers, but not a text of the consensus. This was formulated in a special congregation on 18 December 1551 at the end of the trial against Bolsec. This time the topic was not a passage from the Gospel of John, which was discussed from 1550 to 1553, but a public presentation of the doctrine of predestination by Calvin with additional statements from twelve ministers and one of the lay members, Claude Baduel. The ministers regarded the contents of this congregation as their Consensus Genevenis. To their regret, they were unable to persuade the other Swiss Churches to condemn Bolsec’s teachings as clearly as they had expected in the wake of the Consensus Tigurinus.110 These three examples of doctrinal formulations are connected to the Company of Pastors and the doctrinal aims of the Bible studies.

6.CONCLUSION

The weekly meeting for Bible study must have had a profound influence in making the Company of Pastors into a coherent and competent body. As in Zurich, the ministers of the Word in Geneva took and kept the lead in the Bible studies. However, compared to Zwingli’s institution, the character of the congregations in Geneva was less academic. The primacy of the biblical languages, the Septuagint, and the Latin translation of the Bible were left to the ministers’ personal preparations. The biblical text was read and the studies were conducted in French so that the public could profit from the discussions. The role of regular visitors was more active than in Zurich, but still restricted to the discussion time. The character of the congregations can be described as ministerial, compared to the academic stature of the Prophezei in Zurich and the more democratic form as advanced by John à Lasco in London, Jean Morély in France, and in the later prophesyings of the Puritan movement.111

We end this essay with a practical question: was the congregation a place where the ministers or visitors felt safe to express their opinions or raise questions? Or was the role of reformed doctrine and the Company of Pastors as a body too suppressive? The answer to this question depended on one’s own stand on the role of doctrine. The standard for orthodoxy was the Catechism of Geneva. Yes, there could be censure at the end of the line. But first there was always on-going confrontation with the books of the Bible, opportunity for discussion of doctrine and the stimulus of every colleague presenting on an equal basis both exegesis and propositions. Even the brotherly critique in its regular form must not be seen as “censure,” but as part of the process of ongoing education. Thus the congregation, seen in its primary function, was an in-service theological training centre for the members of the Company of Pastors. Observed in the light of secondary effects, these Bible study meetings were a stimulus for the Reformed movement as a whole. They played a role in the writing of biblical commentaries, educating the laity, shaping the development of young ministers and furthering the confessional development of the Reformed.

TREFWOORDE

Calvyn Geneve, Congregation,,Teologiese opleiding, Pastors, Bybelstudie

KEY WORDS

Calvin Geneva, Congregation, Theological training, Pastors, Bible study

EA de Boer

Godfried van Seijstlaan 50

NL 3703 BT Zeist

Nederland

Tel.: + 31 306 932781

deboerea@XS 4 all.nl