TO THE WALDENSES.
f94HE EXHORTS THEM TO KEEP UP FRIENDLY RELATIONS WITH THE REFORMED CHURCHES OF POLAND.
GENEVA, 1st July, 1560.
After the brother from whom I received your letter had, in a private
interview, exposed to me your instructions, as I perceived that he had been sent trot to me individually, but also to my colleagues, I exhorted him to repeat the same before our society. My answer will, therefore, express the common opinion of all. And, in the first place, we return you no common thanks, because you have not hesitated to send to us brethren who should be witnesses, and, as it were, vouchers of your affection towards us, and of your brotherly connection, and therefore we have the more willingly welcomed this act of courtesy on your part, because it flowed from a sincere zeal for piety. We desire, in our turn:, that you should be equally persuaded how much our inclinations prompt us to cherish a holy unity.
And assuredly, when we are separated from each other by such extensive tracts of country, and surrounded on every side by enemies that occupy nearly the whole world, to enjoy this consolation of our dispersion is dear and delightful. Let us then bear witness, with common consent, that we have one Father in heaven, and that we form one body under Christ our Head. This we are confidently assured you will do, and we will make it our business to make you feel that this is in reality what we have most at heart. Now, we are convinced that there is no better bond for cementing and strengthening concord than not to lend too credulous an .ear to evil reports that people circulate about one another. And, in truth, in this point we do not think that we have at all. failed in our duty towards you; for, with respect to the letter written to the Poles, about which the brother in your name seemed indirectly to complain, we are not conscious of having committed any fault, and you yourselves, having in your equity duly considered our reasons, will find that being consulted on that cause we
could not have given an answer with greater courtesy, nor with more moderation. Certainly we did not mention you invidiously, and as far as the case permitted we strove to mitigate the offenses which had arisen to obviate worse dissensions, and so to reconcile the parties on both sides, that at the ‘very outset you might be fellow-workers with the Poles in erecting the kingdom of Christ. We were on the point of writing to you, also, had an opportunity presented itself; but it cannot escape your observation how difficult the means of communication are between countries lying so remote from each other; now that a more favorable opportunity has been offered, we shall frankly make known our
sentiments. Do you yourselves in your wisdom maturely reflect, even if we said nothing on the vast importance of your holding out a hand to the Poles, in order that the pure doctrine of the gospel may make progress among them. For no one can doubt that your dissension, if it be remarked by the enemy, will throw obstacles in the way of undertakings already so well and happily begun. The brother has assigned to us some reasons more specious than real, why you should dread, to contract a more intimate union with them; namely, that you perceive them to be rent by perverse factions. Now this motive should act the other way, and stimulate you to form a closer connection, in order to counteract the evils which are
springing up and spreading so fast. For the authority of so many churches lending one another mutual aid would curb those wild spirits, that, in a state of dispersion, claim to themselves a license to breed tumults and disturb all order. At present, the pious brethren, deprived of your co- operation, have a much harder task to perform. If Satan directs the attacks of Stancari, George Blandrata, and others against Poland, is it not your duty to come to the rescue? If you neglect it, reflect whether the aid of your brethren may not one day fail yourselves. For it will not be always in your own power to escape contentions from which God has hitherto kept you exempt. The controversy respecting the imparting to us of Christ’s flesh and blood is ‘what prevents people from coalescing with one another. We have given it as our opinion that on this point a fitting and unambiguous explanation, given and received by the two parties, is the way to remove this stumbling-block. If this advice displease you, experience will one day prove it to have been sound and salutary. Two things, perhaps, have given you some offense; first, because we have written that there is an obscure and ambiguous brevity in your confession,
that in your apology there is too much vehemence and animosity against all those who, not content with the bare form of the expression, would like to have the light of a sound interpretation thrown on these words, in which you assert that the bread is the body of Christ. We know the plausible plea of those who, under the shade of the Augsburg confession, consulting only their ease and a quiet life, fly from every thing which might give them trouble; in one word, from the odium of the cross itself.
What opinion M. Philip Melancthon, himself the author of the confession,
f95 entertained on this matter is not unknown to you, and I shall be forced perhaps to let the whole world know it, in consequence of the double dealing of those men who endeavor to spread darkness over a transparent light. And yet, though we reverently cherish the memory of Philip, we do not make use of his authority to crush our adversaries; we only show how unfairly they shelter themselves under the confession of Augsburg, when nothing can be conceived more alien than they are from the sentiments of its author. We, however, persist in our opinion (let this be said without giving you offense) that the formula of your confession cannot be adopted simply as it stands without danger, and that to subscribe to it before it had received a suitable interpretation, would be the origin and subject of many evils to the Poles. We have no difficulty in overlooking your vehemence, for it gives us no pleasure to rake up old griefs, when it is our desire that they should be buried in oblivion. Only this we may be allowed to say, that it cannot decently be denied that the author of your apology exceeded the bounds of moderation. With regard to the charge with which your messenger has reproached me, (for the sake of retaliation, no doubt,)that I too in some of my writings break out into sallies of passion, though I do not entirely deny it, yet it is irrelevantly brought forward. If I, indeed, inveigh rather too sharply against some unprincipled miscreants, the manner of your apology is altogether dissimilar, for it confounds without discrimination or distinction many pious and learned men with the enemies of the truth. Certainly if it was your intention to assail the error of certain persons, you were bound to draw a line of demarkation so as not to involve in one common charge the innocent and the guilty. But to put a stop to all contention, we only beg and entreat you, if we have candidly pointed out the way which we judged most efficacious for healing strife and banishing angry passions, that you should not consider that as any
slight put upon you; nor have we so overweening an opinion of ourselves as not to bear patiently being blamed or admonished, if it should chance that we have at any time acted with too little circumspection.
Farewell, most excellent and respected brethren. We pray our heavenly Father to govern you continually by his Spirit, to shield you with his protection, to enrich you with his gifts, and to bless all your holy labors.
John Calvin, In the name of all.
[Calvin’s Lat. Corresp. — Opera, 9., page 14.]