History of the Reformation, vol. 3

Chapter 10

Catholicity of the Reformation—Friendship between Farel and Oecolampadius—Farel and Erasmus—Altercation—Farel demands a Disputation—Theses—Scripture and Faith—Discussion

The catholicity of the Reformation is a noble feature in its character. The Germans pass into Switzerland; the French into Germany; in latter times men from England and Scotland pass over to the continent, and doctors from the continent into Great Britain. The reformers in the different countries spring up almost independently of one another; but no sooner are they born than they hold out the hand of fellowship. There is among them one sole faith, one spirit, one Lord. It had been an error, in our opinion, to write, as hitherto, the history of the Reformation for a single country; the work is one, and from their very origin the Protestant Churches form “a whole body, fitly jointed together.” HRSCV3 467.3

Many refugees from France and Lorraine at this time formed at Basle a French Church, whose members had escaped from the scaffold. They had spoken there of Farel, of Lefevre, and of the occurrences at Meaux; and when the former arrived in Switzerland, he was already known as one of the most devoted champions of the Gospel. HRSCV3 467.4

He was immediately taken to Oecolampadius, who had returned to Basle some time before. Rarely does it happen that two men of more opposite character are brought together. Oecolampadius charmed by his mildness, Farel carried away his hearers by his impetuosity: but from the first moment these two men felt themselves united for ever. It was another meeting of a Luther and Melancthon. Oecolampadius received Farel into his house, gave him an humble chamber, a frugal table, and introduced him to his friends; and it was not long before the learning, piety, and courage of the young Frenchman gained every heart. Pellican, Imeli, Wolfhard, and other ministers of Basle felt themselves strengthened in the faith by his energetic language. Oecolampadius was at that time much depressed in spirit: “Alas!” said he to Zwingle, “I speak in vain, and see not the least reason to hope. Perhaps among the Turks I might meet with greater success! Alas!” added he with a deep sigh, “I lay the blame on myself alone.” But the more he saw of Farel, the more his heart cheered up, and the courage he received from the Dauphinese became the ground-work of an undying affection. “O my dear Farel,” said he, “I hope that the Lord will make our friendship immortal, and if we cannot live together here below, our joy will only be the greater when we shall be united at Christ’s right hand in heaven.” Pious and affecting thoughts! Farel’s arrival was for Switzerland evidently a succor from on high. HRSCV3 467.5

But while this Frenchman was delighted with Oecolampadius, he shrank coldly and with noble pride from a man at whose feet all the nations of Christendom fell prostrate. The prince of the schools, he from whom every one coveted a word or a look, the master of the age—Erasmus—was neglected by Farel. The young Dauphinese had refused to go and pay homage to the old sage of Rotterdam, despising those men who are only by halves on the side of the truth, and who, though clearly aware of the consequences of error, are full of forbearance towards those who propagate it. Thus we witness in Farel that decision which has become one of the distinctive characters of the Reformation in France and French Switzerland, and which some have called stiffness, exclusiveness, and intolerance. A controversy, arising out of the commentaries of the doctor of Etaples, had begun between the two great doctors of the age, and at every entertainment the guests would take part with Erasmus against Lefevre, and Lefevre against Erasmus. Farel hesitated not to take his master’s side. But what had especially annoyed him was the cowardice of the philosopher of Rotterdam with regard to the evangelical Christians. Erasmus shut his door against them. Good! Farel will not go and beg for admission. This was a trifling sacrifice to him, as he felt that Erasmus possessed not that piety of heart which is the foundation of all true theology. “Frobenius’s wife knows more of theology than he does,” said Farel; and indignant at the conduct of Erasmus, who had written advising the pope how to set about extinguishing the Lutheran conflagration, he boldly affirmed that Erasmus desired to stifle the Gospel. HRSCV3 468.1

This independence in young Farel exasperated the illustrious scholar. Princes, kings, doctors, bishops, popes, reformers, priests, men of the world—all were ready to pay him their tribute of admiration; even Luther had treated him with a certain forbearance; and this Dauphinese, unknown to fame and an exile, dared brave his power. Such insolent freedom caused Erasmus more annoyance than the homage of the whole world could give him pleasure; and accordingly he neglected no opportunity of venting his ill humor on Farel; besides, by attacking so notorious a heretic, he was clearing himself in the eyes of the Romanists from all suspicion of heresy. “I have never met with any thing more false, more violent, and more seditious than this man,” said he; “his heart is full of vanity, his tongue overflowing with malice.” But the anger of Erasmus was not confined to Farel; it was directed against all the French refugees in Basle, whose frankness and decision offended him. They had little respect of persons; and if the truth was not openly professed, they cared not for the man, however exalted might be his genius. They were possibly wanting in some measure in the suavity of the Gospel; but their fidelity reminds us of the vigor of the ancient prophets; and it is gratifying to meet with men who do not bow down before what the world adores. Erasmus, amazed at this lofty disdain, complained of it to every one. “What!” wrote he to Melancthon, “shall we reject pontiffs and bishops, to have more cruel, scurvy, and furious tyrants in their place; for such it is that France has sent us.”—“Some Frenchmen,” wrote he to the pope’s secretary, in a letter accompanying his book on Free Will, “are still more out of their wits than even the Germans. They have five expressions always in their mouths: Gospel, Word of God, Faith, Christ, Holy Ghost; and yet I doubt whether they be not urged on by the spirit of Satan.” Instead of Farellus he would often write Fallicus, thus designating one of the frankest men of his day with the epithets of cheat and deceiver. HRSCV3 468.2

The vexation and anger of Erasmus were at their height, when it was reported to him that Farel had called him a Balaam. Farel believed that Erasmus, like this prophet, allowed himself (perhaps unconsciously) to be swayed by presents to curse the people of God. The learned Dutchman, unable longer to contain himself, resolved to chastise the impudent Dauphinese; and one day, as Farel was talking with several friends on the doctrines of Christianity in the presence of Erasmus, the latter, rudely interrupting him, said: “Why do you call me Balaam?” Farel, at first astonished by so abrupt a question, soon recovered himself and answered, that it was not he who had given him that title. On being pressed to name the offender, he said it was Du Blet of Lyons, a refugee at Basle like himself. “It may be he who made use of the word,” replied Erasmus, “but it was you who taught him.” And then, ashamed of having lost his temper, he quickly turned the conversation to another subject. “Why,” said he to Farel, “do you assert that we ought not to invoke the saints? Is it because it is not enjoined in Holy Scripture?”—“Yes!” replied the Frenchman.—“Well then!” resumed Erasmus, “I call upon you to prove by Scripture that we ought to invoke the Holy Ghost.” Farel made this simple and true reply: “If He is God, we must invoke Him.”—“I dropped the conversation,” says Erasmus, “for night was coming on.” From that hour, whenever the name of Farel fell from his pen, he represented him as a hateful person, who ought by all means to be shunned. The reformer’s letters, on the contrary, are full of moderation as regards Erasmus. The Gospel is milder than philosophy, even in the most fiery temper. HRSCV3 468.3

The evangelical doctrine already counted many friends in Basle, both in the council and among the people; but the doctors of the university opposed it to the utmost of their power. Oecolampadius, and Stor pastor of Liestal, had maintained some theses against them. Farel thought it his duty also to profess in Switzerland the great principle of the evangelical school of Paris and of Meaux: The Word of God is all-sufficient. He requested permission of the university to maintain certain theses, “the rather to be reproved,” added he, “if I am in error, than to teach others;” but the university refused. HRSCV3 469.1

Upon this Farel addressed the council; and the council issued a public notice that a christian man, named William Farel, having by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost drawn up certain articles in conformity with the Gospel, they had given him leave to maintain them in Latin. The university forbade all priests and students to be present at the disputation; but the council sent out a proclamation to the contrary effect. HRSCV3 469.2

The following are some of the thirteen propositions put forth by Farel: HRSCV3 469.3

“Christ has given us the most perfect rule of life: no one has the right to take anything from it, or to add anything thereto. HRSCV3 469.4

“To live according to any other precepts than those of Christ, leads directly to impiety. HRSCV3 469.5

“The real ministry of priests is to attend to the ministering of the Word; and for them there is no higher dignity. HRSCV3 469.6

“To deprive the glad-tidings of Christ of their certainty, is to destroy them. HRSCV3 469.7

“He who hopes to be justified by his own power, and by his own merits, and not by faith, sets himself up as God. HRSCV3 469.8

“Jesus Christ, whom all things obey, is our polestar, and the only star that we ought to follow.” HRSCV3 469.9

Thus did this “Frenchman” stand up in Basle. It was a child of the mountains of Dauphiny, brought up in Paris at the feet of Lefevre, who thus boldly set forth in that illustrious university of Switzerland, and in the presence of Erasmus, the great principles of the Reformation. Two leading ideas pervaded Farel’s theses: one, that of a return to Holy Scripture; the other, of a return to faith: two things which the Papacy at the beginning of the 18th century distinctly condemned as impious and heretical in the famous constitution Unigenitus, and which, closely connected with each other, do in fact subvert the whole of the papal system. If faith in Christ is the beginning and end of Christianity, it follows that we must cleave to the Word of Christ, and not to the voice of the Church. Nay more: if faith in Christ unites souls, where is the necessity of an external bond? Is it with croziers, bulls, and tiaras, that their holy unity is formed? Faith joins in spiritual and true unity all those in whose hearts it takes up its abode. Thus vanished at a single blow the triple delusion of meritorious works, human tradition, and false unity; and this is the sum of Roman-catholicism. HRSCV3 469.10

The disputation began in Latin. Farel and Oecolampadius set forth and proved their articles, calling repeatedly on their adversaries to reply; but not one of them appeared. These sophists as Oecolampadius terms them, acted the braggart,—but in dark holes and corners. The people, therefore, began to despise the cowardice of the priests and to detest their tyranny. HRSCV3 469.11

Thus Farel took his stand among the defenders of the Reformation. They were greatly delighted to see a Frenchman combine so much learning and piety, and already began to anticipate the noblest triumphs. “He is strong enough,” said they, “to destroy the whole Sorbonne single-handed.” His candor, sincerity, and frankness captivated every heart. But amidst all his activity, he did not forget that every mission should begin with our own souls. The gentle Oecolampadius made a compact with the ardent Farel, by which they mutually engaged to practice humility and meekness in their familiar conversations. These bold men, even on the field of battle, were fitting themselves for the duties of peace. It should be observed, however, that the impetuosity of a Luther and a Farel were necessary virtues. Some effort is required when the world is to be moved and the Church renovated. In our days we are too apt to forget this truth, which the meekest men then acknowledged. “There are certain men,” wrote Oecolampadius to Luther when introducing Farel to him, “who would have his zeal against the enemies of the truth more moderate; but I cannot help seeing in this same zeal an admirable virtue, which, if seasonable exerted, is no less needed than gentleness itself.” Posterity had ratified the judgment of Oecolampadius. HRSCV3 469.12

In the month of May 1524, Farel, with some friends from Lyons, visited Schaffhausen, Zurich, and Constance. Zwingle and Myconius gladly welcomed this exile from France, and Farel remembered their kindness all his life. But in his return to Basle he found Erasmus and his other enemies at work, and received orders to quit the city. In vain did his friends loudly give utterance to their displeasure at such an abuse of authority; he was compelled to quit the territory of Switzerland, already at this early period, the asylum and refuge of the persecuted. “It is thus we exercise hospitality,” said the indignant Oecolampadius, “we true children of Sodom!” HRSCV3 470.1

At Basle, Farel had contracted a close friendship with the Chevalier Esch, who resolved to bear him company, and they set out with letters for Luther and Capito from Oecolampadius, to whom the doctor of Basle commended Farel as “that William who had toiled so much in the work of God.” At Strasburg, Farel formed an intimacy with Capito, Bucer, and Hedio; but it does not appear that he went so far as Wittenberg. HRSCV3 470.2