Jacques Pauvan.
The poor wool-carder of Meaux was succeeded by more illustrious victims.
One was of the number of the teachers who had been attracted to Bishop
Briçonnet's diocese by the prospect of contributing to the progress of a
purer doctrine. Jacques Pauvan2 was a studious youth who had come
from Boulogne, in Picardy, to perfect his education in the university,
and had subsequently abandoned a career in which he bade fair to obtain
distinction, in order to assist his admired teacher, Lefèvre, at Meaux.
He was an outspoken man, and
1 The story of Leclerc's fortunes is told both by Crespin,
ubi supra, fol. 46, and by the Histoire ecclésiastique, i. 4; but,
strange to say, both these early authorities fall into the same error:
they place the first arrest of Leclerc in 1523, and his death a year
later. Almost all subsequent writers have implicitly followed their
authority. The Registres du parlement de Paris, already referred to,
March 20, 1524/5, fix the former event as having occurred only three
days before--"depuis trois jours" (p. 27); while François Lambert's
letter to the Senate of Besançon, dated August 15, 1525, expressly
states that Leclerc was burned Saturday, July 22, 1525. Herminjard, i.
372. Jean Châtellain had been executed at Vic, in Lorraine, six months
earlier (January 12, 1525). See P. Lambert to the Elector of Saxony, Herminjard, i. 346.
2 In accordance with the uncertain orthography of the age,
the name is variously written--Pauvan, Pauvant, Pavanne, or Pouvent.]
disguised his opinions on no point of the prevailing controversy. He asserted that
purgatory had no existence, and that God had no vicar. He repudiated excessive
reliance on the doctors of the church. He indignantly rejected the customary
salutation to the Virgin Mary, "Hail Queen, Mother of mercy!" He denied the
propriety of offering candles to the saints. He maintained that baptism was only
a sign, that holy water was nothing, that papal bulls and indulgences
were an imposture of the devil, and that the mass was not only of no
avail for the remission of sins, but utterly unprofitable to the hearer,
while the Word of God was all-sufficient.1
Pauvan was put under arrest, and his theses, together with the defence
of their contents which one Matthieu Saunier was so bold as to write,
were submitted to the Sorbonne. Its condemnation was not long withheld.
"A work," said the Paris theologians, "containing propositions extracted
and compiled from the pernicious errors of the Waldenses, Wickliffites,
Bohemians, and Lutherans, being impious, scandalous, schismatic, and
wholly alien from the Christian doctrine, ought publicly to be consigned
to the flames in the diocese of Meaux, whence it emanated. And Jacques
Pauvan and Matthieu Saunier should, by all judicial means, be compelled
to make a public recantation."2
Even strong men have their moments of weakness. Pauvan was no exception
to the rule. Besides the terrors of the stake, the persuasions of
Martial Mazurier came in to shake his constancy. This latter, a doctor
of theology, had at one time been so carried away with the desire of
innovation as to hurl down a statue of their patron saint standing at
the door of the monastery of the Franciscans. He had now, as we have
already seen, become the favorite instrument in effecting abjurations similar
1 Pauvan's propositions, with the vindication by Saunier
(or Saulnier) are recapitulated in the censure of the theological
faculty, dated Dec. 9, 1525, and published in extenso among the
documents appended to Gerdesius, Hist. Evang. Renov., iv. 36, etc.
Professor Soldan (i. 107) and others are incorrect in placing the
propositions and their condemnation by the Sorbonne subsequent to the
abjuration, which in this very document the Sorbonne demands.]
2 Ibid., iv. 47.]
to his own. His suggestions prevailed over Pauvan's
convictions.1 The young scholar consented to obey the Sorbonne's
demand. The faculty's judgment had been pronounced on the ninth of
December, 1525; a fortnight later, on the morrow of Christmas day--a
favorite time for striking displays of this kind--Pauvan publicly
retracted his "errors," and made the usual "amende honorable," clad only
in a shirt, and holding a lighted taper in his hand.2
He is burned on the Place de Grève.
If Pauvan's submission secured him any peace, it was a short-lived
peace. Tortured by conscience, he soon betrayed his mental anguish by
sighs and groans. Again he was drawn from the prison, where he had been
confined since his abjuration,3 and subjected to new
interrogatories. With the opportunity to vindicate his convictions, his
courage and cheerfulness returned. As a relapsed heretic, no fate could
be in store for him but death at the stake, and this he courageously met
on the Place de Grève.4 But the holocaust was inauspicious for
those who with this victim hoped to annihilate the "new doctrines."
Before mounting the huge pyre heaped up to receive him, Pauvan was
thoughtlessly permitted to speak; and so persuasive were his words that
it was an
1 "You err, Master Jacques," Crespin tells us that Mazurier
used to say, "You err, Master Jacques; for you have not looked into the
depth of the sea, but merely upon the surface of the waters and waves."
"You err, Master Jacques" became a proverbial expression in the mouths
of the inhabitants of Meaux for a generation or more. Actiones et
Monimenta (Geneva, 1560), fol. 52 verso.
2 "Tout nud, en sa chemise, criant mercy à Dieu et à la
vierge Marie." Journal d'un bourgeois, ubi infra.
3 His sentence seems to have been seven years' imprisonment
in the priory of St. Martin des Champs, and it was the prior that
denounced him to parliament. Ibid., ubi infra.
4 Crespin, ubi supra, fol. 53; Hist. ecclés., i. 4; Haag,
France prot., s. v. On the 26th of August, 1526, if, as is likely, he is
the "jeune filz, escolier bénéficié, non aiant encore ses ordres de
prestrise, nommé maistre ... natif de Thérouanne, en Picardie," whom the
Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris refers to--page 291--as having abjured
on Christmas eve, 1525, and been burned "le mardi 28^e aoust, 1526." At
any rate, as M. Herminjard has remarked, Beza and Crespin are certainly
wrong in placing Pauvan's recantation and execution respectively a year
too early (in 1524 and 1525, instead of 1525 and 1526). The date of the
Sorbonne's judgment is decisive on this point.
enemy's exclamation that "it had been better to have cost the
church a million of gold, than that Pauvan had been suffered to speak to
the people."1
The hermit of Livry.
Scarcely more encouraging to the advocates of persecution was the scene
in the area in front of Notre-Dame de Paris, when, at the sound of the
great cathedral bell, an immense crowd was gathered to witness the
execution of an obscure person, known to us only as "the hermit of
Livry"--a hamlet on the road to Meaux. With such unshaken fortitude did
he encounter the flames, that the astonished spectators were confidently
assured by their spiritual advisers that he was one of the damned who
was being led to the fires of hell.2
Bishop Briçonnet becomes the jailer of the "Lutherans."
Where less rigor was deemed necessary, the penalty for having embraced
the reformed tenets was reduced to imprisonment for a term of years,
often with bread and water for the only food and drink. The place of
confinement was sometimes a monastery, at other times the "prisons of
Monseigneur the Bishop of Meaux."3 Thus Briçonnet enjoyed the rare
and exquisite privilege of acting as jailer of unfortunates instructed
by himself in the doctrines for the profession of which they now
suffered! Meantime their companions having escaped detection, although
deprived of the advantage of public worship, continued for years to
assemble for mutual encouragement and edification, as they had
opportunity, in private houses, in retired valleys or caverns, or in
thickets and woods. Their minister was that person of
1 Our authority for the remark of the Parisian doctor,
Pierre Cornu, is Farel, in a MS. note to a hitherto inedited letter of
Pauvan, and in his speech at the discussion at Lausanne. Herminjard, i.
293, 294. Farel's application was not without pungency: "Votre foi
est-elle si bien fondée qu'un jeune fils, qui encore n'avoit point de
barbe, vous ait fait tant de dommage, sans avoir tant étudié ne veu,
sans avoir aucun degré, et vous étiez tant?" The admirer of heroic
fortitude will scarcely subscribe to the words of the Jesuit Daniel, Hist. de France, x. 24:
"On ne donne place dans l'histoire à ces méprisables noms, que pour ne laisser ignorer
la première origine de la funeste contagion," etc.
2 Histoire ecclés., i. 4.
3 Journal d'un bourgeois de Paris sous le règne de François
Ier, April 14, 1526, p. 284.
their own number who was seen to be the best versed in the Holy Scriptures.
After he had discharged his functions in the humble service, by a simple
address of instruction or exhortation, the entire company with one voice
supplicated the Almighty for His blessing, and returned to their homes
with fervent hopes for the speedy conversion of France to the
Gospel.1 Thus matters stood for about a score of years, until a
fresh attempt was made to constitute a reformed church at Meaux, the
signal, as will appear in the sequel, for a fresh storm of persecution.
Lefèvre's subsequent history.
A few words here seem necessary respecting the subsequent fortunes of
the venerable teacher whose name at this point fades from the history of
the French Reformation. The action of parliament (August 28, 1525), in
condemning, at the instigation of the syndic of the theological faculty,
nine propositions extracted from his commentary on the Gospels, and in
forbidding the circulation of his translation of the Holy Scriptures,
had given Lefèvre d'Étaples due warning of danger. We have already seen
that a few weeks later (October, 1525) he had taken refuge in Strasbourg
under the pseudonym of Antonius Peregrinus. But the incognito of so
distinguished a stranger could not be long maintained, and before many
days the very boys in the streets knew him by his true name.2
Meantime the Sorbonne, in his absence, proceeded to censure a large
number of propositions drawn from another of Lefèvre's works. Shortly
after a letter was received from Francis the First, written in his
captivity at Madrid, and enjoining the court to suspend its vexatious
persecution of a man "of such great and good renown, and of so holy a
life," until the king's return. The refractory judges, however,
neglected to obey the order, and continued the proceedings instituted
against Lefèvre.3
1 Crespin, Actiones et monimenta, fol. 118.
2 Haag, La France protestante, art. Lefèvre; Schmidt,
Wilhelm Farel. Bayle (Diet. s. v. Fèvre) maintains, on the authority of
Melchior Adam's Life of Capito, that Lefèvre and Roussel were sent by
Margaret of Angoulême on a secret mission to Strasbourg. Erasmus, in a
letter of March, 1526, and Sleidan (lib. v. ad fin.) know nothing of
this, and speak of the trip as merely a flight.
3 Haag, ubi supra, vi. 507, note.
Lefèvre and the Nuncio Aleander.
When, however, Francis succeeded in regaining his liberty, a year later,
he not only recalled Lefèvre and his companion, Roussel, from exile, but
conferred upon the former the honorable appointment of tutor to his two
daughters and his third and favorite son, subsequently known as Charles,
Duke of Orleans.1 This post, while it enabled him to continue the
prosecution of his biblical studies, also gave him the opportunity of
instilling into the minds of his pupils some views favorable to the
Reformation.2 A little later Margaret of Angoulême secured for
Lefèvre the position of librarian of the royal collection of books at
Blois; but, as even here he was subjected to much annoyance from his
enemies, Margaret, now Queen of Navarre, sought and obtained from her
brother permission to take the old scholar with her to Nérac, in
Gascony.3 Here, in the ordinary residence of his patron, and treated
by the King of Navarre with marked consideration, Lefèvre d'Étaples was
at last safe from molestation. The papal party did not, indeed, despair
of gaining him over. The Nuncio Aleander, in a singular letter exhumed
not long since from the Vatican records, expressed himself strongly in
favor of putting forth the effort. Lefèvre's "few errors" had at first
appeared to be of great moment, because published at a time when to
correct or change the most insignificant syllable, or a faulty
rendering, in the ancient translations of the Holy Scriptures approved
by the church, was an unheard-of innovation. But, now that more
important questions had come up to arrest attention,
1 Haag, La France protestante, art. Lefèvre; Gaillard,
Hist. de François premier, vi. 411. The boy, at this time Duke of
Angoulême, did not assume the name of Charles until after his eldest
brother's death. The Swiss cantons, acting as his sponsors, had given
him the somewhat uncommon Christian name Abednego (Abdénago)!
Herminjard, ii. 17, 195.]
2 The Duke of Orleans may have had sincere predilections
for Protestantism. At least, it is barely possible that the very
remarkable instructions given to his secretary, Antoine Mallet, when on
the 8th of September, 1543, Charles sent him to the Elector of Saxony
and the Landgrave of Hesse, were something besides mere diplomatic
intrigue to secure for his father's projects the support of these
Protestant princes. See, however, a fuller discussion of this incident
farther on, Chapter VI.]
3 Margaret to Anne de Montmorency, Génin, Lettres de
Marguerite d'Angoulême, i. 279, and Herminjard, ii. 250.]
the mere matter of retranslation, without introducing unsound doctrine,
seemed to be a thing of little or no consequence.1 Let Lefèvre but
leave the heretical company which he kept, and let him make the least bit
of a retraction respecting some few passages in his works, and the whole
affair would at once be arranged.2
Lefèvre's mental suffering.
The reconciliation of Lefèvre with the church did not take place. The
"bit of a retraction" was never written. But none the less are Lefèvre's
last days reported to have been disturbed by harassing thoughts. The
noble old man, who had consecrated to the translation of the Bible and
to exegetical comment upon its books the energy of many years, and who
had suffered no little obloquy in consequence, could not forgive himself
that he had not come forward more manfully in defence of the truth. One
day, not long before his death, it is said, while seated at the table of
the King and Queen of Navarre, he was observed to be overcome with
emotion. When Margaret expressed her surprise at the gloomy deportment
of one whose society she had sought for her own diversion, Lefèvre
mournfully exclaimed, "How can I contribute to the pleasure of others,
who am myself the greatest sinner upon earth?" In reply to the questions
called forth by so unexpected a confession, Lefèvre, while admitting
that throughout his long life his morals had been exemplary, and that he
was conscious of no flagrant crime against society, proceeded, in words
frequently interrupted by sobs, to explain his deep penitence: "How
shall I, who have taught others the purity of the Gospel, be able to
stand at God's tribunal? Thousands have suffered and died for the
defence of the truth in which I instructed them; and I, unfaithful shepherd
that I am, after attaining so advanced an age, when I ought to love
1 "Come un cavallo ch' ha un apostema stringendoli il naso
non sente il cauterio."
2 "Una retrattationcella." The letter of the Nuncio to
Sanga, secretary of Clement VII., Brussels, December 30, 1531, appeared
in H. Laemmer, Monumenta Vaticana (ex Tabulariis Sanctæ Sedis Apostolicæ
Secretis), Friburgi Brisgoviæ, 1861. I have called attention to its
importance in the Bulletin de la Société de l'hist. du prot. franç.,
xiv. (1865), 345. M. Herminjard has given a French translation, ii.
386.
nothing less than I do life--nay, rather, when I ought to desire
death--I have basely avoided the martyr's crown, and have betrayed the
cause of my God!" It was with difficulty that the queen and others who
were present succeeded in allaying the aged scholar's grief.1
The "anguish of spirit and terror of God's judgment experienced by so
pious an old man as Lefèvre," because he had concealed the truth which
he ought openly to have espoused, supplied an instructive warning for
his even more timid disciples. Farel, who never lacked courage, was not
slow to avail himself of it. Taking advantage of the freedom of an old
associate, he addressed a letter containing an account of Lefèvre's
death, with some serious admonitions, to Michel d'Arande, who never
venturing to separate from a church whose corruptions he acknowledged,
had reached the position of Bishop of Saint Paul-Trois-Châteaux, in
Dauphiny. The letter has perished, but the reply in which the prelate's
dejection and internal conflicts but too plainly appear, has seen the
light after a burial of three
1 This incident has been rejected as apocryphal by Bayle,
and, after him, by Tabaraud (in the Biographie universelle), as well as
more recently by Haag (France protestante). It has rested until now on
the unsupported testimony of Hubert Thomas, secretary of the Elector
Palatine, Frederick II., whom he accompanied on a visit to Charles V. in
Spain. On his return the Elector fell sick at Paris, where he received
frequent visits from the King and Queen of Navarre. It was on one of
these occasions that Margaret related to him this story, in the hearing
of the secretary. (It is reproduced in Jurieu, Histoire du Calvinisme,
etc., Rotterdam, 1683, pt. i. 70.) Bayle objected that it was incredible
that the reformers should have failed to allude to so striking and
suggestive an occurrence. The objection has been scattered to the winds.
With singular good fortune, M. Jules Bonnet has discovered among the
hidden treasures of the Geneva Library an original memorandum in Farel's
own handwriting, prefixed to a letter he had received from Michel
d'Arande, fully confirming the discredited statements. "Jacobus Faber
Stapulensis noster laborans morbo quo decessit, per aliquot dies ita
perterritus fuit judicio Dei, ut actum de se vociferaret, dicens se
æternum periisse, quod veritatem Dei non aperte professus fuerit, idque
dies noctesque vociferando querebatur. Et cum a Gerardo Rufo admoneretur
ut bono esset animo, Christo quoque fideret, is respondit: 'Nos damnati
sumus, veritatem celavimus quam profiteri et testari debebamus.'
Horrendum erat tam pium senem ita angi animo et tanto horrore judicii
Dei concuti; licet tandem liberatus bene sperare cœperit ac
perrexerit de Christo." Bulletin de la Soc. de l'hist. du prot. fr.,
etc., xi. 215; Herminjard, iii. 400.
centuries. Admitting the guilt of his course, the bishop begs the intrepid
reformer to pray for him continually, and meanwhile not to withhold his
friendly exhortations, that at length the writer may be able to extricate
himself from the deep mire in which he finds no firm foundation to stand
upon.1
Such was the unhappy state of mind to which many good, but irresolute
men were reduced, who, in view of the persecution certain to follow an
open avowal of their reformatory sentiments, endeavored to persuade
themselves that it was permissible to conceal them under a thin veil of
external conformity to the rites of the Roman church.
Fortunes of Gérard Roussel.
Gérard Roussel, the most distinguished representative of this class of
mystics, was appointed by the Queen of Navarre to be her preacher and
confessor, and promoted successively to be Abbot of Clairac and Bishop
of Oléron. Yet he remained, to his death, a sincere friend of the
Reformation. Occasionally, at least, he preached its doctrines with
tolerable distinctness; as, for instance, in the Lenten discourses
delivered by him, in conjunction with Courault and Bertault, before the
French court in the Louvre (1532). In his writings he was still more
outspoken. Some of them might have been written not only by a reformer,
but by a disciple of Calvin, so sharply drawn were the doctrinal
expositions.2 Meanwhile, in his own diocese he set forth the example
of a faithful pastor. Even so bitter an enemy of Protestantism as Florimond
1 "Quo tandem ex hoc profundo limo, in quo non est
substantia, eripi queam." Michel d'Arande to Farel (1536 or 1537),
Bulletin de la Soc. de l'hist. du prot. franç., ubi supra; Herminjard,
iii. 399, etc.
2 Speaking of Roussel's as yet inedited MS., "Familière
exposition du symbole et de l'oraison dominicale," Professor C. Schmidt,
than whom no one has better studied the mysticism of the sixteenth
century, remarks that the basis of the work is the doctrine of
justification by faith, the sole authority invoked is that of the
Scriptures, the only head of the church is Jesus Christ, the perfect
church is the invisible church, the visible church is recognized by the
preaching of the Gospel in its purity, and by the administration of the
two sacraments as originally instituted. He adds that the doctrines of
the Lord's Supper and of predestination are expounded in a thoroughly
Calvinistic manner. See Professor S.'s excellent monograph, "Le
mysticisme quiétiste en France au début de la réformation sous François
premier," read before the Soc. de l'hist. du prot. fr., Bulletin, vi. 449, etc.
de Ræmond, contrasting Roussel's piety with the worldliness
of the sporting French bishops of the period, is forced to admit that
his pack of hounds was the crowd of poor men and women whom he daily
fed, his horses and attendants a host of children whom he caused to be
instructed in letters.1
And yet, Gérard Roussel's half measures, while failing to conciliate the
adherents of the Roman church, alienated from him the sympathies of the
reformers; for they saw in his conduct a weakness little short of entire
apostasy. More modern Roman Catholic writers, for similar reasons, deny
that Roussel was ever at heart a friend of the Reformation.2 Not so,
however, thought the fanatics of his own time. While the Bishop of
Oléron was one day declaiming, in a church of his diocese, against the
excessive multiplication of feasts, the pulpit in which he stood was
suddenly overturned, and the preacher hurled with violence to the
ground. The catastrophe was the premeditated act of a religious zealot,
who had brought with him into the sacred place an axe concealed under
his cloak. The fall proved fatal to Gérard Roussel, who is said to have
expressed on his death-bed similar regrets to those which had disturbed
the last hours of Lefèvre d'Étaples. As for the murderer, although
arrested and tried by the Parliament of Bordeaux, he was in the end
acquitted, on the ground that he had performed a meritorious act, or, at
most, committed a venial offence, in ridding the world of so dangerous a
heretic as the Bishop of Oléron.3
1 Historia de ortu, progressu et ruina hæreseon hujus
sæculi (Col. 1614), lib. vii. c. 3, p. 392.
2 E. g., Tabaraud, Biographie univ., art. Roussel.
3 Haag, France protestante, art. Gérard Roussel; Gaillard,
Hist. de François premier, vi. 418; Flor. de Ræmond, ubi supra.
CHAPTER III.
FRANCIS I. AND MARGARET OF ANGOULEME--EARLY
REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS AND
STRUGGLES.
Share with your friends: |