University of Iowa
Iowa Research Online
Theses and Dissertations
2013
Creating perfect families: French Reformed
Churches and family formation, 1559-1685
Ezra Lincoln Plank
University of Iowa
Copyright 2013 Ezra Lincoln Plank
This dissertation is available at Iowa Research Online: http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd/1727
Recommended Citation
Plank, Ezra Lincoln. "Creating perfect families: French Reformed Churches and family formation, 1559-1685." PhD (Doctor of
Philosophy) thesis, University of Iowa, 2013.
http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd/1727.
Follow this and additional works at: http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd
Part of the Religion Commons
CREATING PERFECT FAMILIES:
FRENCH REFORMED CHURCHES AND FAMILY FORMATION, 1559-1685
by
Ezra Lincoln Plank
An Abstract
Of a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree
in Religious Studies
in the Graduate College of
The University of Iowa
May 2013
Thesis Supervisor: Professor Raymond A. Mentzer
1
ABSTRACT
Although the eruption of religious dissent in Germany touched off by Martin
Luther in 1517 began as a theological disagreement, the ensuring years would reveal that
these religious ideas had important social consequences. They set into motion a process
of reordering society and forming of confessional identities that had significant
implications for the nuclear family. Reflecting John Calvin’s assertion that “every
individual Family ought to be a Little Church of Christ,” Reformed Protestants sought to
transform nuclear families into spiritual communities, creating domestic microcosms of
the larger church.
This project examines the religious formation of families among the French
Reformed (Huguenot) Churches, demonstrating that this was a cultural offensive as much
as it was a religious one. Huguenot leaders wanted far more than their congregants to
attend church: this programme transformed the roles and responsibilities of family
members, shaped the activities and routines of the household, circumscribed and defined
the appropriate associations of family members, and reorganized the family schedule.
This study illuminates the Huguenots’ conception of a “holy household” by analyzing the
four primary characteristics of these godly families – ordered, educational, pure, and
pious – and describes how they were conceived of and implemented in Reformed
communities across early modern France.
In order to provide a comprehensive understanding of the French Reformed
family, this dissertation bridges the divide between intellectual history and social history.
There was no greater intellectual source for French Protestantism than John Calvin and
Geneva: Calvin was one of the primary theologians influencing the development of
Protestantism in France, and the Genevan Church served as an advisor and template for
many of the Huguenot churches. Accordingly, each chapter examines in depth the
2
theological underpinnings of this effort, analyzing Calvin’s sermons, commentaries,
Institutes of the Christian Religion, and written correspondence with leaders of the
Huguenot churches. This investigation, in turn, provides an understanding of the
religious sources for this new emphasis holy family and domestic piety in France, without
which it would be impossible to fully appreciate.
To balance these prescriptive sources, I analyze descriptive records to understand
how the actual reform of the family was carried out on the local level. In particular, my
research relies extensively on church discipline records (consistory registers) from
churches throughout France: Albenc (1606-1682), Archiac (1600-1637), Blois (15741579), Coutras (1582-1584), Die (1639-1686), Le Mans (1560-1561), Mussidan (15931599), Nîmes (1561-1564), Pont-de-Camares (1574-1579), Rochechouart (1596-1635),
and Saint-Gervais (1564-1568). These records reveal the complex and messy manner of
this reform, which was often marked by contestation and negotiation. Throughout, I
compare these records to Genevan discipline records to compare and contrast how
Calvin’s own church instituted this familial reform in the Genevan context. My project,
in sum, reveals the heretofore overlooked religious role and significance of the family
and home in Reformed churches of early modern France.
Abstract Approved:
_______________________________
Thesis Supervisor
_______________________________
Title and Department
_______________________________
Date
CREATING PERFECT FAMILIES:
FRENCH REFORMED CHURCHES AND FAMILY FORMATION, 1559-1685
by
Ezra Lincoln Plank
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree
in Religious Studies
in the Graduate College of
The University of Iowa
May 2013
Thesis Supervisor: Professor Raymond A. Mentzer
Copyright by
EZRA LINCOLN PLANK
2013
All Rights Reserved
Graduate College
The University of Iowa
Iowa City, Iowa
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
___________________________
PH.D. THESIS
_____________
This is to certify that the Ph.D. thesis of
Ezra Lincoln Plank
has been approved by the Examining Committee for the
thesis requirement for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in
Religious Studies at the May 2013 graduation.
Thesis Committee: _______________________________________
Raymond A. Mentzer, Thesis Supervisor
_______________________________________
Kristy Nabhan-Warren
_______________________________________
Michelene E. Pesantubbee
_______________________________________
Constance H. Berman
_______________________________________
Karen E. Spierling
For my parents,
Robert and Smilja Plank
ii
What God intended was, that the priests should lead the way in
divine service, and the people take example by what was done in
the temple, and practice it individually in their private houses.
John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms
God is my witness that He filled me, even before your birth, with
the hope that you would be born to be His servant, and in some
measure, this should be an earnest of His grace, and an admonition
to you to do your duty. To this intent your father and I have
labored to bring you up in His fear, making you suckle it with your
milk so far as lay in our power; and furthermore to render you
more apt we took pains to give you a good education.
Charlotte Arbaleste de Mornay, A Huguenot Family in the
XVI Century: The Memoirs of Philippe de Mornay
sieur du Plessis Marly, written by his wife
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to first thank Professor Raymond A. Mentzer who has been the finest
example of a scholar, instructor, and advisor for whom one could ask. His passion for his
field of study, standard of excellence in research and writing, and generosity of self have
left an indelible mark on me and my scholarship. Moreover, he has shown me the value
and life-giving nature of developing friendships in the scholarly community, and for all
this I am grateful. I also would like to extend my sincere thanks to my entire committee
for their support and their generous gift of time: Professors Kristy Nabhan-Warren,
Michelene E. Pesantubbee, Constance H. Berman, and Karen E. Spierling all brought
unique and important analyses to my project. Although he made a career move in the
middle of my graduate program and was not able to continue as a part of my dissertation
committee, I took courses and my comprehensive exams under Professor Ralph Keen,
and he greatly shaped my understanding of the early modern Europe and the
Reformation. I am grateful for the investment he made in my education and dissertation.
Scholars at a variety of conference and academic venues have also given me support,
encouragement, and helped me clarify my arguments. Not the least among these are
Professors Tim Fehler, R. Ward Holder, Barbara Pitkin, Bruce Gordon, Scott Manetsch
Philippe Chareyre, and Didier Poton.
All projects of this manner succeed in great part through the assistance of
personnel at libraries and archives. I wish to thank helpful and capable resource
librarians and staff members at The University of Iowa and the Bibliothèque de la Société
de l'Histoire du Protestantisme français, particularly Mme. Florence Poinsot, Mme.
Sophie Vié, and Mr. Daniel Dos Santos. Generous financial assistance made my travel,
research, and writing possible, and I would like to thank the following for their generous
financial support of my project: The University of Iowa Department of Religious Studies
iv
for the research assistantships, teaching assistantships, a Rex E. Montgomery Dissertation
Fellowship (2012), and numerous travel awards (2009, 2010, 2011); The University of
Iowa Graduate College for the Summer Fellowship for Graduate Students (2010), T.
Anne Cleary International Dissertation Research Fellowship (2010), and the Ballard and
Seashore Dissertation Fellowship (2012–2013); The University of Iowa College of
Liberal Arts and Sciences for the Marcus Bach Dissertation Fellowship (2011); The
University of Iowa International Programs for the international travel award (2009) and
the Stanley Graduate Award for International Research (2009); The University of Iowa
Graduate Student Senate for the travel awards (2007, 2009).
One of the most unpredictable aspects of a graduate program can be the cohort of
graduate students with which one studies. I am truly overwhelmed by the exceptional
caliber and quality of the graduate students in the Department of Religious Studies during
my studies. Our shared experiences – core curriculum courses, seminars, road trips to
conference, coffeehouses, happy hour at Joe’s Place, and the yearly Soiree on the Lake
event – all made this program, and life, a richly rewarding experience. I wish to thank
many for their support and friendship, including Ryan O’Leary, Nancy Menning, Emily
Ley, David Howlett, Jack Goblirsch, Dustin Eaton, Eric Dickman, Daniel Boscaljon,
Nahed Zehr, Kari Thompson, Sumeyye (and Baris) Pakdil-Kesgin, Dan Morris,
Abbylynn Helgevold, Christine Darr, Sarah Dees, Susan Woolever, and Kristi
DiClemente. Specifically, I want acknowledge the “old school” early modern studies
group (Peter Yoder, Father Cal Lane, Doug Jones, Tim Stoller, Denise Kettering) as well
as the “new school” (Stephen Scheperle, David Greder, John Kennedy, Anna Lynch,
Alicia Vermeer, Nicole Drisdelle, Kyle Dieleman). I hope to work together as colleagues
for many years.
I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge many others in the broader community
for whom I am grateful: Jordan Smith, Beth Mentzer, Paul Meintel, Kathy Klein, Chris
Blosser, Bob Smith, Mag Richer Smith, and my entire family at F.M.C. I would also like
v
to express my warmest appreciation to our departmental administrate assistants, Maureen
Walterhouse and Robin Burns. Throughout my time in Gilmore Hall, both have been
extraordinarily helpful in keeping all my academic files in order, providing
encouragement, and helping in the midst of crises.
In addition, I would like to acknowledge my appreciation for Professor Richard T.
Hughes as well as his wife, Jan Hughes. My educational and vocational journey began in
the spring of 2003 when I took a course from Hughes. His enthusiasm for the history of
Christianity, method of critiquing hegemonic trends in historical perspectives, and
academic guidance are a large part of why I pursued doctoral studies, and specifically
why I selected The University of Iowa. (“Go Hawks!”)
I dedicate this dissertation to my father and mother, Robert and Smilja Plank.
This dissertation is a testament to their vision, many years of sacrifices, and belief in me.
Finally, one of my largest reservations about pursuing a Ph.D. was the heavy
demands it places on one’s family. My partner, Emily, and children, Tekoa, Simone, and
Desmond, have given above and beyond, and it is for their unwavering love, support, and
devotion that I am most indebted.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................ ix
INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
The Protestant Reformation: Reordering Society and
Refashioning the Family .....................................................................................1
Defining Family .......................................................................................................7
Historical Context of Early Modern French Protestantism....................................10
Minority Status...........................................................................................10
Demographics of Early Modern Europe ....................................................12
Demographics of Huguenots......................................................................14
Historiographical Trends .......................................................................................22
Family ........................................................................................................22
Religious Education ...................................................................................29
Confessional Identity .................................................................................32
Documents and Hagiography: The Tendentious Historiography
of French Protestantism ....................................................................................34
The Huguenot Family: A Missing (Historical) Piece ............................................36
The Critical Influences of Calvin and Geneva .......................................................39
The Window of Investigation ................................................................................45
Sources and Method ...............................................................................................35
Dissertation Organization ......................................................................................53
CHAPTER 1 ORDERING THE HOLY HOUSEHOLD ................................................60
Calvin, Genevan Fathers, and Domestic Order .....................................................66
Huguenot Fathers and Domestic Order..................................................................80
Calvin, Genevan Mothers, and Domestic Order ....................................................86
Huguenot Mothers and Domestic Order ................................................................99
Children and Servants in Reformed Homes.........................................................107
Final Thoughts .....................................................................................................115
CHAPTER 2 GODLY FAMILIES AND EDUCATIONAL HOMES..........................117
Calvin and the Reformed Vision of Domestic Instruction...................................117
Genevan Fathers and Religious Education ..........................................................132
Huguenot Fathers and Religious Education .........................................................144
Genevan Mothers and Religious Education .........................................................154
Huguenot Mothers and Religious Education .......................................................156
Final Thoughts .....................................................................................................158
vii
CHAPTER 3 DOMESTIC SACRALITY AND THE PURSUIT OF PURITY ............161
Calvin’s Elevated Vision of the Home as Temple ...............................................161
“[God] cannot be comprehended within any spaces of place”:
Renouncing Sacred Space ...................................................................162
“[T]here is no profane place”: Universalizing Sacred Space...................167
“[E]very individual Family ought to be a Little Church of Christ”:
The Home as Sacred Space .................................................................173
Evidence of Domestic Sacred Space: Purity........................................................177
Domestic Presence and the Godly Home.................................................180
Domestic Purity .......................................................................................186
Final Thoughts .....................................................................................................195
CHAPTER 4 DOMESTIC SACRALITY AND THE PRACTICE OF PIETY ............200
Family Prayer .......................................................................................................204
Psalms and Psalm-Singing ...................................................................................210
Bible Reading.......................................................................................................216
Sermon Reading and Discussion .........................................................................231
Religious Book Reading ......................................................................................232
Final Thoughts .....................................................................................................234
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................240
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................251
viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
BSHPF
Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire du Protestantisme
Français
CommActs, vol. 1
Calvin, John. Commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles,
Volume 1. Edited by Henry Beveridge. Translated by
Christopher Fetherstone. 2 vols. Calvin’s Commentaries
18. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
CommActs, vol. 2
Calvin, John. Commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles,
Volume 2. Edited by Henry Beveridge. Translated by
Christopher Fetherstone. 2 vols. Calvin’s Commentaries
19. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996
CommCor
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the
Apostle to the Corinthians. Translated by John Pringle.
Calvin’s Commentaries 20. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
House, 1996.
CommGen
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the First Book of Moses
Called Genesis. Translated by John King. 2 vols. Calvin’s
Commentaries 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
CommHarmony, vol. 1
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Four Last Books of
Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony, Volume 1.
Translated by Charles William Bingham. Calvin’s
Commentaries 2. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
CommHarmony, vol. 2
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Four Last Books of
Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony, Volume 2.
Translated by Charles William Bingham. Calvin’s
Commentaries 2. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
CommHarmony, vol. 3
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Four Last Books of
Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony, Volume 3.
Translated by Charles William Bingham. Calvin’s
Commentaries 3. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
ix
CommHarmony, vol. 4
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Four Last Books of
Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony, Volume 4.
Translated by Charles William Bingham. Calvin’s
Commentaries 3. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
CommJohn, vol. 1
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Gospel According to
John, Volume 1. Translated by William Pringle. Calvin’s
Commentaries 17. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
CommJohn, vol. 2
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Gospel According to
John, Volume 2. Translated by William Pringle. Calvin’s
Commentaries 18. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
CommJosh
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Book of Joshua.
Translated by Henry Beveridge. Calvin’s Commentaries 4.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
CommPhilColThess
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul the
Apostle to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians.
Translated by John Pringle. Calvin’s Commentaries 21.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
CommPsalms, vol. 1
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume
1. Translated by James Anderson. Calvin’s Commentaries
4. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
CommPsalms, vol. 2
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume
2. Translated by James Anderson. Calvin’s Commentaries
5. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
CommPsalms, vol. 3
Calvin, John. Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume
3. Translated by James Anderson. Calvin’s Commentaries
6. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul the
Apostle to the Romans. Translated by John Owen. Calvin’s
Commentaries 19. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
CommRom
CommTimTitPhil
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy,
Titus, and Philemon. Translated by William Pringle.
Calvin’s Commentaries 21. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
House, 1993.
x
Consist. Albenc
Livre des délibérations de l'Eglise réformée de l'Albenc
(1606-1682). Edition du manuscrit conservé à la
Bibliothèque d'Etude et d'Information Fonds Dauphinois.
Grenoble Cote R 9723, François Francillon (éd.), Paris:
Honoré Champion, 1998.
Consist. Archiac
Registre du Consistoire de l'église d'Archiac (CharenteInférieure), 1600-1637. Bibliothèque de la Société de
l’Histoire du Protestantisme Français (Paris), MS 18.
Consist. Blois
Félice, Paul, La Réforme en Blaisois, documents inédits.
Registre du consistoire (1665-1677), Marseille: Lafitte,
1979, réimpression de l'édition d'Orléans: H. Herluison,
1885.
Consist. Coutras
Soman, Alfred, and Elisabeth Labrousse. “Le registre
consistorial de Coutras, 1582–1584.” Bulletin de la Société
de l’Histoire du Protestantisme Français 126 (1980): 193–
228.
Consist. Die
Mailhet, André, ed. Eglises réformées du Dauphiné: recueil
de documents copiés sur les originaux et augmenté
d’introductions, de notes, de facsimilés et de quelques
documents originaux. 5 vols. Bibliothèque de la Société de
l’Histoire du Protestantisme Français (Paris), MS 655:1-6.
Consist. Genève, Tome I
Lambert, Thomas A., Isabella M. Watt, Robert M.
Kingdon, and Jeffrey R. Watt, eds. Registres du Consistoire
de Genève au temps de Calvin, Tome I (1542–1544).
Genève: Librairie Droz, 1996.
Consist. Le Mans
Papier et registre du Consistoire de l'Eglise du Mans,
réformée selon l'évangile, 1560-1561 (1561-1562 nouveau
style), in MM. Anjubault et H. Chardon (éd.), Recueil de
pièces inédites pour servir à l'histoire de la Réforme et de
la Ligue dans le Maine, Le Mans: Ed. Monnoyer, 1867.
Consist. Mussidan
Valette, Jean, “Les actes du consistoire de l'Eglise
réformée de Mussidan de 1593 à 1599,” Bulletin de la
Société Historique et Archéologique du Périgord, CXV
(1988), p. 181-191.
Consist. Nîmes
Auzière, Louis. “Registres du consistoire de l’église
réformée de Nîmes, Tome 1, 1561-1563, Copié sur
l’original déposé a la Bibliothèque nationale, (Fonds
français N° 8666),” 1874.
xi
Consist. Rochechouart
“Extraits du premier registre consistorial de Rochechouart,
1596-1635,” in Alfred Leroux, Emile Molinier et Antoine
Thomas (éd.), Documents historiques bas-latins,
provençaux et français concernant principalement la
Marche et le Limousin (2 vols., Limoges : Ducourtieux,
1883-1885), II, p. 63-132.
Consist. Saint-Gervais
Registre du consistoire de Saint-Gervais (1564-1568).
Archives Nationales (Paris), TT 269, dossier 25.
Inst.
Calvin, John. Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion.
Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis
Battles. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960.
Inst. 1536
Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1536
Edition. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Grand Rapids,
MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1986.
Serm2Sam
Calvin, John. Sermons on 2 Samuel: chapters 1–13.
Translated by Douglas Kelly. Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth
Trust, 1992.
SermEph
Calvin, Jean. Sermons on the Epistle to the Ephesians.
London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1973.
SermFifthBooke
Calvin, Jean. The Sermons of M. Iohn Calvin upon the Fifth
Booke of Moses called Deuternomie: faithfully gathered
word for word as he preached them in open Pulpet:
Together with a preface of the Ministers of the Church of
Geneva, and an admonishment made by the Deacons
there. Also there are annexed two profitable Tables, the
one containing the chiefe matters; the other the places of
Scripture herein alledged. Translated by Arthur Golding.
At London: Printed by Henry Middleton for Iohn Harison,
1583.
SermGal
Calvin, Jean. Sermons of M. Iohn Caluine Vpon the Epistle
of Saincte Paule to the Galathians. Translated by Arthur
Golding. Early English Books Online. London: By [Henrie
Bynneman, for] Lucas Harison and George Bishop, 1574.
SermJer
Calvin, Jean. Sermons on Jeremiah. Translated by Blair
Reynolds. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990.
xii
SermMicah
Calvin, Jean. Sermons on Micah. Translated by Blair
Reynolds. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990.
SermTenComm
Calvin, Jean. John Calvin’s Sermons on the Ten
Commandments. Translated by Benjamin W. Farley. Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1980.
ThreeSermons
Calvin, John. Men, Women and Order in the Church: Three
Sermons. Translated by Seth Skolnitsky. Dallas, TX:
Presbyterian Heritage Publications, 1992.
xiii
1
INTRODUCTION
In the fall of 1561, the consistory of the Huguenot church in Nîmes, a town in the
Languedoc region of southern France, summoned its dizainiers.1 This city of
approximately 10,000 inhabitants had been divided into ten quarters and each was
assigned to a dizainier who was entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring the moral
order in his quarter. The first task the consistory demanded of the dizainiers was to
circulate through their section of the city and to identify which houses were “chrestiennes
ou papistes.” 2 Albeit brief, this entry offers an insight into the mentality of this church
and the worldview of the French Reformed Churches of the sixteenth century. In their
perspective, homes occupied the exclusive categories of “Christian” or “Papist,” with the
understanding that the Catholic home was certainly not Christian. What made a home
one or the other? Why was it important that they were chrestiennes, and how did the
Reformed churches go about trying to ensure they were? These questions lie at the heart
of this dissertation.
The Protestant Reformation: Reordering Society and Refashioning the Family
The eruption of religious dissent in Germany, touched off by Martin Luther in
1517, began as a theological disagreement and did not concern issues of godly homes.
The early social application of his biblical interpretation soon emerged, but was quickly
and brutally repressed in the Peasants’ War of 1524/1525, justified in part by Luther’s
1 For more information on Nîmes, see Allan Tulchin, That Men Would Praise the Lord : The Triumph of
Protestantism in Nimes, 1530-1570 (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), chapter 1.
2 Louis Auzière, “Registres du consistoire de l’église réformée de Nîmes, Tome 1, 1561-1563, Copié sur
l’original déposé a la Bibliotheque nationale, (Fonds français N° 8666),” 1874, 58.
2
own hand. While the Lutheran and other Protestant traditions eventually embraced a
reform which regulated personal and social life, perhaps no such reform was more
comprehensive than that of the second generation Reformed movement. 3 It possessed an
intense and intentional vision of religious reform, acutely concerned with all areas of
individuals’ lives and societies’ manifestations. Within this Reformed theology a
dominant tenet was the sovereignty of God over all human affairs, and ecclesiastical
officials worked tirelessly to bring all facets of society into harmony with God’s will as
revealed in Scripture. Such a reality has led Raymond A. Mentzer to assert that “the
Reformation was far more than the transformation of theological tenets or the
introduction of new modes of prayer and liturgical practice. It also involved a careful
reordering, delimitation, and supervision of the community.” 4
Indeed, Gerald Strauss’
proposal of the Lutheran Reformation as a movement with the “central purpose to make
people – all people – think, feel, and act as Christians, to imbue them with a Christian
mind-set, motivational drive, and way of life” could aptly describe the aims of the
Reformed movement. 5 Reformed leaders would have been proud of the reports such as
that expressed by Daniel Toussaint, a French Reformed (Huguenot) minister in Orléans
3 Throughout my dissertation, I will follow the current trends of scholarship and use the terms “Reformed”
and “Calvinist” interchangeably, recognizing that the use of “Calvinist” regrettably privileges the
leadership and theology of Calvin over against other influential figures in this movement. See John Witte,
Jr., The Reformation of Rights: Law, Religion and Human Rights in Early Modern Calvinism (New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2007), 18, footnote 4 for further information on the benefits and liabilities of
this terminology.
4 Raymond A. Mentzer, “Introduction,” in Sin and the Calvinists: Moral Control and the Consistory in the
Reformed Tradition, ed. Raymond A. Mentzer (Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers,
1994), vii.
5 Gerald Strauss, Luther’s House of Learning: Indoctrination of the Young in the German Reformation
(Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), 307. Also reference Bruce Gordon, Calvin
(New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009), 61.
3
from 1562-1572, who reported that one could “recognize a member of the Reformed
Religion at twenty paces by his countenance, his words and his deeds.” 6
At the heart of this effort to reorder society and identity was the nuclear family,
the perceived cornerstone of society. In the early modern period the family was
considered the foundation of society and civilization. States sought strong, stable
families as did churches. The Catholic Frenchman Jean Bodin (1530-1596) illustrates
this perspective in his 1576 Six Books of the Commonwealth, in which he asserted that the
family “is not only the source and origin of the commonwealth, but also its principal
constituent.” 7 Reflecting on this point, Barbara Diefendorf explains, “It followed for
Bodin that the ideal family, like the ideal republic, was authoritarian and patriarchal.
Governed by commandment and obedience, strong families were the building blocks of a
strong state.” 8 With the future at stake, great thought and effort was put into ensuring
that families behaved in certain ways and reflected defined values.
While the family had always been a critical part of European society, it took on
special significance in this period. In part, this was due to Protestants’ rejection of the
sacredness of celibacy and the monastic ideal. Protestant theologians and preachers
transferred holiness to marriage, which became the godly ideal. Marriage, they argued,
6 Daniel Toussain, The Exercise of the Faithfull Soule: That Is to Say, Prayers and Meditations for One to
Comfort Himselfe in All Maner of Afflictions, and Specially to Strengthen Himselfe in Faith: Set in Order
According to the Articles of Our Faith, trans. Ferdenando Filding (London: Henrie Middleton for Henrie
Denham, 1583), quoted in Philip Benedict, “Settlements: France,” in Handbook of European History 14001600: Late Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, ed. Thomas Brady, Heiko Augustinus Oberman,
and James D. Tracy (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 441.
7 Jean Bodin, On Sovereignty: Six Books Of The Commonwealth (Lexington, KY: Seven Treasures
Publications, 2009), 48. Bodin was a French lawyer, economist, natural philosopher, member of the
Parlement of Paris, and professor of law in Toulouse.
8 Barbara B. Diefendorf, “Gender and Family,” in Renaissance and Reformation France, 1500–1648, ed.
Mack P. Holt (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 99.
4
was the true order which God had instituted from the beginning; monastic orders were an
inauthentic and perverted human invention. Monasteries and convents were dissolved,
and the home and family were emphasized as the true location for the cultivation of piety.
Steven Ozment’s and Marjorie Plummer’s research has examined the early modern
German context, identifying the flourishing of Hausväterliteratur and Haustafel materials
which accompanied this shift. 9 Sources such as Eucharius Rösslin’s Rosengarten (1513),
Justus Menius’ Oeconomia Christiana (1529), Johannes Coler’s Oeconomia ruralis et
domestica (1593), and the sixteenth-century diary of Hermann von Weinsberg
“prescribed a household concerned with the embodiment of religious values.” 10
Although Lutheran sources have been given much attention, this emphasis on the family
was not limited to early modern Germany or Protestants.
Considering the centrality and priority of the early modern family, my dissertation
analyzes one particular religious tradition – the French Reformed movement – in its
efforts to mold ideal Christian families. They held that the family was to be a principal
locus for molding piety, inculcating morals, and transmitting the Christian faith. 11
Christian families, it was commonly believed, would create moral individuals who in turn
would contribute to a godly society: the home was perceived as the “cradle of citizenship,
extending its values and example into the world around it. The habits and character
9 Steven E. Ozment, When Fathers Ruled: Family Life in Reformation Europe (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1983); Marjorie Elizabeth Plummer, “Reforming the Family: Marriage, Gender and the
Lutheran Household in Early Modern Germany, 1500–1620” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia,
1996).
10 Plummer, “Reforming the Family,” 3.
11 Throughout this dissertation, the term family will primarily refer to the nuclear family, which was – for
the most part – the social unit which existed within a single household. Parts of the dissertation will
consider the larger household, considering too the household servants who often comprised an early
modern French household.
5
developed within families became the virtues that shaped entire lands.” 12 Calvin
describes the Christian religion as the foundation of society in the Institutes, asserting,
“And thus all have confessed that no government can be happily established unless piety
is the first concern; and that those laws are preposterous which neglect God’s right and
provide only for men.” 13 There could be no established, prosperous nation which was
not concurrently pious, and this devotion began in the godly home.
Essentially, therefore, this dissertation seeks to answer a question proposed by
John Thompson in his book on John Calvin and women’s leadership in the church.
Thompson asks,
whether the new ideal of the family as ‘a spiritualized household’
(to use Todd’s phrase) – that is, a household marked by the mutual
devotion and companionship of its members in the service of God
and under the leadership of the head of that household – was also a
Genevan ideal. That these ideals were espoused by the Puritans
has been well documented, as have been the sources on which the
Puritans and early Anglicans drew, namely, Bullinger and Bucer,
and before them, Erasmus and Vives. But what of Calvin? 14
Although this question specifically addresses Geneva, it might be posed of France as
well: did French Reformed Protestants hold a notion of a “spiritualized household”? If
so, what were its characteristics? What was expected of its constituents?
The task of forming godly families was not an easy one, and this dissertation
seeks not only to describe the successes but also detail the process, the failures, the
negotiation, and possible accommodations to congregants. Mark Greengrass’ general
12 Ozment, When Fathers Ruled, 9; reference 134–144; Plummer, “Reforming the Family,” 9–11.
13 John Calvin, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles
(Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960), 4.20.9.
14 John Lee Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah: Women in Regular and Exceptional
Roles in the Exegesis of Calvin, His Predecessors, and His Contemporaries (Geneva: Librairie Droz,
1992), 12.
6
sentiments regarding the persuasion of people ring true with reference to the Huguenots
and their families: “If the defeat of a minority of rural and largely illiterate Waldensians
did not prove easy, the enforcement of orthodoxy in these increasingly literate
conurbations [cities] by traditional means was next to impossible.” 15 Yet, the French
churches ambitiously sought to implement Calvin’s vision – that “every individual
Family ought to be a Little Church of Christ” 16 – and create domestic microcosms of the
larger church, changing nuclear families into spiritual communities. The churches’
zealous programme to create ideal, “Christian” families included social disciplining,
strategic religious education, and inculcating a new understanding of the family. This
was a cultural offensive as much as it was a religious one, affecting the roles and
responsibilities of family members, the celebration of communal and religious rituals, the
raising of children, and the reorganization of the family schedule. 17 Records of the
French Reformed churches are replete with examples of their efforts: leaders threatening
to excommunicate fathers for engaging in extramarital affairs, excoriating mothers for
beating children, and admonishing children to listen to their parents. As confessional
15 Mark Greengrass, The French Reformation (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), 8.
16 John Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata: Or, The Acts, Decisions, Decrees, and Canons of Those
Famous National Councils of the Reformed Churches in France, 2 Vols. (London: T. Parkhurst and J.
Robinson, 1692), 1:79. The national synod records are collected in an English translation by John Quick
(based on an original Latin copy) and a French edition by Jean Aymon, Tous les synodes nationaux des
Églises réformées de France, 2 Vols. (The Hague: Chez Charles Delo, sur le Cingel á l’Esperance, 1710).
In this dissertation, I will rely on Quick’s version, which scholars have asserted is more reliable (e.g. Glenn
S. Sunshine, Reforming French Protestantism: The Development of Huguenot Ecclesiastical Institutions,
1557-1572 (Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 2003), 8).
17 Mentzer, “Introduction,” vii. These churches were not unique in this effort; Lutherans and Catholics,
too, put increasing emphasis on encouraging the formation of strong, confessionally-faithful families.
However, the Reformed church’s possession of the consistory as an instrument of enforcement gave it an
intentionality unseen in other movements. Detailed documentation of consistory meetings furthermore
provides documentation which makes the Huguenot experience a promising window into Early Modern
family formation.
7
lines hardened in Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth century and nations roiled in
political and religious warfare, the principle of family formation became an ever-greater
concern.
Defining Family
Allow me to briefly define in what exact sense I understand the term family. Past
historical works such as those of Ariès, Stone, and many other historians have been
insightful in positing significant changes in composition, structure, and self-perception of
family units in Europe through the centuries. However, as Diefendorf chides, “It is not
enough to recapitulate patterns of social and economic behavior; our inquiry must aim at
an understanding of the forces that shaped family values and conditioned the strategies
for reproduction characteristic of different social groups in the Renaissance.” She
challenges historians to examine families as historical and social artifacts to ascertain the
“cultural values represented by these structures and behaviors.” 18 Given that, as Merry
Wiesner asserts, “the family is a socially-constructed unit, not a natural one,” 19 I view
families as historically-dependent, culturally-constructed carriers of meaning. Thomas
Kuehn provides elaboration: a family was more than
a genetically constituted, coresidential unit of production and
consumption. It was a group with practical interests that were
validated and mediated by a cultural logic. The family was . . . a
monument, a sanctuary, a repository – the expression of a desired
continuity stretching from ancestors to generations yet unborn. . . .
18 Barbara B. Diefendorf, “Family Culture, Renaissance Culture,” Renaissance Quarterly 40, no. 4 (Winter
1987): 661. Wiesner expresses similar sentiments, encouraging the examination of families for “reasons
behind continuity and change,” Merry E. Wiesner, “Family, Household, and Community,” in Handbook of
European History, 1400-1600: Late Middle Ages, Renaissance, and Reformation, ed. Thomas A. Brady,
Heiko A. Oberman, and James D. Tracy, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1996), 59.
19 Wiesner, “Family, Household, and Community,” 51.
8
[T]he life force of this organism was not only, or mainly,
biological; it was cultural.” 20
Following this trajectory, my dissertation inquires into the Huguenot family and what its
new desired form might tell us about its meaning. But it also examines the existing
religious and cultural context which informed the Reformed churches’ perception of the
family, raised a perceived need for a total transformation of the contemporary notion of
the family, and motivated ecclesiastical leaders to adopt rigorous measures to bring about
this transformation.
While “family” can refer to both lineage and a domestic group, I am primarily
concerned with the second understanding. 21 A discussion of this domestic group,
admittedly, often overlaps into the first as the larger aims of nuclear family units are
examined. Research on family has demonstrated that the conjugal family unit was the
rule in early modern Europe. While in rural France, some married men continued to live
in their father’s house, most established their own households. 22 Jan de Vries explains
that there was an “expectation that couples contemplating marriage would establish a
separate household from either of their parents (neolocal marriage). The resulting
conjugal family unit did not ordinarily include other resident kin (parents, siblings,
uncles, or aunts of the husband and wife), but it did commonly supply or take into the
20 Thomas Kuehn, Emancipation in Late Medieval Florence (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University
Press, 1982), 162.
21 Diefendorf, “Family Culture,” 662.
22 Diefendorf, “Gender and Family,” 100. She expounds further elsewhere that “It seems generally agreed
that, with the exception of Italy, extended families – in the sense of families living under one roof and
sharing economic resources – were primarily a rural phenomenon, if they existed at all, by the fifteenth
century. They do not appear to have existed in significant numbers in the cities of England, France,
Germany, or the Low Countries,” Diefendorf, “Family Culture,” 664. Also reference Peter Laslett, Family
Life and Illicit Love in Earlier Generations: Essays in Historical Sociology (Cambridge; New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1977), 12–39; André Burguière, “Pour une typologie des formes
d’organisation domestique de l’Europe moderne (XVIe-XIXe siècles),” Annales. Économies, Sociétés,
Civilisations 41, no. 3, Pour une typologie (1986): 639–655.
9
household, at some point in the life-cycle of the family, non-kin in the form of servants,
apprentices, or lodgers.” 23 Even in Italy, which was one place where extended families
still inhabited the same residence, the conjugal family was the rule. David Herlihy and
Christiane Klapisch-Zuber claim that the joint family of married brothers and their
children “living together, earning together, consuming together” under the same roof was
“an outmoded, archaic ideal in the fifteenth century.” 24 Therefore, while noble
households would have been larger and more complex, for purposes of this research it is
most accurate to envision Huguenot families in France as conjugal and neolocal, with the
possibility of servants (or as John Bossy refers to them, “artificial children” 25) being
included within the larger household.
23 Jan de Vries, “Population,” in Handbook of European History, 1400-1600: Late Middle Ages,
Renaissance, and Reformation, ed. Thomas A. Brady, Heiko A. Oberman, and James D. Tracy, vol. 1, 2nd
ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 27. Also see Diefendorf, “Family Culture,” 679.
24 David Herlihy and Christiane Klapisch-Zuber, Tuscans and Their Families: A Study of the Florentine
Catasto of 1427 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985), 324. They attribute this to the fact that
“The individual was no longer as dependent as he once had been on the help of a large lineage, on a
common patrimony, and on family-based commercial networks.” Jan de Vries demonstrates the
complexity of this issue by noting that the north-south “Hajnal Line” from St. Petersburg to Trieste is also
complicated with an east-west line dividing the north and south of France: in the north there were conjugal
families, whereas in the south there existed what Frédéric Le Play labeled stem families (“where one son
marries and assumes the headship of the paternal household”, leaving the other children to look elsewhere
for their fortunes), de Vries, “Population,” 35. Wiesner, however, argues that by the fourteenth century Le
Play’s stem family had already disappeared (Wiesner, “Family, Household, and Community,” 58).
25 John Bossy, Christianity in the West, 1400–1700 (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1985),
124.
10
Historical Context of Early Modern French Protestantism
Minority Status
The French context in which Protestants undertook this confessional formation
and reshaping of the family was dramatically different from other regions in Europe.
Unlike reformations in other areas of Europe which possessed magisterial support,
Huguenot churches existed as a minority religion. This affected their development in
several ways. First, their political power was severely limited. Churches did not have
state support in establishing doctrinal positions or creating institutional structures; 26 they
lacked the ability to impose reform top-down. This forced Protestants to focus
principally on their own congregants, and prevented them from evangelizing or coercing
Catholic neighbors to convert. 27 Internally, Huguenot ecclesiastical leaders were
compelled to rely on persuasion and spiritual sanctions as the primary motivators for
change. Nicholls claims the Huguenots adopted a “new mentality” toward their spiritual
lives which “meant adhering to a strict moral code and if possible imposing it on the
unrighteous, a purification of self and society according to the precepts of godliness,
frugality and an individual unmediated relationship with God.” 28 Even though the
Reformed churches did impose this code upon their congregants, in this bi-confessional
26 For more on the effects of existing as a minority religion, see Sunshine, Reforming French
Protestantism, 12–16.
27 Apart from the largest Protestant centers, David Nicholls’ assertion provides an accurate description:
“Protestants were only rarely in a position to try and impose their religion and ways of life upon an
uncommitted or hostile population,” David Nicholls, “France,” in The Early Reformation in Europe, ed.
Andrew Pettegree (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 120. Also reference Timothy
Watson, “Preaching, printing, psalm-singing: The making and unmaking of the Reformed church in Lyon,
1550–1572,” in Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, ed. Raymond A. Mentzer and
Andrew Spicer (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 20–23.
28 Nicholls, “France,” 137.
11
context there was the ever-present concern that – if too much pressure was placed on
them – the Huguenots might abjure faith and return to the “idolatry” of Catholicism.
Secondly, despite the hostilities between the military forces of the crown and the
Reformed churches, the leaders of the French Reformed churches sought to present their
faith as compatible with the welfare of the kingdom and avoid being perceived as
seditious. “As a persecuted minority wishing to be accepted as loyal subjects of the
king,” Glenn Sunshine summarizes, “the Huguenots had to be very careful to avoid
practices that might be seen as a challenge or threat to the existing order of society.” 29
As military clashes intensified, especially as illustrated in the Wars of Religion (15621589), the Huguenots’ claim to loyalty became harder to defend.
Finally, the self-perception of the Huguenots became embodied in this minority
position. Élisabeth Labrousse claims that repression of Huguenots brought forth a
vibrancy in the Reformed faith, because “in France, being a Protestant meant choosing to
remain one.” Accepting suffering produced sectarian adherence. The Huguenots viewed
themselves as a spiritual elite, superior to their “superstitious” Catholic neighbors: they
were the faithful, the chosen, the sheep of the remnant flock. Their suffering clearly
identified them as the spiritual descendants of their brutalized messiah and of the martyrs
of the early church. The martyrology of Jean Crespin or the Book of Psalms – with
themes of unjust persecution and the suffering of the righteous – would have thus
resonated with the Huguenots on a deep psychological level for inclusion in the
oppressed community was indisputable evidence of their divine election. 30
29 Sunshine, Reforming French Protestantism, 149. Calvin’s Institutes can be seen, in part, as also
attempting to demonstrate the “essentially peaceful character of [the Huguenots] political intentions,”
David C. Steinmetz, Calvin in Context, 2nd ed. (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 10.
Also reference Watson, “Preaching, printing, psalm-singing,” 20–22.
30 Élisabeth Labrousse, “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685,” in International Calvinism 1541-1715, ed.
Menna Prestwich (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 291–293, 303.
12
Demographics of Early Modern France
France in the early modern era was the most populous country in Europe,
containing over a quarter of the entire European continental population. From a base of
16.4 million inhabitants in 1500, it had swelled to 22 million by 1700. 31 In this period,
France remained a rural society. From 1500 to 1650, only ten percent of inhabitants lived
in cities, while 90 percent lived in towns and villages of just a few hundred or in the
countryside. The mid-seventeenth century would see only five percent living in a city of
over 10,000 people. 32
France possessed 32 cities of over 10,000 inhabitants in 1500, but this number
had jumped to 43 by 1650. In this same period, cities of at least 20,000 increased from
12 to 20, and cities of at least 40,000 went from three to seven. Paris had 100,000 living
in its walls in 1500, and had 400,000 by 1650, making it the largest city in Europe. 33
While city-dwelling possessed its advantages – such as guarded walls, special political
rights, and lower taxes – urban centers had higher crime rates and diseases were able to
spread more quickly. 34 Diverse social classes and economic groups coexisted alongside
each other, with the poor often living in the houses of the wealthy as servants. 35 Urban
31 de Vries, “Population,” 13.
32 Jonathan Dewald, “Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” in Renaissance and Reformation France
1500-1648, ed. Mack P. Holt (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 32; de Vries, “Population,” 15.
33 Dewald, “Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” 40–41. For comparison sake, in the middle of the
sixteenth century, Rouen had over 70,000 inhabitants and Lyon had approximately 58,000 (Philip Benedict,
Rouen During the Wars of Religion [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981], 2–3).
34 Dewald, “Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” 39, 43–44. For example, Lyon was struck by five
waves of the plague in the two decades from 1564 to 1586 (Ibid., 39).
35 Dewald, “Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” 43. Dewald states that approximately ten percent of
the population were domestic servants (Ibid.).
13
and rural life differed considerably, yet travel, immigration, and trade allowed constant
exchange between the two spheres. 36
In the early modern era, infant mortality rates in Europe were around 20 percent
although rates differed greatly from one region to the next. In southwest France, rates
were as low as 19.1 percent, while in the northeast they were as high as 24.9 percent.
Research has demonstrated that cultural factors such as breastfeeding seem to have
played a greater role than other factors such as economic or class. Cities tended to have
higher mortality rates, an issue which was compounded by lower birth rates. Childhood
was just as uncertain, with mortality rates above 20 percent as well. 37 The fact that
approximately half of all children born did not survive to adulthood was a constant and
stark reminder of the tenuousness of life. 38
Overall high infant mortality rates had a significant impact on the ability of
families to produce children to take over family businesses, inherit property, and continue
the family lineage. According to de Vries, “In a typical stationary population, only 60
percent of married men would leave at their own deaths at least one surviving son; 20
percent would leave one or more surviving daughters, but no sons; 20 percent would
leave no surviving children at all.” 39
Evidence from early modern northwestern Europe has indicated that couples
believed they needed to be economically independent before marrying. They would
often leave their houses in their mid-teens and spend a decade as a servant or apprentice
36 Dewald, “Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” 40.
37 Ibid., 31.
38 de Vries, “Population,” 21.
39 Ibid., 22.
14
in the households of non-relatives; as Jan de Vries describes these young adults:
“sexually mature but barred from regular sexual relations.” 40 Men usually married for
the first time at some point in their mid-twenties to mid-thirties, while women were often
a few years younger. After marriage, they would immediately set up their household. 41
The physical arrangement of houses in villages varied significantly depending on
geographical region. In some areas near the Mediterranean, there were houses grouped
near one another in well-regulated villages; in western France (provinces of Brittany and
lower Normandy), Dewald notes, “villages tended to divide into a series of isolated
hamlets and individual farms, and often spread over very large territories.” In upper
Normandy and the Paris basin, there were “villages whose houses straggled for two or
three kilometers along principle streets, with farmland spreading behind them.” 42 The
fact that French Protestantism was primarily an urban phenomenon aligns with what
church disciplinary records reveal: neighbors lived in close proximity of one another,
making a modern sense of privacy impossible. Windows which may not have closed, as
well as thin walls, meant that neighbors knew one another’s business, and someone’s
most private, intimate encounters might be recounted to the consistory.
Demographics of Huguenots
The fate of the French Reformed churches unfolded within this context. In the
days before the Wars of Religion erupted, there was great confidence among the
Huguenots. Jean Morély (1524-1594) declared optimistically, “We have, thanks to God,
40 de Vries, “Population,” 30.
41 This information summarizes Wiesner, “Family, Household, and Community,” 58.
42 Dewald, “Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” 32.
15
churches in nearly all cities in the realm, and soon there will be scarcely a place where
one has not been established.” 43 Although in 1562 Admiral Coligny reported to the
Queen Mother, Catherine de’ Medici, that 2,150 churches had been established in the
kingdom, Janine Garrisson argues against this figure on the principle that such an inflated
number was a political ploy to exaggerate the pesanteur sociale of the Huguenot
minority. She suggests 1400 congregations is a more reasonable estimate, while other
historians have lowered this estimate even further. 44 While some congregations
comprised of no more than a few families, there were also Huguenot congregations as
large as 8000. 45 At their apex in the early 1560s, the Huguenots at most represented ten
percent of the population – approximately two million people. 46
Geographically, Protestant congregations were spread across most of France.
Benedict claims that “. . . by 1540, the ‘contagion’ had touched virtually every region of
the country except Brittany and the Auvergne, where it would never have much success.”
43 Quoted by in Greengrass, The French Reformation, 63. Also reference Greengrass, where he describes
the contemporary conditions of the crown and aristocracy which opened a window for this religious
minority to flourish (Mark Greengrass, “France,” in The Reformation in National Context, ed. Robert
Scribner, Roy Porter, and Mikulas Teich (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 59).
44 See Janine Garrisson-Estèbe, Protestants du Midi, 1559-1598 (Toulouse: Privat, 1980), 62–66. Mark
Greengrass estimates the number of congregations at 1200 at its peak, while Prestwich places it higher at
1750 (Greengrass, The French Reformation, 43; also reference Menna Prestwich, “Calvinism in France,
1559-1629,” in International Calvinism 1541-1715, ed. Menna Prestwich (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1985), 73).
45 Pierre Viret preached to a crowd of 8000 in the Nîmes congregation in 1561 (Prestwich, “Calvinism in
France, 1559-1629,” 85). Benedict claims that in some of the larger cities, Protestants had much higher
numbers: they held a majority in Nîmes, Montauban, and La Rochelle, and “between a fifth and a third of
the population of such leading provincial metropolis as Rouen, Orléans, and Lyon” (Philip Benedict,
Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism (New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press, 2002), 137).
46 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 73; Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 137; Frederic J.
Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995), 148.
16
It took until 1560 for the geography of French Protestantism to solidify; 47 they “were
most numerous in Normandy, the Loire Valley, and a crescent of provinces stretching
from Poitou into Aquitaine and across Languedoc to the Vivarais and Dauphiné.” 48 By
the Edict of Nantes (1598), this crescent of Huguenot strength was well-established with
80 percent of French Protestants were concentrated in western and southern France. 49
The raw numbers of Huguenots during this time, however, do not provide an
accurate picture of Protestant strength. Menna Prestwich warns that “it would be wrong
to assess the strength of Calvinism by numbers; its social composition is more
important.” 50 The early Reformation of the 1530s has been characterized as a religion
des petit gens, dominated by artisans and day laborers; 51 however, by 1559 the Huguenot
churches shifted from being a religion des petit gens to protestantisme seigneurial. 52 At
this point, approximately half of the nobles had embraced Calvinism; French nobles had
become the keystone of the French Reformation. 53 In addition to possessing extensive
47 Nicholls, “France,” 135.
48 Benedict, “Settlements: France,” 426, 427.
49 Labrousse, “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685,” 286; Sunshine, Reforming French Protestantism, 17;
Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 73, 76–77; Garrisson-Estèbe, Protestants du Midi, 52.
50 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 73.
51 Philip Benedict, The Faith and Fortunes of France’s Huguenots, 1600-85 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001),
18; David J. Nicholls, “The Nature of Popular Heresy in France, 1520–1542,” The Historical Journal 26,
no. 02 (1983): 261–275; Nicholls, “France,” 126–130; Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 136.
52 These terms were coined by Henri Hauser and cited by Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,”
79.
53 Ibid., 73; Robert M. Kingdon, Geneva and the Coming of the Wars of Religion in France, 1555-1563
(Geneva: Libraire Droz, 1956), 108; Greengrass, The French Reformation, 49; Lucien Romier, Le royaume
de Catherine de Médicis: la France à la veille des guerres de religion (Paris: Perrin, 1922), 256–262.
Jonathan Dewald’s work places the issue of sixteenth century nobility in context. This period was a time of
great social mobility, marked by constant movement of individuals in and out of the noble class. New laws
allowed for persons to claim nobility when they had held an office for three generations, and many took
advantage of this provision. Additionally, the monarchy attempted to generate additional revenue by
17
land and wealth, these nobles served as “patrons of the church [who] made Protestantism
into a national political party, magnifying its influence by representing it at court and
providing military strength and expertise.” 54 Figures such as Louis (prince of Condé),
Gaspard de Coligny, and Jeanne d’Albret (Francis I’s niece and queen of Navarre) were
among those who provided leadership to and protection for the Huguenot cause. 55
Protestantism flourished on the estates of nobles. 56 Indeed, Robert Kingdon’s research
reveals that of the 42 ministers with records regarding their class status, a third (14) were
of noble birth. 57 It was this strong representation among the nobility which allowed
Protestants to make very direct and bold demands on the monarchy and which forced the
monarchy to negotiate with them. 58 The decades of the Wars of Religion (1562-1589)
were an especially important time of influence for Protestant nobles. Yet, by the signing
creating new offices which escalated the number of nobility in France. Since nobility enjoyed exemption
from taxes, the crown sought to control claims to nobility and made people prove they legally belonged to
the nobility. This upsurge in new nobility caused friction with those families which were a part of the old
nobility (Dewald, “Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” 45–46, 58).
54 Nicholls, “France,” 136. The alignment of the nobles with the Eglises réformées de France is not
considered a purely positive event. Nicholls claims the French Reformation was “hijacked by the nobility,
its fortunes becoming inseparable from political ambition, and as a result it became associated in the eyes
of the majority with disorder and war” (Nicholls, “France,” 140). Greengrass counters this concern,
demonstrating that the leadership of the French Reformation by the nobles was natural: Calvin, Beza, and
the pastors at the early national synods did not want a reformation from below – such was not the divine
role of those which lacked divine leadership and might lead to social chaos (Greengrass, “France,” 60).
55 Philip Benedict and Virginia Reinburg, “Religion and the Sacred,” in Renaissance and Reformation
France, 1500-1648, ed. Mack P. Holt (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 142. While Nicholls
chapter provides some information on the role of noblewomen, see Nancy Lyman Roelker, “The Role of
Noblewomen in the French Reformation,” Archiv Für Reformationsgeschichte 63 (1972): 168–195 and
Sharon Kettering, “The Patronage Power of Early Modern French Noblewomen,” The Historical Journal
32, no. 04 (1989): 817–841 for a fuller treatment.
56 Greengrass, The French Reformation, 50.
57 Kingdon, Geneva and the Coming, 6.
58 Greengrass, The French Reformation, 65.
18
of the Peace of Alès in 1629, Labrousse notes that “the weight of the aristocracy, once so
powerful in the Huguenot party, became negligible.” 59
The Reformation in France, however, had an appeal beyond the nobility,
penetrating nearly all layers of society in the mid-sixteenth century, drawing from both
rich and poor. 60 The groups represented least in the Reformation in France, however,
were peasants and rural populations who composed approximately 80 percent of the
population. 61 Benedict claims this movement “drew very few of its adherents from the
vignerons, laboureurs and other agricultural workers who might constitute as much as a
quarter of the population of many French cities at this time, but that above this level of
society, the movement cut across all major divisions of wealth and status within
society.” 62 Even to this demographic trend, however, there were notable exceptions,
59 Labrousse, “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685,” 286.
60 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 81; Natalie Zemon Davis, “Strikes and Salvation at
Lyon,” in Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight Essays (Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press, 1975), 7.
61 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 81; Nicholls, “France,” 129–130. Greengrass claims that
“at the heart of the failure of the protestant church to convert the rural world to the new faith lay a failure of
mission and evangelization. It could not overcome the problem of illiteracy; there were never enough
ministers and established churches; there was never any effort to preach and catechize in anything but
French in a rural world which dominated by patois” (Greengrass, The French Reformation, 62). Allan
Tulchin’s findings for Nîmes are similar: few Protestants were involved in agriculture, and many were
merchants and bourgeois (Tulchin, That Men Would Praise the Lord, 58–60).
62 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 135. Benedict’s research on Rouen also provide valuable data for the
demographics of Protestantism (Benedict, Rouen, 71–94). In particular, he argues that the linking of
religious preference and social factors can be difficult: “The relationship between confessional conflict and
its social context suggested here is more complex. Any of a number of social variables (literacy, wealth,
occupational status, length of residence in the community) - only some of which could be adequately
investigated in Rouen - may predispose individuals in different occupations or social strata toward different
religious choices, the key to each individual's choice being a certain ‘fit’ between the nature of those beliefs
and that individual’s personality and social experience. Once the choice is made, it involves accepting an
all-encompassing intellectual system composed of a complex, interrelated set of metaphysical postulates
and moral rules which is far more than a simple expression of the interest which may have led the
individual to embrace the faith in the first place. This belief system will then shape the convert's
subsequent behavior, very often along lines that have nothing to do with his self-interest. In short, a twostage process is involved. Social factors predispose men to choose one set of religious beliefs or another;
19
such as the peasants in the Cévennes engaged in textile and leather trades, as well as
peasants and rural artisans in the Dauphiné, the Midi, and Normandy. 63
Such exceptions being acknowledged, it can be stated that the Reformation in
France was indeed a religion of the towns and cities: urban centers were the “heart and
motor” of this movement. 64 This Protestantism represented a cross section of the urban
population, drawing “from Consular families, notable families, and families of the menu
peuple – in numbers roughly proportional to their distribution in the population at
large.” 65 Accordingly, while Nicholls cautions against attempts to map Protestantism
onto specific groups of trades (“It was, with few exceptions, not so much a question of
particular social groups being attracted to Protestantism en bloc, more of groupings more
likely to take an active interest in religious and political affairs and therefore committed
to one side or the other as confessions consolidated” 66), he nevertheless acknowledges
that “. . . certain social groups were of particular significance in their propensity toward
active religious commitment.” Protestantism attracted the bourgeois ruling groups of
towns. Greengrass’ proscription lists from Toulouse, Grenoble, and Montpellier indicate
that 55-65 percent of those suspected of Protestantism were notables, those of merchant
these beliefs in turn motivate much of their subsequent action,” Ibid., 92. Also reference Prestwich,
“Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 81; Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 170.
63 A. Molinier, “De la religion des oeuvres à la Réformation dans les Cévennes (1450-1600),” Revue
d’histoire de l’Eglise de France 72, no. 189 (1986): 245–263.
64 Greengrass, The French Reformation, 54; Nicholls, “France,” 130. Nicholls also points out that other
“heresies” such as Waldensianism were rural phenomena so it is interesting that Protestantism did not make
more headway in rural areas, Greengrass, “France,” 122, 133. Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 15591629,” 79; Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 139. Tulchin describes and summarizes the
“spatial distribution” of the Huguenots well as gathering in towns, in the south, on the outskirts of large
cities, and locations which were defensible (Tulchin, That Men Would Praise the Lord, 187–197).
65 Davis, “Strikes and Salvation,” 54.
66 Nicholls, “France,” 131.
20
status or above. 67 Lawyers were actively involved in religious movements on both sides
of confessional lines. Many merchants embraced the new faith, allowing Huguenots to
“exercise a disproportionate influence within important sectors of trade and
manufacturing.” 68
A majority of Huguenots were artisans, reflecting the predominance of artisans in
urban populations. The distribution of Protestantism among artisans is a good example of
how geographically-dependent Huguenot occupations were. Among artisans, textile
workers in Meaux were passionate about the new faith; in Paris it was the dyers and
combers, and in Lyon it was silk workers and printers. Overall, Protestants were wellrepresented in the corps de métiers related to leather, metal, paper, and cloth, and had
little involvement with those of food, wood, brick, stone, and mortar. 69 One finds similar
variations in other trades. Benedict’s research on Protestants in Montpellier reveals they
were dominant in legal and professional classes; they were also wealthier in this location
than their Catholic neighbors. 70 In Alençon, the Huguenots were “substantially underrepresented in the world of the workshop, but were over-represented in the corridors of
67 Greengrass, The French Reformation, 56; Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 17.
68 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 1, 13, 28–29 (also see footnote 13 for other references); Benedict,
Christ’s Churches, 137. Cf. Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 139.
69 Nicholls, “France,” 131. Nicholls further cautions against assuming that the involvement of artisans in
Protestantism necessarily implies that their religious devotion was motivated by social unrest. Rather, he
clarifies, it means there was a “distrust of exploitative authority” and a “certain social and mental volatility
among artisans in newer trades,” (ibid., 132). Furthermore, he demonstrates the possible liabilities of this
group: “Support among a city’s artisanate was vital to the nascent Protestant churches of the 1550s, but
with the younger artisans, especially journeymen, it introduced a volatile and uncontrollable element, little
concerned with the profuse declarations of pacifistic submission to the political order made by respectable
Protestants” (ibid., 133). Also reference Greengrass, The French Reformation, 59.
70 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 135–138. Allan Tulchin’s thesis that the social composition of the French
Reformed churches shifted over time is demonstrated well in his work on Nîmes, and synthesized well in
his conclusion (Tulchin, That Men Would Praise the Lord, 183–187).
21
the Palais de Justice.” 71 Evidence suggests that the higher magistrates remained within
Gallican Catholicism. 72
This brief description is not intended to be exhaustive, but seeks merely to give a
general context into which this study can be situated. The numbers of Protestants
fluctuated dramatically over the years, often in response to specific events or political
changes. As legal persecution and pressure for conversion increased, especially in the
seventeenth century, abjurations multiplied. For example, as Catholic authorities
zealously limited the numbers of Protestant doctors, barristers, and guildspersons in
towns across France, Protestant adherents fell. Benedict suggests that in Montpellier
Protestants returned to the Catholic Church due to the militant actions of co-religionists
which were viewed as excessive and disloyal. 73 From the optimistic vitality of French
Protestantism in the early 1560s, a gradual slide began. The Saint Bartholomew’s Day
massacre in 1572 – while a key moment of identity formation – was a specific breaking
point which dealt a tremendous blow to Huguenots, resulting in a massive return to the
Catholic Church. Prestwich claims that the “churches in Normandy were crowded out by
those who abjured, for whom the Promised Land was now only a mirage in the desert.” 74
Perhaps, though, the most stunning revelation of this event for the Protestants was the end
to their hope that the monarchy could be won over. 75 Protestant strength was markedly
71 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 15.
72 Nicholls, “France,” 131.
73 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 19, 28, 29, 138, 144, 148. For other possible reasons for the decline, see
Ibid., 20–22.
74 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 97; Greengrass, The French Reformation, 78–80.
75 Georges Livet claimed “The central drama, and fallacy, of the French Reformation lay in the attempt to
win over the support of the monarchy” (Georges Livet, The Reformation, ed. Pierre Chaunu (Gloucester:
Alan Sutton, 1989), 168.) quoted in Greengrass, “France,” 47. John Calvin held out hope that Francis I
would become the patron of Protestantism in France; Greengrass holds that this was not an irrational
22
diminished by the end of the Wars of Religion in 1589: membership of the Églises
réformées de France had fallen to between 860,000 and one million people. 76 Despite
the decreased numbers and the eventual loss of many nobility, the Huguenot churches
were very active, especially in western and southern France; therefore, this study will
examine these churches and their efforts to transform the family until the Revocation in
1685.
Historiographical Trends
Although there has been little scholarship specifically focused on methods of
reforming the Huguenot family in France, this project builds on and engages with the
valuable work of other scholars who have written on the broad areas of early modern
family, religious education, and the formation of confessional identity. Allow me to
provide a brief summary of current scholarship as well as indicate my dissertation’s
distinct and unique contribution.
Family
The family in Europe has been an object of intense scholarly focus since the early
1960s, particularly since the publication of Philippe Ariès’ Centuries of Childhood: A
notion, evidenced by the fact that similar moves were happening all over Europe (Ibid., 47–48). In
Calvin’s introduction to the Institutes which was devoted to the Francis I, he does not claim that the king is
to blame for the persecution of Protestants; rather it is “more through the tyranny of certain Pharisees than
with your approval” (Calvin, Instit., Prefatory Address to King Francis I of France, 11). For a summary of
reasons scholars propose as to why the French monarchy did not embrace Protestantism, see Greengrass,
“France,” 48–50.
76 Benedict, “Settlements: France,” 444; Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 17, 126; Benedict, Rouen, 128–
137, 251–255.
23
Social History of Social Life, a landmark work in the social history of youth. 77 This work
examined the widely divergent approaches to childhood from the medieval period
through the Enlightenment, concluding that the capitalist age produced an ideologically
new type of family. He noted the shift from the absence of childhood as a distinct stage
of life in the Middle Ages to the birth of “childhood” as a special category in the early
modern period. The family, he argued, changed and ceased to be simply an institution for
the transmission of name and estate: it assumed a moral and spiritual function as it
molded bodies and souls. 78 Soon after and into the 1980s, Peter Laslett and the
Cambridge Group built upon Frédéric Le Play’s earlier work on stem families and
claimed that the significant change in the transition from a medieval family to a modern
family was not ideological (Ariès) but structural, involving a shift from a larger family
unit into a nuclear family. Lawrence Stone’s work in 1977 further added to the
discussion by claiming that the change from the medieval family to the modern family
was a change from family units which were cold and distant to families with intense
emotional ties, compassionate marriages, and affection for children. 79 Two years later J.
L. Flandrin affirmed Laslett’s thesis that the modern family experienced a nuclearization,
but undermined Stone’s argument by claiming that relations within the family exhibited
varying degrees of affection, animosity, fear, and deference depending on the persons and
77 Philippe Ariès, Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life (New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
1962). For a summary of the history of the debate on childhood and family, see James A. Schultz, The
Knowledge of Childhood in the German Middle Ages, 1100-1350 (Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1995), 1–13; David Nicholas, The Domestic Life of a Medieval City: Women, Children,
and the Family in Fourteenth-Century Ghent (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1985), 4–12.
78 For a summary of Ariès’ thesis and relevant criticism, see Linda A. Pollock, Forgotten Children:
Parent-Child Relations from 1500 to 1900 (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1983), chapters
1 and 2.
79 Lawrence Stone, The Family: Sex and Marriage in England 1500-1800 (New York: Harper & Row,
1977).
24
context. 80 While these early studies were ground-breaking and provided theories on
which other scholars could build, they accounted very little for the reasons for these
changes. In relation to my own interests, their tools of population studies, statistical
studies, and historical demography failed to address the influence religion had on families
of the early modern period.
In the 1980s, scholars such as Steven Ozment and Lyndal Roper began to reflect
on the Protestant Reformation’s effect on families. While both agreed families
underwent profound change, their evaluation of that change was remarkably divergent.
Ozment described the Reformation as the savior of the family: whereas the condition of
marriage, family, and specifically women were disastrous in the Middle Ages, the
Protestant home was the center of a domestic reform movement against the cloister’s
antifeminism and was an attempt to resolve the crises of family life. He rejected the
arguments of Ariès and Stone which asserted that fathers were tyrannical and families
were loveless during this era. Rather, husbands and wives loved one another, the home
and family life mattered to most people, companionship and mutual respect were key
elements of early modern marriage, and parents loved and nurtured their children. While
Ozment provided a useful survey of contemporary literature, his work was harshly
criticized for its blurring of prescriptive sources and historical reality. 81 Roper’s The
Holy Household provided a challenge to Ozment’s argument through an examination of
the German city of Augsburg. The Protestant Reformation was devastating for women:
improved views of marriage did not translate to elevated assessments of women. She
claimed that a historical perspective which “implicitly allies Protestantism with the forces
80 Jean Louis Flandrin, Families in Former Times: Kinship, Household, and Sexuality (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1979).
81 Ozment, When Fathers Ruled.
25
of progressivism, individualism, and modernization . . . is a profound misreading of the
Reformation itself.” 82 Asserting that the “moral ethic of the urban Reformation, both as
a religious credo and a social movement, must be understood as a theology of gender,” 83
she argued that the Reformation did not liberate women but worsened their situation.
Protestant ethics were married to guild ideology, belying reformers’ claims regarding the
inherent equality of all Christians. While Roper’s research is valuable for its sheer
breadth of archival sources and exposing the specific experience of women, its lack of
comparison to pre-Reformation Augsburg or contemporary Catholic areas compromised
its aim of demonstrating the Protestant nature of this attack on women.
Other scholars fundamentally disagreed: the Reformation did not change the
family. The research of Thomas Safley, Jeffrey Watt, and Joel Harrington all emphasized
that continuity far outweighed change for the early modern family. For Safley,
Protestants preserved Catholic principles and practices and strengthened traditional
systems but with unique justifications. 84 Watt asserted that modern sentiments of
marriage did not emerge until the eighteenth century, in the context of proto-industry and
the Enlightenment. 85 Likewise, Harrington concluded that Catholics and Protestants
differed little in their laws and their solution was the same: the reassertion of paternal
authority. 86 Merry Wiesner’s research has led her to conclude regarding women that “Of
82 Lyndal Roper, The Holy Household: Women and Morals in Reformation Augsburg (Oxford New York:
Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press, 1989), 1.
83 Ibid.
84 Thomas Max Safley, Let No Man Put Asunder: The Control of Marriage in the German Southwest
(Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 1984).
85 Jeffrey R. Watt, The Making of Modern Marriage: Matrimonial Control and the Rise of Sentiment in
Neuchâtel, 1550-1800 (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1992).
86 Joel F. Harrington, Reordering Marriage and Society in Reformation Germany (Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press, 1995).
26
all the ways society was hierarchically arranged – class, age, rank, occupation – gender
was regarded as the most ‘natural’ and therefore was the most important to defend.” 87
Still others, such as Natalie Z. Davis and Raymond A. Mentzer, have
demonstrated that economic and religious changes in the early modern period forced
families to be strategic in family planning. 88 In their perspectives, families developed
strategies to sustain themselves over the centuries through methods such as keeping the
family patrimony intact from generation to generation, improving the family’s land,
securing prestigious marriages, and selecting godparents to solidify kinship bonds.
Additionally, Mentzer highlighted the role of religious identity as an essential stabilizing
factor for families who sought to survive and remain intact through turbulent political
periods. Judith Pollmann and Suzannah Lipscomb, too, have sought to move beyond
binaries in evaluating the effect of the Reformation on women, choosing instead to
examine how women were able to meet their needs within these patriarchal structures. 89
While the above scholarship has been valuable in gaining insights into medieval
and early modern families, it has focused on broad changes in early modern family, such
as the structure (perceived and actual), family relations, marriage, status of individual
family members, effects of the Protestant Reformation on families, the interests of the
87 Merry E. Wiesner, Women and Gender in Early Modern Europe, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge
University Press, 2000), 298.
88 Natalie Zemon Davis, Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight Essays (Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press, 1975); Natalie Zemon Davis, “Ghosts, Kin, and Progeny: Some Features of
Family Life in Early Modern France,” Daedalus 106, no. 2 (1977): 87–114; Raymond A. Mentzer, Blood &
Belief: Family Survival and Confessional Identity among the Provincial Huguenot Nobility (West
Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1994).
89 Judith Pollmann, “Off the Record: Problems in the Quantification of Calvinist Church Discipline,” The
Sixteenth Century Journal 33, no. 2 (2002): 423–438; Suzannah Lipscomb, “Refractory Women: The
Limits of Power in the French Reformed Church,” in Dire L’interdit: The Vocabulary of Censure and
Exclusion in the Early Modern Reformed Tradition (Leiden, 2010), P. 13-28, vol. 33, 2002, 13–28.
27
church and state, and changes in laws and legal structures. My dissertation seeks to
provide a focused understanding of the ecclesiastical aspirations for the French Reformed
family and address the family specifically as an object of confessional concern. Echoing
the research of Davis and Mentzer, it seeks to avoid embellishing the history of the
family, but recognizes that the family was often the context for basic survival.
Specifically, it seeks to restore the religious texture of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century
France, recognizing the central role religion held in the lives of early modern individuals.
Philip Benedict warns historians – when studying the religious phenomena of people’s
lives – that the religious elements cannot be reduced to a single cause, such as
anthropology or sociology, for this “reduces religious movements to instruments of
putatively deeper historical forces and thus misses their coeur religieux.” 90 What, then,
was the theological vision the Reformed church possessed for the family, this vital unit
that lay at the intersection of confessional, political, economic, and social identity?
90 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, xxi. Social history is most effective when it frees religion from being the
single impetus in people’s complex lives, but at the same time allows religion its distinct role. Karen
Spierling justifies introducing theology into her work on infant baptism, claiming that “This study asserts
that theological ideas were important not just on one side of the discussions to be considered, but as an
element effecting, and affected by, all of those involved in discussions regarding baptism and children and
Geneva. . . . [I]t is imperative that we accept religious belief as one equal among a variety of factors that
influenced the interpretation and practice of baptism and the definition of community in early modern
Geneva” (Karen E. Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva: The Shaping of a Community, 1536–
1564 (Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005), 12, 14). Later, she eschews the ideas that
theology is “something detached from the ‘reality’ of social and political interactions,” and instead favors
an approach which values it as “intrinsic to the development on the Genevan Reformation on all levels,”
(Ibid., 28). Also reference Raymond A. Mentzer and Andrew Spicer, “Introduction: Être protestant,” in
Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, ed. Raymond A. Mentzer and Andrew Spicer
(Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 3. This call to take religion seriously as a
motivating factor in the lives of early modern Protestants and Catholics. I am not arguing that the average
early modern individual understood theological arguments which were tossed about during the era.
However, I am arguing that historians should recognize that religious ideas changed the contextual
landscape in which the average person existed and that historians should recognize that almost all early
modern Europeans were theologians – in that God and a spiritual world existed as a part of the habitus
(Pierre Bourdieu) or Lebenswelt (Edmund Husserl) of their context. Therefore, as a historian, I take their
concerns seriously and attempt to understand how these concerns motivated them.
28
This above point is important, because what this dissertation is seeking to do is
side-step what appears to be scholarship loaded with modern presuppositions: that
religion is important and helpful or that religion is not. Both the works and approaches of
Ozment and Roper have their merit and have added significantly to modern
understandings of family life in the Reformation. Yet, both seem to defend modern
agendas (the “Christian” family was developed in the Reformation and was loving; the
Reformation was all about gender and was bad). 91 This dissertation is not attempting to
argue that the Reformation qualitatively improved or worsened conditions for men,
women, children, or families as a whole – to pose such a question seems to make modern
preoccupations normative and read them back into history. I am trying to describe how
the ecclesiastical leaders understood and articulated their religious vision of the family,
and then impressed it on their “flock.” I am also seeking to understand how the faithful
responded to such efforts, and how the shape and practices of the family were eventually
negotiated in its many manifestations. Finally, my approach is sensitive to the possibility
recognized by Joan Kelly-Gadol: “events that further the historical development of men,
liberating them from natural, social, or ideological constraints, have quite different, even
opposite, effects on women.” 92
Other scholars have briefly mentioned domestic piety and spiritualized notions of
family in early modern France, but as of yet, there has been no thorough investigation of
this subject. In the late nineteenth century Paul de Félice identified that there was a
91 Ozment seems to recognize this in Roper’s work (he cites a critique of Roper’s work published by
Sherrin Marshall, “Review of The Holy Household: Women and Morals in Reformation Augsburg by
Lyndal Roper,” The Journal of Modern History 65, no. 4 (1993): 887–889, but at times his own work
comes across as an apologia.
92 Joan Kelly-Gadol, “Did Women Have a Renaissance?” in Becoming Visible: Women in European
History, ed. Renate Bridenthal, Claudia Koonz, and Susan Stuard, 2nd ed. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin
Company, 1987), 176.
29
“culte de famille collectif” which gathered each morning and evening in the early days of
the reform in France, and the more recent scholarship of individuals such as Natalie
Davis, too, identified that Reformed churches relied on families as the “arena” for prayers
and instruction. 93 This study will examine primary sources to reveal what religious
beliefs informed the Huguenots’ understandings of the family and how these beliefs were
practically implemented.
Religious Education
Scholarship on religious formation of family members has received less scholarly
attention than that given to family structure. Karen Spierling’s research on infant baptism
in Geneva has provided great insight into the church’s expectations of fathers, mothers,
and the community as a new member was initiated via baptism. 94 She makes clear the
charged religious and social meaning of baptism as well as the resistance and negotiation
which surrounded the new Reformed guidelines for infant baptism. As an addition to her
main project, Spierling discusses the catechetical expectations of the church. This study
is informative for my research because she demonstrates how rituals were interconnected
with medieval traditions, understandings of family roles, gender expectations, and webs
of authority. This work effectively integrates theological understandings into the
historical context, reflecting my aim of highlighting the theological mandates of the
Reformed church and how these came into conflict with traditional patterns of family life.
93 Paul de Félice, Les protestants d’autrefois: Les temples, les services religieux, les actes pastoraux, Vol.
1 (Paris: Librairie Fischbacher, 1897), 92. Also reference Ibid., 77–91. For other occasions on which the
French “holy household” has been mentioned, see Davis, “Ghosts, Kin, and Progeny,” 99; Barbara B.
Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross: Catholics and Huguenots in Sixteenth-Century Paris (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1991), 107, 126; Mentzer, Blood & Belief, 145.
94 Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva.
30
While Spierling’s work is concerned with a single family-related practice, my work seeks
to investigate how religion impacted the entire family unit and home in the French
context. By broadening my scope, I hope to discover how the various parts of the family
acted in concert with the others. For example, was the demand on fathers to teach the
basic church confessions to his family – a role often assumed by the mother – resented by
fathers or mothers? If so, how did fathers respond? Mothers? Children? This aims to
provide a deeper and broader understanding of how formation of the family affected all
members, often shifting responsibilities from one individual to another.
Gerald Strauss’ influential book Luther’s House of Learning attempted to evaluate
the success of Lutheran reformers in their efforts to transmit their faith to the young.
After examining the goals and techniques of indoctrination, he concludes that this
pedagogical endeavor was a failure: a century after the Reformation had been in progress,
an “appalling ignorance” of basic Protestant belief remained among ordinary German
people. 95 While Strauss’ aim, however, was to assess the success or failure of Lutheran
indoctrination, my primary objective is focused more on the process of family formation.
Viewing the Reformation less as a top-down imposition of beliefs and actions, I seek to
present how the negotiation of Reformation took place “on the ground.”
Margo Todd’s chapter on the “spiritualized household” in Christian Humanism
and the Puritan Social Order argues that the emphasis on domestic piety which is found
among English Puritans in the early modern era was not uniquely Protestant: “the
spiritualized household of protestant England proves to be flowing in precisely the same
direction as Catholic humanist thought about family in the sixteenth century.” 96 By
95 Strauss, Luther’s House of Learning.
96 Margo Todd, Christian Humanism and the Puritan Social Order (Cambridge, U.K.; New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1987), 98.
31
looking upstream, she asserts, the sources can be seen to originate in classical ideas
which were “transmitted to the puritans by humanist authors and editors.” 97 While her
arguments may accurately apply to England, she relies on primarily late evidence (from
the end of the sixteenth century and the seventeenth century). Regardless, her
scholarship raises the question of the sources which influenced continental reformers
such as John Calvin. Calvin was undoubtedly impacted by humanism, but his theology
was rooted in a scripture-based hermeneutical approach. He does not call upon classical
models as the standard for life, knowledge, or piety, but directs the faithful to look to the
revelation of Jesus and Scripture. As one might expect, similar themes emerge from
churches in France since many Huguenot pastors were trained in Geneva.
Although concerned with Catholic instruction, Karen Carter’s recent book
Creating Catholics: Catechism and Primary Education in Early Modern France provides
a valuable examination of the processes of instruction and catechism which paralleled
Protestant efforts to produce educated and confessionally-faithful Huguenots. While
comparing and contrasting parallel efforts can be revealing, it is helpful to remember that
even if similar paradigms were employed (e.g., the Christian home as a “church”), one
must ask how the French Protestants were employing them in their own context for their
own purposes. 98 Even if Catholics were engaged in similar pursuits, this may point more
towards broad efforts of confessionalization rather than identical influences or
rationalizations.
97 Ibid., 101.
98 Karen E. Carter, Creating Catholics: Catechism and Primary Education in Early Modern France (Notre
Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2011).
32
Confessional Identity
My project is keenly interested in how Huguenot leaders molded medieval
Christians into families that exhibited the distinct qualities of the Reformed confession.
The notion of confessional identity has been a crucial one to early modern historical
studies. The dialogue, however, has become increasingly detailed as the concept of
confessionalization (Konfessionalisierung) has entered the academic forum. The
confessionalization thesis developed in the late 1970s based on the earlier work of Walter
Zeeden and Gerhard Oestreich. Zeeden’s work examined the process through which the
ambiguous confessional identities in the early Reformation solidified into distinct, selfconscious religious communities (Catholic, Lutheran, and Reformed). 99 Oestreich
developed the concept of social disciplining in which he claimed the early modern state
played a crucial role in fostering church discipline and confessional identity. 100 Based on
these intellectual sources, Wolfgang Reinhard argued that confessionalization was tied to
political centralization and absolutism, 101 and Heinz Schilling emphasized how
ecclesiastical discipline was used by rulers to wield social control. 102 For both, the
99 Ernst Walter Zeeden, Die Entstehung der Konfessionen: Grundlagen und Formen der
Konfessionsbildung im Zeitalter der Glaubenskämpfe (Munich/Vienna: Oldenbourg, 1965); Ernst Walter
Zeeden, Konfessionsbildung. Studien zur Reformation, Gegenreformation und katholischen Reform
(Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1985).
100 Gerhard Oestreich, Neostoicism and the Early Modern State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1982); Winfried Schulze, “Gerhard Oestreichs Begriff Sozialdisziplinierung in Der Frühen Neuzeit,”
Zeitschrift Für Historische Forschung 14 (1987): 265–302.
101 Wolfgang Reinhard, “Gegenreformation als Modernisierung? Prolegomena zu einer Theorie des
konfessionellen Zeitalters,” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 68 (1977): 226–52; Wolfgang Reinhard,
“Zwang zur Konfessionalisierung? Prolegomena zu einer Theorie des konfessionellen Zeitalters,”
Zeitschrift für historische Forschung 10 (1983): 257–277.
102 Heinz Schilling, Konfessionskonflikt und Staatsbildung: Eine Fallstudie über das Verhältnis von
religiösem und sozialem Wandel in der Frühneuzeit am Beispiel der Grafschaft Lippe, Quellen und
Forschungen der Reformationsgeschichte 48 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1981); Heinz Schilling,
“Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich: Religiöser und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in Deutschland zwischen
1555 und 1620,” Historische Zeitschrift 246, no. 1 (1988): 1–45.
33
Reformation was top-down and contributed to the acceleration of state formation.
However, scholars like Marc Forster, Heinrich Richard Schmidt, Michael Driedger, and
others have identified the limited value of confessionalization as a historical paradigm,
and called for a revision or even rejection of the term. 103 Philip Benedict has raised the
counter-example of France, where confessionalization led to the near disintegration of the
state. 104 He provided help for the field by distinguishing between a “strong”
Reinhard/Schilling-style theory of confessionalization (which linked the development of
confessional identities to social disciplining and state building) and “weak” theory of
confessionalization (which emphasized the “process of rivalry” whereby the various
confessions “defined and enforced their particular versions of orthodoxy and orthopraxy,
demonized their rivals, and built group cohesion and identity” 105).
When used with discrimination, confessionalization can be a useful construct by
which to analyze the actions of the church. Employing Benedict’s distinction, my
dissertation seeks to utilize a weak theory of confessionalization in examining the
103 For example, the following have contributed to this conversation: Marc R. Forster, The Counter-
Reformation in the Villages: Religion and Reform in the Bishopric of Speyer, 1560-1720 (Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press, 1992); Marc R. Forster, Catholic Revival in the Age of the Baroque: Religious
Identity in Southwest Germany, 1550-1750 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001); Heinrich
Richard Schmidt, “Sozialdisziplinierung? Ein Plädoyer für das Ende des Etatismus in der
Konfessionalisierungsforschung,” Historische Zeitschrift 265, no. 3 (1997): 639–682; Heinrich R. Schmidt,
Dorf und Religion: reformierte Sittenzucht in Berner Landgemeinden der Frühen Neuzeit (New York:
Lucius & Lucius DE, 1995); Michael D. Driedger, Obedient Heretics: Mennonite Identities in Lutheran
Hamburg and Altona During the Confessional Age (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2002); Stefan
Ehrenpreis and Ute Lotz-Heumann, Reformation Und Konfessionelles Zeitalter (Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2002); Po-Chia Hsia, Social Discipline in the Reformation: Central
Europe 1550-1750 (London: Routledge, 1992); David Mayes, Communal Christianity: The Life and Loss
of a Peasant Vision in Early Modern Germany (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishing, 2004).
104 Philip Benedict, “Confessionalization in France? Critical Reflections and New Evidence,” in Society
and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, ed. Raymond A. Mentzer and Andrew Spicer (Cambridge,
U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 44–61.
105 Ibid., 48.
34
Huguenot leaders’ efforts to create a defined Reformed identity. Without a doubt, the
family was a key component of confessionalization. My dissertation aims to demonstrate
how exactly the Reformed family came to be such a strong and recognizable symbol in
bi-confessional France and how each catechism, sermon, and act of discipline furthered
this larger process.
Documents and Hagiography: The Tendentious Historiography of French Protestantism
Philip Benedict opens his research on book ownership in Metz with a lament
regarding the narrow interpretive lens through which the history of the Huguenots has
been understood:
Compared with the voluminous literature on Anglo-American
Puritanism, remarkably little is known about Huguenot religious
culture. While the Puritan ‘mind’ has been dissected by a
remarkable succession of scholars wielding analytic tools of all
descriptions, the historiography of French Protestantism has been
so dominated by the twin themes of persecution and resistance that
the properly religious history of the movement has been all but
neglected. 106
Elsewhere he places the blame chiefly on the nineteenth-century historians – who were
Huguenots themselves and whose preoccupations were “shaped by the faith’s
problematic and long-contested place within the French national community.” 107 These
historians fought against the long-standing accusation that the Huguenot movement was
an “alien element in a Catholic country,” and seditious from its birth. Such historical
baggage “produced a historiography that emphasize[d] the political history of the
106 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 153.
107 Ibid., 4.
35
movement and the story of its struggle for legal recognition while largely neglecting its
institutional and theological development.” 108
David Nicholls is more acerbic in his assessment of this historiography. He
contends that early studies of the French Reformation – as exemplified by the Société de
l’Histoire du Protestantisme Français (SHPF) and its Bulletin (BSHPF) – are a mixture
of the scholarly and the unabashedly filiopietistic. 109 His research elaborates on
Benedict’s observations and identifies two primary purposes of the writing of this early
Huguenot history. First, in response to hostility from without and divisions within,
French Protestant historians sought to present their religious tradition as exemplary.
These historians, he explains,
wanted to dispel prejudices, to hold up the Huguenots as edifying
examples for the present, to imbue young people with Protestant
morality, and to keep traditions alive – if necessary by inventing
them, as with the fête de la Réformation, founded on the Society’s
initiative in the 1860s. History was to be a guide for
contemporaries, with a particular stress on the unity supposedly
created by past struggles and suffering. 110
This trajectory presented early Huguenotism as a unified theological movement (namely,
Calvinist), monolithic in its form and aim. Second, these historians presented early
French Protestant history as positivist, a popular movement for liberty. This narrative
asserted that this religious group was composed not of foreign revolutionaries; rather it
was a nationalist movement for “freedom of conscience rather than control of the
state.” 111 In the end, Nicholls affirms Benedict’s analysis that this historiography
108 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 568.
109 David Nicholls, “The Social History of the French Reformation: Ideology, Confession and Culture,”
Social History 9, no. 1 (January 1984): 26–27.
110 Ibid., 27.
111 Ibid.
36
masked most features of Huguenot history other than that which presented the “triumphs
and tribulations of the spirit of truth immanent in history.” 112 The end of the nineteenth
and beginning of the twentieth century saw great improvement with the emergence of
scholars such as Pierre Imbart de la Tour, Lucien Romier, Henri Hauser, and Lucien
Febvre whose careful attention to the social history and provincial particularities of
Huguenots raised the quality of scholarship. This project seeks to build on the
scholarship of these scholars – as well as more recent research – to bring to light the
religious culture of the Huguenots as it related to their families.
The Huguenot Family: A Missing (Historical) Piece
The historical material falling outside the twin themes of “persecution and
resistance” is great. It is impossible to know the full impact this early bias made (and
continues to make) on the study of French Protestantism. As Benedict observed, it has
not only distorted the historiography, but also has obscured certain areas of study within
this field. Fruitful research has emerged over the past several decades, painting a fuller
picture of the Huguenot experience. The research of scholars such as Bernard Roussel,
Raymond Mentzer, Élisabeth Labrousse, Janine Garrison, and Philip Benedict have
opened important windows into the social and devotional life of this religious minority.
While some research has been done on the religious life of the French Reformed family,
it is a subject which has continued to suffer from a lack of scholarly attention. No study
providing a comprehensive examination of this area has been undertaken; my research
112 Ibid., 28. Or, in Greengrass’ estimation, sources like the Bulletin, “presented an inevitably positive
picture of the French reformation for the faithful. It was doctrinally united around Calvinism. It was a
struggle for liberty and progress and not just an accident occasioned by the abuses in the traditional church.
Protestants were also good Frenchmen, enlightened citizens, rarely intolerant, and never seditious
demagogues” (Greengrass, The French Reformation, vi).
37
addresses this lacuna, drawing the Huguenot family from the shadows of the movement’s
political history.
A study of Huguenot families has great value for several reasons: first, it sheds
light on one of the most basic and primal of all human relations. The subjects of the
structure and perception of the European family, rightly, have received great scholarly
attention because the family formed the earliest and most fundamental definition of
individuals: it defined one’s relationship to others as daughter or son, sister or brother,
niece or nephew; it shaped one’s worldview, perceptions, and biases; it existed at the
intersection of individual and society. While larger studies have produced insights in
various areas of its history, the impact of religion on the Huguenot family is sorely
missing.
Second, for reasons outlined above, the narrative of the French Reformation has
been stunted and skewed. To gain a clearer understanding of the Huguenots, a study of
the construction of their families is fundamental. There is more, however. Huguenot
churches placed great importance on the family, but they did not simply value family.
They sought to remake family. It is the motivation behind this and its ultimate affect
which interests me. My research inquires: What were the theological ideas and political
pressures which motivated the consistories to create these “little churches”, and what
mechanisms were used to produce families which would reflect this ideal? Conversely,
what cultural traditions and personal preferences led families to embrace or reject the
demands of the ecclesiastical leaders? While Geneva has received much attention as one
of the strongholds of the Reformed faith, scholars have questioned to what extent it is
anomalous and useful for drawing wider conclusions. The broader historical and
geographical landscape of the French Reformed churches may provide broader insights
for constructing a broad picture of Reformed churches and societies.
38
Third, it provides insight into the connections between family and religion. The
Huguenot ecclesiastical records provide an ideal opportunity to analyze the ways in
which religious traditions influence the roles of fathers and mothers, the function of the
home as a sacred space, and more generally, families’ values, identity, self-perception,
and view of religious practices. This is principally true in the study of the early modern
world in which the divide between the secular and sacred did not exist as it would in a
post-Enlightenment world. Barbara Diefendorf confessed a “naïveté” in her early
scholarship which prevented her from giving a satisfactory account of events in sixteenth
century Paris: she believed that “religious conflicts had relatively little effect on the kind
of social transformations the [she] was studying.” However, she subsequently recognized
that “religious and secular motivations were inseparable,” encouraging the fields of
History and Religious Studies to be mutually informative. 113 Following her lead, I seek
to reveal the role religion played in the French Reformed families.
Finally, this research reveals how families which exist within a minority religion
function and respond to political and religious pressure. Thus, in a minority position, the
Huguenot family functions simultaneously as an incubator of faith, community of
subversion, and transmitter of identity. My dissertation seeks to reveal how these roles
interact with and inform each other. Ultimately, in a world of turmoil and change it was
one of the only consistent aspects of its members’ identity, and as Raymond Mentzer has
demonstrated, even trumped confessional loyalties at times. 114 Such a family experience
differed greatly from that of its religiously franchised neighbors and is important to
understand in its own terms.
113 Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross, 3, 6.
114 Mentzer, Blood & Belief, 45–46, 119, 157, 176–177.
39
The Critical Influences of John Calvin and Geneva
Writing a dissertation on the Huguenot religious reform of the family would be
nearly impossible without referencing Calvin and Geneva. This is true for two main
reasons. First, from the 1550s onward the French Reformed churches were increasingly
tied to and shaped by Calvin and the reform in Geneva. Calvin himself was a
Frenchman, and as Raymond Mentzer argues, “retained an abiding interest in events
throughout his native France,” such that the shape of French Protestantism
“unquestionably owed much to Calvin.” 115 He sent representatives to every national
synod of the French Reformed Churches, and some of his representatives even presided
over the meetings. 116 Calvin also personally maintained contact with many individuals
from France through travel, hosting them in Geneva, and frequent correspondences. 117
115 Raymond A. Mentzer, “Acting on Calvin’s Ideas: The Church in France,” in Calvin and the Church,
ed. David Foxgrover (Grand Rapids, MI: Calvin Studies Society, 2002), 29. This concern for France lasted
until his death: “The problems of one particular area stand out, as they had for much of the time since the
Reformed regime was consolidated in Geneva, in 1555. This area was France. Until the end, Calvin kept
receiving and reporting on the political news from that country. Until the end, he kept advising the faithful
in France on how to adapt themselves to an environment which continued to be basically hostile. And until
the end, he maintained his correspondence with the powerful French aristocrats who were his main hope for
the conversion of the entire kingdom,” Robert M. Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French
Protestant Movement, 1564-1572: A Contribution to the History of Congregationalism, Presbyterianism,
and Calvinist Resistance Theory (Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1967), 13–14. So
strong was this connection that Kingdon asserted that, “Behind the French Reformed Church, however, as
all parties to the controversies [regarding church institutional structure] recognized, lay the Church of
Geneva. Many of the institutions and practices in use among the French Reformed had been borrowed
directly from Geneva,” (Ibid., 38). Also reference Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 135; Diefendorf, Beneath
the Cross, 118–123; Gordon, Calvin, 304; Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 84; Lee Palmer
Wandel, The Eucharist in the Reformation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 176, 185;
Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 139, 142. Although he remained exiled from his homeland
for the latter half of his life – and even confessed in his 1561 preface to his lectures on Daniel that he had
“no desire to return to it” because the Gospel had been “banished” – he admitted that “it would not be in
accordance with either human or divine obligation to forget the people from which I spring and ignore all
regard for their welfare,” (quoted in Gordon, Calvin, 317).
116 Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement, 73.
117 Steinmetz, Calvin in Context, 4; Gordon, Calvin, 251, 262. Due to repression in France, many French
began to move to Geneva by the late 1540s. France had annexed the duchy of Savoy in 1536, making
40
In fact, so great was his influence that he could write to the Elector Palatine in 1558 and
assert, “I do not [doubt] that our brethren of France hold the same opinions that are taught
by me, for they make use of the catechism of our church.” 118 The sentiment was
reciprocated from the Huguenot side: “In 1550 the regent of Nîmes, Claude Baduel,
wrote to Philip Melanchthon, his former teacher in Wittenberg, that their only solace lay
in the ‘teaching of God’s Word, . . . the Genevan church . . . and John Calvin, who
through that piety, sound teaching and strength of soul that you know so well, consoles us
in our deepest misfortune frequently and powerfully with his letters.’” 119 While these
interactions produced tensions between French churches and Geneva at times, it also
produced strong ties: the French churches looked to Calvin and Geneva as a model of
reform. In one case, a church of Rouen sent a promising student to study at the Genevan
academy “to learn that good order . . . was born first among you [Geneva] and then
spread to the churches of France.” 120
Geneva a convenient place to relocate. Historians have estimated that by 1560, approximately 10,000
people had immigrated into Calvin’s city (Greengrass, The French Reformation, 31–38).
118 John Calvin, Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 6, ed. Henry Beveridge and
Jules Bonnet (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983), 21 February 1558, 408.
119 Gordon, Calvin, 304. In Philip Schaff’s history of the reformation, he adds other later French
Protestant voices to demonstrate the sentiment of the Huguenot church toward Geneva: for example, Moses
Amyraut (1596-1645) stated: “That incomparable Calvin, to whom mainly, next to God, the Church owes
its Reformation, not only in France, but in many other parts of Europe.” Charles Drelincourt (1595-1669)
affirmed that “In that prodigious multitude of books which were composed by Calvin, yon see no words
thrown away; and since the prophets and apostles, there never perhaps was a man who conveyed so many
distinct statements in so few words, and in such appropriate And well-chosen terms. . . . Never did Calvin's
life appear to me more pure or more innocent than after carefully examining the diabolical calumnies with
which some have endeavored to defame his character, and after considering all the praises which his
greatest enemies are constrained to bestow on his memory,” Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church,
Volume 7: Modern Christianity, The Swiss Reformation (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1894), 274.
120 Quoted in Karin Maag, Seminary or University?: The Genevan Academy and Reformed Higher
Education, 1560-1620 (Aldershot, England: Scolar Press, 1995), 109.
41
Furthermore, Calvin and the Genevan church invested heavily in France, sending
great amounts of literature (Bibles, psalters, catechisms, devotional materials, and
propaganda), financial aid, and advice. 121 Calvin’s writings were among those most
frequently found in Huguenot homes, shaping the theological perspective of the leaders
and congregants. It has been estimated that 70% of the books on France’s prohibited
index of books came off of Genevan presses. 122
French Catholics were anxious regarding the Protestant printing: in a letter (c.
1560) to the lieutenants of the sénéchaussée, a cathedral canon exclaimed,
The malicious desire of the heretics to deceive the faithful is
nowhere more evident than in the production of books full of
heresy, for by them they preach and dogmatize even in places from
which they are absent or which are forbidden to them, and imprint
in the memory thoughts which time or sound teaching would make
them forget, and in a more eloquent, attractive and memorable
style than the spoken word. 123
So apparent was Geneva’s connection to the Huguenot churches that the French
government worked hard to sever ties between the two. The Edict of Châteaubriant
(1551) contained numerous articles (II, XXI, XXXVII-XXXIX) which cited Geneva as a
source of sedition and prohibited all contact with Geneva. 124
The strongest influence of Calvin’s theology in the Huguenot churches, however,
was the training French pastors received in Geneva. As Robert Kingdon and Karin Maag
121 Greengrass, The French Reformation, 31, 64; Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 74;
Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 142; Gordon, Calvin, 288.
122 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 132, 134; Gordon, Calvin, 132.
123 Quoted by Watson, “Preaching, printing, psalm-singing,” 14.
124 A. C. Duke, Gillian Lewis, and Andrew Pettegree, Calvinism in Europe, 1540-1610: A Collection of
Documents (Manchester [England]; New York: Manchester University Press, 1992), 60–64; Gordon,
Calvin, 181–185, 289; Greengrass, The French Reformation, 26–27; Nicholls, “Popular Heresy in France,”
270.
42
have demonstrated, the academy in Geneva fulfilled a vital educational role for the
French churches. 125 Only some of the displaced Catholic priests decided to embrace the
Protestant ideas and continue in ministry. In an effort to secure qualified pastors, French
churches looked to Geneva as an intellectual center, and they addressed the dearth of
clergy by both appealing to Calvin to send pastors, as well as financially sponsoring
young men from their churches to attend the academy. Geneva sent 220 pastors to
France, yet this was far from enough, leaving Calvin to lament to Heinrich Bullinger in
1561,
Pastors are demanded from all parts. . . . My door is besieged like
that of a king. Vacant posts are fought over as if the reign of
Christ had been peaceably established in France . . .. But our
resources are exhausted. We are reduced to searching everywhere,
even in the artisan’s workshop, to find men with some smattering
of doctrine and of piety as candidates for the ministry. 126
These Genevan-trained ministers doubtless had listened to numerous sermons by Calvin,
attended daily Bible lectures, witnessed the method of discipline imposed by the Genevan
consistory, and probably had completed some practical training in or around Geneva.
These ministers returned to France – many to the same regions from which they had
come – engrained with Calvin’s sermons, biblical commentaries, tracts, treatises, and
theology. 127 Between 1555 and 1570, 1250 Huguenot churches emerged in France: their
125 Kingdon, Geneva and the Coming, part 1; Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French
Protestant Movement, 33–36; Maag, Seminary or University, chapter 4.
126 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 134; Kingdon, Geneva and the Coming, 103; Prestwich, “Calvinism in
France, 1559-1629,” 8; Greengrass, The French Reformation, 40. For more information in the social status
and service of the pastors, see Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement,
33; Gordon, Calvin, 313–315.
127 Kingdon claims that these “missionaries” were “molded by the increasingly rigid matrix of Geneva,”
Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement, 34–36; Gordon, Calvin, 185.
43
theological and institutional shape reflected Calvin’s formidable influence, and they were
recreating a church which they had witnessed in Geneva. 128
Although some scholars have reacted against the perception that the French
Reformation was simply an appendage of Calvin and Geneva 129 – in part because the
early Reformation exhibited great diversity and was heavily influenced by places such as
Strasbourg 130 – by the 1550s Calvin’s influence became increasingly clear as the
Huguenot churches organized themselves according to Reformed theology. The French
Reformed churches did not heed Geneva’s advice in all cases, but the connection between
France and Geneva was so strong that even an individuals like a French Jesuit could
comment that, “In every city ministers from Geneva preach; they have won the principal
people and almost all the magistrates, who do not punish any heretics. . . . I believe the
Lord has abandoned [this country].” 131
The second reason why Calvin and Geneva are essential to a study of Huguenot
families is because of the scarcity of sources. French Protestants kept few personal
records or diaries which give direct insight into their lives. A vast number of documents
128 Garrisson-Estèbe, Protestants du Midi, 83; Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 134.
129 Benedict claims that the historiography of France’s endebtedness to Geneva was a Genevan invention:
“While all of these [Crespin’s martyrology and Beza’s ecclesiastical history] abound with details available
nowhere else, all – since the latter two were published in Geneva – view the events in France from a
distinctly Genevan perspective. Only recently have historians become fully cognizant of the distortions
that these sources might impose on our view of the early growth of our movement and begun to read the
evidence with a concern to capture the full range of ideas current among the ‘mal-sentans pour la foy’”
(Benedict, “Settlements: France,” 426).
130 Sunshine, Reforming French Protestantism, especially 3, 4, 10–11, 20ff., 26–27, 30; Prestwich,
“Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 85–86; Gordon, Calvin, 250, 309–310; Greengrass, “France,” 55;
Greengrass, The French Reformation, 21–23, 38, 40; Nicholls, “France,” 129; Kingdon, Geneva and the
Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement, 41, 72–74.).
131 A. Lynn Martin, The Jesuit Mind: The Mentality of an Elite in Early Modern France (Ithaca & London:
Cornell University Press, 1988), 90.
44
were systematically destroyed by order of the crown following the Revocation of the
Edict of Nantes in 1685 in its attempt to expunge the realm of trace and memory of the
Huguenot minority. This shortage of sources has led Benedict to assert that an “indirect
approach” is therefore necessary to comprehend the world of the Huguenots. 132 This
dissertation adopts this challenge to develop an indirect approach to understand Huguenot
families by comparing the French Reformed experience to that of Geneva (and Calvin
specifically).
Allow me to explain the value and benefits of this approach. As mentioned, this
study relies heavily on discipline records with the goal of discovering how families were
shaped by local churches and to gauge the response of the congregants. To understand
the words and actions of the Huguenot consistories, it is important to understand the
theological foundations which guided their actions. When French consistories ordered
fathers to stay away from taverns and remain at home, for instance, what was the
meaning behind their language? In examining Calvin’s theology and the Genevan
consistory records, this meaning becomes very clear. As chapter 3 will illustrate, the
exact same phrases were used in Geneva – the training ground for the Huguenot pastors –
and were a part of a theological matrix which emphasized the rejection of impure
company and the embrace of a constant patriarchal presence in the home. Without the
theological sources and comprehensive discipline records from Geneva established as a
backdrop, the more fragmentary Huguenot sources would not be as intelligible or as
revealing.
Given the strong influence of Calvin and Geneva’s direct guidance, theology,
training of pastors, and resources, each chapter of this dissertation will examine facets of
132 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 153.
45
Calvin’s theological perspectives as explicated in his Institutes, commentaries, sermons,
and letters. Accordingly, it will also analyze Genevan consistory records from the first
two and a half years of the consistory’s existence (nearly thirty months, from early 1542
to mid-1544) to understand how it began to implement its vision of the godly family.
The interplay between Geneva and the various French Reformed churches will more fully
reveal the vision and reality of Huguenot godly families.
The Window of Investigation
The period from 1559–1685 is a naturally delimited era for investigating French
Reformed churches because these years represent the fullest manifestation of the
churches. To gain a understanding of the religious and political context, however, it is
helpful to establish the historical setting. While Luther’s writings reached France in
1518–1519, reform preceded the Protestant movement. 133 The spark in this early
religious reform was Guillaume Briçonnet, who was appointed bishop of the diocese of
Meaux in 1516. His interest centered on renewing spirituality and morality through an
emphasis on preaching and the reading of scripture. In this mission he attracted a
talented group of reform-minded individuals to Meaux, including François Vatable,
Gérard Roussel, Michel d’Arande, Martial Masurier, and Guillaume Farel. For these
reformers, Bruce Gordon argues, “It was [Jacques] Lefèvre, not Luther, who shaped
evangelical thought in the 1520s, and the German reformer’s writings were read through
the lens of the French humanist.” 134 Although Briçonnet was not Protestant – in fact in
133 Benedict, “Settlements: France,” 422; Gordon, Calvin, 11. “The Basle printer, Johann Froben, reported
to Luther that six hundred copies of his books had been sent to France and Spain and that they had been
well-received, even by some members of the theological faculty” (Ibid., 12).
134 Gordon, Calvin, 13.
46
1523 he forbade priests in his diocese from having Luther’s writings and revoked powers
of preachers that were too “Lutheran” – his reform agenda caught the attention of the
Sorbonne. 135 Those of the “Meaux Circle” found protection in the royal graces of
Marguerite of Navarre, who was involved in the group from 1521, but even this was not
enough to hold back the ire of the Sorbonne and Parlement. 136 The Sorbonne met 103
times in 1523 to denounce writings of Erasmus, Luther, Melanchthon, Lefèvre, and
others. As the fear of heresy intensified, Luther’s books were seized and burned.
Parlement drew up a list of prohibited doctrines and ordered that all translations of
Scriptures were to be suppressed. 137 Although the diocese of Meaux was investigated,
persecuted, and effectively closed down in 1526, it served as the “springboard of
Reformation.” 138 Its members fled abroad, taking their ideas with them. 139 In light of
the early religious stirring of Meaux in the 1520s, it is of little surprise that one of the
first Protestant churches emerged in that region in 1546. 140
The infiltration of Protestantism into France was far from organized or
methodical, leading historian Lucien Febvre to refer to this period as one of “glorious
135 Nicholls, “France,” 124; Gordon, Calvin, 14; Benedict and Reinburg, “Religion and the Sacred,” 135–
136.
136 For more on Marguerite of Navarre, see Jonathan A. Reid, King’s Sister - Queen of Dissent:
Marguerite of Navarre (1492-1549) and Her Evangelical Network, 2 vols. (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2009).
137 Greengrass, The French Reformation, 9–12; Gordon, Calvin, 14. Bruce Gordon, however, places this
in perspective when he notes that even in the 1520s, evangelical publications only represented 80 of the
2500 works published in that decade (Ibid., 16).
138 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 77; Nicholls, “France,” 123; Gordon, Calvin, 15–16,
182. Gordon argues that this persecution was checked by the crown, in part because the Meaux Circle
enjoyed connections to the royal court; in 1533 Noël Beda was banished from Paris for censuring Gérard
Roussel’s preaching, which attracted as many as 5000 people (Ibid., 36).
139 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 77.
140 Greengrass, The French Reformation, 21; Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 143.
47
religious anarchy.” 141 Scholars have characterized the religious activity of the decades of
the 1530s and 1540s as clandestine, lacking theological cohesiveness or unity, and rife
with confusion. There were no pastors, no sacraments, and no formal structure. 142
Because of the diversity of religious ideas, and lack of any clear single, predominate
theology, Nicholls claims that it made “little sense to talk of Protestants as opposed to
Catholics, only of patrons and clients, with the result that the consistency historians look
for is not to be found.” 143 One person called the Virgin Mary a whore, another denied
the existence of hell and that Judas was damned, another refused to answer the
Parlement’s questions because he claimed “he was the son of God and therefore they had
no right to interrogate him.” 144 All unorthodox ideas were labeled “Lutheranism.”
Contemporaries had little knowledge of variations of Protestantism (in part because
Protestantism itself was still solidifying), a point illustrated by Florimond de Raemond’s
characterization of Lefèvre, Farel, and Roussel as “Lutheran Zwinglians.” 145
141 Lucien Febvre, A New Kind of History: From the Writings of Febvre, ed. Peter Burke (London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1973).
142 Nicholls’ article (“Popular Heresy in France.”) provides an insightful treatment of the religious context
at the time. Greengrass argues that individuals did not see the emergence of religious sentiments as a new
religion; thus no one stepped up into leadership (Greengrass, The French Reformation, 20). Also reference
Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 83; Nicholls, “France,” 120; Greengrass, The French
Reformation, vi, 8; Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 136.
143 Nicholls, “France,” 127; Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 136.
144 Cited in Nicholls, “Popular Heresy in France,” 274. For a summary of what “heretics” might have
believed and been punished for, see Ibid., 271–274.
145 Benedict, “Settlements: France,” 421–423; Nicholls, “Popular Heresy in France,” 261, 268. Nicholls
elaborates that “. . . heretics were defined by their being opposed to certain dogmas and practices, and were
accused of proffering specific ‘heretical propositions’ or blasphemies’” (Ibid., 270). For more on the
confessional fluidity of the early French Reformation, see Watson, “Preaching, printing, psalm-singing,”
11–18.
48
The response from the Sorbonne, Parlement, and crown was anything but swift.
Considering the amorphous and messy nature of the spread of these religious ideas – not
to mention the other contemporary issues, such as conflicts with Spain – it is quite
understandable. 146 While the Sorbonne declared in 1530 that biblical languages were not
vital to the study of scripture, it was not until the 1540s that the more aggressive attack on
heresy took place. 147 The Edict of Fontainebleau (1540) transferred prosecution of
heresy cases from the church to the courts of the crown, “making false belief a matter of
sedition, a crime of spiritual and temporal lèse majesté.” 148 1543 witnessed the
emergence of a clearer orthodoxy as the Sorbonne released a confession of faith,
followed two years later by the index of prohibited books. Henry II created a special
chamber within the Parlement of Paris in 1547, the chambre ardent, for the repression of
heresy. 149 The lengthy Edict of Châteaubriant (1551) mandated that property and goods
from all religious émigrés was to be confiscated, made informing on heretical neighbors
mandatory and sheltering them punishable, established new courts to prosecute heresy,
and excluded evangelicals from office-holding. 150 In 1557, the Edict of Compiègne
declared the death penalty for those who persisted in this heresy. 151 This array of
146 “The clarity between orthodoxy and heresy was, however, a long way off, even in 1530. The
impression of measured coherence in the institutional response to the Lutheran reform is almost completely
illusory. Even the Sorbonne was bitterly divided and obsessed with the possibility of heresy in its ranks,”
(Greengrass, The French Reformation, 10, 12). Also reference Nicholls, “France,” 122.
147 Gordon, Calvin, 32. Also reference Watson, “Preaching, printing, psalm-singing,” 16.
148 Gordon, Calvin, 181, 184.
149 Benedict notes that “the judges of the royal law courts . . . were deeply divided over just how harshly
the laws against heresy should be enforced. Only seven percent of those denounced to the chambre ardent
for heresy were condemned to death, and the percentage is lower still for the two other Parlements for
which we have statistical evidence” Benedict, “Settlements: France,” 42.
150 Gordon, Calvin, 181–185; Greengrass, The French Reformation, 26–27; Nicholls, “Popular Heresy in
France,” 270.
49
measures was perhaps as disorganized as the movements it sought to combat, and amidst
the confusion, divergent theologies developed and spread. 152
This religious diversity was eventually brought under the theology of John Calvin.
The broad diversity which characterized French Protestantism disappeared in the 1550s.
Calvin’s 1541 French edition of the Institutes as well as his other vernacular writings
were an enormous success in his homeland. 153 Nonetheless, Nicholls disparages the
notion that the diversity of Protestantism in France was “suddenly brought under control
merely because the French edition of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion became
available,” cautioning historians against simplistically portraying Calvin’s ideas as
instantly or completely providing a uniting system for Huguenots. The Institutes did
provide a common bond, but such absolute assertions fail to recognize the complexity of
the French context. 154 Yet, he admits that it is clear in the 1550s French Protestantism
was “eventually channeled by Calvinism,” and that “Calvinist theology was established
as the doctrine of Huguenotism.” 155
151 Gordon, Calvin, 308.
152 “The patchy nature of repression and the inconsistencies of royal policy helped to maintain a social
space in which individuals could develop their heretical thoughts,” Nicholls, “Popular Heresy in France,”
263.
153Gordon, Calvin, 185; Benedict, Rouen, 51.
154 Nicholls, “France,” 129, 135.
155 Ibid., 120, 135; Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 142. Prestwich describes the
transformation: “Up to the 1550s, French Protestantism was a religion of small groups devoted to prayer
and mutual edification. Lutheran ideas seeped through the porous plaster of traditional Catholic beliefs,
and Beza wrote complacently to Bullinger in 1554 that there was hardly any part of France which was not
showing some fruits of the Gospel . . .” (“Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 73–74) while Estèbe may
reveal more of a confessional bias in her claim that Calvin “came in time to canalize into a coherent
doctrine and rigorous discipline all the heretical ferment which had penetrated the population” Robert
Mandrou et al., eds., Histoire des protestants en France (Toulouse: Eduoard Privat, 1977), 50, as quoted by
Nicholls, “Popular Heresy in France,” 261.
50
As Protestant communities coalesced in the 1550s, congregations appeared:
churches in Poitiers (1554), Paris (1555), and Orléans (1557) were established and
possessed consistories. 156 By this time it was being reported that entire towns were
transitioning to Protestantism. 157 The first national synod in Paris in 1559 marked the
birth of the Huguenots; bound together by a common confession of faith and church
discipline, this meeting signaled the strength, organization, and unity of French
Protestants. As Prestwich asserts, “The years from around 1555 to 1562 saw an
explosion of Calvinist conversions. The foundation of the Paris church set the tone for a
mood of defiance, almost of triumph, and the will to resist replaced the cult of
martyrdom.” 158 Sources record Protestants gathering on the left bank of the Seine, three
to four thousand strong, parading and singing Psalms. 159 (Additionally, the month after
the national synod King Henry II was killed in a jousting accident, opening political
space for the Huguenots to flourish.) Such a visible and vocal presence led the Jesuit
Jean Pelletier from Toulouse to comment in 1561 that “This entire country is so full of
156 Greengrass, The French Reformation, 38; Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 85;
Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 147.
157 Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century, 144.
158 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 71. Prestwich continues, describing the era from 1559
to 1562: Huguenots were “impelled by a new offensive spirit, moving towards victory. Basements and
cellars could no longer hold the faithful, who came out into the daylight, taking over houses and churches”
(Ibid., 87). Still, Nicholls warns, “The acceptance of doctrinal unity, itself by no means unanimous, did not
mean that the growing numbers of Huguenots all thought and acted the same way or that they accepted the
views of Calvin and the Genevan theologians on any matter other than religious doctrine, that is on tactics
or politics,” (Nicholls, “France,” 129). Even the form of ecclesiastical government was unclear: Morely
wanted power to reside with the local congregation, but Calvin and Geneva wanted a stronger form which
suited a minority religious group (Greengrass, The French Reformation, 64). For a thorough treatment, see
Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement, 37–148.
159 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 71–72. Similar activities were undertaken by the
Rouennais (Benedict, Rouen, 52). Surely, this activity and the first national synod (late May) were a threat
to the crown, which issued the Edict of Écouen days later (2 June 1559) which outlawed Protestantism
(Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 72).
51
heretics that if our Lord does not have mercy and does not intervene this year then
everything is finished.” 160 Therefore, while religious reform, Protestant ideas, and
Calvinist doctrine were all present in France before this date, the established federation of
churches did not emerge until the late 1550s. 161
Due to a lack of sources and any apparent unity, it is futile to analyze the familial
aspect of this confessional group until the 1559 synod, the event which bound them to
one another under theological and constitutional statements. My dissertation, therefore,
looks to the 1559 synod as the point to begin inquiry of French Reformed families. Only
by the end of this decade can French Protestantism be recognized as a unified and distinct
religious group, an identity which would be strengthened by events such as the massacre
at Vassy (1 March 1562) and Wars of Religion (starting in May 1562).
The concluding date for this study is similarly clear. In October of 1685, Louis
XIV issued the Edict of Fontainebleau which reversed the protections offered to
Protestants under the 1598 Edict of Nantes (and therefore is commonly referred to as the
Revocation of the Edict of Nantes). It was promulgated, as Labrousse argues, “under the
specious pretext that there were no more Huguenots in France.” 162 Although the
Huguenots’ legal right to existence was formally terminated in 1685, in all actuality it
had “been in nearly every way a dead letter . . . the [Huguenot church] was disabled and
160 Quoted by Benedict, “Settlements: France,” 427. In his book on Rouen, he notes as well that the
Huguenot strength had become so undeniable and public that in April of 1561 Catherine de Medici issued
an edict “forbidding magistrates to search houses suspected of holding Huguenot assemblies, ordering the
release of all prisoners held on religious grounds, and outlawing the use of the insulting terms ‘papist’ and
‘huguenot’” (Benedict, Rouen, 52).
161 Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” 72; Greengrass, “France,” 53; Baumgartner, France in
the Sixteenth Century, 147.
162 Labrousse, “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685,” 309.
52
dying.” 163 The churches’ numerical strength had been falling since the 1560s, and their
political will was broken in the 1628 collapse of La Rochelle. 164 The following years
witnessed the steady loss of civil and religious liberties. The years preceding the
Revocation were marked by numerous decrees from the Council which “multiplied the
chances of Protestants finding themselves in breach of law, and being immediately
punished by the suppression of the church concerned and the banishment of its pastor
from the province.” 165 For example, the meeting of national synods were outlawed
(1659), it became illegal for Protestants to convert back to their faith if they had
temporarily converted to Catholicism (1663), and Protestants required special permission
before leaving France (1669). Furthermore, occupations and professions other than
agriculture and trade were closed to Huguenots, Protestant women were banned from
serving as midwives, and even the age at which Huguenot children could convert to
Catholicism was lowered.
When these measures were not found to be effective or expeditious enough,
Catholic officials and citizens resorted to abducting Huguenot children and imposing
163 Ibid., 301.
164 Most later edicts of pacification reiterated the demands gained in the 1562 Edict of Saint-Germain
(Edict of January). Philip Benedict’s analysis indicates that “. . . all but one [of the edicts of pacification]
. . . from 1563 onward parted company with the Edict of January by restricting the exercise of the ‘socalled Reformed religion’ to specified localities. This limited the Protestants’ capacity to evangelize after
1563 and probably should be considered . . . as one of the fundamental reasons why it did not continue the
dramatic expansion of the period 1555-62” (Benedict, “Settlements: France,” 439). Mack Holt asserts that
“instead of de-escalating religious tensions, however, the new edict only exacerbated them, as Catholics all
over France refused to accept it” (Mack P. Holt, “The Kingdom of France in the Sixteenth Century,” in
Renaissance and Reformation France 1500-1648, ed. Mack P. Holt (New York: Oxford University Press,
2002), 25). Also reference Labrousse, “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685,” 302.
165 Labrousse, “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685,” 306. Labrousse claims that, “Decrees framed on this
principle [Peace of Nijmegen, 1678] were so numerous that they constituted a sword of Damocles hanging
over the Huguenots, even though they were far from being systematically implemented. In consequence, in
the years just before the Revocation, there were few Protestants who were not in breach of the law, often
without knowing it” (Ibid., 307).
53
dragonnades, issues which will be examine later. 166 Although the Huguenot churches
were declining before 1685 and clandestine activities continued until the passage of the
Edict of Toleration in 1787, the Revocation clearly marks the end of their legal
recognition. There were no buildings left standing, very few pastors left to guide
congregations, and no institutional organization to provide structure: it had effectively
ceased to exist as it once had. Therefore 1559 and 1685 serve as historical bookends for
this research: how did families of the Eglises réformées de France change their families
during this one hundred and twenty-six year period?
Sources and Method
My dissertation follows in the trends of current historical studies which seek to
move beyond a single approach and mere descriptive sources. Philip Benedict asserts
that “social and cultural history are mutually illuminating specializations, not rival
absolutisms competing for explanatory hegemony.” 167 Accordingly, the research for this
project is drawn from a multiplicity of rich and varied extant sources – both prescriptive
and descriptive – and seek to represent national, local, and individual voices. Sources
include influential theological works (tracts and commentaries), official ecclesiastical
decisions related to local issues (synodal records), instructional materials representing the
local application of Reformed theology (sermons and catechisms), books for devotional
purposes (handbooks and psalters), and personal works of reflection and disclosure
(letters, diaries, and memoirs). In the past historians relied principally on records from
persons of privileged status – the educated, the nobility, the wealthy – and consequently,
166 Labrousse, “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685,” 305–308.
167 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 4.
54
historical approaches have traditionally been “top-down.” 168 As a result, ordinary people
who had limited access to social, economic, and political power remained obscured.
Since the 1980s, historians have sought out other sources that provide alternative
perspectives. However, documentation regarding those such as children, women, the
poor, the illiterate, and the disabled remain scarce, and therefore, it continues to be
difficult to “hear” their voices.
One of the strengths of this project is the inclusion and analysis of little-studied
sources: records from the disciplinary committee of the French Reformed Church – the
consistory (consistoire). 169 The consistory was a governing body for each local
Reformed congregation. It usually met weekly and was responsible for the
administration of ecclesiastical affairs, the distribution of social welfare, and the
enforcement of moral discipline, and it was composed of pastors, lay elders, and
sometimes deacons. John Calvin mandated that a consistory was an essential component
of the church, and they quickly became a mark of Reformed churches across Europe.
Robert Kingdon claims this group functioned “as a hearings court, as a compulsory
counseling service, and as an educational institution.” 170 Although its operations varied
168 For example, studies such as Steven Ozment’s When Fathers Ruled: Family Life in Reformation
Europe have been critiqued as “misleading” and making “no distinction between valid description and
moralizing rhetoric” because of their reliance on purely elite, prescriptive sources.
169 Scholars such as Raymond Mentzer, Philippe Chareyre, and Suzannah Lipscomb have creatively used
these records to reveal many facets of Huguenot religious life, and other scholars such as Robert Kingdon,
Thomas Lambert, Jeffrey Watt, Karen Spierling, Janine Olson, and Michael Graham have done the same in
other regions of Europe. I am grateful for their research, and it is on their work that my own is built.
170 Robert M. Kingdon, Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1995), 4. For a full description of this body, see Robert M. Kingdon, “The Geneva Consistory as
Established by John Calvin,” On the Way: Occasional Papers of the Wisconsin Conference of the United
Church of Christ 7 (1990): 30–44; Robert M. Kingdon, “Calvin and the Establishment of Consistory
Discipline in Geneva: The Institution and the Men Who Directed It,” Nederlands Archief Voor
Kerkgeschiedenis 70, no. 2 (1990): 158–172; William G. Naphy, “The Renovation of the Ministry in
Calvin’s Geneva,” in The Reformation of the Parishes: The Ministry and the Reformation in Town and
55
between regions, the consistory usually convened once a week to address the needs of the
church, discussing matters such as financial affairs, distribution of aid to the poor and
needy, and the schedule of worship services. But perhaps the most interesting element of
these meetings for historians was the administration of discipline wherein members
would be summoned by the consistory to account for their words and deeds. The
consistory would question members to ascertain if and why specific infractions were
committed, and if so, provide counsel, reproof, and disciplinary measures to deal with the
issue. If the consistory’s encouragement and coercion were successful, the cause of the
concern would be addressed, the sin would be properly and ceremonially expunged from
the godly community, and the individual(s) would be restored to the community.
Detailed notes of the proceedings were recorded, and then were collected into
registers. These registers provide documentation of the interactions of the church
leadership and the congregants in the course of the practical implementation of Reformed
belief. Rich, qualitative data regarding all aspects of political, social, and religious life in
the early modern period emerge as these records are examined. 171 The previously-muted
voices of individuals of a wide range of socio-economic level, status, gender, and age are
able to emerge in these documents, revealing the thoughts, fears, aspirations, and realities
of ordinary congregants. For this project, the records of the following churches will be
analyzed: Albenc (1606-1682), Archiac (1600-1637), Blois (1574-1579), Coutras (15821584), Die (1639-1686), Le Mans (1560-1561), Mussidan (1593-1599), Nîmes (1561-
Country, ed. Andrew Pettegree (Manchester [England]; New York: Manchester University Press, 1993),
113–132.
171 These consistory discipline records only began to receive scholarly attention in the last two decades
with the transcription and analysis of the discipline records of John Calvin’s Genevan church; see Thomas
A. Lambert et al., eds., Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin, Tome I (1542–1544)
(Genève: Librairie Droz, 1996); volumes 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 followed in 2001, 2004, 2007, 2010 and 2012
respectively.
56
1564), Pont-de-Camares (1574-1579), Rochechouart (1596-1635), and Saint-Gervais
(1564-1568). 172 While scholarship on discipline records has focused on types of
infractions punished, how often each type of infraction was committed, the gender of the
offender, and so forth, it has often failed to examine the offenses in light of the domestic
and familial contexts. The household held great significance for the Reformed church,
and as such, historical sources need to be examined through the lens of consistories’
preoccupation with its preservation.
Consistory records, however, are not without their limitations. 173 They do not
provide a comprehensive and accurate representation of the particular community in
which they are embedded. Discipline records are filled with stories of those who have
transgressed boundaries of proscribed Reformed morality. They contain few positive
models, leaving historians to decipher the aspirations of ecclesiastical leaders through
logic and prescriptive sources. Even within the domain of moral transgressions, records
do not reveal the full spectrum of infractions. They reflect the preoccupations of
particular leaders in particular regions. It is not uncommon for certain “sins” to have
high rates of prosecution during one time period, fade in another, or be absent in a
different consistory. Significantly, sentiments of both the consistory and congregants are
also ultimately filtered through the scribe who took notes of the proceedings.
Additionally, as Judith Pollmann has demonstrated, many issues were solved by elders
172 Despite the valuable nature of these records, many discipline registers have been destroyed, lost, or
hidden in personal collections over the years. Therefore, the dates given reflect the limits of the period the
particular set of records covers.
173 The weaknesses and value of consistory records are discussed by Karen E. Spierling, “Making Use of
God’s Remedies: Negotiating the Material Care of Children in Reformation Geneva,” The Sixteenth
Century Journal 36, no. 3 (2005): 787–788.
57
speaking informally and individually with congregants, and these interactions are never
included in the registers. 174
Despite these weaknesses, consistory records have tremendous value for
historians. Pollmann’s caution compels one to embrace an approach to these valuable
sources other than statistical analysis. Research such as that of Raymond Mentzer, Karen
Spierling, and Margo Todd masterfully demonstrates a responsible approach which
analyses specific cases in light of the larger context in order to draw meaning from
consistorial cases. 175 Historians have reexamined previous assumptions and paradigms
and modified existing conceptions of early modern society and culture because of the
important and insightful studies that have emerged. They exist as one of the only sources
which reveal expressions of the interior and religious life of commoners. Moving beyond
descriptive sources, these records, “bring to light otherwise unobservable patterns of
social and religious behavior.” 176 These types of primary sources offer the exciting
potential of a rich and informative conversation between the many individuals and
institutions involved in shaping the French Reformed family, exposing the broad range of
perspectives, interests, agendas, and modes of agency. This previously missing dialectic
animates the historical process and teases out the mixture of motivating elements both for
church leaders (for example, identity of the family, stability of the community, and future
of the Reformed Church) and for congregants (for example, personal status, honor and
shame, gender norms, community traditions).
174 Pollmann, “Off the Record.”
175 For example, Raymond A. Mentzer, “Morals and Moral Regulation in Protestant France,” Journal of
Interdisciplinary History 31, no. 1 (2000): 1–20; Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva; Margo
Todd, The Culture of Protestantism in Early Modern Scotland (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002).
176 Philip Benedict, “The Huguenot Population of France, 1600-1685: The Demographic Fate and Customs
of a Religious Minority,” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 81, no. 5 (1991): 2.
58
The analysis of these documents will serve as a lens through which to understand
the church’s deep-seated and ambitious programme of changing social familial entities
into spiritual communities. While each particular source has a specific theological and
historical context, this dissertation does not have the ability nor the aim to provide these
details. Therefore, the theological and practical purposes of sermons will be examined
only to the extent that they relate to the primary focus of family. Likewise, discipline
records will not be given the in-depth historical treatment that one might expect from a
micro-history. While each source will be studied in its entirety, only those aspects which
possess relevance to the dissertation thesis will be utilized. Examined collectively, these
sources provide a window to the multifaceted and self-reinforcing reform of Calvinist
families in France.
Dissertation Organization
This dissertation is divided into four central chapters, each of which explores a
separate facet of the ideal Reformed home. Chapter 1 examines order as the foundational
component of the home. The concept and function of order is placed in its theological
context by examining Calvin’s sermons and commentaries. The discipline records from
Geneva and France are then analyzed to compare how this theological concept was
applied to the roles and responsibilities of fathers, mothers, children, and servants and
reveal how each member of the household was to create this order. Chapter 2 focuses on
the educational mandate for the home. This chapter, too, first investigates the Genevan
vision for religious instruction in the home, and then turns to descriptive records to verify
how this was carried out by parents in Geneva and France.
Through creating an ordered home which instructed the members of the
household in the knowledge of God, the reformers were aspiring for the home to function
as sacred space, the subject of chapters 3 and 4. Chapter 3 addresses the way in which
59
the Reformed Church both rejected Catholic understandings of sacred space and
embraced its own particular understanding of how domestic space could possess a sacral
quality. It then takes up the first element of sacred space, purity, to consider how the
social location of the household members, the guests invited into the home, and the
activities engaged in all impacted the purity – and thus the sanctity – of the home.
Chapter 4 continues with the theme of sacred space to evaluate practices of domestic
piety, inquiring, “How were exercises such as family prayer, Psalm-singing, Bible
reading, sermon reading and discussions, and religious book reading intended to function
in the godly household, and what do consistory records reveal about how they were
practiced?” Together, these chapters weave together voices from numerous sources to
provide a comprehensive description and analysis of these domestic “Little Churches” in
early modern France.
60
CHAPTER 1
ORDERING THE HOLY HOUSEHOLD
. . . God’s intention is not that all men should be jumbled together
(as would happen, if there were no restraint) but that some should
rule and have authority to command others, and that they which are
under them should obey them. . . .
So then, God’s Word must have its course in this matter to restrain
both the one and the other, that we may live each man according to
his calling in such a way that God be may peaceably obeyed, and
that in listening to his voice, we may desire nothing but to perform
our duty towards him and towards all creatures . . .
– John Calvin, Sermons on the Epistle to the Ephesians 1
A central characteristic of the godly Reformed family was order. John Calvin
associated order with the very nature of God; as creation became more godly, it grew
more ordered. 2 From the personal ordering of one’s life, to the order within the church,
to the political order in a state, Paul’s admonition that “all things should be done decently
and in order” [1 Corinthians 14:40] was a frequent refrain in Calvin’s writings. 3 Calvin
claimed that it was only this order which made life possible:
let us carefully note that we cannot live together here unless this
order which God has established is holily kept, that is, unless we
esteem and honor and obey all those in authority. Without that,
1 John Calvin, Sermons on the Epistle to the Ephesians (London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1973), Eph. 6:1–4,
637 and 646.
2 For example, John Calvin, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford
Lewis Battles (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960), 1.5.2; 1.13.20.
3 For additional reading on Calvin and order, see Harro Höpfl, The Christian Polity of John Calvin
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982); Susan E. Schreiner, The Theater of His Glory: Nature
and the Natural Order in the Thought of John Calvin (Durham, NC: Labyrinth, 1991).
61
there would be one horrible confusion. . . . For that is the sole
means by which God has willed to preserve the human race. 4
Elsewhere, he derided those who would not recognize or live according to the natural
order God had established, claiming they were possessed by the devil, monsters, and
enemies of God, nature, and the whole human race. 5
The order of the world was predicated on the understanding that God had
ordained a calling to each person, a role which possessed certain duties. In his Institutes,
Calvin elaborated on what this role required from individuals:
For no one, impelled by his own rashness, will attempt more than
his calling will permit, because he will know that it is not lawful to
exceed its bounds. A man of obscure station will lead a private life
ungrudgingly so as not to leave the rank in which he has been
placed by God. Again, it will be no slight relief from cares, labors,
troubles, and other burdens for a man to know that God is his guide
in all these things. The magistrate will discharge his functions
more willingly; the head of the household will confine himself to
his duty; each man will bear and swallow the discomforts,
vexations, weariness, and anxieties in his way of life, when he has
been persuaded that the burden was laid upon him by God. From
this will arise also a singular consolation: that no task will be so
sordid and base, provided you obey your calling in it, that it will
not shine and be reckoned very precious in God’s sight. 6
Despite the fact that some possessed an “obscure” calling and others a nobler one, all
were ordained by God. Moreover, God had designed human society as a complex web of
relationships which required some to rule and some to obey. Ultimately, this hierarchy
4 John Calvin, John Calvin’s Sermons on the Ten Commandments, trans. Benjamin W. Farley (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1980), Deut. 5:16, 139.
5 Calvin asked, “[Can] we not see that the devil possesses everyone who cannot submit in all modesty to
the subjection which God has established and without which everything would perish and result in
confusion in this world?” Later he passionately exclaimed that “Thus all who rebel against legitimate
authority are both God and nature’s enemies, as well as enemies of the whole human race; they are
monsters whom we ought to detest” (Ibid., Deut. 5:16, 139 and 148). Reference Derek S. Jeffreys, “‘It’s a
Miracle of God That There Is Any Common Weal Among Us’: Unfaithfulness and Disorder in John
Calvin’s Political Thought,” Review of Politics 62, no. 1 (December 2000): 107–130.
6 Calvin, Inst., 3.10.6.
62
maintained order, making obedience to God possible and forming the foundation for
society. 7
Ordered individuals were fundamental to a stable social life, and this began in
ordered, Christian homes. 8 This understanding of order had immediate implications for
the home: Calvin’s vision for the home was one in which individuals knew their position,
each accepted the accompanying responsibilities, and all duties of domestic life were
cared for in a timely manner. Perhaps more than any other quality, however, Calvin’s
understanding of a well-ordered home was organized specifically with regard to
hierarchy. The world was ordered by God but pushed toward chaos by the sinfulness of
7 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 6:1–4, 637 and 646. Elsewhere, Calvin argued that obedience to God “is the
foundation upon which we must build in order to be obedient, humble, and subject to our superiors, which
is, to understand that God is represented in them. Now once we have removed the foundation, isn’t it
obvious that the entire edifice will slip and come crashing down?” Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 142.
Reference Michael L. Monheit, “‘The Ambition for an Illustrious Name’: Humanism, Patronage, and
Calvin’s Doctrine of the Calling,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 23, no. 2 (Summer 1992): 267–287. This
emphasis on order would have been important in Calvin’s context where the city’s Protestant leaders
wanted order and stability for their newly-created republic, as well as in France where Huguenots sought to
assure the crown that their new faith was not sedition and would not upset the political order.
8 A frequent theme in his writing was the need for Christians to reclaim order in all realms of life. For
example, Calvin asserted that the order observed in church was intentionally given by God: “For our Lord
did not institute the order to which we hold when we gather in his Name merely to amuse people in seeing
and gazing upon it; rather, he willed that from it all his people might profit, as St. Paul testifies,
commanding that everything done in the church be for the common edification /13/ of all (1 Cor. 14:26)”
John Calvin, “The Form of Prayers and Songs of the Church, 1542: Letter to the Reader,” trans. Ford Lewis
Battles, Calvin Theological Journal 15, no. 2 (1980): 160. Elsewhere he writes, “Now, all man’s faculties
are, on account of the depravity of nature, so vitiated and corrupted that in all his actions persistent disorder
and intemperance threaten because these inclinations cannot be separated from such lack of restraint.
Accordingly, we contend that they are vicious. Or, if you would have the matter summed up in fewer
words, we teach that all human desires are evil, and charge them with sin — not in that they are natural, but
because they are inordinate. Moreover, we hold that they are inordinate because nothing pure or sincere can
come forth from a corrupt and polluted nature” Calvin, Inst., 3.3.12. Calvin argues that the rightly ordered
life consists of one offered completely in service to God: “Even though the law of the Lord provides the
finest and best-disposed method of ordering a man’s life, it seemed good to the Heavenly Teacher to shape
his people by an even more explicit plan to that rule which he had set forth in the law. Here, then, is the
beginning of this plan: the duty of believers is ‘to present their bodies to God as a living sacrifice, holy and
acceptable to him,’ and in this consists the lawful worship of him [Romans 12:1]. From this is derived the
basis of the exhortation that “they be not conformed to the fashion of this world, but be transformed by the
renewal of their minds, so that they may prove what is the will of God” [Romans 12:2]. Now the great
thing is this: we are consecrated and dedicated to God in order that we may thereafter think, speak,
meditate, and do, nothing except to his glory. For a sacred thing may not be applied to profane uses without
marked injury to him” Ibid., 3.7.1.
63
humanity. Each member of the household realized this domestic order by willingly
embracing the divinely-established hierarchy of authority. It was not humanity’s place or
in humanity’s best interest to challenge God’s order.
When Calvin discussed the positions of husbands and wives, he encouraged each
to accept their respective place in the order:
God is the Source of both sexes, and hence both of them ought
with humility to accept and maintain the condition which the Lord
has assigned to them. Let the man exercise his authority with
moderation, and not insult over the woman who has been given
him as his partner. Let the woman be satisfied with her state of
subjection, and not take it amiss that she is made inferior to the
more distinguished sex. Otherwise they will both of them throw
off the yoke of God, who has not without good reason appointed
this distinction of ranks. 9
Although his interpretation might be shocking to modern sensibilities, Calvin found a
divine mandate in the biblical text for ordering the home: the father was the head of the
household, the final authority in all matters. He had authority over his wife, children, and
servants. The wife submitted to her husband, but also possessed significant authority in
the home, guiding her children and household servants. Children and servants were both
primarily instructed to obey the commands of the householders. More important than the
various positions, however, was the understanding that God had ordained the order and
ruled over all.
The hierarchical ordering of the world was not a consequence of the Fall. Calvin
insisted that God had established the order, although it did not possess the harsh nature of
the “double bond” brought on by the Fall. 10 Since God had ordained this order, each
9 John Calvin, Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, trans. John Pringle,
Calvin’s Commentaries 20 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), I Cor. 11:12, 305.
10 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 567. Also reference John Lee Thompson, John Calvin and the
Daughters of Sarah: Women in Regular and Exceptional Roles in the Exegesis of Calvin, His Predecessors,
and His Contemporaries, 1st ed. (Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1992), 138; Claude-Marie Baldwin, “Marriage in
Calvin’s Sermons,” in Calviniana: Ideas and Influence of Jean Calvin, ed. Robert V. Schnucker
(Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1988), 122–124. Claude-Marie Baldwin argues
that Calvin’s strategy places the subjection of women into a cosmic framework: all things – even the
animals – are subject to someone (Ibid., 122–123).
64
possessed a duty to honor and respect those above them and fulfill responsibilities to
those below. Calvin viewed two commandments from the Decalogue as directly
informing this order. The first was the Fifth Commandment: “Honor your father and
your mother.” Here the divinely ordained model of domestic order was deemed
important enough to be included as one of ten non-negotiable mandates for God’s people.
Calvin admonished children to follow this command by purging themselves of
“contempt,” “stubbornness,” and “ungratefulness,” instead committing themselves to
treating parents “with honor, obedience, and gratefulness.” 11 He narrowed the duty to
obey by coupling this passage with Ephesians 6:1 (“Children, obey your parents in the
Lord, for this is right,”) and emphasizing the condition “in the Lord.” Similar to Calvin’s
view on obedience toward civil authorities, he declared that children were obliged to
obey parents to the extent that parents acted as representative of God. If parents
encouraged a child to do wrong, “we have a perfect right to regard them not as parents,
but as strangers, who are trying to lead us away from obedience to our true Father. So
should we act toward princes, lords, and every kind of superiors.” 12 Here we witness
blood relations being circumscribed by the parents’ willingness to be obedient to God.
Calvin drew inspiration from a second, less intuitive commandment: “Thou shall
not steal.” He viewed a failure to act appropriately based on one’s position as a form of
theft, and thus a violation of the Eighth Commandment. The duties obliged to others, he
argued in his Institutes, were a type of debt owed. Therefore, the prohibition against theft
was to be applied in cases of people disrespecting their rulers (as well as rulers not caring
for their people), ministers delivering sermons which were impure (as well as people not
giving their ministers due honor), and servants disobeying their masters (as well as
masters oppressing their servants). This commandment also addressed the relationship of
11 Calvin, Inst., 2.8.35.
12 Ibid., 2.8.38.
65
household members to one another. If parents withheld nourishment or instruction from
their children, this was stealing; likewise, a child who failed to revere his or her elders
was guilty of theft. 13 He admonished his readers to remember their place when
considering their duties: “In this manner, I say, let each man consider what, in his rank
and station, he owes to his neighbors, and pay what he owes. Moreover, our mind must
always have regard for the Lawgiver, that we may know that this rule was established for
our hearts as well as for our hands, in order that men may strive to protect and promote
the well-being and interests of others.” 14
One of the tenets of the early Reformation was the emphasis on the priesthood of
all believers. Incidents such as the Peasants’ Rebellion in the mid-1520s applied equality
and freedom in ways reformers considered erroneous and offensive. In response to those
with antinomian tendencies, Calvin sought to limit the application of the potentiallyproblematic statement of Galatians 3:28 (“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: For ye are all one in Jesus Christ”). He
argued, instead, that this did not eradicate the divine hierarchy that God had
established. 15 Like other commentators, Calvin claimed this passage should be
understood spiritually and not applied socially, which allowed him to simultaneously
preserve the hierarchical social order and affirm the spiritual equality of all people.
13 Calvin claimed parents violated this commandment when they did not “nourish, govern, and teach, their
children committed to them by God” and warned them not to fail by “provoking their minds with cruelty or
turning them against their parents; but cherishing and embracing their children with such gentleness and
kindness as becomes their character as parents.” Conversely, he ordered youth to “reverence old age, as the
Lord willed that age be worthy of honor” (Ibid., 2.8.46).
14 Ibid.
15 “However, Paul does not mean here that there are no differences of status with regard to the society of
this world. For as we know, there are servants and masters, rulers and subjects; in the home, the husband is
the head, and the wife must be in subjection. We know this economy to be inviolable, and that our Lord
Jesus Christ did not come into this world to confuse everything by overturning what God the Father had
established,” John Calvin, Sermons on Galatians, trans. Kathy Childress (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth
Trust, 1997), Gal. 3:26–29, 352.
66
Calvin, Genevan Fathers, and Domestic Order
In the divine, “inviolable” hierarchy of the household, according to Calvin, fathers
were to hold a near-absolute rule in their homes. 16 He asserted that “In a well-regulated
house, one person, the head of the family, has the sole right to say what ought to be done;
and the servants are bound to employ their hands and feet in his service.” 17 His
understanding of the father’s responsibility and role in the home was further
communicated in his tract On Shunning the Unlawful Rites of the Ungodly and
Preserving the Purity of the Christian Religion (1537). He opened on the topic of
domestic order with an encouragement to his reader, signaling the shape of his argument:
“Then you must be particularly careful in regulating your household, over which you
should consider that you have been set, not merely that each may yield you obedience and
service, but be religiously brought up in the fear of the Lord, and imbued with the best
discipline.” He continued:
For if it is truly said by Aristotle that ‘Every man’s house is the
image of a little kingdom, in which the head of the family, as chief,
makes laws by which he may train those under him to all justice
and innocence,’ not even in human judgment is he excusable who,
careless as to the regulation of his family, provided it is sedulous
and dutiful towards himself, allows it to be flagitious in regard to
God and man. You ought even to rise higher in your thoughts, and
consider, that those persons of whom the Lord has made you
master are committed to your trust, He having placed them under
16 “However, Paul does not mean here that there are no differences of status with regard to the society of
this world. For as we know, there are servants and masters, rulers and subjects; in the home, the husband is
the head, and the wife must be in subjection. We know this economy to be inviolable, and that our Lord
Jesus Christ did not come into this world to confuse everything by overturning what God the Father had
established” (Ibid).
17 John Calvin, Commentary on the Gospel According to John, Volume 1, trans. William Pringle, Calvin’s
Commentaries 17 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), John 13:7, 56; John Calvin, Tracts and
Treatises on the Reformation of the Church, Volume 1, ed. Thomas F. Torrance, trans. Henry Beveridge
(Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), 242.
67
you that you may teach and accustom them, first of all, to obey and
serve him; and next, under him, obey and serve yourself. 18
Here Calvin characteristically relied on “common sense” of “heathens” to verify the
“natural” foundation of the given order, seeking to demonstrate that even non-Christian
philosophers recognized the need for familial regulation. He then raised the bar for the
faithful and argued for a higher standard in Christian homes, emphasizing godly
instruction (“religiously brought up”); beyond simple domestic order, faithful patriarchs
were to direct their households toward God. Calvin closed with a warning, cautioning
with the words of Paul that those who failed to look after their houses had “denied the
faith, and are worse than infidels.” 19 Fathers who had been given authority over their
households by God were bound to take this duty seriously; this authority was given by
God for the glory of God. 20 As patriarchs both submitted to God and demanded
submission from others in their households, God was glorified in the ordered nature of
the home.
Calvin also found a mandate for patriarchal leadership in the very title of “father.”
In his discussion of the Fifth Commandment (“Honor your father and your mother,”), he
moved beyond advocating mere reverence for the father’s position. God, he claimed,
18 John Calvin, “On Shunning the Unlawful Rites of the Ungodly and Preserving the Purity of the Christian
Religion,” in Tracts and Treatises in Defense of the Reformed Faith, Volume 3, ed. Thomas F. Torrance,
trans. Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), 408.
19 Ibid., 408; John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, trans. William
Pringle, Calvin’s Commentaries 21 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1993), I Timothy 5:8, 102–
103. Elsewhere Calvin follows a similar line of logic, declaring that “The house of a believer ought to be
like a little church. Heathens, who did not know what a church is, said that a house is but an image and
figure of any public government. A poor man, living with his wife and children and servants, ought to be
in his house like a public governor. But Christians ought to go beyond this. Every father of a family
should know that God has appointed him to that place, that he may know how to govern his wife and
children and servants; so that God shall be honored in the midst of them, and all shall do Him homage”
(Ibid., I Tim. 3:5, 83, footnote 1).
20 “Calvin asserted that ‘men dishonor God . . . if they do not demonstrate their headship, if they do not use
that freedom and maintain themselves in . . . the state which God wishes to be observed to the end of the
world’” (as cited in Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah, 110).
68
“shares his name with those to whom he has given pre-eminence.” Calvin drew a close
tie between fathers and God based on the shared name:
The titles “Father,” “God,” and “Lord” so belonged to [God] alone
that as often as we hear any one of these our mind cannot fail to be
struck with an awareness of his majesty. Those persons, therefore,
with whom he shares these titles he lights up with a spark of his
splendor so that each may be distinguished according to his degree.
Thus, in him who is our father we should recognize something
divine because he does not bear the divine title without cause. 21
Just by virtue of their title, fathers were signaled to be divinely ordained and containing
“something divine.” The very name entitled fathers to a higher level of honor and
obedience. For a tradition which forbade all carved or graven images for fear of violating
the First Commandment, this was a remarkable allowance for Calvin to claim that the
father somehow represented, reflected, and embodied divine qualities.
Although properly-functioning fathers were to demand obedience from all
members of the household – wives, children, and servants 22 – Spierling argues that by its
very nature early modern masculinity implied both obedience and submission. 23 The
father’s own power, therefore, was to be tempered by the fact that all individuals were
sinful and reliant on the grace of God. 24 For example, when Calvin addressed the
submission of the wife, his instruction revealed his concern with excess on the part of the
husband. Rather than addressing insubordination on the part of the wife, the husband was
instructed not to employ force to produce submission but to act with “kindness and
mildness.” 25 His “honor of superiority” was given on the condition that he would not be
21 Calvin, Inst., 2.8.35.
22 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 570.
23 Karen E. Spierling, “Father, Son, and Pious Christian: Concepts of Masculinity in Reformation Geneva,”
in Masculinity in the Reformation Era, ed. Scott H. Hendrix and Susan C. Karant-Nunn (Kirksville, MO:
Truman State University Press, 2008), 98.
24 Ibid., 116.
25 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 570–571.
69
cruel toward his wife or act as if his every wish was “permissible and lawful.” Calvin
held that the husband’s role of authority “should rather be a companionship than a
kingship,” thereby inverting the power dynamic: “For there is no question that the
husband is not his wife’s head to oppress her or to make no account of her. But let him
understand that the authority he has puts him so much the more under obligation to
her.” 26 Ideally, mutual submission was to be practiced based on the husband’s
realization that self-sacrificial service was how Christ exercised his authority over the
church. 27 A properly disciplined home was one in which the father allowed his own
relationship to the ultimate authority of God to inform the way he enforced the domestic
hierarchy. 28
26 Ibid., Eph. 5:22–26, 570; John Calvin, Commentaries on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, trans.
John King, Calvin’s Commentaries 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Gen. 2:18, I: 130.
Also reference Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 560–561 and 565. Calvin furthermore emphasized that if
husbands abuse their authority “they will not be upheld before God” (Ibid., Eph. 5:22–26, 570).
27 Calvin claimed that the husbands’ actions should be informed by Jesus, who “loved his church” and
gave “himself for her.” They ought to ponder, “[W]hy is it that God has shown himself so loving, so kind,
and so pitiful towards me? Seeing he has advanced me to such dignity, it is good reason that I should
fashion myself like him. And now he will have me to behave myself towards my wife as Jesus Christ has
behaved himself towards me” (Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 572, 573). Baldwin argues that although
“mutual” appears less times in Calvin’s sermons on Eph. 5:22-26, “the whole structure of the sermon
emphasizes mutual responsibilities in marriage” (Baldwin, “Marriage in Calvin’s Sermons,” 128). For
more references where Calvin addressed themes of mutual submission, see Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 2:18,
1:130; Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:18–21, 560–561. Also reference Willis P. DeBoer, “Calvin on the Role of
Women,” in Exploring the Heritage of John Calvin, ed. David E. Holwerda (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Book House, 1976), 250–251; Baldwin, “Marriage in Calvin’s Sermons,” 127–128. It would be a mistake
to interpret Calvin’s statements as supporting a modern form of egalitarian marriage. Calvin avidly insisted
on men’s superiority and the “frailty” of women (see Calvin, SermEph, 570).
28 Spierling argues, for example, “that obedience to one’s superiors was as much a part of masculinity in
early modern Europe as was demanding obedience from one’s inferiors” (Spierling, “Father, Son, and
Pious Christian,” 108). Calvin states, after explaining that parents should not be too hard on children –
because God rules over all: “Let a father carefully instruct his children in the fear of the Lord and begin to
show the way. Let the mother do the same. Let God receive his homage above the great and small, the old
and the young. . . . Each must do the same in his home and in his family. Let those on whom God has
bestowed the fortune of having servants and chambermaids clearly remember that there is a master over
[us] all, and that he truly must be obedient, and that his right must be preserved in its entirety” (Calvin,
SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 143).
70
This theme of kindness was persistent throughout Calvin’s life, and can even be
seen in his first published work – his 1532 commentary on Seneca’s De Clementia.
Therein, Calvin stated that “clemency dwells indeed in every private house; it dwells – if
you will – in poor huts and rustic cottages; when the father of the family conducts himself
with moderation toward wife, children, and servants, and forgives, overlooks, is kind and
invites rather than compels them to do their task.” 29 His adaptation of Seneca’s theme of
the clemency of rulers leads Bruce Gordon to observe that Calvin was “deliberately
reorienting the subject to address clemency in the common household. Clemency, rooted
in Calvin’s understanding of Roman law, is the proper function of domestic relations.” 30
Such clemency should lead a husband to be gentle with even the most “difficult” wife. In
situations of conflict between spouses, Calvin called husbands to recognize that God
“holds people’s hearts in his hand and bows them as he pleases”; therefore husbands
should pray that God would give them “grace and power to win over their wives that the
wives may agree with them and humble themselves.” 31
For Calvin, Abraham was a model of a householder who kept a well-ordered
home. The Genesis 17 story of Abraham imposing circumcision on all male members of
his household (an “impossible” task) demonstrated that Abraham’s house was well
instructed, obedient, and “under holy discipline.” 32 Likewise, the account of Abraham
hosting the divine guests in Genesis 18:6 “show[ed] what a well-ordered house he had.”
29 Quoted in Bruce Gordon, Calvin (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009), 28. This
might be an area in which – as Margo Todd asserts regarding English Puritans – Calvin notions of the
family were informed by his humanist studies.
30 Ibid.
31 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 570 (also reference 571 and 575); John Calvin, Sermons on 2 Samuel:
Chapters 1–13, trans. Douglas Kelly (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1992), 2 Sam. 2:1–7, 57.
32 “We know that he had a great multitude in his house, nearly equal to a people. It was scarcely credible
that so many men would have suffered themselves to be wounded, apparently to be made a laughing-stock.
Therefore it was justly to be feared, that he would excite a great tumult in his tranquil family; yea, that, by a
common impulse, the major part of his servants would rise up against him; nevertheless, relying upon the
word of God, he strenuously attempts what seemed impossible. We next see, how faithfully his family was
71
In short, [Moses] presents us, in a few words, with a beautiful
picture of domestic government. Abraham runs, partly, to
command what he would have done; and partly, to execute his own
duty, as the master of the house. Sarah keeps within the tent; not
to indulge in sloth, but rather to take her own part also, in the
labor. The servants are all prompt to obey. Here is the sweet
concord of a well-conducted family; which could not have thus
suddenly arisen, unless each had, by long practice, been
accustomed to right discipline. 33
Abraham’s household is worthy of praise, according to Calvin, because the domestic
hierarchy was sharply defined, and each member of the household knew their role and
fulfilled it without coercion. It was self-evident to him that the family’s disposition was
attributable to Abraham and, therefore, he was the one worthy of praise. 34 (Interestingly,
despite the occurrences of scandalous misdeeds in the house of David – including his
own adultery, the rape of one of his daughters by one of his sons, one of his sons
publically having sex with his wives, and multiple fratricides among his sons – even
David received praise from Calvin for the efforts he made in regulating his household. 35)
instructed; because not only his home-born slaves, but foreigners, and men bought with money, meekly
receive the wound, which was both troublesome, and the occasion of shame to carnal sense. It appears then
that Abraham diligently took care to have them prepared for due obedience. And since he held them under
holy discipline, he received the reward of his own diligences in finding them so tractable in a most arduous
affair” (Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 17:23, 1:464–465).
33 Ibid., Gen. 18:6, 1:471.
34 For other stories in the Hebrew Bible which point to a well-ordered and hierarchical home, see Calvin’s
commentaries on Cain and Abel in Gen. 4:2 (Ibid., 1:192) and the description of David’s household in Ps.
30 and 2 Sam. 8:9-18 (John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 1, trans. James Anderson,
Calvin’s Commentaries 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), 485; Calvin, Serm2Sam, 427).
Another insightful passage which evoked Calvin’s interest was the Gen. 24 story of Abraham sending his
servant back to his homeland to find a wife for his son Isaac: “The kind of discipline which prevailed in
Abraham’s house is here apparent. Although this man was but a servant, yet, because he was put in
authority by the master of the family, his servile condition did not prevent him from being next in authority
to his lord; so that Isaac himself, the heir and successor of Abraham, submitted to his direction. To such an
extent did the authority of Abraham and reverence for him prevail, that when he substituted a servant in his
place, he caused this servant, by his mere will or word, to exercise a power which other masters of families
find it difficult to retain for themselves. The modesty also of Isaac, who suffered himself to be governed by
a servant, is obvious; for it would have been in vain for Abraham to enter into engagements with his
servant, had he not been persuaded that his son would prove submissive and tractable. It here appears what
great veneration he cherished towards his father; because Abraham, relying on Isaac’s obedience,
confidently calls his servant to him” (Calvin, CommGen, 2:13–14).
35 Calvin, CommPsalms, vol. 1, Ps. 30, 485; Calvin, Serm2Sam, 2 Sam. 8:9–18, 427.
72
The New Testament abounded with examples as well. Calvin applauded fathers
whose homes were so well-regulated that they were called “churches” in Paul’s New
Testament letters. Calvin commended Nymphas, stating that “When [Paul] speaks of the
Church which was in the house of Nymphas, let us bear in mind, that, in the instance of
one household, a rule is laid down as to what it becomes all Christian households to be –
that they be so many little Churches.” Calvin’s application of this passage was spoken as
a mandate for all householders: “Let every one, therefore, know that this charge is laid
upon him – that he is to train up his house in the fear of the Lord, to keep it under a holy
discipline, and, in fine, to form in it the likeness of a Church.” 36 Philemon and his
unnamed wife were also praised for their home: “By employing these terms, he bestows
the highest praise on the family of Philemon. And certainly it is no small praise of a
householder, that he regulates his family in such a manner as to be an image of the
Church, and to discharge also the duty of a pastor within the walls of his dwelling. Nor
must we forget to mention that this good man had a wife of the same character; for she,
too, not without reason, is commended by Paul.” 37 In addition to complimenting the
order of his “church,” Calvin bestowed upon Philemon the title of ordained clergy, a
pastor. Calvin often used this language of father-as-pastor in his writings. Given his
respect for the pastorate, this indicates the high esteem – as well as high expectation – in
which he held the father role.
Calvin demonstrated that the ordered home was so important that it was one of the
primary qualifications for the role of elder in the church. In his commentary on I Tim.
3:4 (“He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he
must do so in a manner worthy of full respect”), Calvin argued that “The apostle does not
36 John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Philippians, Colossians, and
Thessalonians, trans. John Pringle, Calvin’s Commentaries 21 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996), Col. 4:15, 230.
37 Calvin, CommTimTitusPhil, Phil. 3, 349.
73
recommend a clever man [for the office of elder], and deeply skilled in domestic matters,
but one who has learned to govern a family by wholesome discipline.” 38 In his
commentary on Titus, Calvin draws the parallel between governing a church and
governing the home, reflecting the more widespread idea that a man cannot be a good
ruler if he cannot control his own household. 39
While Calvin’s theology was reflected in practice, it was not replicated exactly.
The Genevan consistory was acutely interested in domestic order, and viewed its
maintenance as one of its “most important functions.” 40 The instructions of the pastors
and elders, seated in the consistory, demonstrate their assumptions regarding the order of
the domicile, namely that husbands were responsible for their wives. 41 For example, in
the spring of 1544 two men – Mermet Julliard and Claude Tappungnier – were
summoned to the consistory of Geneva for a conflict between them. As the parties were
reconciled, the consistory instructed Julliard to make his wife behave and Tappungnier to
“make his wife be quiet, who is very haughty.” 42 Or, when a woman was found saying
her prayers in Latin, the husband was summoned “to learn how he instructs his wife and
38 Ibid., I Tim. 3:4, 82.
39 “Seeing that it is required that a pastor shall have prudence and gravity, it is proper that those qualities
should be exhibited in his family; for how shall that man who cannot rule his own house — be able to
govern the church! Besides, not only must the bishop himself be free from reproach, but his whole family
ought to be a sort of mirror of chaste and honorable discipline; and, therefore, in the First Epistle to
Timothy, he not less strictly enjoins their wives what they ought to be. First, he demands that the children
shall be “believers;” whence it is obvious that they have been educated in the sound doctrine of godliness,
and in the fear of the Lord. Secondly, that they shall not be devoted to luxury, that they may be known to
have been educated to temperance and frugality. Thirdly, that they shall not be disobedient; for he who
cannot obtain from his children any reverence or subjection — will hardly be able to restrain the people by
the bridle of discipline” (Ibid., Titus 1:6, 292–293).
40 Robert M. Kingdon, Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1995), 99.
41 Spierling, “Father, Son, and Pious Christian,” 100.
42 Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin, Tome I (1542–1544) (Genève: Librairie Droz,
1996) vol. 1, fol. 181-181v, 27 March 1544.
74
children.” 43 Patriarchs were told to make sure their wives, children, and servants were
better instructed in religious doctrine, learned obedience, and attended sermons. 44
However, the registers also reveal that some husbands used the consistory as a
mechanism to establish hierarchical order so that their wives would submit to their
authority. For example, on 20 March 1544, Jehan Du Nant complained to the consistory
that his wife Jane “insulted him,” “behaved badly,” and kept the regular company of a
man even though Jehan had forbidden it. He pled with the consistory that “he cannot
have peace with her, and he admonishes his said wife to follow the Word of Our Lord.” 45
His appeal was couched in terms of peace and respect for Scripture, but his desire was
clear: the submission of his wife. Jehan’s interpretation was clearly biased, focusing only
on portions which mandated Jane’s respect, submission, and obedience. Six weeks later a
similar case arose: Jehan Papillier was summoned because of a conflict between him and
his wife. He demanded that “he must be believed in his house,” adding that “he will not
be subjected to his wife.” 46 It seems that both Du Nant and Papillier internalized the
belief that the Word of God mandated that wives were to submit to their husbands, and
used the consistory to affirm their authority and gain their wives’ obedience. While the
registers do not record the resolution of these cases, the incident of Jehan Guynet and his
wife provides what might be a model for the realignment of the domestic order. In the
spring of 1544, Guynet and his wife appeared before the consistory because they were
“always angry at one another.” The reason for the conflict centered around the fact that
this couple was raising Guynet’s illegitimate son, the fruit of a prior adulterous
43 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 90v, 22 February 1543.
44 For example, Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 22, 20 April 1542; vol. 1, fol. 62v, 5 October 1542; vol. 1, fol. 86v, 1
February 1543; vol. 1, fol. 90v, 22 February 1543; vol. 1, fol. 93, 8 March 1543.
45 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 180, 20 March 1544.
46 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 196v, 8 May 1544. It must be noted that the records indicate that Papillier beat his wife
and daughter, so his desire for his wife to submit to him cannot be taken at face value.
75
relationship. Apparently in response to pressure from the consistory to reconcile and
submit to her husband, she responded that “one may order what one wants;” but she then
acquiesced, admitting that “she will do it for the honor of God and will always obey her
husband here present and will treat the child as well as she can.” The resolution,
according to the scribe, was that, “They both intend to live in peace together.” 47 Despite
the fact that she found obedience to an unfaithful spouse difficult, she did so because she
thought it was important for God’s honor. If we take her at her word, such a response
demonstrates the willingness of common people to allow the theological principles taught
by the church to determine their course of action.
Just as the consistory sought to ensure the father was enforcing order on his home,
it also sought to guarantee the father was promoting order by fulfilling his own
obligations toward family members. Domestic order was compromised when the
patriarch was heavy-handed in his authority and abused family members. As Spierling
has observed, the consistory had to carefully balance its admonitions regarding excessive
coercion, because it did expect fathers to discipline their families. It insisted that “fathers
should discipline their children strictly but not too harshly.” 48 Consider the case of
Claude Galleys: upon being confronted by the Genevan consistory for beating his son too
severely, he replied that “there was not one who could keep him from punishing and
beating his child, not even the Messieurs themselves.” 49
The challenge of moderating excessive discipline and abuse is most clearly seen
in husbands’ mistreatment of their wives. Calvin insisted that abuse ran contrary to
God’s intention: husbands were to love and protect their wives. Instead, husbands were
called regularly before the consistory for physical abuse. For example, Mauris de La
47 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 186, 8 April 1544.
48 Spierling, “Father, Son, and Pious Christian,” 109.
49 Ibid., 110.
76
Ruaz was summoned in July 1542 due to the “treatment of his wife in his house and other
things in his household.” He claimed he “struck his wife because she did not do what he
commanded her. And he never gave her more than four blows. . . . because she had not
cleaned up the front of the house.” 50 Such accounts were not uncommon. One husband
threatened his wife with physical harm, 51 another threw his wife out of a window while
she was naked, 52 and yet another beat his wife with a broom so badly she “lost an eye
and can see nothing.” 53 Perhaps Thomas Genod was the most honest to the consistory –
and reflected the mentality of many in his day – when he asserted that he had the right to
treat his wife however he wanted: “If his wife offends him, why should he not punish
her?” He then admitted that “It is six months or thereabouts since he hit her, except for a
couple of blows he gave her because she spoke to someone he had forbidden.” 54 Genod
believed that punishing his wife was his right and duty, so much so that he had little
50 Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 46, 27 July 1542.
51 In this notable case, Pierre Rosset “threatened to cut off [his wife’s] head if she returned to this place of
the Consistory” (Ibid., fo. 181v, 27 March 1544). Also see Ibid., fo. 143v, 6 December 1543.
52 Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 128, 30 August 1543. Jaquemaz Papilliez claimed her husband wanted to
throw her out of the window into the Rhone, and that “in the winter he threw her out of his company
pregnant. He threw a bucket of water on the fire so she would not get warm and so she might die. And he
beats her more often when she is pregnant than other times . . . ” (Ibid., fo. 197, 15 May 1544).
53 In this particular case, it is clear to see how vulnerable wives were. The victim, Martinaz Soutiez,
begged the consistory not to confront her husband: “And she asks mercy, and did not dare to say it because
of her husband who, if anyone opposed him at all, would go away and leave behind his wife and children
and her mother. Then she said she was wrong and asks that he might be pardoned so he will not go,
because he will leave great misery in this household. The Consistory advises the he be given
remonstrances of correction, and at his wife’s request that nothing be done to him and that he be remanded
to Monday before the Council and that he promise not to get angry or beat his said wife, have any anger
between him and his wife,” (Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 52, 17 August 1542). It must not be concluded,
however, that women were only victims. For example, it appears that Pernon Marcer had enough of her
husband’s abuse and whoring; she responded by biting him on the arm and sleeping with a knife in the bed,
threatening to “put a dagger in his belly,” (Ibid., fo. 155v–156, 10 January 1544). Also see Consist.
Genève, Tome I fo. 105, 29 March 1543; fo. 138v, 8 November 1543; fo. 196v, 8 May 1544.
54 Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 147, 18 December 1543.
77
hesitation in telling the consistory about it. 55 Similar sentiments are found in the
testimony of Pierre Rosset who claimed, after his wife insulted him, that he beat her and
“will beat her wherever he finds her when he has forbidden her someone’s company and
she goes there; he will beat her in front of everyone.” Rosset seemed emboldened by the
Reformation reification of domestic hierarchy and complained that his wife “does not
want to do what he commands her…[b]ecause she is angry and wants to be the master.” 56
Since he was instructed to discipline his household, perhaps he interpreted his violent
actions as fulfilling the consistory’s charge and imposing God’s desired hierarchy.
Desiring the family to remain intact, the consistory rarely split abusive husbands apart
from families. Rather, it gave “admonitions and remonstrances,” ordered the husband to
stop beating his wife, threatened punishment, demanded that they live in peace together,
and instructed them to attend sermons. 57 Even when disciplining the father, it rarely (if
ever) undermined the father’s authority in his home, but rather chose to affirm his
leadership. This reaffirmation of patriarchy often could come at the cost of those of
lower status in the home – the wife, children, and servants.
A second issue commonly brought before the consistory was the management of
domestic goods. Fathers were supposed to provide for their families, but often wives
complained that their husbands were wasting household goods. 58 This was not only a
threat to the well-being of the family, but also jeopardized the wives’ dowry. In the case
of Estienne Furjod , his wife, Bezansonne was not living with him but with her father.
55 Jeffrey Watt claims that “Members of the Consistory clearly adhered to the view that husbands had the
right and duty to punish their wives, as long as they did so with moderation. In one case, the Consistory
even admonished a man for not chastising his wife sufficiently to make her attentive to her duties” (Jeffrey
R. Watt, “Women and the Consistory in Calvin’s Geneva,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 24, no. 2
(Summer 1993): 436–437).
56 Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 156v, 17 January 1544.
57 Watt, “Women and the Consistory in Calvin’s Geneva,” 436–438.
58 Spierling, “Father, Son, and Pious Christian,” 96, 99, 108.
78
When the consistory called Estienne to inquire about this, he claimed that she “disposed
of the entire household” during his time in prison. When she appeared the next week
with her father, she claimed that it was her husband, in fact, who had wasted all of the
household goods. The consistory clearly sided with Bezansonne, ordered that Estienne
find a way to support his family (and compensate his wife “for the goods he wasted”),
and directed that they be reconciled. 59 Johannete Betend, also tired of her husband’s
wastefulness, moved into her father’s house. Her husband, she complained, “takes
[property] from the household and sells it…wastes everything and eats up her goods and
her marriage [portion].” 60 In one of the more outrageous cases, the same circumstances
led Jana Voland to threaten her husband with genital mutilation. Her husband,
Hieronime Aygre, alleged that his wife “hit him twice with a stone and took him by his
member, pretending she would cut it off, and did him great injury.” In her defense, Jana
passionately described her husband’s waste: “her husband destroys her and eats up all her
labor and does not want to do anything and has sold all his household [goods] except two
chests. And she gave him three florins to go out of the country, and when they were
eaten up he returned and insulted her.” She added, she “did not want to cut off his
member. …[S]he never took a knife to do him harm.” 61 Afflicted with a husband who
squandered household resources, she could not handle any more. 62 This issue of waste
was one which disturbed the stability of the home and threatened to split it apart. The
consistory usually responded to protect the welfare of the household and the rights of the
59 Bezansonnaz responded that she desired “to be and act like a respectable woman if it pleases God, and it
is very proper for a woman to live with her husband if he wants to support her as he should,” (Consist.
Genève, Tome I, fo. 141, 15 November 1543).
60 Ibid., fo. 85–85v, 25 January 1543.
61 Ibid., fo. 123v–124, 5 July 1543.
62 For other additional cases related to the waste of household resources, see Ibid., fo. 64, 12 October 1542;
fo. 74v, 14 December 1542; fo. 86, 1 February 1543; fo. 138, 8 November 1543., especially the case of
Johannete and Glaude Du Chesne (Ibid., fo. 133, 13 September 1543).
79
wife. While it appeared concerned with the immediate concerns of waste, it was even
more so alarmed with the conflict in the household. It characteristically encouraged the
couple to reconcile and live in peace.
One immediately interesting observation which emerges from the consistory
records is the tension between the consistory’s expectations of men to be responsible for
their family and its willingness to intervene and correct the father. 63 Interactions
between a householder and city or church officials in Calvin’s Geneva differed greatly
from previous, medieval arrangements. Calvin established a new paradigm for
householders; autonomy took a backseat to the consistory’s close management. For
instance, a Genevan man summoned for fornicating complained that this was “an act of
conscience that should be left to God.” Spierling argues, however, that
the Genevan consistory generally was unwilling to rely solely on
people’s consciences. Calvin’s vision for reforming church and
society was founded on the conviction that weak and sinful human
beings could only survive as a stable society with the gifts of
authority and discipline provided by God. Based in part on this
idea, both church and city authorities claimed the right to careful
oversight of the domestic life of all Genevan inhabitants. As a
result, men . . . who traditionally exercised considerable autonomy
in terms of their households now could be called to account for
almost anything . . . 64
Accordingly, sometimes the consistory overrode the authority of fathers, such as in cases
when the consistory ordered fathers to publically discipline their children or send children
to be whipped by school authorities. 65 This imposition of control on traditionally
autonomous fathers initiated a power struggle as they sought to continue determining
what was best for their household. 66 Despite these reactions, it seems that Geneva
63 Jeffrey R. Watt, “Childhood and Youth in the Genevan Consistory Minutes,” in Calvinus Praeceptor
Ecclesiae: Proceedings of the International Congress on Calvin Research, ed. Herman Selderhuis (Geneva:
Librairie Droz, 2004), 41–62; Gordon, Calvin, 296.
64 Spierling, “Father, Son, and Pious Christian,” 106. Also reference Ibid., 110, 111; Gordon, Calvin, 296.
65 Spierling, “Father, Son, and Pious Christian,” 111, 114.
66 For example, Ibid., 109, 110.
80
advocated for the right of the church and state to intervene if needed, not unlike Luther’s
approach. As Joel F. Harrington argues,
Children belonged first to God, Luther reminded parents, and thus
by implication to His Church. Parental authority, he wrote, was
natural and therefore fundamentally superior to the contrived and
artificial authority of government, yet he did not oppose official
intervention in cases where fathers and mothers were not carrying
out their responsibilities. [Johannes] Bugenhagen and [Johann]
Spangenberg, among others, thought such intervention inevitable,
otherwise bad parents would bring up children as badly as their
own parents did them. The only way to end the cycle of ignorance
was for the Landesvater or other secular authority to step in for the
Hausvater when the latter failed in his duties to their common
Gottesvater. 67
In Luther’s and Calvin’s approaches, similar foundational ideas are apparent regarding
God’s sovereignty and the need for the intervention of other duly-appointed authorities if
parents were delinquent in their duties. While Calvin desired fathers to use their position
to bring order to the family, the discipline records demonstrate tension over how and for
what purposes this power would be wielded. 68
Huguenot Fathers and Domestic Order
The consistories of the Églises Réformées de France held the same high view and
expectations of fathers in their congregations that were found in Geneva. The father, as
the paterfamilias, was responsible for the persons, behaviors, and routines in his
household. Ministers and elders held firmly to a biblical understanding of the family
characterized by the Apostle Paul’s admonition:
Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the
Lord. Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with
them. Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases
67 Joel F. Harrington, “Bad Parents, the State, and the Early Modern Civilizing Process,” German History
16, no. 1 (1998): 22–23.
68 For more on Paul’s interpretation on fathers and families in the Reformation, see Karen E. Spierling,
“Honor and Subjection in the Lord: Paul and the Family in the Reformation,” in A Companion to Paul in
the Reformation, ed. R. Ward Holder (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 465–500.
81
the Lord. Fathers, do not embitter your children, or they will
become discouraged. Slaves, obey your earthly masters in
everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to
curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the
Lord. 69
Although it was recognized that the father could not determine the actions of each
individual under his supervision, the expectation remained that he was ultimately
responsible for the actions of his household and events which took place in his home.
As in Geneva, Huguenot churches also expected the paterfamilias to embrace his
own responsibilities. Consistories did not respond well to fathers whose families were
forced to seek out the assistance of the church as a result of fathers withholding
necessities or wasting goods. 70 Two issues in particular where fathers were frequently
confronted were anger and sexual promiscuity. Consistories seemed genuinely disturbed
by fathers’ harsh words and violence toward family members. The records of Nîmes are
particularly illustrative of this phenomenon, evidenced by the fact that on multiple
occasions even elders in Nîmes were confronted by their own consistory for beating their
wives. 71 Nîmois husbands were rebuked, suspended from the Lord’s Supper, and
sometimes even forced to make public reparations for physically abusing their wives. 72
Whether instructed to “live peacefully with his wife” or to “be good to his wife and
69 Col. 3:18-22.
70 “Registres du consistoire de l’église réformée de Nîmes, Tome 1, 1561-1563, Copié sur l’original
déposé a la Bibliotheque nationale, (Fonds français N° 8666),” 1874, 297; Paul de Félice, La Réforme en
Blaisois, documents inédits. Registre du consistoire (1665-1677), Réimpression de l'édition d'Orléans: H.
Herluison, 1885 (Marseille: Lafitte, 1979), 67.
71 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 29, 253. Allan Tulchin explains that the process of the consistory discussing
and confronting its own members’ actions (grabaud) was not a lasting feature of these meetings (Allan
Tulchin, That Men Would Praise the Lord : The Triumph of Protestantism in Nimes, 1530-1570 (Oxford;
New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 125).
72 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 76, 187, 234, 235, 313. Not surprisingly for the consistory, this physical
abuse was often related to other infractions: patriarchs who were not living out their vocation properly in
one area were failing in others as well, such as blasphemy, coarse language, and preventing family from
attending sermons (for example, Ibid., 230, 234, 353).
82
children,” 73 each husband was admonished to relate to his wife more compassionately,
although the Saint-Gervais consistory’s reprimand to a husband to “give his wife the
benevolence and friendship he owes to her, and not treat her so inhumanely without
reason” 74 reveals the mindset of the day. Even the gentler treatment of servants was
taken up by the consistory and pressed upon householders. 75
A second area of self-regulation for godly fathers related to their sexual impulses.
The consistory records are replete with cases of fathers summoned for all manner of
sexual immorality. 76 Consistories struggled against fathers’ apparent lack of sexual
restraint and sought to identify sexual propriety and fidelity as one of the marks of a
godly father. The testimony of the records suggests sexual boundaries were anything but
firm for many fathers (and men in general), and the creative genius of fathers permeates
excuses for why their fornication was not as it appeared. 77 Even when confronted, there
were many who were determined to continue their illicit affairs, some of which had been
73 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 26, 39, 46, 54.
74 Registre du consistoire de Saint-Gervais (Archives Nationales (Paris), 1564), 19, emphasis added.
75 For example, MM. Anjubault and H. Chardon, eds., “Papier et registre du Consistoire de l’Église du
Mans, réformée selon l’Évangile, 1560–61 (1561–62 nouveau style),” in Recueil de pièces inédites pour
servir à l’histoire de la Réforme et de la Ligue dans le Maine, vol. 1 (Le Mans: Ed. Monnoyer, 1867), 36.
76 I employ the term “fornication” according to the Merriam-Webster definition, which is “consensual
sexual intercourse between two persons not married to each other.” Therefore, fornication could be
intercourse between two unmarried individuals, one unmarried and one married individual (adultery), or
two married individuals who are not married to one another (adultery). For cases in which individuals tried
to excuse their fornication, see Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 22, 41, 47, 68, 144, 175–177, 180, 182, 188,
193, 215, 217, 218, 240, 279, 306, 318, 321, 343–345; André Mailhet, ed., Eglises réformées du Dauphiné:
recueil de documents copiés sur les originaux et augmenté d’introductions, de notes, de facsimilés et de
quelques documents originaux (MS 655/1-6) (BPF, n.d.), 3: 482, 590; 5:19–27; François Francillon, Livre
des délibérations de l’Eglise réformée de l’Albenc (1606-1682). Edition du manuscrit conservé à la
Bibliothèque d’Etude et d’Information Fonds Dauphinois. Grenoble Cote R 9723 (Paris: Honoré
Champion, 1998), 95, 102, 112, 124, 129.
77 For example, in Nîmes Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 95.
83
maintained for many years. 78 One such father threatened the summoner that if he
returned to call him and his mistress to appear before the consistory again, he would
break his arms; another claimed he would move and take the Lord’s Supper in England,
Paris, or Germany; and still another threatened to return to the Catholic church. 79 But
consistories were relentless in their determination to call fathers to account for all forms
of fornication, using the power of suspension from the Lord’s Supper and
excommunication if needed. Despite the protracted nature of the cases of these men
confronted for paillardise, most ultimately submitted to the discipline of the church and
made the expected reparations.
Often cases of fornication involved household servants. 80 Given the intimate
setting of the home and the power differential between masters and servants, servants
were particularly vulnerable to the advances of male family members or male friends
frequenting a house. Men were repeatedly told to stop spending time with female
servants and admonished for having sex with them. These servants were helpless, as
poignantly illustrated in the case of Maître Bresson of Nîmes. Bresson was denounced to
the consistory for claiming that he wanted to rape his servant, Marguerite Julliane.
Julliane was called and asked if she had been “ravished and raped by the said Bresson
and beaten, and exhorted to tell them the truth.” She denied that he had violated her, but
divulged that he had beaten her twice. When the consistory asked why she did not leave
and go and spend the night in someone else’s home, she confessed that she did not know
78 In Nîmes, for example, Jacques Ursi had a relationship with the wife of Estienne “le sourd” for seven or
eight years, while Jehan de Vray had been with the maid that cared for his elderly and sick parents for nine
or ten years, (Ibid., 175–177, 182–188, 345).
79 Mailhet, Consist. Die, 4:271; 5:19, 23, 24, 27–29; Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 175.
80 For example, Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 91, 99, 100, 120, 195, 237, 299; Mailhet, Consist. Die, 3:483,
555–589; 5:140; Jean Valette, ed., “Les actes du consistoire de l’Eglise réformée de Mussidan de 1593 à
1599,” Bulletin de la Société Historique et Archéologique du Périgord CXV (1988): 185, 188.
84
of anywhere to go. 81 Servants such as Julliane could be from rural areas, serving as a
maid in the city to generate income. As such, they were isolated from their families and
communities, only adding to their vulnerability. Furthermore, servants who were called
to testify about possible involvement in sexual affairs with masters or other members of
the family were put in the impossible place of choosing between the wrath of the
consistory, their masters, or master’s wives. 82 Consistories watched and listened for
inappropriate interactions between men and servants in an attempt to ensure even these
relationships reflected their ideals of godly households.
One of the common ways in which illicit unions were discovered was by
pregnancies and the birth of illegitimate children. In the 1660s, the pastor of Die was
upset by the “great number of bastard children being presented to baptism by various
people.” It created scandal in the church and prompted ecclesiastical authorities to crack
down on the offenders. 83 While consistories often placed the burden of proof on the
mother to establish the paternity of the child, once the paternity was established, it
applied the same rules of the household to the illegitimate child; it placed great pressure
on fathers to acknowledge their duty to care for the child and support it. 84 A case in
Blois in 1674 illustrates churches’ concerns. When the son of Sr. Bretonneau was
81 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 403–405. Also reference Ibid., 237.
82 For example, reference the case in Die where André Payan presented the consistory with two statements
from his servant girl which testified that he did not impregnate her. The consistory was skeptical and told
Payan to abstain from the Lord’s Supper because they had heard the servant had previously testified to the
contrary, and they wanted to sort the matter out. It summoned Payan and the servant to appear, but no
record of this meeting is found in the records. It is only four months later, after repeated summonses and
finally the threat of suspension from the Lord’s Supper that Payan confessed to his faute (Mailhet, Consist.
Die, 555, 556, 558, 583, 588, 589–560). For analysis on this tension in early modern Geneva, see Karen E.
Spierling, “Putting ‘God’s Honor First’: Truth, Lies, and Servants in Reformation Geneva,” Church History
and Religious Culture 92, no. 1 (2012): 85–103.
83 Mailhet, Consist. Die, 3:50–51. Also reference Ibid., 3:323, 525.
84 In Blois, for example, reference Félice, Consist. Blois, 87, 90, 93, 94, 95, 97, 102. In other instances, the
consistory ordered the man to marry the woman and have the child baptized (Francillon, Consist. Albenc,
93).
85
accused by Suzanne Camus of having sex with her, he confessed and was suspended
from the Lord’s Supper until the church was sure of his repentance. As the fall Supper
approached, he asked to be allowed to participate in the Lord’s Supper – to which the
church agreed only after emphatically insisting that he support the child resulting from
his sexual misconduct. 85 For these church leaders, accepting responsibility for one’s
child was evidence of full repentance, without which one could not participate in the
Supper.
In addition to regulating themselves, husbands were responsible for their wives.
Ministers and elders often bolstered domestic patriarchies by the manner in which they
disciplined fathers and mothers. While women were often called to appear before the
consistory to account for their own actions – which demonstrates an element of autonomy
for wives – often their husbands were summoned to supervise their wives, reprimand
their wives, and ensure their wives’ quarrels were settled. 86 Consistories’ demands were
predicated on the assumption that God demanded that wives obey their husbands. Even
husbands like Pierre Messonier, for example, understood this. He promised the Nîmes
consistory to moderate his brutality toward his wife, “provided that she obey him as she
should and is required to do.” 87 While the details of the case of Ambroys Lego are not
included in the Le Mans records, it apparently involved him acquiescing to his wife in a
manner the consistory found impertinent. The brief note in the register, “after he
[Lego] submitted to the judgment of the consistory,
[he] was admonished to obey God rather than his wife, which he promised to do,” sent a
clear message: the flow of obedience moved in one direction – from wife to husband to
85 Félice, Consist. Blois, 90–91, 93, 94.
86 Consist. Saint-Gervais, fols. 953v, 959v, 964; Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 53, 218; Mailhet, Consist.
Die, 2:274, 276–279.
87 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 370. In a similar case, Roland Valat claimed he beat his wife because she
had reproached him (Ibid., 230).
86
consistory (which acted in the place of God). 88 In this moment, the consistory reified its
own position of power while also emphasizing the domestic chain of command.
Finally, godly fathers were responsible for the actions and general religious wellbeing of their household. In Saint-Gervais, for example, when rumors arose of swearing
and blasphemy in particular households, fathers were called before consistories and told
to correct such vice. 89 As a part of the household, servants too fell under the jurisdictions
of the head of the household: patriarchs were sometimes called to resolve problems
created by their servants 90 or instructed to make certain their apprentices and servants
attended the sermons. 91 Or, as Raymond Mentzer demonstrates, fathers were responsible
for ensuring that all members of the household attended special religious events, such as
fasts. 92 All religious matters were to be guided under the watchful eye of the engaged
and present patriarch.
Calvin, Genevan Mothers, and Domestic Order
One of the best and most comprehensive works regarding Calvin’s view of
women is John Thompson’s Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah. He overturns the
previous conclusions of Jane Dempsey Douglass, 93 arguing that Calvin’s position on the
88 Anjubault and Chardon, “Consist. Le Mans,” 9.
89 For example, Consist. Saint-Gervais, fols. 950, 952v. This was not a sole responsibility – at times,
wives were also called in and admonished in the same way (Ibid., fol. 950v.). This same sense of
responsibility is seen in the consistory’s directive to Monsieur le Gouverneur who was admonished to stop
the soldiers who were under his command from swearing and blaspheming “as they have been
accustomed,” (Ibid., fol. 966).
90 For example, Mailhet, Consist. Die, 2:383.
91 For example, Consist. Saint-Gervais, 35, 36.
92 Raymond A. Mentzer, “Fasting, Piety and Political Anxiety among French Reformed Protestants,”
Church History 76, no. 2 (2007): 344.
93 Douglass concluded that Calvin viewed Paul’s exclusion of women’s voices from the church as a matter
of indifference (adiaphora), and was therefore open to women’s inclusion in ecclesiastical leadership, (Jane
87
silence of women in church is marked by ambivalence rather than Calvin regarding this
issue as adiaphora. As a consequence of this ambivalence, he maintains, scholars have
struggled with the relation of the subordination and equivalence of women in Calvin’s
writings: his position has variously been characterized as hierarchalism and misogynism,
egalitarianism, leaning toward a “functional equivalence” of women, and an evolving,
contextual view. 94 Such a multiplicity of perspectives, according to Thompson, is due to
the recognition of “Calvin’s exegetical dualism.” He asserts, “Regardless of how one
accounts for Calvin’s ambiguity, however, it is clear that this ambiguity contributes
significantly to the remarkable variations among these interpreters as to precisely how
traditional and hierarchical, or how innovative and open, Calvin was with respect to the
role of women.” 95 Recognizing Calvin’s lack of clarity on this issue, I want to at least
examine some of his writings which suggest his understanding of the position of women
in the home.
Calvin’s view of the role of the wife in a well-ordered home began with his belief
that wives were created for their husbands. While I am limiting my scope to women in
their role as wives in the home, it bears mentioning that Calvin’s view of the
subordination of wives to their husbands was contextualized and more universally
applied to all men and women. In a sermon on I Cor. 11, Calvin provided one of the
clearest pictures of men and women found in his writings. He asserted that men and
women did not need to be married for the headship of men to be operative:
Dempsey Douglass, Women, Freedom, and Calvin, 1st ed. [Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox Press,
1985]).
94 John Thompson argues a better schema would be to “divide Calvin’s interpreters into those few who
find no inconsistencies, tensions, or ‘loose ends’ (and even no exegetical inadequacies) in Calvin’s doctrine
of woman [e.g., Rita Mancha, André Biéler, and Ronald S. Wallace], and that larger number who do [e.g.,
Charmarie J. Blaisdell, John H. Bratt, Willis D. DeBoer, Mary Potter, and Jane Dempsey Douglass],”
(Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah, 18). For a comprehensive summary of various
arguments and positions on this topic, consult Ibid., 16–23.
95 Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah, 22.
88
[E]ven though a man may not be married, he still has this privilege
of nature: he is a ‘head.’ Of whom? Of women, because we are
not merely to examine one house, but the order that God has
established in this world. In the case of a widow, or a young
woman who has yet to marry, the subjection of which St. Paul is
speaking still pertains to them. Why? Because it applies to the
entire feminine sex, as I said. . . . For, as I already indicated, he is
not dealing with each individual in particular, but with the general
order. 96
Calvin later explained the ramifications of the sexes being created in hierarchical relation:
[I]t was not good for the man to be alone . . . he needed someone at
hand who would always be ready to help. Since God was thinking
of the man, it certainly follows that the woman is only an
accessory. And why? Because she was only created for the sake
of man, and she must therefore direct her whole life toward him.
She must confess, “I am not supposed to be without direction here,
not knowing my purpose and station. Rather, I am obliged by
God, if I am married, to serve my husband, and render him honor
and reverence. And, if I am not married, I am bound to walk in all
soberness and modesty, cognizant than men have the higher rank,
and that they must rule, and that the woman who disregards this
forgets the law of nature and perverts what should be observed as
God commands.” 97
This strongly-worded passage reveals the implications of Calvin’s understanding of the
created, hierarchical order, especially with regard to the status and purpose of women.
Familial and marital structures were not the only social locations which subordinated
women to men – they were engrained into the very fabric of the godly society by divine
design. 98
96 John Calvin, Men, Women and Order in the Church: Three Sermons, trans. Seth Skolnitsky (Dallas, TX:
Presbyterian Heritage Publications, 1992), I Cor. 11:4–10, 26–27. Also reference John H. Bratt, “The Role
and Status of Women in the Writings of John Calvin,” in Renaissance, Reformation, Resurgence : Papers
and Responses Presented at the Colloquium on Calvin & Calvin Studies, Held at Calvin Theological
Seminary, Grand Rapids, Michigan, on April 22 and 23, 1976, ed. Peter De Klerk (Grand Rapids, MI:
Calvin Theological Seminary, 1976), 1–3.
97 Calvin, ThreeSermons, I Cor. 11:4–10, 35–36 (emphasis added).
98 While Calvin spoke of mutuality in marriage, this was in part difficult due to hierarchical roles, but also
due to the nature of men and women. Women were not only created as an “accessory” to men, but they
failed to contribute positively to society in the manner in which men did. Calvin viewed men as the
fountainhead from which all earthly blessings flowed, asserting, “It is true that today men are as channels
through which God causes His grace to stream down upon women. For, from where do industry and all the
arts and sciences come? From where does labor come? From where do all the most excellent things and
highly-esteemed things come? To be sure, it all comes from the men’s side. So God is well-pleased for
men to serve the good of women, as experience shows” (Ibid., I Cor. 11:4–10, 35).
89
Calvin justified the subjection of women in a second way: the subordination of
women to men was the “wages of Eve’s sin.” 99 Here he echoed the ancient Christian and
contemporary hermeneutical tradition which linked the Fall and women’s subordinate
status. Although women were originally created to voluntarily obey men, the punishment
of the Fall made this subjection more “punitive” in nature. 100 This event was to shape
how women perceived themselves and conducted themselves:
[S]ince there is no other remedy except that women have to
humble themselves and to understand that the ruin and confusion
of the whole human race came in on their side, so that we are all
lost and cursed and banished from the kingdom of heaven – when
women (I say) understand all this came from Eve and the feminine
sex (as St. Paul tells us in another place [I Tim. 2:14]) there is no
other way for them but to humble themselves lowly and modest. 101
A wife’s failure to adopt this “lowly and modest” posture and “find pleasure” in the rule
of her husband only relived and affirmed the rebellion of Eve.
A final reason Calvin proposed for woman’s lower status was one of
correspondence. In his theology, marriage served as a visible manifestation of the ChristChurch union. He took seriously the Christ-Church analog which Paul used in his
epistles, and it served as a paradigm by which much of social life was to conform. 102
Therefore, the “woman must understand that since marriage is like a lively image of the
99 Calvin, SermEph, 567. For more on Calvin’s view of Eve, see Thompson, John Calvin and the
Daughters of Sarah, chapters 2 and 3.
100 Thompson calls this the “double subjection” of women, (Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of
Sarah, 138).
101 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 569. Calvin’s language is even more harsh in his commentary on I
Tim. 2:11-15, when he describes how the reality of Eve’s actions affect women: “It might have the effect
(as I have already said) of striking terror into the minds of women, when they were informed that the
destruction of the whole human race was attributed to them; for what will be this condemnation? especially
when their subjection, as a testimony of the wrath of God, is constantly placed before their eyes” (Calvin,
CommTimTitusPhil, I Tim. 2:11–15, 70).
102 Calvin, SermEph, Ephesians 5:28–30, 595–597; John Witte and Robert M. Kingdon, Sex, Marriage,
and Family in John Calvin’s Geneva I: Courtship, Engagement, Marriage (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing, 2005), 50, 222, 241, 244, 486.
90
spiritual union between [Christians] and the Son of God, it is also for their benefit to be
under their husbands and to yield them obedience.” Indeed, he argued, this will be “for
their profit” and “their welfare” for them to submit to their husbands: “You see then how
Jesus Christ is set down as the savior of the body, in order that wives should know that
God has provided better for their necessities than they themselves could do.” 103
Even in the midst of using the language of status, Calvin was clear in his writings
that an individual’s place in the familial hierarchy was not intended as an assessment on
their value. Men were not better than or superior to women. In God’s sight all were
equal: “[W]e must know that regarding our salvation, and regarding the Kingdom of God
(which is spiritual), there is no distinction or difference between man and woman, servant
and master, poor and rich, great and small.” As Thompson summarizes, this was “an
equality which is manifested in their common humanity, their equality in sin and grace,
and the equality they share with respect to the so-called ‘marital debt,’ whereby neither
partner may withhold conjugal rights from the other.” 104 Lest this Gospel message
appear too radical, however, Calvin quickly qualified the nature of this equivalence:
Nevertheless, there does have to be some order among us, and
Jesus Christ did not mean to eliminate it, as some flighty and
scatterbrained dreamers have taken this passage we have cited, and
dragged the Holy Scriptures by the hair (as the saying goes). . . .
[T]here still have to be laws, and consequently, magistrates. The
man at home must instruct his children, and they must be subject to
him. Servants must also be cognizant of their rank and station; and
everyone must apply himself in the thing to which he has been
called. 105
103 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 572. Ultimately, Calvin states that wives would be miserable without
their husbands, just as the Church would be deprived of meaning without Jesus: the Church would be
“robbed of all hope of life, and all of God’s benefits”, because “all [their] happiness, joy, and rest, lies in
[their] having Jesus Christ to preside over [them] and to govern [them]” (Ibid., Eph. 5:22–26, 571–572).
104 Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah, 17. Also see Bratt, “The Role and Status of
Women in the Writings of John Calvin,” 8.
105 Calvin, ThreeSermons, I Cor. 11:2–3, 20.
91
While affirming the fundamental equality of all in the sight of God, Calvin yet again
emphasized the acceptance of divinely-established stations. Members were not appointed
to their place because of their inherent spiritual superiority or inferiority; it was simply a
result of God’s free, good, and mysterious ordering of society which produced this
structure. 106 There could be no household order if members stood in rebellion against
God’s appointed design.
The example of Sarah’s banishment of Hagar (Genesis 21) was one which again
displayed Calvin’s ambivalence. He condemned Sarah’s ordering of Abraham to carry
out the exile of Hagar and Ishmael: Sarah “acts more imperiously towards her husband
than was becoming in a modest wife. . . . But now, she not only usurps the government of
the house, by calling her husband to order, but commands him whom she ought to
reverence, to be obedient to her will.” 107 However, even while Calvin rebuked Sarah for
usurping her husband’s position and inverting the domestic order, he imputed good
motives to her. He praised her as an instrument of God, a “celestial oracle.” 108
106 Regarding the question of whether the advent of Christ lifted the “curse” of women, Thompson asserts
Calvin’s position is that, “Christ restores the original divine intention, so that far from equalizing the sexes,
Christ returns them to their original condition, namely, man ruling and woman obeying, man above and
woman below,” (Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah, 154).
107 Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 21:10, 543.
108 Calvin partially vindicated her actions, referring to the New Testament: “Peter shows, that when, on a
previous occasion, she called Abraham lord, she did not do so feignedly; since he proposes her, as an
example of voluntary subjection, to pious and chaste matrons.(1 Peter 3:6).” He then gushed approvingly,
“Here, although I do not deny that Sarah, being moved by womanly feelings, exceeded the bounds of
moderation, I yet do not doubt, both that her tongue and mind were governed by a secret impulse of the
Spirit, and that this whole affair was directed by the providence of God. Without controversy, she was the
minister of great and tremendous judgment. And Paul adduces this expression, not as a futile reproach,
which an enraged woman had poured forth, but as a celestial oracle. But although she sustains a higher
character than that of a private woman, yet she does not take from her husband his power; but makes him
the lawful director of the ejection” (Ibid., Gen. 21:10, 543–544). Therefore, this can be viewed as another
example of exceptional behavior; Thompson claims that Calvin “intends his readers to see therein the
uniqueness (and hence inimitability) of this particular exception” (Thompson, John Calvin and the
Daughters of Sarah, 175).
92
According to Thompson, this may be the “Calvin’s most distinctive contribution,” for
here we witness Calvin assigning Sarah a “public, quasi-ecclesiastical office.” 109
Despite this small exception in the case of Sarah, Calvin’s mandate for wives’
submission to husbands was determined. In Calvin’s correspondence with women, he
consistently instructed wives to remain with their husbands regardless of the men’s vices,
even in instances of mistreatment. 110 Although divorce was introduced in Reformation
Geneva for cases of adultery, desertion, and impotence, it was rarely granted – especially
to female initiators. 111 Jeffrey Watt’s research reveals that in the first two years of
consistory records (1542-1544) all requests for separations were denied and only one out
of three petitions for divorces was approved, and William Monter further notes that even
at the beginning of the eighteenth century the consistory granted only one divorce per
year. 112 Wives were forced to remain with their husbands as a part of God’s design. In
the end, the husband’s authority, the wife’s obedience, and (if pertinent) the husband’s
conversion were the most important issues. Only if the husband ordered the wife to sin
against God or if the wife’s life was in immediate danger could she disobey her
husband. 113 Even while the consistory tried to encourage husbands to be more gentle, the
109 Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah, 175.
110 Calvin stated, “But the vices which are in the man must not prevent the woman from being subject to
him and obeying him” (quoted in Baldwin, “Marriage in Calvin’s Sermons,” 127). Charmarie J. Blaisdell,
“Calvin’s and Loyola’s Letters to Women: Politics and Spiritual Counsel in the Sixteenth Century,” in
Calviniana: Ideas and Influence of Jean Calvin, ed. Robert V. Schnucker, Sixteenth Century Essays and
Studies 10 (Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1988), 242–244.
111 For a thorough overview of the creation and implementation of divorce in Geneva, consult Kingdon,
Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva.
112 Watt, “Women and the Consistory in Calvin’s Geneva,” 436; E. William Monter, “Women in Calvinist
Geneva (1550-1800),” Signs 6, no. 2 (Winter 1980): 195.
113 See Blaisdell, “Calvin’s and Loyola’s Letters to Women,” 242–244; Charmarie J. Blaisdell, “Calvin’s
Letters to Women: The Courting of Ladies in High Places,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 13, no. 3
(1982): 71. Here she speaks specifically of Calvin’s correspondence with Madame de Grammont (John
Calvin, Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 7, ed. Henry Beveridge and Jules
Bonnet (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983), 70–72). Blaisdell, however, argues that Calvin’s
treatment of women in cases such as this demonstrates his egalitarianism rather than a bias: “As far as
93
responsibility for keeping the marriage together fell almost solely upon the wife: the
domestic order was so sacred that the wife was to endure any abuse her husband might
inflict upon her.
The divine constraints placed upon women were not to cause bitterness. Calvin
reminded women in his commentary on I Timothy that “they have no reason to complain
that injury is done to them, or to take it in that they are excluded from one kind of honor.”
Women were no less “acceptable to God, because they obey his calling;” furthermore,
they were given the right to manage their households. 114 As women embraced their
particular calling and aligned their lives with the divine order, they could bring order to
their own domains. Both tyranny (on the part of husbands or wives) or rebellion (on the
part of wives, children, or servants) represented a sinful rejection of their respective
callings and the divine order. These different stations were “certainly not diabolical, nor
[proposed] to make men like brute beasts, but . . . intended to lead to good order and
government.” 115
In truth, Calvin’s ideas fluctuated in his writings, at times he appeared to be open
to women leading in religious, political, and domestic realms, and at other times he was
far more restrictive. While much of Calvin’s work on I Corinthians 11 and Ephesians 5
locates women’s station in Eve’s guilt and punishment, in practice he had a more open
view of women and their domestic role. He did not view women as worthy of contempt,
offering spiritual care, Calvin was not known among his contemporaries for his warmth and sympathy in
relation to recent converts or to those experiencing persecution. In 1543 Antoine Fumee wrote Calvin very
frankly that, ‘a number of people think your assertions are thoroughly wretched. They accuse you of being
merciless and very severe to those who are afflicted; and say that it is easy for you to preach and threaten
over there, but that if you were here you would, perhaps, feel differently.’ Calvin seems to have reserved
no more sympathy for women than for men. While he may have thought of woman as the weaker vessel, in
spiritual matters he treated her as if she were equal to man,” (Blaisdell, “Calvin’s Letters to Women,” 74).
114 Calvin, CommTimTitusPhil, I Tim. 5:14, 110.
115 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 5:22–26, 570. For further discussion on this point of women accepting their
role, see Baldwin, “Marriage in Calvin’s Sermons,” 124–127.
94
neglect, or abuse. They were worthy of respect from their husbands and households, and
Calvin viewed them as powerful and influential within the household. As previously
noted, his commentary on the Ten Commandments envisioned wives as partners
alongside fathers in the instruction and modeling of godliness to children. 116
The primary distinction Calvin made in his writings was between women having
authority in their home versus having authority in a church assembly. He elaborated
extensively on Paul’s admonition in I Timothy 2:11-14, 117 reflecting on the cause for this
limitation. Once again harkening to the story of the first sin of Eve, he argued that the
effects of Eve’s decision caused the permanent subjugation of women. As punishment
for the first woman’s action, women were “by nature . . . formed to obey”:
Now Moses shews that the woman was created afterwards, in order
that she might be a kind of appendage to the man; and that she was
joined to the man on the express condition, that she should be at
hand to render obedience to him. (Gen. ii. 21.) Since, therefore,
God did not create two chiefs of equal power, but added to the man
an inferior aid, the Apostle justly reminds us of that order of
creation in which the eternal and inviolable appointment of God is
strikingly displayed. . . . Because she had given fatal advice, it was
right that she should learn that she was under the power and will of
another; and because she had drawn her husband aside from the
command of God, it was right that she should be deprived of all
liberty and placed under the yoke. 118
The consequences of Eve’s actions were that God forever placed women under men.
Since teaching, by its very nature, assumed leadership over others, women were not
allowed to teach. In the end, for a woman to teach or lead in a church gathering was
“inconsistent with subjection.” 119
116 Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 143.
117 “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to
assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not
the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner,” NIV translation.
118 Calvin, CommTimTitusPhil, 69.
119 This is the language Calvin uses in his commentary on I Cor. 14:34, where he claimed, “For how
unseemly a thing it were, that one who is under subjection to one of the members, should preside over the
entire body! It is therefore an argument from things inconsistent — If the woman is under subjection, she
95
Calvin’s absolute condemnation of women’s participation in public leadership
was not deterred by biblical examples that offer a potentially divergent perspective, such
as Deborah (Judges 4-5), the woman at the well (John 5), and the women who first found
Jesus’ tomb empty (John 20). 120 Extraordinary examples of women leading were, in the
words of Thompson, “not as a commendation of women but as a rebuke to men.” 121
Calvin dismissed these examples by arguing that “Extraordinary acts done by God do not
overturn the ordinary rules of government, by which he intended that we should be
bound. Accordingly, if women at one time held the office of prophets and teachers, and
that too when they were supernaturally called to it by the Spirit of God, He who is above
all law might do this; but, being a peculiar case, this is not opposed to the constant and
ordinary system of government.” He concluded that the government of women “has
is, consequently, prohibited from authority to teach in public. And unquestionably, wherever even natural
propriety has been maintained, women have in all ages been excluded from the public management of
affairs. It is the dictate of common sense, that female government is improper and unseemly. Nay more,
while originally they had permission given to them at Rome to plead before a court, the effrontery of Caia
Afrania led to their being interdicted, even from this. Paul’s reasoning, however, is simple — that authority
to teach is not suitable to the station that a woman occupies, because, if she teaches, she presides over all
the men, while it becomes her to be under subjection” (Calvin, CommCor, 392).
120 Regarding the woman at the well, Calvin insisted that “she may appear to deserve blame on this
account, that while she is still ignorant and imperfectly taught, she goes beyond the limits of her faith. I
reply, she would have acted inconsiderately, if she had assumed the office of a teacher, but when she
desires nothing more than to excite her fellow-citizens to hear Christ speaking, we will not say that she
forgot herself, or proceeded farther than she had a right to do. She merely does the office of a trumpet or a
bell to invite others to come to Christ” (Calvin, CommJohn, vol. 1, John 4:28, 167). His description of the
women at the tomb worked just as hard to argue that this was not an example of a woman teaching: “For it
is no small honor which he confers on them by sending his angels, and, at length, making himself known to
them, which he had not done to the apostles. Though the apostles and the women were afflicted with the
same disease, yet the stupidity of the apostles was less excusable, because they had profited so little by the
valuable and careful instruction which they had received. One purpose, certainly, which Christ had in view
in selecting the women, to make the first manifestation of himself to them, was, to fill the apostles with
shame” (John Calvin, Commentary on the Gospel According to John, Volume 2, trans. William Pringle,
Calvin’s Commentaries 18 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), John 20:12, 254–255).
121 Thompson continues, pointing out that at Calvin’s harshest moments, Calvin “liken[s] God’s use of
women in leadership to the use of stones or fools or the mute to speak on God’s behalf” (Thompson, John
Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah, 182). Even in the only place Calvin left the door open for women to
have a public role – his commentary on I Cor. 14:34 – he clearly thought it would only occur when the
“church is not in ‘working order’ or ‘properly organized’” (Ibid., 205).
96
always been regarded by all wise persons as a monstrous thing; and, therefore, so to
speak, it will be a mingling of heaven and earth, if women usurp the right to teach.” 122
While his position was not quite as harsh as John Knox’s The First Blast of the
Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women (1558), similar conclusions are
drawn. In this matter, however, Calvin had far more tact and finesse than did Knox.
Calvin was concerned about proper hierarchy and roles, but he was even more so about
the success of the Reformation. He wrote to and maintained correspondences with many
women who governed, and did not raise the issue of their perceived usurpation of power.
His exchanges with the Renée de France, for example, are pastoral and complimentary
and do not raise the issue of her position. Calvin understood the damage done by Knox’s
First Blast, and in a letter concerning this book affirmed his position (governance by
women was a “deviation from the primitive and established order of nature”) while
allowing for exceptions. Just as in the case of Deborah, he maintained that sometimes
women “had been so gifted that the singular blessing of God was conspicuous in them”
either to “condemn the weakness of men, or thus to show more directly his own
glory.” 123 Since the mind of God was inscrutable, people would not have the ability to
recognize the extraordinary moments in history in which God was raising up women for a
122 Calvin, CommTimTitusPhil, 67–68. In a similar vein, Calvin compared the reign of Mary Tudor with
Deborah in a letter to Bullinger (28 April 1554). He claimed that although Mary’s rule was not in
accordance with the “order of nature,” people should not revolt any more than they should revolt in the case
of tyranny: “Since it is utterly at variance with the legitimate order of nature, it ought to be counted among
the judgments with which God visits us; and even in this matter his extraordinary grace is sometimes very
conspicuous, because to reproach men for their sluggishness, he raises up women endowed not only with a
manly but a heroic spirit, as in the case of Deborah we have an illustrious example. But though a
government of this kind seems to me nothing else than a mere abuse, yet I gave it as my solemn opinion,
that private persons have no right to do any thing but to deplore it. For a gynecocracy or female rule badly
organized is like a tyranny, and is to be tolerated till God sees fit to overthrow it. If any tumult shall arise
for the sake of religion, I pronounced that to me it seems the better and the safer course, to remain quiet till
some peculiar call for interference should clearly appear — that it is our duty rather to ask God for a spirit
of moderation and prudence, to stand us in aid in the critical moment, than to agitate idle inquiries” (John
Calvin, Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 6, ed. Henry Beveridge and Jules
Bonnet (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983), 38).
123 Cited in Gordon, Calvin, 264.
97
specific purpose – indeed, perhaps Calvin’s own context was one in which God had
chosen women to lead.
As the husband exercised the authority of his position by pressing members of his
household toward the Reformed faith, a godly wife did likewise. Lydia in Acts 16 was a
prime example of this, and Calvin praised her, claiming that “her holy zeal and godliness
do therein show themselves, in that she doth also consecrate her family to God.” He
further explained the significance of her actions, stating,
And, surely, all the godly ought to have this desire, to have those
who are under them to be partakers of the same faith. For he is
unworthy to be numbered among the children of God, and to be a
ruler over others, whosoever is desirous to reign and rule in his
own house over his wife, children, servants, and maids, and will
cause them to give no place to Christ. Therefore, let every one of
the faithful study to govern and order his house so, that it may be
an image of the Church. I grant that Lydia had not in her hand the
hearts of all those which were of her household, that she might turn
unto Christ whomsoever she would; but the Lord did bless her
godly desire, so that she had her household obedient. 124
Here Calvin found in Lydia a model for all householders. He continued by comparing
her to Abraham: just as Abraham brought his entire household into the covenant by
requiring their circumcision, so too did Lydia make her household “obedient.” 125
A key difference between the father and mother was that the primary
responsibility of enforcing order on the home was supposed to fall on the shoulders of the
father. If a member of the household – mother, child, or servant – stepped out of what
was considered to be his or her proper position, Calvin maintained it was the duty of the
father to bring that member back into the hierarchical structure. Women were to assist in
124 John Calvin, Commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles, Volume 2, ed. Henry Beveridge, trans.
Christopher Fetherstone, Calvin’s Commentaries 19 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Acts
16:15, 104–105.
125 Ibid., Acts 16:15, 105.
98
this process, but were more often expected to focus their energies on keeping their own
person in subjection to their husband. 126
Overall, Calvin’s reification of the traditional familial hierarchy – with the goal of
establishing domestic order – affected women more dramatically than other members of
the ideal godly household. While William Monter’s early studies argue that – statistically
speaking – women’s experience in Geneva was not negatively affected by “Calvinism,”
this fails to account for the narrowing of options for women. 127 The Reformation
brought about the closure of municipal brothels and convents, thereby limiting women’s
independence and effectively making marriage the only option available to Genevan
women. 128 Marriage moved a woman from one patriarchy (as daughter) and inserted her
126 “According to both church and city, fathers were responsible for the discipline and the religious
education of their children. Mothers shared that burden, but since they were ultimately expected to submit
to their husbands, mothers were seldom independently called to account unless they were widows”
(Spierling, “Father, Son, and Pious Christian,” 116). This same emphasis was not stressed in regarding the
care of children. Spierling claims that her research in both consistory and city council records reveal that
“both bodies sought to hold mothers, as well as fathers, responsible for the nurture and education of their
children” (Ibid., 100). Also reference Ibid., 116; Barbara Pitkin, “‘The Heritage of the Lord’: Children in
the Theology of John Calvin,” in The Child in Christian Thought, ed. Marcia J. Bunge (Grand Rapids, MI:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001), 171; Steven E. Ozment, When Fathers Ruled: Family Life
in Reformation Europe (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983), 132.
127 Monter argues that if one examines Genevan women’s experience according to Joan Kelly-Gadol’s
rubric (regulation of their sexuality, options in economic and political roles, and opportunities for cultural
and educational expression), they do not appear to have been disadvantaged by the reign of Reformed
theology. While inequities exist to modern observers, he concludes, “When we consider the ways in which
the experiences of women in early modern Geneva were unlike their European neighbors, the most
important differences attributable to Calvinism were on balance beneficial — the evenhanded justice for
sexual misdemeanors and the early acceptance of widespread contraception more than offset a poor record
on girls’ education” (Monter, “Women in Calvinist Geneva,” 208). Jeffrey R. Watt disagrees with
Monter’s conclusions, claiming that the “the evidence from the first volume of the Consistory’s registers
makes it difficult to argue that the Reformation enhanced the status of women in Calvin’s Geneva” (Watt,
“Women and the Consistory in Calvin’s Geneva,” 438).
128 Convents in Geneva and elsewhere, however, proved to be tenacious; see Douglass, Women, Freedom,
and Calvin, 98ff; Natalie Zemon Davis, “City Women and Religious Change,” in Society and Culture in
Early Modern France: Eight Essays (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975), 89; Monter, “Women
in Calvinist Geneva,” 54. For further discussion on the Reformation’s impact on women, see Davis, “City
Women,” 94; Eleanor Commo McLaughlin, “Equality of Souls, Inequality of Sexes: Woman in Medieval
Theology,” in Religion and Sexism: Images of Woman in Jewish and Christian Tradition, ed. Rosemary
Radford Ruether (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1974), 233–245, 260; Joan Kelly-Gadol, “Did Women
Have a Renaissance?,” in Becoming Visible: Women in European History, ed. Renate Bridenthal, Claudia
Koonz, and Susan Stuard, 2nd ed. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1987), 175–202. Kelly-
99
into another (as wife). 129 Although women such as Marie Dentière – a Protestant
reformer, theologian, and preacher in Geneva – found ways to lead within the early
Genevan Reformation, after Calvin’s arrival women were no longer allowed to preach
and were excluded from the diaconate. 130
Huguenot Mothers and Domestic Order
The role of Huguenot wives was greatly shaped by Calvin’s theology. In spite of
women’s many responsibilities in the domestic sphere, 131 their ability to bring order to
Gadol concludes that a “new division between personal and public life made itself felt as the state came to
organize Renaissance society, and with the division the modern relation of the sexes made its appearance,
even among the Renaissance nobility. Noblewomen, too, were increasingly removed from public concerns
– economic, political, and cultural – and although they did not disappear into a private realm of family and
domestic concerns as fully as their sisters in the patrician bourgeoisie, their loss of public power made itself
felt in new constraints placed upon their personal as well as their social lives. Renaissance ideas on love
and manners, more classical than medieval, and almost exclusively a male product, expressed this new
subordination of women to the interests of husbands and male-dominated kin groups and served to justify
the removal of women from an ‘unladylike’ position of power and erotic independence” (Ibid., 197).
129 Merry E. Wiesner, Women and Gender in Early Modern Europe, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press, 2000), 26–28.
130 Blaisdell, “Calvin’s and Loyola’s Letters to Women,” 241. However, in his Institutes, Calvin divided
the diaconate into two areas – the distribution of alms and the care of the poor and sick – and claimed that
the only public role in the church allowed to women was the later (Calvin, Inst., 4.3.9, 1061).
131 Although, as Merry Wiesner-Hanks argues, women’s activities increasingly came to be understood as
“housekeeping” as opposed to men’s “work” and “production,” women’s domestic undertakings were
extensive (Merry E. Wiesner, “Family, Household, and Community,” in Handbook of European History,
1400-1600: Late Middle Ages, Renaissance, and Reformation, ed. Thomas A. Brady, Heiko A. Oberman,
and James D. Tracy, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 61–62).
According to Diefendorf, women’s responsibilities often included the management of the household,
including supervising children, managing servants, caring for barnyard animals, and tending fruit and
vegetable gardens. Depending on the status and involvement of the family, wives might have to know how
to inspect the house and the mill, supervise construction, inspect accounts of managers on estates,
superintend the winemaking, protect woods against poaching, or inventory furnishings in manors. Noble
women would have to understand the nature and timing of work on the land, care of livestock, property and
tax laws, family finances, and perhaps even how to organize the castle’s defenses in case their husbands
were away at court or war. If a husband was a master craftsman or merchant, the wife’s work might be an
extension of his trade, or if the woman was a widow she might manage his shop and continue his trade
(Barbara B. Diefendorf, “Gender and Family,” in Renaissance and Reformation France, 1500–1648, ed.
Mack P. Holt (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 106–108).
100
the familial hierarchy was the primary concern of Reformed consistories. Wives
occupied an intermediate space in the familial hierarchy in which they were supposed to
submit to the guidance of their husbands and exercise authority over the household. The
Huguenot consistory registers, however, demonstrate this was a constantly negotiated
arrangement between consistories and wives, husbands and wives, and consistories and
husbands.
In this role, consistories endlessly chided wives that they were to look after the
honor of their husbands, obey them, and follow their leading. 132 The new emphasis on
the religious responsibilities of patriarchs worked only if wives accepted their own
unique place in the structure. The consistories’ efforts to reshape husbands’ and wives’
understanding of their proper relation were evidenced in the case of Jacques Bois. In
August of 1561, the Nîmes consistory ordered Bois to stop beating his wife: instead, he
should “teach and show [his wife] by the Word of God.” In turn, his wife was ordered to
“obey her husband according to the Word of God.” 133 Here the consistory makes the
impetus for its actions clear: it is the Word of God – the Scriptures – which was to
establish clemency from the husband and obedience from the wife as the relational norm.
The tensions between Reformed husbands and wives which often appear in discipline
registers are, in fact, evidence of couples seeking to negotiate the boundaries of this new
paradigm. Was it the husband’s right to beat his wife? Was it her duty to submit? Could
the husband control where his wife went and with whom she associated? While the
limitations of the husband’s power and the wife’s submission were intended to be guided
by the biblical principle of love, this was often not the case in the messy lives of early
modern Huguenots.
132 This was true especially in public. When the wife of a vintner in Nîmes said in the company of some
neighbors that the devil had broken her husband’s neck, the consistory sided with the husband and required
that she promise to speak better to him and ask for his forgiveness (Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 88, 91).
133 Ibid., 46, 47.
101
A prototypical example of a matriarch who embodied the values of the Huguenot
woman was Charlotte Arbaleste de Mornay (1550-1606), the wife of Philippe DuplessisMornay (1549-1623). Philippe Duplessis-Mornay was an influential Huguenot leader
and writer, advisor to Henry of Navarre (future King Henry IV), and instrumental figure
in drafting the Edict of Nantes. 134 Madame de Mornay’s memoir of her husband’s life,
while recognized to embellish points, provides valuable insights into the construction of a
public religious identity. 135 In the genre of hagiography, she describes DuplessisMornay’s parents as people raised in the “Roman church” yet pulled toward the “true
faith.” At his death, his father “would have neither priest nor any superstitious ceremony,
feeling full assurance of his salvation by the sole passion of Jesus Christ.” 136 His mother,
widowed at twenty-nine, guided the family. Emphasizing Duplessis-Mornay’s pious
heritage, his wife tied his mother’s identity closely to the home and family: “As for her
family and household she had always ruled them with much honor and praise from all,
and now in her widowhood she continued to spend her time in building up and taking
134 Hughes Daussy, Les Huguenots et le Roi: Le combat politique de Philippe Duplessis-Mornay (1572–
1600), Travaux d’Humanisme et Renaissance (Genève: Droz, 2002). In addition he was a member of the
Monarchomachs, an anti-monarchist group who opposed absolute monarchy in the late sixteenth century,
and was particularly known to have theoretically justified tyrannicide. He is considered the most likely
author of the Vindiciae contra tyrannos (1579), a pseudonymous tract which advocated resistance to the
French crown (for more on this work, see Miriam Yardeni, “French Calvinist Political Thought, 15341715,” in International Calvinism 1541-1715, ed. Menna Prestwich (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1985); Robert M. Kingdon, “Calvinism and Resistance Theory, 1550-1580,” in The Cambridge History of
Political Thought: 1450-1700, ed. J. H. Burns and Mark Goldie (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1994), 193–218).
135 As Hugues Daussy notes, “l’écriture de l’histoire n’apparaît pas comme une fin en soi, mais comme la
fabrication d’un instrument employé dans le combat politique et religieux” (“L’instrumentalisation
politique et religieuse de l’histoire chez Philippe Duplessis-Mornay,” in Écritures de l’histoire (XIVe-XVIe
siècles), ed. Danièle Bohler and Catherine Magnien Simonin (Genève: Droz, 2005), 471–484).
136 Charlotte Arbaleste de Mornay, A Huguenot Family in the XVI Century: The Memoirs of Philippe de
Mornay, sieur du Plessis Marly, written by his wife, trans. Lucy Crump (London, Routledge; New York, E.
P. Dutton & Co., 1926), 82. Furthermore, although he held to the Roman church, he refused to read his
son’s catechism because he was “loth to read in any suspect book.” Instead, he read a New Testament,
which he “diligently studied, seeking to enlighten himself and praying God’s help. As he read and re-read,
he noticed that purgatory and prayers to the saints were never mentioned, whereas idolatry and so forth
were expressly forbidden” (Ibid., 87).
102
care of her children’s welfare, in which she took a singular pleasure all the days of her
life.” 137
As Madame de Mornay shifted to describe her own life with Duplessis-Mornay,
she emphasized the familial hierarchy and her embrace of her place within this order.
She referred to her husband as “my highly honored lord and husband” and “the head of
this family” and stated that she never hid anything from her husband, even her own
thoughts. She made sure her children (sons) were instructed “in the fear of the Lord,”
and when her husband was absent she took all of her servants to the catechism before
communion. 138
While Madame de Mornay is characterized much like the Wise Woman of
Proverbs 31 who brought order to her household, her writings possess an ambiguity. In
particular, her memoir contains an extended account of a conflict between her and the
church of Montauban. After settling in Montauban, Philippe Duplessis-Mornay was busy
with the Assembly of the King of Navarre. During this time, as Madame de Mornay
recounted, the leadership of the church disapproved of her wig as immodest. Rather than
formally confronting her or discussing the matter with her husband, the Montauban
minister and consistory refused to give the Duplessis-Mornay household communion
tokens for admission to the Supper. Despite the theme of submission to proper familial
authority found elsewhere in the story, Madame de Mornay was determined to challenge
the unjust decision of the Montauban church. Upon being confronted and ordered to
discard her false hair, she retorted that “since they would not admit M. du Plessis’
household among their flock that they should expect her to recognize them as her
137 Mornay, The Memoirs of Philippe de Mornay, 83. In addition, his mother spent time “reading the Bible
or the Psalms” (Ibid.).
138 Mornay, The Memoirs of Philippe de Mornay, 84, 86, 200, 202, 205–207.
103
pastors.” 139 She further insisted that “it was neither in accordance with the law of charity
nor the commands of God to punish a wrongdoer before admonishing him.” 140
After Duplessis-Mornay appeared to resolve the problem, the relationship with
the church only deteriorated. 141 When he was out of town, the minister refused Madame
de Mornay admittance to the pre-Supper catechism. Her husband’s absence did not deter
her from handling this slight to the family’s honor on her own. In an extended conflict
which included both written letters and in-person meetings with the consistory, she
resolutely confronted the male ecclesiastical authorities. First, she demonstrated an acute
understanding of the hierarchy of the Montauban church and the Reformed Churches of
France by declaring that the minister had no right to cast them out of the church and that
the minister should, in fact, have to submit to the judgment of the church. Later she
touched on the sensitive subject of the local church’s relationship to the national
confederation by asserting that the behavior of the minister in this matter (and by
extension, the church) represented an elevation of his own authority over the expressed
will of all the French churches. In this way, the authoritarian manner in which the
consistory arrived at and defended its position on her hair was very similar to how the
Roman Church operated.
Second, she challenged the minister’s disapproval of false hair. She claimed that
he fundamentally misunderstood the French churches’ position on this issue by
referencing ordinances of national synods as well as John Calvin’s commentary on Paul’s
letters to Timothy. She insisted that the consistory “point out the article in which the
139 Ibid., 200.
140 Ibid., 202.
141 To reference this extended narrative, see Ibid., 198–217.
104
disuse of false hair is ordered by the National Synod,” 142 finishing with the promise that
if she was not admitted to the Cène she would appeal their decision to the national synod.
Third, in the absence of a scriptural or synodal precedent, she appealed for
inclusion in the Supper based on the argument that she must obey her husband, who was
absent and had not given her permission to change her hair (“I beg to remind the
members of the consistory of the duty wives owe to their husbands to whom, by God’s
express commandment, their will is subjected” 143). In fact, she turned a key Scriptural
passage which the consistory used to defend its position on hair against it:
And also how Saint Peter expounds in the third chapter of his first
epistle what [wives’] duty is. You cite this chapter against
braiding the hair while all the while, gentlemen, you cannot be
ignorant, as plainly appears in the text, that the chief aim of the
apostle is to admonish wives to be submissive to their husbands,
even infidel husbands. 144
While this account affirms the role of the matriarch in bringing order to the home, it
problematizes the notion of submission as the principal characteristic of such a wife. As
a godly wife, Madame de Mornay submitted to her husband and worked to order the
household. She affirmed the authority of the church and submitted herself to the
mandates of Scripture, especially those which defined her role as a wife. At the same
time, however, de Mornay’s actions were subversive and undermined the authority of the
Montauban church. She set the authority of the local consistory against both the
authority of her husband and that of the national synod. Exploiting this tension in
overlapping power structures of this male-dominated world, she disobeyed the consistory
and kept her hair. In exemplary Protestant fashion, she even challenged the consistory’s
decision on scriptural grounds, citing at least two separate references. Since Scripture
142 Ibid., 212.
143 Ibid., 213.
144 Ibid.
105
was lauded as the source of all authority, she proved herself as adept at wielding it to
protect the interests, honor, and religious standing of her family.
The ambiguity of the godly matriarch in this memoir does much to remind
historians of the difficulty of interpreting church discipline records which recount the
experiences of women. Women who were deemed sinful by the consistory or who
claimed not to have understood the desires of the consistory may have actually thought
they were living out their proper role. Or, perhaps, they were faced with what they
considered to be two important but conflicting directives and chose between them.
Fermine Chambone, a widow of Nîmes, was called before the consistory at the close of
1562 because she had married “à la papauté.” She then explained that she married her
second husband in the Catholic manner in order to obey him. 145 While little more is
known of the circumstances around this curious incident, Chambone certainly touched
one of the consistory’s own preoccupations – the obedience of a wife to a husband – to
justify her actions.
Despite the ambiguity, Madame de Mornay’s writings do serve to highlight
concerns of consistories. Consistories’ aims for godly matriarchs were, in reality, not all
that different from those held for patriarchs. First, consistories expected wives and
mothers to contribute to the order in their families. They began by controlling
themselves and remaining in the home, eschewing dancing, fighting with neighbors, and
fornicating. 146 Perhaps the most unique area in which the consistory focused on
women’s self-regulation was in their modest appearance. Although the ecclesiastical
discipline encouraged modesty among all church members, and particularly the families
of ministers, women were the targets of charges of immodesty in discipline records. 147
145 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 366.
146 For examples from Albenc, see Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 27–31, 33, 39, 40.
147 The Huguenot Discipline ordered, “Churches will admonish the faithful, both men and women, to have
the recommended modesty, and especially in their clothes, and give order to remove the superfluities which
106
Secondly, Madame de Mornay’s account embodies the imperative that mothers
were to create order in the household by guiding and disciplining their offspring. In
fathers’ absences, it fell to mothers to look after the development of the children. As
these children grew older, they were not necessarily removed from the duty of honoring
their parents, nor were parents relieved from their obligation. When a physician by the
name of Poldon appeared before the consistory at Nîmes for playing tennis (à la paulme)
by day, and cards and dice by night, and feasting frequently with his friends, he argued
that he no longer participated in these activities. To substantiate his claim, the consistory
called on his mother to testify: Had Poldon in fact still been engaged in these
activities? 148 A couple of weeks later Marguerite Baudriene was also summoned as a
result of her daughter being discovered to be pregnant. The mother revealed that the
baby’s father was Jehan Paulet, and that her daughter and Paulet had exchanged wedding
promises. While the consistory reprimanded the daughter for having slept with Paulet
before being married, it also censured her mother for having allowed Paulet to visit her
daughter. 149 Both of these incidents reveal the consistory’s assumption that mothers
would know about the moral activities of their children, and the latter explicitly confronts
Baudriene because she failed to protect her daughter.
are perpetrated there. However, those churches will not make ordinances, as something belonging to the
magistrate, but will by all remonstrances that orders made of the king on this subject, are diligently
observed.” The next article clarified, “We cannot deprive anyone of the communion of the Lord’s Supper
for some manner of clothes which is ordinary and usual in this kingdom – but in this place we must not
include those who have a well-known mark of fornication, dissolution, too curious novelty, as make-up,
revealing blouses, and the like, Consistories all should suppress such dissolutions by censure, and proceed
against the rebels until the suspension of the Last Supper” (François Méjan, Discipline de l’Église réformée
de France annotée et précédée d’une introduction historique (Paris: Éditions “Je sers,” 1947), Chap. 14,
art. 25 and 26, 295–296). For the article related to ministers’ modesty, see Ibid., Chap. 1, art. 20, 202–203.
For complaints lodged against ministers and their families in synod meetings, see John Quick, Synodicon in
Gallia Reformata: Or, The Acts, Decisions, Decrees, and Canons of Those Famous National Councils of
the Reformed Churches in France, 2 Vols. (London: T. Parkhurst and J. Robinson, 1692), 1:349; 2:7, 527.
For examples of issues with modesty, reference Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 22; Mailhet, Consist. Die, 1:18;
5:107–109.
148 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 306–307.
149 Ibid., 327–328.
107
Children and Servants in Reformed Homes
Although Calvin claimed that by nature children possessed the “seed of sin”
which was “hateful and abominable to God,” 150 Barbara Pitkin asserts, “it is important to
underscore that he does not view children as more sinful and depraved than anyone
else.” 151 The guidance of parents and the Reformed community would help a child grow
to be “morally upright, submissive to authority, and self-critical.” 152 Within the family
context, children could be instructed and guided in the hopes that baptism and faith could
combat their fallen nature.
Children were also expected to conform to the familial hierarchy. They existed in
a unique temporary state at the bottom of the power structure, in authority over none but
displaying honor, obedience, and gratefulness toward all. The chief duty of children was
to honor those in authority over them, primarily their parents. In his sermons on the Ten
Commandments, Calvin clearly defined what it meant for children to honor their parents:
children were “to follow the advice of their fathers and mothers, for them to let
themselves be guided by them, to take the trouble to fulfill their duty to them: in brief, a
child ought to understand that he is not at liberty with respect to his father and
mother.” 153 Calvin’s clear message for children was that they were to be passive. His
150 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1536 Edition, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Grand
Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1986), 4.17.
151 Pitkin, “The Heritage of the Lord,” 168.
152 Ibid., 172.
153 Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 137. Elsewhere, Calvin elaborated on this definition: “It will be
now well to ascertain what is the force of the word ‘honor,’ not as to its grammatical meaning, (for dbk,
cabad, is nothing else but to pay due honor to God, and to men who are in authority,) but as to its essential
signification. Surely, since God would not have His servants comply with external ceremonies only, it
cannot be doubted but that all the duties of piety towards parents are here comprised, to which children are
laid under obligation by natural reason itself; and these may be reduced to three heads, i.e., that they should
regard them with reverence; that they should obediently comply with their commands, and allow
themselves to be governed by them; and that they should endeavor to repay what they owe to them, and
thus heartily devote to them themselves and their services,” John Calvin, Commentaries on the Four Last
108
1545 catechism admonishes, “That children be with modesty and humility compliant and
obedient to their parents,” and elsewhere he encourages children to “peaceably submit,”
be “teachable and obedient,” and “quiet” (paisible). 154 For Calvin, children’s humble
acceptance of their place and their parents’ authority was to directly reflect the posture of
the faithful toward God.
One ever-present concern for Calvin was that the respect and obedience rendered
by children be sincere. Just as God did not want his people to “comply with external
ceremonies only,” children were not to feign honor while possessing a stubborn heart. 155
“For it isn’t enough for children to honor their fathers for [the purpose of] bearing them
some respect,” Calvin asserted, “but it is necessary for them to help them; they need to.
For as our Lord Jesus Christ makes it clear, it is nothing but hypocrisy when children
merely offer signs of honoring their fathers and mothers and yet leave them in necessity,
demonstrating that they don’t care about their needs or of accounting for their own
obligation.” 156 Actions should ultimately demonstrate the disposition of the heart: did
Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony, Volume 3, trans. Charles William Bingham, Calvin’s
Commentaries 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Exod. 20:12, 7.
154 John Calvin, “Catechism of the Church of Geneva (1545),” in Calvin: Theological Treatises, trans. and
ed. J. K. S. Reid, Library of Christian Classics 22 (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006),
113; Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 135; John Calvin, Tracts and Treatises on the Doctrine and
Worship of the Church, Volume 2, trans. Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1958), 97; John Calvin, Ioannis Calvini Opera Quae Supersunt Omnia, ed. Wilhelm
Baum, Edward Cunitz, and Edward Reuss (Brunsvigae: Apud C.A. Schwetschke et filium, 1863), 27: 685.
155 Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 3, Exod. 20:12, 7.
156 Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 152. Earlier in this same sermon series Calvin declares that it was
“insufficient for children to nod their head toward or simply bow in front of their father[s] and mother[s]”
Calvin asserted, “rather they must be subject to [the parents] and serve them to their fullest capacity” (Ibid.,
137). Also reference his sermons on Deuteronomy where he insists, “The honor then which a child owes to
his father & mother, consists not in pretending some ceremonious and counterfeit humility: but in behaving
himself meekly, in suffering them to have the government of him, and in being tractable to be reformed
when his parents tell him of his faults” (John Calvin, The Sermons of M. Iohn Calvin upon the Fifth Booke
of Moses called Deuternomie: faithfully gathered word for word as he preached them in open Pulpet:
Together with a preface of the Ministers of the Church of Geneva, and an admonishment made by the
Deacons there. Also there are annexed two profitable Tables, the one containing the chiefe matters; the
other the places of Scripture herein alledged, trans. Arthur Golding [At London: Printed by Henry
Middleton for Iohn Harison, 1583], Deut. 21:18–21, 759).
109
the child truly seek to actively assist his or her parents? It was of paramount importance
that the well-ordered, hierarchical house – from the least to the greatest – was sincerely
embraced and not an elaborate fabrication.
The obedient response of children toward parents was a divine mandate and not
contingent on parents’ behavior. While parents were instructed to be gentle with their
children, even if they were cruel, their offspring were to “endure it” and bear it
“patiently.” 157 Randy Blacketer argues that Calvin expected a child to “humble himself
before his father when his father [spoke] to him, or [struck] him, or even attack[ed] him
with a barrage of insults.” Indeed, the child should “consider it an honor when his father
chatise[d] him with such rigor, and take his lumps in silence.” 158 This posture, which
modern sensibilities would find appalling, was to extend to the point of the child wishing
to die “rather than caus[ing] his parents nothing but sorrow.” 159
One important element for children (and parents) to recognize was that God had
selected parents for children, and Calvin labeled parents as God’s agents, representatives,
lieutenants, officers, and ministers “in his place.” 160 Calvin warned children against
finding fault with their parents or speaking disrespectfully about them because God had
specifically appointed them. 161
The Genevan reformer claimed that mothers and fathers
had been given the “mark” of God’s image on them and acted as a visible symbol of God
157 Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 146.
158 Raymond A. Blacketer, The School of God: Pedagogy and Rhetoric in Calvin’s Interpretation of
Deuteronomy, Studies in Early Modern Religious Reforms 3 (Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 2006),
253.
159 Ibid., 252.
160 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 6:1–4, 623; Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 138, 141; Calvin,
SermFifthBooke, Deut. 21:18–21, 760; Witte and Kingdon, Courtship, Engagement, Marriage, 484;
Blacketer, The School of God, 253, 257.
161 “[T]he one who has commanded you to honor your father and mother has given you such a father as
you have. The same hold true for masters, princes and superiors . . . they are not the products of chance; it
is God who sends them” (Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 141; Blacketer, The School of God, 252).
110
on earth. 162 Although he appeared to limit proxy of God’s authority to a male patriarch,
Calvin extended the implied honor and authority to both parents in a sermon on the Ten
Commandments. 163 Parents were acting as God’s representatives, and as a result, Calvin
adamantly held that any form of response towards parents was a response directed at
God. Dishonor of parents was dishonor toward God, and a child despising the correction
of a parent despised God. 164 Such dispositions and actions were considered an
“offense,” 165 “insult,” 166 and “war,” 167 against God.
As children properly embraced their place in the family and honored their parents,
they were honoring God’s ordering of the world and stabilizing the home. This was also
training for how to properly perceive and accept one’s societal role in the future.
Calvin’s catechism provided a regular reminder of this for children: the commandment to
honor one’s father and mother was properly understood as an admonition to repect all
those in authority – especially civil rulers. 168 Here he explicitly linked the divine
162 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 6:1–4, 623; Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 138; Blacketer, The School of
God, 255–256.
163 For example, he stated that “Therefore this honor of being called Father properly belongs to God alone
and can only apply to men when it pleases him to confer it on them. Seeing then that this title of Father is
like a mark which God has engraved on men, we see that if children do not take their father and mother
into consideration, they insult God” (Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 138 (emphasis mine). Cf.
Thompson, John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah, 103ff.
164 Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 3, Exod. 20:12, 5; Blacketer, The School of God, 254–256.
165 Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 3, Exod. 20:12, 5.
166 Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 138.
167 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 6:1–4, 623.
168 “Though the words [fifth commandment: ‘Honor thy father and thy mother’] refer to father and mother
only, we must understand all who are over us, since they have the same ground,” Calvin asserted, because
“the Lord has raised them to a degree superior in honor . . . for it so pleased him to order the world”
(Calvin, “Catechism (1545),” 113). Also see Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 135. Calvin even made
this more explicit in his sermons on the Ten Commandments. In discussion Deut. 5:16, he notes that “Thus
we see that God fully explained and pointed out that he not only wished for us to obey fathers and mothers,
but all [our] superiors without exception” (Ibid., 136). He later tied honor of parents to the wider goal of
proper relation to all authorities: Paul’s words “in the Lord” were to remind the faithful that “this is the
foundation upon which we must build in order to be obedient, humble, and subject to our superiors, which
111
mandate to obey parents to the child’s duty to obey all those in “superior” roles. He
attempted to help youth internalize this ideal by inserting a daily prayer into the
catechism for children to pray when “Preparing to Go to School”: “I entreat that thou
wouldst be pleased to turn me to true humility, that thus I may show myself teachable and
obedient first of all to thyself, and then to those also who by thy authority are placed over
me.” 169 This prayer embodied the spirit in which Calvin desired children to participate in
the divine universal order: not one motivated by coercion or fear, but one willingly
accepted as a vocation, just as a mother and father had their own call. 170 A prayer such
as this would have engrained this message into a child day after day.
While Calvin hoped for children to obey out of love for God, he was not naïve.
He was keenly aware of the realities of Genevan life and the challenges of motivating
children to honor their parents. He also was not above employing threats and fear to
persuade youth to change. He likely viewed childhood generally in terms similar to his
own youthful era, which Bruce Gordon has characterized as “a brief and brutal
preparation for adulthood associated primarily with ignorance, volatility and
waywardness.” 171 Calvin’s repugnance for youth who failed to honor their parents
comes through strongly in his writings: such a child is a “monster” whom all “will look
upon in disgust.” 172
is, to understand that God is represented in them” (Ibid., 142). He concluded, “For what zeal and affection
do fathers and mother have for instructing their children in the fear of God? It’s all the same to them,
provided they advance according to the world” (Ibid., 143).
169 Calvin, Tracts and Treatises, vol. 2, 97.
170 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 6:1–4, 619.
171 Gordon, Calvin, 2.
172 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 6:1–4, 630. “Those who abusively or stubbornly violate parental authority are
monsters, not men!” (Calvin, Inst., 2.8.36).
112
While Calvin’s comments on Moses’ injunction to stone an incorrigible child to
death (Deuteronomy 21:18-21) focused attention on both the extreme and unique nature
of such a case and likely-correlated failure of the parents, he did acknowledge that there
was a point at which the child could no longer be reformed. 173 Blacketer summarizes
Calvin’s condemnation of those youth who are “devoid of God’s grace and deprived of
God’s blessing:” “Lest children try to excuse themselves by treating their disobedience as
a minor fault, God condemns such sedition to death. Divine, not human law, prescribes
this sentence because such an incorrigible child is a ‘monster’ and his crimes are
‘contrary to nature’; we ought to view him as an abomination and a horror.” 174 In such a
case, Calvin had little sympathy for the child. His final concern was for the purity and
well-being of the community: “Therefore, when children are so far astray as to set light
by their fathers and mothers, God will have them dispatched (“exterminated”) out of the
world, for they are monsters, and an infection to pollute the whole earth.” 175 He asserted
in the Institutes that if these disobedient children somehow elude death, God will take
vengeance on the children himself, and they will perish in battles, quarrels, or “ways less
common.” 176 Calvin’s writings made clear he loathed disobedience almost above any
other familial discord. This rejection of the natural hierarchy of authority established by
173 Again, referring to Gordon's comments on Calvin's childhood, Gordon comments that "Without
authority and discipline childish ways distort character, a perversion not easily remedied in later life”
(Gordon, Calvin, 2). Also reference Calvin, Serm2Sam, 2 Sam. 13:15–25, 641; Calvin, SermFifthBooke,
745..
174 Blacketer, The School of God, 254, 255.
175 Calvin, SermEph, Eph. 6:1–4, 623; Blacketer, The School of God, 241. As Blacketer clarifies, “. . .
Calvin does not see the punishment of the incorrigible son to be in any sense remedial or beneficial for the
condemned youth. It does, however, have a medicinal effect on a godly society” (Ibid., 256). The death of
a disobedient child was only the first phase of punishment. While Calvin does not make it clear if such a
child is reprobate, he intimates such in his catechism that if children are contumacious toward parents they
“will not only be punished at the last judgment; here also God will inflict punishment on their bodies, either
by removing them in the midst of their days, or by bringing them to an ignominious death” (Calvin,
“Catechism (1545),” 113).
176 Calvin, Inst., 2.8.38.
113
God represented the destabilizing, unraveling of order in the world. In families, it was
imperative that children learn to obey their parents, wives to obey husbands, and servants
to obey masters. All were to know and respect the authorities which God had given
them, just as all were to obey secular magistrates and ultimately submit to God. For
Calvin, a child’s disobedience in the face of parental authority was the first step toward
an anarchic and chaotic society in which individuals rejected their proper place in the
hierarchical social and spiritual realms.
The final group within many households was servants. Calvin’s writings have
much less to say about this group compared with the principal members of the household,
but what he does share is consistent with his vision of the divinely-ordained domestic
hierarchy. While servants were often not related by blood, they were considered a part of
the household unit, and the householder possessed great authority over them. Servants
were in a place of submission within the domestic order, like wives and children. While
all individuals should humbly submit to their masters, servants were in a unique situation:
their employment placed them in a home which made them a part of the family and
therefore subject to expectations of domestic piety. Calvin often referenced godly
households in the Scriptures and encouraged householders to use their authority to
pressure servants into adopting and conforming to the Reformed faith. For this reason,
Calvin’s primary reference to servants in the context of the household was not to
admonish them in their duties as much as it was to instruct householders to bring
confessional homogeneity to the home.
Calvin clearly aimed to promote the Reformed faith, but servants’ obedience to
their masters was considered a religious issue. Within this paradigm, Calvin addressed
servants secondarily: “let fathers and mothers take care to instruct their children well; let
them teach them to recognize God as their only father. And with regard to their servants
and chambermaids, let [fathers and mothers] teach them to serve in such a way that God
114
is always the principal end of their service.” 177 Just as godly children recognized that
they ultimately served God when they humbled themselves before their parents, so too
servants were to embrace the master-as-God perspective. They should recognize the
divine expectations for those of their rank and station and embrace this as their calling. 178
Logical conclusions of this perspective applied to instances of disobedience; Calvin
instructed, “Let servants and chambermaids realize that when they refuse to be subject to
those whom they serve that God is offended by their action and that of necessity in the
end they are guilty of not being willing to be governed by his hand.” 179 In the end,
Calvin’s perspective on servants was little different than any other member of a
household: all were to acknowledge their place in God’s order and willingly accept the
required duties.
By incorporating servants into his discussion of the home, Calvin extends his
view of the divine order of the home as reaching beyond blood relations, illustrating his
understanding that the entire world is organized according to hierarchical relationships –
from the monarch to the child. Each had those to whom he or she owed obedience, and
the faithful were to recognize that all authority figures were proxy figures for God.
Therefore, although the web of hierarchy might have seemed complex and biased toward
some, these hierarchies, in fact, disintegrated in light of God’s predominance. Calvin’s
sermons on the Ten Commandments articulated well his vision for how the ordered home
was but a part of the larger ordered world:
And insofar as all authority which men possess comes from [God],
he speaks according to the legitimate civil order: that is we are
careful to render him the homage which he is due, if each in his
own place obeys those who are in authority over him, [if] each
177 Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 145.
178 “Servants must also be cognizant of their rank and station; and everyone must apply himself in the
thing to which he has been called,” (Calvin, ThreeSermons, I Cor. 11:2–3, 20).
179 Calvin, SermTenComm, Deut. 5:16, 145.
115
takes into account his own estate and condition, if children honor
their fathers and mothers, if everyone honors those who sit in the
seat of justice, and servants do the same toward their masters, in
brief, there will be beautiful harmony among us for our peace,
according to the order which our Lord has established, which is to
be held inviolable by us. 180
Final Thoughts
French consistories’ attempts to make order a hallmark of the godly family
required householders to accept their place in the familial hierarchy and accept the
accompanying responsibilities. This biblical vision of order was driven by a strong
notion of paternal responsibility and enforced ultimately by the threat of exclusion from
the sacred community. Local churches counseled, pressed, and coerced fathers and
mothers to accept their duties and press the church’s expectations on others, and their
endeavors seem to have gained some ground over time.
However, in an effort to strengthen the family, both parents’ positions were
modified: the father’s, strengthened, and the mother’s, weakened. While the matriarch
was arguably the stable point at the center of the medieval family, the Reformation
sought to change this. Traditional roles were undermined as husbands were pressed to
take up new responsibilities and wives were told to submit to their husbands. The records
indicate that the householders were confused about the consistories’ expectations, as well
as indignant that their lives and traditional ways were being dictated by the consistories.
Although the aim of these efforts was the reinforcement of the familial hierarchy and
subsequent stability, the effect was that families – at least initially – were destabilized.
Even into the 1600s there were many instances of defiance as parishioners ignored the
consistories’ vision for the roles of godly fathers and mothers, and consistories were
aggravated that their directives were not being followed. They were often pushed to
180 Ibid., Deut. 5:16, 137.
116
make “examples” out of their faithful and punishing them in front of the congregations so
that no one could claim ignorance as to what their responsibilities were.
This was not primarily a theology of gender, as Roper asserts. It did have the
submission of wives to husbands as one of its components, and in this manner, expressed
continuity with the social, legal, and theological systems of medieval Europe.
Furthermore, the same principles which motivated Reformed churches to insist on the
submission of wives also led them to insist on the submission of children and servants to
the father and mother. What was significant about the Reformed tradition is that it
embraced a biblical rationale to justify the familial hierarchy and applied it broadly and
thoroughly. Moreover, it had consistories which functioned as mechanisms of
enforcement so that this vision could be fulfilled. While this ecclesiastical body did not
implement this vision perfectly and while it lacked the backing of the secular arm of
government, its “power of the keys” gave it enough authority to enforce substantive
changes in familial relations.
117
CHAPTER 2
GODLY FAMILIES AND EDUCATIONAL HOMES
True Piety and Holiness depend upon
the right knowledge of the Mysteries of Religion.
National Synod of the French Reformed Churches, Loudun, 1659 1
Calvin and the Reformed Vision of Domestic Instruction
For Calvin, all of life cohered under the principle that the primary responsibility
of individuals was to know God; therefore, all of life – socially, politically, and
religiously – should be arranged to facilitate the goal of furthering the knowledge of the
creator. 2 His 1545 catechism – used in Geneva and throughout France – begins thus:
“Minister: What is the chief end of human life? Child: That men should know God by
whom they were created.” 3 Likewise, it is little wonder that Book 1 of his Institutes of
the Christian Religion addresses “The Knowledge of God the Creator.” True Christians
were not to trust blindly in priests to lead them to salvation – as Protestants might have
characterized Catholics – but they were to understand God’s will for the world as
contained in the Word and taught by the Reformed church. While the Church and State
1 John Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata: Or, The Acts, Decisions, Decrees, and Canons of Those
Famous National Councils of the Reformed Churches in France, 2 Vols. (London: T. Parkhurst and J.
Robinson, 1692), 2:529.
2 “According to Calvin’s theology and vision for the Reformed society, God lay behind everything in the
world and provided order for human society, but one had to attend church and learn the lessons of the Bible
in order to understand God’s intentions,” (Karen E. Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva: The
Shaping of a Community, 1536–1564 (Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005), 217.).
3 John Calvin, “Catechism of the Church of Geneva (1545),” in Calvin: Theological Treatises, trans. and
ed. J. K. S. Reid, Library of Christian Classics 22 (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006),
91.
118
were important in this endeavor, with the Church proclaiming the Gospel and the State
protecting the purity of the Church, the foundation of both was the home.
Calvin’s vision for the pious home was tied to two central, interconnected, and
complementary metaphors: the home as classroom and the home as temple. While
chapter 4 will examine how the home functioned as a temple, this chapter explores how
Calvin envisioned the home as complementing the church in its mission of passing on the
faith. He highly esteemed the potential of families to transmit knowledge of God, and
although pastors trained in exegesis and theology taught the faithful through sermons and
catechism, parents were expected to play a critical role in household instruction.
Throughout his writings, Calvin insisted that the home was to be a classroom: a
place where husbands, wives, children, and servants were instructed daily to deepen their
understanding of God, nourished by pious activities, and guided in living godly lives. In
his sermons on the Ten Commandments, he asserted,
Let a father carefully instruct his children in the fear of the Lord
and begin to show the way. Let the mother do the same. Let God
receive his homage above the great and small, the old and the
young. . . . Each must do the same in his home and in his family.
Let those on whom God has bestowed the fortune of having
servants and chambermaids clearly remember that there is a master
over [us] all, and that he truly must be obedient, and that his right
must be preserved in its entirety. 4
Calvin saw a unity between order and education: householders were to use their power
and position to impart knowledge of God to those under their authority.
Viewing the home as a classroom assumed two roles: teacher and pupil. All
members in the household were to deepen their understanding of God, but Calvin
particularly emphasized the home as the space for the religious education of the children.
This domestic education would provide extra instruction beyond sermons to cement the
fundamentals; therefore, the home (in addition to Sunday catechism) was the place where
4 Jean Calvin, John Calvin’s Sermons on the Ten Commandments, trans. Benjamin W. Farley (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1980), Deut. 5:16, 143.
119
children learned the basics of the Christian faith. Calvin viewed catechizing as learning
the “ABCs” of the faith, a process that was successful through persistent repetition. 5
Catechizing represented the future of the church: it was:
strictly required and quite necessary for maintaining the people in
purity of doctrine, that children of tender age be so instructed that
they are able to give reason for the faith, so that evangelical
doctrine is not left to decay, and also that its substance be
diligently maintained and transmitted from hand to hand and from
father to son. 6
One might have expected Calvin’s comments on the crucial nature of catechesis to be
directed toward admonitions for catechizing in the ecclesiastical context. However,
instruction was placed fully within a domestic one, indicating both the importance of
parents in instruction and the early idealism of Calvin’s views of domestic piety.
In his 1536 edition of the Institutes in his exposition of the Eighth Commandment
(“Thou shall not steal”), he affirmed parents as educators and asserted, “Let parents
undertake to nourish, teach, and govern the children committed to them by God, not
provoking their minds with inhumanity and cruelty and turning them against their parents
[Eph. 6:4; Col. 3:21]; but cherishing and embracing their children with such gentleness
and kindness as becomes their character as parents.” 7 Calvin and the Genevan ministers
further affirmed this role in the 1537 articles which they proposed to the city council.
First, they asserted that children “without doubt ought to make a confession of their faith
to the Church. …The children [in ancient days] were individually taught from this
catechism and had to come to testify their faith to the Church, to which they were unable
at their baptism to render witness.” This mandate was even more pressing in their day,
5 Raymond A. Blacketer, The School of God: Pedagogy and Rhetoric in Calvin’s Interpretation of
Deuteronomy, Studies in Early Modern Religious Reforms 3 (Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 2006), 59.
6 As cited in Ibid., 25.
7 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1536 Edition, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Grand Rapids,
MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1986), 1.22; John Calvin, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion,
ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960), 2.8.46.
120
they argued, because of what they perceived to be a generation of parents who avoided
educating their children, and, by extension, children who were ignorant, rude, and
impious. The solution to this ignorance was a catechism for the children whose success
hinged on active, persistent parent-educators to ensure their children were learning the
fundaments of the faith. 8
Calvin’s view of instruction was not narrowly confined to doctrinal matters: it
was a well-rounded and comprehensive education including guidance in godly behavior
and virtue, piety and worship of God, and correction of vice. Moreover, education served
a role in confessionalizing the faithful, of making them the right type of Christian: this
training “was well designed to instill obedience and mark out boundaries, between
versions of the Reformation as much as between Protestants and Catholics, and it could
be the foundation of a reflective Christian life.” 9 Calvin warned parents against being too
cruel and excessively overbearing with their children, but also admonished parents to
“continue to chastise their children until there is no hope left.” 10 While Calvin’s
8 This was because of “the neglect of the Word of God which we see in most people, and the contempt of
parents in instructing their children in the way of God, from which one sees a remarkable rudeness and
great ignorance which is quite intolerable in the Church of God.” According to these articles, this effort
would hinge on the parents: the city council should “command parents to exercise pains and diligence that
their children learn this summary and that they present themselves before the ministers at the times
appointed,” John Calvin, “Articles Concerning the Organization of the Church and of Worship at Geneva
Proposed by the Ministers at the Council (1537),” in Calvin: Theological Treatises, trans. and ed. J. K. S.
Reid, Library of Christian Classics 22 (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), 54. Also
reference Robert M. Kingdon, “Catechesis in Calvin’s Geneva,” in Educating People of Faith: Exploring
the History of Jewish and Christian Communities, ed. John Van Engen (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge,
U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004), 303. At a later date, Calvin would write to the
Protector Somerset, “Believe me, Monseigneur, the Church of God will never preserve itself without a
Catechism, for it is like the seed to keep the good grain from dying out, and causing it to multiply from age
to age. And therefore, if you desire to build an edifice which shall be of long duration, and which shall not
soon fall into decay, make provision for the children being instructed in a good Catechism, which may
shew them briefly, and in language level to their tender age, wherein true Christianity consists.” John
Calvin, Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 5, ed. Henry Beveridge and Jules
Bonnet (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983), 22 October 1548, 177.
9 John Bossy, Christianity in the West, 1400-1700 (Oxford [Oxfordshire]; New York: Oxford University
Press, 1985), 120.
10 See Blacketer, The School of God, 246–249.
121
optimism regarding the parents’ willingness and ability to instruct their children may
have faded over time, he maintained a vision for the home as a center of a robust
religious instruction.
Faithful parents should be motivated to educate their children by the
understanding that their children were gifts from God. Without this awareness, Calvin
dismayed at the prospect of parents following through with the task. 11 He further
accentuated this in his sermons on 1 Timothy where he claimed God only gave children
to their parents on the condition that parents would take responsibility for their
offspring. 12 Simple discipline for faults was insufficient – youth needed to be guided in
the knowledge of God and godly ways of living – for such comprehensive care was
modeled on God’s care of his own children. 13 Furthermore, Calvin reminded parents of
their promise to instruct their child at his or her baptism and chided parents to fulfill this
vow. 14 Religious instruction lay at the center of domestic piety and purity, and
ultimately Calvin prioritized this objective before all others (kin responsibilities, the
11 “Unless men regard their children as the gift of God,” Calvin argued, “they are careless and reluctant in
providing for their support, just as on the other hand this knowledge contributes in a very eminent degree to
encourage them in bringing up their offspring,” as cited in Barbara Pitkin, “‘The Heritage of the Lord’:
Children in the Theology of John Calvin,” in The Child in Christian Thought, ed. Marcia J. Bunge (Grand
Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001), 171.
12 “When God has given a man children, it is not only that he should have charge to give them bread to eat,
but good instruction is the main thing,” (quoted in Blacketer, The School of God, 48.).
13 Ibid., 241–248. “[Moses] concludes that in the constant tenor of God’s acts, from the time the Israelites
were brought out of Egypt, His paternal care for their instruction might be recognised. For the word rsy,
yasar, is taken by some in too restricted a sense for ‘to chastise,’ whereas it comprehends the whole process
of a proper education; as if he had said, that unless they were hereafter submissive, and disposed to be
dutiful, they would be something more than intractable, since they had been duly taught and kept under the
best discipline, and that God had omitted nothing which could be required from the father of a family.
Hence it follows, that long ago, and by much instruction, they were accustomed to embrace the teaching of
the Law, just as it becomes children to be obedient to their father’s voice,” (John Calvin, Commentaries on
the Four Last Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony, Volume 1, trans. Charles William
Bingham, Calvin’s Commentaries 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Deut. 8:5, 387.).
14 John Calvin, Sermons on 2 Samuel: Chapters 1–13, trans. Douglas Kelly (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth
Trust, 1992), 2 Sam. 9:1–13, 437. Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva, 200–208.
122
future material well-being of children, the quality of education, and so forth). 15 If basic
care of one’s family was considered natural and observed by even “infidels,” then
Christians who failed to care for their offspring were worse than “brute beasts”; indeed,
they were “monsters,” devoid of all “feelings of humanity,” and had “denied the faith.” 16
God’s love for the offspring of the faithful should inspire education for their
children. In his Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin taught that infant baptism
demonstrated God’s goodness. This sacrament proved that God would care for these
children even after the passing of their parents. Unfortunately, Calvin asserted, the
faithful had been assailed by Satan and doubted the promise and grace of this baptism,
resulting in “an impious ungratefulness toward God’s mercy [as well as] a certain
negligence about instructing [their] children in piety.” Parents ought to dispel this doubt
and be spurred to teaching their children:
For when we consider that immediately from birth God takes and
acknowledges [newborns] as his children, we feel a strong stimulus
to instruct them in an earnest fear of God and observance of the
law. Accordingly, unless we wish spitefully to obscure God’s
goodness, let us offer our infants to him, for he gives them a place
among those of his family and household, that is, the members of
the church. 17
15 Jeffrey R. Watt, “Calvinism, Childhood, and Education: The Evidence from the Genevan Consistory,”
The Sixteenth Century Journal 33, no. 2 (Summer 2002): 450.
16 John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, trans. William Pringle,
Calvin’s Commentaries 21 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1993), 1 Tim. 5:8, 102–103.
17 Calvin, Inst., 4.16.32. Furthermore, Calvin claimed that a proper response to God’s love for a father’s
children and family should be such: “When he sees a mirror of God’s grace in his house, it is the blessing
which the scripture does so highly commend as who would say, I have my young children about me, and
God shows me as it were with his finger, that he loves me and has a care of my house. He has created me
here young children of my seed, after his own image, and they be baptised in his name, to the intent I
should be the more moved to dedicate them to him, and to frame them to the obeying of him,” (Jean Calvin,
The Sermons of M. Iohn Calvin upon the Fifth Booke of Moses called Deuternomie: faithfully gathered
word for word as he preached them in open Pulpet: Together with a preface of the Ministers of the Church
of Geneva, and an admonishment made by the Deacons there. Also there are annexed two profitable
Tables, the one containing the chiefe matters; the other the places of Scripture herein alledged, trans.
Arthur Golding (At London: Printed by Henry Middleton for Iohn Harison, 1583), Deut. 21:18–21, 756.).
123
Indeed, by ushering children into the church through instruction, faithful parents obeyed
Jesus’ request to “Let the little children come to me” (Matthew 19:14). 18
In addition to recognizing God’s love, godly parents should be moved to instruct
their children by their own concern for their offspring. Calvin was scandalized by
parents who ensured their children had the best academic education possible, even
instruction in Latin, but failed to teach them the basics of Christian doctrine. 19 Such
spiritual neglect was inexcusable. He excoriated parents in his sermon on Deuteronomy
21, asking,
Can people be anything but totally blind when they prefer other
things in their household to their own children? Such people take
better care of their cows and oxen and horses than of their children.
Such a person prizes his commodities and fields and meadows, and
neglects the main thing. . . . For those who are so vigilant and
attentive to their commodities, and their revenue, their possessions,
and their cattle, with the result that they take better care of their
dogs and horses than of their children, as in the case of princes
who prize their hawks and dogs more than their own children – is
it not the case that such pathetically blind individuals betray their
bestial nature, and they are worthy of being detested as people who
are completely devoid of reason and sense? 20
18 For example, Calvin urged, “How unjust of us to drive away those whom Christ calls to himself! To
deprive those whom he adorns with gifts! To shut out those whom he willingly receives! But if we wish to
make an issue of the great difference between baptism and this act of Christ, how much more precious shall
we regard baptism, by which we attest that infants are contained within God’s covenant, than the receiving,
embracing, laying on of hands, and prayer, by which Christ himself present declares both that they are his
and are sanctified by him?” (Calvin, Inst., 4.16.7.). For a fuller understanding of Calvin’s view of how
infant baptism represented God’s adoption of infants, reference the entirety of Ibid., 4.16.
19 Blacketer, The School of God, 48–50.
20 As quoted by Ibid., 242. “Truly, negligence is too common a thing: for fathers and mothers have no
further regard of their children, than to receive some service at their hands. Indeed they could well find in
their hearts that their children were taught: what to do? To think upon their household business and
dealings, or to occupy some trade that they might put them to no cost when they came to age, but rather that
they might reap some profit by them,” (Calvin, SermFifthBooke, Deut. 21:18–21, 755.)
124
Beyond his sharp criticisms, Calvin warned parents regarding their failure to train up
their children in godliness. God would make such parents pay in the end: their children
would bring shame upon their parents, their ignorance resulting in flagrant sin. 21
To care for children in the manner in which God desired required parents to
provide religious instruction and training in godliness; indeed, there was no more
important subject for children to know about than their Creator. 22 Negligent parents
were shortsighted, limiting their parental responsibilities to the present with little
consideration for a child’s eternal welfare. Calvin drew a parallel between negligent
parents who failed to instruct their child and the ruler who failed to train his or her child
to inherit the kingdom. 23 Teaching the Christian faith in the home not only prepared
them to live a life in accordance with the Creator’s will but also provided for the eternal
security of children.
Parents who neglected to instruct their children failed to recognize that the Gospel
was not given to them for their own good alone. Calvin looked to the life of Abraham:
what made Abraham a “good householder” was recognizing that his own knowledge of
God’s plans were intended for others too. Abraham knew of the destruction of Sodom
21 They would “become whoremongers and harlots, and probably steal from [their] parents,” Blacketer,
The School of God, 244. Calvin proceeded further and claimed that parents who made excuses for their
children’s behavior (rather than correcting it) were a “block of wood” (Ibid., 243.), and those who resisted
the intervention of others to correct their children were “filled with the Devil,” (Ibid., 245.).
22 For example, in his Harmony of the Law, Calvin asserted that the commandments of God not only
represented the interests and rights of God, but they also would be to the “advantage” and “benefit” of the
faithful to fulfill, (Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 1, 362–363.).
23 “The pious solicitude of Joshua is here also set forth, for the imitation of all who are in authority. For as
the father of a family will not be considered sufficiently provident if he thinks of his children only till the
end of his own life, and does not extend his care farther, studying as much as in him lies [sic] to do them
good even when he is dead; so good magistrates and rulers ought carefully to provide that the well arranged
condition of affairs as they leave them, be confirmed and prolonged to a distant period,” (John Calvin,
Commentaries on the Book of Joshua, trans. Henry Beveridge, Calvin’s Commentaries 4 (Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Josh. 23:1–11, 163.).
125
(Genesis 18), information that was intended for the “benefit of his race.” Calvin
concluded,
And truly, God does not make known his will to us, that the
knowledge of it may perish with us; but that we may be his
witnesses to posterity and that they may deliver the knowledge
received through us, from hand to hand, (as we say,) to their
descendants. Wherefore, it is the duty of parents to apply
themselves diligently to the work of communicating what they
have learned from the Lord to their children. In this manner the
truth of God is to be propagated by us, so that no one may retain
his knowledge for his own private use; but that each may edify
others, according to his own calling, and to the measure of his
faith. 24
Parents who failed in their educational responsibilities were the cause of the “gross
ignorance” in the land, a failure which Calvin warned would lead to God’s punishment.
The religious education did more than inculcate godly belief and living to
children: it ensured the persistence of the Christian faith and guaranteed that God would
be worshipped in every age. 25 Raymond Blacketer summarizes Calvin’s argument,
24 John Calvin, Commentaries on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, trans. John King, Calvin’s
Commentaries 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Gen. 18:19, 1:481. Calvin expounded on
this in his sermons on Deut.: “Now then the intent of Moses, is that those to whom he had declared the
Law, should not only endeavor themselves to serve GOD during their own lives: but also find the means
that their children and successors should follow them in the same trace. And this lesson belongeth to us as
well as to them. For we know that God calleth us with the same condition, not only that we ourselves
should serve and honor him to our lives; end: but also that we should have a care to cause them that come
after us to do the like. Verily there are very few that discharge themselves in the behalf: but yet are we
bound unto it, and there will be no excuse for us if we do not our endeavor. Therefore let every man have
an eye to himself, and let us not think it enough to have served God so long as we ourselves lives: but [that
we also must also find means] that his name may continue forever, and that his truth may [always] be
known, so as although we be taken out of this world, yet they that come after us being taught by our means,
may link in with us into the same faith, and so fashion themselves thereunto, as God may always be
glorified and honored unto the world’s end. And specifically they that have children ought to think that it
is they to whom this warning is given. True it is that every one of us is bound thereto for himself, yea and
we must teach even the most strangers: so as the man needeth not to be my son, or my nephew, or my
kinsman, whom I should endeavor to cause to serve God and to be of the same faith and religion that I am
of: but yet they which have children ought to consider that they shall yield account for it, if they do not
what they can to hold them in the fear of God, and to see them so instructed and established in the pure
doctrine, as they may continue in it, and as the knowledge of God’s truth may still be conveyed over from
hand to hand,” (Calvin, SermFifthBooke, Deut. 6:20–25, 297.).
25 “God, therefore, would have the fathers proclaim it unto their children, so that the knowledge of their
redemption, being handed down by tradition, may flourish in all ages,” (Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 1,
Exod. 12:25, 223.).
126
asserting that “God has honored parents by giving them this office; thus they must offer
their children as genuine sacrifices (vrais sacrifices) to God, so that there will always
remain some good seed (bonne semence) and that God will continue to be honored.” 26
God would be glorified as memories of God’s activity and mercy were kept alive in
parents’ retelling and teaching. For Calvin, the stories about the timeless God took on a
timeless quality as they were passed from one generation to another. Elsewhere he
compared these stories to the stones which the Hebrew people placed into the middle of
the Jordan River upon crossing into Canaan [Joshua 4]: just as they served as a reminders
of important past events, so too parents connected their young with the past by instructing
them in pious living. 27
In the end, Calvin argued, the very survival of the church depended on parents
teaching their children. His commentary on Psalm 33 contains a passionate plea for
parents to educate their children to ensure the church’s future:
The Psalmist here confirms what I have previously stated, that
since the fathers will transmit the knowledge of this benefit to their
children, as it were from hand to hand, the name of God will be
always renowned. From this we may also deduce the additional
truth, that it is by the preaching of the grace of God alone that the
Church is kept from perishing. At the same time, let it be observed,
that care and diligence in propagating divine truth are here
enjoined upon us, that it may continue after we are removed from
this world. As the Holy Spirit prescribes it as a duty incumbent on
all the faithful to be diligent in instructing their children, that there
may be always one generation after another to serve God, the
sluggishness of those who have no scruple of conscience in
burying the remembrance of God in eternal silence, a sin with
which those are virtually chargeable who neglect to speak of him
to their children, and who thus do nothing to prevent his name
26 Blacketer, The School of God, 245.
27 “And here zealous endeavors to propagate piety are required of the aged, and they are enjoined to exert
themselves in instructing their children. For it was the will of God that this doctrine should be handed down
through every age; that those who were not then born being afterwards instructed by their parents might
become witnesses to it from hearing, though they had not seen it with their eyes,” (Calvin, CommJosh,
Josh. 4:7, 38–39.)
127
from utterly perishing, is condemned as involving the greatest
turpitude. 28
Once again, Calvin’s example of “the preaching of the grace of God alone” was not set in
the context of a Reformed temple, but in the home of the pious, a message passed from
parent to child. It was this domestic transmission of the faith that would guarantee the
continued existence of the Church, apart from which no one could be saved. 29
Although Calvin’s writings emphasized the flow of religious instruction moving
down the familial hierarchy – from husband to wife or from parents to children – there
were times in practice that this rule was abrogated. In exceptions, sons tended to be
called upon to provide religious instruction for parents. For example, on 14 September
1542 the consistory summoned a mason, Pierre Calabri, regarding “the Word of God”
and “profiting by the Word of God.” He responded that he willingly went to sermons,
but that he only knew the prayer in Latin (“as his father and mother taught him”). He
was trying hard to learn the prayer, finally admitting that his son was teaching him. 30 In
another case after Easter the following year, the consistory learned of Pernete Du Pain’s
continued involvement and belief in Catholic practices, as well as her possible defiance
of the Reformation in Geneva. Displeased, they required her attendance at sermons, and
they also demanded that her son instruct her and the family. 31 When her son, Pierre
28 John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 1, trans. James Anderson, Calvin’s
Commentaries 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Ps. 22:31, 388–389.
29 For example, in his Institutes, Calvin claimed that just as God is Father, the Church is Mother. In
explaining how the Church is a Mother, he asserted, “For there is no other way to enter into life unless this
mother conceive us in her womb, give us birth, nourish us at her breast, and lastly, unless she keep us under
her care and guidance until, putting off mortal flesh, we become like angels [Matt. 22:30]. Our weakness
does not allow us to be dismissed from her school until we have been pupils all our lives. Furthermore,
away from her bosom one cannot hope for any forgiveness of sins or any salvation,” (Calvin, Inst., 4.1.4.).
30 Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin, Tome I (1542–1544) (Genève: Librairie Droz,
1996) vol. 1, fol. 57, 14 September 1542.
31 “And in view of her hypocrisy that she be remanded here on some day before Pentecost. And that she
frequent the sermons every day and learn how to pray to the Lord. And that her son Pierre Pauloz be
admonished to instruct his family well in the Lord and that Pierre Pauloz, her son, should have a Bible,”
(Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 106v, 5 April 1543.). It is likely that if Pernete was not a widow that her husband would
have been told to instruct her, unless he were not educated enough.
128
Pauloz Du Pain, appeared the following week, he tried to justify himself by claiming “if
his mother is a papist it is not his fault, because he gave her a New Testament to study.”
The consistory demanded more, advising Pierre to teach his own household and mother,
“frequent the sermons more often and remove the books from his house so his mother
will not read them. And give him good remonstrances to teach his mother to pray to God
and learn her creed, and all those of his house.” 32
Instruction was the priority and extenuating circumstances demanded flexibility.
This was early in the Reformation and Protestantization of Geneva, and there were many
of the older generation who were still enmeshed in medieval Christian (“Catholic”)
practices. The consistory was not averse to using the younger, catechized generation to
root out “superstition” and instruct their parents in Protestant doctrine, even if this
appeared to invert the God-given hierarchy inherent in instruction. 33 Additionally, while
the language of “Honor thy father and mother” is not explicitly used, the consistory
possessed an expectation that children would take care of their parents, even in (or
especially in) the matter of religious instruction. 34
32 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 109-109v, 12 April 1543.
33 This is how the singing of the Psalms was originally envisioned in the Reformed Church: the youth of
the church would be taught, and they would teach the older members. In his 1537 “Articles concerning the
Organization of the Church and of Worship at Geneva proposed by the Ministers at the Council,” Calvin
and the ministers stated, “This manner of proceeding seemed specially good to us, that children, who
beforehand have practised some modest church song, sing in a loud and distinct voice, the people listening
with all attention and following heartily what is sung with the mouth, till all become accustomed to sing
communally [sic],” (Calvin, “Articles Concerning the Organization of the Church (1537),” 54.). Later, this
was mentioned in the marriage section of the draft of the ecclesiastical ordinances: “It will be good to
introduce some ecclesiastical songs, the better to incite people to prayer and to praise God. To begin with,
little children are to be instructed; then in time all the Church will be able to follow,” (John Calvin, “Draft
Ecclesiastical Ordinances (1541),” in Calvin: Theological Treatises, trans. and ed. J. K. S. Reid, Library of
Christian Classics 22 (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), 67.). Pitkin, “The Heritage of
the Lord,” 186.
34 This is apparent in this same story of the Du Pain family. While it was expected that the three sons of
their widowed mother would help her financially to retrieve her clothes which had been pawned (and was
one of her primary excuses for not attending sermons), to provide a stipend for her to live off, and to open
their homes for her to live with them, the consistory also required them to provide her with religious
instruction (Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 48, 10 August 1542; vol. 1, fol. 87-87v, 8 February 1543.).
129
The Hebrew Bible also provided models for Calvin. His commentaries
emphasized passages which encouraged the familial transmission of stories of God.
Reformed children should not have to ask questions regarding their religious history, he
maintained, as was done by Jewish children in Exodus 12:26 (“Then, when your children
ask you, ‘What is the meaning of this rite?’ you shall say…”). Instead, father and
mothers “ought to be voluntarily disposed to educate their children in the fear of
God…that the memory of their deliverance should be annually renewed lest it should
ever fade away, since religion is easily neglected unless men are diligently exercised in
its study.” 35 In his exposition of Deuteronomy 6:6-9, 36 Calvin argued that domestic
education should be a routine and frequent activity. 37 Just as vices were ingrained into
children slowly, over the years, so the knowledge of God should be impressed into
children through continual engagement. 38 For example, Calvin encouraged his
35 Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 1, Exod. 13:8, 471.
36 “These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. Impress them on your children.
Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when
you get up. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Write them on the
doorframes of your houses and on your gates,” NIV translation.
37 “[It was] as though [God] had said that this was so great a treasure, that there was good cause why they
should hide it in their hearts, or so fix this doctrine deeply in their minds that it should never escape.
Afterwards He enjoins that constant conversation should be held about it with their children, in order that
fathers should diligently attend and apply themselves to the duty of instruction. The word wnc shanan,
which Moses uses, means properly ‘to whet.’ Commentators think that it is employed metaphorically for
‘to reiterate,’ or ‘to repeat constantly,’ because, when the heavenly doctrine is inculcated, it will scarcely
even thus be duly impressed on their hearts; but, since it is here used in the conjugation Piel, its
signification may be transitive, viz., that they should cause it to penetrate their minds, as if they should
prick them with the point of a sword,” Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 1, 366.
38 For example, Calvin admonished parents, “And this ought to be thoroughly known unto us, that when a
man hath been naughtily brought up from his childhood, and hath dwelled in a house of disorder till he
come to twenty years of age: although he take pains all the time of his life after, to forget the corruptions
which he had seen, and wherewith he had been imbrewed before: yet can he never bring it to pass, but that
he shall always retain still some spot or blemish. And hereby we see how gracious God is to such as are so
well brought up, that they have seen none other but good and honest examples, whereby they have learned
to serve God and to honor him. It is an inestimable privilege, when God granteth us to have such bringing
up: and unhappy be they which abuse it. And this ought to be so much the greater provocation to fathers
and mothers to nurture well their children, and to take pains in the good bringing of them up, because there
is such corruption in men, that when they have once been imbrewed and infected with vices, they can
hardly refrain them with great pain. This then is that which in effect we have to remember upon this text,
130
congregants to take the message of the sermons from the Sunday service and reflect on it
at home. He asked, “How often do we remind ourselves of the content of the sermons in
order to benefit from it? How do we talk about it at home?”39 Through disciplined
practice, Calvin envisioned the home could be a rich environment of religious instruction,
discussion, and growth.
This same religious guidance which Calvin demanded for children he extended to
the entire household. The early modern household was often a collection of looselyconnected family and servants. Wars, disease, and migration could sometimes result in
households with more than a father, mother, and children; widowed parents, children of
extended families, and servants added to the size of a household. While servants were
often not related to a family by blood, they were considered part of the household. The
parents’ obligation to provide religious instruction, Calvin insisted, extended to these
individuals as well. 40 This gave the parents great control over not only their employment
but also their personal and religious lives. Calvin instructed householders to do all they
could to educate servants in the pure Gospel, especially those which might hold Catholic
beliefs.
Calvin correlated a servant’s disposition with the faithfulness of the parents.
Those who dutifully instructed their servants in piety would reap the benefit; masters who
to the end that all men should be vigilant in bringing up their children in true religion and virtue,” (Calvin,
SermFifthBooke, Deut. 21:10–14, 745.).
39 Wilhelmus H. Th. Moehn, “God Calls Us to His Service”: The Relation Between God and His Audience
in Calvin’s Sermons on Acts (Genève: Librairie Droz, 2001), 204–205. “Let us take care that His word is
better received than it customarily is and that we do not come to the sermon merely to say, ‘that’s all old
hat to me!’ but that we return home and meditate on the Word we have heard,” Jean Calvin, Sermons on
Jeremiah, trans. Blair Reynolds (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990), Jer. 17:24–27, 233.
40 “For, although children may have been transferred, or may have passed into a different family by
marriage, or in any way may have left the house of the parents; yet the right of nature is not altogether
extinguished, so as to destroy the obligation of the older to govern the younger as committed to them by
God, or at least to take care of them as far as they can. Towards domestics, the obligation is more strict; for
they ought to take care of them for two reasons, both because they are their own blood, and because they
are a part of the family which they govern,” Calvin, CommTimTitusPhil, I Tim. 5:8, 127.
131
were negligent in their families, conversely, would be punished by God with stubborn
and disloyal servants. 41 To elaborate, Calvin examined a proverb,
But then most servants are of a very bad disposition, and the old
proverb almost always holds true — “As many servants in the
house, so many enemies!” This, indeed, is vulgarly thought and
alleged, but it is not so. We get them not as enemies, but make
them so by our own fault, while we bring them up like brute
beasts, without doctrine, without the knowledge of God, without
pious training, forgetting that they are our fellowservants, and have
been committed to our charge by a heavenly Master. Will the
Scripture never bestow praise on a Christian man, without adding
that he and his whole house believed, (John 4:53,) and shall we
boast of faith in Christ, while fostering the denial of him within the
walls of our house, in the persons of our servants? Wherefore, if
the first requisite in a good householder is to manage his household
rightly, and in order — and the household of a Christian man can
then only be considered duly arranged, when it exhibits the
appearance of a little Bethel — it must be your careful endeavour
not to leave yours ignorant or devoid of piety. 42
Calvin inverted the interpretation of this proverb, arguing the nature of servants was not
essential but a product and reflection of their master. The lack of religious training made
servants enemies and brute beasts. Piety was the sine qua non of a well-ordered home,
converting the house into a meeting place with God (Bethel).
To fully understand how this vision of domestic education was to be lived out, it
would be useful to apply the domestic order described in the previous chapter to the task
of familial instruction. Therefore, the subsequent sections will inquire: How did Calvin
conceive of the roles of fathers and mothers in instructing themselves and others in the
household? How did this instruction serve to create a Reformed identity? And, as
41 “Cornelius had this reward for being so diligent in teaching his family, that he had faithful and honest
servants who were willing to do him service; and also such as that he might commit any thing to them. On
the other side, the Lord doth oftentimes punish masters with just punishments who have no regard to
instruct their families. For they find those justly stubborn and unfaithful whom they would not frame unto
godliness and the fear of God, and also they are afraid of their treachery,” (John Calvin, Commentary upon
the Acts of the Apostles, Volume 1, ed. Henry Beveridge, trans. Christopher Fetherstone, Calvin’s
Commentaries 18 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Acts 10:7, 416.).
42 John Calvin, “On Shunning the Unlawful Rites of the Ungodly and Preserving the Purity of the Christian
Religion,” in Tracts and Treatises in Defense of the Reformed Faith, Volume 3, ed. Thomas F. Torrance,
trans. Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), 408.
132
Calvin’s theological ideals are compared to discipline records, how effective were these
efforts toward domestic education?
Genevan Fathers and Religious Education
While both parents had a duty to provide religious instruction for the household,
John Calvin viewed the father as primarily responsible for himself, his wife, children, and
other members of the household. Calvin’s writings emphasized that the godly father took
seriously the spiritual education of his household. 43 There was little doubt that this
system of transmission worked. The church discipline records are full of testimonies by
congregants like Thibauda Le Guex who had memorized their prayers: she knew “how to
pray as her father and mother taught her.” 44 Parents were a powerful, formative force in
the lives of their offspring, and the consistory strove to harness this influence to
propagate Reformed identity and belief.
While the above case of Le Guex describes both the mother and father
participating in the education of their daughter, education of the children in Geneva fell
to the father as a part of God’s ordering of the world. In Calvin’s discussion of the
43 Karen E. Spierling, “Father, Son, and Pious Christian: Concepts of Masculinity in Reformation Geneva,”
in Masculinity in the Reformation Era, ed. Scott H. Hendrix and Susan C. Karant-Nunn (Kirksville, MO:
Truman State University Press, 2008), 96. Clearly Calvin viewed the duty of parents toward children as
much broader than providing spiritual instruction and guidance. His expectations also included providing
materially – food, home, vocation training, etc. In fact, Spierling argues that the material and spiritual were
connected – if fathers could be convinced or coerced into providing for their children and not sending them
abroad to Catholic kinship, the chances of children remaining “faithful” were much higher. But for the
purposes of this project, religious education is singularly being considered. For additional reading on the
obligations of parents, see Karen E. Spierling, “Making Use of God’s Remedies: Negotiating the Material
Care of Children in Reformation Geneva,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 36, no. 3 (2005): 785–807.
44 Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 116v, 26 April 1543. As scholars have argued, parents taught
children their prayers in pre-Reformation Geneva, (Robert M. Kingdon, “The Geneva Consistory as
Established by John Calvin,” On the Way: Occasional Papers of the Wisconsin Conference of the United
Church of Christ 7 (1990): 30–44; Watt, “Calvinism, Childhood, and Education,” 446–447.).
133
writings of the Psalmist 45 and the narratives of Abraham 46 and Cornelius, 47 he
emphasized that godly fathers embraced their responsibility to educate the next
generation in their home. 48 This was a divinely prescribed role: he asserted that
45 “The Psalmist here confirms what I have previously stated, that since the fathers will transmit the
knowledge of this benefit to their children, as it were from hand to hand, the name of God will be always
renowned. From this we may also deduce the additional truth, that it is by the preaching of the grace of
God alone that the Church is kept from perishing. At the same time, let it be observed, that care and
diligence in propagating divine truth are here enjoined upon us, that it may continue after we are removed
from this world. As the Holy Spirit prescribes it as a duty incumbent on all the faithful to be diligent in
instructing their children, that there may be always one generation after another to serve God, the
sluggishness of those who have no scruple of conscience in burying the remembrance of God in eternal
silence, a sin with which those are virtually chargeable who neglect to speak of him to their children, and
who thus do nothing to prevent his name from utterly perishing, is condemned as involving the greatest
turpitude,” (Calvin, CommPsalms, vol. 1, Ps. 22:31, 388–389.). Also reference John Calvin, Commentary
on the Book of Psalms, Volume 2, trans. James Anderson, Calvin’s Commentaries 5 (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Book House, 1996), Ps. 44:2, 151–152; Ps. 78:5, 230–231.
46 In the original narrative of this biblical character, his name changes from Abram to Abraham; however,
for clarity’s sake, I will use “Abraham” throughout my discussion. Calvin asserted that “. . . Abraham is
admitted to the counsel of God, because he would faithfully fulfill the office of a good householder, in
instructing his own family. Hence we infer, that Abraham was informed of the destruction of Sodom, not
for his own sake alone, but for the benefit of his race. Which is carefully to be observed; for this sentence
is to the same effect, as if God, in the person of Abraham, addressed all his posterity. And truly, God does
not make known his will to us, that the knowledge of it may perish with us; but that we may be his
witnesses to posterity and that they may deliver the knowledge received through us, from hand to hand, (as
we say,) to their descendants. Wherefore, it is the duty of parents to apply themselves diligently to the
work of communicating what they have learned from the Lord to their children. In this manner the truth of
God is to be propagated by us, so that no one may retain his knowledge for his own private use; but that
each may edify others, according to his own calling, and to the measure of his faith. There is however no
doubt, that the gross ignorance which reigns in the world, is the just punishment of men’s idleness. For
whereas the greater part close their eyes to the offered light of heavenly doctrine; yet there are those who
stifle it, by not taking care to transmit it to their children. The Lord therefore righteously takes away the
precious treasure of his word, to punish the world for its sloth. The expression after him is also to be
noticed; by which we are taught that we must not only take care of our families, to govern them duly, while
we live; but that we must give diligence, in order that the truth of God, which is eternal, may live and
flourish after our death; and that thus, when we are dead, a holy course of living may survive and remain,”
(Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 18:19, 1:481.).
47 “[Cornelius] saith that he was a godly man, and one that feared God; secondly, that like a good
householder he had a care to instruct his families; he praiseth him afterward for the offices of love, because
he was beneficial [beneficent] toward all the people; and, lastly, that he prayed [to] God continually,”
(Calvin, CommActs, vol. 1, Acts 10:2, 406.). Calvin finished his assessment of Cornelius by claiming,
“And we must not omit the circumstance, that he instructed his family in the fear of God, setting light by
the fear of danger, which did hang over his head therefore. For the Jewish religion was in great contempt;
and no citizen of Rome might freely receive any strange religion, as they called it. Wherefore, although the
sincere profession of the gospel be evil spoken of in the world, yet is it too corrupt frightfulness if that
unjust hatred hinder any man from offering his family to God for a sacrifice, by godly instruction,” (Ibid.,
Acts 10:2, 407–408.).
134
fathers were not led to instruct their children in these truths under
the mere impulse of their own minds, but by the commandment of
God. . . . The decree then is this, That the fathers being instructed
in the doctrine of the law themselves, should recount, as it were,
from the mouth of God, to their children, that they had been not
only once delivered, but also gathered into one body as his Church,
that throughout all ages they might yield a holy and pure obedience
to him as their deliverer. 49
This transmission lay at the heart of the Reformed family: father passing the truth of the
Gospel on to his children, and they to their children. These were men who recognized
that the knowledge they had of God was not meant for them alone and that future godly
generations depended upon their active instruction of their children. 50
Evidence of the patriarch’s responsibility for the confessional status of the
household abounds in the Genevan discipline registers. The consistory was disappointed
to learn that the merchant Jaques Pichard could not say the Lord’s Prayer or other
statements of faith. It immediately ordered him to learn this prayer and statements “so he
can teach his children,” concluding with the instruction that “he, his children, his wife
and his household go to catechism on Sunday with the others.” 51 Such an order was
common as the consistory pushed for fathers to create well-instructed, confessionally48 Jean Calvin, Calvin: Commentaries, trans. Joseph Haroutunian and Louise Pettibone Smith
(Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1958), 359. Elsewhere, Calvin chided parents in his sermons on
Deuteronomy that “fathers should teach their children, and masters their servants, to do the like. For it is
not enough for a faithful man, that he himself serve God: but he must also govern his household, assuring
himself that it is committed to him to the same end, & that he is to yield account of it. . . . Then let us mark
well, that here we be warned to rule our houses in such wise, as GOD may be served both of great and
small. Let him to whom God hath given children, beware that he bring them up in the right religion, & let
him do the like to his men and his maids, so as God may be the common father and master of them all,”
(Calvin, SermFifthBooke, Deut. 12:12–18, 507.).
49 Calvin, CommPsalms, vol. 2, Ps. 78:5, 230–231. Also see Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 18:19, 1:481; Watt,
“Calvinism, Childhood, and Education,” 447–448.
50 In his commentary on Exodus 10 Calvin stated, “It was proper, then, that their posterity should be thus
instructed by their fathers, that they might have no doubts as to the author of so illustrious a work. But it is
here required of the fathers, who had been eye-witnesses of the signs, that they should be diligent and
assiduous in teaching their children; and on these also, care and attention in learning is enjoined, that the
recollection of God’s mercies should flourish throughout all ages,” (Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 1, Exod.
10:1, 194.).
51 Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 22, 20 April 1542.
135
unified households. While it did not exclusively expect the father to make certain that the
wife, children, and servants were instructed in religious matters, it often looked to fathers
as guardians who were to answer for their households. It called fathers to render an
account of their families’ comprehension of basic confessional knowledge, encourage
them to teach their families, exhort them to transmit the faith with diligence and care, and
admonish them for educational deficiencies, such as if a wife said a prayer in Latin.
Some fathers began to recognize these expectations and responded accordingly. When
Mathieu Gathiner was questioned regarding “the diligence of his faith,” he replied that
“he has done what he could,” and immediately offered an assessment of his children’s
religious understanding. 52 In the very same meeting, Claude de Miribello explained that
“he is teaching his wife and his children as it is proper to instruct them to pray to the Lord
and not otherwise.” 53 Such disclosures indicate that the educational expectations of the
consistory were embraced by some members of the Genevan churches.
A clear indicator that homes were well-ordered was that the father was able to
bring about confessional homogeneity among members of his household. Places like
Geneva and France were challenging because contact with Catholic relatives, friends, and
neighbors occurred regularly, making confessional conformity in the home difficult. In
this matter, Abraham stood as an exemplar because of his ability to bring his entire
household into the covenant by circumcising all the male members. 54 While Calvin
52 He replied “also his older children [have done what they could], the younger are behind, and he will do
what there is to do,” (Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 92v, 8 March 1543.).
53 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 93, 8 March 1543. For other examples of fathers testifying to educational efforts in their
homes, see Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 21, 20 April 1542; vol. 1, fol. 55, 7 September 1542.
54 “Moses now praises the obedience of Abraham, because he circumcised his whole household as he had
been commanded. . . . Two points are worth considering. First, Abraham was not deterred by the difficulty
of the task from offering to God the sacrifice which he owed. We know that he had a great number of
people in his household. . . . And there was danger of stirring up a riot in a peaceful community. But
relying on God, he began what was an impossible task. Secondly, we see how well-ordered his household
was. Not only the slaves born in the house, but also foreigners bought for money, quietly accepted the pain
of circumcision. Obviously Abraham had taken great pains to train them in their duty. And since he had
136
argued that the baptism of a child of a faithful parent subsumed the child in the parents’
covenant, 55 he interpreted the Abraham story even more liberally: non blood-related
members of the household (namely, servants and slaves) were “embrace[d]” and
“adopt[ed]” by God. 56 His reading of this story extended the power of God’s covenant
beyond blood ties. 57 Calvin declared that the family could not be a church if all members
of the household, including servants, had not embraced the Reformed faith and thereby
submitted to God. This was a remarkably candid call for all Reformed fathers to secure
not only the commitment of their children for the Reformed church, but also any others
who might be included in the household.
The New Testament also held examples of domestic confessional conformity that
served to “prove” the father’s faith. It was not enough for the householder to be obeyed
by servants; God also needed to be obeyed, as evidenced by all members embracing the
Reformed confession. Calvin drew on stories in the New Testament in which a father
and his entire household were converted – such as Cornelius (Acts 10) and the unnamed
jailor (Acts 16) – model fathers who spared no effort in converting those under their
influence. Concerning Cornelius, Calvin stated,
kept up a holy discipline, he now received the reward of the care he had taken,” Calvin, Calvin:
Commentaries, Gen. 17:23, 404.
55 John Calvin, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles
(Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960), see 4.15.1 and 4.16, especially 3, 9, 10, and 24; Spierling,
Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva, 55–59.
56 “When God commands Abraham to circumcise all whom he has under his power, his special love
towards holy Abraham is conspicuous in this, that He embraces his whole family in His grace. We know
that formerly slaves were scarcely reckoned among the number of men. But God, out of regard to his
servant Abraham, adopts them as his own sons: to this mercy nothing whatever can be added. The pride
also of the flesh is cast down; because God, without respect of persons, gathers together both freemen and
slaves,” (Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 17:12, 455.).
57 “In the person of Abraham, [God] has prescribed it as a law to all his servants, that they should endeavor
to bring all who are subject to them, into the same society of faith with themselves. For every family of the
pious ought to be a church. Therefore, if we desire to prove our piety, we must labor that every one of us
may have his house ordered in obedience to God. And Abraham is not only commanded to dedicate and to
offer unto God those born in his house, but whomsoever he might afterwards obtain,” Ibid.
137
We must not lightly pass over this commendation that Cornelius
had a church in his house. And, surely, a true worshipper of God
will not suffer so much as in him lieth God to be banished from his
house. For how unmeet a thing is it for him to maintain his own
right stoutly, that his wife, children, servants, and maids may obey
him, and not to regard that God is disobeyed. It shall sometimes
fall out so that a godly man cannot have even his wife to be of his
mind; yet he, which ruleth others, must endeavor by all means to
have God obeyed; and there is nothing more meet than that we
should consecrate all ours to God as ourselves. 58
The jailer was commended because he too “did consecrate all his whole house to the
Lord; wherein doth also appear the grace of God, in that he brought all his whole family
unto a godly consent.” 59
While Calvin charged fathers with the duty of instruction of their households, he
also possessed misgivings regarding fathers’ instructional capabilities. In consistory
records householders repeatedly confessed that they gained nothing from sermons at
church, could not understand or remember sermons, could not recite the confession, and
others did not know the prayers. 60 How were fathers to carry out their educational duties
in the home if their own religious understanding was so inadequate? This was a serious
issue if fathers were to bring about the confessionalization of their families. Even while
pressing fathers to teach their households, the consistory recognized their ignorant state.
In addition to incessantly ordering people to attend Sunday catechism to gain
remedial education, the consistory assigned ministers and schoolmasters to tutor those
congregants who failed to grasp doctrinal rudiments of the church. 61 This concession
58 Calvin continued, “Therefore, if a godly man have children which are unlike him, or a wife of evil
conditions, or lewd and wicked servants, let him not wink, nor yet suffer his house to be polluted through
his slothfulness. The diligence of Cornelius is not so much commended as the blessing of God, whereby it
came to pass that he had his house obedient unto him in godliness.,” (Calvin, CommActs, vol. 1, Acts 10:2,
407.).
59 Ibid., Acts 16:33, 122.
60 For example, see Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 50-50v, 17 August 1543; vol. 1, fol. 68, 26
October 1542; vol. 1, fol. 105, 29 March 1543.
61 For example, see Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 11, 30 March 1542; vol. 1, fol. 100v-101, 22 March 1543; vol. 1, fol.
148v, 20 December 1543.
138
was an acknowledgement of fathers’ inability to carry out their pedagogical
responsibilities, perhaps as well as of the ineffectiveness of catechism (or churches’
inability to coerce them to attend catechism!). The Genevan church reprimanded a
dizainier who was called in for being too lax; he promised to “be diligent in regulating
his dizaine in religion and that he will make those women, children, servants and maids
whom he can go to catechism.” 62 While fathers’ instruction was never intended to be the
sole form of education, 63 the use of threats and imposition of ecclesiastical force from
outside the family delegitimized the role and power fathers did have to educate their
households. These actions passively acknowledged that the high hopes for fathers which
rang from pulpits were half-hearted and would likely never be enough.
Calvin’s own commentaries and sermons simultaneously discredited fathers’
ability to succeed on their own efforts: he claimed the successful transmission of the faith
was ultimately an act of the grace of God. 64 The prime example for Calvin in this regard
was King David, and Calvin mentioned it on numerous occasions. On the one hand,
David was one of Scripture’s most godly individuals. 65 On the other, his children were
some of the most immoral in the Hebrew Bible. Calvin’s preoccupation with this aspect
of David’s life – to a great extent – seems to be due to Calvin’s inability to reconcile the
62 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 41v, 13 July 1542.
63 Indeed, this was built into the very catechetical instruction: “[Child]: Certainly, while everyone ought to
exercise himself in daily reading, at the same time also all are to attend with special regularity the
gatherings where the doctrine of salvation is expounded in the company of the faithful. [Minister]: You
deny then that it is enough for each to read privately at home; and affirm that all should meet together to
hear the same doctrine? [Child]: They must meet when they can, that is, when opportunity offers,” (Calvin,
“Catechism (1545),” 130.).
64 “Farther, although fathers ought diligently to form their children under a system of holy discipline, yet
let them remember that they will never succeed in attaining the object aimed at, save by the pure and
special grace of God,” (John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 3, trans. James
Anderson, Calvin’s Commentaries 6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Ps. 127:5, 112.).
65 As a parent, he “took pains to have [his children] instructed and taught the requirements of the Law. . . .
[He] attempted to make his children worthy, so that he might have good and faithful successors who could
train the people in righteousness and maintain them in integrity,” Calvin, Serm2Sam, 2 Sam. 8:9–18, 426.
139
king’s close connection with God and his dismal failure as a parent. His solution was a
two-fold approach. First, parents needed to pray for God to guide their children. 66
Second, parents needed to trust in the sovereignty of God. 67 The theme of the grace of
God became all the more pronounced. David’s culpability for his depraved family was
removed as God’s sovereignty was elevated. Therefore, while this interpretation allowed
Calvin to maintain the need for parents to instruct their children, the result ultimately was
left in the hands of God.
More surprising – especially in light of his preoccupation with the role of fathers
– was that Calvin maintained a fundamental disbelief in their ability to transmit the pure
religion. For example, the author of Psalm 78 declared that he told his descendants the
great things God had done in the past so they would trust in God. Calvin affirmed that
fathers needed to follow this example and instruct their children about God. At the same
time, a thread of suspicion wove its way through Calvin’s commentary (1557): “If it was
incumbent upon the fathers to recount to their children the things here spoken of, these
things ought, of course, to have been familiarly known to all the people, yea, even to
those who were most illiterate, and had the weakest capacity.” 68 There was an obvious
66 “Fathers are further instructed by this principle to commend their children to God, asking him to instruct
them by his Spirit. They must realize that all their labour, industry, and vigilance will be useless unless it is
blessed by his Spirit. Even when fathers spare neither gold nor silver, even when they send their children
to school, and given them good examples and keep them under a firm hand of leadership – still their whole
duty has not been discharged. They can do all of that, and still miss the main thing, which is to call upon
God and recognize their dependence upon him to prosper the instruction of their children,” Ibid., 2 Sam.
8:9–18, 427.
67 “Therefore, since David had already publically declared that all the good and prosperity of the people
depended on the pure grace of God, he now gave the same testimony to his family in private: namely, that
they needed God to watch over them and be their protector. . . . It is certainly true that fathers of families
(as one says) and heads of houses ought to be careful to do their duty in governing those who are placed
under their authority. But the main thing that parents should do is take refuge in God. Those who have
children should recognize that they will never reach their goal, and their pain can produce no good fruit
unless God takes the whole matter in hand and controls it. Those who have servants and handmaids must
recognize that if God does not preside in their house, everything will go badly and there will be much
confusion. Even when a man has only his wife, we must know that when his house is not blessed by God,
there will be nothing but poverty,” Ibid., 2 Sam. 6:20–23, 280.
68 Calvin, CommPsalms, vol. 2, Ps. 78:3, 228.
140
problem – many people were ignorant of religious instruction – and Calvin admitted that
“This does not imply, that what is taught under the domestic roof is always faultless.” At
the heart of a passage which spoke most clearly about fathers transmitting their faith to
their children, Calvin then made a major adjustment: he cast doubt on the ability of
fathers and shifted the responsibility for instruction to ministers. Ministers, therefore,
and not fathers, would serve as the “continual succession of persons to communicate
instruction in divine truth.” 69
For Calvin, the biblical shift away from fathers filling the role as instructors
occurred after the patriarchs. The patriarchs were responsible for transmitting the
message to their offspring, but then God transferred this charge to priests and teachers. 70
While this did not relieve fathers of their duty to instruct their families – for Calvin
encouraged them to do so! 71 – it was not the fathers who could guarantee the longevity of
the knowledge of God. Calvin asserted, “By the words, ‘That the children to be born
should arise,’ is not denoted a small number of individuals; but it is intimated, that the
69 “It greatly concerns us to know, that the law was given not for one age only; but that the fathers should
transmit it to their children, as if it were their rightful inheritance, in order that it might never be lost, but be
preserved to the end of the world. This is the reason why Paul, in 1 Timothy 3:15, asserts that ‘the Church
is the pillar and ground of the truth;’ by which he does not mean that the truth of itself is weak, and stands
in need of foreign supports, but that God extends and diffuses it by the instrumentality of his ministers, who
when they faithfully execute the office of teaching with which they are invested, sustain the truth, as it
were, upon their shoulders. Now, the prophet teaches us, that it is our bounden duty to use our endeavors
that there may be a continual succession of persons to communicate instruction in divine truth,” Ibid., Ps.
78:6, 231.
70 “It is said of Abraham before the law was written, Genesis 18:19, ‘I know him, that he will command his
children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment;’
and after his death, this was enjoined upon the patriarchs as a necessary part of their duty. No sooner was
the law delivered, than God appointed priests in his Church to be public masters and teachers,” (Ibid., Ps.
78:6, 231–232.).
71 “In the passage before us, however, a particular injunction is given to the fathers on this point — each of
them is enjoined diligently to instruct his own children, and all without distinction are taught, that their
exertions in transmitting the name of God to their posterity will be most acceptable to Him, and receive his
highest approbation.” Soon after Calvin claimed, “when [fathers] find that on the one hand they are
instrumental in maintaining the pure worship of God, and that on the other, they are the means of providing
for the salvation of their children, should, by such a precious result of their labors, be the more powerfully
stirred up to instruct their children,” (Ibid., Ps. 78:6–7, 232–233.).
141
preachers of divine truth, by whose efforts pure religion may flourish and prevail for
ever, will be as numerous as those who are born into the world.” 72 Minsters could
maintain the longevity of the message when fathers failed.
Trusting parents with catechetical duties was a doubled-edged sword. They could
be charged with transmitting the faith to their children, but from experience Calvin knew
that this did not happen. 73 Fathers not only failed to provide this domestic training,
but they often transmitted their own vices, immorality, and unorthodox ideas. 74 Or, as
consistory records reveal, they actively strategized against the church by sneaking their
children outside the wall of the city to watch them practice their swordplay during the
Sunday catechism. 75
Calvin’s final descriptions of fathers and their failure in Psalm 78 were bleak. His
commentary on verse eight targeted Jewish descendants and claimed they were like their
fathers, but not in the way God desired: they were “a treacherous, rebellious, crooked and
disobedient race.” 76 His indictment was damning:
As the prophet teaches the Jews from the wickedness and
perverseness of their fathers, that they stood in need of a severe
discipline to recall them from the imitation of bad examples, we
learn from this, how great the folly of the world is, in persuading
itself that the example of the fathers is to be regarded as equivalent
to a law, which ought, in every case, to be followed. He does not
here speak of all people without distinction, but of the holy and
chosen race of Abraham; nor does he rebuke a small number of
72 Ibid., Ps. 78:6, 232.
73 Calvin’s Latin commentary on the Psalms was published in1557, providing him a many years over
which to reflect.
74 In his treatment of Ps. 95, Calvin bemoaned the fact that “We know how apt men are to follow the
example of their predecessors; custom begets a sanction; what is ancient becomes venerable, and such is
the blinding influence of home example, that whatever may have been done by our forefathers passes for a
virtue without examination. We have an instance in Popedom, of the audacity with which the authority of
the fathers is opposed to God’s word,” (Calvin, CommPsalms, vol. 3, Ps. 95:9, 42.).
75 Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva, 200–205.
76 Calvin, CommPsalms, vol. 2, Ps. 78:8, 234.
142
persons, but almost the whole nation, among whom there prevailed
excessive obstinacy, as well as perverse forgetfulness of the grace
of God, and perfidious dissimulation. He does not mention merely
the fathers of one age, but he comprehends a period stretching back
into a remote antiquity, that persons may not take occasion to
excuse themselves in committing sin, from the length of time
during which it has prevailed. We must therefore make a wise
selection from amongst the fathers of those whom it becomes us to
imitate. It being a work of great difficulty to remove the
disposition to this perverse imitation of the fathers, towards whom
the feeling of reverence is naturally impressed on the minds of
their successors, the prophet employs a multiplicity of terms to set
forth the aggravated wickedness of the fathers, stigmatising them
as chargeable with apostasy, provocation, treachery, and
hypocrisy. These are very weighty charges; but it will be evident
from the sequel that they are not exaggerated. 77
Here Calvin condemned the entirety of the Jewish fathers (“whole nation” from “remote
antiquity”): the sons had become just as wicked as their fathers.
Skepticism regarding parents’ ability to transmit the faith was not confined to
Calvin’s writings, but also clearly emerges in Genevan consistory records. The
consistory – especially in the early years – believed wives were far more likely to hold on
to Catholic practices, consequently, the consistory examined women’s beliefs more
closely and also instructed husbands to ensure their wives knew the Reformed prayers. 78
In addition, there was tension between the consistory’s expectations of fathers to provide
domestic instruction and its provision of religious education:
Calvin and his colleagues in the Consistory hoped to increase the
importance of the religious instruction in the home. Calvin surely
shared Luther’s view that the home was the most important site for
the shaping of Christians and that male household heads were to be
the religious leaders in their homes. . . . At the same time, Calvin
obviously did not entirely trust the ability of fathers – and still less
of mothers – to fulfill their roles in the religious education of the
young. Church authorities intervened and required Genevan youth
to attend weekly catechism lessons. 79
77 Ibid., Ps. 78:8, 234–235.
78 Watt, “Calvinism, Childhood, and Education,” 448.
79 Ibid., 454. Also reference Kingdon, “Catechesis,” 300.
143
Spierling comments on this shift, noting how the efforts of the consistory belied its
alleged belief in the ability of parents to transmit the faith:
Both Council and Consistory depended on these fathers to help
maintain the stability and disciplinary structure of the church and
city, but both bodies also at times found themselves disciplining
children whose parents had not held their offspring to Reformed
standards. . . . [I]n cases where the Consistory was directly
disciplining children, they were at the same time casting doubts on
the authority, and perhaps even the family honor, of the parents of
those children. 80
Barbara Pitkin goes as far as referring to children as “public battlegrounds” in the fight
between “ecclesiastical power, parental rights and obligations, and ‘ethnic’ resentments
between Genevans and French,” claiming that the intervention of magistrates into this
familial realm “meant sacrificing familial to Christian identity.” 81 As the Reformation
progressed, institutionalized catechism by professional clergymen would supplement the
Catholic form of home-based instruction. 82
Calvin’s critique was a reproach of the entire system of parental transmission,
calling into question the ability of fathers to fulfill this role. In his Harmony of the Law,
Calvin followed similar logic to describe the origins of the Law. He argued that
originally religious tenets were passed down orally, but given the propensity of people to
quickly “forget true doctrine,” God “consigned the rule of piety to public records, so that
there might be no pretense of ignorance if their posterity should decline from it.” 83 The
80 Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva, 212. (emphasis added). For a broader picture of this
tension between parents and authorities (ecclesiastical and civic), see Ibid., chapter 6, especially pp. 194,
205–209.
81 Pitkin, “The Heritage of the Lord,” 178.
82 Kingdon, “Catechesis,” 265, 300, 306.
83 “But forasmuch as nothing is more easy than for men’s minds, in their vanity, speedily to forget true
doctrine, and to involve themselves in manifold errors, God, willing to provide against this evil, consigned
the rule of piety to public records, so that there might be no pretense of ignorance if their posterity should
decline from it. Behold, then, the reason why the Law was written down, that God’s truth might be
witnessed in the continued lapse of ages,” Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 1, Deut. 31:10, 370–371.
144
codification of the Law represented the failure of fathers to transmit the faith to their
descendants. Fathers were unreliable, so they were replaced by Levites who would
annually recite the Law orally to the people: “Wherefore the Levites are appointed to be
the guardians of the Law (nomophylaces), to watch diligently, amidst the neglect and
contempt of others, lest the knowledge of God should fail.” 84 Calvin’s evaluation and
expectation of fathers in Geneva and beyond was low, in many ways matching his
estimation of humanity. His constant desire for them to teach their children was
consistent with his belief, however, that humanity must continue to strive for God’s
intention despite its sinfulness.
Huguenot Fathers and Religious Education
In France, Reformed churches also showed concern for the role of fathers in
the education of the household. 85 National synods declared education to be the
responsibility of ministers and parents, and over time the details of respective roles were
defined. Significantly, mandates regarding catechism were only discussed by the synod
and added to the Discipline in the wake of the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre in 1572,
two decades after the Reformed Churches of France were formally organized. 86 Against
the backdrop of the massacre, the churches’ insistence on education appears as a
deliberate effort to confessionalize their congregants. The educational role of ministers
84 Ibid.
85 The national synod records are collected in an English translation by John Quick (based on an original
Latin copy) and a French edition by Jean Aymon, Tous les synodes nationaux des Églises réformées de
France, 2 Vols. (The Hague: Chez Charles Delo, sur le Cingel á l’Esperance, 1710).). For my purposes, I
will rely on Quick’s version, which scholars have asserted is more reliable (e.g. Glenn S. Sunshine,
Reforming French Protestantism: The Development of Huguenot Ecclesiastical Institutions, 1557-1572
(Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 2003), 8.).
86 The 1572 Nîmes synod assembled earlier in the spring, but the massacre occurred late in the summer.
The next synod did not gather until 1578 in Sainte-Foy.
145
was first articulated at this meeting, 87 and – more relevant to this study – parental
involvement in familial instruction was mandated. The Sainte-Foy assembly ordered:
Fathers and mothers shall be exhorted to carefully look after the
instruction of their children who are the seed in the nursery of the
church. And those who send them to the school of priests, monks,
Jesuits, and nuns will be prosecuted by all church censures. Also
admonish those who put their children to be pages or otherwise in
the homes of lords or gentlemen of the opposite religion. 88
The French Reformed Churches understood the youth as the future of the faith, and
therefore, in the confessional war on the domestic front, their places of education and
employment were significant. Children were vulnerable and open to persuasion, and
their adherence to the Reformed faith hinged on them studying in Reformed schools and
working for Reformed masters. As confessional tensions continued to build in the
seventeenth century, the final synod before the Revocation (Loudun, 1659) reaffirmed the
Sainte-Foy declaration that parents were responsible for the education of their children:
“All Fathers and Mothers shall take special Care of the Religious Education of their
87 The Sainte-Foy synod urged churches to “put the catechism into more frequent usage,” ensure that all
congregants were catechized before communion time, use brief questions and answers and avoid long
discourses, and adapt to the roughness of the people (François Méjan, Discipline de l’Église réformée de
France annotée et précédée d’une introduction historique (Paris: Éditions “Je sers,” 1947), 28, 199–200,
258; Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 1:119. Later synods would refine this role. The Montauban
synod (1594) ordered that only Calvin’s catechism was to be employed for instruction (Ibid., 1:161.). A
half century later, the synod of Charenton (1645) provided ministers the freedom to choose whether the
catechism would be on Sundays or another more suitable day, as well as granting the ability to break from
Calvin’s catechism if the question/answer format was ineffective (Ibid., 2:453.). Loudon (1659) reaffirmed
the mandates of Charenton, and further emphasized the need to accommodate “their Discourses to the
meanest Capacities.” Furthermore, it ordered that churches in which a sermon was preaching almost every
day of the week were to “exchange one or more of these Sermons into Catechetical Exercises;” that in
populous areas they were to hire someone to teach catechisms, and that ministers were to be discharged of
some of their duties to allow them time to catechize,” (Ibid., 2:529–530.). For places in the consistory
records that discussion of catechizing appears, reference Louis Auzière, “Registres du consistoire de
l’église réformée de Nîmes, Tome 1, 1561-1563, Copié sur l’original déposé a la Bibliotheque nationale,
(Fonds français N° 8666),” 1874, 358; Alfred Leroux, Emile Molinier, and Antoine Thomas, eds., “Extraits
du premier registre consistorial de Rochechouart, 1596-1635,” in Documents historiques bas-latins,
provençaux et français concernant principalement la Marche et le Limousin, vol. 2 (Limoges: Ducourtieux,
1883), 81.
88 Méjan, Discipline de l’Église réformée de France, 291.
146
Children, teaching them themselves, and committing them to Godly Ministers, who may
form their tender years unto Godliness.” 89
On the domestic level, the patriarch held a significant role in this educational
programme in France. As the spiritual head of the home, the Huguenot father was
expected to be responsible for the religious education of his family. While the Protestant
doctrine of the “priesthood of all believers” originally sought to strip priests of their
mediatory powers, in many ways it simply transferred these pastoral duties to fathers. It
is little wonder, then, that Calvin referred to fathers as priests and pastors. In this new
Reformed family, a family raised above its biological definition and given spiritual
significance, fathers were to ensure that they and their family members received the
proper instruction regarding their faith.
Consistories expected adults to know and be able to recite two statements which
summarized central Christian beliefs (the Lord’s Prayer and the Apostles’ Creed) as
expounded in John Calvin’s catechism. Since immoral or unruly behavior was often
assumed to be connected to a lack of instruction, those called before the consistory were
not only corrected for their faults, but they were also ordered to attend sermons. 90
Additionally, those whose actions were particularly grievous – or analogously, their
religious understanding appeared exceptionally lacking – were ordered by the consistory
to attend catechism before they could participate in the Lord’s Supper. 91 The Lord’s
Supper was celebrated by the community four times each year, and it functioned as a
89 Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 2:530.
90 In Nîmes, for example, see Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 27, 28–29, 39, 45, 47, 54, 122, 160, 171, 195,
255.
91 Ibid., 144, 207, 208, 237, 356, 358, 363; MM. Anjubault and H. Chardon, eds., “Papier et registre du
Consistoire de l’Église du Mans, réformée selon l’Évangile, 1560–61 (1561–62 nouveau style),” in Recueil
de pièces inédites pour servir à l’histoire de la Réforme et de la Ligue dans le Maine, vol. 1 (Le Mans: Ed.
Monnoyer, 1867), 33, 34.
147
control point. 92 Usually two weeks before the celebration of the Supper, ministers,
elders, or sometimes deacons taught a general catechism class to refresh the faithful on
the central doctrines of the Reformed faith. 93 Thus, the morally/doctrinally deficient
were made worthy to participate in the Cène and given tokens (méreaux) to signify the
church’s approbation. 94
At this nexus of knowledge, power, approval, and access, the patriarchal emphasis
of the Reformed godly family was clear. Although in the medieval world the patriarch
exercised great authority over members of the household, the French consistories were
passionately committed to an interpretation of the biblical text which emphasized the
father’s hierarchical status and corresponding obligations, especially as they related to
religious education and morals control. Churches took an active role in reifying the
father’s role in the home, conferring on him powers and duties resembling those of an
abbot.
92 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 25, 103. For more on Lord’s Supper practices in French Reformed
Churches, see Raymond A. Mentzer, “Communities of Worship and the Reformed Churches of France,” in
Defining Community in Early Modern Europe, ed. Michael James Halvorson and Karen E. Spierling
(Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2008), 34–36.
93 Or, as the Albenc consistory explained, the purpose of the catechism was to explicate Calvin’s large
catechism so “the people are informed of the exercises of piety,” (François Francillon, Livre des
délibérations de l’Eglise réformée de l’Albenc (1606-1682). Edition du manuscrit conservé à la
Bibliothèque d’Etude et d’Information Fonds Dauphinois. Grenoble Cote R 9723 (Paris: Honoré
Champion, 1998), 269.). For other cases of this general catechism, see Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 282,
306; Anjubault and Chardon, “Consist. Le Mans,” 6, 8; André Mailhet, ed., Eglises réformées du
Dauphiné: recueil de documents copiés sur les originaux et augmenté d’introductions, de notes, de
facsimilés et de quelques documents originaux (MS 655/1-6) (BPF, n.d.), 1:120, 225, 346, 397; 2:224;
3:183.
94 Anjubault and Chardon, “Consist. Le Mans,” 35; Paul de Félice, La Réforme en Blaisois, documents
inédits. Registre du consistoire (1665-1677), Réimpression de l'édition d'Orléans: H. Herluison, 1885
(Marseille: Lafitte, 1979), 89; Mailhet, Consist. Die, 1:96; 2:57, 224, 330, 406, 411–412, 440; 4:210–
211.For more on Huguenot communion tokens and their use, see Raymond A. Mentzer, “Disciplina nervus
ecclesiae: The Calvinist Reform of Morals at Nimes,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 18, no. 1 (Spring
1987): 95–96; Raymond A. Mentzer, “The Reformed Churches of France and the Visual Arts,” in Seeing
Beyond the Word: Visual Arts and the Calvinist Tradition, ed. Paul Corby Finney (Grand Rapids, MI;
Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1999), 220–228.
148
In this familial hierarchy, fathers were responsible for their own educational
proficiency: the consistory alone held them accountable for attending sermons and, if
need be, catechism. 95 The expectations were quite different in the case of wives. While
wives were often called directly to account for communal disruptions or moral
infractions, frequently consistories would address a husband regarding the condition of a
wife’s religious life. Husbands were told to make sure wives were instructed,
remained within the confines of Reformed belief, attended sermons, and remained in
good standing with the church. 96
The expectation that husbands were responsible for their wives’ religious life is a
common assumption throughout consistory records. In Le Mans in 1561, for example,
the consistory admonished Mathurin Le Roy to make certain his wife withdrew from
l’ydolatrie. 97 That same year in Nîmes, after the consistory reconciled Jacques Reboul to
his wife and mother-in-law, Jacques promised to reprimand his wife “who he said had
been found en paillardise.” 98 In a third example from Saint-Gervais in October 1565, the
consistory ordered Sire Bernard Combes to “make his wife come to the asamblées,” and
the following year remonstrated him because “he had permitted his wife to devote herself
to the devil and to swear.” 99
These cases illustrate the manner in which consistories related to husbands, much
as one duly-appointed authority might relate to another authority of lower rank. Both
understood themselves as placed within a divinely-ordered universe, and both accepted
95 For example, see Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 38, 39, 57, 58, 61; Mailhet, Consist. Die, 4:92.
96 For example, Registre du consistoire de Saint-Gervais (Archives Nationales (Paris), 1564), fo. 945,
945v, 949, 949v, 950v, 951, 953v, 959v, 960v, 964; Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 173.
97 Anjubault and Chardon, “Consist. Le Mans,” 27.
98 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 53.
99 Consist. Saint-Gervais, fo. 949, 953v.
149
the fact that husbands possessed authority over their wives and the rest of the households.
Regardless of this agreement between consistories and husbands, these parties were not
always unified regarding exactly what a husband’s responsibility demanded of him. The
consistory expected Reformed husbands to control wives’ religious exposure, shape their
religious thought, guarantee their religious instruction, and discipline religious (and
moral) deviance. 100 While husbands would have embraced their role as head of the
household, they often resisted the consistory’s demands and failed to perform the
expected duties. Moments of conflict in the discipline records reveal ways in which the
consistory was working to shape fathers’ perceptions of their duties in the midst of
paternal resistance as well as incongruities between how the parties’ expectations were
realized in concrete realities.
Fathers also possessed the responsibility to guide, correct, and provide instruction
to their children. The promises made in baptism were fulfilled by Reformed fathers in
providing instruction in the Christian faith to their growing children, both personally and
at the hands of qualified instructors. John Bossy emphasizes the practical and
confessional importance of this catechizing, positing that “…initiation into Christianity
was not really achieved by symbolic rituals [baptism or godparents] but by instructing
children in their faith.” 101 In addition to providing instruction at home, fathers were to
ensure that their children attended weekly catechism taught at the church building. 102
100 Of course, given the doctrine of “The priesthood of all believers,” the is a certain irony about this
intentional effort to mediate and control women’s religious lives.
101 Bossy, Christianity in the West, 1400-1700, 116–117.
102 In most churches a minister or elder (or perhaps a deacon) taught catechism on Sunday afternoons for
children as well as adults who were found to be lacking in their religious understanding. For more
examples of cases regarding catechizing children or specific churches’ insistence on a general catechizing
of its members before the Lord’s Supper, reference Anjubault and Chardon, “Consist. Le Mans,” 33–36;
Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 43, 44, 144, 208, 209, 282, 306, 356, 358, 361–362, 363, 364; Leroux,
Molinier, and Thomas, “Consist. Rochechouart,” 81; Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 269; Mailhet, Consist.
Die, 1:62, 193, 225, 231/240; 2:57; 3:183. The same was true in Geneva (Kingdon, “Catechesis,” 305.).
150
Philippe du Plessis-Mornay was a model in regard to the religious instruction of
his children, as described by his wife in a biography of his life. She wrote to her son,
But you He [God] caused to be born of a father whom He has
chosen for His servant in these days now present, and who will
continue to serve Him for His glory's sake; a father who dedicated
you to His service from your childhood; who educated you in piety
and doctrine as befitted your years, and who, to sum up, has left
nothing undone, both by earnest prayer to God and by unfailing
care in your instruction to render you fit, when the day comes, to
do His work. 103
The baptismal promise of a father was considered the beginning of a long process to
usher his child into the community of salvation, and du Plessis-Mornay exemplified the
commitment of a godly father who accompanied his child into adulthood. As in Geneva,
the entire Reformed community shouldered some of the responsibility for the raising of a
child in godliness. 104 In reality – despite the inclusive language of official church
documents charging the “fathers and mothers” with the religious instruction of children –
it was fathers who were held responsible for these duties. Fathers were to instruct their
children at home and ensure their attendance at the Sunday afternoon catechism at the
temple. To properly order their families, father had to protect the orthodoxy of their
children. Church leadership urged fathers to view any contact with the Catholic tradition
as religious contamination and do all within their power to protect their children. 105
103 Charlotte Arbaleste de Mornay, A Huguenot Family in the XVI Century: The Memoirs of Philippe de
Mornay, sieur du Plessis Marly, written by his wife, trans. Lucy Crump (London, Routledge; New York, E.
P. Dutton & co., 1926), 288–289.
104 “While the responsibility of the parents was primary, the Reformed community as a whole was on
some level accountable for overseeing the nurture and education of children baptised into that community,”
Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva, 211. This entire monograph is an excellent study of the
Reformed conception of the sacrament of baptism and the struggles John Calvin and the Genevan
consistory experienced in implementing a new understanding of baptism and the cultivation of faith for the
young.
105 The Discipline specifically mandated that schools be established for the young and urged parents to
instruct their children, (Méjan, Discipline de l’Église réformée de France, 215, 291.). The regents of
teachers of these institutions were required to evidence their orthodoxy by signing the discipline and
confession of the Reformed Churches of France (Ibid., 216.).
151
As in Geneva, French consistories were dismayed by fathers’ failure in their
catechetical obligation. Fathers often appeared to be working against the Reformed
churches: on some occasions fathers taught their children Catholic doctrine, but more
often fathers sent their children across confessional lines to Catholic schools. 106 National
synods extended the 1578 Sainte-Foy prohibition against parents allowing their children
to work for Catholics or be educated by Catholics. In 1614, the synod gathered at
Tonneins decreed that consistories should deny the Lord’s Supper to all persons who
“directly maintained Idolatry, or [raised] their Children in it.” 107 Several years later, the
Vitré synod (1617) recommended vigorous discipline for those caught sending their
children to Jesuit schools, identifying this perverted education as the source of “grief and
sorrow, Impiety, Lukewarmness, and Indifference” in the church. 108 The 1644 synod of
Charenton was even more acerbic in its description of the result of Jesuit education, an
education of “Cursed principles,”
Which having been once been instilled into the tender Minds of
young Scholars, by the Regents of Jesuit Colleges, have plunged
this Kingdom once and again into a Sea of Tears and Sorrows. . . .
[Even the Sorbonne and the University of Paris] have now this day
commenced, a Suit at Law against the Jesuits, for Debauching our
Youth, and poisoning their Morals, a thing never to be endured by
Church or State, because contrary both to sound Policy and true
Theology. 109
106 “Registre du Consistoire de l’église d’Archiac (Charente-Inférieure), 1600-1637” (BPF, n.d.), fol. 5.
Or in Albenc, the consistory scolded one father for attending and accompanying Catholics to the Festival of
the Combers, noting that he did so “with his children,” (Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 40.); this particular
case will be discussed in the following chapter.
107Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 1:412.
108 Ibid., 1:481.
109 Ibid., 2:437.
152
Despite the admonitions and threats, records reveal that Catholic education was far too
attractive for many Reformed fathers. Many remained obstinate and continued to allow
their children to attend Catholic schools. 110
Protestant fathers also permitted Catholic influences in arranging for their
children to be employed in Catholic households. 111 Given the Huguenot leaders’
appreciation for the transformative power of a religious household, it is understandable
why consistories took this issue so seriously. In 1603, for example, the consistory of
Rochechouart announced that several members of the church would be remonstrated
for “guiding their infants and putting them under the control and doctrine of ragés
papistes.” It singled out Jean de la Chaulmette, who admitted that he had sent his son to
the house of “Jehan,” a regent of the city. For de la Chaulmette, this was an impossible
decision. Yes, Jehan was a papiste, but he provided food for his son and a place to sleep.
De la Chaulmette added protectively that he “prefers to [allow his son to live in Jehan’s
house] and leave him without instruction, seeing that there are not any capable regents in
110 In one notable case, Sandillion, a parishioner in Mussidan, was conditionally received back into
communion with the church based on his promise to remove his son from the tutelage of neighboring
Carthusian monks and “instruct him in the true religion.” He did remove his son, only to send him to the
Jesuit collège in Périgueux. After strategic stalling over the course of three years, he finally consented to
withdraw his son from the Catholics (Jean Valette, ed., “Les actes du consistoire de l’Eglise réformée de
Mussidan de 1593 à 1599,” Bulletin de la Société Historique et Archéologique du Périgord CXV (1988):
187, 188, 189, 191.). Also reference Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 53, 56, 61; Mailhet, Consist. Die, 1:16,
17, 19, 323, 327 (footnote), 359; 2:71. This pull toward Catholic education was likely for a variety of
reasons: affordability, quality, and perhaps some parents wanted their children to receive Catholic doctrine.
Benedict notes that itinerant Jesuit preachers organized catechetical instruction and helped establish
permanent houses – 11 by 1575, 20 by 1594, and 37 by 1615, Philip Benedict, “Settlements: France,” in
Handbook of European History 1400-1600: Late Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, ed. Thomas
Brady, Heiko Augustinus Oberman, and James D. Tracy (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1996), 445. Also see Élisabeth Labrousse, “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685,” in International Calvinism
1541-1715, ed. Menna Prestwich (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 288; Jonathan Dewald,
“Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” in Renaissance and Reformation France 1500-1648, ed. Mack P.
Holt (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 51; David Nicholls, “France,” in The Early Reformation
in Europe, ed. Andrew Pettegree (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 127–128; Frederic J.
Baumgartner, France in the Sixteenth Century (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995), 249–250.
111 Consist. Saint-Gervais, 18; Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 40.
153
this city.” 112 Torn between the competing paternal responsibilities of caring for the
future and well-being of his son and providing Christian instruction, he chose the former.
As the consistory of Albenc expressed, fathers should put their children “in the service of
someone of the [Reformed] religion.” 113
Consistories were afraid of Reformed children converting to Catholicism, a fear
which is dramatically illustrated in a case from Blois. The consistory discovered that one
of the daughters of Monsieur des Chancelières had been solicited by people of the
Catholic faith, and it ordered three elders to go investigate and do whatever was
necessary to protect her from harm. They removed her from her father’s house and made
her live in the house of a certain Mademoiselle de Clèves. One year later the news spread
that the daughter was still being proselytized “by secret solicitation,” and therefore she
needed to be sent away from the city altogether. Additional concern for the spiritual wellbeing of the young girl’s siblings prompted the consistory to relocate all three children in
another home. When lodging was found for the children in a town eighty miles away, the
church acted despite the hefty lodging expense of 165 livres per year: “The Company
has determined that although this was a large burden for this
church, nevertheless, because of the danger and since the pension was not very excessive,
it was intending to send them instead.” 114 Although consistories sought to strengthen
family bonds and placed the responsibility for the religious instruction in the hands of
fathers, this story seems to illustrate what might occur in the most extreme of
circumstances. If the father could not fulfill his duty to keep his children from
112 Leroux, Molinier, and Thomas, “Consist. Rochechouart,” 86.
113 Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 42. Perhaps the most frequent issue which signaled paternal failure was
the complicity of fathers who allowed their children to be married to Catholics. While this study does not
have the space to devote time to this topic, suffice it to say that consistories believed fathers were risking
the salvation of their children and undermining the integrity of the godly family.
114 Félice, Consist. Blois, 97, 98, 105, 106.
154
detrimental influences, the Blois consistory considered splitting a family an acceptable
alternative.
Genevan Mothers and Religious Education
In contrast to Calvin’s more universal application of men’s leadership, his
teachings on women’s role in education centered on location: since women were not to
teach in the church, the home was to be their classroom. 115 In his discussion on one of
the most notable New Testament examples of a woman teaching a man, he discussed the
example of Priscilla from Acts 18. This passage describes how one of the early
evangelists of the Christian church, Apollos, was taught and corrected by Priscilla and
her husband Aquila. Calvin identifies that although Apollos was “mighty in the
Scripture,” he “doth suffer himself to be taught and instructed not only [by] an
handycraftsman, but also by a woman.” The legitimacy of this instruction was due to the
location: “we must remember that Priscilla did execute this function of teaching at home
in her own house, that she might not overthrow the order prescribed by God and
nature.” 116 Calvin drew a similar conclusion from the story of Philip’s four prophesying
daughters in Acts 21. He emphasized that the Spirit of God “guide[d] and govern[ed]
them, that he did not overthrow the order which he himself set down.” He concluded by
reminding the reader of the site of the women’s prophetic utterances: “And forasmuch as
he doth not suffer women to bear any public office in the Church, it is to be thought that
they did prophesy at home, or in some private place, without the common assembly.” 117
115 “Not that [Paul] takes from [women] the charge of instructing their family, but only excludes them
from the office of teaching, which God has committed to men only,” (Calvin, CommTimTitusPhil, 67.).
116 John Calvin, Commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles, Volume 2, ed. Henry Beveridge, trans.
Christopher Fetherstone, Calvin’s Commentaries 19 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Acts
18:26, 202–203.
117 Ibid., Acts 21:9, 271. Calvin affirmed this in his commentary on I Cor.: “Hence he forbids them to
speak in public, either for the purpose of teaching or of prophesying. This, however, we must understand as
referring to ordinary service, or where there is a Church in a regularly constituted state; for a necessity may
occur of such a nature as to require that a woman should speak in public; but Paul has merely in view what
is becoming in a duly regulated assembly,” (John Calvin, Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle
155
Thus, a woman providing instruction to her household did not violate the principle of
keeping the home hierarchically ordered.
At the same time that the consistory maintained the social hierarchy of the home
to make certain the husband held authority over his wife, it looked to the wife to share
authority over the household, namely regarding the children and servants. As referenced,
women were often summoned by the consistory and directed to make sure their
households were instructed in the faith, inappropriate behavior was punished, and
“superstition” was suppressed. 118
Robert Kingdon has argued that this instructional activity was not necessarily
novel for mothers. Children’s repeated admission that their parents taught them their
prayers and creeds demonstrated the existence of “a highly developed system of family
instruction in religion before the Reformation.” 119 In the middle ages mothers
shouldered a “particularly heavy responsibility” for teaching their children the prayers
(Pater and Ave Maria in Latin) and the Credo – more than the father, and certainly more
than parish priests. 120 While Kingdon concludes that women continued to have a role in
domestic instruction in Geneva, Jeffrey Watt has argued that the excessive interrogation
of women regarding their religious practices and behaviors in their homes did not
necessarily imply that the consistory expected women to adopt “greater religious
responsibilities within the home than before.” 121 Rather, since the male household head
to the Corinthians, trans. John Pringle, Calvin’s Commentaries 20 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996), I Cor. 14:34–40, 392.).
118 For example, see Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 77, 21 December 1542; vol. 1, fol. 123v, 5 July
1543; vol. 1, fol. 144v, 13 December 1543.
119 Kingdon, “The Geneva Consistory as Established by John Calvin,” 35; Kingdon, “Catechesis,” 296;
Jeffrey R. Watt, “Women and the Consistory in Calvin’s Geneva,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 24, no. 2
(Summer 1993): 431.
120 Kingdon, “Catechesis,” 296.
121 Watt, “Women and the Consistory in Calvin’s Geneva,” 431.
156
was expected to assume spiritual leadership of the home, the questions posed to Genevan
women reveals the consistory’s fear of their incomplete confessionalization: it worried
women might harbor lingering Catholic superstitions and did not trust them to educate
their children. 122
Over time, it appears that women understood what was expected of them. A
widowed businesswoman named Jane informed the consistory that she “makes her
apprentices go to the sermons.” Pernete de Miribello stated she “has many children and
must teach them.” And Guychard Auberte boasted that she was “teaching the Pater to her
son in Latin and French.” 123 It is impossible to know whether these mothers internalized
the consistory’s expectations or simply acted out of the maternal tradition of passing
along religious belief; regardless, they clearly took their educational responsibilities
seriously.
Huguenot Mothers and Religious Education
Many of the beliefs informing the wife’s role in educating the household can be
seen in Huguenot families as well. For instance, in the aforementioned memoir of
Philippe Duplessis-Mornay, Madame de Mornay diligently watched over her household
and paid particular attention to the religious development of her sons, claiming that she
122 Judith Pollmann’s article, “Off the Record: Problems in the Quantification of Calvinist Church
Discipline” (The Sixteenth Century Journal 33, no. 2 (2002): 423–438), makes one cautious to read too
much into rates of occurrence in discipline records. Is it possible that husbands were approached
informally regarding their unorthodox beliefs and practices rather than before the consistory? Might the
consistory have recognized the time-tested value of women as transmitters of the faith and put more time
into their reform than that of their husbands? In the end, while the consistory undoubtedly viewed wives
and husbands as risky instructors of Reformed theology and piety, it nevertheless repeatedly entrusted them
with these duties. The consistories’ issue with fathers seemed to be motivating them to engage with their
children and provide guidance; with mothers, the issue seemed to revolve more around ensuring they were
teaching orthodox doctrine to their children. For example, see Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 77, 21
December 1542; vol. 1, fol. 188v-189, 10 April 1544.
123 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 72, 23 November 1542; vol. 1, fol. 90, 22 February 1543; vol. 1, fol. 132v, 13
September 1543.
157
took the time to ensure that her sons were instructed “in the fear of the Lord.” 124
Madame de Mornay testified elsewhere to her active participation in the education of her
household, claiming that she had taken her family and servants to catechism when her
husband was absent. 125 In a letter written to her son toward the end of her life, Madame
de Mornay reminisced on her and her husband’s efforts to inculcate piety:
God is my witness that He filled me, even before your birth, with
the hope that you would be born to be His servant, and in some
measure, this should be an earnest of His grace, and an admonition
to you to do your duty. To this intent your father and I have
labored to bring you up in His fear, making you suckle it with your
milk so far as lay in our power; and furthermore to render you
more apt we took pains to give you a good education. 126
Her hopes concisely expressed the vision of Reformed churches in France: that fathers
and mothers would work together to nurture their children’s faith.
From study of prescriptive sources such as synodal records and the Discipline, it
is clear that the French church desired men and women to take part in religious
instruction. Notably, that same desire lacks witness in the discipline records. The
evidence supports Diefendorf’s claims that, “French Calvinists taught that women should
help provide young children with their first education in the faith, but they made the male
head of the household ultimately responsible for his family’s religious education and
practice.” 127 French Reformed consistories consistently called on the father to teach the
faith to his children and held him responsible for their instruction; but among the sources
examined, there were no cases in which wives were questioned regarding their household
teaching, how they were teaching, or how often they were teaching the young of the
124 Mornay, The Memoirs of Philippe de Mornay, 86.
125 Ibid., 86, 206–207.
126 Ibid., 288.
127 Barbara B. Diefendorf, “Gender and Family,” in Renaissance and Reformation France, 1500–1648, ed.
Mack P. Holt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 111.
158
household. There are simply no consistory records of wives taking their children or
servants to catechism.
For a religious tradition which stressed domestic piety and ostensibly declared
women responsible for instructing children in this piety, why are the records silent on
women’s inclusion and function? Was it because mothers were already performing this
role, as they had traditionally done, and therefore it could go unspoken? 128 Was it an
effort to over-compensate for fathers’ past relative absence in the process of religious
inculcation and reassert the perceived biblical mandate for fathers to be the “head of the
house”? 129 Or, perhaps this was because mothers were perceived as inclined to pass on
the old, “superstitious” religion of Ave Marias and rosaries, as in Geneva. 130 Regardless,
the discipline records fail to demonstrate that, at the local level, Reformed pastors and
elders in France viewed or promoted wives as teachers. Wives were certainly called to
testify regarding baptisms and marriages of their children, but I could find no anecdotal
evidence to suggest the consistory expected them to assume instructional responsibility
over their households.
Final Thoughts
The Reformed churches in Geneva and France displayed a passionate interest in
the instruction of their congregants and viewed parents as important partners in this
128 Kingdon claims that in the middle ages “mothers carried a particularly heavy responsibility for this
instruction, often heavier than fathers,” Kingdon, “Catechesis,” 296.
129 For example, see Spierling, Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva, 91–102, 193–205. The argument
that the Reformation represented the re-imposition of paternal authority is one of the conclusions arrived at
by Lyndal Roper (The Holy Household: Women and Morals in Reformation Augsburg (Oxford New York:
Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press, 1989).).
130 Watt, “Calvinism, Childhood, and Education,” 448. Robert M. Kingdon notes that it was women who
were called before the Genevan consistory for murmuring during sermons, and it was revealed they were
“repeating prayers by rote as they had been accustomed to do during the Mass,” (Kingdon, “Catechesis,”
299.).
159
enterprise. However, the records reveal that this was not an easy or particularly
successful endeavor. Even while fathers were encouraged in their role, they were shown
to be one of the greatest obstacles to reforming the family. Mothers, conversely, were
infrequently held accountable for the confessional competencies of the household
whether related to instruction at home or attending catechism.
If the Reformed pressure on patriarchs to create Reformed households was an
effort to press confessionalization onto the familial level, parents can be understood as
agents of religious conformity, responsible for their families, servants, and any others
which might enter their homes. While some parents undoubtedly embodied the hopes of
the ecclesiastical leadership, many exercised their own agency by stalling, making
excuses, resisting, and refusing to appear before the consistory. They demonstrated a
creative ability to instruct their children in the beliefs that were most important to them,
keep them connected to their social network, and further other familial interests. 131
131 Indeed, as consistories forced confessionalization downward, families pushed back, reflecting a
transferal of responsibility that was happening throughout Reformation Europe. Bossy notes that early
optimism regarding parental instruction among Lutherans faded quickly, dramatically stating that “The ink
was scarcely dry on Luther’s Shorter Catechism (1529), framed as a dialogue between father and child,
when evangelical authorities had thrown up the sponge and passed the responsibility to the clergy; this
became the rule in Lutheran churches.” He continued, “The Genevan tradition, launched by Calvin’s illconceived Formulaire d’instruire les enfants en la Chretiente of 1541 and the more viable Heidelberg
Catechism of 1563, may have tried to keep the balance for longer; but most of the evidence comes from
England, where Calvinists were often unhappy with the doctrine being taught by the parish clergy. Among
both Catholics and Protestants domestic catechising only really occurred where they were condemned to
privacy by a hostile or unsympathetic establishment. Hence the Church of England hierarchy was not out
of step with the general practice of reformed Churches in taking it for granted that catechism was a
parochial activity, and that parishes would be well edified if their children spent Sunday afternoons
learning by rote the obligations which had been undertaken for them at their baptism. . . . [T]he general
view of the Counter-Reformation clergy was that it was hard enough to get parents to send their children
along to catechism, never mind doing it themselves. I doubt if the experience of reformed Churches was
much different,” (Bossy, Christianity in the West, 1400-1700, 118–119.). Jane E. Strohl remarks on the
irony of this shift: “[Luther] saw the family as the natural locus of education: parents catechizing their
children and household dependents, joining them in prayers, teaching them their proper duties, and
administering discipline. But Luther's naiveté was dispelled by the radicalism of the 1520s and the
depressing results of the church visitations in Saxony in the latter half of the decade. Gerald Strauss has
argued that the result was a transfer of responsibility for education from negligent parents to the superior
paternal authority, the ruler and his instruments of governance. Catechizing was part of the school
curriculum and was to be the constant subject of pastoral teaching and preaching in parishes. Ironically,
learning about the freedom of a Christian became for Lutherans a highly regimented process,” (Jane E.
Strohl, “The Child in Luther’s Theology: ‘For What Purpose Do We Older Folks Exist, Other Than to Care
160
For...the Young?’,” in The Child in Christian Thought, ed. Marcia J. Bunge (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001), 134–159. Also see Pitkin, “The Heritage of the Lord,” 169.).
While these observations might not exactly reflect the French context, they reveal the trend of negotiating
responsibility for educating families. In spite of the fact that discipline records reveal that Reformed
fathers seemed to often fail in their duty to instruct their children or take them to catechism, consistories
nevertheless refused to release fathers from this responsibility.
161
CHAPTER 3
DOMESTIC SACRALITY AND THE PURSUIT OF PURITY
What God intended was,
that the priests should lead the way in divine service,
and the people take example by what was done in the temple,
and practice it individually in their private houses.
– John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms 1
Calvin’s Elevated Vision of the Home as Temple
Although for Calvin the godly home was to function as a classroom, it was much
more. For while knowledge was a goal, knowledge was not the end. He asserted that
knowledge of God did not merely lead one to “apprehend God,” because the human mind
could not “apprehend God without rendering some honor to him.” 2 Ultimately,
knowledge of God was linked to piety: “I call piety,” he clarified, “that reverence joined
with love of God which the knowledge of his benefits induces.” 3 Understood thus, the
home was far more than a space for simply educating its members about facts regarding
the divine; it was teleologically oriented toward piety. Calvin argued in his Harmony of
the Law that humans “are created to no other end, and live for no other cause than that
1 John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 3, trans. James Anderson, Calvin’s
Commentaries 6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Ps. 134:3, 168.
2 John Calvin, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles
(Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960), 1.2.1.
3 Ibid. In commenting on the fact that God tells Moses to assemble the people every seven years for a
recitation of the Law, Calvin noted: “The fruit and utility (of this recitation) is added, that by hearing they
might learn to fear God. Whence we infer, that true religion has its origin in knowledge, and that whatever
piety men not instructed by God’s word may appear to have, is mere pretense,” (John Calvin,
Commentaries on the Four Last Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony, Volume 1, trans.
Charles William Bingham, Calvin’s Commentaries 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Deut.
31:12, 373.).
162
God may be glorified in us.” 4 He believed that – as the faithful directed their lives and
families toward the glory of God – the home was most fully understood as a temple. The
notion of a temple, however, brings the discussion of the home into Calvin’s – and
Reformed churches’ – abstruse understanding of sacred space.
“[God] cannot be comprehended within any spaces of
place”: Renouncing Sacred Space
Calvin’s notion of the home as temple existed within his complex notion of sacred
space and revolved around his understanding God’s nature: God is spiritual, and therefore
the worship of God must be spiritual and internal. 5 What good, then, were external rites?
Calvin began at the story of Abraham building an altar (Genesis 12) with an inquiry:
“could [Abraham] not worship God without an altar?” He concluded that external rites
could be misguided and dangerous: “all ceremonies which have no right and lawful end,
are not only vain and worthless in themselves, but also corrupt the true worship of God
by their counterfeited and fallacious appearance.” The key was whether the external
worship “terminate[d] in bare ceremonies” or if it had the “purpose of calling upon God.”
The external had to be tied to the internal and vice-versa: “the inward worship of the
4 John Calvin, Commentaries on the Four Last Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a Harmony,
Volume 2, trans. Charles William Bingham, Calvin’s Commentaries 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
House, 1996), Deut. 13:12, 85. Also reference Bernard Reymond, L’architecture religieuse des protestants
(Genève: Labor et Fides, 1996), especially chapter 3.
5 Regarding the nature of God and corresponding worship, Calvin relied heavily on the book of Exodus: “it
would not be sufficient for us to be instructed to worship [God] alone, unless we also knew the manner in
which He would be worshipped. The sum is, that the worship of God must be spiritual, in order that it may
correspond with His nature,” (Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 2, Exod. 20:4, 107.). Also reference Ibid.,
Exod. 25:8, 151. For Calvin, the Hebrew Bible was intended to provide shadows of things to come. The
Law was intended to foreshadow the proper worship of God: “So the Law instructed the Jews in the
spiritual worship of God, and in nothing else, though it were clothed in ceremonies agreeably to the
requirements of the age. For, before the truth was fully made known, the childhood of the Church was to be
directed by earthly elements, and thus, though there was great affinity and likeness between the Jews and
Gentiles as regarded the external form of their religious service, yet its end was widely different,” (Ibid.,
Exod. 25:8, 154.).
163
heart is not sufficient unless external profession before men be added. Religion has truly
its appropriate seat in the heart; but from this root, public confession afterwards arises, as
its fruit. For we are created to this end, that we may offer soul and body unto God.”
Therefore, both internal and external worship of God were essential. Abraham’s altar,
therefore, was legitimate; it was set up “for the purpose of calling upon God. The altar
then [was] the external form of divine worship; but invocation [was] its substance and
truth.” 6
Calvin interpreted the Isaac story (Genesis 26) similarly. The altar was “built for
the external exercises of faith, the expression, ‘he called upon God,’ implies as much as if
Moses had said that Isaac celebrated the name of God, and gave testimony of his own
faith.” 7 The principle of proper ceremonies having reference to the spiritual worship of
God was universal, applying to ceremonies in the Reformed temples and anywhere else
the worship of God occurred. 8
6 John Calvin, Commentaries on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, trans. John King, Calvin’s
Commentaries 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Gen. 12:7, 1:353–354. Calvin has similar
observations in his discussion on Gen. 33: Abraham, Issac, and Jacob “gave themselves up to the pure
worship of God in prayers and other acts of devotion; nevertheless they did not neglect the external
confession of piety, whenever the Lord granted them any fixed place in which they might remain.”
Speaking specifically of Jacob, Calvin stated he not only “privately worship[ped] God in the secret feeling
of his mind; but he exercise[d] himself in ceremonies which are useful and commanded by God,” (Ibid.,
Gen 33:20, 2:213–214.). Elsewhere, Calvin explained that “When God doth declare, by the external rites,
that he will be present with his, that he may dwell in the midst of them, he commandeth them to lift up their
minds, that they may seek him spiritually,” (John Calvin, Commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles,
Volume 1, ed. Henry Beveridge, trans. Christopher Fetherstone, Calvin’s Commentaries 18 (Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Acts 7:49, 303.).
7 Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 26:25, 2:71.
8 Ibid., Gen. 12:7, 1:354. Or, as Calvin summarized the story of Isaac erecting an altar, that “whatever
exercises of piety the faithful undertake are to be directed to this end, namely, that God may be worshipped
and invoked. To this point, therefore, all rites and ceremonies ought to have reference,” (Ibid., Gen. 26:25,
2:71.). His commentary on the Gospel of John is also insightful in this matter: “Every man worshipped
God daily at his own house in a spiritual manner; but the saints under the Law were likewise bound to
make profession of outward worship and obedience, such as was prescribed by Moses, by appearing in the
temple in the presence of God. Such was the design for which the feasts were appointed. And if those men
undertook so long a journey at great expense, with great inconvenience, and not without personal risk, that
they might not treat with indifference the external profession of their piety, what apology can we now offer,
if we do not testify, in our own houses, that we worship the true God? The worship which belonged to the
Law has indeed come to an end; but the Lord has left to his Church Baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and public
164
Calvin’s conception of spiritual worship, therefore, untethered ceremonies from
specific locations. God’s spiritual nature allowed the faithful to worship God anywhere.
In his 1536 Institutes Calvin asserted that places of worship did not by “any secret
sanctity of their own make prayers more holy, or cause them to be heard by God.” 9 His
commentary on Isaac’s domestic worship further illustrated this: “From other passages
we are well aware that Moses here speaks of public worship; for inward invocation of
God neither requires an altar; nor has any special choice of place; and it is certain that the
saints, wherever they lived, worshipped.” 10 Moreover, Calvin insisted that a single
location could not be considered to contain God, and the Ark of the Covenant, the
tabernacle, and the temple in Jerusalem were no exceptions. 11
prayer, that in those exercises believers may be employed. If we despise them, therefore. it proves that our
desire of godliness is excessively cold,” (John Calvin, Commentary on the Gospel According to John,
Volume 1, trans. William Pringle, Calvin’s Commentaries 17 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996), John 12:20, 26–27.).
9 He continued, insisting that “But they are intended to receive the congregation of believers more
conveniently when they gather to pray, to hear the preaching of the Word, and at the same time to partake
of the sacraments. Otherwise (as Paul says) . . . we ourselves are the true temples of God. . . . But those
who suppose that God's ear has been brought closer to them in a temple, or consider their prayer more
consecrated by the holiness of the place, are acting in this way according to the stupidity of the Jews and
Gentiles. In physically worshipping God, they go against what has been commanded, that, without any
consideration of place, we worship God in spirit and in truth,” (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian
Religion, 1536 Edition, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1986),
3.9.); also reference Calvin, Inst., 3.20.30; Andrew Spicer, “‘What Kinde of House a Kirk Is’:
Conventicles, Consecrations and the Concept of Sacred Space in post-Reformation Scotland,” in Sacred
Space in Early Modern Europe, ed. Will Coster and Andrew Spicer (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2005), 86–87; Andrew Spicer, “‘Qui est de Dieu, oit la parole de Dieu’: The Huguenots and their
temples,” in Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, ed. Raymond A. Mentzer and Andrew
Spicer (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 184–185.
10 Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 26:25, 2:71. This being said, Calvin added, “But because religion ought to
maintain a testimony before men, Isaac, having erected and consecrated an altar, professes himself a
worshipper of the true and only God, and by this method separates himself from the polluted rites of
heathens,” (Ibid.). Clearly, this did not change the reality of God’s ubiquity; rather, it served as a way for
Isaac to make a statement about his spiritual loyalties to surrounding peoples.
11 “[B]ut, because in [God’s] indulgence for the infirmities of an ignorant people He desired to testify the
presence of His grace and help by a visible symbol, the earthly sanctuary is called His dwelling amongst
men, inasmuch as there He was not worshipped in vain. And we must bear in memory what we have lately
seen, that it was not the infinite essence of God, but His name, or the record of His name, that dwelt there,”
Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 2, Exod. 25:8, 150. (emphasis added).
165
There was no specific location which enclosed God, and therefore, these locations should
not be understood as having an inherent sanctity. 12 The Genevan reformer clarified these
implications in his Acts commentary when he discussed of Solomon’s temple: “it must
not be so understood as if [God] had a body, or could be divided into parts, after the
manner of men; but because he is infinity, therefore he saith that he cannot be
comprehended within any spaces of place; therefore, those men are deceived who esteem
God or his worship according to their own nature.” 13 By “their own nature,” Calvin
chastised those who tethered God to a specific material space to reflect their own singular
material location.
From Calvin’s perspective, both Jews and “Papists” misunderstood the nature of
God and God’s desire for worship. Jews built a temple for God, localizing God’s
presence. 14 In similar ways, Catholics tied God’s presence to objects (viz., the elements
of the Eucharist), as well as represented God’s image in mediums such as statues and
stain glass (violating Deuteronomy 5:8-9). 15 The medieval Christian doctrine of the Real
Presence affirmed that upon the words of institution (hoc est corpus meum), the elements
of the Eucharist were transformed into Christ’s body and blood, making Christ truly
present. Calvin’s discussion on Solomon’s temple concludes with an excoriation of
Catholics:
12 Spicer, “Qui est de Dieu,” 184.
13 Calvin, CommActs, vol. 1, Acts 7:49, 302.
14 Calvin stated, “as he complaineth by his prophet that the people do him injury, when as they imagine
that he is tied to a place; but the prophet doth not for that cause only inveigh against the Jews, because they
worshipped God superstitiously, thinking that his power was tied to the temple, but because they did
esteem him according to their own affection, and, therefore, after that they had ended their sacrifices and
external pomp, they imagined that he was pleased, and that they had brought him indebted to them. This
was almost a common error in all ages; because men thought that cold ceremonies were sufficient enough
for the worship of God. The reason is, because forasmuch as they are carnal, and wholly set upon the
world, they imagine that God is like to them; therefore, to the end God may take from them this
blockishness, he saith that he filleth all things,” (Ibid., Acts 7:47, 302.).
15 Philip Benedict, Rouen During the Wars of Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981),
59.
166
Hypocrites, which are entangled in the world, will rather pluck
God out of heaven; and whereas they have nothing but vain and
bare figures, they are puffed up with such foolish confidence, that
they pamper themselves in their sins carelessly, so, at this day, the
Papists include Christ in the bread and wine in their imagination;
that done, so soon as they have worshipped their idol with foolish
worship, they vaunt and crack as if they were as holy as angels.
We must diligently note these two vices, that men do
superstitiously forge to themselves a carnal and worldly God
which doth so come down unto them, that they remain still having
their minds set upon the earth, and that they rise not up in mind to
heaven. 16
In this way, Calvin’s theology led the Reformed Church to eschew Catholic notions of
sacred space. 17 This disregard for sacred space was so flagrant in the seventeenth
century that churches were found to have mice-infested wheat being stored inside, cured
pork hanging from the ceiling rafters, and meat lying on church benches. 18 French
Reformed churches employed their buildings for ecclesiastical and municipal business
meetings. 19
Ironically, however, many Reformed congregations participated in the
desacralizing of Catholic spaces, an ineffectual effort if the space did not possess the
ability to possess beneficent or malefic power. In iconoclastic fervor, the interior spaces
of Roman churches were cleansed and purified. 20 For example, the Reformed in
Hungary desacralized churches by removing all marks of and opportunities for idolatry
16 Calvin, CommActs, vol. 1, Acts 7:49, 303.
17 For other scholars’ perspective on this, reference Reymond, L’architecture, 46–48; Raymond A.
Mentzer, “The Reformed Churches of France and the Visual Arts,” in Seeing Beyond the Word: Visual Arts
and the Calvinist Tradition, ed. Paul Corby Finney (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1999), 201.
18 Graeme Murdock, Calvinism on the Frontier 1600-1660: International Calvinism and the Reformed
Church in Hungary and Transylvania (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 216.
19 Mentzer, “The Reformed Churches of France and the Visual Arts,” 209–210.
20 For instance, see Benedict, Rouen, 59–62; 97–98. For a description of how Catholics viewed this
“purification” as pollution, see Natalie Zemon Davis, “The Rites of Violence,” in Society and Culture in
Early Modern France: Eight Essays (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975), 57–59; Benedict,
Rouen, 62.
167
(such as images representing God, stone altars, and statues), whitewashing the walls, and
replacing colored window glass with clear panes. 21 While some scholars have
interpreted Protestant attacks on church buildings as motivated by a desire to purify the
community, 22 Tulchin has proposed that the example of a place like Nîmes – in which
Protestantism became the dominant religion – there would have been no need to drive out
idolatrous neighbors. Thus, the iconoclasm may have functioned as a method of
“purging the memory of Catholicism from the community . . . [of] marking a liminal
moment, that is, a line in time dividing their sinful past from their spiritually reborn
present.” 23 Such an interpretation adds a valuable nuance to understanding complex
relationships to sacred spaces in the midst of change.
21 Graeme Murdock, “‘Pure and White’: Reformed Space for Worship in Early Seventeenth-Century
Hungary,” in Defining the Holy: Sacred Space in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ed. Andrew Spicer
and Sarah Hamilton (Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005), 232–235.
Dedication services for these purified spaces departed from Catholic practice by emphasizing that the
church was not made sacred by rituals, but it was sanctified when the believers gathered (Ibid., 241–244.).
Similar “cleansings” happened in Scottish churches (Spicer, “What Kinde of House a Kirk Is,” 87.). For
research on iconoclasm, see Lee Palmer Wandel, Voracious Idols and Violent Hands: Iconoclasm in
Reformation Zurich, Strasbourg, and Basel (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995);
Olivier Christin, Une révolution symbolique: L’iconoclasme huguenot et la reconstruction catholique
(Paris: Les Editions de Minuit, 1991); Carlos M. N. Eire, War Against the Idols: The Reformation of
Worship from Erasmus to Calvin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). For a broader look at
this topic, reference Willem J. van Asselt, Paul van Geest, and Daniela Müller, eds., Iconoclasm and
Iconoclash: Struggle for Religious Identity (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2007).
22 Davis, “Violence,” 173–174.
23 Allan Tulchin, That Men Would Praise the Lord : The Triumph of Protestantism in Nimes, 1530-1570
(Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 133–134. Thus, he avers, the destruction of the
polluted objects may have served to resolve the cognitive dissonance for the newly-converted Protestants
between who they were before (idolaters) and who they were now (Reformed Christians). They were
symbolically lashing out against the institution and people who had deceived them, and at the same time,
they were wiping away their history of idolatry, (Ibid., 140–141.) Also reference Benedict, Rouen, 58.
168
“[T]here is no profane place”:
Universalizing Sacred Space
Max Weber famously asserted that Calvin’s theology stripped sacred power from
the world, enforcing a delineation between the sacred and profane, God and the world.
This interpretation of Calvin led him to declare the Reformation as the cause of the
“disenchantment of the world.” 24 While Robert Scribner’s rebuttal of Weber’s thesis
admitted that Protestantism “destroyed the basis for sacraments and sacramental,” he
rejected the basic premise and asserted that, in fact, the Reformation led to “a world of
highly charged sacrality.” 25 The “boundaries between sacred and secular remained
highly porous” for Protestants just as for their Catholic neighbors; it was impossible for it
to be otherwise because Protestants were “positioned in the same force-field of
sacrality.” 26 Scribner’s arguments emphasized the continuity between the cosmos of
medieval Christians and early modern Protestants. Although Calvin could reject the
notion of sacred space, even his ideas contained ambiguities – ambiguities which were
magnified in common folks’ understandings of sacred and profane.
24 In his work published in 1904–5, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, German sociologist,
economist, and politician Max Weber argued that the Reformation initiated a fundamental change in
perspective towards the sacred and supernatural. The Reformation was part of a “great historic process,”
the “disenchantment of the world,” (Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans.
Talcott Parsons (London: G. Allen & Unwin, 1930), 105, 125; Max Weber, The Sociology of Religion
(London: Social Science Paperbacks, 1971), 270.). For a concise essay on the historiography of Weber’s
thesis, see Alexandra Walsham, “The Reformation and ‘the Disenchantment of the World’ Reassessed,”
The Historical Journal 51, no. 2 (2008): 497–528.
25 He argued that “Protestant belief did not hold that the sacred did not intrude into the secular world,
simply that it did not do so at human behest and could not automatically be commanded,” (Robert W.
Scribner, “The Reformation, Popular Magic, and the ‘Disenchantment of the World’,” The Journal of
Interdisciplinary History 23, no. 3 (1993): 484.) “The consequence was in no sense, however, a
desacralization of the world; quite the contrary. . . . The world of Luther and the Reformation was a world
of highly charged sacrality, in which all secular events, social, political, and economic, could have cosmic
significance. The same was true of the second generation of reform, associated with Calvin and the
followers of the “reformed religion,” whose characteristic belief above all else was that Lutherans and
Lutheranism had made too many compromises with the Antichrist by accepting that some matters were
indifferent in the great cosmic struggle. Far from further desacralizing the world, Calvin and the reformed
religion intensified to an even higher degree the cosmic struggle between the divine and the diabolical,”
Ibid., 482–483.
26 Scribner, “The Reformation, Popular Magic, and the ‘Disenchantment of the World’,” 487, 491.
169
Richard Williams’ term “hierarchies of sanctity” is a useful term when analyzing
past understandings of sacred space because it recognizes that the discussion of sacrality
is often more about a difference of degree than of kind. 27 Protestants all possessed these
hierarchies, and often conflict between consistories and congregants actually pointed to
differences in the ordering of these hierarchies. Ultimately studies have shown that early
modern conceptions of sacred space indeed had much in common with medieval
understandings; even in the Reformed church, they were being constantly negotiated,
“created and re-created.” 28
While Calvin’s theology seriously damaged any strict assignment of sacred space,
it did not make all space secular. Instead, his rejection of the notion that space was made
sacred by containing God’s presence meant that God was equally present in all places.
For those with a pure heart, pilgrimage sites, reliquaries, monasteries, and Reformed
temples possessed a sanctity equal to any other location. Calvin’s theology consequently
expanded the domain of the sacred: “there is no profane place, nor any from which both
men and women may not draw near to God, provided they are not excluded by their
vices.” 29
27 Richard L. Williams, “Forbidden Sacred Spaces in Reformation England,” in Defining the Holy: Sacred
Space in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ed. Andrew Spicer and Sarah Hamilton (Aldershot, England;
Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005), 95–96.
28 For instance, Sarah Hamilton and Andrew Spicer, “Defining the Holy: The Delineation of Sacred
Space,” in Defining the Holy: Sacred Space in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ed. Andrew Spicer and
Sarah Hamilton (Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005), 19. For some
significant contributions on this topic, reference the other chapters in Hamilton’s and Spicer’s edited
volume (Defining the Holy: Sacred Space in Medieval and Early Modern Europe) as well as Will Coster
and Andrew Spicer, eds., Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2005).
29 John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, trans. William Pringle,
Calvin’s Commentaries 21 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1993), 1 Tim. 2:9, 65. Also reference
John Calvin, Commentaries on the Book of Joshua, trans. Henry Beveridge, Calvin’s Commentaries 4
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Josh. 5:15, 54.
170
This universalization occurred in part because Calvin relocated sacred space from
a geographic location to the people of God: the faithful were the “Church,” the
“temple.” 30 In his Acts commentary he elaborated that, “the metaphor of a building is
very convenient, because the Church is the temple and house of God, and every one of
the faithful is also a temple, (1 Tim. iii. 15; 1 Cor. iii. 16.)” 31 Gathered Christians were
the Church regardless of their geographic location – whether it was a Reformed temple,
open countryside, or prison cell – in fulfillment of Jesus’ words, “For where two or three
gather in my name, there am I with them,” (Matt.18:20).
There was no place God
recognized as a temple except “where his Word [was] heard and scrupulously
30 Calvin’s understanding of the temple was not without ambiguity. While the people of God were the
temple of God, he also applied the label of “temple” to human bodies, much in the same tradition as I Cor.
6:19-20. A human body, therefore, was capable of being defiled by sin – regardless of whether an
individual was among the faithful – because the body was the “holy temple of God”: “As concerning the
judgment of God, the knowledge thereof must be let [sought] out of the continual doctrine of the Scripture;
and it is nothing doubtful what the Scripture saith; to wit, that whoredom is accursed before God, and that
the soul and body are thereby defiled, that the holy temple of God is polluted, and Christ is rent in pieces;
that God doth daily punish whoremongers, and that he will once pay them home. The filthiness of
whoredom, which the heavenly Judge doth so sore condemn, can be covered with no cloaks by the patrons
of whoredom how witty and eloquent soever they be,” (John Calvin, Commentary upon the Acts of the
Apostles, Volume 2, ed. Henry Beveridge, trans. Christopher Fetherstone, Calvin’s Commentaries 19
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Acts 15:19, 72–73.). Also, reference John Calvin, The
Sermons of M. Iohn Calvin upon the Fifth Booke of Moses called Deuternomie: faithfully gathered word for
word as he preached them in open Pulpet: Together with a preface of the Ministers of the Church of
Geneva, and an admonishment made by the Deacons there. Also there are annexed two profitable Tables,
the one containing the chiefe matters; the other the places of Scripture herein alledged, trans. Arthur
Golding (At London: Printed by Henry Middleton for Iohn Harison, 1583), Deut. 12:1–5, 492. Reference
Calvin’s commentary on 1 Pet. 2:5 where he discusses the tension between Christians being individual
temples and part of a corporate temple: “Peter no doubt meant to exhort the faithful to consecrate
themselves as a spiritual temple to God; for he aptly infers from the design of our calling what our duty is.
We must further observe, that he constructs one house from the whole number of the faithful. For though
every one of us is said to be the temple of God, yet all are united together in one, and must be joined
together by mutual love, so that one temple may be made of us all. Then, as it is true that each one is a
temple in which God dwells by his Spirit, so all ought to be so fitted together, that they may form one
universal temple. This is the case when every one, content with his own measure, keeps himself within the
limits of his own duty; all have, however, something to do with regard to others,” John Calvin,
Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles, trans. John Owen, Calvin’s Commentaries 22 (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Book House, 1996), 1 Pet. 2:5, 64–65.
31 Calvin, CommActs, vol. 1, Acts 9:31, 394. Elsewhere Calvin echoed this concept: “There are good
reasons why God bestows this name on his Church; for not only has he received us to be his children by the
grace of adoption, but he also dwelleth in the midst of us,” (Calvin, CommTimTitusPhil, 1 Tim. 3:15, 89.).
171
observed.” 32 In the end, God heard his people not because the space (church building)
was sacred but because they (the Church) were holy. This position was quite different
than the medieval notion of sanctity because it denied that objects possessed inherent
sacrality. Calvin and other reformers were distinguished from their Catholic neighbors
by their insistence that sacred power could not reside within an object, be transferred, or
used for accomplishing individuals’ purposes.
This normative stance toward material sacrality, however, was complicated by
Calvin’s ambiguity and contradictions. 33 He asserted that some objects and places were
inherently polluted and needed to be burned 34 and others could be made sacred. 35
Therefore, some Calvinists in France built their own places of worship because they
32 Calvin, Inst. 1536, 6.20. We should not downplay Calvin’s view of the church building as made sacred
by preaching. In his sermon on 1 Cor. 11:4-10, he clearly believed that the space was transformed:
“[W]hen we come to the temple to assemble in the name of god, we must be pure in heart and inclined to
all modesty, in order to do homage to the Son of God, who presides in our midst. … [W]hen a man
preaches, although we may perceive him to be as we are, and of no great repute or refinement, nevertheless
Jesus Christ is present and has His royal throne there. …[W]henever we have a group gathered in His
Name to hear His Word and confess our faith – Jesus Christ is there in the midst of us (as He says that
when two or three are gathered in His name, He will be there with them)…” He later adds, “Therefore, as
to going to the house of God, let us resolve to appear in such humility and reverence that we seek only to
open our hearts before Him…” (John Calvin, Men, Women and Order in the Church: Three Sermons, trans.
Seth Skolnitsky (Dallas, TX: Presbyterian Heritage Publications, 1992), 42, 44.).
33 For example, at times Calvin used the language of “consecrating” or “sanctifying” something to suggest
setting them apart or dedicating them to God and not necessarily imbuing them with supernatural power:
“[I]t is not lawful for us to use anything without thanksgiving, and without praying unto G[od] that all may
be pure and clean unto us. Saint Paul says that our meat and our eating and drinking are sanctified: And
how? By prayer and by the word. The bread (as you see) is a creature whereunto G[od] has given virtue to
nourish us: and yet if we eat thereof without regarding him that feeds and sustains us by it, we defile it.
When the thing that G[od] had created for our sustenance, is perverted by our defiling of it, it is treason
against G[od]. And therefore there is none other mean for our food to become pure unto us, than to
acknowledge G[od] to be the giver of them, and to yield him thanks for the same, praying him to guide us
as his children, that we may Lawfully receive the benefits which he bestows upon us,” Calvin,
SermFifthBooke, Deut. 19:19–20:4, 719.
34 “Rather let us learn from the severity of this Law, how detestable is the crime of setting up false and
spurious modes of worship, since it contaminates not only the infants, whose age prevents them from being
conscious of it, but even the cattle and flocks, and the very houses and walls. … If any city was taken in
war, all that God here commands to be burnt was to be counted as spoil, for the Jews would pollute
themselves by its very touch,” Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 2, Deut. 13:15–16, 87–88.
35 Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 1, Deut. 27:1, 286.
172
insisted that medieval churches were “irreparably corrupted and defiled” 36 and others
purified them through rituals of purification. 37 Both actions revealed an understanding of
physical space having the ability to possess a sacred power – whether beneficent or
malefic.
Furthermore, in Calvin’s commentary on Joshua, he affirmed the equivalent
holiness of all places (“For one place cannot have a greater sanctity than another…”) and
simultaneously left room for exceptions (“…except God deigns specially to make it
so”). 38 He does not make clear what these places of “greater sanctity” were, however.
Reformed places of worship clearly held a sacredness and accompanying decorum of
their own, despite the fact that the medieval doctrine of the Real Presence had been
repudiated. The temple was the place, for example, that the Lord’s Supper was
celebrated four times each year, the Word of God was preached, baptisms were
preformed, marriages were sealed, and the faithful gathered to fast during times of
calamity. 39
Calvin’s theology, as we have seen throughout this study, was not always
understood and/or embraced on the local level, and a tension between the ideal and
36 Mentzer, “The Reformed Churches of France and the Visual Arts,” 205; Raymond A. Mentzer, “Acting
on Calvin’s Ideas: The Church in France,” in Calvin and the Church, ed. David Foxgrover (Grand Rapids,
MI: Calvin Studies Society, 2002), 38–40.
37 For more on the “cleansing” of Catholic churches in France, see Spicer, “Qui est de Dieu,” 184; Philip
Benedict, “The Dynamics of Protestant Militancy: France, 1555-1563,” in Reformation, Revolt and Civil
War in France and the Netherlands, 1555-1585, ed. Philip Benedict et al. (Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands
Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1999), 45–46; Davis, “Violence,” 159, 163–164; Christin, Une révolution
symbolique, chs. 1–3; Denis Crouzet, Les guerriers de Dieu: La violence au temps des troubles de religion,
vers 1525-vers 1610 (Seyssel: Champ Vallon, 1990), chs. 7–8. Similar actions took place in Reformed
churches across Europe (Reference Spicer, “Qui est de Dieu,” 184, footnote 30.).
38 Calvin, CommJosh, Josh. 5:15, 54. In this specific context Calvin described Jacob’s vision of God at
Bethel and concluded with, “Thus Jacob exclaims, (Genesis 26:17) that the place where he had known God
more nearly is the house of God, a dreadful place, and the gate of heaven.”
39 Spicer, “Qui est de Dieu,” 179–180; Raymond A. Mentzer, “Fasting, Piety and Political Anxiety among
French Reformed Protestants,” Church History 76, no. 2 (2007): 330–362.
173
practice emerged in Reformed churches across Europe. In post-Reformation Scotland
it was quite challenging for churches to convince the faithful of the desacralized nature of
places of worship: long after churches had “been abandoned and deemed idolatrous, the
authorities still had to combat the continued perception of these places as holy sites.” 40
Reformed churches in Hungary demonstrated the same discrepancy between doctrine and
the faithful’s understanding of what made space holy. 41 Despite these theological tenets
which held that the consecration of a church might not make the building, interior
objects, or space sacred per se, Reformed ministers continue to talk about the building as
a house of God, 42 and the same can be found in French Calvinist consistory records. 43
40 Spicer, “What Kinde of House a Kirk Is,” 87.
41 Murdock, “Pure and White,” 242–243. Murdock’s chapter acknowledges the tension in the Hungarian
churches’ move to desacralize their churches: “The Debrecen articles sharply reprimanded anyone who
turned their church into a ‘pigsty’, or who used the building for an inappropriate or profane purposes,”
(Ibid., 234.); in another example, Murdock cites a warning issued to churches that were to
“abandon…profane uses of their churches at once” (Ibid., 236.); last, the (re)consecration services
performed in formerly-Catholic churches reveal the newly-conceived sacred nature of these buildings:
“Szepsi [the district archdeacon and minister at Tarczal] explained that when churches were consecrated,
they were being set apart from all other common uses for the particular functions of pure worship and right
administration of the sacraments. Szepsi stressed that churches should not be consecrated through any sort
of pagan ceremony or Papist rite involving water, oil, candles, or writing letters in Hebrew. A church
building was consecrated through prayer…” (Ibid., 242–243.). Also reference Margo Todd, The Culture of
Protestantism in Early Modern Scotland (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 327. Similar
discussions were occurring among Catholics in Elizabethan England (Williams, “Forbidden Sacred Spaces
in Reformation England,” 95–96.).
42 Murdock, “Pure and White,” 239.
43 For example, the Die consistory excoriated its congregants for being “greatly irreverent” during
baptisms and marriages, instructing them that these events should be observed in silence and respect –
because they were in the house of God (André Mailhet, ed., Eglises réformées du Dauphiné: recueil de
documents copiés sur les originaux et augmenté d’introductions, de notes, de facsimilés et de quelques
documents originaux (MS 655/1-6) (BPF, n.d.), 5:93–94.). Also reference Ibid., 3:198, 469–470; 5:109.
174
“[E]very individual Family ought to be a Little Church of
Christ”: The Home as Sacred Space
Calvin’s writings drew a close connection between the church building and the
godly home. While his understanding of sacred space implied Christian worship could
take place anywhere, it primarily occurred in these two locations. Indeed, godly homes
were to exist alongside temples as parallel sacred spaces, unique sites where prayer,
singing, and Scripture reading were practiced, where instruction was given, and where
spiritual lives were formed and strengthened.
There was an important distinction between the temple and home: while both
were sanctified by their use, the home lacked preaching and sacraments as features of
piety because both were tied to the ordained office of the minister. 44 Thus, although a
rightly-ordered Huguenot home would closely mirror the public temple in most ways,
critical “sacred” components were consigned to the temple. Calvin thus used terms like
“temple,” “church,” or “sanctuary” when discussing the godly home and its associated
characteristics: the space (house), activities (devotion), and persons (family). 45 He drew
44 According to Calvin, the preaching of the Word and the administering of the sacraments were the two
essential marks of the true church (Calvin, Inst., 4.1.9.) while the First Scots Confession (1560, chapter
xviii) and the Belgic Confession (1561, article xxix) include discipline as a third mark. Andrew Spicer
identifies a similar theological distinction in the Scottish Reformed Church that was supported by Calvin’s
contemporary in Zurich: “The line of argument pursued by the Kirk reflected theological developments on
the continent, which defined a church as being made holy through its use rather than possessing an inner
sanctity of its own. [Heinrich] Bullinger, whose Decades circulated in Scotland, had argued that the temple
or church was the place where the Word of God was heard and the Sacraments were administered, but ‘the
place of itself is nothing holy; but because these holy things are done in that place, in respect that they are
done there, the place itself is called holy,’” Spicer, “What Kinde of House a Kirk Is,” 89.
45 In fact, so close was the association between church and home that Calvin often used each to clarify the
other. Blacketer explains that for Calvin “the church is like the home, and the Minister of the Word is like
the parent; the people in the congregation ought to revere the minister’s exhortations no less than the
rebukes of a father or mother,” (Raymond A. Blacketer, The School of God: Pedagogy and Rhetoric in
Calvin’s Interpretation of Deuteronomy, Studies in Early Modern Religious Reforms 3 (Dordrecht,
Netherlands: Springer, 2006), 257.).
175
this church-home parallel in his instruction to the national synod of the French Reformed
Churches that “every individual Family ought to be a Little Church of Christ.” 46
This begs the question: What was it that made godly homes sacred? Were these
places of special sanctity or did they possess the sanctity common to all? Could they be
made materially sacred? These questions are particularly important when considering
how faith was understood and practiced in Reformed homes. Medieval Christianity was
a materially-mediated experience, and domestic devotion possessed many tangible sacred
elements. How then might this demarcation of sacrality have affected household worship
in early modern Reformed homes?
Calvin’s theology of material sanctity of the home reflected the same tension
related to the church building. Some of his writings advocated the possibility of material
sanctity. 47 Other of his statements, however, argued that since God’s people were the
46 John Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata: Or, The Acts, Decisions, Decrees, and Canons of Those
Famous National Councils of the Reformed Churches in France, 2 Vols. (London: T. Parkhurst and J.
Robinson, 1692), 1:79. This church/home association was foreshadowed by the Patriarchs in the Hebrew
Bible who erected “a royal throne for God” in their homes by establishing godly worship. Calvin
applauded Abraham, for example, stating, “The Canaanites had their religion; they had also altars for
sacrifices: but [Abraham], that he might not involve himself in their superstitions, erects a domestic altar,
on which he may offer sacrifice; as if he had resolved to place a royal throne for God within his house. . . .
Moses commends in [Abraham] his unwearied devotedness to piety: for by these words, he intimates, that
whatever place he visited, he there exercised himself in the external worship of God; both that he might
have no religious rites in common with the wicked, and that he might retain his family in sincere piety,”
(Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 12:7, 1:354, 356.). In the case of Isaac, “From other passages we are well aware
that Moses here speaks of public worship; for inward invocation of God neither requires an altar; nor has
any special choice of place; and it is certain that the saints, wherever they lived, worshipped. But because
religion ought to maintain a testimony before men, Isaac, having erected and consecrated an altar, professes
himself a worshipper of the true and only God, and by this method separates himself from the polluted rites
of heathens,” (Ibid., Gen. 26:25, 2:71.). He echoed this same theme in his discussion of Jacob: “Besides,
since the inhabitants of that region had fallen into many superstitions, and had corrupted the true worship of
God, Jacob wished to make a distinction between himself and them. The Shechemites and other
neighboring nations had certainly [sic] altars of their own. Therefore Jacob, by establishing a different
method of worship for his household, thus declares that he has a God peculiar to himself, and has not
degenerated from the holy fathers, from whom the perfect and genuine religion had proceeded. This course
could not but subject him to reproach, because the Shechemites and other inhabitants would feel that they
were despised: but the holy man deemed anything preferable to mixing himself with idolaters,” (Ibid., Gen.
33:20, 2:214.).
47 For example, in his commentary on Deuteronomy 27:1 – which spoke of God wanting to have God’s
commandments written on the door-posts and borders of the Israelites’ garments – extended the concept of
making objects holy: “When the precepts were written on the doors, every one was admonished that his
176
“Church,” domestic space was made sacred when the space was used by the faithful to
honor God, learn about God, and/or call upon God. Apart from logical cases where
houses functioned as church buildings (as in the case of the Early Church), a home
became a church or sanctuary when the family dedicated it to the service of God, 48 as
witnessed in Calvin’s letter to Monsieur de Clervant (November 1559) regarding the
destruction of Clervant’s home. Calvin lamented:
Thus as your enemies have had permission to carry their evil
intentions so far as even to wish to have the place razed, which you
had dedicated to the word of God for the instruction of yourself
and many believers, you have now to combat in another fashion. It
is true that during your absence your house cannot be a sanctuary
of God in which he is served and adored, but this blessing remains,
that wherever you go, you will carry his temple along with you. 49
house was sacred to God, and the same was the case with the whole land, so that whosoever entered it
might know that it was, as it were, the sanctuary of heavenly doctrine, and thus their zeal might be stirred
up to the pure worship of God,” Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 1, Deut. 27:1, 286.
48 This language emerges in Calvin’s correspondences with individuals in the Huguenot churches whose
persecution forced the faithful to gather in their homes. For example, Calvin spoke to the persecuted
Huguenots in Poitiers, instructing them that they should meet in their homes: “Especially let every one
make it his business to lend his dwelling as a temple in which to invoke the name of God, and esteem it a
singular blessing, that your houses should be dedicated to such a service,” (John Calvin, Selected Works of
John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 6, ed. Henry Beveridge and Jules Bonnet (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Book House, 1983), 9 September 1555, 224 .). Referencing the home of Mary in Acts 12, Calvin
commented that, “It appeareth that she was a matron of rare godliness, whose house was, as it were, a
certain temple of God, where the brethren did use to meet together,” (Calvin, CommActs, vol. 1, Acts
12:12, 486.).
49 John Calvin, Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 4, ed. Henry Beveridge and
Jules Bonnet (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983), 79. Similar sentiments are expressed by
Calvin regarding David’s home: “Besides, they were at the same time admonished by this ceremony, that
every one enjoyed his house aright and regularly, only when he so regulated it that it was as it were a
sanctuary of God, and that true piety and the pure worship of God reigned in it. The types of the law have
now ceased, but we must still keep to the doctrine of Paul, that whatever things God appoints for our use,
are still ‘sanctified by the word of God and prayer,’ (1 Timothy 4:4, 5)” John Calvin, Commentary on the
Book of Psalms, Volume 1, trans. James Anderson, Calvin’s Commentaries 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Book House, 1996), Ps. 30, 485. For other examples, reference Calvin’s comments regarding Abraham:
“…the Lord had chosen this family to himself, as the only sanctuary on earth in which he was to be
worshipped in purity,” Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 31:19, 2:169. Earlier in his commentary, Calvin also
remarked that Shem’s home “was the peculiar sanctuary of God,” (Ibid., Gen. 11:10, 1:333.). Regarding
Jacob: “He had also another purpose; namely, that his whole family should worship God with the same
sense of piety. For it behooves a pious father of a family diligently to take care that he has no profane
house, but rather that God should reign there as in a sanctuary,” Ibid., Gen. 33:20, 2:214.
177
Therefore, while all places were alike in sanctity because God was infinite, the
family who dedicated itself and its home to God somehow defied this principle and its
home became a “sanctuary.” Whatever special sanctity Calvin assigned to Reformed
places of worship, he viewed homes in a similar category. With this religious
understanding of the home, domestic activities, even the most mundane took on spiritual
significance. Every interaction became an opportunity to embody the divinely-ordained
hierarchal relations between members, every meal a chance to pray together, every chore
an opportunity to improve the temple. 50 Calvin’s vision of the godly home was
characterized by two primary elements – purity and piety – and it is to these that we turn
next.
Evidence of Domestic Sacred Space: Purity
As noted earlier, domestic order and education were directed toward piety.
However, since these efforts were futile if the home was morally polluted, Calvin and the
Genevan consistory constantly pressed the faithful toward purity and sought to eradicate
impurity. Domestic impurity in Geneva tended to revolve around the behavior of
household members: activities such as sexual immorality and gossiping brought impurity
into a holy place and scandal on the godly community.
In his Harmony of the Law, Calvin spent a significant amount of time discussing
how the laws of the Hebrew Bible applied to contemporary Christians and elaborating on
the theme of purity in the home. He argued that the tedious laws of the ancient Jewish
people which addressed diseases – and ordered mass quarantining of “every leper, and
every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead” outside of the camp –
50 As one Lutheran pastor summarized this view, “the spiritual functions of the Hausmutter and Hausvater
within the household should constitute as much a part of daily routine as milking and fieldwork,” Marjorie
Elizabeth Plummer, “Reforming the Family: Marriage, Gender and the Lutheran Household in Early
Modern Germany, 1500–1620” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia, 1996), 13.
178
were all an attempt to aid God’s people in developing an awareness of and desire for
purity. 51 “It is just as if [God] had said,” Calvin asserted, “that all the habitations of His
elect people were parts of His sanctuary, which it was a shame to defile with any
pollution. For we know what license men give themselves in corrupting the service of
God, by mixing, as the proverb says, sacred things with profane.” 52 The mandate for the
purity of godly homes was rooted in an understanding of domestic space of the faithful as
a part of God’s sanctuary. 53 Calvin built on this theme shortly afterward when discussing
a section which spoke of Jewish houses being torn down because they contained mold
(Leviticus 14:34). He claimed the mold was a divine method of identifying who in the
community was impure. God thereby used the condition of the home to determine the
moral purity of the inhabitants: “it was just as if [God] drove away from approaching His
sanctuary those who came from an unclean house. The sense, then, was that they should
each of them diligently endeavor to keep their houses pure, and chaste, and free from
every stain.” 54 The condition of the home possessed a relation to the moral lives of the
household members and, therefore, required safeguarding.
The consistory records testify to the fact that Reformed churches in Geneva and
France embodied this concern for domestic moral purity. Rather than simply interpreting
51 “But we must always consider the intention of God: from whence we shall learn that He was not so
severe and exacting in unimportant things as to tie His people to the observation of (superfluous) matters;
but that these were acts of discipline whereby He might accustom them to study purity, which is so
generally neglected and omitted among men,” (Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 2, Lev. 14:34, 27.). Also
reference Ibid., Lev. 11:13, 66–67; Num 5:2, 12.
52 Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 2, Num. 5:2, 12.
53 Calvin also tied the purity of the Church to the Jewish temple. In explaining the cleansing of the temple,
Calvin claimed, “The same arguments do not apply, in the present day, to our buildings for public worship;
but what is said about the ancient Temple applies properly and strictly to the Church, for it is the heavenly
sanctuary of God on earth. We ought always, therefore, to keep before our eyes the majesty of God, which
dwells in the Church, that it may not be defiled by any pollutions; and the only way in which its holiness
can remain unimpaired is, that nothing shall be admitted into it that is at variance with the word of God,”
(Calvin, CommJohn, vol. 1, John 2:16, 93.).
54 Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 2, Lev. 14:34, 27–28.
179
sin as coincidentally occurring in domestic space or coincidentally being enacted by
members of households, I suggest that the home and the family were of primary concern
to members of this disciplinary body. Therefore, when a father in Albenc was censured
for having attended to the Festival of the Combers because “il a accompagné les idolâtres
par le bourg avec ses enfans,” the consistory was upset by more than his fraternizing with
the confessionally contaminated or attending idolatrous festivals. 55 It was chastising him
for neglecting his duty to raise his children according to the true faith, exposing them to
immoral activities and impure company, and endangering their confessional fidelity. The
Reformed family was a holy entity, and the Reformed home was sacred space: both
needed constant attention to be protected from sin.
The home possessed the potential to standardize and invigorate faith formation for
family members through praying, singing, and teaching. However, the challenge for
ecclesiastical leadership was the secluded and private nature of the home; it could also be
the site of immoral activities, such as domestic violence, games and gambling, dancing,
and fornicating, as well as contact with those of the Catholic faith. The consistory
demonstrated little reluctance to pry into personal, private affairs of the family, question
the ability or capacity of a father or mother to manage the household, or force immoral
individuals to make public reparations for domestic failings. 56 In order to accomplish
these tasks, the consistory systematically examined individuals, called others for
testimonies, and cross-examined witnesses, all in an attempt to ascertain the truth of any
particular case. A consistory was not above soliciting information about others, as the
one in Coutras did when it questioned a wife, daughter, and son-in-law regarding
suspicions of adultery by a father. While family members could be uncooperative, in this
55 François Francillon, Livre des délibérations de l’Eglise réformée de l’Albenc (1606-1682). Edition du
manuscrit conservé à la Bibliothèque d’Etude et d’Information Fonds Dauphinois. Grenoble Cote R 9723
(Paris: Honoré Champion, 1998), 40.
56 Bruce Gordon, Calvin (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009), 296.
180
particular case all the members of the family testified against the father, providing
evidence which substantiated the father’s immorality. 57 In Geneva, the consistory was
even more general when it asked Philiberta Magnin, an innkeeper in Geneva “if she
knows any neighbors who do not behave well according to the Word of God.” 58 Apart
from obvious issues which provoked a consistory summons, elders were to visit each
household in their section of town at least once per year to ensure that all was well in
these Christian homes. 59 These efforts to ensure homes were morally pure demonstrate
the churches’ perception that a home could not be godly if its members, activities, and
guests were not pure.
Domestic Presence and the Godly Home
On 22 June 1567, the consistory of the small French village of Saint-Gervais
summoned Jacques de Castelnau and Motet Bousque. The disordered and morallydecrepit lives of these fathers represented everything the consistory was working to
reform: it chastised them to “stop being insolent and loitering in the taverns with games,
dancing, and other scandals.” It then instructed them to “stay in their houses and work
according to the Word of God.” 60 While this interaction represents a familiar correction
of vice, it also exposes a pressing concern of Huguenot churches. For the consistory, the
moral failures of these men – as well as other husbands and fathers – were not
57 Alfred Soman and Elisabeth Labrousse, “Le registre consistorial de Coutras, 1582–1584,” BSHPF 126
(1980): 204–207, 210, 213, 215, 216, 223–225, 255.
58 Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin, Tome I (1542–1544) (Genève: Librairie Droz,
1996) vol. 1, fol. 18v, 13 April 1542.
59 The church of Nîmes, for example, divided the city into ten districts and each district was assigned an
area overseer (dizainier) who was given the charge of knowing if houses were “chrestiennes ou papistes,”
Louis Auzière, “Registres du consistoire de l’église réformée de Nîmes, Tome 1, 1561-1563, Copié sur
l’original déposé a la Bibliotheque nationale, (Fonds français N° 8666),” 1874, 58.
60 Registre du consistoire de Saint-Gervais (Archives Nationales (Paris), 1564), fo. 963v, 22 June 1567.
181
unconnected to the solution: godly patriarchs should be at home taking care of their
households. 61
In the Reformed churches’ effort to mold godly patriarchs, one of the primary
concerns was to reform the father and reinsert him back in the home. Clearly, the
churches’ larger aims of the formation of proper Christian character, ordering of familial
relationships, and institution of domestic piety were all contingent on patriarchs being
present in their homes. Discipline records, however, reveal this was a contentious and
constant struggle between congregants and consistories. By habits of traditional
sociability, fathers were accustomed to spending time outside the home, often in taverns
and in others’ houses. 62 Consistories insisted that in order for fathers to be effective in
caring for the physical and spiritual needs of their families, they needed to be active and
engaged at home.
Places like taverns carried many associated temptations and were part of a larger
constellation of vices. Calvin warned the French churches of the interconnectedness of
these vices in his 1559 letter:
Dice and cards . . . have brought much ruin and corruption in the
world. It is true that we would dare not condemn any of the games,
if we knew how to use them licitly, but where is such restraint
found? First there is nothing in the world which makes more
people lazy than games, even until to the point of holding their
senses captives, as a kind of witchcraft . . . It is well known
that games are almost never [played] without blasphemy against
God, without fraud or anger against men. Then how many
households do we not witness wasted . . .? Especially it is almost
61 Similar cases are found in the Genevan records, but this section will focus on the French context. For
examples in Geneva, see the case of Jehan Renault who was summoned “Because of the Mass and taverns.”
After addressing the Mass, he immediately replied that “Touching the taverns, he will remain (?) in his
household.” It seems that the corrective for loitering in taverns was communicated frequently enough that
the godly community knew what was expected of them (Lambert et al., Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 134,
25 October 1543.).
62 For examples in the city of Nîmes, see Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 22–28, 120, 145, 158, 165, 170, 172,
181–182, 185, 203, 226. For an examination of how the church and tavern related, see Beat Kümin,
“Sacred church and worldly tavern: reassessing an early modern divide,” in Sacred Space in Early Modern
Europe, ed. Will Coster and Andrew Spicer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 17–38.
182
impossible to play for money, there God is offended in some way.
Whereby it is good to require we keep away as much as we
can. The best is to abstain from all. 63
Therefore, an absent father who was spending time at the taverns was often involved in
other scandalous activities, such as masquerades and dancing, 64 game playing (e.g., dice,
cards, and ninepins), 65 gambling, 66 swearing, 67 fighting, and excessive drinking. 68 It
was common to have men confronted for multiple transgressions: in Albenc, Severin
Chambut was suspended for dancing and playing cards, Josué Boucher for playing cards
and participating in the Festival of the Combers, and Jean Pierre Prellon for mischief and
spending several nights – all night long – playing cards in the cabarets. 69
But time spent away from homes posed a threat beyond moral impurity.
Remonstrances for a patriarch to stop frequenting taverns were often tied to concerns of
63 John Calvin, Lettres de Jean Calvin, recueillies pour la première fois et publiées d’après les manuscrits
originaux: lettres françaises, 1555–1564, ed. Jules Bonnet, vol. 2 (Paris: Librairie de Ch. Meyrueis, 1854),
318. Elsewhere illustrating the “slippery slope” of vice, he warned, “We well know that dances can be
nothing except the prelude to fornication, that they open the door to Satan and beg that he comes and
enters,” as quoted by Léon Wencelius, L’esthétique de Calvin (Genève: Slatkiné, 1979), 141.
64 For example, reference Mailhet, Consist. Die I:90, 91, 359; II:118, 321, 335, 384, 439; III: 112, 113,
123, 132, 535; IV:162; Alfred Leroux, Emile Molinier, and Antoine Thomas, eds., “Extraits du premier
registre consistorial de Rochechouart, 1596-1635,” in Documents historiques bas-latins, provençaux et
français concernant principalement la Marche et le Limousin, vol. 2 (Limoges: Ducourtieux, 1883), 67, 83,
91; Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 27–33, 36, 40, 45, 56; Soman and Labrousse, “Consist. Coutras,” 206–214;
Jean Valette, ed., “Les actes du consistoire de l’Eglise réformée de Mussidan de 1593 à 1599,” Bulletin de
la Société Historique et Archéologique du Périgord CXV (1988): 186; Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 23, 101–
102.
65 Consist. Saint-Gervais, fol. 958v; Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 40, 55–59, 136, 169; Soman and
Labrousse, “Consist. Coutras,” 221–222; Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 23, 182, 226, 236. Furthermore, the
Discipline specifically warned that such pastimes would “promote curiosity, add cost, and [were] a waste of
time … [and lead to the] corruption of morals.” The Synod of La Rochelle (1571) added “avarice,
obscenity, notorious waste of time, or scandal” to the objectionable effects of these games (François Méjan,
Discipline de l’Église réformée de France annotée et précédée d’une introduction historique (Paris:
Éditions “Je sers,” 1947), 14.29, 296–297.).
66 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 24, 307, 321; Consist. Saint-Gervais, fo. 945v, 960, 961v, 963v.
67 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 27.
68 Ibid., 145.
69 Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 29, 33,40, 45, 57–59, 136.
183
personal and domestic neglect. After the Nîmes consistory chastised men for frequenting
taverns, it admonished them for their correlated failure: Jehan Baboys and Jehan Troucat
were ordered to instead prepare themselves for the Lord’s Supper, Jehan Carrière to take
care of his duties to his wife and children, and a cobbler to stop “beating his wife, but to
live soberly in his house with her and his family.” 70 As in Geneva, men’s pastimes also
brought financial strain on the family. Households suffered materially and spiritually
when fathers spent leisure time in taverns instead of fulfilling domestic responsibilities.
While taverns were also frequented by women, men were overwhelmingly the
ones admonished by Huguenot consistories to stop visiting these establishments. The
prohibitions reveal the churches’ particular concern for fathers’ abandonment of their
divinely-ordained social location. When not engaged in their profession, away on
business, or carrying out some other duty, husbands and fathers were to be in their homes
and actively engaged in the business of caring for and guiding their households. 71
Understood in this way, frequenting taverns and cabarets – as well as attending
celebrations related to guilds, confraternities, saints’ days, Catholic weddings 72 – were
simply activities resulting from a prior failure by fathers to properly understand and
embrace their vocational purpose and location. 73
70Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 81, 195, 230, 237, 278.
71 For example, Claude Girault of Coutras was reprimanded for dancing at a wedding celebration and
frequenting taverns; in his case the consistory admonished him to “not live idly, but work,” (Soman and
Labrousse, “Consist. Coutras,” 212–214.).
72 For example, reference “Consist. Rochechouart,” 83; “Consist. Mussidan,” 190; “Consist. Coutras,” 220;
“Consist. Nîmes,” 106.
73 A similar observation can be made of all Christians who failed to attend sermons. For examples of the
consistory’s frustration at its congregants engaging in other activities during Sunday sermons, reference
Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 169; Soman and Labrousse, “Consist. Coutras,” 225. For another case that
illustrates the close connections between being present in the house, religious pollution from taverns, and
the religious purity of the home, see Lambert et al., Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 109–109v, 12 April
1543.).
184
Taverns were not the only place which might draw a father away from his home
and domestic responsibilities. Frequently the registers of consistories reveal men were
spending time in others’ houses. While this was often for game playing and drinking, it
was also for illicit liaisons with women. For example, on 18 March 1562 the Nîmes
consistory discussed the case of a young cobbler by the name of Pierre who often visited
the house of another cobbler, Antoine Combettes. A neighbor testified to having found
them alone together in the house, and another neighbor added that sometimes they spent
time privately in a different individual’s home. 74 The neighbors, according to these
witnesses, were scandalized by the actions of the couple, and while the conclusion to this
case is not contained in the records, the church was undoubtedly as well. Men often
snuck off to meet with women while their husbands, fathers, and masters were away from
the home. The relative privacy of homes, away from the prying eyes of pastors and
elders, made them the location for all manners of mischief. The consistory condemned
premarital and extramarital sexual relations: such relations not only were immoral, but
the resulting illegitimate children, familial conflicts, and divorces could dissolve a
Christian marriage, family, and home. If properly rooted in their own domestic duties,
fathers could avoid spaces which would undermine their calling.
Efforts to force patriarchs to remain in their homes took the form of education
(sermons and catechism) and coercion. The church at Die chastised its members for
these pastimes, but in its work exposed its suspicion of congregants’ willingness or
ability to live godly lives: it mandated that during the sermon on Sundays the taverns,
boutiques, and bouchons be closed. 75 Later the same activities (“vices which prevail
74 “Consist. Nîmes,” 174–175. For another example in Nîmes, read about the relationship of Dubois and
Alaissete Borrillone (Ibid., 258–262.).
75 Consist. Die, II:383. Raymond Mentzer notes similar efforts to prevent the playing of games during
Sunday sermons and catechism (Raymond A. Mentzer, “Disciplina nervus ecclesiae: The Calvinist Reform
of Morals at Nimes,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 18, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 106.).
185
among them and dishonor God and the church”) led to the declaration of a public fast.
Citing the congregants’ pastimes as the source of disorder and the anger of God – as well
as the immediate cause for two recent outbreaks of the plague – the prohibition of these
activities was viewed as the solution. It set up five broad “rules,” one of which
denounced frequenting cabarets and the accompanying playing of games of chance and
excessive drinking. Such practices, the consistory warned, were “entirely incompatible
with the holiness of the religion which they profess.” 76 The Nîmes consistory pled for
fathers to “live well,” “live soberly,” “live according to the Gospel,” and “promise to do
your duty” – all synonymous calls for fathers to embrace their divine role as head of the
household as well as the necessary constraint of being present in their homes. 77
Time spent in taverns, games, and festivals tied men into the social fabric of the
community, and therefore, the Reformed attempts to extract fathers and husbands from
these social locations placed stress on relationships and undermined community
cohesiveness. 78 Scholars have noted how confessionalization placed incredible tension
on the social life of bi-confessional communities, evidenced as these traditional social
spaces (which often did not distinguish between confessions) came under greater
scrutiny. Church leaders perceived that these social spaces compromised the creation of
holy households, and therefore emphasized men’s responsibility to the household. This
immense undertaking was nothing less than an effort to redefine religious duty, reassert
patriarchal domestic responsibility, and reorganize patterns of sociability.
Unsurprisingly, these efforts to extricate men from their social networks and
routines and press them back into the home were met with resistance. Men were clearly
76 Mailhet, Consist. Die V:108.
77 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 22, 28, 356.
78 Menna Prestwich, “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629,” in International Calvinism 1541-1715, ed. Menna
Prestwich (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 95–96.
186
offended by consistories’ apparent over-reaching. Jean Seguineau of Coutras, for
example, was warned by his mother-in-law and brother for publically dancing at a
confraternity celebration. He flippantly responded that “the only ones who don’t dance
are those who don’t know how” (ceux qui ne savent danser ne dansent point), a not-sosubtle swipe in the consistory’s direction. After initial resistance to the consistory’s
pressure to confess his sin, he submitted and made a public admission. 79 Since many,
perhaps most, of the fathers eventually submitted and were allowed to participate in the
Cène, it appears that it was worth the loss of certain privileges in order to gain those
which came to those who were in good standing with the church.
Domestic Purity
Even if consistories in Geneva and France were successful at keeping families in
their homes, this did not guarantee families were living according to the church’s vision
for a holy household. In cases related to the home and family, consistories were often
quite effective at discovering what events transpired behind closed doors. They believed
members of the church were far too liberal about what they participated in and what they
allowed to transpire in their homes. The consistory registers record case after case of
members summoned in order that elders might root out ungodly domestic activities.
Consistories targeted activities such as cards and dice, drinking, and swearing; 80 others
upset consistories by hosting dances, balls and masquerades in their houses. 81 Many
79 Soman and Labrousse, “Consist. Coutras,” 210–211, 216.
80 In France, see MM. Anjubault and H. Chardon, eds., “Papier et registre du Consistoire de l’Église du
Mans, réformée selon l’Évangile, 1560–61 (1561–62 nouveau style),” in Recueil de pièces inédites pour
servir à l’histoire de la Réforme et de la Ligue dans le Maine, vol. 1 (Le Mans: Ed. Monnoyer, 1867), 51;
Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 70; Consist. Saint-Gervais, fo. 949v, 3 December 1564; fo. 950v, 24 December
1564; fo. 965, 17 August 1567. For examples in Geneva, see Lambert et al., Consist. Genève, Tome I vol.
1, fol. 55v, 7 September 1542; fol. 72, 23 November 1542; fol. 83v, 11 January 1543; fol. 153v, 10 January
1544.
81For example, see Mailhet, Consist. Die, 3:78; 5:76; Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 27–31.
187
were called in for singing “indecent” and “infamous” songs in their homes late at night;
some in Geneva creatively attempted to disguise their activities under the pretense of
Psalm-singing – a hallmark of Reformed piety – while others claimed they “sang songs in
praise of God and of the Gospel,” others that they sang “only ‘Our Father Almighty,’”
and still some that their songs were those “of war and according to the Gospel.” 82 These
“worshippers” were admonished, likely a sign of consistorial skepticism regarding their
pious pastimes.
The most common moral impurity associated with the home, however, was sexual
misconduct. Consistory records reveal the attempts of Reformed churches to address the
unrestrained nature of early modern sexuality. 83 While some Reformed Christians could
(and did) have sex anywhere they could find a private place, many intimate moments
occurred in the homes of the faithful – spaces which were intended to be sanctuaries of
God. The discipline meeting, therefore, became an endeavor in deduction: witnesses
were called to describe what they saw or heard, the offender interrogated, and
consistories tried to decide if sin had been committed.
When Monsieur de Serpe of Coutras was questioned in 1583 because “he was
scandalized by a common and universal rumor that he has paillardes in his house and
hangs out with them,” he denied it. The consistory repeatedly asked if he had a young
garce serving as a chambermaid in his home, which he repudiated and claimed that
82 Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 55v, 7 September 1542; vol. 1, fol. 57v and 58, 14 September 1542;
vol. 1, fol. 75, 14 December 1542.
83 In his work on early modern Scotland, Michael Graham argues that the disproportionately high number
of sexual offenses in the early years of the Reformation were a “reflection of [the Kirk’s] weakness than its
strength. . . . As the population grew, resources shrank, and beggars crowded the roads, even the most
traditionalist elders were happy to seize the untraditional reins of church discipline to attack the social
problem of bastardy, although they had little interest in the rest of the Kirk’s program.” It was only when,
he concludes, the disciplinary body and its power were established and the elders were more invested in the
mission of reform that the kirk-session shifted it gaze to other matters, (Michael F. Graham, “Social
Discipline in Scotland, 1560–1610,” in Sin and the Calvinists: Moral Control and the Consistory in the
Reformed Tradition, ed. Raymond A. Mentzer (Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers,
1994), 137.).
188
whoever said such things about him was “a whore or a coward.” However, the consistory
was not convinced by his strong disavowal and was only pacified when he promised to
“send away from his home all these women and servants with which he might be
scandalized.” 84 Despite the consistory’s persistence, this case reveals the limits of the
consistory’s power. Its only recourse, in this case, was to eject all of the women from De
Serpe’s home to ensure that he and his home remained pure. 85 Similarly, in SaintGervais a man was instructed by the consistory to make a woman leave his home because
“she is not living like a moral woman.” 86 Churches’ efforts to shape the lives and actions
of their members were not entirely effective, and these accounts reveal that they also used
their power to ensure that the context – the home – was not undermining their goal of
holy households. It pressured the Reformed to expel or exclude any whom it deemed
might pollute the godly family.
Additionally, the case of De Serpe touches on the issue of fornication with
servants. Servants were vulnerable members of the household and often their employers
were expected to care for them in loco parentis; therefore, when heads of households
became involved sexually with a servant, it introduced dynamics of gender, power,
84 Soman and Labrousse, “Consist. Coutras,” 208, 209.
85 In another adultery case from Coutras, Pierre Vincens was denounced by his son-in-law for fornicating
with a certain Catharine Turlay. Vincens’ wife – who, as it turned out, had also witnessed the tryst between
Vincens and Turlay, carefully watched her house to ensure that the Turlay did not sneak inside. When his
wife needed to be absent, she posted another woman, Ysabeau, warning her to keep close guard while she
was away, (Ibid., 204–207, 210, 213, 215, 216, 223–225.).
86 Consist. Saint-Gervais, fo. 958v, 26 May 1566. In Le Mans, the consistory did not believe even the
most noble of excuses for questionable circumstances: Jehan Couldray claimed that even though his fiancé
was living in his home, they were not fornicating. To the contrary – she “returned to the truth” while living
with him because it allowed her to escape the Catholic influences of her parents. The consistory’s doubts
about his “missionary dating” were confirmed when his fiancée was discovered to be pregnant a month
later (Anjubault and Chardon, “Consist. Le Mans,” 25–26, 29, 31.). For examples of fornication cases in
France, see Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 22, 47, 68, 95, 144–147, 175–177, 180, 286–287; especially see the
case of Catharine Baudance and Estienne Mazoyer 193, 240–243, 316, 365, 371; Valette, “Consist.
Mussidan,” 188; Francillon, Consist. Albenc, 81, 93, 124; Mailhet, Consist. Die, 2:172; 3:405; 4:271; 5:19–
29. For Geneva, reference Lambert et al., Consist. Genève, Tome I, vols. 1, fol. 38v, 15 June 1542; vol. 1,
fol. 67–67v, 19 October 1542; vol. 1, fol. 79v, 28 December 1543; vol. 1, fol. 110v and 11v, 12 April 1543.
189
honor, and economics. While it was one thing to try to prevent known Catholics or
immoral individuals from entering the homes of the faithful, servants were accepted
members of the household who defied the insider-outsider binary. They were employed,
and therefore needed to be in the home. Yet servants were non-familial members of the
household and consequently could become entangled in paillardise with individuals in
the family. The complicated master-servant relationship and the private nature of the
home made it difficult to ascertain if sexual misconduct had occurred. 87 Consistories
reacted at the slightest rumor or suggestion of immoral activities with servants, seeking
out the truth and punishing those which had sinned. 88 However, whether sexual
misconduct occurred with a servant or other family associate, it was often only once
someone became pregnant or brought a bastard child for baptism that the church was
made aware of the immorality. 89
The topic of servants raises the issue of religious pollution in the home resulting
from the presence of a guest who was not committed to following God in accordance
with Reformed doctrine. Guests who entered the home brought their world with them –
their language, relational particularities, moral life, and doctrinal beliefs. Since the
householder was responsible for what happened under his roof, this was a risk. Calvin
found the Genesis 18 story of Abraham welcoming strangers instructive for his readers.
87 Spierling demonstrates this in her research on illegitimate children in Geneva in the 1550s (Karen E.
Spierling, “Putting Order to Disorder: Illegitimate Children, Their Parents and the Consistory in
Reformation Geneva,” in Dire L’interdit: The Vocabulary of Censure and Exclusion in the Early Modern
Reformed Tradition, ed. Raymond A. Mentzer, Françoise Moreil, and Philippe Chareyre (Leiden; Boston:
Brill, 2010), 43–62..
88 For examples of fornication with servants in France, see Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 61, 299, 403–405;
Consist. Saint-Gervais, 10.
89 For example of cases in Die involving bastard children, reference Mailhet, Consist. Die, 2:44, 421–428;
3:43, 50, 132–133, 323, 525; 4:92; 5:21, 205, 209. The church in Die was so overrun by individuals
seeking baptisms for their bastard children that they finally protested that this was occurring far too
frequently (Ibid., 3:50, 471.).
190
After praising Abraham for providing hospitality for three strangers who might never
repay him, Calvin warned:
It is however asked, whether Abraham was wont, thus to receive
indiscriminately all kinds of guests? I answer that, according to his
accustomed prudence, he made his distinction between his guests.
And truly, the invitation, which Moses here relates, has something
uncommon. Undoubtedly, the angels bore, in their countenance
and manner, marks of extraordinary dignity; so that Abraham
would conclude them to be worthy not only of meat and drink, but
also of honor. 90
Abraham’s example was to serve as a warning to householders to use prudence in
opening their door to guests: Were the guests God-fearing? Would they pollute the home
with their scandalous lives, heretical ideas, or wasteful pastimes?
This concern for pure company in congregants’ homes appears regularly in the
Genevan consistory minutes. Whether or not the faithful understood the sacred nature of
the home could be judged by the company who were invited into their homes. Although
the records are not always clear, it appears that a number of summoned individuals even
offered up information regarding the character of houseguests as a means of establishing
their own innocence or demonstrating high personal moral standards. In a revealing
example, Pierre Bertet, an armorer, was called in for an altercation with one of Geneva’s
syndics, Lord Michel Morel. Allegedly, he mentioned to Morel that he had someone
lodging in his house, and the syndic responded by cautioning Bertet that “he did not want
to lodge a fornicator or pimp.” The comment made Berthet “very angry,” so much so
that he threated Morel that once his term as syndic expired that Berthet would “have it in
for him.” 91 This case illustrates several significant points this chapter has been
90 Calvin, CommGen, Gen. 18:2, 1:469.
91 Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 191, 10 April 1544. Bertet was punished by the consistory for
fornication on 16 March 1542, so it is possible that he felt the syndic was making a backhanded comment
about Bertet’s past moral failing (see Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 8, 16 March 1542.). In another interesting example,
Pierre Des Vignies and Johan Jaquard were summoned in the spring of 1543 for quarreling: as a part of
their defense they protested that they “do not shelter any vagabonds in their houses,” Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 91v, 1
March 1543. Also reference on 30 March 1542, Tyvent Laurent was summoned and “[a]sked about the
wizard he had in his house and why,” Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 11, 30 March 1542. That summer another
191
discussing. First, both parties understood the importance of the home and the need to
carefully consider the lives of the guests who entered. Second, Bertet understood that the
moral character of guests reflected on his own honor and moral standing; the suggestion
that he would host a “fornicator or pimp” was taken as a serious insult. Finally, the
Christian community properly supported the purity of a member’s household: a syndic
(who was presiding over the consistory a mere two weeks before) cautioning a
congregant of the need to consider the moral integrity of his home.
In France, an early national synod at Vertueil (1567) took a similar approach to
Geneva. On several key points, this council addressed the mandate for purity and the
father’s role in this endeavor. Most important for this study, however, it asserted that
“Fathers, as leaders of the household, are called to protect the climate in the home and
provide spiritual nourishment – be very careful about which servants they let in their
homes and do not let the name of God be blasphemed in the house.” 92 This directive
codified in the French context Calvin’s admonition regarding allowing strangers in the
home, and directly tied the notion of the purity of the Reformed home to the character of
its guests.
This command was directed at fathers, but it was applied more broadly and
considered the responsibility of all household members to prevent pollution from
entering. The consistory records covering the early years of the Reformation in Nîmes
individual, Pernon, was called in “[a]bout the honesty of her house, because certain young men who come
and go in her house, as in fornication,” Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 49, 10 August 1542. In a similar case, the
consistory summoned Jehan Tevenyn because of his suspicious activity: he was “hanging around a house
where he goes too much,” adding that his loitering is “more than being a relative would justify,” (Ibid. vol.
1, fol. 51, 17 August 1542.). Finally, see Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 83v, 11 January 1543.
92 Quick, 1: 78. Similar concerns were voiced at the preceding synod in Paris (1565) when it was declared
that “Lords and Gentlemen shall be censured according to the Discipline of our churches, if after frequent
Admonitions, they entertain in their Houses scandalous and incorrigible Persons, especially if they suffer
Priests to sing Mass, or by Dogmatizing to debauch their Domestics, or if having cashiered them, they shall
again receive them into their service,” (Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 1:66.). Reference Méjan,
Discipline de l’Église réformée de France, 14.13.
192
illustrate the nature of the synod’s concern. The consistory might admonish someone like
Jacques Merle to stop spending time (and “drinking and eating familiarly”) with an
excommunicated friend, or order Baumete to stop allowing her young companions to
come into her house because of their immoral and dishonest words. 93 Clearly, just as the
consistory used discernment to separate the wheat from the chaff, excluding the
superstitious, disobedient, and immoral from the sacraments, the Reformed were to guard
the boundaries of their homes and keep all sources of contamination from gaining access
to their “temples.”
Reformed churches were also concerned about heretical religious beliefs and
practices in the godly home which could defile it. The bi-confessional nature of France
made this a challenge for the Huguenot churches, although it appears to have been more
evident in the early years of the Reformation. Reformed Christians held to some
medieval “Catholic” practices, many of which were components of a domestic
spirituality. The prevalence of such practices can even be witnessed by the fact that a
member of the Nîmes consistory was chastised by his own colleagues to stop using the
Paternoster. 94 Jehan Mombel, another Nîmois, personified what the consistory sought
from its members as they purified their homes: after he confessed to his involvement in
Catholic activities and scandal, he promised to “stop his wife and all those in his house
who are not acting according to the Holy Scriptures.” 95
Geneva, too, existed in close proximity to Catholic towns, and many Genevans
had ties with family, friends, and businesses in those places. This afforded opportunities
93 The case of Jacques Merle and his friend, Lussat Estienne, is a long and complicated one. The
consistory seemed unable to pressure Merle into parting company with Estienne, and it appears that at one
point the consistory is even concerned that Estienne has moved into Merle’s house (Auzière, “Consist.
Nîmes,” 39, 42, 45, 54, 81, 84, 109, 144, 158, 193, 308, 311. To reference the admonition given to
Baumete, see Ibid., 42, 19 July 1561.
94 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 196, 27 March 1562.
95 Ibid., 55, 6 September 1561. Also, reference the case of Jehan Mercier, Ibid., 90.
193
for Reformed Christians to spend time among Catholics, visit Catholic celebrations, send
their children to Catholic schools, and intermarry with Catholics. Such interactions,
however informal, were occasions in which Catholic beliefs and practices might be
spread to the faithful. In his sermons on Deuteronomy, Calvin emphasized how this
context demanded vigilance in the home, asserting that each household needed to
“cleanse his own house from all filthiness . . . he must not suffer any superstition or
idolatry.” 96 Here Calvin described domestic impurity in theological terms: fathers and
mothers were to be on their guard against Catholic influences however these might be
manifested in the home. Of all impurities, confessional “filthiness” was the most
insidious and dangerous, because it threatened to erode the basis of their faith and
knowledge of God. 97
The biblical passage in Deuteronomy 13:15-16 demonstrated to Calvin God’s
abhorrence for idolatrous worship, especially when it occurred in the home. In this
passage, God instructed the Hebrew people that if they found a Hebrew city misled into
worship of a false god, the faithful were to kill all of the inhabitants, burn the city, and
burn all of the goods inside the city. Calvin elaborated,
[L]et us learn from the severity of this Law, how detestable is the
crime of setting up false and spurious modes of worship, since it
contaminates not only the infants, whose age prevents them from
being conscious of it, but even the cattle and flocks, and the very
houses and walls. … If any city was taken in war, all that God here
commands to be burnt was to be counted as spoil, for the Jews
would pollute themselves by its very touch. 98
96 Calvin, SermFifthBooke, Deut. 12:1–5, 492.
97 While Catholicism was very prevalent and the immediate context of Calvin’s writing, another form of
theological heterodoxy was associated with folk magic and healing. For some examples of the consistory’s
treatment of these cases, see Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 35, 26 May 1542; fo. 42v, 13 July 1542; fo. 70v,
16 November 1542.
98 Calvin, CommHarmony, vol. 2, Deut. 13:15–16, 87–88. Calvin also found the story of Rachel’s
harboring of idols in her tent (Genesis 35) to provide a strong warning regarding spiritual pollution in the
home: “Hence also we perceive to what point the theft of Rachel tended. For, (as we have said,) she neither
wished to draw her father away from superstition, but rather followed him in his fault; nor did she keep this
poison to herself, but spread it through the whole family. Thus was that sacred house infected with the
194
In addition to demonstrating God’s particular concern for domestic purity, this passage
again emphasizes Calvin’s understanding of religious pollution as possessing a material,
tangible quality: it contaminated through touch, even effecting animals and building
structures! Such a perspective on the effects of Catholic worship would make the
possibility of domestic contamination all the more threatening and the need for vigilance
all the more critical.
It was one thing for Reformed churches in France and Geneva to reject the Mass
and adopt Protestant theology, but was quite another to assume that they could convince
families to overhaul their interior and domestic spiritual lives, the product of generations
of development and habit. In Geneva, as in France, religious practices and ideas were
spread across a wide continuum: men and women were repeatedly called before the
consistory for attending papal ceremonies, 99 saying their prayers in Latin, 100 affirming
the power of the Mass, 101 praying to the Virgin Mary, 102 adoring images (“idols”), 103
worst contagion. Whence also it appears, how great is the propensity of mankind to impious and vicious
worship; since the domestics of Jacob, to whom the pure religion had been handed down, thus eagerly laid
hold on the idols offered to them. … The infinite goodness of God is here conspicuous; seeing that he still
deigned to regard the house of Jacob, though polluted with idols, as his sanctuary,” (Calvin, CommGen,
Gen. 35:2, 2:234.).
99 For example, see Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 86v, 1 February 1543 .
100 The faithful were instructed like Pernete, “to pray more to the Lord in the vulgar tongue” (Ibid. vol. 1,
fol. 90v, 22 February 1543 .). Among other examples, see Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 58v, 14 September 1542; vol. 1,
fol. 61, 21 September 1542; vol. 1, fol. 62, 5 October 1542; vol. 1, fol. 64v, 12 October 1542; vol. 1, fol.
69v, 9 November 1542; vol. 1, fol. 73v-74, 14 September 1542; vol. 1, fol. 74v, 14 December 1542; vol. 1,
fol. 84v, 25 January 1543.
101 For example, Pierre Falcat and Nycod Moury were both priests before the reform and claimed that they
did not “want to live according to the Reformation.” Falcat elaborated that “he has doubts about the
Reformation, because he means to live and die in the law of his predecessors and would not want at all to
leave the ancient law because of saying the Mass. . . . he wants to live according to the law under which his
father, mother, and master lived.” Moury answered in similar terms: he “will never renounce the Mass”
because it “is said in many places”, it is “entirely from scripture”, and “there are many respectable people
who have said the mass,” (Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 71v, 23 November 1542.). For other
references, see Ibid., 210 vol. 1, fol. 11v-12, 30 March 1542; vol. 1, fol. 98, 20 March 1543.
102 For example, when an ironmonger, Claude Tappugnier, confessed that he believed “that the Virgin
Mary has the power to pray for us,” and in response the scribe recorded, “Of which doubts he was relieved
by Monsieur Calvin,” (Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 107, 5 April 1543 .). Among others, Ibid. vol.
195
and possessing rosaries. 104 The consistory worried that the presence of such objects,
practices, or beliefs would defile the home. Therefore, the consistory relentlessly
questioned congregants to ascertain the nature of their beliefs, where they originated, and
if they were based in ignorance or willful resistance. In the example of the rosary, some
individuals may have known they were doing wrong but were attached to the practice
(“sometimes she says her rosary, and she does not want to be a heretic” 105), some may
have tried to hide it (“she has not had a rosary since she has been with Domeyne Franc
and has not had one under her apron” 106), and others may have known the right words to
use to demonstrate their understanding (“she no longer says the rosary and does not
commend herself to the saints, because the saints do not do miracles and will not save
us” 107). These “papist” practices, however, were often very personal and private, and
were not always visible for the consistory to eradicate. It typically viewed education as
the solution (ordering individuals to attend catechism or more sermons) and followed up
with individuals so they might demonstrate their ability to conform their beliefs and
practices to those held by the Reformed church.
Final Thoughts
Since Reformed homes possessed a semi-sacred status, Reformed consistories
were vigilant regarding issues of domestic purity. Records indicate that the private nature
1, fol. 63-63v, 5 October 1542; vol. 1, fol. 89-89v, 15 February 1543; vol. 1, fol. 154v-155, 10 January
1544.
103 For example, Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 107, 1 March 1543; vol. 1, fol. 154v, 10 January
1544.
104 For example, Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 32, 11 May 1542; vol. 1, fol. 98v, 20 March 1543.
105 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 98v, 20 March 1543.
106 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 91, 22 February 1543.
107 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 145v, 13 December 1543.
196
of these spaces was a challenge, and that consistories had to rely on the eyes and ears of
family members, servants, and neighbors to gain virtual entry inside the walls of the
faithful’s homes. 108 While the confessions of others which led to the purging of
domestic impurity was ultimately supposed to strengthen the Christian community, it
could also place great strain on the social fabric. What was the role of family, friends and
neighbors – to protect their honor and family reputation or to ensure their reform?
Recent research on the Genevan consistory’s efforts to convince household servants to
tell the truth regarding events in their employers’ homes strikes at the heart of this issue
as well. The consistory demanded the truth from servants to carry out the reform, and yet
the servants also felt an obligation to their employers. 109 In the case of both family
members and servants, the divine mandate to provide obedience to the father, mother, or
master, only made this decision more problematic. Even while Calvin may have believed
that the integrity of the godly community must be protected at all costs, it undermined the
most fundamental relationships which held the community together because they
included sinful aspects.
It is also interesting to consider how the notion of the home as sacred space might
have impacted the way in which the domestic space was perceived. Despite the
Protestant claims that medieval churches were not sacred space, there was a need to
ritualistically purge them through iconoclastic violence. Was the same true of Reformed
homes? When the Reformation gained momentum, is there evidence that Reformed
families purified them by destroying household altars, images of saints, books for
meditation, relics, rosaries, or other objects of devotion?
108 Janay Nugent discusses the challenges of this in early modern Scotland (“‘None Must Meddle
Betueene Man and Wife’: Assessing Family and the Fluidity of Public and Private in Early Modern
Scotland,” Journal of Family History 35, no. 3 (2010): 219–231.).
109 Karen E. Spierling, “Putting ‘God’s Honor First’: Truth, Lies, and Servants in Reformation Geneva,”
Church History and Religious Culture 92, no. 1 (2012): 85–103.
197
If one considers the following quote from Calvin’s sermons on Deuteronomy, it
appears as though he is envisioning domestic iconoclasm:
God has given us a charge of our own persons, and made us as it
were keepers of his temples, to the intent that every of us should
look narrowly to ourselves. That is a thing which it befits us to do
when we are in the country of Idolaters. Besides this, every man
must purge and cleanse his own house from all filthiness. So as if
a man be a householder, he must look well about him that he hold
well his children and servants in the fear of God and in the
pureness of religion. For if a man suffer his house to be defiled,
and all things there to go to havoc: he shall be sure to make
account thereof to God. Not that a man can hold his wife and
servants continually tied to his sleeve to turn them to the Christian
faith when he lysteth: but my meaning is, that he must not suffer
any superstition or idolatry. For why? Seeing that God hath given
him sovereignty in his own house; it behooveth him to deal in such
wise as God be honored there, and as no filthiness be mingled with
the pure religion, but that all be rid quite and clean away. 110
This passage echoes of iconoclastic zeal; but is there evidence for reading these historical
sources in this light? While this is a topic for future research, I offer two brief
considerations. First, let us consider rosaries. Rosaries would have been a practical,
portable, and kinesthetic devotional tool, common among Christians in late medieval
Europe; references to them show up a few times in the Genevan consistory records. On 4
May 1542, Jana Bovier was asked by the consistory about her recent involvement with a
rosary: “She does not know whether it is good to pray to the Virgin Mary and does not
know whose the said rosary is, but she picked it up and it is not hers, and that she wanted
to take it to Decompesio’s house to be burned.” 111 While the later testimony of a
neighbor makes her possession of the rosary less innocuous than she intimated, the case
causes one to wonder why Bovier offered burning as the method of disposal in her
account. Clearly Genevans were not to be using these “papist” artifacts, but were they
instructed how to discard them? Was it common practice to burn them? Had she seen
110 Calvin, SermFifthBooke, Deut. 12:1–5, 492.
111 Lambert et al., Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 32.
198
others doing this, and thus it seemed a probable excuse? Does this incident connect at all
to an event in the early 1550s when a woman was confronted about possessing a Book of
Hours – but claimed that she had burned it? 112 A year and a half later after the
aforementioned case of the rosary, another brief and mysterious account was recorded: a
woman was summoned who was keeping a rosary: “Said that a man found her [Tevenaz,
widow of Jehan Marchiand] with a rosary in her hand, that is was broken to bits and she
no longer has a rosary.” 113 Is this a case of a woman holding on to a discarded rosary,
one which had been demolished at the hands of her family or Protestant neighbors?
While there is much more work to be done, historical sources reveal that there was an
entire culture of domestic piety in the late middle ages which I have found no account of
its removal. In this case, the material culture of religious practice and how it was handled
with the advent of the Reformation may reveal the Protestant perspective on the home as
sacred space.
Finally, another potentially fruitful way of conceiving of domestic iconoclasm is
in relational terms. The process of confessionalization demanded the resocializing of the
faithful, and perhaps it was in this process that the consistory was encouraging the
112 In a case in the summer of 1550, a woman appears who indicated that she burned her book of hours
(Robert M. Kingdon et al., eds., Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin, Tome V (20
février 1550 - 5 février 1551) (Genève: Librairie Droz, 2010), fo. 58–58v, 28 August 1550.). Original text::
[Anthoinne femme du Sieur Francoys Vullient, son serviteur, le filz de luy et une petite fille.] “A laquelle
furent faictes les remonstrances qu'elle est touiours papiste et dict ses heures et instruyt les petits enfant
á…á dire l'Ave Maria. A nyá‚á disant que en ceste ville ny au monde n'en a point si avant qu'elle. Nye
avoir ses heures et qui les ont bruslá‚á. A la fin nye qu'elle, 58 (cont.) ne y disoit austre chose sinon
certaine orayson que sont á…á la fin. L'on a retenu la petite fille pour scavoir comme elle prie et la
servante. Interroguer de ce qu'elle scayt ditz ne scavoir austre sinon que l'on luy a bruslá‚á ses heures et
dempuys en a eu d'austres et dit que ladicte sa maistresse ne mange point de chair et jeune les vigilles ny
vendredi et faict toutes les festes. Ledit filz confesse comme dessus la servante et que son pere luy eu faict
bien les remonstrances mais elle luy dit qu'elle n'en ferat rient. Le serviteur ditz estre vray que une sienne
seur mis des heures enneysi dans certaine abis. Ledit est aller querre lesdictes heures chez son maistre.
[addition from folio 58 v.: A derechief está‚á apellá‚á ladicte femme de Vullient pour scavoir oá—á sont
ses heures. Le nye scavoir et admonestá‚á de son ydollatrie en laquelle touiours elle vit.” A special thanks
to Karen Spierling for sharing this citation.
113 Lambert et al., Consist. Genève, Tome I, fo. 135, 25 October 1543.
199
breaking and destroying of previous social ties. For example, in Geneva the church
prevented its members from using saints’ names for their children. This was an attempt,
as Bruce Gordon asserts, to “break the emotional bond with the veneration of saints,”
“cleanse godparenting of elements regarded as superstitious”, and “make parents, fathers
in particular, more responsible for the spiritual guidance of their children.” 114 Religion
and society were so inextricably intertwined that there could be no destruction of the one
without the other. Since names represented important alliances between families, this
rejection of saints’ names might be interpreted as the severing of social ties and
redefining family in terms of confession. Like vestiges of religious pollution purified
from a Catholic worship space, historical demography demonstrates that these names and
the social ties they represented were purged. Popular pre-Reformation names that were
considered linked to the “superstition” of Catholicism – like Claude, François(e) and
Louis(e) – were replaced by biblical names like Abraham, Isaac, Sara, and Rachel. By
the 1560s, ninety-seven percent of babies baptized in Geneva were given biblical names,
reflecting a fairly thorough uprooting of traditional names and severing of traditional
ties. 115 Holy households would be marked with approved names and approved social
networks, now suited for the pious purposes for which it had been divinely intended. 116
114 Gordon, Calvin, 203.
115 In pre-Reformation Geneva, saints’ names represented 43.3 percent of boys’ names and 49 percent of
girls’ names; in the period from 1550-1555, these numbers had dropped to 18.7 and 12.5 percent,
respectively; in the decade of the 1560s, the percentage sank to 3.2 and 1.8, respectively. E. William
Monter, “De L’évêché à La Rome Protestante,” in Histoire de Genève, ed. Paul Guichonnet (Lausanne:
Payot, 1974), 146–147; E. William Monter, “Historical Demography and Religious History in SixteenthCentury Geneva,” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 9, no. 3 (January 1, 1979): 412–414,
doi:10.2307/203418; Benedict, Rouen, 104–106; Jeffrey R. Watt, “Calvinism, Childhood, and Education:
The Evidence from the Genevan Consistory,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 33, no. 2 (Summer 2002):
444–445.
116 Cf. Raymond A. Mentzer, Blood & Belief: Family Survival and Confessional Identity among the
Provincial Huguenot Nobility (West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1994), 145–147. Mentzer
argues that among the Huguenots, traditional naming patterns were often sustained.
200
CHAPTER 4
DOMESTIC SACRALITY AND THE PRACTICE OF PIETY
Besides, they were at the same time admonished by this
ceremony, that every one enjoyed his house aright and regularly,
only when he so regulated it that it was as it were a sanctuary of
God, and that true piety and the pure worship of God reigned in
it. The types of the law have now ceased, but we must still keep
to the doctrine of Paul, that whatever things God appoints for our
use, are still “sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”
– John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms 1
Purity did not represent the fullness of Calvin’s desire for the home and family.
Calvin envisioned a home made pure through pious activities, which essentially mirrored
the activities in places of worship. In his commentary on the Psalms Calvin tied the
activity of Solomon’s temple to those in the home. After castigating Catholics (“who
think that if the monks chant in the temples, this is all the worship necessary on the part
of the whole body of the people”), he asserted that “What God intended was, that the
priests should lead the way in divine service, and the people take example by what was
done in the temple, and practice it individually in their private houses.” 2
1 John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 1, trans. James Anderson, Calvin’s
Commentaries 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Ps. 30, 485. (emphasis mine). For other
examples, reference Calvin’s comments regarding Abraham: “…the Lord had chosen this family to
himself, as the only sanctuary on earth in which he was to be worshipped in purity,” John Calvin,
Commentaries on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, trans. John King, Calvin’s Commentaries 1
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Gen. 31:19, 2:169. Earlier in his commentary, Calvin also
remarked that Shem’s home “was the peculiar sanctuary of God,” (Ibid., Gen. 11:10, 1:333.). Regarding
Jacob: “He had also another purpose; namely, that his whole family should worship God with the same
sense of piety. For it behooves a pious father of a family diligently to take care that he has no profane
house, but rather that God should reign there as in a sanctuary,” Ibid., Gen. 33:20, 2:214.
2 John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 3, trans. James Anderson, Calvin’s
Commentaries 6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), Ps. 134:3, 168.
201
Domestic piety, not surprisingly, was to be initiated and guided by the father. In a
letter to the national synod of the French Reformed Churches – in response to their
question of “Whether a private Christian may exercise the Office of a Minister unto his
own Family?” – Calvin described his understanding of the role of the godly father:
A Godly Man being the Head and Master of his Family, ought to
serve, guide and instruct it, according to the Measure of his Gifts
and Graces, and may so far supply the Pastor’s Office, and perform
his Duty in it, as to teach sound Doctrine, and inculcate wholesome
Counsels to it… But forasmuch as also Persons indifferently are
not allowed to Preach the Word and Administer the Sacrament, it
is but just and reasonable, that a Man should first try and examine
himself, and be well assured, that he is called of God before he
attempts to take upon him so great and weighty an Office. Yet
nevertheless, every individual Family ought to be a Little Church
of Christ. 3
Calvin agreed that fathers could adopt a pastor’s role in the family, provided that the
sacramental elements were reserved for the ordained pastor’s office. Tellingly, it was
instruction that he held as the core of the office and what made a home a “Little Church.”
The application of this title was not unique to Calvin or the Reformed. Luther too
referred to fathers as “bishops” and “priests.” 4 Marjorie Plummer has argued that this is
significant in light of the fact that Protestantism rejected celibacy and saints:
symbolically, fathers replaced saints in their homes, and even priests found their spiritual
3 John Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata: Or, The Acts, Decisions, Decrees, and Canons of Those
Famous National Councils of the Reformed Churches in France, 2 Vols. (London: T. Parkhurst and J.
Robinson, 1692), 1:79.
4 Gerald Strauss, Luther’s House of Learning: Indoctrination of the Young in the German Reformation
(Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), 4; Steven E. Ozment, When Fathers Ruled:
Family Life in Reformation Europe (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983), 9. Luther’s
emphases on the family and domestic piety – specifically daily prayer and Bible reading – are the
forerunners of Reformed efforts. While his desire for families to be the locus for devotion and instruction
would not be realized, he laid the foundation for an understanding that would be a valuable resource for
both Reformed and Catholic Christians alike. For more information on Luther’s vision for the family and
household worship and the practice of German Protestants, reference Franc̜ois Lebrun, “The Two
Reformations: Communal Devotion and Personal Piety,” in History of Private Life, Volume III: Passions of
the Renaissance, ed. Roger Chartier, trans. Arthur Goldhammer (Cambridge, MA; London: Belknap Press
of Harvard University Press, 1989), 69–109; Patrice Veit, “L’église à la maison. La dévotion privée
luthérienne dans l’Allemagne du XVIIe siècle,” in Homo Religiosus, autour de Jean Delumeau (Pairs:
Librairie Artheme Fayard, 1997), 92–98.
202
calling in being a married father. 5 The father was now the bishop – the shepherd of the
family – guiding families to spiritual maturity.
In his biography of the Admiral Gaspard de Coligny (1519-1572), an important
Huguenot nobleman and military commander in the early French Wars of Religion, his
contemporary François Hotman suggested that the origins of domestic piety in Calvinist
France originated in the home of Coligny in the 1560s. 6 In a moving – if slightly
hagiographical – account, the Coligny household is described as practicing a deliberate
routine of domestic piety:
As soon as Coligny was out of bed, quite early, having put on his
dressing gown and kneeling down, along with all the others who
were present, he prayed in the usual form of the Churches of
France . . .. At the midday meal . . . his domestic servants, except
those who were prevented by the necessary meal preparations,
gathered in the room where the table was set. His wife stood by his
side, and if there had been no sermon, they sang a psalm and then
said the usual blessing . . .. When the meal was finished, Coligny
rose and stood with his wife and the others who were present, and
he gave thanks to God – or this was given by his minister. The
same routine was practiced at supper, and seeing that all those in
his household were unaccustomed to evening prayer before going
to bed . . . he ordered everyone come at the end of supper, and after
the singing of the psalm, a prayer was said. 7
5 Marjorie Elizabeth Plummer, “Reforming the Family: Marriage, Gender and the Lutheran Household in
Early Modern Germany, 1500–1620” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia, 1996), 11.
6 Marianne Carbonnier-Burkard, “La pratique réformée du culte de famille,” La vie spirituelle 715, no.
mai-juin (1995): 308. Original: “Et ne se peut dire le nombre de ceux d'entre la noblesse française qui ont
commencé d'establir en leurs familles cette religieuse règle, à l'exemple de l'amiral qui les exhortait souvent
à la véritable practicque de la piété . . . ” (Coligny and Hotman, La vie de Messire Gaspar de Colligny,
134.). Protestant mealtime spirituality can be found as early as Luther’s Small Catechism (1529), in which
he urged parents to pray with their families before and after the morning and evening meals (Martin Luther,
“Small Catechism,” in The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, trans.
Theodore G Tappert (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), 353–354.). Even these mealtime prayers, Tappert
notes, were adapted from the Roman Breviary.
7 Coligny and Hotman, La vie de Messire Gaspar de Colligny, 132–134. (as cited in Carbonnier-Burkard,
“La pratique réformée du culte de famille,” 308.). Original: “Aussi tôt que [Coligny] était sorti du lit, assez
matin, ayant pris sa robe de chambre et s'étant mis à genoux, comme aussi tous les autres assistants, il
faisait lui-même la prière dans la forme accoutumée aux Églises de France [. . .]; à l'heure du dîner [. . .],
ses serviteurs domestiques, hormis ceux qui étaient empêchez aux choses nécessaires pour le repas, se
trouvaient en sa salle où la table était dressée; auprès de laquelle étant debout et sa femme à son côté, s'il y
avait point eu de prêche, l'on chantait un psaume et puis on disait la bénédiction ordinaire [. . .]. La nappe
étant ôtée, se levant et tenant debout, avec sa femme et les assistants, ou il rendait grâces lui même ou les
203
In this elaborate recounting, Coligny was actively engaged in the spiritual well-being of
his entire household – family members and servants. The family hierarchy was evident,
and all things were ordered. There was also a predictability to the domestic piety because
it was tied to the meal routine. This routine included prayers three times each day, the
singing of Psalms twice, and an afternoon blessing, thanksgiving, and occasional sermon.
While this schedule would have been impossible for most families outside of nobility, the
message was clear: religious devotion was the central defining characteristic of the godly
family, as necessary for sustaining the spiritual life as food was for sustaining the
physical life.
Likewise, references to similar practices emerge in other sources. In Jacques
Fontaine’s memoire – which will be discussed more later – he mentions that he
orchestrated “family worship” each day. 8 Mentzer’s research on the Lacger family of
Castres reveals a family whose domestic practices included family prayer, paraphrasing
Psalms, and reading the Bible, Calvin’s Institutes and commentaries, and the early church
fathers. 9 It also appears in visual representations such as Abraham Bosse’s
La bénédiction de la table (1635, Bibliothèque Nationale de France) 10
The final synod (Loudon, 1659) appeared to be dismayed that families were not
practicing these activities in their homes: people were engaged in worldly things on
faisait rendre par son ministre. Le même se pratiquait au souper, Et, voyant que tous ceux de sa maison se
trouvaient mal aisément à la prière du soir, au temps qu'il fallait reposer, […] il ordonna que chacun vînt à
l'issue du souper, et qu'après le chant du psaume la prière se fît.”
8 Jacques Fontaine, Memoirs of a Huguenot Family, Translated and Compiled from the Original
Autobiography of the Rev. James Fontaine, trans. Ann Maury (New York: George P. Putnam, 1853), 142.
9 Raymond A. Mentzer, Blood & Belief: Family Survival and Confessional Identity among the Provincial
Huguenot Nobility (West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1994), 163.
10 For examples of other art which depicts such scenes, see Philippe Ariès, Centuries of Childhood: A
Social History of Family Life (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1962), 360; Jean Louis Flandrin, Families in
Former Times: Kinship, Household, and Sexuality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 103.
204
Sundays when they should have been spending more time in “Holy Duties,” such as
reading, hearing and meditating on God’s Word, and prayers. 11
These accounts prompt questions regarding domestic piety: How common were
these devotional practices in Geneva and across France? What do historical sources
reveal about household devotion in Geneva and Calvin’s homeland of France and –
perhaps more importantly – was there a discrepancy between the ideals and the practices?
Can the practice of praying, Psalm-singing, speaking blessings, and preaching sermons be
corroborated in other sources? Although the historical evidence for household worship in
France – and even Geneva – is thin and fragmentary, as records of churches across
France are examined, certain practices are evident. It is in these sources, such as the
Coligny memoir, that historians can gain a window into domestic religious practices of
early modern Huguenot families.
Family Prayer
In Geneva, the consistory pressed the faithful to make domestic prayers a
component of family worship. The entire household was supposed to assemble and
repeat the prayers together, especially the Lord’s Prayer. As discussed in the section on
education (Chapter 3), it was ideally in this context that the father would ensure that all
members of the household had memorized this prayer in their native language (if the goal
of prayer was to speak to God, why would one speak in Latin, a language the people did
not understand? 12). Among the “prayers” were two other central confessional statements
– the Apostles’ Creed and the Ten Commandments – which would be recited by the
11 Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 2:551. Family worship is also briefly described in Lebrun, “The
Two Reformations,” 102–103.
12 For Calvin’s thoughts in saying prayers in Latin, see John Calvin, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian
Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960),
2.20.33.
205
family. 13 If a family was diligent in these prayers, members should have little trouble
reciting them to the consistory to obtain entrance to the quarterly Lord’s Supper.
In addition to these prescripted prayers, Calvin encouraged domestic prayers by
providing aids to his congregants and believers abroad. He expanded the French edition
of his catechism (1537, and then in Latin in 1538) in 1545 by adding daily household
prayers for the morning, the departure of children to school, mealtimes, and the
nighttime. 14 The morning and evening prayers emphasized broad themes contained in
the Lord’s Prayer: submission to the will of God, the pursuit of righteousness, and
protection from evil. The prayer regarding school emphasized both that the goal of
learning was for the knowledge and glory of God, and that the fruits of knowledge should
be virtue and humility. The prayers addressed topics of authority, the willing obedience
to those in power, and the acceptance of one’s station – all subjects pertinent to godly
children. The prayers for before (bénédicité) and after (grâces) meals relied on Psalms
104 and 117, respectively. 15 The 1560 psalter of Clement Marot and Theodore Beza
included the morning and evening prayers of Calvin and were distributed through Geneva
and France by the thousands. The simplicity and brevity of Calvin’s prayers, as well as
the ubiquity of the psalters which contained them, likely made these prayers a popular
option for domestic use. 16 The 1563 edition of Calvin’s catechism broadened spiritual
13 Robert M. Kingdon, “Catechesis in Calvin’s Geneva,” in Educating People of Faith: Exploring the
History of Jewish and Christian Communities, ed. John Van Engen (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004), 299–300.
14 John Calvin, Calvin’s Tracts, Containing Treatises on the Sacraments: Catechism of the Church of
Geneva, Forms of Prayer, and Confessions of Faith, ed. Henry Beveridge, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: The Calvin
Translation Society, 1849), 95–99.
15 Carbonnier-Burkard asserts these prayers were modeled almost directly on fifteenth-century prayers
which were included in primers in Latin schools (Carbonnier-Burkard, “La pratique réformée du culte de
famille,” 309.). Also reference Philippe Ariès, L’Enfant et la vie familiale sous l’Ancien Régime (Paris: Le
Seuil, 1973), 401–403.
16 Carbonnier-Burkard, “La pratique réformée du culte de famille,” 309. Carbonnier-Burkard argued that
the psalter, along with the prayers and catechism were the manuel du fidèle réformé for the French
Calvinists. Additionally, she recognized that there were other “nouveaux modèles de prières familiales”
206
care for the household by including a morning prayer for the father to say with the
servants. 17
Furthermore, Calvin also desired for fathers to seek God’s blessing and protection
by praying over their households. He held up the example of King David who prayed for
the nation he ruled, and then at home prayed to God for his family. Godly fathers, Calvin
insisted, should recognize that “God has us and our lives in his hands,” and therefore, part
of their “duty” was to seek God’s favor on behalf of the household. His prediction for
those who failed to do so was grim: “everything will go badly . . . there will be much
confusion . . . there will be nothing but poverty.” 18 This category of prayer does not
appear to have any set form; rather, it was simply an extemporaneous prayer driven by
concern for one’s household.
Genevan consistory records reveal the church’s unrelenting pressure to have
parents inculcate the basic prescribed prayers to their households. 19 The recitation and
understanding of these prayers was critical, but the early records of the consistory reveal
that this was an uphill battle. 20 Since prayers were a traditional feature of medieval
which others offered: in particular, reference Daniel Pastor’s book (Le manuel du vray Chrestien, opposé
au diurnal du sieur Jean Balcet, enseignant la maniere de la droite invocation, & du pur service de Dieu:
et contenant, la Decision claire, & solide des principales controverses de theologie, agitées ce temps
(Genève: Jean Gautier & Pierre Molard, 1652), 91–103.) and the prayers of Jean de Focquembergues
(1636-1653) (Le Voyage de Bethel ou sont representez les devoirs de l’Ame fidèle…avec des prieres et des
meditations (Paris, 1670), 4–12.).
17 Agnès Walch, “Prier en famille chez les catholiques et les protestants avant la Révocation de l’Edit de
Nantes,” in Famille et spiritualité protestante, ed. Alain Joblin and Jacques Sys (Arras, France: Artois
Presses Université, 2006), 13. See also the national synod’s defense of keeping the prayers in the psalter,
(Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 2:139.).
18 John Calvin, Sermons on 2 Samuel: Chapters 1–13, trans. Douglas Kelly (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth
Trust, 1992), 2 Sam. 6:20–23, 280.
19 Jeffrey R. Watt, “Calvinism, Childhood, and Education: The Evidence from the Genevan Consistory,”
The Sixteenth Century Journal 33, no. 2 (Summer 2002): 447.
20 For example, on 7 September 1542, Guygone Meyniez from Gex claimed that her husband, Louis, was
teaching her the prayer, Geneva (Thomas A. Lambert et al., eds., Registres du Consistoire de Genève au
temps de Calvin, Tome I (1542–1544) (Genève: Librairie Droz, 1996), fo. 55.). The following year, Claude
do Miribello asserted that he too was “teaching his wife and his children as it is proper to instruct them to
207
domestic piety, it was a challenge to convince the faithful to learn a new set of prayers,
recite these in their native language, and direct them to Jesus rather than the Virgin Mary
or the saints. The consistory seemed focused on the prescribed prayers, since nothing
appears in the records regarding the prayers from the catechisms or the general prayers
over the household. It appears that the ambitious program of the Reformation –
especially during these early years – resigned itself with inculcating prayers that
encapsulated the fundamental doctrines in the lives of the faithful.
In the French churches, the desire for domestic prayers emerges in the sources.
However, there is only fragmentary evidence in prescriptive and descriptive sources,
which makes it difficult to assess if this pious practice was enacted in homes and to what
extent. For instance, the consistory of Saint-Gervais exhorted Antoine Fraissinet to stop
insulting his mother and to pray to God in his home. 21 Given the variety of prayers
discussed above, what exactly was the consistory expecting of Fraissinet? Was this a call
to general piety, to the recitation of the prescribed prayers, or to the inclusion of
extemporaneous prayers? Despite the fact that the details are not clear, the consistory’s
specific injunction to Fraissinet remains as evidence of a concern for domestic prayer in
Saint-Gervais.
In 1561, the Le Mans consistory stated in its minutes, “Item, that they [the
members of the consistory] should inquire as to what each is doing in his household, to
pray to the Lord and not otherwise,” (Ibid., fo. 93, 8 March 1543.). In the case of an apothecary, nobleman
Pierre Pauloz Du Pain, he had been admonished along with his other brothers to look after their mother –
and in light of her ignorance – to instruct his family well (Ibid., fo. 106v, 5 April 1543.). The following
week he claimed that he “stays quietly in his house with his household and rarely goes to taverns”, but then
mentions “And that his wife is not a papist. And if his mother is a papist it is not his fault, because he gave
her a New Testament to study.” The consistory advised him to “instruct his wife and his mother, that he
admonish and give a good example to his household and that he frequent the sermons more often and
remove the books from his house so his mother will not read them. And give him good remonstrances to
teach his mother to pray to God and learn her creed, and all those of his house,” (Ibid., fol. 109–109v, 12
April 1543.).
21 Registre du consistoire de Saint-Gervais (Archives Nationales (Paris), 1564), fo. 955, 5 August 1565.
208
relieve the Minister in this, and to admonish the heads of families to pray in their houses
at night, morning, and before and after meals.” 22 This entry echoes the Coligny
household routine and well as the Genevan ideal of a ritualized schedule of family prayer
(perhaps even intended to employ Calvin’s catechetical prayers). It also reveals how
meal times functioned as a natural context for devotional activities because the household
was already gathered. The Le Mans mandate for household prayers was emphasized to
all Huguenot churches a few years later at the national synod meeting in Paris (1565).
After the synod expressed concern over “Superstition” in the church, as well as the
“visible Neglect and Contempt of sermons,” it forcefully asserted that family prayers,
“which every Householder is bound to perform, may no more be neglected.” 23 This call
was repeated again at the 1626 synod (Castre) at which pastors were scolded for allowing
“family-prayers” to be neglected by “a multitude of heads of families, householders, and
other domestics.” 24 The continued pressure applied by these synods implies that the
ecclesiastical leadership viewed this as a practice which had not been embraced by
fathers.
The records from the church in Albenc disclose another way in which prayer in
the family was to function. The consistory praised God on a couple of occasions for the
civil liberties which allowed them to worship publically. In August of 1664, for example,
it instructed its congregants “to solemnly give thanks to God,” specifically adding a
component for a domestic application:
22 MM. Anjubault and H. Chardon, eds., “Papier et registre du Consistoire de l’Église du Mans, réformée
selon l’Évangile, 1560–61 (1561–62 nouveau style),” in Recueil de pièces inédites pour servir à l’histoire
de la Réforme et de la Ligue dans le Maine, vol. 1 (Le Mans: Ed. Monnoyer, 1867), 17.
23 Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 1:63.
24 “….very many neglecting sermons and public ordinances of religious worship, yea, and family-prayers,
of which omissions a multitude of heads of families, householders, and other domestics are exceedingly
guilty,” Ibid., 2:173.
209
. . . . you are strongly urged to lead a life according to the holy and
heavenly vocation with which it has pleased God to honor
you, and every father is urged to ask God for the continuation [of
this right to public worship], not only in his holy temple and in the
company of the faithful, but also in the special prayers that he
makes in his house, morning and evening, in the presence of his
children and servants, in order to make the necessary reflections. 25
A similar order was repeated in September of 1681. 26 These domestic prayers reflect the
particular circumstances of the French Calvinists and the intensified persecution which
they received from the crown in the second half of the seventeenth century. These
prayers expanded beyond seeking God’s provision and protection of the immediate
family but took on the concerns of the local and national church.
While the consistory minutes of the town of Blois do not address household
prayer, this topic emerges elsewhere in its records. After the promulgation of the Edict of
Nantes (1598), officials traveled throughout France to enact the king’s legislation on the
local level. The Copie de l'ordonnance de Mrs de Rys et du Faur (7 July 1599) outlined
sixteen articles which established the guidelines for the practice of the “so-called
Reformed religion.” Article 15 mandated to the Reformed in Blois: “In the future they
will not sing their Psalms and prayers in their private houses in this city and surrounding
neighborhoods, as they are accustomed to doing both night and day in so loud and clear
of a voice that neighbors and other Catholic inhabitants passing close to their homes are
scandalized.” 27 This ordinance reacted to an apparently persistent and contentious issue
in the town: the boisterous prayers and singing were disturbing the neighbors.
25 François Francillon, Livre des délibérations de l’Eglise réformée de l’Albenc (1606-1682). Edition du
manuscrit conservé à la Bibliothèque d’Etude et d’Information Fonds Dauphinois. Grenoble Cote R 9723
(Paris: Honoré Champion, 1998), 203.
26 Ibid., 286.
27 Original text: “Qu'ilz ne chanteront à l'advenir leurs psalmes et prières en leurs maisons particulières de
cette ville et fauxbourgs, comme ilz ont accoustumé tant de nuict que de jour à si haute et intelligible voix,
que les voisins et aultres habitans catholiques passans prez de leurs maisons en demeurent scandalisez,”
(Paul de Félice, La Réforme en Blaisois, documents inédits. Registre du consistoire (1665-1677),
Réimpression de l'édition d'Orléans: H. Herluison, 1885 (Marseille: Lafitte, 1979), 16.)
210
This demonstrates how houses in the early modern world lacked the near-airtight
privacy which modern homes afford. Domestic piety may not have been considered
public worship, but neither was it private. Jacque Fontaine remarked how his family
prayed aloud, 28 while Pierre Du Moulin’s letter to his sons claimed that, “in your families
the reading of Scripture is common, the praises of God resound, prayer are like the scent
of the evening and the morning.” 29 Audible exercises of family piety could
simultaneously shape the beliefs of the household members and make a confessional
declaration to neighbors and passersby.
Psalms and Psalm-Singing
A second element of domestic piety which emerges from historical records is the
singing of Psalms. Calvin introduced Psalm-singing into Genevan church worship in late
1530s, and with the help of individuals of such as Clement Marot (1495–1544), Louis
Bourgeois (c. 1510–1560), and Theodore Beza (1519–1605), the Genevan Psalter (150
Pseaumes mis en vers français) was completed two years before Calvin’s death (1562). 30
28 Fontaine, Memoirs of a Huguenot Family, Translated and Compiled from the Original Autobiography of
the Rev. James Fontaine, 87.
29 Pierre Du Moulin, “À mes fils Pierre, Louis & Cyrus Du Moulin,” in Huictieme Decades de Sermons
(Genève: Pierre Chouët, 1653), no pagination.
30 Reference Pierre Pidoux, Le Psautier Huguenot du XVIe siècle. Mélodies et documents (Basle: Éditions
Bärenreiter, 1962); O. Douen, Clément Marot et le Psautier Huguenot, étude historique, littéraire, musicale
et bibliographique (Nieuwkoop: B. de Graaf, 1967). For some insights into Calvin’s perception of Psalms,
see Calvin, Serm2Sam, 2 Sam. 6:1–7, 240–242; John Calvin, “Draft Ecclesiastical Ordinances (1541),” in
Calvin: Theological Treatises, trans. and ed. J. K. S. Reid, Library of Christian Classics 22 (Louisville,
KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), 53. In his 1542 “The Form of Prayers and Songs of the
Church,” he described what he perceived to be the place and spirit of Psalm-singing: “One must always see
to it that the singing not be light and frivolous but have weight and majesty, as St. Augustine says (Aug.
Conf. 10.33). Thus there is a great difference between music that one makes to give joy to men at table and
in their houses on the one hand and the Psalms, which are sung in the church in the presence of God and his
angels. But when one wishes rightly to judge the form which is here set forth, we hope it will be found to
be holy and pure, seeing that it is simply intended for the edification of which we have spoken, although the
use of singing extends much farther. Even in houses /16/ and in the fields it would be for us an incitement
and as it were an organ to praise God, and to raise our hearts to him for him to console us, as we meditate
upon his power, goodness, wisdom and justice. … Therefore, when we sing [Psalms], we are certain that
God has put the words in our mouth as if they themselves sang in us to exalt his glory. Consequently
211
Tens of thousands of copies of this 1562 psalter came off the presses for Geneva and
France.
Barbara Diefendorf argues that the Psalms were not only a symbol of solidarity
for those among the French Reformed; the content of the Psalms – the suffering in the
midst of faith – would have personally resonated with this minority in the midst of
persecution. Just as God provided victory for David over his enemies, the Psalms shaped
the identity of the Huguenots and their expectation of their eventual triumph. 31 In the
last half of the 1540s, there were twenty-five signed editions of Marot’s Cinquante
psaumes printed in Paris, but by the 1550s the Psalms became so synonymous with
Protestantism that Henri II forbade the public singing of Psalms in 1558. Psalms were
sung in France, Diefendorf points out,
Chrysostom exhorts both men, women and little children to learn to sing them in order that they may be
like a meditation to associate them with the company of angels (Chrysostom, In Ps. 41.1,2),” (John Calvin,
“The Form of Prayers and Songs of the Church, 1542: Letter to the Reader,” trans. Ford Lewis Battles,
Calvin Theological Journal 15, no. 2 (1980): 163. emphasis added). Calvin further explained the (positive
and negative) power of music, cautioning, “However, we must guard against abusing it for fear of soiling
and contaminating it and thus converting it to our condemnation when it is intended for our profit and
salvation. If there were no other consideration than this one alone, namely that we must be moved to
moderate the use of music, to make it serve all honesty and that it may not be occasion to unbridle us to
dissoluteness or to weaken us to disordered delights, and that it may not be an instrument of fornication or
any immodesty. But there is still another advantage. For there is scarcely anything in this world more
capable of turning or bending hither and thither the customs of men, as Plato has wisely remarked (Rep.
3.12, 401B; Laws, 2.8, 664B). And actually we know by experience that it has a secret power, almost
unbelievable, to move morals one way or another. Therefore we ought to be even more diligent to regulate
it, to the end that it may be useful for us and not dangerous. For this reason, the ancient Doctors of the
church oftentimes complained that the people of their times were given to dishonorable and immodest
songs, which with good reason they considered and called deadly and devilish poison to corrupt the world
(Aug., Enarr. in Ps., 2.1; Chrysostom, In Psal. 41.1.2; In Matt., Horn 68.4; 27.5). But in speaking now of
/17/ music, I understand two parts, that is, the letter or subject and matter; secondly, singing or melody. It
is true that all evil speaking (as St. Paul says) perverts good morals (1 Cor. 15:33), but when melody
accompanies it, it pierces the heart much more strongly and so enters inside it. Just as by a funnel wine is
forced into a vessel, likewise venom and corruption is distilled into the depths of the heart by melody.
What then is to be done? We must have songs not only honorable but also holy, which are to be like
needles to arouse us to pray and praise God, to meditate on his works, in order to love him, fear, honor and
glorify him,” (Calvin, “The Form of Prayers and Songs of the Church, 1542.”).
31 Barbara B. Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross: Catholics and Huguenots in Sixteenth-Century Paris (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 137–139.
212
in moments of defiance or spiritual need. They were used to
disrupt Catholic services and call attention to Protestant gatherings.
They were sung by religious prisoners as they were being dragged
off to their jails in chains and by convicted heretics on their way to
execution. They were used as marching songs by Huguenot armies
and to rally the courage of civilians in the wars as well. . . . The
Huguenots of Bourges celebrated their seizure of the city in 1562
by singing Psalm 12; the citizens of Sancerre marked an initial
victory in the eventually disastrous siege of 1572-1573 by singing
Psalm 144. 32
Diefendorf’s observations make clear that Psalm-singing was not only an important part
of Reformed spirituality, but it also served as a distinctive marker of confessional
identity.
The use of Psalms was not only for corporate worship, however; it also composed
an important element of domestic piety. As suggested by the aforementioned mandate
from Blois, in which Protestants were ordered to stop singing Psalms in their houses “so
loud and clear of a voice,” it appears to have occurred frequent enough to warrant an
official decree.
Calvin encouraged parents to have private family devotionals in their homes in
order to impart biblical instruction to children, and psalters were printed in part for this
purpose, allowing families to sing Scriptures at home in their worship times. Based on
his analysis of book ownership in seventeenth-century Metz, Benedict argues that the
psalter played a significant role in Huguenot domestic piety:
. . . psalms formed as standard part of family services as well. It is
not uncommon to find six or seven copies in a single household,
one for the use of each family member… In sum, the inventories
provide ample confirmation of the place of the Bible and the
psalter in Huguenot personal and family piety, although they also
suggest that every Huguenot household may not have possessed
them. 33
32 Ibid., 137. Also reference p. 51. In the Nîmes consistory records, for example, they describe the process
of integrating the newly-translated Psalms into their church services (Louis Auzière, “Registres du
consistoire de l’église réformée de Nîmes, Tome 1, 1561-1563, Copié sur l’original déposé a la
Bibliotheque nationale, (Fonds français N° 8666),” 1874, 245.).
33 Philip Benedict, The Faith and Fortunes of France’s Huguenots, 1600-85 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001),
165.
213
While one cannot determine behavior from artifacts, this evidence suggests that the
psalter played an important role in the Huguenot home. The sheer abundance of psalters
may also find validation in the 1581 national synod (La Rochelle) records which declared
that:
Forasmuch as there is notorious contempt of Religion visible in all
places, yea also in our Religious Meetings, we advise that notice
be given unto all Persons, to bring with them their Psalm-Books
into the Churches, and that such as contemptuously neglect the
doing of it, shall be severely censured; and all Protestant Printers
are advised not to sunder in their Impressions the Prayers and
Catechism from the Psalm-Books. 34
This command makes use of psalters universal – which was certainly never a reality – but
it also assumes possession of a psalter by the French Calvinists. Additionally, it reveals
the ecclesiastical leadership’s value of the psalter, as well as their continued desire that it
be bound together with Calvin’s Catechism and the domestic prayers. Such suggests the
validity of Carbonnier-Burkhart claim that the 1562 Genevan Psalter – with the complete
collection of Psalms, catechism, and prayers – served as a practical guide for regular
family worship, a manuel du fidèle réformé. 35
The use of the Psalms in domestic settings also appears in other sources. Writing
in the seventeenth century, John Quick, the translator of the English version the French
national synod records, described the singing of Psalms by the Reformed as a customary
event:
[Psalms] were sung in the Louvre, as well as the Prez des Clerks,
by the ladies, the princes, yea and by Henry the second himself.
This one ordinance only contributed mightily to the downfall of
34 Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 2:139. Also reference p. 1:xliii. The Huguenot Discipline
records, “Les congrégations des fidèles étant aussi ordonnées pour chanter les louanges de Dieu, et se
consoler et fortifier par l'usage des psaumes, tous seront avertis d'en porter ès assemblées : et ceux qui par
mépris délaisseront d'en avoir, seront censurés, comme aussi ceux qui ne se découvrent tandis qu'on chante,
tant au commencement qu'à la fin du prêche, et même durant la célébration des sacrements,” (François
Méjan, Discipline de l’Église réformée de France annotée et précédée d’une introduction historique (Paris:
Éditions “Je sers,” 1947), 10.2, 258.).
35 Carbonnier-Burkard, “La pratique réformée du culte de famille,” 309.
214
popery, and the propagation of the Gospel. It took so much with
the genius of the nation, that all ranks and degrees of men
practiced it in the temples and in their families. No gentleman
professing the Reformed religion, would sit down at his table
without praising God by singing. Yea, it was a special part of their
morning and evening worship, in their several houses, to sing
God’s praises. 36
Here, two daily occasions of domestic worship are considered the custom, and the Psalms
represent a core component. John Welsh (1568–1622), a Scottish Presbyterian leader
who spent the last half of his life in France, described a similar use of the Psalms:
“Before dinner, Mr. Welsh came from his chamber, and made his family exercise
according to his custom. And first, he sung a Psalm, then read a portion of Scripture, and
discoursed upon it; thereafter he prayed with great fervour, as his custom was.” 37
While the psalter was employed as a resource for family worship, there are also
records which describe a more private use of the Psalms. Jean Migault, a schoolmaster of
Mougon in Poitou, extolled the piety of his wife to his children, claiming that,
Your mother lived in the fear and in the love of God, and the study
of his holy Word was her greatest delight even from her infancy.
She was equally conversant with the history of the martyrs; and
she read with eagerness all the works that had a tendency to fortify
her mind against the fear of death. She gave, also, a great part of
her time and attention to the psalms, which she knew so well, and
which were so deeply engraven on her memory, that in her sleep
during the night it was not unusual for me to hear her sing parts of
them. 38
Here, Psalm-singing is clustered with the reading of the Bible and Crespin’s Martyrs as
the three activities of his godly wife. Her passion and memorization is hardly surprising,
36 Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 1:v.
37 James Young, Life of John Welsh, Minister of Ayr (Edinburgh: J. Maclaren, 1866), 360. John
Welsh (1568–1622) was a Scottish Presbyterian leader who was married to Eizabeth, a daughter of John
Knox. His was imprisoned by King James VI of Scotland for his preaching, and in 1606 was exiled
to France where he lived, ministered, and preached until his death.
38 Jean Migault, Jean Migault, or, The Trials of a French Protestant Family During the Period of the
Revocation of the Edict of Nantes (Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1852), 56. Or, in the French edition,
Journal de Jean Migault, ou, Malheurs d’une famille protestante du Poitou, 1682-1689, ed. Yves
Krumenacker (Paris: Les Editions de Paris, 1995), 50.
215
considering Emmanuel LeRoy Ladurie’s claim that Protestant babies in France were
rocked to sleep with Psalms. 39
While children were fairly passive participants in most aspects of the holy
household, domestic Psalm-singing may be one area which they were allowed a more
active role. In medieval European masses, there was no congregational singing; the Mass
– in many ways – merely required that one be present. In order that the Reformed
churches in Geneva could learn to sing the Psalms from the progressively expanding
psalter, Calvin recommended teaching the children Psalms, who would then teach the
congregation. He stated in the 1537 articles regarding the Genevan church’s organization
that “This manner of proceeding seemed specially good to us, that children, who
beforehand have practised some modest church song, sing in a loud and distinct voice,
the people listening with all attention and following heartily what is sung with the mouth,
till all become accustomed to sing communally [sic].” 40 Records from Nîmes indicate
this same strategy was adopted. 41 Given the hierarchical structure of early modern
society, church, and family, this may have been an area in which the young found a
measure of agency and control over a religious agenda which was largely imposed from
above. Despite the fact that I cannot locate any such directives, it is not too much to
assume that if children in Reformed churches were taught the Psalms so they might teach
the congregation, they performed a similar function in their respective homes. Fathers
39 Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, The Peasants of Languedoc (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1974),
1:613.
40 John Calvin, “Articles Concerning the Organization of the Church and of Worship at Geneva Proposed
by the Ministers at the Council (1537),” in Calvin: Theological Treatises, trans. and ed. J. K. S. Reid,
Library of Christian Classics 22 (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), 54. Later, this is
mentioned in the marriage section of the draft of the ecclesiastical ordinances: “It will be good to introduce
some ecclesiastical songs, the better to incite people to prayer and to praise God. To begin with, little
children are to be instructed; then in time all the Church will be able to follow,” (Calvin, “EccOrd (1545),”
67.).
41 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 248. This effort does not seem to have been particularly effective, because
the consistory ordered that the children be taught “autrment a entonner les pseaulmes,” (Ibid., 271.).
216
and mothers who had no musical training would have found it quite difficult to live up to
the expectations of singing Psalms in their homes. In Huguenot homes, therefore, if
parents decided to implement Psalm-singing, it likely would have been the children who
lead the domestic singing. This practice may have been a visible example of the
“priesthood of all believers” in action as children taught their parents the notes of the
tunes, guiding their “superiors” in the musical nuances of the Genevan Psalter.
While there is a breadth of documentation regarding the Reformed uses of Psalmsinging as a component of domestic worship in prescriptive literature and memoires,
there is no mention of this practice in church discipline records from France (the records
from Geneva are likely too early to have included this practice). No questions are posed
to the faithful regarding if they have psalters, if they are using them, or what particular
songs they are singing, making it very difficult to ascertain how widespread the use
psalters were and what role they actually played in domestic devotion. How are
historians to account for this absence? Might it have been primarily a practice for the
temples, even though it was practiced in some homes?
Bible Reading
Another central element of Reformed piety in the home was the reading of the
Scriptures. No tradition or authority figure rivaled its importance – a point of pride and
superiority for Protestants. Possession of the Bible, therefore, would seem an
indispensable element of domestic piety. Genevan presses printed off thousands of
copies of the Bible and shipped many abroad to places like England and France. 42 A
42 The Genevan presses printed an incredible volume of Protestant books for circulation throughout
Europe. During Calvin’s lifetime, Greengrass claims there were over five hundred titles produced on forty
presses in Geneva (Mark Greengrass, The French Reformation (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), 31.). One
hundred and fifty complete Bibles were produced in Geneva (Bruce Gordon, Calvin (New Haven and
London: Yale University Press, 2009), 288.). And Benedict claims that an estimated seventy percent of
books prohibited in France came from Genevan presses (Philip Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely
Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002), 132–134.).
217
reoccurring event in the church discipline records was the consistory’s inquiry if parents
had a Bible in their house.
If we first examine domestic Scripture reading in Geneva, this concern is
particularly evident in the case of two pack-saddlers, Jaques Emyn and Robert Breysson.
On 23 February 1542 Breysson and Emyn were summoned before the Genevan
consistory. They were called on account of the consistory’s concern regarding how they
were managing their homes, and in turn, each was specifically warned regarding the
“course of his household and of his guests, muleteers, merchants and others from distant
countries and of the words they use among themselves.” Both were commanded to learn
the Apostle’s Creed and the Lord’s Prayer before the next communion service and to
return to demonstrate their progress. 43 The following week, their wives were summoned.
Pernete Breysson was questioned because of “the discipline and fashion of living in her
household according to the Word of God, about songs, sermons and her faith and servants
and maids.” After she provided a “sound explanation of her faith and creed,” the
consistory instructed her to “buy a Bible to put before her people to read instead of game
boards, cards, songs, and to eschew all dice.” 44 Tevenete Emyn was also questioned
about her life and household, specifically regarding foreign guests in her home. She was
ordered to buy a Bible “to show guests in her house.” 45
Soon after, the husbands returned and were re-examined. Robert Breysson was
admonished for having made no progress on the prayer and confession and was ordered
to appear before the consistory each week to show his improvement. In his next
appearance a couple of weeks later he had learned so little that he was instructed to buy a
Bible for his house. Another three months transpired, and yet the consistory was still
43 Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 3v, 23 February 1542.
44 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 4v, 2 March 1542.
45 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 4v, 2 March 1542.
218
dismayed at his progress, so it remanded him to the city council; the council ordered
Robert to attend catechism for one year and sermons every day until he knew his prayers.
Finally, a little over six months from his first appearance, Robert was able to recite the
prayer and confession and was re-admitted to communion. 46
Jaques Emyn, on the other hand, was told at his first call-back to the consistory to
“buy a Bible to instruct his people and guests in the Word of God.” In response, he
requested “a young child or any other” who could come and teach him to say the prayer
and confession. He made insufficient progress by the time of his next meeting with the
consistory and was admonished to sit “close to the pulpit to hear the Word of God better”
and was given a “respectable teacher” to assist him. Subsequent appearances before the
consistory resulted in orders to “frequent the sermons and catechism, and to buy a Bible.”
He was cleared to participate in the September communion service, but was again
commanded to buy a Bible for his home. The record of his final appearance before the
consistory prior the 1542 Christmas Lord’s Supper records: “Has bought a Bible that the
merchants read in his house.” 47 The consistory’s efforts had been successful.
In answer to the question “What role did the Bible play in domestic piety?”, the
parallel experiences of these Genevan pack-saddlers are not surprising. The ecclesiastical
leadership’s concern that the Breysson and Emyn households should have and read
Bibles was not only consistent with John Calvin’s theology – who was in attendance at
the aforementioned meetings – but it also reflected the central Protestant tenet of sola
scriptura. Sola scriptura had been a Protestant rallying cry in the fierce confessional
battles: the Bible, Protestants maintained, was the source for knowledge of God.
Scholarship on Calvin has demonstrated how deeply Calvin was rooted in this Word46 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 8v, 23 March 1542; vol. 1, fol. 16, 6 April 1542; vol. 1, fol. 45, 20 July 1542; vol. 1, fol.
54, 5 September 1542.
47 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 9, 23 March 1542; vol. 1, fol. 10v-11, 30 March 1542; vol. 1, fol. 32v, 17 May 1542;
vol. 1, fol. 50v, 17 August 1542; vol. 1, fol. 54v, 7 September 1542; vol. 1, fol. 76, 19 December 1542.
219
centered approach to the Christian faith. Randall Zachman, for example, has argued that
“Calvin above all else sought to restore the proper and fruitful reading of Scripture to
every Christian, no matter how unlearned that person might be.” Defending his position,
he cites Calvin’s preface to Olivétan’s 1535 French translation of the Bible in which
Calvin anticipated objections of those who might protest to the “divine mysteries” being
placed in the hands of “simple common people,” “poor illiterates,” those “ignorant of all
things.” Calvin replied that this effort would be validated as foretold in Joel’s prophecy
that the spirit would be poured out on all flesh (Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17). 48 Furthermore, the
consistory’s efforts are congruent with both Protestant and Catholic attempts to make
each home a space for devotion and instruction. In such a context, therefore, it is of little
wonder that these pack-saddlers would be admonished to have a Bible in their homes.
Given the printing presses and active consistory in Geneva, a Bible would seem an
indispensable element of domestic piety. 49
However, understanding these cases as an attempt on the part of the Genevan
church to cultivate Christian faith in households may not accurately represent reality. In
this early window of the consistory registers, the issue of owning and/or reading a Bible
in the homes of Genevans was only raised with a mere half dozen individuals or families.
This infrequency is quite perplexing in light of the Reformed emphasis on Scriptures.
If we inquire more fully into the cases which specifically address this concern,
additional considerations come to light. When Robert Breysson and Jaques Emyn were
summoned initially, Bibles were not mentioned. They had been called because of “the
48 Randall C. Zachman, John Calvin as Teacher, Pastor, and Theologian: The Shape of His Writings and
Thought (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006), 56.
49 For example, Benedict makes the passing comment, “Some of the first entries in Geneva’s consistory
registers admonished church members to buy a Bible,” Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 510–511. Genevan
presses printed off thousands of copies of the Bible and shipped many abroad to places like England and
France. During Calvin’s lifetime, Greengrass claims there were over five hundred titles produced on forty
presses in Geneva (Greengrass, The French Reformation, 31.). One hundred and fifty complete Bibles were
produced in Geneva (Gordon, Calvin, 288.).
220
management and course of [their] household[s] and of [their] guests, muleteers,
merchants and others from distant countries and of the words they use among
themselves,” suggesting that the consistory’s concern might have arisen from the guests
and foreigners (presumably non-Reformed) spending time in their Reformed homes, an
issue examined in the preceding chapter. The consistory’s fears regarding Catholic
influences in Jaques Emyn’s home were confirmed when they summoned him months
after he had testified to having purchased a Bible for his home and read it to his merchant
guests. He could recite the church’s expected prayers, but he confessed that “his guests
do not eat Lent-breaking food” (marking them as Catholics) and that, coincidentally, he
too had “no appetite for eating meat or breaking Lent.” Despite his protests that he
wanted to “rule himself by the Word of God” and “live and die in this city of Geneva,”
the consistory was skeptical, warning him to “demonstrate his Christianity by works” and
“live according to the Reformation of the church.” 50
Rather than an attempt to educate the faithful, therefore, these cases under
investigation may be better understood to reflect the consistory’s desire to
confessionalize Reformed homes: the reading of Scripture was to protect against the
religious influence of Catholic guests by marking the home as Protestant and combating
Catholic “superstitions” – and possibly even converting some of their guest to the “true
faith.” Spierling’s research on Genevan legal codes and consistory records from the
1530s-1560s reveals the consistory and city council were alarmed by travelers and
Catholic influences they spread. 51 The movement of Catholic individuals – merchants,
immigrants, family members – across the physical boundaries of Geneva endangered the
church and city’s intertwined and interdependent efforts “to create an independent and
50 Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 104v, 29 March 1543.
51 Karen E. Spierling, “Friend and Foe: Reformed Genevans and Catholic Neighbors in the Time of
Calvin,” in John Calvin and Roman Catholicism: Critique and Engagement, Then and Now, ed. Randall C.
Zachman (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 79–98.
221
purely Reformed city.” 52 In this context, the consistory’s admonitions to the packsaddlers reflect Geneva’s concern about the relationships between Reformed and Catholic
inhabitants, their interactions, shared ideas, and their movement between religious
communities and political territories. Pack-saddling and other similar professions were
one of the primary means of this movement: they brought regular interaction with
outsiders and other transient trades. Jaques’ and Robert’s business likely put them in
frequent contact with Catholic travelling merchants, and – as the records suggest – these
merchants may have even stayed in their homes as guests. This sub-culture which
allowed religious pollution to seep into the holy city gave the consistory cause for great
anxiety.
This connection between godly homes, Bibles, and Catholic influence becomes
stronger when the other occasions (in which the consistory explicitly instructed
individuals to purchase a Bible and read it in their homes) are examined. I have
identified three other cases: interestingly, all were owners of inns, and thus, likely had
regular contact with Catholics. Jean Du Nant, host of the Stag, appeared before the
consistory on 27 April 1542. The record demonstrates the consistory’s bias: Du Nant
was questioned regarding his sermon attendance “because he keeps an inn.” Moreover, it
elaborated, “God is not honored in his house and that he is like the others in the papistry.”
After defending himself against the charge of “papistry,” his poor performance in reciting
the Lord’s Prayer and Creed led the consistory to order him to “teach service to God in
his house and to frequent the sermons and to learn his faith better and that his family,
servants and maids go to catechism on Sunday.” 53 He was re-examined five months later
because the consistory believed his wife, Clauda, and older son were “strongly against
52 Ibid., 85.
53 Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 24v, 27 April 1542.
222
the Word of God” and claimed the new laws in Geneva would not endure. 54 The
consistory then summoned Clauda, who it clearly feared was harboring Catholic
sympathies: it probed if she held to her faith, if she sent her son to a Catholic school, if
she believed the Reformation would endure in Geneva, and if her son could recite the
prayer and confession. She defended her innocence, and the consistory ordered her to
“buy a Bible in their house [sic] and have it read.” 55
Jehan and Loyse Bennar, hosts of the Rock, sent their son to the collège in La
Roche, a Catholic town in Savoy. The consistory admonished them to “bring [their] son
back here, and that they be well instructed in religion and have a Bible to show their
guests.” 56 In the case of the host of the Three Haberdashers, Mathieu Gathsiner, the
consistory was clearly concerned about whether he embraced Catholic beliefs. He was
told to make sure his family was properly catechized and that “he instruct his guests in
religion,” adding that he should “have a New Testament in his house, and come here
before receiving Communion, and that all three of his daughters appear here, and to teach
his guests.” 57
54 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 63, 5 October 1542.
55 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 64, 12 October 1542.
56 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 86, 1 February 1543.
57 Ibid. vol. 1, fol. 89, 15 February 1543. Anthoyne, wife of Aymo Foral, host of the Three Quail,
appeared before the consistory on account of “song, games, and other acts that are not proper.” After
pleading her innocence and demonstrating her upright life, the consistory admonished her to “live honestly
in their house and with their guests and household, that they not follow a bad course in their house . . .”
(Ibid., vol. 1, fol. 16v, 6 April 1542.). Another interesting case pertains to the host of the Crane, Pierre
Monetier. When questioned regarding the “papistry” of Monetier and his wife, the records note that they
“do not give good instruction in the Word of the Lord and give a bad example to the others who lodge
there, both he and his wife.” It is furthermore revealed that “he was sent guests because he was thought to
be papistic, and he may well have the name, but the fact no. And indeed he believes that some have written
to be lodged at his house as a papist, which he is not,” (Consist. Genève, Tome I vol. 1, fol. 126, 28 August
1543.). This account reveals the failure of the consistory to create a black-and-white, uniconfessional
society: there are Catholic influences moving in and out of Genevan society. Catholics assumed they had
found a co-confessor in Monetier, and it does not appear that he tried very hard to dispel this assumption.
While no Bible reading is required in this account, it can be seen how Bible reading would make
confessional allegiances clear, creating a sharply divided world.
223
Once again, the presence of Catholic influences seemed to be the impetus behind
admonitions to domestic Scripture reading, but it is the inn-keeping profession that is
shown to be a point of intersection between Reformed and Catholic individuals. As the
Genevan faithful hosted Catholics in their inns and homes – and interacted with them
commercially – the Reformed were to perform and embody one of their central
confessional distinctives: the reading of Scriptures in the common tongue. 58 In addition
to this reading functioning as a form of evangelism, it could serve to reify their own
identity as people of the Bible, those who rejected the superstitions of tradition in favor of
the direct commands of God.
While Calvin and the consistory may have wanted Genevans to read Bibles in
their homes more universally, these early discipline records remain silent on this topic,
making it difficult to ascertain whether Bible reading was practiced in Genevan homes as
part of a customary domestic piety. It may have been that owning a copy of the
Scriptures was simply too expensive. At the end of the sixteenth century in Scotland,
only the affluent were ordered to purchase a Bible and a Psalmbook, and in Zurich as late
as the eighteenth century a copy of the Bible would have cost an unskilled worker five
full days’ salary. 59 If cost were an issue for Genevans, however, it is interesting that not
even the more wealthy households were asked if they possessed a Bible.
Or maybe literacy rates rendered the reading of Scripture in homes a moot point?
Philip Benedict notes that although writing was not a skill acquired by the majority in
Reformed communities until much later, reading was far more widespread. 60 However,
58 For discussion of how the consistory sought to draw sharp confessional boundaries to keep Protestants
and Catholics from interacting, reference William G. Naphy, Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan
Reformation (New York: Manchester University Press, 1994), 103; Karen E. Spierling, “Making Use of
God’s Remedies: Negotiating the Material Care of Children in Reformation Geneva,” The Sixteenth
Century Journal 36, no. 3 (2005): 800–806.
59 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 511.
60 For an overview of literacy rates in early modern Europe, see Ibid., 514–518.
224
almost all peasants, women from urban working classes, and women from artisanal
families could not read – it was only among the daughters of merchants and those
engaged in the “liberal professions” that this skill became more commonplace. 61 In the
northern portion of rural France in the late seventeenth century, a third of rural men and
ten percent of women were able to read. 62 Benedict avers that by the end of the period
on which I am focused a “heft majority” of Reformed believers would have either been
able to read or have had someone in their household who was literate. 63 While literacy
rates from the mid-sixteenth century to the late seventeenth would have affected the
reading of Bibles, psalters, and religious books, 64 one wonders why the consistory would
not have targeted the more educated, those who were involved in literate professions, like
notaries, lawyers, or printers? 65
Perhaps a key in this discussion may be the consistory’s most common
admonition to those summoned: attend more sermons. Case after case, it was God’s
Word preached that the faithful were commanded to attend. This emphasis was true to
such an extent that Robert Kingdon has argued that the Lord’s Supper was not the central
61 Barbara B. Diefendorf, “Gender and Family,” in Renaissance and Reformation France, 1500–1648, ed.
Mack P. Holt (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 111.
62 Jonathan Dewald, “Social Groups and Cultural Practices,” in Renaissance and Reformation France
1500-1648, ed. Mack P. Holt (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 38.
63 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 515.
64 For other figures on literacy rates across Europe, see Ibid., 514–515.
65 It is possible that my historical window is simply too brief and too early in the Genevan Reformation.
There were many things which Calvin and the Genevans were attempting to accomplish, and they did not
always push equally on all fronts. Jeannine Olson’s book inventories from Geneva in the late 1540s reveal
that many individuals possessed Bibles (Jeannine E. Olson, Calvin and Social Welfare: Deacons and the
Bourse Française (Susquehanna University Press, 1989).). Marianne Carbonnier-Burkhard claims that
Bible reading was a regular feature of family piety in Geneva, citing Mathurin Cordier’s Colloquies (1564)
in which fathers were “read something [quelque chose] before and [. . .] after meals and in the presence of
the whole family,” (Carbonnier-Burkard, “La pratique réformée du culte de famille,” 309–310.). While this
evidence is not entirely convincing, it is likely that Bible ownership and reading increased as the
Reformation became firmly established in the 1550s.
225
feature of Reformed worship in the way the mass was for Catholics: rather, the sermon
was. 66 Genevans were summoned and asked
whether they had attended sermons, how often they attended them,
who was the preacher they had last heard, what had been the
subject of his sermon, upon which Bible verses he had commented.
If they had troubling handling any of these questions, they were
told to attend more sermons and to pay closer attention to them. 67
This seemingly strong and universal preference for sermons aligns with Herman
Selderhuis’ assertion that Calvin stressed the preached word over the written word. 68
This may indicate that Calvin’s theological commitment to a biblically-literate lay public
was already circumscribed, to some extent, by a theological prioritization of the preached
word. Furthermore, the consistory’s interest in sermon attendance and the faithful’s
comprehension is quite remarkable, considering that in the few recorded cases the
consistory never inquired what scriptures were being read or if the inhabitants of the
house understood them: it was simply enough to have and read the Word.
Regardless, this reflected a tension in the broader Reformation movement
between access to the Scriptures for all and the resulting differing interpretations. Over
against parent-directed Scripture reading, sermons provided biblical enrichment with
proper interpretive guidance. This problem of interpretation had already been recognized
by Luther by 1525 (consider the issues in Wittenberg, the knights' uprising, the peasants’
revolts) and would have certainly been clear to Calvin by the 1540s. How, then, are we
to understand this preference for sermons? Does it – as some studies suggests – reveal
Calvin’s distrust of the ability of the common person to read and properly interpret the
66 Robert M. Kingdon, “Worship in Geneva Before and After the Reformation,” in Worship in Medieval
and Early Modern Europe: Change and Continuity in Religious Practice, ed. Karin Maag and John D.
Witvliet (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2004), 48.
67 Kingdon, “Catechesis,” 299.
68 Herman J. Selderhuis, Calvin’s Theology of the Psalms (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007),
119.
226
Scriptures (consider the attempt at establishing a New Jerusalem in Münster in 1534/35)?
Research by Carlo Ginzburg has clearly demonstrated the powerful (and unpredictable)
imaginative potential of untrained minds. 69 Natalie Davis, in her essay on printing in
early modern France exhibited that people were “active users and interpreters of the
printed books they heard and read.” 70 Such research underscores the perceived dangers
of the lay mind in interpreting texts and assimilating knowledge. Or perhaps Calvin’s
view that “To be good theologians [one] must lead a holy life,” persuaded him that the
lives of the Genevans were proof of their inability to understand Scripture. 71
In France, the case is different. Although Quick, the translator of the national
synod records for the French Reformed Churches boasted that:
This Holy Bible is read in their solemn meetings, in the great
congregations. This divinely inspired Scripture is perused and
studies by nobles and peasants, by the learned and by idiots, by
merchants and tradesmen, by women and children, in their houses
and families; by this they be made wiser than their popish priests,
than their most subtle adversaries, 72
69 For example, see Carlo Ginzburg, The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-Century
Miller, trans. John Tedeschi and Anne C. Tedeschi (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press,
1992); Carlo Ginzburg, The Night Battles: Witchcraft & Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth & Seventeenth
Centuries, trans. John Tedeschi and Anne Tedeschi (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press,
1992).
70 Natalie Zemon Davis, “Printing and the People,” in Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight
Essays (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975), 225.
71 As quoted by T. H. L. Parker, Calvin’s Preaching (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press,
1992), 15. These efforts confirm Jaroslav Pelikan’s observation that “Despite the protestations of ‘sola
Scriptura,’ the Reformers showed that the ‘Scriptura’ has never been ‘sola,’” (Jaroslav Pelikan, The
Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, Vol. 4: Reformation of Church and Dogma
(1300-1700) (Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press, 1985), vii.). In Geneva, scriptura would in
fact be “the Word of God preached,” foreshadowing the claim of the Second Helvetic Confession (1566)
that “The Preaching of the Word of God Is the Word of God,” (Arthur C. Cochrane, ed., Reformed
Confessions of the 16th Century (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1966), 225.). Sermons – the Word of
God preached, the Word of God explained – would be the avenue for understanding God’s will and curing
immoral behavior. Domestic Bible reading was a strong medicine suitable only for dangerous cases of
religious infection: Catholicism.
72 Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata, 1:v.
227
how can historians know if – and how regularly – the Bible was used in Reformed homes
in France?
While not ubiquitous by any means, domestic Bible reading does appear in
Huguenot sources. Consistory records, however, do not reveal a use of Scriptures for
confessionalization purposes as appears to have existed in Geneva. There are no direct
mandates given to Huguenots to buy Bibles or read Bibles in their homes, or – for that
matter – no questions posed regarding what families were reading in Bibles. An
examination of the selected discipline records only reveals two faint references. In the
summer of 1561, the Nîmes consistory ordered a husband to “deal peacefully with his
wife without beating her, as to teach and show her by the Word of God.” 73 Six years
later, two members of the Saint-Gervais church who were spending too much time
outside their homes in scandalous activities were told to “stay in their houses and work
according to the Word of God.” 74 While both cases reference the Bible, these are general
admonitions to live according to the Gospel and neither appears to be a call to engage in
domestic Scripture reading.
The strongest evidence for this practice emerges in anecdotal sources. First, it is
interesting to note that the household worship in the Coligny home in the 1560s made no
mention of the Bible. While Psalms from the Bible were sung, there was no Scripture
read and expounded upon. This is congruent with the French Discipline, which never
required this practice as a part of family worship. Carbonnier-Burkhard speculates that
this omission was due to the fact that Bibles were “were banned in the kingdom (unlike
the Psalms), therefore access was difficult and dangerous – moreover, it would have cost
significantly more than a pocket Psalter.” 75 If this is accurate, it is little wonder that
73 Auzière, “Consist. Nîmes,” 46.
74 Consist. Saint-Gervais, fo. 963v, 22 June 1567.
75 Carbonnier-Burkard, “La pratique réformée du culte de famille,” 309.
228
Psalms played a significant role in France – the Psalms would have served as an
important connection to the Bible without the threat of incurring the wrath of the state.
In the biography of Philippe Du Plessis-Mornay (1549-1623), however, there are
two references to personal, domestic reading. Charlotte Arbaleste de Mornay, his wife
(1550-1606), records that Philippe’s mother would often be found “reading the Bible or
the Psalms” in their home.” 76 Then, referencing her concern over the condition of her
eyes in the mid-1590s, Charlotte confessed,
…I began to suffer more acutely from my usual catarrh and I even
feared the loss of my sight. I felt my eyes growing constantly
weaker, although I saved them all I could as I always have done. I
spared no remedy, living in constant terror lest I should be
deprived of my only consolation in reading the Holy Scriptures. 77
This passion for and dedication to the Scriptures are also found in the next generation as
well. Their daughter, Anne de Mornay, wrote in her Bible in 1620:
This Bible was given to me by M. du Plessis, my much-honored
father. After I am gone I want it to go to Philippe des Nouhes, my
eldest son, so that he may read it carefully in order to learn to
know and serve God in the Holy Trinity. To encourage him in this
endeavor, let him think of the example of his grandfather, from
whom he received nourishment, and let him constantly remember
the wishes that I his mother, have made for him. 78
This touching note gives insight into the trans-generational meaning of the Bible for this
family. It served as a point of connection from father to daughter to grandson, achieving
an almost relic-like status. Many homes which otherwise might not have been able to
purchase a copy of the Scriptures may have inherited one from their families. These may
have possessed important documents, genealogical information, or messages inside,
76 Charlotte Arbaleste de Mornay, A Huguenot Family in the XVI Century: The Memoirs of Philippe de
Mornay, sieur du Plessis Marly, written by his wife, trans. Lucy Crump (London, Routledge; New York, E.
P. Dutton & Co., 1926), 83.
77 Ibid., 274. Another story of the use of Scriptures in the home, comes from 1658 when a lawyer
instructed his son to read two or three chapters from the Bible each morning and evening (Walch, “Prier en
famille,” 11.).
78 As quoted in Lebrun, “The Two Reformations,” 102.
229
gaining significance over the decades. Moreover, the de Mornay Bible was an important
material link of faith to the family patriarch, reminding each generation about their
beliefs and the responsibility to submit to God. The Bible reminded them of their
Protestant commitment, but it also recalled their Huguenot particularity: Philippe de
Mornay had been a great Huguenot leader whose life was dedicated to establishing the
French Reformed church.
Charlotte Arbaleste de Mornay’s zeal for the Word of God appears too in Jean
Migault’s journal. Therein, he praises his wife to his children (1683): “Your mother lived
in the fear and in the love of God, and the study of his holy Word was her greatest delight
even from her infancy.” 79 Despite the fact that these reference a more individual use of
the Bible for personal devotion, it does demonstrate a culture of Bible reading in the
home.
Direct references to the use of the Scriptures in a familial setting emerge in the
1600s, however, possibly a result of raising literacy rates. John Welsh, an exiled Scottish
pastor who ministered in Huguenot churches, described his family’s pious practices in the
second decade of the seventeenth century: he “read a portion of Scripture” to his family
and then discussed it together.” 80 Jacques Fontaine recounted at length his family’s
worship in the early 1670s, in which the Bible played a central role:
When I was only four years old, I was so taken with hearing my
father read the Scriptures and pray with the family, that l had a
fancy to imitate him, and l called together the servants and my
sisters, and made them kneel down while l prayed. They gave my
father such an account of my proceedings, that he and my mother
became curious to hear me. I would not proceed until they also
knelt down with the rest. My father was much affected by the
earnestness of my manner, and he thought he could discover a
79 Migault, Jean Migault, 56; Migault, Journal de Jean Migault, ou, Malheurs d’une famille protestante du
Poitou, 1682-1689, 50.
80 Young, Life of John Welsh, 360. John Welsh (1568–1622) was a Scottish Presbyterian leader who was
married to Eizabeth, a daughter of John Knox. His was imprisoned by King James VI of Scotland for his
preaching, and in 1606 was exiled to France where he lived, ministered, and preached until his death.
230
germ of piety and talent, which he prayed to God to nourish and
strengthen so as to produce fruit in due season. . . . You must bear
in mind that all my knowledge was derived, from what l could see
for myself, and learn from the Holy Scriptures, which l heard my
father read in the family daily . . . 81
This account presents both domestic Scripture reading as a frequent element of the
devotional routine, as well as the manner in which younger members of the Fontaine
family embraced the tradition.
While the given accounts provide insight into the specific households and – if
taken at face-value – demonstrates regular Bible reading was practiced, one cannot
extrapolate the evidence to prove that this was the custom of some or all Huguenot
homes. In regards to both Psalms and Scripture, the following account of the aftermath
of the Saint Bartholomew’s Day massacre by Natalie Davis is revealing:
So a crowd of Orléans Catholics taunted its victims in 1572:
“Where is your God? Where are your prayers and Psalms? Let
him save you if he can.” Even the dead were made to speak in
Normandy and Provence, where leaves of the Protestant Bible
were stuffed into the mouths and wounds of corpses. “They
preached the truth of their God. Let them call him to their aid.” 82
While the anger of the Catholic masses was passionate, it was not random. Just as
Protestants targeted Catholic worship spaces, the Mass, and monasteries as objects of
wrath, Catholics destroyed Bibles and psalters and symbolically filled the mouths of their
Protestant foes and victims. While these sacred words were certainly part of the public
worship of the Huguenots, it may be that this was also the reaction of enraged neighbors
81 Fontaine, Memoirs of a Huguenot Family, Translated and Compiled from the Original Autobiography of
the Rev. James Fontaine, 40. A similar practice was recounted by Thomas Platter regarding his father,
Felix, a physician from Basel: “Avant le sermon, mon père nous lisait au logis les saintes Ecritures,
ajoutant à cette lecture des exhortations qui remuaient profondément nos jeunes âmes, et je me demandais:
‘Comment se peut-il qu’il y ait des impies? N’ont-ils donc aucune crainte de l’enfer?’” (Félix Platter,
Mémoires de Félix Platter: médecin bâlois, trans. Edouard Fick (Genève: Fick, 1866), 8.).
82 Natalie Zemon Davis, “The Rites of Violence,” in Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight
Essays (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975), 157.
231
that had endured the scandalizing “loud and clear” prayers, Psalms, and Scriptures for far
too long. 83
Sermon Reading and Discussions
Sermons were not purely educational: to know God was to worship God. While
catechism laid the basic foundation of the Christian life, sermons were to further
education, convict, and apply God’s Word to the faithful’s lives. Yet the life of the
sermon was not to cease after it echoed from the walls of the temple. Calvin envisioned
pious families taking up the sermon in their homes. “Let us take care that His word is
better received than it customarily is,” he admonished the Genevans in his sermons on
Jeremiah, “and that we do not come to the sermon merely to say, ‘that’s all old hat to
me!’ but that we return home and meditate on the Word we have heard.” 84 Elsewhere he
asked pointedly, “How often do we remind ourselves of the content of the sermons in
order to benefit from it? How do we talk about it at home?”85 Yet again, the church
building and home were to closely reflect one another, each functioning to strengthen the
spiritual lives of its members.
Unfortunately, there is no descriptive evidence corroborating this practice. The
consistory records as well as memoirs contain no references to this in Geneva or France.
Although few sermons were written down in the sixteenth century, books of sermons
became popular to read in the seventeenth century, especially in the middle decades.
Benedict notes that, “The preoccupation of so much French Protestant writing with
doctrine and its defense may well explain why English works of practical divinity and
83 Félice, Consist. Blois, 16.
84 John Calvin, Sermons on Jeremiah, trans. Blair Reynolds (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990),
Jer. 17:24–27, 233.
85 Wilhelmus H. Th. Moehn, “God Calls Us to His Service”: The Relation Between God and His Audience
in Calvin’s Sermons on Acts (Genève: Librairie Droz, 2001), 204–205.
232
spiritual consolation proved to be so appealing when they were translated. ‘Books written
by Englishmen concerning the way to practice piety are running from hand to hand and
enjoy a remarkable vogue’ [Moïse] Amyraut wrote in 1660.” 86 The problem with
interpreting this evidence, as with all inventories of books, is linking book possession
with their use. Even Benedict recognizes that many individuals inherited books or simply
possessed them as a positive reflection of their social image. 87 Just as with Bibles and
psalters, we must inquire “Were they read, by whom, how often, and how widely?” The
more complex works would have held limited appeal, while more practical compendiums
might have attracted “some readers from further down the social scale.” 88 In the end,
given the many motivations and methods of book acquisition, historians are forced to
acknowledge that possession does not prove reading or comprehension. 89
Religious Book Reading
A final form of domestic piety which emerges from historical sources includes the
reading of religious books, in part leading historians to declare that Protestantism was a
“une heresie du Livre.” 90 Benedict claims that “Beyond simply encouraging psalmsinging and reading the Bible, Calvinism clearly also bred a personal religious culture
that often included direct contact with the writings of important Reformed theologians
86 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 171. Moïse Amyraut (1596-1664) was an important French Protestant
theologian and metaphysician, perhaps most best known for his modifications to Calvinist theology
regarding the nature of Christ's atonement.
87 Ibid., 169, 156–157.
88 Ibid., 171.
89 Ibid., 156–157. For further discussion on this see the excellent chapter in Davis, “Printing,” especially
192. Also reference Ginzburg, The Cheese and the Worms, xx–xxii.
90 Henri Hauser, La naissance du protestantisme, 2nd ed. (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1962),
59.
233
and with major works of church history.” 91 While evidence for this does not surface in
consistory registers, one can find examples such as the wife of Jean Migault who was
known to have frequently read the “Histoire des martirs.” 92 As mentioned previously in
relation to Bible reading, there are several complicating factors related to religious books
and their use. First, as mentioned, literacy rates were low. Second, there was a great
variation in spoken languages throughout France. Despite official efforts at standardizing
the France language in the legal realm (1539) and the slow shift away from local dialects
and toward a national language, vernaculars continued to be used throughout the
kingdom. 93
Book possession also affected families’ ability to attain religious books. Printing
presses did not produce mass quantities of books until the 1550s, a practice that really
expanded in the 1560s. 94 Studies of book ownership have revealed that two thirds of
rural homes in Zurich in the late seventeenth century possessed at least one book –
“usually a Bible, a psalter, a prayer book, or a popular devotional classic” – and by the
mid eighteenth century almost all homes did. Forty-five percent of Genevan homes at
1700 and seventy percent of Reformed households in Metz by the mid seventeenth
century had books. 95 While most Reformed households owned a Bible – in Metz, for
instance, Bibles (mostly complete editions) and psalters were the most popular (in 87 of
91 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 166.
92 Migault, Journal de Jean Migault, ou, Malheurs d’une famille protestante du Poitou, 1682-1689, 50.
93 Mack P. Holt, “The Kingdom of France in the Sixteenth Century,” in Renaissance and Reformation
France 1500-1648, ed. Mack P. Holt (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 11–14; Dewald, “Social
Groups and Cultural Practices,” 54.
94 Philip Benedict, “Settlements: France,” in Handbook of European History 1400-1600: Late Middle
Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, ed. Thomas Brady, Heiko Augustinus Oberman, and James D. Tracy
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 423–425. Nicholls cautions against connecting
printing and literacy too immediately (David J. Nicholls, “The Nature of Popular Heresy in France, 1520–
1542,” The Historical Journal 26, no. 02 (1983): 265–266.).
95 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 516–517.
234
96 inventories) 96 – there were other popular books, such as Du Moulin’s Bouclier de la
foi (1617) and Nouveauté du Papisme (1627), writings by Du Plessis-Mornay and
Drelincourt, and Paul Ferry’s Dernier Désespoir (1618). Next to the Bible and the
psalter, Crespin’s Histoire des Martyrs (1554) was very popular, becoming “iconic
centerpiece of family piety, made to be read aloud around the table.” 97
What is challenging about interpreting the use of books outside of descriptive
evidence is that books functioned in many ways. Families may have inherited religious
books, 98 gained social status from their possession, 99 or used religious books as a
talisman to “protect the family against harm.” 100 As Benedict admits, the “…mere
possession of a book was no guarantee that the owner read it.” 101 Finally, while we must
admit that we cannot know exactly how many families may have engaged in the reading
of these books for religious fortification, the books were clearly significant to their
owners. Furthermore, since there were no ecclesiastical mandates which required this
reading, any use of them would have signaled a personal initiative.
Final Thoughts
If there appears to be one rule that emerges from sources regarding the practice of
piety in Huguenot homes, it is that there is no consistent rule: there was no standardized
religious ritual for Reformed households. While domestic piety is clearly important to
96 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 165.
97 Ibid., 173. Another insightful and valuable book inventory can be found in Mentzer, Blood & Belief,
124–128.
98 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 169.
99 Ibid., 156–157.
100 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, 518.
101 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 156.
235
Calvin and was practiced in some homes, the historical evidence presents a variegated
image of how this might have occurred in homes. Practices varied from household to
household and town to town. Some might have sung Psalms and read Scripture while
others prayed together and discussed the sermon. Given the private nature of the home,
the only windows which give historians a glimpse into family worship is in letters,
memoirs, discipline records. And – problematically – while these sources are valuable,
they likely do not fully reflect the experiences of the illiterate, common people.
While the Huguenot were incredibly efficient and organized in instituting specific
aspects of their churches’ polity and discipline, worship in the home was not such an
effort. It would have taken an incredible amount of resources and policing to ensure that
such familial activities were occurring. The discipline registers reveal the ongoing
tension to have the faithful live Christian public lives, making the dream of a private
piety virtually impossible in a location without civil backing. If the silence of the
consistory records on this matter is any indicator, the churches did not even attempt to
hold their congregants accountable for domestic worship. That being said, it is probable
that some zealous and pious families embraced this call to be holy households. Memoirs
and accounts such as that of the Coligny home likely stimulated some to invigorate their
religious lives through such family piety.
It is also important that this was not an endeavor that the Reformed alone pursued.
Consistent with theories of confessionalization, all branches of the Western Christian
church placed an emphasis on the spiritualization of the family and the home. The
ecclesiastical leadership of the medieval European church did not need to worry about
this, because in reality there was “other” religion to pull the faithful away. In many ways
there was flexibility and room for ambiguity. With the threat of Protestantism co-existing
alongside those following the Roman church, both sides sought to commence a program
of confessionalization which would reach all the way down to the personal level.
236
Protestants began this process of pressing for religious devotion in the homes in
the mid-sixteenth century, but Catholics did not follow until the end of the century. 102 In
part, as Marc Forster argues, this was because family piety was viewed as a Protestant
phenomenon since it originated from Luther’s elevation of the family and the spirituality
of the home, all a corollary of his assault on priests and their honored celibate lifestyle.
Bossy claims that early modern Catholicism viewed these elements as so closely
connected that it was assumed “that household religion was the seed-bed of
subversion.” 103 Additionally, while Protestant pastors embodied and modeled domestic
spirituality in Protestant towns, celibate parish priests provided no such example. 104
Much of the energy of the larger Catholic Church was expended on attacking
Protestantism, and when the Council of Trent addressed marriage – affirming its
sacramental status, restricting clandestine marriages, and reforming the clergy – it failed
to discuss domestic piety or the family. Even when family devotions began to gain
popularity in Catholic circles in the late sixteenth century, it was Jesuits – and not the
ecclesiastical leadership – who led the charge. Jesuits began distributing devotional
literature in the early 1600s, but even after the 1650s, Catholic writers “remained
suspicious of domestic piety.” 105 In contrast to the communal and public nature of
102 Walch estimates that the Catholics lagged behind Protestants by about three decades (Walch, “Prier en
famille,” 12.). This paragraph summarizes much of the material from Marc R. Forster, “Domestic
Devotions and Family Piety in German Catholicism,” in Piety And Family In Early Modern Europe:
Essays In Honour Of Steven Ozment, ed. Marc R. Forster and Benjamin J. Kaplan (Aldershot, England;
Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005), 97–114.
103 John Bossy, “The Counter-Reformation and the People of Catholic Europe,” Past & Present 47, no. 1
(1970): 68.
104 Interestingly, one of the influences that prompted interest in the domestic devotion in Germany was the
cult of the Holy Family. Quite distinct from Protestant examples, the Holy Family served as a model that
emphasized transmitting the faith and submission to parents (Forster, “Domestic Devotions and Family
Piety in German Catholicism,” 108–110.). Often, however, the devotion which was encouraged was
private, rather than oriented toward the family.
105 Ibid., 105.
237
Catholic devotion, the private nature of household worship appeared secretive and
Protestant. It would not be until the eighteenth, and especially the nineteenth, century
that household piety would become a significant element of Catholic devotion.
Therefore, while all confessions embraced some distinctive elements of domestic
piety and mirrored each other in many ways, there were some important confessional
tensions which shaped how practices were perceived and how quickly they spread.
Perhaps scholars’ who have noted the similarity of accounts of both Catholic and
Protestant churches encouraging the lay to read devotional books in their homes for
spiritual renewal, 106 marking out special moments each day for prayers, and providing
religious education in the family setting 107 have overplayed the commonalities.
In addition, scholars have traced the genesis of family worship to various
locations. Todd argues that the domestic spirituality practiced by English Puritans
mirrors the efforts of Catholics – out of their common humanist heritage. 108 Walch finds
the linking of meal times and piety as a sign that Protestant families had incorporated the
medieval habit of doing the canonical “hours;” their routine represented the
modernization and modification of a monastic practice. 109 However, while both theories
have merit of their own, I believe they cannot be applied to the Reformed tradition.
106 Benedict, Faith and Fortunes, 154.
107 Walch, “Prier en famille,” 11–13. Walch describes domestic practices of Catholics: the family of
Barbe Acarie, in the late sixteenth century, who began the day early with a morning prayer, and then the
entire household attended mass; in the afternoon, the family attended Vespers, read the lives of the saints;
in the evening they had a prayer which included an interrogation of their consciences. In the seventeenth
century, Gaston de Renty provided his children some instruction and prayed together each evening after
dinner. Then he gathered the household to examine their consciences and recite a prayer to the Vigin.
Each Saturday – in front of his wife – he quizzed his household on the Gospel reading for the following
week. She also mentions that the abbot Claude Fleury, recounted that his father began having him pray on
his knees at three years old, as well as recounting to him stories of the Old Testament. She claims that
these practices became very common in the seventeenth century.
108 Margo Todd, Christian Humanism and the Puritan Social Order (Cambridge, U.K.; New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1987), chap. 4, 96–117.
109 Walch, “Prier en famille,” 15.
238
These theories would fail to capture the distinctive nature of the Reformed tradition and
its literal hermeneutic of the Scriptures. Although Calvin was undeniably indebted to his
humanist training, his sermons, commentaries, and other writings illustrate his tenacious
reliance upon the Bible and following the models provided therein. From his
understanding of the families of the Old Testament patriarchs to the churches which met
in New Testament homes, Calvin’s notions of the holy household are rooted through and
through in his reading of Scripture. The conception of the ordered home, the educational
home, the pure home, and the pious home all start for Calvin in God’s view and intention
for the family. Calvin makes no reference to figures drawn from humanist wells, and he
would have revolted at the suggestions that he was adopting a practice from the
monasteries he so passionately loathed.
Finally, it is important to note that the Reformed vision of domestic piety differs
substantially from the middle ages. While fourteenth-century preachers admonished
families to practice their faith in their families, 110 the household devotion of the middle
ages was internal, private, and meditation-based. Diana Webb, for instance, demonstrates
that medieval domestic worship was often characterized by individuals engaging in the
private reading of books and prayers and the reciting of Psalms. A bedchamber might be
temporarily converted to an oratory, especially for those who felt called to live a quasimonastic life. Sometimes religious imagery was employed, and even in some cases a
portable altar was brought in to celebrate the mass. The later was more likely if a family
chapel was part of the home, which was only the case for very few: these practices were
almost exclusively practiced by the highest social classes, although it saw some
broadening in the late middle ages. 111 It is important to note that these medieval
110 Ibid., 10.
111 Diana Webb, “Domestic Space and Devotion in the Middle Ages,” in Defining the Holy: Sacred Space
in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ed. Andrew Spicer and Sarah Hamilton (Aldershot, England;
Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005), 27–47. Also reference Jeanne Nuechterlein, “The
Domesticity of Sacred Space in the Fifteenth-Century Netherlands,” in Defining the Holy: Sacred Space in
239
practices possessed no notion of the spiritualized family: they were not oriented toward
the worship and education of the family, the entire family did not participate in these
religious exercises, and family hierarchy was not emphasized. Rather, these were
experiences to extend one’s private devotion.
Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ed. Andrew Spicer and Sarah Hamilton (Aldershot, England;
Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005), 49–79. For more information on Psalms in the middle
ages, see Nancy Van Deusen, The Place of the Psalms in the Intellectual Culture in the Middle Ages
(Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1999).
240
CONCLUSION
This dissertation has identified and described the various individual components
of the idealized godly home in the French Reformed Churches – order, instruction, purity,
and piety – but it has also illuminated how these elements were, in fact, self-reinforcing.
Without instruction regarding God and morality, there could be no foundation and
mandate for God’s order, pure living, or pious practices. Without order, pollution could
not be kept from the home nor could the household members be systematically educated.
Without purity, “havoc” would result, the practices of worship in the home would be
rendered meaningless, and the teaching would be compromised. Without piety, there
would be no proper manifestation of the instruction and the pure space would not be
sanctified. This quadripartite approach could only thrive and transform the home into a
“Little Church of Christ” so long as all four components were present. 1
One of the contributions this study makes is that it demonstrates the centrality of
the family to Reformed churches. While the Reformation has unfortunately, and perhaps
unfairly, been characterized in past scholarship as a revolution which dismantled the
communal and elevated the individual, this study demonstrates that the Reformed
consistories did not view the faithful primarily as discrete individuals; they viewed them
in relation to their familial relations – as mothers/wives, fathers/husbands, brothers,
sisters, children, aunts, uncles, cousins, and so forth. This familial context and web of
1 In Geneva, for example, Karen Spierling asserts that reformers perceived a direct link between ignorance
and “unchristian (and socially disruptive) behavior:” in Geneva, “church and city authorities acted on the
conviction that such misbehavior based on ignorance, when it led an individual to challenge established
authorities, threatened not only the condition of that individual’s soul, but just as importantly, the peace and
survival of the entire Reformed community,” (Karen E. Spierling, “Making Use of God’s Remedies:
Negotiating the Material Care of Children in Reformation Geneva,” The Sixteenth Century Journal 36, no.
3 (2005): 789.). Clearly, Christian homes needed to provide instruction and guidance to ensure the ordered
well-being of society. Also reference Gerald Strauss, Luther’s House of Learning: Indoctrination of the
Young in the German Reformation (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), 255.
241
relationships defined them, their religious roles, and their religious responsibilities. As
such, this project demonstrates the importance of approaching the family as lens for
interpreting sources related to Huguenot history.
For instance, there were a number of strategies employed by the crown against the
Protestants toward the end of their protected existence. One was the dragonnades, a
tactic adopted by the French government in the 1680s leading up to the revocation. This
policy used the forced billeting of military units (dragoons) in Protestant homes as a
method to obtain their abjurations. The intentionally rough and disorderly manner of the
soldiers was a tremendous disturbance to the homes. The “hosts” were required to pay
and feed the soldiers, placing an incredible financial stress on the household. Family
members were often abused and tortured. If and when the family’s financial resources
were exhausted, the soldiers would sell off household items or destroy them. Regardless
of their ability to resist other forms of persecution, families could not endure the
harassment of the dragonnades for long and within months tens of thousands of
“conversions” were recorded. Part of the reason this approach were so effective was
because it struck at the heart of the family. The family sustained the French Calvinists
through the dark times of religious and legal repression. The home functioned as a secret
church and nourished their confessional beliefs when external pressures became too
caustic. However, for the Huguenots to have their homes invaded, domestic schedules
disrupted, pantries emptied, furniture broken, and members harassed was too much to
bear. Most either converted to the Catholic faith or fled. 2 This assault on the family
succeeded where even the executions, wars, and massacres had failed.
2 For further reading on the dragonnades, reference Jean Migault, Journal de Jean Migault, ou, Malheurs
d’une famille protestante du Poitou, 1682-1689, ed. Yves Krumenacker (Paris: Les Editions de Paris,
1995), 27–45; Marianne Carbonnier-Burkard and Patrick Cabanel, Une histoire des protestants en France:
XVIe-XXe siècle (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1998); Henri Dubief and Jacques Poujol, La France
protestante: histoire et lieux de mémoire (Paris: Les Editions de Paris, 1996); Yves Krumenacker, “Les
dragonnades du Poitou: leur écho dans les mémoires,” BSHPF 131, no. 3 (1985): 405–422; L. L. Bernard,
“Foucault, Louvois, and the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes,” Church History 25, no. 1 (1956): 27–40;
Jacqueline Gratton, “The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes and the Role of the Intendants in the
242
Another example is the removal of Protestant children from their homes. Despite
prohibitions by the Edict of Nantes (1598), 3 there were many cases of children being
kidnapped illegally or removed from their homes through legal means. Beginning in the
early seventeenth century and lasting into the mid-eighteenth century, children were
abducted from their homes and placed in Catholic homes so they could be raised and
educated in the Catholic faith. 4 In one heart-breaking case from the Albenc consistory,
for example, Magdelaine Bergerand nearly lost contact with her three daughters. 5
Around Christmas of 1674, Bergerand appealed to the consistory for assistance.
Apparently, her husband had died, so she had entrusted the children to her widow’s
parents (Samuel and Susanne) while she worked in Lyon as a servant. However, soon
after leaving, she had heard that Samuel had abjured the Reformed faith, moved to
another city to work, and had placed the children in the hands of a Catholic woman so
that they would “follow the perversion of the religion” of their grandfather. The
consistory was certain that great pressure was being placed on the three girls to convert
and worked assiduously to get them restored to their mother. A legal battle ensued
Dragonnades,” French History 25, no. 2 (2011): 164–187; Jacques Fontaine, Memoirs of a Huguenot
Family, Translated and Compiled from the Original Autobiography of the Rev. James Fontaine, trans. Ann
Maury (New York: George P. Putnam, 1853), 115.
3 “We also forbid all our subjects, of whatever quality and condition, from carrying off by force or
persuasion, against the will of their parents, the children of the said religion, in order to cause them to be
baptized or confirmed in the Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church; and the same is forbidden to those of
the said religion called Reformed, upon penalty of being punished with especial severity . . .” (Edict of
Nantes, Art. XVIII).
4 This was part of a larger progressive push. In 1665, boys as young as fourteen and girls as young as
twelve could convert to Catholicism without their parents’ permission, and parents could not object. The
following year, Reformed churches were forbidden from censuring their congregants for sending their
children to Catholic schools. It was also stipulated that if the Catholic father in a mixed marriage died, the
child would be automatically moved to a Catholic home. For more on this, see Alain Jobin, “Un drame
familial en France sous l’Ancien Régime: l’enlèvement des enfants Huguenots,” in Famille et spiritualité
protestante, ed. Alain Joblin and Jacques Sys (Arras, France: Artois Presses Université, 2006), 23–34.
5 François Francillon, Livre des délibérations de l’Eglise réformée de l’Albenc (1606-1682). Edition du
manuscrit conservé à la Bibliothèque d’Etude et d’Information Fonds Dauphinois. Grenoble Cote R 9723
(Paris: Honoré Champion, 1998), 244–266.
243
between the guardians of the girls and the church, and it was only three months later that
the courts decided in favor of their mother. The entry in the consistory upon receiving
the news is telling:
Now this happy success was enough to know that it is to God alone
who we should give the glory of this great consolation to his
church and to this poor mother, who has put the innocence of these
small children under her protection, blessed our care, and guided
the sovereign powers against the annexation of the young children
[inférieures], in order to remove them from the abyss where the
powers [ces dernières] wanted to plunge them. 6
The church of Albenc interpreted the case of these children in terms of a great cosmic
struggle for the salvation of their children’s souls; despite the fact that the political power
sought to destroy them by plunging them into “the abyss,” God rescued them. Just as
the dragonnades were a political and religious scheme to cripple the Huguenots by
targeting their families, this policy too struck at the heart of the family and family piety.
Huguenot persistence was predicated upon the ability for the family to pass on their faith
to their children; as their children were removed, this jeopardized its very survival. 7
Beyond demonstrating that the family was a critical part of the Huguenots’ selfidentity and was targeted by Catholics, this research has also demonstrated the broad
religious understanding of the “holy household.” While some Huguenot families prayed,
sang, read religious books, and discussed sermons together, there was much more to a
godly family than simply conducting domestic worship. Proper order had to be
demonstrated by the manner in which members embraced the divine hierarchy and the
appropriate responsibilities associated with their positions. Parents had to
conscientiously shape the religious development of their children by use of the catechism,
6 Ibid., 266.
7 For additional information, see Paul de Félice, La Réforme en Blaisois, documents inédits. Registre du
consistoire (1665-1677), Réimpression de l'édition d'Orléans: H. Herluison, 1885 (Marseille: Lafitte, 1979),
14, art. 10. And John Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata: Or, The Acts, Decisions, Decrees, and
Canons of Those Famous National Councils of the Reformed Churches in France, 2 Vols. (London: T.
Parkhurst and J. Robinson, 1692), cxi, sec. XXVII.
244
as well as ensure that their children attended catechism and sermons. Finally, the pious
family devoted the home to God as sacred space by guarding over the moral purity of the
home; they lived wholesome lives and carefully prevented immoral individuals from
polluting their domestic space. In reality, these elements often conflicted with other
cultural norms and traditional sociability and proved difficult for the church to instill in
its members.
While this project has focused on the similarities between France and Geneva in
order to illuminate the religious conception of the family, there is one theme which
appears frequently in the French context but is not found as strongly in the Genevan.
Because of their own persecuted, minority position, the Huguenots clearly identified their
own experience with the Christian martyr tradition stretching back to the early church
and the crucified Jesus. While there were atrocities committed by both confessions, the
Saint Bartholomew’s Day massacre was a powerful symbolic episode for the Huguenots,
solidifying their collective identity as martyrs. They viewed their path as indelibly linked
with the primitive church, and this narrative provided courage and strength. It is little
wonder that next to the Bible and psalter, Crespin’s Book of Martyrs was one of the
books most frequently found in Huguenots homes. 8 The consistory records from Le
Mans note that the church was studying the histories of the Bible; not surprisingly,
the Acts of the Apostles was the text identified. 9 Their own experience of martyrdom
8 Philip Benedict, The Faith and Fortunes of France’s Huguenots, 1600-85 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001),
188. Jean Migault claimed that his wife was very familiar with this work (Migault, Journal de Jean
Migault, ou, Malheurs d’une famille protestante du Poitou, 1682-1689, 50.).
9 MM. Anjubault and H. Chardon, eds., “Papier et registre du Consistoire de l’Église du Mans, réformée
selon l’Évangile, 1560–61 (1561–62 nouveau style),” in Recueil de pièces inédites pour servir à l’histoire
de la Réforme et de la Ligue dans le Maine, vol. 1 (Le Mans: Ed. Monnoyer, 1867), 27 November 1561,
43.
245
served not only as de facto proof of their identity as the True Church, but it also validated
their salvation in the face of competing confessions, persecution, and frequent loss. 10
Jacques Fontaine’s memoire offers a clear illustration of this martyr identity. It
opens with Jacques quoting Psalm 78:1-7 to his children, a passage that emphasizes the
need to pass on to the next generation the stories of old and the knowledge of God. He
then encouraged his children to take strength in the stories of their ancestors, fellow
Huguenots who suffered as martyrs, whose massacred infants were blessed because they
“saw the glory of heaven before daylight.” 11 He exclaimed,
Continue faithful and zealous in the service of God who has so
often preserved, and since we are descendants of the martyrs and
part of our blood is already crowned with glory, that which flows
in our veins is always ready to get out the first time it pleases God
to call us the honor of martyrdom.
Martyrdom, he asserted, was a part of their religious heritage both because their ancestors
died for the faith and also because they too might be killed because of their confession.
He continued by explaining what this heritage demanded of them:
Also give such instructions to your children that they have God's
love for the first principle of all their actions. Inspire them from
10 Benedict describes how this shaped the Huguenot understanding of their salvation vis-à-vis other
confessions: “Still, inward religious life seems to have been cultivated less intensely among French
Protestants and to have been centered far more resolutely on the Bible than was the case in within German
Lutheranism. Those great questions that haunted so many raised within the English tradition – ‘how can I
know if I am among the elect?’, ‘what are the inward signs of saving grace?’ – simply do not seem to have
much preoccupied the Huguenots. As a religious minority under constant pressure from would-be
convertisseurs, their great test lay in whether or not they remained faithful to their confession. The popular
writings of their ministers were those that reinforced them in this struggle,” Benedict, Faith and Fortunes,
189.
11 Jacques Fontaine, Mémoires d’une famille Huguenote: victime de la révocation de l’édit de Nantes
(Toulouse: Société Livres Religieux, 1877), 18. “I would fain hope that the pious examples of those from
whom we are descended, may warm your hearts and influence your lives. l hope you will resolve to
dedicate yourselves, wholly and unreservedly, to the service of that God whom they worshipped at the risk
of their lives, and that you, and those who come after you, will be steadfast in the profession of that pure
reformed religion, for which they endured, with unshaken constancy, the most severe trials. You cannot fail
to notice, in the course of their lives, the watchful hand of God's Providence, supporting and preserving
them through hardship and suffering,” Fontaine, Memoirs of a Huguenot Family, Translated and Compiled
from the Original Autobiography of the Rev. James Fontaine, 14; Fontaine, Mémoires d’une famille
Huguenote, 13. Also see Ibid., 16–19.
246
their infancy, the same feelings you’ll find that almost all
descendants of those glorious martyrs have been to the pure
religion, so they do not degenerate this principle of grace, the great
and true nobility who reigned in the hearts of all your predecessors
and their families. The goodness of God, whose providence
ordinarily reserves its favors to the children of those who give their
blood in his service. 12
Martyrdom had become a principal interpretive lens. Rather than interpreting their brutal
treatment as a sign of God’s wrath against them or their own failure to recognize Rome as
the head of the True Church, their circumstances solidified their identity as martyrs dying
for a righteous cause. 13
In addition, this memoire reveals the critical role that families played in this
martyr tradition. The earliest French churches began meeting in the 1550s in secret in
12 Fontaine, Mémoires d’une famille Huguenote, 18. Another rich passage is included later in the memoire:
“Consider this cloud of examples you see in your family and the maternal and paternal side: of it, you see
the half that gave up everything for the love of Christ and the Gospel on the paternal side, one great-great
grandfather and his wife who suffered martyrdom, a great-grandfather and his two brothers who, as
children, become strangers even in their homeland, and are reduced to misery for the last occupation of the
truth and a grandfather who advanced the glory of God with his whole heart and with all his strength, and if
it has not suffered martyrdom in fact, was all the time in his life by the provision of his heart, and ten
families that had left him after eight have shown that they prefer the peace of God and their conscience
above all they had the world by leaving their homeland . . . nay, leaving? fleeing and exposing themselves
to many dangers to escape and steal their property, their parents and friends become strangers and pilgrims
throughout the earth, and have never been ashamed of any work, some low, servile and painful it was,
provided he was honest and fair, for Leques, they could earn a living and not depend on the charity of
strangers, though abundant data and a good heart and good grace. Conveyed, my dear children, these holy
and glorious feeling to your descendants, and let love and fear of God in inamissible inheritance, affected
father to son until the end of the world. Observe also what posterity as the fair continues and augments the
earth by the number of descendants of those few people you keep your home” (Ibid., 59–60).
13 Benedict even connects this perspective to the naming of the French Reformed children. In response to
the question of why Huguenots chose Old Testament names for their children, he argues that “Significantly,
the percentage of Old Testament names among the Protestant children in Rouen is over 20 per cent higher
than the percentage of such names bestowed on infants in Geneva in this period, a disparity which reflects
the difference between a minority Reformed congregation whose members had all joined out of conviction
and a community where the faith was imposed on all by law. It also seems revealing that of all the
prominent figures in the Old Testament, the ones after whom the Calvinists most frequently named their
children - Abraham, Isaac, and Daniel - were individuals whose lives represented dramas of obedience to
God's will and of suffering for that obedience. However militant the actions of the Huguenots, it was not
the warrior-kings or the lawgivers to whom they felt the closest bond. In their own eyes they were servants
of God's will whose faith was being constantly tested,” Philip Benedict, Rouen During the Wars of Religion
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 106.
247
their homes, 14 just as the earliest Christians 1500 years before had been forced to hide in
their homes and nurture their faith in secret. 15 As Huguenot church buildings were
destroyed, the church hierarchy scattered, massacres were carried out, and legal
repression was enacted, it again was families that would be the conveyers of the Christian
faith. Homes became churches, fathers became pastors, and the elect persevered in the
mist of oppression.
This same mythology which shaped their identity and tied their own experiences
to that of the primitive church in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries would be
reaffirmed throughout history. With the Revocation in 1685, the full weight of the
monarchy fell upon the French Calvinists. These years of the Désert, as it was called,
was an era when most of the pastors were driven out of France, many others abjured or
fled, and the remaining church was driven underground. In addition to meeting in remote
places out in the open (because all Huguenot churches were destroyed), homes nurtured
the piety of the faithful. 16 During this period, collections of prayers were specifically
designed and published for those in France, such as those of Benedict Pictet (1708, 1725)
and the Liturgie pour les protestans de France ou prières pour les familles des fidè les
privés de l'exercice public de leur religion (1758). 17 This same appeal to martyrdom and
the home as worship space continues well into the nineteenth century. 18
14 Philip Benedict and Virginia Reinburg, “Religion and the Sacred,” in Renaissance and Reformation
France, 1500-1648, ed. Mack P. Holt (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 140.
15 Interestingly, just as the secrecy of the meetings of these early Christians gave rise to rumors of erotic
orgies, so too did the Catholics circulate salacious stories of the clandestine meetings of their co-religionists
in France (Benedict, Rouen, 65.).
16 For examples of how Protestants during this period au Désert would be treated if caught, see Raymond
A. Mentzer, Blood & Belief: Family Survival and Confessional Identity among the Provincial Huguenot
Nobility (West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1994), 16–17.
17 Marianne Carbonnier-Burkard, “La pratique réformée du culte de famille,” La vie spirituelle 715, no.
mai-juin (1995): 313.
18 In particular, reference Culte de La Famille, n.d., 1–2.: “You've often admired, is it not true, the
Protestants of the sixteenth century? It is a fact that the annals of our country have no more beautiful pages
248
This narrative had important significance for the French that was not necessarily
true for Genevans. Geneva experienced tumultuous political periods, but the magistrates
were still able to rule the city as an autonomous state and enact the Reformation in
concert with the ecclesiastical leadership. The Huguenots’ existence, despite moments of
triumph, was one defined by tenuousness, vulnerability, and persecution. They were
always an unwelcomed minority presence. Due to their context and accompanying
narrative of martyrdom, therefore, their understanding of the family took on a
significance that did not exist in Geneva. 19
Finally, it is important to restate that the process of creating these godly families
was never fully realized. The decentralized nature of the French Reformed Churches led
to variation in practice in the implementation of holy household. Many of the records
simply do not have the span required to track congregations and their changes over the
than those in which we trace the history of that glorious phalanx heroes, martyrs and saints who have
passed through many trials and persecutions, the fire of faith: those times when morals were simple and
austere, where faith knew how to inspire the most admirable devotion. It is a pure and invigorating breath
of air, like in the high peaks. One will regain strength through contact with these great characters, with this
piety permeated by the Bible, with these manly virtues which made our fathers an incomparable elite and
the true founders of modern freedom. But we should not limit ourselves to admiring them, we must strive
to emulate their wholesome and strong piety, and we will succeed if we know to draw from and nourish our
religious life by the same sources where they drew from and nurtured them. Well, you know what has been
one of these sources? It is family worship, whose custom was common among the Protestants of the past.”
This booklet later declares, “Our fathers affirmed their faith! They confronted torture and death to be
faithful to their religion; you, their children, might be quite unworthy of them, quite degenerate, to not dare
to confront it…why?” (Ibid., 18.).
19 For more research on this martyr identity, see the work of Nikki Shepardson (Nikki Shepardson, “‘Le
Zèle Ardent’: The Rhetoric of Martyrdom and the Huguenot Community in Reformation France, 15201570” (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 2001); Nikki
Shepardson, “The Rhetoric of Martyrdom and the Anti-Nicodemite Discourses in France, 1550-1570,”
Renaissance & Reformation/Renaissance Et Reforme 27, no. 3 (June 2003): 37–61; Nikki Shepardson,
“Gender and the Rhetoric of Martyrdom in Jean Crespin’s ‘Histoire Des Vrays Tesmoins’,” The Sixteenth
Century Journal 35, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 155–174.) as well as Luc Racaut, “Religious Polemic and
Huguenot self-perception and identity, 1554-1619,” in Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 15591685, ed. Raymond A. Mentzer and Andrew Spicer (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2002),
29–43; David Nicholls, “The Theatre of Martyrdom in the French Reformation,” Past & Present 121
(November 1988): 49–73; Donald R. Kelley, “Martyrs, Myths, and the Massacre: The Background of St.
Bartholomew,” The American Historical Review 77, no. 5 (December 1972): 1323–1342; Brad S. Gregory,
Salvation at Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1999).
249
years. The records do reveal that this process was constantly negotiated, and that
Huguenots used the means at their disposal to achieve their own ends. Sometimes, they
refused to appear. At other times, they refused to comply. And occasionally, individuals
such as Matieu Guesdon used words or concepts shaped by the Reformation against the
very ones in power. In 1564 Guesdon was summoned by the Saint-Gervais consistory.
Evidently it was having problems getting him to bring his wife to church and to appear
when summoned. Additionally, the consistory was disturbed that he had been using
“such responses as ‘unless the Bible commands him, he will not do it,’” and it warned
him to stop using these. Just as Guesdon creatively resisted the demands of the
consistory by couching his opposition in terms of sola scriptura, other congregants
appeared to embrace the Reformation while challenging its enforcers. 20
While the city council of Geneva certainly placed restrictions on Calvin and the
consistory, the Reformation in Geneva enjoyed the support of a magisterially-imposed
reform. This provided the backing of God’s “other arm” in case of a particularly resistant
individual. In France, however, this was clearly not the case. Huguenot churches were
forced to use their use their powers of admonition, sanctions, and excommunication far
more diplomatically. Part of this arrangement demanded that the consistories negotiate,
recognize when to press and when to give in the interest of their goals. This is no less
true of the reformation of the family, a process which the consistory tried to change its
families into “Little Churches” while only possessing spiritual sanctions as tools for
correction. While Huguenot families may not have reflected the ideal that Calvin and the
Reformed churches envisioned, there is no doubt that the family, the family culture of the
20 Registre du consistoire de Saint-Gervais (Archives Nationales (Paris), 1564), fo. 949v, 3 December
1564. In a similar case, a student in Nimes, Jean Garragues, was summoned to the consistory for allegedly
impregnating his servant. He responded: “Did [the minister] have authority in Scripture to ask him to that
question, and he should first prove whether the minister had the authority to pardon him for his sins, or
God. If it was he [the minister], then he would confess to him, and if it was God, he must confess to God
and not to men,” (Allan Tulchin, That Men Would Praise the Lord : The Triumph of Protestantism in
Nimes, 1530-1570 (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 125.).
250
home, and the conceptions of the home were impacted by these efforts, making the
“Huguenot family” an important product of the Reformation.
251
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Manuscript Sources
Auzière, Louis. “Registres du consistoire de l’église réformée de Nîmes, Tome 1, 15611563, Copié sur l’original déposé a la Bibliotheque nationale, (Fonds français N°
8666),” 1874.
Mailhet, André, ed. Eglises réformées du Dauphiné: recueil de documents copiés sur les
originaux et augmenté d’introductions, de notes, de facsimilés et de quelques
documents originaux (MS 655/1-6). 5 vols. BPF, n.d.
Registre du Consistoire de l’église d’Archiac (Charente-Inférieure), 1600-1637.
Bibliothèque de la Société de l’Histoire du Protestantisme Français (Paris), n.d.
Registre du consistoire de Saint-Gervais. Archives Nationales (Paris), 1564.
Printed Primary Sources including Modern Collections
Anjubault, MM., and H. Chardon, eds. “Papier et registre du Consistoire de l’Église du
Mans, réformée selon l’Évangile, 1560–61 (1561–62 nouveau style).” In Recueil
de pièces inédites pour servir à l’histoire de la Réforme et de la Ligue dans le
Maine. Vol. 1. Le Mans: Ed. Monnoyer, 1867.
Aymon, Jean. Tous les synodes nationaux des Églises réformées de France. 2 Vols. The
Hague: Chez Charles Delo, sur le Cingel á l’Esperance, 1710.
Bodin, Jean. On Sovereignty: Six Books Of The Commonwealth. Lexington, KY: Seven
Treasures Publications, 2009.
Calvin, John. “Appendix to the Tract on the True Method of Reforming the Church: In
Which Calvin Refutes the Censure of an Anonymous Printer on the Sanctification
of Infants and Baptism by Women.” In Tracts and Treatises in Defense of the
Reformed Faith, Volume 3, edited by Thomas F. Torrance, translated by Henry
Beveridge. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958.
———. “Articles Concerning the Organization of the Church and of Worship at Geneva
Proposed by the Ministers at the Council (1537).” In Calvin: Theological
Treatises, translated and edited by J. K. S. Reid, 47–55. Library of Christian
Classics 22. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.
———. Calvin: Commentaries. Translated by Joseph Haroutunian and Louise Pettibone
Smith. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1958.
———. Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion. Edited by John T. McNeill.
Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960.
———. Calvin’s Tracts, Containing Treatises on the Sacraments: Catechism of the
Church of Geneva, Forms of Prayer, and Confessions of Faith. Edited by Henry
Beveridge. Vol. 2. Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society, 1849.
———. “Catechism of the Church of Geneva (1545).” In Calvin: Theological Treatises,
translated and edited by J. K. S. Reid, 88–139. Library of Christian Classics 22.
Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.
———. Commentaries on the Book of Joshua. Translated by Henry Beveridge. Calvin’s
Commentaries 4. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
252
———. Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles. Translated by John Owen. Calvin’s
Commentaries 22. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans. Translated by
John Owen. Calvin’s Commentaries 19. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
———. Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Philippians, Colossians,
and Thessalonians. Translated by John Pringle. Calvin’s Commentaries 21. Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. Translated by
William Pringle. Calvin’s Commentaries 21. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
House, 1993.
———. Commentaries on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis. Translated by John
King. 2 vols. Calvin’s Commentaries 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1996.
———. Commentaries on the Four Last Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a
Harmony, Volume 1. Translated by Charles William Bingham. Calvin’s
Commentaries 2. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentaries on the Four Last Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a
Harmony, Volume 2. Translated by Charles William Bingham. Calvin’s
Commentaries 2. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentaries on the Four Last Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a
Harmony, Volume 3. Translated by Charles William Bingham. Calvin’s
Commentaries 3. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentaries on the Four Last Books of Moses Arranged in the Form of a
Harmony, Volume 4. Translated by Charles William Bingham. Calvin’s
Commentaries 3. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 1. Translated by James Anderson.
Calvin’s Commentaries 4. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 2. Translated by James Anderson.
Calvin’s Commentaries 5. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 3. Translated by James Anderson.
Calvin’s Commentaries 6. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians. Translated
by John Pringle. Calvin’s Commentaries 20. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
House, 1996.
———. Commentary on the Gospel According to John, Volume 1. Translated by William
Pringle. Calvin’s Commentaries 17. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentary on the Gospel According to John, Volume 2. Translated by William
Pringle. Calvin’s Commentaries 18. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles, Volume 1. Edited by Henry
Beveridge. Translated by Christopher Fetherstone. 2 vols. Calvin’s Commentaries
18. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
———. Commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles, Volume 2. Edited by Henry
Beveridge. Translated by Christopher Fetherstone. 2 vols. Calvin’s Commentaries
19. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996.
253
———. “Draft Ecclesiastical Ordinances (1541).” In Calvin: Theological Treatises,
translated and edited by J. K. S. Reid, 56–72. Library of Christian Classics 22.
Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.
———. Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1536 Edition. Translated by Ford Lewis
Battles. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1986.
———. Instruction in Faith (1537). Edited by Paul Traugott Fuhrmann. Louisville, KY:
Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992.
———. Ioannis Calvini Opera Quae Supersunt Omnia. Edited by Wilhelm Baum,
Edward Cunitz, and Edward Reuss. 59 vols. Brunsvigae: Apud C.A. Schwetschke
et filium, 1863.
———. John Calvin’s Sermons on the Ten Commandments. Translated by Benjamin W.
Farley. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1980.
———. Lettres de Jean Calvin, recueillies pour la première fois et publiées d’après les
manuscrits originaux: lettres françaises, 1555–1564. Edited by Jules Bonnet. Vol.
2. Paris: Librairie de Ch. Meyrueis, 1854.
———. Men, Women and Order in the Church: Three Sermons. Translated by Seth
Skolnitsky. Dallas, TX: Presbyterian Heritage Publications, 1992.
———. “On Shunning the Unlawful Rites of the Ungodly and Preserving the Purity of
the Christian Religion.” In Tracts and Treatises in Defense of the Reformed Faith,
Volume 3, edited by Thomas F. Torrance, translated by Henry Beveridge, 359–
411. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958.
———. Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 4. Edited by Henry
Beveridge and Jules Bonnet. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983.
———. Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 5. Edited by Henry
Beveridge and Jules Bonnet. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983.
———. Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 6. Edited by Henry
Beveridge and Jules Bonnet. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983.
———. Selected Works of John Calvin: Tracts and Letters, Volume 7. Edited by Henry
Beveridge and Jules Bonnet. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983.
———. Sermons of M. Iohn Caluine Vpon the Epistle of Saincte Paule to the Galathians.
Translated by Arthur Golding. Early English Books Online. London: By [Henrie
Bynneman, for] Lucas Harison and George Bishop, 1574.
———. Sermons on 2 Samuel: Chapters 1–13. Translated by Douglas Kelly. Carlisle,
PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1992.
———. Sermons on Galatians. Translated by Kathy Childress. Edinburgh: Banner of
Truth Trust, 1997.
———. Sermons on Jeremiah. Translated by Blair Reynolds. Lewiston, NY: Edwin
Mellen Press, 1990.
———. Sermons on Micah. Translated by Blair Reynolds. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen
Press, 1990.
———. Sermons on the Epistle to the Ephesians. London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1973.
———. Sermons sur les livres de Jérémie et des Lamentations. Edited by Rodolphe
Peter. Supplementa Calviniana 6. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verl. des
Erziehungsvereins, 1971.
254
———. “The Form of Prayers and Songs of the Church, 1542: Letter to the Reader.”
Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Calvin Theological Journal 15, no. 2 (1980):
160–165.
———. The Sermons of M. Iohn Calvin upon the Fifth Booke of Moses called
Deuternomie: faithfully gathered word for word as he preached them in open
Pulpet: Together with a preface of the Ministers of the Church of Geneva, and an
admonishment made by the Deacons there. Also there are annexed two profitable
Tables, the one containing the chiefe matters; the other the places of Scripture
herein alledged. Translated by Arthur Golding. At London: Printed by Henry
Middleton for Iohn Harison, 1583.
———. Tracts and Treatises in Defense of the Reformed Faith, Volume 3. Edited by
Thomas F. Torrance. Translated by Henry Beveridge. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958.
———. Tracts and Treatises on the Doctrine and Worship of the Church, Volume 2.
Translated by Henry Beveridge. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1958.
———. Tracts and Treatises on the Reformation of the Church, Volume 1. Edited by
Thomas F. Torrance. Translated by Henry Beveridge. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958.
CLSNERE, Commission de Liturgie du Synode National des Eglises Réformées
Evangéliques -. Le Culte de La Famille Chrétienne, Méditations & Prières.
Toulouse: Le Cateau, E. Roland, & Delacroix, 1907.
Cochrane, Arthur C., ed. Reformed Confessions of the 16th Century. Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1966.
Coligny, Gaspar de, and François Hotman. La vie de Messire Gaspar de Colligny,
seigneur de Chastillon, admiral de France: a laquelle sont adjoustés ses
Mémoires sur ce qui se passa au siège de S. Quentin. Originally <i>Vita
Colinii</i> (1575). Leyde: Chez Bonaventure & Abraham Elzevier, 1643.
Cramer-Audeoud, Louis-Gabriel. Du culte domestique. Genève: Chez les principaux
libraires, 1824.
Culte de La Famille, n.d.
Du Moulin, Pierre. “À mes fils Pierre, Louis & Cyrus Du Moulin.” In Huictieme Decades
de Sermons. Genève: Pierre Chouët, 1653.
Félice, Paul de. La Réforme en Blaisois, documents inédits. Registre du consistoire
(1665-1677). Réimpression de l'édition d'Orléans: H. Herluison, 1885. Marseille:
Lafitte, 1979.
Focquembergues, Jean de. Le Voyage de Bethel ou sont representez les devoirs de l’Ame
fidèle…avec des prieres et des meditations. Paris, 1670.
Fontaine, Jacques. Mémoires d’une famille Huguenote: victime de la révocation de l’édit
de Nantes. Toulouse: Société Livres Religieux, 1877.
———. Memoirs of a Huguenot Family, Translated and Compiled from the Original
Autobiography of the Rev. James Fontaine. Translated by Ann Maury. New York:
George P. Putnam, 1853.
Francillon, François. Livre des délibérations de l’Eglise réformée de l’Albenc (16061682). Edition du manuscrit conservé à la Bibliothèque d’Etude et d’Information
Fonds Dauphinois. Grenoble Cote R 9723. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1998.
255
Kingdon, Robert M., Thomas A. Lambert, M. Wallace McDonald, Isabella M. Watt, and
Jeffrey R. Watt, eds. Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin,
Tome V (20 février 1550 - 5 février 1551). Genève: Librairie Droz, 2010.
Kingdon, Robert M., Thomas A. Lambert, and Isabella M. Watt, eds. The Registers of the
Consistory of Geneva in the Time of Calvin, Volume 1: 1542-1544. Grand Rapids,
MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002.
Knox, John. History of the Reformation in Scotland. Edited by W. C. Dickinson. New
York: Philosophical Library, 1950.
———. The Works of John Knox. Edited by David Laing. Edinburgh: Johnston and
Hunter, 1855.
Lambert, Thomas A., M. Wallace McDonald, Isabella M. Watt, and Robert M. Kingdon,
eds. Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin, Tome II (1545–
1546). Genève: Librairie Droz, 2001.
Lambert, Thomas A., Isabella M. Watt, Robert M. Kingdon, and Jeffrey R. Watt, eds.
Registres du Consistoire de Genève au temps de Calvin, Tome I (1542–1544).
Genève: Librairie Droz, 1996.
Leroux, Alfred, Emile Molinier, and Antoine Thomas, eds. “Extraits du premier registre
consistorial de Rochechouart, 1596-1635.” In Documents historiques bas-latins,
provençaux et français concernant principalement la Marche et le Limousin,
2:63–132. Limoges: Ducourtieux, 1883.
Levade, David. Liturgie de famille, ou Recueil de prières pour servir au culte domestique
et à l’instruction religieuse des familles. Valence: J. Marc Aurel, 1846.
Luther, Martin. “Small Catechism.” In The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church, translated by Theodore G Tappert, 338–356.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959.
Méjan, François. Discipline de l’Église réformée de France annotée et précédée d’une
introduction historique. Paris: Éditions “Je sers,” 1947.
Merle d’Aubigné, Jean-Henri. Le culte domestique: sermon sur ces paroles du livre de
Joshue, chapitre 24, verset 15. Paris: Chez Henry Servier, 1827.
Migault, Jean. Jean Migault, or, The trials of a French Protestant family during the
period of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter,
1852.
———. Journal de Jean Migault, ou, Malheurs d’une famille protestante du Poitou,
1682-1689. Edited by Yves Krumenacker. Paris: Les Editions de Paris, 1995.
Mitchell, Alexander Ferrier. Catechisms of the Second Reformation. London: James
Nisbet, and Co., 1886.
Mornay, Charlotte Arbaleste de. A Huguenot Family in the XVI Century: The Memoirs of
Philippe de Mornay, sieur du Plessis Marly, written by his wife. Translated by
Lucy Crump. London, Routledge; New York, E. P. Dutton & Co., 1926.
Moulinié, Charles. Sermons sur l’importance et le devoir du culte domestique. Genève:
J.J. Luc Sestié, 1827.
Pastor, Daniel. Le manuel du vray Chrestien, opposé au diurnal du sieur Jean Balcet,
enseignant la maniere de la droite invocation, & du pur service de Dieu: et
contenant, la Decision claire, & solide des principales controverses de theologie,
agitées ce temps. Genève: Jean Gautier & Pierre Molard, 1652.
———. Prière Du Soir Pour L’usage Des Familles et Assemblées Chrestiennes, n.d.
256
Platter, Félix. Mémoires de Félix Platter: médecin bâlois. Translated by Edouard Fick.
Genève: Fick, 1866.
Quick, John. Synodicon in Gallia Reformata: Or, The Acts, Decisions, Decrees, and
Canons of Those Famous National Councils of the Reformed Churches in France.
2 Vols. London: T. Parkhurst and J. Robinson, 1692.
Soman, Alfred, and Elisabeth Labrousse. “Le registre consistorial de Coutras, 1582–
1584.” BSHPF 126 (1980): 193–228.
Toussain, Daniel. The Exercise of the Faithfull Soule: That Is to Say, Prayers and
Meditations for One to Comfort Himselfe in All Maner of Afflictions, and
Specially to Strengthen Himselfe in Faith: Set in Order According to the Articles
of Our Faith. Translated by Ferdenando Filding. London: Henrie Middleton for
Henrie Denham, 1583.
Valette, Jean, ed. “Les actes du consistoire de l’Eglise réformée de Mussidan de 1593 à
1599.” Bulletin de la Société Historique et Archéologique du Périgord CXV
(1988): 181–191.
Viret, Pierre. Instruction Chrétienne, Tome deuxième. Edited by Arthur-Louis Hofer.
Lausanne; Paris: L’Age d’Homme, 2009.
———. Instruction Chrétienne, Tome Premier. Edited by Arthur-Louis Hofer. Lausanne;
Paris: L’Age d’Homme, 2004.
Secondary Sources
Ariès, Philippe. Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1962.
———. L’Enfant et la vie familiale sous l’Ancien Régime. Paris: Le Seuil, 1973.
Aries, Philippe, and Georges Duby. A History of Private Life, Volume III: Passions of the
Renaissance. Edited by Roger Chartier and Arthur Goldhammer. Cambridge,
MA; London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1989.
Asselt, Willem J. van, Paul van Geest, and Daniela Müller, eds. Iconoclasm and
Iconoclash: Struggle for Religious Identity. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2007.
Baldwin, Claude-Marie. “Marriage in Calvin’s Sermons.” In Calviniana: Ideas and
Influence of Jean Calvin, edited by Robert V. Schnucker, 121–129. Kirksville,
MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1988.
Baumgartner, Frederic J. France in the Sixteenth Century. New York: St. Martin’s Press,
1995.
Beik, William. A Social and Cultural History of Early Modern France. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Bels, Pierre. Le Mariage des Protestants Français jusqu’en 1685, fondements doctrinaux
et pratique juridique. Paris: Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1968.
Benedict, Philip. “Calvinism as Culture?: Preliminary Remarks on Calvinism and the
Visual Arts.” In Seeing Beyond the Word: Visual Arts and the Calvinist Tradition,
edited by Paul Corby Finney, 19–45. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1999.
———. Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism. New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press, 2002.
257
———. “Confessionalization in France? Critical Reflections and New Evidence.” In
Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, edited by Raymond A.
Mentzer and Andrew Spicer, 44–61. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University
Press, 2002.
———. Rouen During the Wars of Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1981.
———. “Settlements: France.” In Handbook of European History 1400-1600: Late
Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, edited by Thomas Brady, Heiko
Augustinus Oberman, and James D. Tracy, 417–454. Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996.
———. “The Dynamics of Protestant Militancy: France, 1555-1563.” In Reformation,
Revolt and Civil War in France and the Netherlands, 1555-1585, edited by Philip
Benedict, Guido Marnef, Henk van Nierop, and Marc Venard, 35–50.
Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1999.
———. The Faith and Fortunes of France’s Huguenots, 1600-85. Aldershot: Ashgate,
2001.
———. “The Huguenot Population of France, 1600-1685: The Demographic Fate and
Customs of a Religious Minority.” Transactions of the American Philosophical
Society 81, no. 5 (1991): i–164.
Benedict, Philip, and Virginia Reinburg. “Religion and the Sacred.” In Renaissance and
Reformation France, 1500-1648, edited by Mack P. Holt. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2002.
Bernard, L. L. “Foucault, Louvois, and the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes.” Church
History 25, no. 1 (1956): 27–40.
Blacketer, Raymond A. The School of God: Pedagogy and Rhetoric in Calvin’s
Interpretation of Deuteronomy. Studies in Early Modern Religious Reforms 3.
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 2006.
Blaisdell, Charmarie J. “Calvin’s and Loyola’s Letters to Women: Politics and Spiritual
Counsel in the Sixteenth Century.” In Calviniana: Ideas and Influence of Jean
Calvin, edited by Robert V. Schnucker, 235–253. Sixteenth Century Essays and
Studies 10. Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1988.
———. “Calvin’s Letters to Women: The Courting of Ladies in High Places.” The
Sixteenth Century Journal 13, no. 3 (1982): 67–84.
———. “Response to ‘The Role and Status of Women in the Writings of John Calvin, by
John H. Bratt’.” In Renaissance, Reformation, Resurgence : Papers and
Responses Presented at the Colloquium on Calvin & Calvin Studies, Held at
Calvin Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, Michigan, on April 22 and 23, 1976,
edited by Peter De Klerk, 19–32. Grand Rapids, MI: Calvin Theological
Seminary, 1976.
Bossy, John. Christianity in the West, 1400–1700. Oxford; New York: Oxford University
Press, 1985.
———. “The Counter-Reformation and the People of Catholic Europe.” Past & Present
47, no. 1 (1970): 51–70.
Bourdieu, Pierre. The Logic of Practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1990.
Bratt, John H. “The Role and Status of Women in the Writings of John Calvin.” In
Renaissance, Reformation, Resurgence : Papers and Responses Presented at the
258
Colloquium on Calvin & Calvin Studies, Held at Calvin Theological Seminary,
Grand Rapids, Michigan, on April 22 and 23, 1976, edited by Peter De Klerk, 1–
17. Grand Rapids, MI: Calvin Theological Seminary, 1976.
Burguière, André. “Pour une typologie des formes d’organisation domestique de l’Europe
moderne (XVIe-XIXe siècles).” Annales. Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations 41,
no. 3. Pour une typologie (1986): 639–655.
Burguiere, Andre, Christiane Klapisch-Zuber, Martine Segalen, and Francois Zonabend,
eds. A History of the Family, Volume II: The Impact of Modernity. Cambridge,
MA: Belknap Press, 1996.
Campbell, Julie D., and Anne R. Larsen, eds. Early Modern Women and Transnational
Communities of Letters. Farnham, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2009.
Carbonnier-Burkard, Marianne. “La pratique réformée du culte de famille.” La vie
spirituelle 715, no. mai-juin (1995): 307–317.
Carbonnier-Burkard, Marianne, and Patrick Cabanel. Une histoire des protestants en
France: XVIe-XXe siècle. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1998.
Carroll, Stuart. Blood and Violence in Early Modern France. Oxford; New York: Oxford
University Press, 2006.
Carter, Karen E. Creating Catholics: Catechism and Primary Education in Early Modern
France. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2011.
Christin, Olivier. Une révolution symbolique: L’iconoclasme huguenot et la
reconstruction catholique. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit, 1991.
Colin, Pierre, ed. Aux origines du catechisme en France. 1. ed. Paris: Desclee, 1989.
Conner, Philip. Huguenot Heartland: Montauban and Southern French Calvinism
During the Wars of Religion. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2002.
Coster, Will, and Andrew Spicer, eds. Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Crouzet, Denis. Les guerriers de Dieu: La violence au temps des troubles de religion,
vers 1525-vers 1610. 2 vols. Seyssel: Champ Vallon, 1990.
Daussy, Hughes. “L’instrumentalisation politique et religieuse de l’histoire chez Philippe
Duplessis-Mornay.” In Écritures de l’histoire (XIVe-XVIe siècles), edited by
Danièle Bohler and Catherine Magnien Simonin, 471–484. Genève: Droz, 2005.
———. Les Huguenots et le Roi: Le combat politique de Philippe Duplessis-Mornay
(1572–1600). Travaux d’Humanisme et Renaissance. Genève: Droz, 2002.
Davis, Natalie Zemon. “Boundaries and the Sense of Self in Sixteenth-Century France.”
In Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality, and the Self in Western
Thought, edited by Thomas C. Heller, David E. Wellbery, and Morton Sosna.
Standford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986.
———. “City Women and Religious Change.” In Society and Culture in Early Modern
France: Eight Essays, 65–95. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975.
———. “Ghosts, Kin, and Progeny: Some Features of Family Life in Early Modern
France.” Daedalus 106, no. 2 (1977): 87–114.
———. “Printing and the People.” In Society and Culture in Early Modern France:
Eight Essays, 189–226. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975.
———. Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight Essays. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press, 1975.
259
———. “Strikes and Salvation at Lyon.” In Society and Culture in Early Modern
France: Eight Essays, 1–16. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975.
———. “The Rites of Violence.” In Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight
Essays, 152–188. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975.
———. “The Rites of Violence.” In Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight
Essays, 152–188. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1975.
———. “The Sacred and the Body Social in Sixteenth-Century Lyon.” Past & Present
90, no. 1 (1981): 40–70.
De Vries, Jan. “Population.” In Handbook of European History, 1400-1600: Late Middle
Ages, Renaissance, and Reformation, edited by Thomas A. Brady, Heiko A.
Oberman, and James D. Tracy, 1:1–50. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1996.
DeBoer, Willis P. “Calvin on the Role of Women.” In Exploring the Heritage of John
Calvin, edited by David E. Holwerda, 236–272. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
House, 1976.
Dewald, Jonathan. “Social Groups and Cultural Practices.” In Renaissance and
Reformation France 1500-1648, edited by Mack P. Holt, 27–61. New York:
Oxford University Press, 2002.
Diefendorf, Barbara B. Beneath the Cross: Catholics and Huguenots in SixteenthCentury Paris. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.
———. “Family Culture, Renaissance Culture.” Renaissance Quarterly 40, no. 4 (Winter
1987): 661–681.
———. “Gender and Family.” In Renaissance and Reformation France, 1500–1648,
edited by Mack P. Holt, 99–118. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press,
2002.
Dinges, Martin. “Huguenot Poor Relief and Health Care in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth
Centuries.” In Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, edited by
Raymond A. Mentzer and Andrew Spicer. Cambridge, U.K. & New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Donawerth, Jane, and Adele Seeff, eds. “Crossing Boundaries: Attending to Early
Modern Women.” Newark, NJ; London: University of Delaware Press ;
Associated University Presses, 2001.
Douen, O. Clément Marot et le Psautier Huguenot, étude historique, littéraire, musicale
et bibliographique. Nieuwkoop: B. de Graaf, 1967.
Douglass, Jane Dempsey. Women, Freedom, and Calvin. 1st ed. Philadelphia:
Westminster John Knox Press, 1985.
Driedger, Michael D. Obedient Heretics: Mennonite Identities in Lutheran Hamburg and
Altona During the Confessional Age. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2002.
Dubief, Henri, and Jacques Poujol. La France protestante: histoire et lieux de mémoire.
Paris: Les Editions de Paris, 1996.
Duke, A. C., Gillian Lewis, and Andrew Pettegree. Calvinism in Europe, 1540-1610: A
Collection of Documents. Manchester [England]; New York: Manchester
University Press, 1992.
Dunan-Page, Anne, ed. The Religious Culture of the Huguenots 1660-1750. Aldershot,
England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2006.
260
———. The Religious Culture of the Huguenots, 1660-1750. Aldershot, England;
Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2006.
Durkheim, Émile. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. Edited by Mark S. Cladis.
Translated by Carol Cosman. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Ehrenpreis, Stefan, and Ute Lotz-Heumann. Reformation Und Konfessionelles Zeitalter.
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2002.
Eire, Carlos M. N. War Against the Idols: The Reformation of Worship from Erasmus to
Calvin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
Engen, John Van. Educating People of Faith: Exploring the History of Jewish and
Christian Communities. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 2004.
Eurich, Amanda. “Sacralising space: reclaiming civic culture in early modern France.” In
Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe, edited by Will Coster and Andrew Spicer,
259–281. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Febvre, Lucien. A New Kind of History: From the Writings of Febvre. Edited by Peter
Burke. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1973.
Félice, Paul de. Les protestants d’autrefois: Les temples, les services religieux, les actes
pastoraux, Vol. 1. Paris: Librairie Fischbacher, 1897.
———. Les Protestants d’autrefois: vie intérieure des églises, moeurs et usages. Paris:
Librairie Fischbacher, 1896.
Flandrin, Jean Louis. Families in Former Times: Kinship, Household, and Sexuality.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Forster, Marc R. Catholic Revival in the Age of the Baroque: Religious Identity in
Southwest Germany, 1550-1750. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
———. “Domestic Devotions and Family Piety in German Catholicism.” In Piety And
Family In Early Modern Europe: Essays In Honour Of Steven Ozment, edited by
Marc R. Forster and Benjamin J. Kaplan, 97–114. Aldershot, England;
Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005.
———. The Counter-Reformation in the Villages: Religion and Reform in the Bishopric
of Speyer, 1560-1720. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992.
Gamble, Richard C., ed. Calvinism in France, Netherlands, Scotland, and England.
Articles on Calvin and Calvinism 14. New York; London: Garland Publishing,
1992.
Garrisson, Janine. A History of Sixteenth-Century France, 1483-1598: Renaissance,
Reformation and Rebellion. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1991.
Garrisson-Estèbe, Janine. Protestants du Midi, 1559-1598. Toulouse: Privat, 1980.
Gaussent, Jean-Claude. Mémoires de Paul Rabaut: ministre de la religion réformée en
Languedoc. Paris: Champion, 2000.
Ginzburg, Carlo. The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-Century Miller.
Translated by John Tedeschi and Anne C. Tedeschi. Baltimore, MD: The Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1992.
———. The Night Battles: Witchcraft & Agrarian Cults in the Sixteenth & Seventeenth
Centuries. Translated by John Tedeschi and Anne Tedeschi. Baltimore, MD: The
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.
Gordon, Bruce. Calvin. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009.
261
Gottlieb, Beatrice. The Family in the Western World from the Black Death to the
Industrial Age. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Graham, Michael F. “Social Discipline in Scotland, 1560–1610.” In Sin and the
Calvinists: Moral Control and the Consistory in the Reformed Tradition, edited
by Raymond A. Mentzer, 129–57. Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal
Publishers, 1994.
———. The Uses of Reform: “Godly Discipline” and Popular Behavior in Scotland and
Beyond, 1560-1610. Leiden; New York: Brill, 1996.
Graham, W. Fred. Later Calvinism: International Perspectives. Sixteenth Century Essays
and Studies 22. Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1994.
Gratton, Jacqueline. “The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes and the Role of the
Intendants in the Dragonnades.” French History 25, no. 2 (2011): 164–187.
Greengrass, Mark. “France.” In The Reformation in National Context, edited by Robert
Scribner, Roy Porter, and Mikulas Teich, 47–66. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1994.
———. The French Reformation. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991.
Gregory, Brad S. Salvation at Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modern Europe.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.
Haas, Louis. The Renaissance Man and His Children: Childbirth and Early Childhood in
Florence, 1300-1600. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998.
Hajnal, John. “Two Kinds of Preindustrial Household Formation System.” Population
and Development Review 8, no. 3 (1982): 449–494.
Halvorson, Michael J., and Karen E. Spierling, eds. Defining Community in Early
Modern Europe. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2008.
Hamilton, Sarah, and Andrew Spicer. “Defining the Holy: The Delineation of Sacred
Space.” In Defining the Holy: Sacred Space in Medieval and Early Modern
Europe, edited by Andrew Spicer and Sarah Hamilton, 1–23. Aldershot, England;
Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005.
Hanley, Sarah. “Engendering the State: Family Formation and State Building in Early
Modern France.” French Historical Studies 16, no. 1 (Spring 1989): 4–27.
doi:10.2307/286431.
Hanlon, Gregory. Confession and Community in Seventeenth-century France: Catholic
and Protestant Coexistence in Aquitaine. Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1993.
Hardwick, Julie. The Practice of Patriarchy: Gender and the Politics of Household
Authority in Aarly Modern France. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State
University Press, 1998.
Harrington, Joel F. “Bad Parents, the State, and the Early Modern Civilizing Process.”
German History 16, no. 1 (1998): 16–28.
———. Reordering Marriage and Society in Reformation Germany. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Hauser, Henri. La naissance du protestantisme. 2nd ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires de
France, 1962.
Heller, Henry. The Conquest of Poverty: The Calvinist Revolt in Sixteenth Century
France. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1986.
262
Hendrix, Scott H. “Masculinity and Patriarchy in Reformation Germany.” Journal of the
History of Ideas 56, no. 2 (1995): 177–193.
Herlihy, David, and Christiane Klapisch-Zuber. Tuscans and Their Families: A Study of
the Florentine Catasto of 1427. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985.
Hesselink, I. John. Calvin’s First Catechism: A Commentary. Louisville, KY:
Westminster John Knox Press, 1997.
Hexter, J. H. The Vision of Politics on the Eve of the Reformation: More, Machiavelli,
and Seyssel. New York: Basic Books, 1973.
———. “Utopia and Geneva.” In Action and Conviction in Early Modern Europe:
Essays in Memory of E. H. Harbison., edited by Theodore K. Rabb and Jerrold E.
Seigel, 77–89. Princeton University Press, 1969.
Higman, Francis. Piety and the People: Religious Printing in French, 1511-1551.
Aldershot, England; Brookfield, VT: Scolar Press, 1996.
Higman, Francis M. Lire et Découvrir: La circulation des idées au temps de la Réforme.
Genève: Droz, 1998.
Holt, Mack P., ed. Adaptations of Calvinism in Reformation Europe: Essays in Honour of
Brian G. Armstrong. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007.
———. , ed. Renaissance and Reformation France 1500-1648. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2002.
———. “The Kingdom of France in the Sixteenth Century.” In Renaissance and
Reformation France 1500-1648, edited by Mack P. Holt, 5–26. New York:
Oxford University Press, 2002.
———. “The Social History of the Reformation: Recent Trends and Future Agendas.”
Journal of Social History 37, no. 1 (Autumn 2003): 133–144.
Höpfl, Harro. The Christian Polity of John Calvin. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1982.
Hsia, Po-Chia. Social Discipline in the Reformation: Central Europe 1550-1750.
London: Routledge, 1992.
Hughes, Philip Edgcumbe, and Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, trans. The Register of the
Company of Pastors of Geneva in the Time of Calvin. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B.
Eerdmans Pub., 1966.
Hunt, David. Parents and Children in History: The Psychology of Family Life in Early
Modern France. New edition. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1970.
Janse, Wim, and Barbara Pitkin, eds. The Formation of Clerical and Confessional
Identities in Early Modern Europe. Leiden; Boston: Brill Academic Publishers,
2006.
Jeffreys, Derek S. “‘It’s a Miracle of God That There Is Any Common Weal Among Us’:
Unfaithfulness and Disorder in John Calvin’s Political Thought.” Review of
Politics 62, no. 1 (December 2000): 107–130.
Jobin, Alain. “Un drame familial en France sous l’Ancien Régime: l’enlèvement des
enfants Huguenots.” In Famille et spiritualité protestante, edited by Alain Joblin
and Jacques Sys, 23–34. Arras, France: Artois Presses Université, 2006.
Karant-Nunn, Susan C. The Reformation of Ritual: An Interpretation of Early Modern
Germany. London; New York: Routledge, 1997.
263
Kelley, Donald R. “Martyrs, Myths, and the Massacre: The Background of St.
Bartholomew.” The American Historical Review 77, no. 5 (December 1972):
1323–1342.
Kelly-Gadol, Joan. “Did Women Have a Renaissance?” In Becoming Visible: Women in
European History, edited by Renate Bridenthal, Claudia Koonz, and Susan
Stuard, 175–202. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1987.
Kertzer, David I., and Marzio Barbagli, eds. Family Life in Early Modern Times, 15001789. The History of the European Family 1. New Haven; London: Yale
University Press, 2001.
Kettering, Sharon. “The Patronage Power of Early Modern French Noblewomen.” The
Historical Journal 32, no. 04 (1989): 817–841.
Kingdon, Robert M. Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1995.
———. “Calvin and the Establishment of Consistory Discipline in Geneva: The
Institution and the Men Who Directed It.” Nederlands Archief Voor
Kerkgeschiedenis 70, no. 2 (1990): 158–172.
———. “Calvinism and Resistance Theory, 1550-1580.” In The Cambridge History of
Political Thought: 1450-1700, edited by J. H. Burns and Mark Goldie, 193–218.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
———. “Catechesis in Calvin’s Geneva.” In Educating People of Faith: Exploring the
History of Jewish and Christian Communities, edited by John Van Engen, 294–
313. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 2004.
———. Geneva and the Coming of the Wars of Religion in France, 1555-1563. Geneva:
Libraire Droz, 1956.
———. Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement, 1564-1572:
A Contribution to the History of Congregationalism, Presbyterianism, and
Calvinist Resistance Theory. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press,
1967.
———. “International Calvinism.” In Handbook of European History 1400-1600: Late
Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, edited by Thomas Brady, Heiko
Augustinus Oberman, and James D. Tracy, 2:229–249. Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996.
———. “Problems of Religious Choice for Sixteenth-century Frenchmen.” Journal of
Religious History 4 (1966): 105–112.
———. “The Geneva Consistory as Established by John Calvin.” On the Way:
Occasional Papers of the Wisconsin Conference of the United Church of Christ 7
(1990): 30–44.
———. “Worship in Geneva Before and After the Reformation.” In Worship in Medieval
and Early Modern Europe: Change and Continuity in Religious Practice, edited
by Karin Maag and John D. Witvliet, 41–60. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre
Dame Press, 2004.
Kingdon, Robert M., and Thomas A. Lambert. Reforming Geneva: Discipline, Faith and
Anger in Calvin’s Geneva. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2012.
Krumenacker, Yves. “La place du culte privé chez les protestants français au XVIIIe
siècle.” Revue de l’histoire des religions 217, no. 3 (2000): 623–638.
264
———. “Les dragonnades du Poitou: leur écho dans les mémoires.” BSHPF 131, no. 3
(1985): 405–422.
Kuehn, Thomas. Emancipation in Late Medieval Florence. New Brunswick, N.J.:
Rutgers University Press, 1982.
Kümin, Beat. “Sacred church and worldly tavern: reassessing an early modern divide.” In
Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe, edited by Will Coster and Andrew Spicer,
17–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Labrousse, Élisabeth. “Calvinism in France, 1598-1685.” In International Calvinism
1541-1715, edited by Menna Prestwich, 285–314. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1985.
Lambert, Thomas A. “Preaching, Praying and Policing the Reform in Sixteenth Century
Geneva.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Wisconsin Madison, 1998.
Laslett, Peter. Family Life and Illicit Love in Earlier Generations: Essays in Historical
Sociology. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
———. “The Character of Familial History, Its Limitations and the Conditions for Its
Proper Pursuit.” Journal of Family History 12, no. 1 (1987): 263–284.
Laslett, Peter, and Richard Wall. Household and Family in Past Time: Comparative
Studies in the Size and Structure of the Domestic Group Over the Last Three
Centuries in England, France, Serbia, Japan and Colonial North America, with
Further Materials from Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1972.
Le Roy Ladurie, Emmanuel. The Peasants of Languedoc. Urbana: University of Illinois
Press, 1974.
Lebrun, Franc̜ois. “The Two Reformations: Communal Devotion and Personal Piety.” In
History of Private Life, Volume III: Passions of the Renaissance, edited by Roger
Chartier, translated by Arthur Goldhammer, 69–109. Cambridge, MA; London:
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1989.
Lipscomb, Suzannah. “Refractory Women: The Limits of Power in the French Reformed
Church.” In Dire L’interdit: The Vocabulary of Censure and Exclusion in the
Early Modern Reformed Tradition, edited by Raymond A. Mentzer, Françoise
Moreil, and Philippe Chareyre, 13–28. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010.
Livet, Georges. The Reformation. Edited by Pierre Chaunu. Gloucester: Alan Sutton,
1989.
Long, Kathleen P., ed. High Anxiety: Masculinity in Crisis in Early Modern France.
Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 2002.
Lualdi, Katharine J. “Persevering in the Faith: Catholic Worship and Communal Identity
in the Wake of the Edict of Nantes.” Sixteenth Century Journal 35, no. 3 (Fall
2004): 717–734. doi:Article.
Luria, Keith P. Sacred Boundaries: Religious Coexistence and Conflict in Early-Modern
France. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2005.
Luria, Keith P. “Separated by Death? Burials, Cemeteries, and Confessional Boundaries
in Seventeenth-Century France.” French Historical Studies 24, no. 2 (Spring
2001): 185–222. doi:Article.
———. “The Counter-Reformation and Popular Spirituality.” In Christian Spirituality:
Post-Reformation and Modern, edited by Louis Dupré and Don E. Saliers, 93–
265
120. World Spirituality: An Encyclopedic History of the Religious Quest 18. New
York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1989.
Lynch, Katherine. Family, Class, and Ideology in Early Industrial France: Social Policy
and the Working-Class Family, 1825-1848. Madison, WI: University of
Wisconsin Press, 1988.
Maag, Karin. Seminary or University?: The Genevan Academy and Reformed Higher
Education, 1560-1620. Aldershot, England: Scolar Press, 1995.
Mandrou, Robert, Janine Estèbe, Daniel Ligou, and et al, eds. Histoire des protestants en
France. Toulouse: Eduoard Privat, 1977.
Marshall, Sherrin. “Review of The Holy Household: Women and Morals in Reformation
Augsburg by Lyndal Roper.” The Journal of Modern History 65, no. 4 (1993):
887–889.
Martin, A. Lynn. The Jesuit Mind: The Mentality of an Elite in Early Modern France.
Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press, 1988.
Mayes, David. Communal Christianity: The Life and Loss of a Peasant Vision in Early
Modern Germany. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishing, 2004.
Mazoyer, Louis. Une page douloureuse dans l'Histoire des persécutions aux XVI et XVII
siècles contre la R.P.R.: L'enlèvement des enfants. La Bégude de Mazenc: Musée
du désert, 1991.
McLaughlin, Eleanor Commo. “Equality of Souls, Inequality of Sexes: Woman in
Medieval Theology.” In Religion and Sexism: Images of Woman in Jewish and
Christian Tradition, edited by Rosemary Radford Ruether, 213–266. New York:
Simon & Schuster, 1974.
McNeill, John T. The History and Character of Calvinism. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1954.
Mentzer, Raymond A. “Acting on Calvin’s Ideas: The Church in France.” In Calvin and
the Church, edited by David Foxgrover, 29–41. Grand Rapids, MI: Calvin Studies
Society, 2002.
———. Blood & Belief: Family Survival and Confessional Identity among the Provincial
Huguenot Nobility. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 1994.
———. “Communities of Worship and the Reformed Churches of France.” In Defining
Community in Early Modern Europe, edited by Michael James Halvorson and
Karen E. Spierling, 25–42. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2008.
———. “Disciplina nervus ecclesiae: The Calvinist Reform of Morals at Nimes.” The
Sixteenth Century Journal 18, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 89–116.
———. “Fasting, Piety and Political Anxiety among French Reformed Protestants.”
Church History 76, no. 2 (2007): 330–362.
———. Heresy Proceedings in Languedoc, 1500-1560. Part 5. Transactions of the
American Philosophical Society 74. Philadelphia: American Philosophical
Society, 1984.
———. “Introduction.” In Sin and the Calvinists: Moral Control and the Consistory in
the Reformed Tradition, edited by Raymond A. Mentzer, vii–ix. Kirksville, MO:
Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1994.
———. “Marking the Taboo: Excommunication in French Reformed Churches.” In Sin
and the Calvinists: Moral Control and the Consistory in the Reformed Tradition,
266
edited by Raymond A. Mentzer, 63–96. Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century
Journal Publishers, 1994.
———. “Morals and Moral Regulation in Protestant France.” Journal of
Interdisciplinary History 31, no. 1 (2000): 1–20.
———. , ed. Sin and the Calvinists: Morals Control and the Consistory in the Reformed
Tradition. Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1994.
———. “The Printed Catechism and Religious Instruction in the French Reformed
Churches.” In Habent sua fata libelli. Books Have Their Own Destiny. Essays in
Honor of Robert V. Schnucker, edited by Robin B. Barnes, Robert A. Kolb, and
Paula L. Presley, 93–101. Kirksville, MO: Thomas Jefferson University Press,
1998.
———. “The Reformed Churches of France and the Visual Arts.” In Seeing Beyond the
Word: Visual Arts and the Calvinist Tradition, edited by Paul Corby Finney, 199–
230. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1999.
Mentzer, Raymond A., Françoise Moreil, and Philippe Chareyre, eds. Dire L’interdit:
The Vocabulary of Censure and Exclusion in the Early Modern Reformed
Tradition. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010.
Mentzer, Raymond A., and Andrew Spicer. “Introduction: Être protestant.” In Society
and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, edited by Raymond A. Mentzer
and Andrew Spicer, 1–9. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Moehn, Wilhelmus H. Th. “God Calls Us to His Service”: The Relation Between God
and His Audience in Calvin’s Sermons on Acts. Genève: Librairie Droz, 2001.
Molinier, A. “De la religion des oeuvres à la Réformation dans les Cévennes (14501600).” Revue d’histoire de l’Eglise de France 72, no. 189 (1986): 245–263.
Monheit, Michael L. “‘The Ambition for an Illustrious Name’: Humanism, Patronage,
and Calvin’s Doctrine of the Calling.” The Sixteenth Century Journal 23, no. 2
(Summer 1992): 267–287.
Monter, E. William. Calvin’s Geneva. New York; London: WileJohn Wiley and Sons,
Inc., 1967.
———. “De L’évêché à La Rome Protestante.” In Histoire de Genève, edited by Paul
Guichonnet. Lausanne: Payot, 1974.
———. “Historical Demography and Religious History in Sixteenth-Century Geneva.”
The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 9, no. 3 (1979): 399–427.
———. Judging the French Reformation: Heresy Trials by Sixteenth-Century
Parlements. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press, 1999.
———. “Women in Calvinist Geneva (1550-1800).” Signs 6, no. 2 (Winter 1980): 189–
209.
Muchembled, Robert. Popular Culture and Elite Culture in France, 1400-1750.
Translated by Lydia Cochrane. Baton Rouge; London: Louisiana State Univ
Press, 1985.
Murdock, Graeme. Calvinism on the Frontier 1600-1660: International Calvinism and
the Reformed Church in Hungary and Transylvania. Oxford; New York: Oxford
University Press, 2000.
———. “‘Pure and White’: Reformed Space for Worship in Early Seventeenth-Century
Hungary.” In Defining the Holy: Sacred Space in Medieval and Early Modern
267
Europe, edited by Andrew Spicer and Sarah Hamilton, 231–250. Aldershot,
England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005.
Murdock, Graeme, Penny Roberts, and Andrew Spicer, eds. Ritual and Violence: Natalie
Zemon Davis and Early Modern France. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Naphy, William G. Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan Reformation. New
York: Manchester University Press, 1994.
———. “The Renovation of the Ministry in Calvin’s Geneva.” In The Reformation of the
Parishes: The Ministry and the Reformation in Town and Country, edited by
Andrew Pettegree, 113–132. Manchester [England]; New York: Manchester
University Press, 1993.
Nicholas, David. The Domestic Life of a Medieval City: Women, Children, and the
Family in Fourteenth-Century Ghent. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press,
1985.
Nicholls, David. “France.” In The Early Reformation in Europe, edited by Andrew
Pettegree, 120–141. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
———. “Social Change and Early Protestantism in France: Normandy, 1520-62.”
European History Quarterly 10, no. 3 (1980): 279–308.
———. “The Social History of the French Reformation: Ideology, Confession and
Culture.” Social History 9, no. 1 (January 1984): 25–43.
———. “The Theatre of Martyrdom in the French Reformation.” Past & Present 121
(November 1988): 49–73.
Nicholls, David J. “The Nature of Popular Heresy in France, 1520–1542.” The Historical
Journal 26, no. 02 (1983): 261–275.
Nuechterlein, Jeanne. “The Domesticity of Sacred Space in the Fifteenth-Century
Netherlands.” In Defining the Holy: Sacred Space in Medieval and Early Modern
Europe, edited by Andrew Spicer and Sarah Hamilton, 49–79. Aldershot,
England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005.
Nugent, Janay. “‘None Must Meddle Betueene Man and Wife’: Assessing Family and the
Fluidity of Public and Private in Early Modern Scotland.” Journal of Family
History 35, no. 3 (2010): 219–231.
Oestreich, Gerhard. Neostoicism and the Early Modern State. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1982.
Olson, Jeannine E. Calvin and Social Welfare: Deacons and the Bourse Française.
Susquehanna University Press, 1989.
Ozment, Steven. Ancestors: The Loving Family in Old Europe. Cambridge, MA; London:
Harvard University Press, 2001.
Ozment, Steven E. When Fathers Ruled: Family Life in Reformation Europe. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1983.
Parker, Charles H. “French Calvinists As the Children of Israel: An Old Testament SelfConsciousness in Jean Crespin’s Histoire Des Martyrs before the Wars of
Religion.” The Sixteenth Century Journal 24, no. 2 (July 1993): 227–248.
Parker, T. H. L. Calvin’s Preaching. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press,
1992.
Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine,
Vol. 4: Reformation of Church and Dogma (1300-1700). Chicago; London:
University of Chicago Press, 1985.
268
Pelikan, Jaroslav, and Valerie Hotchkiss. Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the
Christian Tradition, Volume II, Part Four: Creeds and Confessions of the
Reformation Era. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2003.
Pettegree, Andrew. The French Book and the European Book World. Leiden; Boston:
Brill, 2007.
———. , ed. The Reformation World. London; New York: Routledge, 2000.
Pettegree, Andrew, Alastair Duke, and Gillian Lewis, eds. Calvinism in Europe, 15401620. Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Pettegree, Andrew, Paul Neave Nelles, and Philip Conner, eds. The Sixteenth-Century
French Religious Book. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing,
Ltd., 2001.
Phillips, Henry. Church and Culture in Seventeenth-century France. Cambridge, U.K.;
New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Pidoux, Pierre. Le Psautier Huguenot du XVIe siècle. Mélodies et documents. Basle:
Éditions Bärenreiter, 1962.
Pitkin, Barbara. “‘The Heritage of the Lord’: Children in the Theology of John Calvin.”
In The Child in Christian Thought, edited by Marcia J. Bunge, 160–193. Grand
Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001.
Plummer, Marjorie Elizabeth. “Reforming the Family: Marriage, Gender and the
Lutheran Household in Early Modern Germany, 1500–1620.” Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Virginia, 1996.
Pollmann, Judith. “A Different Road to God: The Protestant Experience of Conversion in
the Sixteenth Century.” In Conversion to Modernities: The Globalization of
Christianity, edited by Peter van der Veer, 47–64. London: Routledge, 1996.
———. “Off the Record: Problems in the Quantification of Calvinist Church Discipline.”
The Sixteenth Century Journal 33, no. 2 (2002): 423–438.
Pollock, Linda A. Forgotten Children: Parent-Child Relations from 1500 to 1900.
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Prestwich, Menna. “Calvinism in France, 1559-1629.” In International Calvinism 15411715, edited by Menna Prestwich, 71–108. New York: Oxford University Press,
1985.
———. “Introduction.” In International Calvinism 1541-1715, edited by Menna
Prestwich. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.
Racaut, Luc. Hatred in Print: Catholic Propaganda and Protestant Identity During the
French Wars of Religion. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate
Publishing, Ltd., 2002.
———. “Religious Polemic and Huguenot self-perception and identity, 1554-1619.” In
Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, edited by Raymond A.
Mentzer and Andrew Spicer, 29–43. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University
Press, 2002.
Reid, Jonathan A. King’s Sister - Queen of Dissent: Marguerite of Navarre (1492-1549)
and Her Evangelical Network. 2 vols. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2009.
Reid Jr., Charles J. Power over the Body, Equality in the Family: Rights and Domestic
Relations in Medieval Canon Law. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2004.
269
Reinhard, Wolfgang. “Gegenreformation als Modernisierung? Prolegomena zu einer
Theorie des konfessionellen Zeitalters.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 68
(1977): 226–52.
———. “Zwang zur Konfessionalisierung? Prolegomena zu einer Theorie des
konfessionellen Zeitalters.” Zeitschrift für historische Forschung 10 (1983): 257–
277.
Reymond, Bernard. L’architecture religieuse des protestants. Genève: Labor et Fides,
1996.
Richardson, R. C. “Social Engineering in Early Modern England: Masters, Servants, and
the Godly Discipline.” CLIO: A Journal of Literature, History, and the
Philosophy of History 33, no. 2. Literature Online (2004): 163–187.
Roberts, Penny. “The Most Crucial Battle of the Wars of Religion? The Conflict over
Sites for Reformed Worship in Sixteenth-Century France.” Archiv Für
Reformationsgeschichte 89 (1998): 247–267.
Roelker, Nancy Lyman. “The Role of Noblewomen in the French Reformation.” Archiv
Für Reformationsgeschichte 63 (1972): 168–195.
Romier, Lucien. Le royaume de Catherine de Médicis: la France à la veille des guerres
de religion. 2 vols. Paris: Perrin, 1922.
Roper, Lyndal. The Holy Household: Women and Morals in Reformation Augsburg.
Oxford New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press, 1989.
Safley, Thomas Max. Let No Man Put Asunder: The Control of Marriage in the German
Southwest. Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 1984.
Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church, Volume 7: Modern Christianity, The
Swiss Reformation. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1894.
Scheck, Helene. Reform and Resistance Formations of Female Subjectivity in Early
Medieval Ecclesiastical Culture. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2008.
Schilling, Heinz. “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich: Religiöser und gesellschaftlicher
Wandel in Deutschland zwischen 1555 und 1620.” Historische Zeitschrift 246,
no. 1 (1988): 1–45.
———. Konfessionskonflikt und Staatsbildung: Eine Fallstudie über das Verhältnis von
religiösem und sozialem Wandel in der Frühneuzeit am Beispiel der Grafschaft
Lippe. Quellen und Forschungen der Reformationsgeschichte 48. Gütersloh:
Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1981.
Schmidt, Heinrich R. Dorf und Religion: reformierte Sittenzucht in Berner
Landgemeinden der Frühen Neuzeit. New York: Lucius & Lucius DE, 1995.
Schmidt, Heinrich Richard. “Sozialdisziplinierung? Ein Plädoyer für das Ende des
Etatismus in der Konfessionalisierungsforschung.” Historische Zeitschrift 265,
no. 3 (1997): 639–682.
Schreiner, Susan E. The Theater of His Glory: Nature and the Natural Order in the
Thought of John Calvin. Durham, NC: Labyrinth, 1991.
Schultz, James A. The Knowledge of Childhood in the German Middle Ages, 1100-1350.
Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995.
Schulze, Winfried. “Gerhard Oestreichs Begriff Sozialdisziplinierung in Der Frühen
Neuzeit.” Zeitschrift Für Historische Forschung 14 (1987): 265–302.
Scott, Kieran, and Michael Warren, eds. Perspectives on Marriage: A Reader. 2nd ed.
New York, NY; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
270
Scribner, Robert W. “The Reformation, Popular Magic, and the ‘Disenchantment of the
World’.” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 23, no. 3 (1993): 475–494.
Selderhuis, Herman J. Calvin’s Theology of the Psalms. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic, 2007.
———. Marriage and Divorce in the Thought of Martin Bucer. Translated by John
Vriend and Lyle D. Bierma. Kirksville, MO: Thomas Jefferson University Press
at Truman State University, 1999.
Shepardson, Nikki. “Gender and the Rhetoric of Martyrdom in Jean Crespin’s ‘Histoire
Des Vrays Tesmoins’.” The Sixteenth Century Journal 35, no. 1 (Spring 2004):
155–174.
———. “‘Le Zèle Ardent’: The Rhetoric of Martyrdom and the Huguenot Community in
Reformation France, 1520-1570.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers, The
State University of New Jersey, 2001.
———. “The Rhetoric of Martyrdom and the Anti-Nicodemite Discourses in France,
1550-1570.” Renaissance & Reformation/Renaissance et Reforme 27, no. 3 (June
2003): 37–61.
Spicer, Andrew. “‘Qui est de Dieu, oit la parole de Dieu’: The Huguenots and their
temples.” In Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685, edited by
Raymond A. Mentzer and Andrew Spicer, 175–192. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press, 2002.
———. “‘What Kinde of House a Kirk Is’: Conventicles, Consecrations and the Concept
of Sacred Space in post-Reformation Scotland.” In Sacred Space in Early Modern
Europe, edited by Will Coster and Andrew Spicer, 81–103. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Spierling, Karen E. “Father, Son, and Pious Christian: Concepts of Masculinity in
Reformation Geneva.” In Masculinity in the Reformation Era, edited by Scott H.
Hendrix and Susan C. Karant-Nunn, 95–119. Kirksville, MO: Truman State
University Press, 2008.
———. “Friend and Foe: Reformed Genevans and Catholic Neighbors in the Time of
Calvin.” In John Calvin and Roman Catholicism: Critique and Engagement, Then
and Now, edited by Randall C. Zachman, 79–98. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic, 2008.
———. “Honor and Subjection in the Lord: Paul and the Family in the Reformation.” In
A Companion to Paul in the Reformation, edited by R. Ward Holder, 465–500.
Leiden: Brill, 2009.
———. Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva: The Shaping of a Community, 1536–
1564. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005.
———. “Making Use of God’s Remedies: Negotiating the Material Care of Children in
Reformation Geneva.” The Sixteenth Century Journal 36, no. 3 (2005): 785–807.
———. “Putting ‘God’s Honor First’: Truth, Lies, and Servants in Reformation
Geneva.” Church History and Religious Culture 92, no. 1 (2012): 85–103.
———. “Putting Order to Disorder: Illegitimate Children, Their Parents and the
Consistory in Reformation Geneva.” In Dire L’interdit: The Vocabulary of
Censure and Exclusion in the Early Modern Reformed Tradition, edited by
Raymond A. Mentzer, Françoise Moreil, and Philippe Chareyre, 43–62. Leiden;
Boston: Brill, 2010.
271
Stacey, Sarah Alyn, and Veronique Desnain, eds. Culture and Conflict in SeventeenthCentury France and Ireland. Dublin, Ireland: Four Courts Press, 2004.
Steinmetz, David C. Calvin in Context. 2nd ed. New York/Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1995.
Stone, Lawrence. The Family: Sex and Marriage in England 1500-1800. New York:
Harper & Row, 1977.
Strauss, Gerald. Luther’s House of Learning: Indoctrination of the Young in the German
Reformation. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978.
Strohl, Jane E. “The Child in Luther’s Theology: ‘For What Purpose Do We Older Folks
Exist, Other Than to Care For...the Young?’” In The Child in Christian Thought,
edited by Marcia J. Bunge, 134–159. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 2001.
Sunshine, Glenn S. “Discipline as the Third Mark of the Church: Three Views.” Calvin
Theological Journal 33 (1998): 469–480.
———. Reforming French Protestantism: The Development of Huguenot Ecclesiastical
Institutions, 1557-1572. Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 2003.
Thompson, John L. “Rules Proved by Exceptions: The Exegesis of Paul and Women in
the Sixteenth Century.” In A Companion to Paul in the Reformation, edited by R.
Ward Holder, 501–540. Leiden: Brill, 2009.
Thompson, John Lee. John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah: Women in Regular and
Exceptional Roles in the Exegesis of Calvin, His Predecessors, and His
Contemporaries. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1992.
Tingle, Elizabeth C. Authority and Society in Nantes During the French Wars of
Religion, 1559-1598. Manchester [England]; New York: Manchester University
Press, 2006.
Todd, Margo. Christian Humanism and the Puritan Social Order. Cambridge, U.K.; New
York: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
———. The Culture of Protestantism in Early Modern Scotland. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 2002.
Tulchin, Allan. That Men Would Praise the Lord : The Triumph of Protestantism in
Nimes, 1530-1570. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Van Deusen, Nancy. The Place of the Psalms in the Intellectual Culture in the Middle
Ages. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 1999.
Van Ruymbeke, Bertrand, and Randy J. Sparks, eds. Memory and Identity: The
Huguenots in France and the Atlantic Diaspora. Columbia, SC: University of
South Carolina Press, 2003.
Veit, Patrice. “L’église à la maison. La dévotion privée luthérienne dans l’Allemagne du
XVIIe siècle.” In Homo Religiosus, autour de Jean Delumeau, 92–98. Pairs:
Librairie Artheme Fayard, 1997.
Walch, Agnès. “Prier en famille chez les catholiques et les protestants avant la
Révocation de l’Edit de Nantes.” In Famille et spiritualité protestante, edited by
Alain Joblin and Jacques Sys, 9–22. Arras, France: Artois Presses Université,
2006.
Walsham, Alexandra. “The Reformation and ‘the Disenchantment of the World’
Reassessed.” The Historical Journal 51, no. 2 (2008): 497–528.
272
Wandel, Lee Palmer. The Eucharist in the Reformation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2006.
———. Voracious Idols and Violent Hands: Iconoclasm in Reformation Zurich,
Strasbourg, and Basel. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press,
1995.
Watson, Timothy. “Preaching, printing, psalm-singing: The making and unmaking of the
Reformed church in Lyon, 1550–1572.” In Society and Culture in the Huguenot
World, 1559-1685, edited by Raymond A. Mentzer and Andrew Spicer, 10–28.
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Watt, Jeffrey R. “Calvinism, Childhood, and Education: The Evidence from the Genevan
Consistory.” The Sixteenth Century Journal 33, no. 2 (Summer 2002): 439–456.
———. “Childhood and Youth in the Genevan Consistory Minutes.” In Calvinus
Praeceptor Ecclesiae: Proceedings of the International Congress on Calvin
Research, edited by Herman Selderhuis, 41–62. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2004.
———. The Making of Modern Marriage: Matrimonial Control and the Rise of
Sentiment in Neuchâtel, 1550-1800. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press,
1992.
———. “Women and the Consistory in Calvin’s Geneva.” The Sixteenth Century
Journal 24, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 429–439.
Webb, Diana. “Domestic Space and Devotion in the Middle Ages.” In Defining the Holy:
Sacred Space in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, edited by Andrew Spicer
and Sarah Hamilton, 27–47. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate
Publishing, Ltd., 2005.
Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by Talcott
Parsons. London: G. Allen & Unwin, 1930.
———. The Sociology of Religion. London: Social Science Paperbacks, 1971.
Wencelius, Léon. L’esthétique de Calvin. Genève: Slatkiné, 1979.
Wheaton, Robert, and Tamara K. Hareven, eds. Family and Sexuality in French History.
Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1980.
Wiesner, Merry E. “Family, Household, and Community.” In Handbook of European
History, 1400-1600: Late Middle Ages, Renaissance, and Reformation, edited by
Thomas A. Brady, Heiko A. Oberman, and James D. Tracy, 1:51–78. 2nd ed.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996.
———. Women and Gender in Early Modern Europe. 2nd ed. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Williams, Richard L. “Forbidden Sacred Spaces in Reformation England.” In Defining
the Holy: Sacred Space in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, edited by Andrew
Spicer and Sarah Hamilton, 95–114. Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT:
Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005.
Witte, John, and Robert M. Kingdon. Sex, Marriage, and Family in John Calvin’s
Geneva I: Courtship, Engagement, Marriage. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing, 2005.
Witte, Jr., John. The Reformation of Rights: Law, Religion and Human Rights in Early
Modern Calvinism. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Wolfe, Michael, ed. Changing Identities in Early Modern France. Durham, NC; London:
Duke University Press, 1996.
273
Yalom, Marilyn. A History of the Wife. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 2001.
Yardeni, Miriam. “French Calvinist Political Thought, 1534-1715.” In International
Calvinism 1541-1715, edited by Menna Prestwich. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1985.
Young, James. Life of John Welsh, Minister of Ayr. Edinburgh: J. Maclaren, 1866.
Young, R. V. “The Reformations of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.” In
Christian Marriage: A Historical Study, edited by Glenn Olsen. New York: The
Crossroad Publishing Company, 2001.
Zachman, Randall C., ed. John Calvin and Roman Catholicism: Critique and
Engagement, Then and Now. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008.
———. John Calvin as Teacher, Pastor, and Theologian: The Shape of His Writings and
Thought. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006.
Zeeden, Ernst Walter. Die Entstehung der Konfessionen: Grundlagen und Formen der
Konfessionsbildung im Zeitalter der Glaubenskämpfe. Munich/Vienna:
Oldenbourg, 1965.
———. Konfessionsbildung. Studien zur Reformation, Gegenreformation und
katholischen Reform. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1985.
Zuidema, Jason, and Theodore Van Raalte. Early French Reform: The Theology and
Spirituality of Guillaume Farel. Farnham, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate,
2011.