Calvin. History and Reception of a Reformation Week 4. The Spread of Calvinism Sequence 5. From Orthodoxy to the Enlightenment Hello. My name is Maria-Cristina Pitassi and I am a professor at the University of Geneva's Institute for Reformation History, of which I am also the Director. My area of specialization is the history of religious and philosophical ideas in the 17th and 18th centuries. Today's sequence will focus on the spread of Calvinism from Orthodoxy to the Enlightenment. The term "Orthodoxy" is used to describe the form that Calvinism took on during the late 16th century and the first few decades of the 17th. Orthodox Calvinism has two main features: 1) a rigorous definition of Calvinist doctrine; and 2) a gradual reintroduction of Aristotelian philosophy in the field of theology. Aristotle, indeed, had been more or less ostracized from theology by the first Protestant Reformers. Both of these features -- the crystallization of Calvinist doctrine and the reintroduction of Aristotelianism -- came about under the impetus of two important factors. The first was the requirements of education; the second was the requirements imposed by the conflict between the faiths. Indeed, because both sides -- Roman Catholics and Reformed Protestants -- needed to present a rigorous doctrine, the articles of faith came to be defined with much greater precision. Orthodox Calvinism reached its high point with the Synod of Dort (1618-19). In tracing the evolution of Calvinism from Orthodoxy to the Enlightenment, we will use Geneva as a case study. Why Geneva? Because in the 16th and 17th century, Geneva exerted considerable moral influence over the entire Reformed world, for which it represented the ideal city. At the time, Geneva was considered the symbol of Orthodoxy. Yet in the beginning of the 18th century, it became a symbol of the renewal of Reformed theology. Indeed, towards the end of the 17th century and the first few decades of the 18th, Geneva underwent a series of major reforms: educational and academic reforms, liturgical reforms,
and reforms in the art of preaching. All these reforms reflected the emergence of a new theological stance. At the heart of this new stance was a newfound respect for reason, which was now placed at the very center of theology. Reason's ability to construct a "natural" theology was acknowledged -- natural in the sense that reason was now considered able, without the help of revelation, to discover and prove the existence
of God, the immortality of the soul and the reality of life after death. At the same time, there arose a widespread rejection of the confessional controversies that had very much torn apart Western Christianity in the 17th century. Orthodoxy's strict, dogmatic
definitions were derided as excessive nit-picking, i.e., superfluous theological subtleties. This new attitude carried with it an increased openness and tolerance towards the other families of Protestantism, namely, the Lutherans and the Anglicans. One of the catalysts of this movement was a Genevan theologian, Jean-Alphonse Turrettini, who, though largely forgotten today, enjoyed considerable fame in his time. In 1757, a very famous article was published: the "Geneva" entry in d'Alembert's "Encyclopédie" (Voltaire probably helped d'Alembert write that entry). In it, d'Alembert presented the city (or Republic) of Geneva on several levels: social, political, cultural, intellectual and so on. Also included was a chapter devoted to religion in Geneva, which d'Alembert described in a very flattering light. D'Alembert, of course, was from the Catholic country of France, where Protestantism had been made illegal by the revoking of the Edict of Nantes. Still, he portrayed Genevan ministers as highly tolerant, very enlightened -- people whose morals and behavior were beyond reproach. In short, religious life in Geneva was presented as ideal. But d'Alembert's article also stated that the majority of Genevan ministers no longer believed in the divinity of Jesus Christ or in the notion of eternal punishment. In his conclusion, d'Alembert declared Genevan religion to be nothing else than a form of perfect Socinianism. Socinianism was a "heretical" offshoot of Protestantism that first developed during the late 16th century and continued to grow during the 17th. It featured a nontrinitarian Christology and placed reason at the center of its doctrine. As such, it was reviled by orthodox Protestants. As you can imagine, the community of Genevan pastors reacted with outrage to the publication of d'Alembert's article. In essence, d'Alembert had said: the only difference between your religion and Deism -- that is, a purely and simply natural religion -- is that you show a certain level of respect
towards Jesus Christ and the Bible. The Genevan pastors signaled their outrage in an official declaration. Several of them, such as Jacob Vernet and Jacob Vernes, published rebuttals in which they professed
their adherence to the Reformed tradition and to the ideals of the "Holy Reformation", as they put it. So who was right, d'Alembert or the Genevan pastors? It's hard to say. Genevan theology in the 18th century was very different from that of the 16th and 17th centuries. Indeed, two major changes had taken place, one anthropological, the other theological. First, Augustinian anthropology, centered as it was around the notions of original sin and the inherent corruption of human nature, had been gradually pushed to the side and replaced with a system that valued the human being -- and specifically man's ability to make something of himself by following the guidance of reason and conscience. Theologically, the predominance of dogma had waned, and morality was now viewed as centrally important. Reason was held in the highest esteem, with everything
that entails in terms of theology and Biblical interpretation. And unlike in the 16th century, tolerance and freedom of conscience had come to be considered no longer as peripheral concerns, but as full-fledged values. Thus, when the Genevan pastors claimed to be loyal to the ideals of the Reformation, they were right -- in the sense that they remained very attached to their Reformed identity. The only problem is that this identity had changed over the centuries. Theirs was a very different identity from that of the Reformed Protestants of the 16th century. Indeed, certain new markers of Reformed identity -- the identity by which Genevan pastors defined themselves -- had emerged. Just like in the 16th century, the Bible was still at the center of Reformed theology, as were ethical considerations and faith itself. But at the same time, new ideas had taken hold -- for instance, the idea that the only correct interpretation of Scripture is one that does not contradict the laws of reason. In a sense, Reformed theology was now haunted by the fear of a doctrine incompatible with reason. It was admitted, of course, that some mysteries were beyond human reason -- but never in contradiction with it. The second new marker that came to define Reformed identity was the centrality of morality and ethics, and of tolerance in particular. Thus it can be said that yes, the community of Genevan pastors did remain loyal to its Reformed identity. Yet this identity had greatly evolved over the centuries, gradually transforming itself to
reflect and adopt the new intellectual, cultural and philosophical ideals of the Enlightenment.
