"We honour Calvin for his excellent parts": Bramhall on Calvin and the discipline of Geneva

Following on from last week's post on Bramhall and the non-episcopal continental Churches, an important passage in which Bramhall describes the absence of the episcopacy in Calvin's Geneva as "out of necessity":

No more did Calvin himself out of judgment, but out of necessity, to comply with the present estate of Geneva, after the expulsion of their Bishop: as might be made appear, it were needful, by his public profession of their readiness to receive such Bishops as the primitive Bishops were, or otherwise that they were to be reputed "nullo non anathemate dignid"; by his subscription to the Augustan Confession, which is for Episcopacy ... by his confession to the King of Polonia - "The ancient Church instituted Patriarchates, and assigned primacy to single provinces, that Bishops might be better knit together in the bond of Unity"; by his description of the charge of a Bishop that should join himself to the reformed Church, "to do his endeavour, that all the Churches within his Bishopric be purged from errors and idolatry, to go before the Curates" (or Pastors) "of his diocese by his example, and to induce them to admit the Reformation"; and, lastly, by his letters to Archbishop Cranmer, the Bishop of London, and a Bishop of Polonia.

In other words, this places Calvin's Geneva amongst those churches Bramhall describes as driven by "invincible necessity" to abandon the episcopate. Thus, Bramhall's was refusing to 'unchurch' the Church of Geneva for, to use his words from last week's post, "Should I condemn ... these as schismatics for want of Episcopacy, who want it out of invincible necessity?".

The above extract also places Calvin with those Bramhall recognises as those who honour and approve of episcopacy and, thus, free of the condemnation of those who rejected episcopacy as inherently 'papist'.

And all this, remember, from a leading Laudian: an important rejoinder to those who persist in portraying Laudianism as 'unchurching' non-episcopal Churches on the continent and as straightforwardly rejecting Calvin. Not only was the Laudian relationship with the non-episcopal Churches much more Hookerian than often supposed (as last week's post indicated), the Laudian appreciation of Calvin also stood in continuity with Hooker's measured combination of praise and critique: praising Calvin's Institutes and commentaries on Scripture, while also robustly critiquing and refuting his claims of divine right for the Genevan discipline (LEP, Preface 2.7-2.8).

It was, then, in true Hookerian fashion that Bramhall regarded Calvin:

We honour Calvin for his excellent parts, but we do not pin our religion either in doctrine or discipline or liturgy to Calvin's sleeve.

---

From The Works of The Most Reverend Father in God, John Bramhall, Volume II.