Friends in Ministry: Calvin’s Circle of Friends¹

How does one sustain a movement of ideas over time? Is something as non-cognitive as social friendship a factor? Commonsensically, it would be impossible for someone like Calvin to be so dearly loved at his death if he had been a monster all his life. Not only was Calvin praised at his death, but his many friends joined him in embracing similar ideas and sought to cultivate them. The often-misrepresented Calvin enjoyed friendships in different locales and seasons—during his student days, in exile in Strasbourg, among Genevan institutions, and at his death. Indeed, the propulsion effect of friendships to cultivate longevity for an ideological movement may be observed in his life and legacy.²

Even a cursory study of Calvin’s letters reveals a pattern of friendship and collegiality.³ As van den Berg observes, without a wide circle of friends providing a colorful palette for the canvas, students would not be acquainted with Calvin’s finer points embedded within his extensive correspondence.⁴ To be sure, Calvin did not view himself as the only individual involved in these matters of reform. For “the other side of the story,” one should consult the small work, The Humanness of John Calvin by Richard Stauffer.⁵ In the foreword to that monograph, leading Calvin scholar J. T. McNeill chronicles how he had been led to question the “hearsay” about Calvin, which depicted him as largely inhumane. As he perused Calvin’s letters, he found to the contrary that Calvin was vividly humane, associated with rich and poor alike, and exhibited a sturdy loyalty to friends. He attributed to Calvin the following traits: gentleness, warmth, tenderness, generosity, hospitable, and other well-attested virtues.⁶

Richard Stauffer describes the “calumny” that Calvin has received from his enemies, as well as how he has “been misunderstood and misinterpreted by his great-grandchildren.”⁷ Another historian noted that no other Reformer generated more personal loyalty than Calvin. Emile Doumergue put it this way: “There were few men who developed as many friendships as he and who knew how to retain not only the admiration, but also the personal affection of these friends.”⁸ Abel Lefranc expressed the same sentiment this way: “The friendships which he inspired . . . among his teachers as well as among his colleagues, are strong enough testimonies to the fact that he knew how to combine with his serious and intense commitment to work, an affability and graciousness which won everyone over to him.”⁹

Whether he was in a university setting or whether he drew on the experience of his teachers to assist him, Calvin was a more sociable man than sometimes thought. He was a habitual letter writer, corresponding with jurists, governors, common people, and many ministers. These letters provide glimpses into the real Calvin. In these letters, for example, he referred to the affection he had for his teacher Melchior Wolmar, and at the same time mourned the passing of a ministerial friend, describing it as so staggering as to be himself burdened with grief.

The character and impulse of Calvinism (and Lutheranism as well) impacted the world through a fraternity of devoted and committed friends. American theologian Douglas Kelly confirms that the Calvinistic tradition wielded influence far beyond Switzerland and France.¹⁰ No individual could sow so many seeds without friends; these victories were scored by a team of colleagues.

During his student days, Calvin counted both Nicholas and Michael Cop as friends in Paris, with one study inferring: “Such friendships testify both to the worth and the attractiveness of his character, and contradict the old legend that he was an unsociable misanthrope.”¹¹ Prior to taking up residence in Geneva in 1536, Calvin enjoyed a friendship with the neighboring Lausanne Reformer, Pierre Viret, extending back almost a decade to their Paris years. Both studied under the same professors at the College de Montaigu,¹³ and both had a common friend/mentor in Guilluame Farel.¹⁴ So close were Calvin and Viret that when it came time to return to Geneva from his Strasbourg exile, Calvin asked Viret to prepare the way for his parousia.¹⁴ From that point on, whenever mediation was needed in Geneva, Calvin and the leaders often turned to Viret, who eventually settled there in 1559, following his own exile from Lausanne. So close were these friends that both were awarded full citizenship in Geneva on the same day, December 25, 1559.

Among Calvin’s correspondents, Viret was one of the most voluminous (with almost four hundred extant letters to him). Calvin and Viret would remain close until death took Calvin. Their shared traits of shyness, determination, sensitivity to sufferers, and tireless labor are reflected in their correspondence. Their epistolary testimony indicates that they were close enough to give blunt rebukes and correction, while also “commiserating with each other in their mutual grief over the loss of spouses whom they described as beloved partners and companions.”¹⁵ In terms of impact, Viret may even have wielded an influence far greater than previously known in terms of politics; he supported the right to resist magistrates more than any other of Calvin’s friends early on and likely persuaded Calvin (if not his disciples) toward that radical idea.¹⁶ Indeed, Robert Linder assessed the friendship to be so strong that to the four statues of Farel, Calvin, Beza, and Knox in Geneva’s Parc de Bastions, he asserts a statue of Viret should be added “symbolically just behind his good friend John Calvin’s left shoulder.”¹⁷

Calvin’s companionship with Theodore Beza is a model of friendship. With all the heady intellectual issues of the day, still what greatly impressed Beza was Calvin’s personal support and friendship. Thus Beza (and others) wrote about the camaraderie that Calvin shared with those around him. Calvin epitomized the modern notion of collegiality, and he was prudent enough to attract brilliant friends if at all possible. Once when Beza was ill, Calvin wrote about the “fresh fear” that “overwhelmed him with deep sorrow” upon learning of Beza’s sickness. He was “staggered . . . already weeping for him . . . grieved” and afraid of the loss that might come to the church and to him personally.¹⁸ Fortunately, Beza recovered.

Moreover, there were many other friends beside Beza. The consensual strains of thought that flowed through the literary veins of Bullinger, Bucer, Viret, and Calvin—soon to be supplemented by Knox, Beza, Hotman, and Junius Brutus—formed an intellectual tradition with Geneva at its epicenter and Calvin its architect. His friendship with these scholars would prove to be the glue that held the movement together in its delicate infancy.¹⁹ J. H. Merle D’Aubigne noted this mutual interchange of ideas in these words:

The catholicity of the Reformation is a noble feature in its character. The Germans pass into Switzerland; the French into Germany; in latter times men from England and Scotland pass over to the Continent, and doctors from the Continent into Great Britain. The reformers in the different countries spring up almost independently of one another, but no sooner are they born than they hold out the hand of fellowship. . . . It has been an error, in our opinion, to write as hitherto, the history of the Reformation for a single country; the work is one.^2o

Calvin’s associates served to stabilize and standardize an international movement. Their collective effort certainly led to its expansion.

Calvin, Farel, and Peter Viret were called “the tripod” or “three patriarchs,” so well-known was their friendship. In Calvin’s Commentary on Titus, he wrote that he did “not believe that there have ever been such friends who have lived together in such a deep friendship in their everyday style of life in this world as we have in our ministry.”²¹ Calvin, in that preface, referred to their “friendship and holy union,” averring that their union, despite holding forth from different locales, aided the unity of the church. Even when there were strong disagreements, Calvin was a paragon of friendship. When these reformers experienced family struggles or joys, Calvin shared those in his letters. These letters to various reformers are full of sympathy and quick to illustrate a healthy loyalty. Moreover, his correspondence with refugees exhibits his great compassion as well. He even built bridges to Luther’s disciples after the German leader denounced him.

Calvin’s acquaintance with Melanchthon began with correspondence to Bucer during Calvin’s Strasbourg exile. Calvin first met Melanchthon in person, however, at the 1539 Diet of Frankfort. At this early stage of the Reformation, the winds of “ecumenical optimism” blew freely among many Reformers. Calvin thought that Melanchthon agreed with him on a wide range of doctrinal topics, thinking even that Melanchthon perhaps held the key to potential unity with Lutherans.²² At this early stage of the Reformation, shortly after his arrival in Strasbourg, Calvin advised trying “every remedy” that might effect unity, “persever[ing] even to the last gasp.”²³ Despite the similarities in personality and scholarly bent—especially contrasted with their mercurial mentors, Luther and Farel—Calvin and Melanchthon never attained the unity first thought possible.

At times, as in any historic era, there were also disruptions of friendships.²⁴ Calvin had to assist church members with broken relationships, and he had to deal with friction among the Protestant Reformers. No leader should expect that all will always go smoothly in the area of friendship; Calvin learned to encourage others around him, however, and he delegated certain responsibilities to his associates.

Richard Stauffer concluded that Calvin was far from “the isolated hero or the lonely genius that has often been pictured. Throughout his career, he had relationships with friends who show him unfailing affection and indefatigable devotion. If he exerted such charm, it is certainly because he himself had been such an incomparable friend. . . . For the devotion which one showed him, he paid the tribute of unswerving loyalty.”²⁵ Following Calvin’s death, the continuing work of Reformation was entrusted to his colleagues, Beza being the chief.

Willem Van ‘t Spijker has explored the impact of Bucer’s friendship on Calvin in and after his time in Strasbourg.²⁶ Van ‘t Spijker reports that Calvin had recently rebuked Bucer only about three months prior to his April 1538 exile. Despite such, the magnanimity of Bucer is seen in his encouragement to young Calvin to seek shelter in Strasbourg.²⁷ From that time on, Bucer was a larger influence over Calvin than Farel. Van ‘t Spijker states, “A deep friendship developed between them, which continued as long as they lived and which made Calvin always talk about Bucer with deep appreciation, even after Bucer’s death. When Calvin was called to return to Geneva in 1541, he consented only on the condition that Bucer was to accompany him to reform the Geneva church together.” Bucer, at least through his commentary on Romans (1536; Calvin’s was published later in 1539), wielded a friendly and lasting influence over Calvin and his Institutes.

Just prior to returning to Geneva, Calvin became a citizen of Strasbourg and met a widow, Idelette de Bure, who became his wife. He also inherited Idelette’s two daughters by a previous marriage, becoming solely responsible to care for them after her death in 1549. When Idelette died in 1549, Calvin faced an unparalleled grief. His letters to Farel and Viret reveal both his faith in God and his love for her. In observing this grief, those watching developed admiration. He paid high tribute to Idelette after her death, as one who was an excellent companion either in exile, sorrow, or death.

Not only was it venerable, but the Company of Pastors also formed a circle of friends. One of the things that Calvin insisted on prior to returning to Geneva was that a presbyterate be formed. Rather than wishing for dictatorial rule, Calvin opted for collegiality in his fraternity of ministers. His Ecclesiastical Ordinances called for the establishment of a circle of ministers who would labor together, meeting frequently. Later, the formation of the Academy added another guild of friendships.

Wherever Calvinism spread, other “Venerable Companies of Pastors” cropped up, for example, in Potiers (1555), Orleans (1557), La Rochelle (1558), and Nimes (1561).²⁸ Perhaps the influence of the Academy helps explain these similarities. These ecclesiastical governing authorities precluded civil magistrates from acting as the only lawfully ordained governors; power had to be shared with the private sphere.

Calvin even enjoyed amicable relationships with many rulers. The amount of concerted interaction among Calvin, his Company of Pastors, and the Genevan city council may unsettle modern readers. Although there was a purposeful separation of jurisdictions, these reformers did not think it was healthy for the leading spheres of influence, church and state, to operate in strict isolation. The Genevan Senate and the Council of Two Hundred frequently consulted with the Genevan pastors. At times, the pastors suggested legislation or due processes that were approved by the civil council. While each power was to have “autonomy of function, the relationship envisaged was one of harmony in which church and state cooperated fruitfully with each other to the glory of God.”²⁹

It is customary to acknowledge friends in book dedications. It is also true that such dedications can, at times, be aspirational (more than accomplished) for friendships. Calvin, however, dedicated over a dozen volumes of his commentaries to political rulers who were counted as friends.

Earlier, Calvin had dedicated his 1543 The Bondage and Liberation of the Will to Melanchthon, hoping to underscore the unity among reformers on these loci. Calvin’s reasons for this dedication were numerous, including Melanchthon’s own professed love for Calvin and Calvin’s commendation of Melanchthon’s similar teaching, referring to Melanchthon in these halcyon years as a “most zealous supporter” and “a distinguished and very brave champion.”³⁰ Calvin, known for his love for brevity, clarity, and simplicity (perhaps going back to Melanchthon’s text on rhetoric used in Paris during Calvin’s student days), commended Melanchthon similarly for his sharpness, perspicuity, and simplicity.

When Calvin passed away almost a month after making these comments on May 27, 1564, the whole State regretted the death of “its wisest citizen . . . their common parent.”³¹ The widespread notice and sadness at his death should serve to correct any faulty view that his contemporaries either despised him or underestimated his importance. He was mourned, and his large number of friends would keep his memory alive far more than contemporaries would have predicted. This leader’s successes were recognized and celebrated.

These kinds of friendship show how reformers strove for unity. At the same time, they did not withhold rebukes. Calvin could severely accuse Melanchthon of being timid, too quick to concede matters that were not adiaphoric, and as unwilling to draw orthodox lines at some loci. To clarify any misunderstanding that these rebukes reflected animosity, Calvin wrote that, merely due to his reproofs (which Melanchthon gave him full liberty to issue), any construal that he and Luther’s lieutenant were “in opposition greatly wrongs both the one and the other, as well as the whole Church of God.”³² Yes, these reforming friendships defended one another’s reputations and sought to build bridges based on common belief, but no, they were not always affirming. Still, as late as December 1558, Calvin would write to Melanchthon, urging him to let his zeal burn more brightly (noting that even “pious friends” were criticizing his timidity) while cheering: “Whatever happens, let us cultivate with sincerity a fraternal affection towards each other, of which no wiles of Satan shall ever burst asunder the ties.³³

Few, if any, social or theological movements will endure if led only by an individual. For lasting impact, a set of ideas must be attractive to more than one or a few. It is, thus, not accidental that faculties or “schools” often have more longevity than even the finest individual thinkers of a generation. Barth would have little influence if there were no Barthians; the same is true for Luther and Lutherans. Interestingly, few identify themselves as generic Protestants; most of the living strands of Protestantism that thrive and survive anchor themselves in a Luther, a Calvin, or a Zwingli. Those same enduring Protestant traditions seem to have continuing circles of friendship at their fonts.

A few lessons on friendship may be reprised below, both from this history and from Scripture.

• To have a friend . . . be one.
• Look for a younger man to befriend and assist.
• Avoid instantaneous friendships; good friendships, as the Proverbs indicate (see Part 1), take cultivating.
• All men need correction, and none are above accountability. This does not mean, however, that there is no place to be a loyal advocate for your ministry friend. A friend stands and defends not his own reputation, but that of his friends.
• “Bartenders” and distant colleagues have a place in real life. Notwithstanding, while Calvin’s friendships were centuries prior to social media, online communities and friendships can no more minister to us in times of hardship than digital worship could substitute for in-person worship, as Covid proved. Digital friends may or may not exist. Investing in persons in our own communities or with whom we have regular interactions is needed for pastoral stability.

Notes

1. This section is summarized from my “Calvin’s Circle of Friends: Propelling an Enduring Movement,” in my Post Tenebrae: Essays on Calvin and Calvinism (2018).
2. The 1997 Calvin Studies Society Colloquium featured essays on Calvin’s friendship with Viret, Farel, Bullinger, Bucer, Melanchthon, and the Budé family. For more on this, one may also see the recent work by Machiel A. van den Berg, Friends of Calvin, trans. Reinder Bruinsma (Grand Rapids, MI/Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. Eerdmans Publ. Co., 2009), which includes vignettes of twenty-four friendships.
3. Van den Berg, Friends of Calvin, viii-ix.
4. See observations from these in Herman Selderhuis, John Calvin: A Pilgrim’s Life (Wheaton, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 2009).
5. Richard Stauffer, The Humanness of John Calvin (New York; Abingdon Press, 1971); all parenthetical page citations in this section are to that edition.
6. Stauffer, Calvin, 9.
7. Stauffer, 19.
8. Stauffer, Calvin, 47. Emile Doumergue wrote a 1923 French work on The Character of Calvinism: The Man, His System, The Church, The State (1923; rpr. Neuilly [Seine]: La Cause, 1931). In that work, he highlighted the following as distinguishing attributes, among others, of Calvin’s character: vivacity, joyishness, affection (Fr. mignardise, preciousness), nobility, and a concern to pitch his written style for common understanding.
9. Stauffer, Calvin, 51.
10. Douglas Kelly, The Emergence of Liberty in the Modern World (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1992), 37.
11. See “John Calvin,” NNDB. At Orleans, “His friends here were Melchior Wolmar, a German schoolmaster and a man of exemplary scholarship and character, François Daniel, François de Connam and Nicolas Duchemin; to these his earliest letters were written.”
12. Jeannine Olson has noted the friendship with the brothers Budé (Jean, Francois, and Louis) that extend back to Calvin’s student days in Paris. She also, “Viewing Calvin among his friends puts him, too, in a positive light. It also reveals how he accomplished as much as he did, for the people with whom he associated helped him with his work, especially his publications. Together they collectively shaped the Reformation from Geneva.” Jeannine Olson, “The Friends of John Calvin: The Budé Family,” in Calvin Studies Papers [1997] (Grand Rapids: CRC Product Services, 1998), 160.
13. Robert D. Linder, “Brothers in Christ: Pierre Viret and John Calvin as Soul-mates and Co-laborers in the Work of the Reformation,” in Calvin Studies Papers [1997] (Grand Rapids: CRC Product Services, 1998), 141. Linder also notes that Calvin broke with Farel after his mentor’s marriage to a lady half his age in 1558.
14. The well-chosen term is Linder’s; “Brothers in Christ,” 155. David N. Wiley believes that Calvin wanted Viret to assume the pastorate in Geneva, so that Calvin might stay in Strasbourg; “Calvin’s Friendship with Guillaume Farel,” in Calvin Studies Papers [1997] (Grand Rapids: CRC Product Services, 1998), 192.
15. Linder, “Brothers in Christ,” 150. They were also close enough to differ on the selection of a new wife after Elizabeth Viret’s death. Linder, 152.
16. Linderterms Viret’s view “more advanced and generous” toward the right of resistance than Calvin’s; “Brothers in Christ,” 154. For more on this see Linder’s The Political Ideals of Pierre Viret and chapter 4 of my Calvin in the Public Square (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 2009).
17. Linder, “Brothers in Christ,” 157.
18. Van den Berg, Friends of Calvin, 247.
19. Aurelio Garcia summarized the connection between the Zurich and Genevan reformers as follows: “Very often Bullinger would transmit this information, or conversely, we will find Calvin inquiring about events. Geneva in turn, was particularly closely involved with events in France and was well-acquainted with the life of congregations there. Very closely related to this theme of current news, is the evaluation of events. By means of third parties of directly, appraisals of historical happenings, or the clarification of the validity of rumors, would be carried out. Routine and domestic issues would be taken care of, such as the arrival of students, entrusted by their parents to the care of either city’s churches, by mediation of the pastors. On occasion, we find Bullinger and Calvin clarifying monetary accounts, usually in relation to the provision of some writing.” Aurelio Garcia, “Bullinger’s Friendship with Calvin: Loving One Another and Edifying the Churches,” in Calvin Studies Papers [1997] (Grand Rapids: CRC Product Services, 1998), 126.
20. J. H. Merle D’Aubigne, The History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century, vol. 3 (New York: American Tract Society, 1848), 416.
21. Stauffer, Calvin, 57.
22. Randall C. Zachman, “Restoring Access to the Fountain: Melanchthon and Calvin on the Task of Evangelical Theology,” in Calvin Studies Papers [1997] (Grand Rapids: CRC Product Services, 1998), 207. Zachman notes that although their friendship was strained at times—with numerous epistolary rebukes—nevertheless, the friendship lasted until Melanchthon’s death. Zachman highlights the difference in methodology between these two reformers, noting that the mutual admiration, however, remained. Calvin also thought that Melanchthon’s differences with Luther on God’s decrees might further ecumenical cooperation (Zachman, “Restoring Access,” 211).
23. Zachman, “Restoring Access,” 209.
24. Calvin had a “huge capacity for friendship. He maintained some friendships from childhood years into adult life. Two of his closest friends were Viret and Farel, with whom he shared the highs and lows of the Reformation cause. Calvin chided Farel when at the age of sixty-nine he married a much younger women. But this did not break their friendship. Calvin even urged restive members of Farel’s church to bear with their pastor as the old warrior looked for the comforts of married life. Calvin also extended the hand of friendship to men whose opinion on theological matters was different to his own, amongst them Luther’s deputy, Philip Melanchthon.” Guy Davies, “The Humanness of John Calvin by Richard Stauffer,” Exiled Preacher (blog), July 11, 2009.
25. Stauffer, Calvin, 71.
26. Willem Van ‘t Spijker, “Calvin’s Friendship with Martin Bucer: Did It Make Calvin a Calvinist?” in Calvin Studies Papers [1997] (Grand Rapids: CRC Product Services, 1998), 170–171.
27. Van ‘t Spijker, “Calvin’s Friendship,” 171.
28. Alister McGrath, A Life of John Calvin (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 1993) 184.
29. Philip E. Hughes ed., The Register of the Company of Pastors in the Time of Calvin (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1966), 7.
30. Zachman, “Restoring Access,” 211. As early as 1539, Calvin also interpreted Melanchthon’s differences with Luther on matters of the eternal decree as a point of contact. See Zachman, 215.
31. Calvin’s Farewell Address to the Ministers of Geneva (April 28, 1564), translated by Henry Beveridge.
32. Zachman, 224.
33. Zachman, 227. Nevertheless, Zachman (228) also notes the deterioration of ecumenicity after Melanchthon’s 1560 death, showing that Calvin began to view Lutheranism more negatively (“I am carefully on the watch that Lutheranism gain no ground, not be introduced into France”) until his death.

©David Hall. All Rights Reserved.

You can find the whole series here. 

---

RESOURCES

• Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
• The Heidelblog Resource Page
• Heidelmedia Resources
• The Ecumenical Creeds
• The Reformed Confessions
• The Heidelberg Catechism
• Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
• Why I Am A Christian
• What Must A Christian Believe?
• Heidelblog Contributors
• Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to

Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

---

Post authored by:

• David Hall

  

  Reverend David W. Hall is married to Ann, and they are parents of three grown children and grandparents of eight grandchildren. He has served as the Senior Pastor of Midway Presbyterian Church (PCA) since 2003. Previously, he served as Pastor of the Covenant Presbyterian Church in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (1984–2003) and as Associate Pastor at the First Presbyterian Church in Rome, Georgia (1980–1984). He was ordained to pastoral ministry in 1980. He was educated at Covenant Theological Seminary and is the editor and author of several volumes.

  More by David Hall ›