Calvin: Arrested and Imprisoned Jerome Bolsec, Then Wanted Him “Rotting in a Ditch"?

Here's a tidbit from a blog entry entitled, John Calvin: Heresy Hunter with an Axe to Grind:

In addition to Servetus, Jerome Bolsec was arrested and imprisoned for challenging Calvin during a lecture, then banished from the city. Calvin wrote privately about the matter saying that he wished Bolsec were “rotting in a ditch.”

Documentation
The documentation provided is, "Quoted in History of the Christian Church Volume VIII. p. 137 See online here. " This link doesn't go to the exact spot where Schaff discusses this. Here is the discussion in Schaff. 

Historical Context Via Schaff
Schaff explains that Jerome Bolsec actually interrupted John de St. André who was speaking that day (hence, a public disturbance), and challenged this minister, not Calvin. According to Schaff,

On the 16th of October, 1551, Bolsec attended the religious conference, which was held every Friday at St. Peter's. John de St. André preached from John 8: 47 on predestination, and inferred from the text that those who are not of God, oppose him to the last, because God grants the grace of obedience only to the elect. Bolsec suddenly interrupted the speaker, and argued that men are not saved because they are elected, but that they are elected because they have faith. He denounced, as false and godless, the notion that God decides the fate of man before his birth, consigning some to sin and punishment, others to virtue and eternal happiness. He loaded the clergy with abuse, and warned the congregation not to be led astray.

Calvin was in attendance, though Schaff says he “entered the church unobserved.” Calvin waited until Bolsec was finished, then had an impromptu debate with Bolsec, and refuted him. Schaff does not say Calvin had Bolsec arrested, nor was Bolsec arrested for challenging Calvin. Other church leaders were in attendance (for instance, Schaff says William Farel was also present). Schaff says, “The lieutenant of police apprehended Bolsec for abusing the ministers and disturbing the public peace.”

Schaff says the ministers of Geneva "drew up seventeen articles against Bolsec." Yes, Bolsec was eventually banished, but only after a number of other churches were asked to weigh in on what should be done with Bolsec (and not all of those churches were favorable to Calvin). Because of the collected work of all these churches, the milder sentence of banishment was imposed.

Rotting in a Ditch?
I’m not sure where the exact form of "Calvin wrote privately about the matter saying that he wished Bolsec were 'rotting in a ditch'" comes from. It’s similar to this from Called to Communion:

In 1551, Bolsec, a physician and convert to Protestantism, entered Geneva and attended a lecture on theology. The topic was Calvin’s doctrine of predestination, the teaching that God predetermines the eternal fate of every soul. Bolsec, who believed firmly in “Scripture alone” and “faith alone,” did not like what he heard. He thought it made God into a tyrant. When he stood up to challenge Calvin’s views, he was arrested and imprisoned.

What makes Bolsec’s case interesting is that it quickly evolved into a referendum on Church authority and the interpretation of Scripture. Bolsec, just like most Evangelicals today, argued that he was a Christian, that he had the Holy Spirit and that, therefore, he had as much right as Calvin to interpret the Bible. He promised to recant if Calvin would only prove his doctrine from the Scriptures. But Calvin would have none of it. He ridiculed Bolsec as a trouble maker (Bolsec generated a fair amount of public sympathy), rejected his appeal to Scripture, and called on the council to be harsh. He wrote privately to a friend that he wished Bolsec were “rotting in a ditch.”2

2 Letter to Madame de Cany, 1552.

This Called to Communion snippet is fascinating. Notice how the author, David Anders, restates the facts to give off the appearance that Bolsec interrupted Calvin's lecture. It was also not simply "Calvin's view's," but rather, the view of  John de St. André (the person lecturing), and the collective ministers of Geneva. Anders also leaves out that the entire affair was presented to a number of churches to weigh in on. Anders also presents the straw-man argument that Protestants have no right to church authority or discipline without an infallible church.

Anders does though provide a reference, "Letter to Madame de Cany, 1552." This letter can be found here. Calvin writes,

Madame,—I am very sorry that the praiseworthy act which you did about half a year ago, has met with no better return. This is because no good and true servant of God found himself within reach of such help, as that received by as wicked and unhappy a creature as the world contains. Knowing partly the man he was, I could have wished that he were rotting in some ditch; and his arrival gave me as much pleasure as the piercing my heart with a poniard would have done. But never could I have deemed him to be such a monster of all impiety and contempt of God, as he has proved himself in this. And I assure you, Madame, that had he not so soon escaped, I should, by way of discharging my duty, have done my best to bring him to the stake. 

Note the actual English translation is,  “I could have wished that he were rotting in some ditch.”  Note also, Bolsec is not named in this private correspondence. Bonnet, the translator of this letter, says

Who is the personage to whom these words refer, stamped at once by the inflexible spirit of the time and the stern rigour of the Reformer? The historian can only offer conjectures: can it be Jerome Bolsec? But a regular sentence had banished him from Geneva, and Calvin himself does not appear to have called for a more severe judgment against this innovator whom resentment bad transformed into a vile pamphleteer. "That fellow, Jerome, is driven out into perpetual exile by a public sentence. Certain revilers have spread abroad the falsehood, that we earnestly desired a much severer punishment, and foolishly, it is believed."—(Calvin to Bullinger, in the month of January 1552.) In that age of inexorable severity against unsound doctrine, Servetus only appeared at Geneva to expire at the stake, and Gentili only escaped the scaffold for a time, by the voluntary retraction of his opinions. To name Gentili, Servetus, Bolsoc, is to recall the principal victims of Calvinistic intolerance in the sixteenth century, but not to solve the mystery which attaches to the personage designated in the letter of Calvin to Madame de Cany.

Bonnet says that “The historian can only offer conjecture” as to who is meant. Bonnet then goes on to say, "… can it be Jerome Bolsec? But a regular sentence had banished him from Geneva, and Calvin himself does not appear to have called for a more severe judgment against this innovator whom resentment had transformed into a vile pamphleteer.”

Conclusion
In this age of "fake news" is it any surprise that the internet is filled with fake history as well? A closer look at the facts show that Bolsec was not "arrested and imprisoned for challenging Calvin during a lecture." Yes, Bolsec was banished, but it was not simply at the whim of Calvin. Nor is it a certainty that Calvin "wished Bolsec were 'rotting in a ditch'.'"

It is shocking to our modern scruples that a person could be banished for a perceived heretical view. Calvin and Bolsec were part of a world in which this happened. There are still churches to today (though few probably few in number!) that practice a form of banishment: excommunication. While a person is not ostracized from an entire society, they could be ostracized from certain aspects of a spiritual community.

Yes, Calvin had an important influence in Geneva, yes he could be intolerant, yes, there were tragedies in Geneva that Calvin played a part in.  While Calvin had his faults, flaws, and sins, this closer look shows there are those who wish to vilify Calvin and make him the tyrant of Geneva. The question though is... why? Why is it so important to characterize Calvin as a blood-thirsty dictator?  That's a topic for a future blog entry!

Addendum
For further reading, see: Robert Godfrey, Calvin, Bolsec and the Reformation. Godfrey says:

Jerome Bolsec, who was a Carmelite monk and doctor of theology in Paris, was drawn to the Reformation and so forced to leave France. By early 1551 he had settled in the canton of Geneva working as a physician. From early on he became a critic of Calvin's doctrine of predestination in a variety of ways and settings.

And also:

The trial of Bolsec proceeded despite such advice, especially charging Bolsec with attacking the religious establishment of Geneva and bringing scurrilous charges against its doctrine. On December 23, 1551 he was banished permanently from Geneva. He eventually returned to the Roman Church and in 1577 wrote a vicious biography of Calvin which propagated many false stories about Calvin. Bolsec died in 1584.

Calvin: I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard.

In a recent discussion, the following John Calvin quote was provided:

Letter to the Marquis Paet, chamberlain to the King of Navarre, 1561. "Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels [Anabaptists and others], who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

This quote has been around for quite awhile, receiving its popularity because of its negative reference to Michael Servetus, "I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard." Here, Calvin directly admits to having Servetus killed. This admission would be contrary to the popular defense of Calvin's involvement that he had no authority in Geneva to put anyone to death.   Here is not the place to delve into a defense or prosecution of Calvin's involvement in the execution of Servetus. What interested me is the actual letter this quote comes from and the possibility it may be a forgery.

Documentation
In the snippet above, the only documentation provided is that the quote is from a 1561 letter "to the Marquis Paet, chamberlain to the King of Navarre." If you search the first phrase of the snippet, it becomes obvious it's a blatant cut-and-paste. For example, you can find it in the exact form here and here. A more broad search demonstrates the quote was often used in the 1800's.  For instance,  in the 1848 book, The life of Michael Servetus, the author states,

No one could know the history of Calvin and Servetus better than Voltaire. He affirms that the former acted towards the latter with treachery and theological hatred; that "when he saw his adversary in confinement, he loaded him with every kind of insult and vile treatment that base minds are wont to do when they get the upper hand. At length, by continually pressing the judges to employ the credit of those he pointed out to them, and by proclaiming in person, and by his emissaries, that God demanded the execution of Michael Servetus, he had him burned alive, and took a cruel pleasure in being a witness to his sufferings; he who, if he had set a foot in France would have heen sent to the stake himself, and who had so loudly exclaimed against all persecution." The finishing stroke to this picture of Calvin may be found in a letter written with his own hand, which is still preserved in the castle of Bastie-Roland, near Montelimar: it is directed to the Marquis de Poet, high chamberlain to the king of Navarre, and dated Sept. 30, 1561. "Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those zealous scoundrels who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."*

* Works of Voltaire translated by Smollet, and Franklin, &;c.—Lond. 1763. vol. iv. pp. 82—84.

This old book gives a reference to  the works of Voltaire vol. 4.  In the 1761 edition, Voltaire's comment can be found on page 84 as part of a chapter entitled "Calvin and Servetus":

It appears that Voltaire was the source for this popular quote, and the English translator provided the form that it's in. A contemporary English version of Voltaire's words can be found here. Voltaire had a severe view of Calvin (as this  biographical book documents). This letter from Calvin cited by Voltaire does indeed exist. It was included in Dr. Jules Bonnet's collection of Calvin's letters, published in French in the 1850's. There is an English translation of Calvin's letters from Bonnet's French. The letter in question can be found in Letters of John Calvin Vol. IV, pp. 439-440. There is a typo in the English translation. In the letter below, the date is said to be "8th September, 1561." The French version verifies that this is an error, the actual date should have been September 13, 1561.


Context

XVII.—To MONSEIGNEUR, MONSEIGNEUR DU POET, GRAND CHAMBERLAIN OF NAVARRE AND GOVERNOR OF THE TOWN OF MONTELIMART, AT CREST..

MONSEIGNEUR :—What have you judged of the Colloquy of Poissy? We have conducted our business safely. The Bishop of Valence as well as the others have signed our profession of faith. Let the king make processions as much as he pleases, he will not be able to hinder the preaching of our faith, harangues in public, nor gain anything except to stir up the people already too disposed for rebellion. The brave Seigneurs de Montbrun and de Beaumont abandon their opinions. You spare neither courses, nor cares; labour, you and yours will find their turn (sic). One day, honour, glory, and riches will be the reward of so much pains. Above all, do not fail to rid the country of all those zealous scoundrels that stir up the people by their discourses to make head against us, blacken our conduct, and wish to make our belief pass for a reverie. Such monsters should be smothered, as I have done here, by the execution of Michel Servetus the Spaniard. Do not imagine that in future any one will take it into his head to do the like. 

For the rest, Monseigneur, I forgot the subject for which I did myself the honour to write to you, which is humbly to kiss your hands, supplicating you to take in good part the quality which I shall covet during my whole life of . . . 

MONSEIGNEUR,
 Your very humble and affectionate servant, 

                                                                J. CALVIN.

At Geneva, this 8th September, 1561.
[Fr. Copy—Arch. of M. le Marquis d' Alissac a Valreas.]  

Conclusion 
Dr. Jules Bonnet included this letter in a chapter entitled, "An Historical Calumny Refuted." There Bonnet documents the spuriousness of the letter. He mentions that the first publication of the letter was in 1750, and indeed that Voltaire popularized the quote in question. He also documents that letter swept across nineteenth century scholarship. After personally seeing the letter, Bonnet argues it (along with another one) is a fraud. His reasons are as follows:

1st. These originals, written by Calvin’s own hand (as Voltaire affirms), are anything but autographs. They are neither in the handwriting of Calvin, nor in that of Jonvillers his secretary, nor of Antony Calvin, who sometimes held the pen under the dictation of the Reformer during the latter years of his life.

2nd. If these pieces are not in the handwriting of Calvin, still less do we find in them his style, admired by Bossuet himself and one of the finest in our language. That style is concise, nervous, and dignified, bearing the impress of a strong individuality more easy to caricature than to imitate.

3rd. From the form let us pass to the substance. The two letters swarm with mistakes and historical blunders which betray the work of an unskillful forger. The first, dated the 8th May, 1547, and addressed to M. du Poet, General of the Religion in Dauphiny, bestows this title on this seigneur, fifteen years before the period in which he declared for the Reformation, and when the new faith, having neither church nor soldier in Dauphiny, could scarcely enumerate some obscure martyrs in that province. The second, dated the 13th September, 1561, has for superscription — to M. du Poet, grand chamberlain of Navarre and Governor of Montelimart, dignities with which he was invested only twenty years later, in 1584. It is one of Calvin’s accusers, M. Aubenas himself, who informs us of that, without remarking that the notice which he has devoted to M. du Poet is the best refutation of the authenticity of the letters attributed to the Reformer.

The first reason given does not necessarily prove the letter is a forgery. I would assume Dr. Bonnet was familiar enough with the writing styles of the men he mentions, yet it does not rule out that Calvin could have dictated the letter to someone else as an exception. The second reason given is even less convincing. However, the third reason, of blunders with dates, is compelling. The alleged letter gives someone a title he did not hold until twenty years later... that is indeed a problem, and it's enough then to pull the letter from historical evidence until further notice.  I did a cursory search to see if any more recent Calvin scholarship discussed the letter, and did not come across anything, yet. When I mentioned in dialog that the letter is a suspected forgery, the response given back was "James I Don't believe you, both quotes are found in numerous places especially the quote about Servetus." But then again, this person thinks Calvin was a "demon possessed murderer" so it probably wouldn't matter if there were a dozen more reasons proving the letter spurious.