PROTESTANT POLEMIC IN POST-EDICT FRANCE: PIERRE DU MOULIN

AND THE SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY HUGUENOT WORLD, 1598-1625

A Thesis

Presented to

The Faculty of Graduate Studies

of

The University of Guelph

by

Nicole M. Drisdelle

In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree

Master of Arts

September, 2010

© Nicole M. Drisdelle, 2010 Library and Archives Bibliothèque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l'édition

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington OttawaONK1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada

Your file Votre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-71479-9 Our file Notre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-71479-9

NOTICE: AVIS:

The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l'Internet, prêter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non- support microforme, papier, électronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission.

In compliance with the Canadian Conformément à la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privée, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont été enlevés de thesis. cette thèse.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis.

1+1 Canada ABSTRACT

PROTESTANT POLEMIC IN POST-EDICT FRANCE: PIERRE DU MOULIN AND THE SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY HUGUENOT WORLD, 1598-1625

Nicole M. DrisdeIIe Advisor: University of Guelph, 2010 Peter A. Goddard

This thesis is an investigation of French Reformed minister Pierre du Moulin as an important figure, both in the defence of the Protestant faith, and in ongoing efforts from the sixteenth into the seventeenth century by Protestants to define their role as a body of faithful and as a minority in France. Pierre du Moulin was increasingly active within the French Reformed Church as both a minister who sought to guide the Huguenot in correct orthodoxy, and a vehement defender of the faith. A prolific writer, du Moulin soon emerged as a prominent polemicist in an international Protestant movement that was fighting to defend and define itself to King and Pope. As a Reformed minister who vocalized his defence of the Protestant faith in often controversial dialogues, a study of du Moulin will shed further light on the nature of Protestantism in the seventeenth century. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost I would like to thank my Advisor, Peter A. Goddard, and co- Advisor, Greta Kroeker, for directing me in and towards a project that I care passionately about. For their advice, patience, feedback, and for believing in this project with me, I am eternally grateful. I must extend further thanks to Philip Benedict for his kind permission to use his research on Huguenot book readership in Metz; though ultimately much of this valuable work was not re-produced in this work, it was immensely helpful in assessing my own subjects place in seventeenth-century Huguenot book ownership. Thanks must also be extended to Mack Holt for his advice and kind words of encouragement. I would also like to thank my family and friends who have supported me throughout this endeavour; thanks especially for my mother Sandra, my best friend Tara, and my grandma Carol, who answered their phones at all hours of day and night and who kept me sane during what can sometimes be a rather trying process. Thanks as well to my father and step-mother, whose support I could not have done without. Thank you, finally, to the memory of my grandfather, Lou Joseph Drisdelle, whose desire to see his grandchildren succeed made the fulfillment of my dream possible.

Nicole M. Drisdelle

? TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments i Table of Contents ii

Chapter Introduction 1

1. Pierre du Moulin in Paris 21

2. Pierre du Moulin and James I 43

3. Protestant Unity and a Christian Reformed Church 64 Conclusion 83 Bibliography 94

11 1

Introduction

The seventeenth century in Europe is often characterized as a period during which the continent was struggling to find stability after the previous upheaval of the Reformation.1 In France, this characterization often tends to situate the first half of the seventeenth century as a transitory period, placed neatly between what has been considered the end of the religious wars under Henri IV and the administrative consolidation under Louis XIV. It is true that this period marked one of adjustment for France: having just ended over three decades of civil war in 1598, the country was struggling to come to grips with the existence of a Protestant minority, or as the Edict of Nantes seemed to provide, a "state within a state." Accurate though this characterization may be, in its focus on how Catholic France was struggling to come to terms with the Huguenots, it has failed to consider the nature of French Protestantism in its own right. The Edict of Nantes had granted the Huguenots freedom of worship and the right to maintain strongholds in certain areas of the country (the most well known being La Rochelle). These freedoms afforded the Huguenot movement a level of stability and security within France, though that security would always be dependent on the protection of the crown. From their new position as a legally recognized minority in France, the Huguenot continued to struggle to both defend and define their faith. Reformed minister of Paris Pierre du Moulin was at the forefront of this growing international Huguenot community. In England he enjoyed the patronage of James I5 and his works were published across Europe in French, English, Latin, Dutch, and German. To date, few studies of this prolific Reformed polemicist have been undertaken, in part because du

1 See Theodore K. Rabb's The Strugglefor Stability in Early Modern Europe (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975). 2

Moulin' s publication of a number of lengthy works in at least ten different languages is quite a large task to tackle, but the oversight may also be attributed to the tendency to conclude studies of the religious conflicts with the end of the civil wars in 1598, a timeline that would exclude du Moulin' s polemical work. To limit studies of the religious conflicts to the period before 1598 is to limit these studies to examinations that focus heavily on Catholic activity. To a certain extent this can be understood by the fact that, because the Protestant community before 1 598 was often forced to operate underground, fewer documents survive; but the period after 1598, when Protestants in France were permitted to function more openly, demonstrates that to conclude studies of the religious conflicts with the Edict of Nantes overlooks a significant period in the development of the French Protestant identity. It was during the first half of the seventeenth century that Protestant polemic flourished, and in order to gain a complete understanding of both sides of the religious conflicts, the same consideration that has been afforded to the Catholics in the sixteenth century must now be extended more fully to the Huguenots in the 1600s. What is meant when we speak of "Protestant" or "Huguenot polemic" during this period? "Huguenot" was the derogatory name given to the French Protestants during the sixteenth-century wars of religion. Different historians have offered different explanations for the word's origin, and the word has been adopted in the historiography to refer to the population of French Protestants in the Early Modern period. The French

2 Brian G. Armstrong and Vivienne Larminie, "Du Moulin, Pierre (1568-1658)," in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, ed. H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison (Oxford: OUP, 2004); online ed., ed. Lawrence Goldman, October 2008. 3 See, for example, Nicola M. Suthelrand, The Huguenot Strugglefor Recognition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1 979); Philip Benedict's Christ 's Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002) also offers an excellent overview of the different titles given to, and adopted by, the various Protestant groups across Europe. 3

Protestants followed a Calvinist program, but to call them "Calvinists" would be incorrect. The terms Calvinist and Calvinism were used "to identify the essential features of the larger tradition to which Calvin attached himself but of which he was not the sole spokesman. While a few of those attacked as Calvinists accepted the label for the purposes of public debate, most rejected it as the appropriate name for the party or church of which they were a part."4 Philip Benedict has argued that because the term Reformed had emerged "as the most common label amid the broader process of confessional differentiation and hardening," it is the more historically accurate and less misleading term.5 It is also the term that the French Protestants were using by the seventeenth century. The present work will therefore refer to the French Protestant church as French Protestants of the seventeenth century had: the Reformed Church of France. While the term Reformed will be used to refer specifically to the French Protestant Church, "Huguenot" will be used to refer to the French Protestant population in France. "Polemic" and "theology" are two other terms that we must clarify for the purposes of the present study. In its most basic sense, theology refers to the study of the nature of God and Scripture. Where debates of a theological nature had dominated during the sixteenth century, the seventeenth century instead gave rise to a process of confessionalization and hardening of orthodoxy. Instead of theological debates, we witness the rise of polemics, or works of controversy. Works of polemic were written specifically to argue or dispute religious matters against the position held by one's adversary. The seventeenth-century polemical battle was therefore not fought over new or emerging theories, but polemic was instead directed at refuting, and thereby undermining

4 Philip Benedict, Christ's Churches, xxiii. 5 Ibid. 4 the legitimacy of, the accepted position of either Catholic or Protestant orthodoxy. "Huguenot polemic" therefore refers to the controversial works written specifically by French Protestants. The term "polemic" was not coined until the 1630s and up to this point Pierre du Moulin (and others like him) would have considered themselves to be "controversialists," or even "defenders of the faith."6 Although the 1630s falls outside of the timeline of the present study, "polemic" is the best description of the works of controversy that du Moulin published over the course of his life and both "controversialist" and "polemicist" will be used to describe du Moulin' s activities in the present study.

The trend in the study of the French Reformed Church has tended towards exclusive focus on sixteenth-century figures because of the religious wars in France during this period; figures like Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples, Agrippa d'Aubigné, Theodore Beza, and above all, Jean Calvin, have received most of the attention to date. Changes in the field of study over the last thirty years, however, are finally allowing us to shed light on figures such as Pierre du Moulin, who were central to the seventeenth-century Huguenot movement. As minister to the Paris congregation at Charenton, du Moulin sought to play a leading role in the development of the seventeenth-century French Reformed movement. An orthodox Calvinist, du Moulin' s own theology led him to develop a program for the promotion of a united, pan-European Christian church under the banner of French Calvinist doctrine. Du Moulin was the most influential French polemicist in the first half of the seventeenth century and served as the theological head

6 Benjamin Boyce, The Polemic Character, 1640-1661: A Chapter in English Literary History (New York: Octagon Books, 1 969), iv-vi. 5 of the Huguenot movement during this period in much the same way Beza and Calvin had before him. As stated above, this period witnessed little in terms of theological innovation, and so when du Moulin is referred to as the "theological head" of the

Reformed in France, I am referring to the fact that his work the Bouclier de la Foy became the program of seventeenth-century Huguenot belief, just as Calvin's Institutes had in the sixteenth century. Furthermore, his articulation of a program for the union of all Protestant churches in Europe was the most ambitious and unique program of its kind. A Huguenot minister and successor of Calvin and Beza, Pierre du Moulin was increasingly active within the French Reformed Church as both a minister who sought to guide the French Reformed in correct orthodoxy, and a vehement defender of the faith. A prolific writer, du Moulin soon emerged as a prominent polemicist in an international Protestant movement that fought to defend and define itself to King and Pope. Born in France the son of a newly converted Protestant minister, Pierre du Moulin' s childhood was shaped by the turbulence of the religious wars. In 1588 he was forced by poverty and the dangerous situation in Sedan to leave France and continue his education in England. There he was educated at Cambridge, after which he attended the University of Leiden in the Netherlands. Du Moulin would make several journeys back to England over the course of his life, becoming a respected friend and advisor to King James I. His penchant for debate and controversy placed du Moulin as one of the leading voices of French Protestantism in France, England, the Netherlands, and elsewhere in Europe, and he was published in over ten languages.7 Du Moulin offers an excellent chance to gain further

7 This brief sketch of Pierre du Moulin's life is indebted to Brian G.Armstrong's article for the, Oxford Dictionary ofNational Biography "Pierre du Moulin," and the biographical sketch provided in the opening of his Bibliographia Monolaei: An Alphabetical, Chronological, and Descriptive Bibliography ofthe works ofPierre du Moulin (1568-1658) (1997). 6 insight into theological developments within the seventeenth-century French Protestant community - a topic Philip Benedict laments "we still know too little about." As part of a generation that grew up after the Reformation, du Moulin never experienced a Europe united under one faith, as it had been under the Catholic Church. His death in 1658 came only a decade after the Peace of Westphalia ended the Thirty Years War and, for all intents and purposes, the religious wars that had been ongoing since the Reformation. The proliferation of his works, his international status, and his impressive ninety year life span make du Moulin an ideal character for further investigation into the French Protestant movement and its developments in the seventeenth century.

Up until the 1970s, events of the sixteenth, and only occasionally the seventeenth, century religious conflicts in France were interpreted under either one of two models: the confessional model, born during the time of the conflicts themselves as Catholics and Protestants wrote to defend their respective faiths,9 and the political model, which held that religion was merely a "cloak" used by the French nobility to mask their true ambitions.10 It has only been in the last thirty years that critical studies of the socio- cultural conditions and the role of religion as a determining factor in the religious conflicts have emerged. The most significant breakthroughs in the study of the polemics

8 Benedict, The Faith and Fortunes ofFrance's Huguenots, 1600-85 (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2001), 11. 9 Robert M. Kingdom's Myths About the St. Bartholomew 's Day Massacres 1572-1576 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1988) and Brad S. Gregory's Salvation at Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999) are both excellent studies in the way in which Catholic and Protestants (and in Gregory's study, Anabaptists) consciously constructed matryologies to justify their cause. Such works, originating in the periods of the conflicts themselves, resulted in a centuries-long tradition of writing the history of the religious conflicts along confessional lines. 10 James W. Thompson's The Wars ofReligion in France, 1559-1576; the Huguenots, Catherine de Medici, Philip II (New York: F. Ungar Publishing Co., 1957) and J. E. Neale's The Age ofCatherine de Medici (London: J. Cape, 1943) remain the two best examples of the politics-centered interpretation of the French wars of religion. 7 of the wars of religion were actually made in studies of Catholic activities during the sixteenth-century conflicts. This is not surprising given that, in previous studies of the religious conflicts of sixteenth and seventeenth-century France, Catholic preachers have received far more attention than their Protestant counterparts. Natalie Zemon-Davis and

Barbara Diefendorf both wrote influential studies on the key role that Catholic preachers played in inciting popular acts of violence on the part of the Catholics in the sixteenth- century religious conflicts.11 Such studies are indebted to the anthropological methods of Emile Durkheim and Clifford Geertz and the paradigm shift of the 1970s, which breathed new life into the subject. The 1972 anniversary of the Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre coincided with a larger movement in the field of religious history to incorporate analysis of social, cultural, economic, and international (i.e.: foreign policy) impulses, instead of focusing exclusively on politics and/or religion. New works emerged that considered both religion and politics, rejecting the previous thesis of mutual exclusivity. The insight that Davis and Diefendorf provided forced the field to consider the role of religion, specifically the role of priests as leaders of their flocks, in the French religious conflicts. It also brought attention to the significant role of individuals, again looking specifically at the role of local religious leaders, in the events of the French religious conflicts.

Certainly studies analyzing the key role of Huguenot ministers and theologians in these events existed, but the socio-cultural approach of the 1970s in works such as

11 Natalie Zemon Davis, "The Rites of Violence: Religious Riot in Sixteenth-Century France," first published in Past and Present 59 (May 1973). Reprinted in Natalie Zemon Davis, Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight Essays (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1 975); Barbara Diefendorf, "Prologue to a Massacre: Popular Unrest in Paris 1557-1572," The American Historical Review 90 NO. 5 (December 1985); Barbara Diefendorf "Simon Vigor: A Radical Preacher in Sixteenth-Century Paris," The Sixteenth Century Journal 1 8 No. 3 (Autumn 1 987); Barbara Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross: Catholics and Huguenots in Sixteenth-Century Paris (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991). 8

Natalie Zemon-Davis' "The Rites of Violence," emphasised the study of religion as a body of believers, and questions of theology were of secondary concern. Recently, Mack Holt's call to "put religion back" into the French religious conflicts, together with his extension of the religious wars timeline to consider the Huguenot rebellions of the 1620s, has introduced the methodological groundwork to expand interpretations of the French religious conflicts to include explorations of the Reformed controversialists during its most important phase of development, the early seventeenth century, by examining the works of significant figures in that period like Pierre du Moulin.12 By examining the impact of Pierre du Moulin's efforts towards Protestant unity and his theological defence of the Reformed church, it is hoped that this study will expand on our understanding of the nature of French Protestantism, and more generally, the growing international

Protestant community. Previous study has been undertaken, primarily in French, of Pierre du Moulin and his role in the push for Protestant unity. A handful of studies appeared in the late 1 800s, but the first significant modern work appeared in 1966 by Lucien Rimbault: Pierre du Moulin (1568-1658): Un Pasteur Classique à I 'age Classique. Even in 1966 Rimbault remarked that "il est suprenant de constater qu'aucune étude d'ensemble sur sa vie et son oeuvre [a été produit]."13 By attempting to present a full account of du Moulin's life, Rimbault pays little attention to the controversy that du Moulin was involved in, despite arguing that "la polémique n'est qu'une forme de son ministère."14 Brian Armstrong has

12 See Mack P. Holt, "Putting Religion Back into the Wars of Religion." French Historical Studies 18 No. 2 (1993): 524-551 and The French Wars ofReligion, 1562-1629. New Approaches to European History (New York,; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. 13 Lucien Rimbault, Pierre du Moulin (1568-1658): Un Pasteur Classique a Gage Classique (Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1966), 7. 14 Rimbault, 8. 9 argued that, by characterizing du Moulin as "un pasteur classique à l'âge classique," Rimbault has misunderstood his subject completely. 15 Rimbault's assertion that du Moulin imagined himself as a "Ministre de la parole de Dieu" who took his role as a "défenseur de la foi" quite seriously is supported by looking at the entire body of du Moulin' s works and career16 - though Rimbault's reliance on du Moulin' s own account of his life in his autobiography leads Rimbault to perpetuate several small facts that

1 7 Armstrong has since proven false. In his introduction to the comprehensive bibliography he composed on all of the editions of du Moulin's works that he could track down in various archives across Europe and North America, Armstrong notes two colleagues who, after years of research, abandoned their projects on du Moulin. Armstrong's own project took twenty years to complete, but he died before producing his own monograph on the subject. Nevertheless, Armstrong has left us with a number of articles and other works that incorporate du

Moulin, constituting the last and most recent work on the seventeenth-century polemicist to date.

The first of the two articles was published in 1988 as part of Robert Schnucker's edited work Calviniana: Ideas and Influence ofJohn Calvin. In the article, titled "The Changing Face of French Protestantism: the Influence of Pierre du Moulin," Armstrong attempts to prove that du Moulin's noble heritage and his position as a leading polemicist in seventeenth-century French Protestantism solidified the noble leadership of the movement. Armstrong's thesis here has been disproven by a number of works that have

15 Armstrong, Bibliographia Molinaei (1997). 16 Rimbault, 8; 33. 17 For example, Rimbault recounts the story of du Moulin's brother, allegedly buried alive during the wars of religion for being a Protestant; In his Bibliographia Molinaei, Armstrong notes that no evidence has been produced to support this story. Armstrong, Bibliographia Molinaei (1997). 10 demonstrated that, after the Edict of Nantes a number of French nobles, following in the footsteps of Henri IV, abandoned the Reformed faith.18 Nevertheless, Armstrong further investigates the role that du Moulin played in two key developments in seventeenth- century Protestantism: the French Protestant view of the ministry, and the development of scholasticism in French Protestant theology. Du Moulin' s preference for the English Episcopal model is unsurprising given his close ties to the country as a favourite of James I, a topic that will be addressed in Chapter 3 of this work. As for the development of scholasticism, Armstrong points to du Moulin' s background and training as a Professor of Logic in Leiden, the popularity of his treatise on logic, the Elementa Logicka, his style of polemics in which he trusted to his skills in logic to prove the truth of his words, and his broad readership across several languages to prove that "it was only during the career of Pierre du Moulin that [reason and the logical system] became the normal program, almost the exclusive program, of the theological enterprise."19 Armstrong's Bibliographia Molinaei does not make any argument, but rather is an invaluable compilation of the works of du Moulin.

The argument of this paper - that Pierre du Moulin was the theological head of the French Huguenot movement at home, and that he was foremost amongst a growing international Protestant discourse because of his unique plan for union - depends upon two premises that have been established by the previous historiography: Firstly, that there

18 For example: International Calvinism, 1541-1715 Menna Prestwich ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985); Mack Holt The French Wars ofReligion, 1562-1629 (1995); Philip Benedict Christ's Churches Purely Reformed (2002). 19 Brian G. Armstrong, "The Changing Face of French Protestantism: The Influence of Pierre du Moulin." In Calviniana: Ideas and Influence ofJean Calvin. Sixteenth Century Essay & Studies 1 (Kirksville, Mo.: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1988), 146. 11 was, in fact, a growing international Protestant community in the seventeenth century; and secondly, that the act of defending the faith through printed works of controversy - otherwise known as polemics - formed an integral part of this community. This project will build on the current historiography through a case study of Pierre du Moulin as an important figure, both in the defence of the Protestant faith, and in ongoing efforts from the sixteenth into the seventeenth century by Protestants to define their role as a body of faithful and as a minority in France. Du Moulin' s plan for union was also unique amongst his co-religionists in both France and the European continent. Unlike the earlier sixteenth-century leagues in Northern Europe and the German principalities, which were primarily alliances of defence motivated by a combination of religious and political interests, du Moulin' s plan was not a defensive alliance; it contained no provisions or intent for military activity of any kind, and it promoted a strictly religious program for union. Du Moulin's plan therefore offers an interesting exploration of the growth of an international Protestant discourse in Early Modern Europe that was not based on military activities or political alliances. As a Protestant minister who vocalized his defence of the Protestant faith in often controversial dialogues, further investigation of the career of du Moulin will shed further light on the nature of Protestantism in the seventeenth century.

International Calvinism

In 1980 Nicola M. Sutherland broke with the traditional model of interpretation of the wars of religion with her work The Huguenot Struggle for Recognition. In it, Sutherland argued for an international focus on the events of the wars of religion. She recognized the importance of religion, but maintained that events in France were driven by politics, specifically the international situation. She argued that the Huguenot struggle 12 in France was from the beginning a struggle that was intimately related to the rest of Europe, specifically England (because Mary Queen of Scots was married to Francis II, dauphin of France) and Spain (because of Huguenot support for the Protestant revolts in the Spanish Netherlands).20 Similarly, in 1985 Menna Prestwich's edited volume International Calvinism, 1541-1715 presented a series of essays on the international nature of Calvinism during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Each of the articles in the volume is concerned with a specific country and the way in which the international appeal of Calvinism manifested there. Protestantism in France is addressed in four chapters, each concerned with a different phase of development in the Huguenot movement; no other country receives as much attention. In her introduction to the work Prestwich argues that Calvinism became an international movement from the moment Jean Calvin, a Frenchman, settled in Geneva.21 It is indeed difficult to exaggerate the importance of Geneva to the Reformed movement in France, or the fact that Calvin was himself French by birth. A French exile in Geneva, Calvin "could never entirely abandon

99 his native France or his hope of seeing it converted to the true religion." Although her 1991 publication Beneath the Cross is more concerned with the Catholic community in Paris, Barbara Diefendorf includes two chapters on the Huguenot movement in the capital that offer important insights into the international nature of French Calvinism. According to Diefendorf, the close, continual involvement of Geneva in the development of the French Reformed church meant that French Protestantism was "international" more than any other European adaptation of the movement in the

20 Sutherland, Huguenot Struggle (1980). 21 Prestwich, International Calvinism (1985), 1. 22 Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross (1991), 119. Also see Robert M. Kingdon's Geneva and the Consolidation ofthe French Protestant Movement, 1564-1572 (University of Wisconsin Press, 1967) for a more detailed study of the efforts from Geneva. 13 sixteenth century. The Genevan Company of Pastors and the sponsorship provided by French Reformed churches for ministers to train at the Genevan Academy ensured the continual relationship between France and Geneva.23 Diefendorf also demonstrates that Genevan ministers played an active role in French national synods and that French churches continued to seek the advice of the Genevan Company on questions of church governance. Philip Benedict's 2002 monograph Christ's Churches Purely Reformed opens by stating that "Calvinism superseded Lutheranism within a generation as the most dynamic and widely established form of European Protestantism."25 One of the most significant works in the study of the Reformed churches across Europe, Benedict agrees with Diefendorf in the assertion that Calvin never lost interest in seeing France converted and contends that it was Calvin's willingness to assume a "leading role in international controversies" that made Calvinism the forerunner amongst Protestant movements. The initial edition of Calvin's most important works, the Institutes ofthe Christian Religion was, Benedict tells us, written to demonstrate to Francis I that the Reformed were not a seditious group, but were in fact loyal to their monarch.27 Benedict further argues that Calvin's relationship with the Reformed churches of France was "of an intensity and a character with few or no parallels in the history of Reformed church building. . . all the more significant because the French church in turn became a model to other churches." Receiving its impetus from Geneva, French Protestantism was both Calvinist and

23 Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross, 1 19-120. 24Ibid., 120. 25 Benedict, Christ 's Churches, xv. 26 Ibid., 77. 27Ibid., 141. 28 Benedict, Christ 's Churches, 113. 14 international, and even before the religious conflicts, was driven by French theologians and polemicists, beginning with Calvin himself.

Protestant Polemic in Early Modern Europe The body of work concerning controversialist activities in France during the religious conflicts continues to grow, a testament to the fact that polemics had a very real resonance amongst the early modern community that we are still only beginning to understand. Natalie Zemon-Davis' pioneering work in the 1970s on the social impact of the messages of Catholic preachers has since been adapted and applied to examinations of French Protestant polemic. Due to the fact that the Huguenot movement of the sixteenth century was forced underground, it is not sermons that survive, but clandestine literature and polemical treatises, and historians have slowly begun to acknowledge the importance of these works in shaping the Huguenot movement on both a national and international scale, as well as identifying the increasing strains of militancy within its content. Again we must turn to Barbara Diefendorf who, following in the footsteps of Natalie Zemon-Davis, sought to understand the role of sermons and rhetoric in inciting the population to action in the city of Paris during the religious wars. In her treatment of the Huguenots, Diefendorf is particularly interested in how the sale of clandestine literature ensured the survival of the Reformed church underground, even in a city as staunchly Catholic as Paris (Paris was excepted from every peace treaty during the wars of religion that allowed for tolerance and Calvinism was therefore never officially allowed to enter city walls29). Important though her work is, Diefendorf s concern is with

Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross, 63 . 15 how the trade in banned literature strengthened ties amongst the Huguenot community, and she gives no consideration to questions of the message being received in these books. Also in 1991, French historian Denis Crouzet published his two volume study of the religious conflicts, Les Guerriers de Dieu. Here, Crouzet presented several new models for interpreting the wars, including his argument for a cultural consideration of the conflict as a clash between two competing faiths under a cloak of "eschatological fear."30 More important for our own purposes, Crouzet's work was among the first to identify an increasing militancy in Huguenot polemic. In an article written for a colloquium on the Reformation in France and the Netherlands, Crouzet attributes this to the heritage of Calvin himself, whose writings contained "important latent ambiguities" that were later easily transformed into "explicit enunciations of radical views." The importance of Crouzet's work was felt across the field, in both French and English histories. His interpretation not only broke completely with the traditional model of interpreting the wars of religion (in 1991 Diefendorf s Beneath the Cross still clung to a model in which religious and secular motivations were inseparable), but also challenged the historiography of the Protestant movement which, at the same colloquium, Benedict argued had been falsely painted as a passive, non-seditious minority. Benedict's own paper on impulses towards militancy within the Reformed church set about to investigate "the full dossier of the Protestant aims and actions" during the period form 1555-1563, well before the time of Pierre du Moulin or the Edict ofNantes, and is concerned with the

30 Denis Crouzet, Guerriers de Dieu: Violence au temps des troubles de religion 2 vol. (Seyssel: Champs Vallon, 1990). 31 Denis Crouzet, "Calvinism and the Uses of the Political and the Religious (France, ca. 1560-ca. 1572) in Benedict et. al, eds., Reformation, Revolt and Civil War in France and the Netherlands (Amsterdam, 1999), 103. 32 Philip Benedict, "The Dynamics of Protestant Militancy: France, 1555-1563" in Benedict et. al, eds., Reformation, Revolt and Civil War in France and the Netherlands (Amsterdam, 1999), 35. 16 question of why the organization of the Reformed church in France went hand-in-hand with the organization of a "para-military system" and is unconcerned with theology. The fact that such developments began to emerge during the religious wars is unsurprising, neither is the impact such developments would later have on the works of polemicists like du Moulin. Benedict also explores the growing international Huguenot discourse in his 2002 publication Christ 's Churches Purely Reformed. In it, Benedict demonstrates that dogmatics and polemics were the very crux of a French Protestant movement that began to lead the way on an international scale. Benedict expands upon the idea of Calvin as an international figure by showing that he corresponded with several key church figures across Europe, including important reformers in Elizabethan England.34 He further shows that, even in an era that provoked theological disagreement and numerous battles of polemic, "all of the leading Reformed churchmen retained enough respect for one another to cooperate in spite of their differences," coming to one another's aid when needed, and working towards an international solidarity within the movement.35 It was in defence of the faith against Catholic attacks that Huguenot polemic developed in its most militant forms, and it is by using Pierre du Moulin as an example of an active Huguenot polemicist who was at the centre of numerous polemical controversies in the seventeenth century that this will be shown. Pierre du Moulin and International Calvinist Polemics This project will be based in the writings of Pierre du Moulin himself. Through a careful examination of his dialogues with various representatives of the French crown,

33 Benedict, "The Dynamics of Protestant Militancy," 35 34 Benedict, Christ's Churches, 112. 35IWd., 117,287. 17 the Roman Catholic Church, and contemporaries in the period 1598-1625, this thesis will undertake to show how French Protestant theologians represented their faith and their position to those who saw the Reformed faith as heresy. It will further show that du Moulin' s fiery polemic and adherence to strict Calvinist theology prompted him to promote a program of European Christian unity under a Calvinist Church with King James I of England at its head. It will give careful consideration to the political and social status of French Protestants, the nature of French Protestant theology and du Moulin' s own views, and the influence of du Moulin on an international scale (as in the case of England). Through an investigation of Pierre du Moulin as one of the most important Protestant writers in the seventeenth century, this thesis hopes to offer a more nuanced approach to understanding the ways in which the Huguenot understood their place as a minority in Catholic France. Due to the sheer volume of polemical works published by du Moulin, I have chosen to focus my study on the years 1598, when du Moulin first accepted a position as a minister in France, to 1625, when James I's death signalled the end of du Moulin's dreams of union. The first chapter, "Pierre du Moulin in France," will focus specifically on du Moulin's earlier activities from his position as minister of the Reformed congregation of Paris at Charenton. It will examine the way in which du Moulin petitioned the king for legitimacy on behalf of the Huguenot population, and the various controversies with which he became involved at the French court. As a number of these controversies were often fought against the Jesuits at the French court, this chapter will also examine du Moulin's attitude towards the Jesuits and, because he saw the Jesuits as a seditious extension of the Papacy, it will also consider du Moulin' s attacks against the

Papacy during these years. Du Moulin' s international career began in 1610 when he undertook to defend King James I of England on the matter of the Oath of Allegiance. Chapter Two, "Pierre du Moulin and James I," will focus on the relationship that developed between the two men as a result ofthat defence. It will examine how and why the situation in France led du Moulin to place his hopes in a foreign king and country. James I became the monarch upon whom all of du Moulin' s hopes for a united Christendom depended. Equally, du Moulin came to exercise a notable influence on James G s own policies towards religious (re)unification in his own realms, most notably the ongoing struggles between the Scottish Presbyterian and English Episcopal models. Because of their close relationship, du Moulin himself became a sort of closet Episcopalian, and his promotion of James I as the head of a united Christian Reformed Church almost certainly included du Moulin holding some sort of influential position akin to a Bishopric.36 The English connection was the platform from which du Moulin constructed his broader view for a Christian Reform Church in Europe and exercised a significant impact on the development of du Moulin's own theology until the death of James I in 1625. The third and final chapter, "Protestant Unity and a Christian Reformed Church" will examine du Moulin's planned program for unity in detail. Huguenot writing in the post-Edict of Nantes period experienced two significant changes. Firstly, the vast majority of Protestant polemicists in France turned away from the heated rhetoric of the

36 Brian G. Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I: the Anglo-French Programme" in Michelle Magdelaine, Maria Cristina Pitassi, Ruth Whelan, and Anthony McKenna, eds., De l'humanisme aux lumières, Bayle et le protestatisme: mélanges en l'honneur d'Elisabeth Labrousse (Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 1996). 19 sixteenth-century monarchomach tendencies such as those expressed by Theodore Beza became much less popular outside of the Midi region and the Huguenot stronghold at La Rochelle.37 Nevertheless, the Huguenot polemicists of the seventeenth-century were no match for the increasingly Catholic program of the crown; this not only led du Moulin to seek support elsewhere, as he did in England, but it also led to the formulation of his plan for union. Du Moulin was not the first among the great Protestant theologians to promote unity, but he was the first to articulate a clear, step by step program for implementing unity across Europe's Protestant churches, a feat worth studying in its own right. This chapter will therefore examine the role of du Moulin's predecessors in opening a dialogue on the topic of unity, and then explore du Moulin's own plan. What precisely set du Moulin's plan apart from similar attempts at cooperation in the sixteenth century? Who was included in du Moulin's plan and who was not? Room was even made for the Catholic laity in du Moulin's vision of a united church, and as the first chapter will show, du Moulin took great pains to distinguish between the Papacy as corrupter of the Christian faith, and the body of lay Catholics who had been led astray as a result. This distinction and the promotion for the incorporation of Catholics and Catholic elements into a united European Christendom set du Moulin apart amongst his contemporaries, both Catholic and Protestant. Lastly we must ask, how did du Moulin go about introducing the plan to the other Protestant churches, and how was that plan received?

These are all questions that the third chapter seeks to answer.

37 W.B. Patterson, King James VI and I and the Reunion ofChristendom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); Jason Sager, "Devotion and the Political: Sermon and Devotional Literature in the Reigns of Henri IV and Louis XIII, 1598-1643" (unpublished PhD thesis, Faculty of History, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON, 2007). 20

Previous studies of France in the early seventeenth century have overlooked the continued Huguenot conflicts in favour of portraying the period as one in which France struggled towards stability, which it eventually found in the absolute state of Louis XIV. Upon closer examination, however, it becomes clear that the Protestant movement was growing increasingly international and that French Huguenot polemicists played an important role in this development. A close study of Pierre du Moulin, a figure who was at the forefront of this development, demonstrates that the Huguenots were not only involved in their own continued struggles against the French state and the Papacy, but that they were actively engaged in defending and defining their faith and fostering an international, Protestant identity in Europe. 21

Chapter One Pierre du Moulin in Paris

In 1 598, as France accepted the terms of the Edict of Nantes, Pierre du Moulin completed his studies in Leiden and accepted the post of minister of the Reformed Church of Paris. Paris had always been an exceptional case during the religious civil wars; any exercise of the Reformed religion was forbidden in Paris, and the French capital was exempt from every one of the edicts of toleration issued during the wars, including the Edict of Nantes.38 Thus, despite the changes that the Edict of Nantes introduced across the kingdom, the Reformed congregation of Paris was not allowed to assemble within Parisian walls. Instead, the congregation first met under the protection and patronage of the new King's sister, Catherine de Bourbon, before moving to the location of Charenton. As the kingdom's capital, Paris felt strongly that it had a duty to defend the Catholicity of the crown. In the sixteenth century, during the religious wars, the Catholic population of Paris had been "urged [by its priests and preachers] to be avengers in the name of an angry God."39 This attitude persisted even after the Edict of Nantes had elevated the status of the Huguenots to a legal minority, and into the seventeenth century clashes between Huguenots and Catholics persisted. Despite this hostility and the restrictions placed on Reformed worship within city walls, Paris was still home to between 20,000 and 30,000 Huguenots, making Charenton the largest of the Reformed churches.40 As such, the four ministers at Charenton, which included du

Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross, 63. 39 Ibid., 8. 40 Brian Eugene Strayer, Huguenots and Camisards as Aliens in France, 1598-1 789: The Strugglefor Religious Toleration. Studies in Religion and Society 50 (Lewiston, New York: E. Mellen Press, 2001), 136. 22

Moulin, held a status akin to bishops within the French Protestant community. Brian Armstrong, whose work comprises the most in-depth study of du Moulin to date, has argued that "it was during the twenty-two plus years at Paris that du Moulin gained his great reputation - as the greatest of the Huguenot polemicists and as the premier spokesman for French Protestantism [sic]."42 It was during his ministry at Charenton that du Moulin defended the Reformed faith against the foremost Catholic controversialists of both the French court, and the Papacy. It was also during his ministry at Charenton that du Moulin formulated his plan for unity for the Protestant churches of Europe, to which end he developed a close partnership with James I of England. In addition to authoring several of his own works, du Moulin was also the leading voice of the four ministers of

Charenton, and several of the treatises of defence produced by them were largely penned by du Moulin himself. Du Moulin' s ministry at Charenton therefore reveals a great deal about his understanding of the Huguenot position in France, for it was his failure to effect change on behalf of the Huguenots here that turned him towards a vision for a broader European Protestant consensus under the leadership of James I. Because his ministry at Charenton was so important, this chapter will focus on the controversialist debates he fought there, specifically with the Jesuits at the French court. Works such as the Bouclier de la Foy that were published as part of these controversies illuminate not only Pierre du Moulin' s own core beliefs, but also reveal a great deal about du Moulin' s polemical style, and where he may be situated in the larger Huguenot movement.

41 Menna Prestwich, "The Huguenots under Richelieu and Mazarin, 1626-61: A Golden Age?" In Huguenots in Britain and their French Background, 1550-1800: Contributions to the Historical Conference ofthe Huguenot Society ofLondon 24-25 Sept. Irene Scouloudi ed. (Totowa, New Jersey: Barnes & Noble Books, 1987), 178. 42 Armstrong in Schnucker, 136. 23

Despite the fact that the Edict of Nantes was intended by the crown as a temporary settlement, for some among the Huguenot population of France the 1598 Edict was "merely an expedient" towards further reform of the country.43 At the turn of the seventeenth century Huguenot sentiment was divided. The Huguenots' dependence on the monarchy to uphold the terms of the Edict "had the effect of dividing the Huguenot community between those eager to court [royal] favour and those willing to challenge [it]."44 These two attitudes dominated in the Huguenot world in the first half of the seventeenth century, and manifested itself as a divide between North (led by Paris) and South (led by La Rochelle). There were also many among the Huguenots who still believed that a Reformation of France was possible - especially as long as Henri IV was on the throne.45 Pierre du Moulin also believed in this and he returned to France in 1598 to lead the Reformed congregation of Paris towards this goal. The attitude of the ministers at Charenton took a completely different approach from their co-religionists in the south. While the Huguenots in the south had abandoned their support of king killing, the south remained a focal point of the more militant wing of the Huguenot community. The ministers at Charenton instead struggled to secure unity amongst the Reformed in France, and also to prove to the King that their heterodox beliefs were not incompatible with loyalty to the crown.46 Throughout the Défense de la Foy Catholicke and the Bouclier de la Foy du Moulin rejected the language ofthose who would resist the crown. It would appear that the attitude at Charenton prevailed in most places outside the Midi:

43 Elisabeth Labrousse, "Calvinism in France, 1598-1685." In International Calvinism. Menna Prestwich, ed. (1985), 301. 44 Alan James, "Huguenot militancy and the seventeenth-century wars of religion." In Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685. Raymond A. Menzter and Andrew Spicer, eds. (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 213. 45 Benedict, Christ's Churches, 127-8. 46 Sager, "Devotion and the Political," 200. 24

In his study "Huguenot militancy and the seventeenth-century War of Religion," Alan James demonstrates that military resistance by the Huguenots in the seventeenth century was increasingly rare outside of La Rochelle and Beam. In addition to attempting to prove French Protestant loyalty to the crown, Pierre du Moulin and the rest of the ministers at Charenton were engaged in a polemical battle to defend Reformed doctrine against the attacks of their Catholic counterparts. In 1617 du Moulin set off the famous Charenton Controversy that involved the ministers at Charenton, the French court, and the Papacy, by publishing the Lettre à Messieurs de l 'Eglise Romaine. An open letter to the Catholic laity, the Lettre outlined the core Calvinist doctrines that du Moulin would later expand upon in perhaps his most important work - and certainly his most lengthy - the Bouclier de la Foy. It was during this controversy that the future Cardinal Richelieu made a name for himself with his publication of the Principal points ofthe Catholicfaith, a defence against attacks from Charenton.48 Throughout the controversy, the ministers of Charenton continued to strive to prove their loyalty to the king, going to great lengths to prove that their doctrinal heterodoxy was not a threat.49 While the Edict of Nantes had granted the Huguenots significant concessions, such as the right to keep fortified towns, it had also made the Reformed Church entirely dependent on the King for its existence. Petitioning the King for legitimacy and to prove their loyalty was therefore a necessary and on-going struggle for the Huguenots. This effort was naturally led by the ministers at Charenton: their bishop-like status lent them the authority to speak to the crown on behalf of the entire

James, "Huguenot militancy" in Mentzer and Spicer, eds. Strayer, Huguenots andCamisards, 67. Sager, "Devotion and the Political," 187. 25

Reformed Church, and their proximity to court meant that controversies and opponents were never lacking. Du Moulin and the other ministers at Charenton were equally concerned with ensuring the survival of the Reformed Church in France by fighting to preserve orthodoxy, and were consequently engaged in debates over matters of doctrine and ecclesiastical governance, both within France and - in the case of du Moulin - without. Du Moulin was particularly concerned with the question of orthodoxy, for he saw differences in orthodoxy as the great divider amongst European Protestants, and therefore an obstacle towards unity and the future of the Reformed Church. During his ministry at Charenton du Moulin published several instructional treatises on matters pertaining to Reformed doctrine in order to encourage unity within French Reformed practices. In a study of du Moulin' s publications in France, Brian Armstrong concluded that "if one looks at the sheer number of treatises of a particular type, especially those translated into the many languages of Europe, [Pierre du Moulin] must be seen primarily as one of the most popular writers of books of piety, devotional literature, of his century."51 Du Moulin was a leader within the Huguenot community, one of its most important proponents of unified doctrine, and French Huguenots read him more than any other contemporary French Protestant writer, and almost as much as they read Jean Calvin. In his own study of Huguenot book ownership, Philip Benedict has shown that in terms of shorter, cheaper volumes (i.e.: books on topics such as the psalms and the Lord's Supper, designed to

Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross, 125. 51 Armstrong, Bibliographia Molinaei, xi. 26 promote uniform practices), du Moulin was the second most frequently owned author among Huguenots households. If we look to du Moulin' s own program of beliefs, we find a mixed picture of orthodoxy that is indebted to both Jean Calvin and Theodore Beza. Opinions and interpretations of both men's theology abound in the histories of the sixteenth century, but for the purposes of the present work, we need only consider the fundamentals of each that influenced du Moulin' s own theological framework. By the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century it was Theodore Beza' s theological program, which had so dominated throughout the French wars of religion, that was considered "orthodox." Nevertheless, and though he never referenced Calvin directly,53 certain of Pierre du Moulin' s core theological beliefs are closer to Calvin than Beza. This is especially true of du Moulin' s conception of royal authority. In the Institutes ofthe Christian Religion, Calvin distinguished the spiritual kingdom, or the eternal kingdom of Christ, from the civil kingdom, or the temporal kingdom of man: the two existed for Calvin not in contradiction, but rather, the goal of this temporal kingdom is to make us conform to human society for the time that we must live among people, to form our morals and customs to a civic justice or righteousness, to make us agree with each other, to maintain and preserve a common peace and tranquility. . . if the Lord's will is that we walk on earth while we are aspiring to our true country; and moreover, if such helps are necessary for our journey; then those who want to separate people from these laws are taking away their human nature.54

Benedict, Faith and Fortune, 175. 53 This could in part be attributed to the fact that by the seventeenth century Reformed orthodoxy meant reliance on Beza, Martyr, Zanchi, ans St. Thomas and the scholastic method begun with them. See Brian Armstrong, Calvinism and the Amrraut Heresy: Protestant Scholasticism and Humanism in Seventeenth- Century France (Madison, Milwaukee, and London: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1969). Unfortunately, a more in depth and broader analysis of du Moulin's works than the length of the present work allows is needed to answer the question of why du Moulin never referenced or referred to Calvin. 54 Jean Calvin, Institutes ofthe Christian Religion, 1541 French Edition. Trans. Elsie Anne McKee (Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009), 657. 27

Calvin further identified within the civic or temporal kingdom three elements: the magistrate or ruler, the law, and the people. According to Calvin, the magistrates "have God's commandment and they are authorized by Him, and they fully represent His person, being in some way His deputies."55 Quoting passages and precedent from scripture, Calvin concluded that "no one must doubt that civil authority is not only a vocation both holy and lawful before God but also very holy and honourable among all others."56 As for the people, Calvin declared that "if it is His pleasure to establish kings over the kingdoms and some other kinds of superiors over free peoples, it is for us to be subject and obey whatever superiors rule in the place where we live."57 Pierre du Moulin believed in the same concept of temporal, royal authority. Du Moulin's belief in the sacrality of the King's temporal power is best expressed in his condemnation of the Papacy for attempting to claim power over kings, penned while at Charenton. In his 1610 publication the Defense de la Foy Catholicke [sic], du Moulin extended the question of temporal and spiritual authority to a direct attack against the "Romish Church," and argued at length against the Papal claim that the Pope could

co deprive kings of their crowns and free subjects of their fidelity to their temporal lords. Like Calvin, du Moulin made careful and deliberate distinction between the temporal and the spiritual realms, and argued that "as then the Temporali governement doth not impose Spirituali punishments, so the Spirituali government cannot impose temporali

55 Ibid., 658-9. 56 Ibid., 659. 57 Ibid., 662. 58 Pierre du Moulin, Defense de Ia Foy Catholicke, or: A Defence ofthe Catholic Faith: Contained in the Booke ofthe most Mightie and most Gracious King James thefirst... Against the answere ofN. Cofféteau (London, 1610), 45. 28 punishments [sic]."59 All power on earth, according to du Moulin, like Calvin, comes from God, and the power that exists on earth is power "which God hath permitted." Both Calvin and du Moulin further emphasized the divine origin of political power in such a way that resistance and rebellion against this power was not justified. It has been argued that for his part, Calvin allowed for a loophole in his conception of a kingdom's "lesser magistrates," whose job it was to correct and guide rulers; this conception later allowed Huguenots such as Theodore Beza to conceive of a way to justify rebellion if sanctioned by these magistrates. Thus, at the time of the religious wars in France and even into the seventeenth century in La Rochelle, when theological orthodoxy meant reliance on figures such as Beza, not Calvin, rebellion against the crown was permissible. Not so for du Moulin and the other ministers of Charenton and the divide between them and their more militant co-religionists was made clear when the church at Charenton refused to back the revolts in La Rochelle and Rohan. ' Du Moulin was equally influenced by the theological contribution of Theodore Beza, most especially surrounding the question of orthodoxy. In 1618 du Moulin endorsed the confession of the Synod of Dort, a confession which Menna Prestwich has argued represented Calvinism in its harshest and most austere form, and which emphasized the influence of Beza over Calvin.62 Du Moulin's determination to uphold orthodoxy within the Reformed community often involved him in controversies outside of France; the various political connections he had fostered during his studies in both England and Leiden meant that he was particularly aware of the situations there. When,

59 Ibid., 62-63. 60Ibid„ 63. 61 Prestwich, "Huguenots under Richelieu and Mazarin," in Scouloudi, ed., 178. 62 Prestwich, "Introduction," in International Calvinism, Prestwich ed. (1985). 29 for example, the Arminian controversy erupted in the Netherlands (the conflict which brought about the aforementioned Synod of Dort), du Moulin was quick to pen a defence of orthodoxy and condemnation of Arminius. The letter, published in English as The Anatomie ofArminianisme [sic], offered a harsh rebuke against new inventions of faith that served only "the ambition of some men" and threatened the unity of the Reformed community.63 While du Moulin' s activities in France were often only met with vehement responses from his opponents, his international activity sparked enough concern from the crown that he was forbidden to attend the Synod of Dort, and his letter was sent ahead to the synod while du Moulin remained at Charenton. It is also worth noting that by this time du Moulin had already developed a close relationship with James I and in 1621 had raised enough suspicion for both his international activities and his controversy with the King's Jesuit confessor Jean Arnoux, that he was forced to flee Charenton for a time. Such activity reflected du Moulin' s commitment to upholding unity within the Reformed church, as well as his growing belief that international unity was the only hope for the future of the Reformed Church in Europe.

Du Moulin' s beliefs are most clearly expressed, and thus best understood, in how he chose to attack the Catholics. At the French court, du Moulin' s most prominent foes were the Catholic ministers to the court, who were most often Jesuits. In terms of developments in the Catholic camp, after the Edict of Nantes there occurred a gradual shift away from the sixteenth-century view that the Protestants needed to be exterminated. In the seventeenth century, Catholics were no longer interested in the physical removal of the Huguenots, but rather, Catholic preachers and polemicists turned

63 Pierre du Moulin, The Anatomie ofArminianisme (London: 1620), A4. 30 their attention towards undermining the Protestant belief system, a tactic they hoped would diminish Huguenot numbers by encouraging a return to the Catholic fold. Despite the strength of the Catholic Counter Reformation in France in the years 1598-1685, the average Catholic priest remained comparatively under-trained in polemics, unlike their Huguenot counterparts who depended upon polemic to prove the verity of their faith. From Geneva, where many of the Reformed ministers of France had trained in the sixteenth century, French Protestants adopted the belief that ministers should be skilled controversialists, and they were.65 The Jesuits emerged as the Huguenots' foremost adversary because their order made the prominence of preaching and knowledge of scripture of the utmost importance; the Order's 1540 Bull of Institution also stressed the importance of teaching Catholic doctrine specifically against the Protestant threat. Where the seventeenth-century wars of religion were fought on paper, here was a Catholic opponent that could match the skill of the Huguenot polemicists. Though the Jesuit order was only just founded in 1540, as early as the 1570s Theodore Beza had grown alarmed at the growing presence of the Jesuits in France. Of the leading Huguenot theologians, it was Beza who first expressed fear that the Jesuit advisors in the

64 Larissa Taylor, Soldiers ofChrist: Preaching in Late Medieval and Reformation France (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). Taylor argues that it took longer for Catholic priests to develop their skills as polemicists during this period because so much of the Catholic clergy remained under- or un-trained, and even after the reforms of the Council of Trent, many areas were slow to introduce the reforms and leave behind the medieval parable that had previously been the mainstay of Catholic preaching. The Huguenots, on the other hand, had been trained in polemic from the beginning, necessitated by their minority status. 65 Benedict, Christ's Churches (436); Labrousse in Prestwich, (295). 66 Thomas Worcester, "The Catholic Sermon." In Preachers and People in the Reformation and Early Modern Period. Larissa Taylor, ed. (Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2003), 17; 28. 67 Scott M. Manetsch, Thoedore Beza and the Questfor Peace in France, 1572-1598. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought Vol. 7. (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2000), 123. 31

French court "owned Henri III and pushed him to adopt harsher measures toward the Huguenot."68 The Huguenot situation in France changed significantly when the assassination of Henri IV in 1610 left the kingdom under the rule of a Catholic regency. The court, which had already been adopting an increasingly Catholic policy, was flooded by Catholic influence led by the Queen Regent, Marie de Medici. Alarmed, du Moulin responded immediately by targeting what he believed was the seditious influence of the Jesuits at court. Expressing the same fears as Beza had only forty years earlier, du Moulin penned the Anti-Coton (161 1), in which he entreated the Queen Regent to reconsider the position of the Jesuits at court. Du Moulin saw the Jesuit order as the worst incarnation of the "Romish Church" and a seditious influence on the person of king.69 Du Moulin charged the Jesuits with playing a key role in the assassination of the king, and warned the Queen: I thought it necessary to make appear to your Majesty the original cause of this aspersion cast upon them [the Jesuits], to the end that if it be found to spring from sure and undoubted grounds, your Majesty may from thence conjecture whether it may stand with the safeguard of the present king, your son's life, to suffer these holy Fathers to approach near his person. In the Anti-Coton du Moulin "tapped into more than just anti-Jesuit sentiment; he expressed a conception of monarchy which appealed directly to the crown" by emphasising his concept of the sovereignty of kings. The Jesuits, he charged, threatened this sovereignty as their very doctrine "approves and mantaines the Parricide of Kings

68 Ibid., 128-9. 69 Du Moulin always refers to the Church in Rome, or the "Romish Church;" an effort to distinguish between the evils of Popery that are brewed by the Papacy in Rome, and the general body of Catholic believers, whom he hopes to bring into the fold of a united, European, Protestant Church (under James I). 70 Pierre du Moulin, The Anti-Coton, or, A Refutation ofCoton 's Letter Declaratorie (1611). 32 and the Rebellion of Subjects [sic]."71 Quoting from the Jesuits' own writings, and just as he would argue in England, du Moulin pointed to the Jesuits' belief that the Pope hath power to dispose of kingdoms, to bestow them as he shall see fit, on whom it shall please him, and to stir up the Subjects to rebel against their 72 Prince by unloosing them from their sacred bond of allegiance. Such arguments complimented the theory of Gallicanism, which upheld the belief that "the temporal sovereignty of kings was independent of the Pope," and led to an informal, pseudo-alliance between the Gallican parlements and the Calvinists.73 The independent interests of both sides, however, meant that the alliance was always tenuous and never meant to last.

The most formidable treatise that du Moulin composed against the Jesuits at court also proved to be his most significant work, and the 1618 Bouclier de la Foy became the most comprehensive statement of Protestant doctrine since Calvin's Institutes. Another rebuke against the Jesuits and the Jesuit presence at the French court as part of the on- going Charenton Controversy, the Bouclier was written to address a series of attacks launched against the Reformed church by the King's Jesuit confessor, Jean Arnoux. The Bouclier also showcases du Moulin' s excellent command of the Protestant polemical style. By the seventeenth century the foremost tenet of the Protestant ministers was to teach scripture and provide their flock with the tools to resist the Roman Church;74 in the realm of polemics, this transformed the belief "sola scriptum" to mean a reliance strictly on the word of Scripture and the omission of secondary sources.75 Of the number of

7lIbid., 1. 72 Ibid., 5. 73 George Elmore Reaman, The Trail ofthe Huguenots in Europe: The United States, South Africa and Canada (Toronto: T. Allen, 1963), 50. 74 James Thomas Ford, "Preaching in the Reformed Tradition." In Preachers and People, Larissa Taylor ed. (2003), 67. "Taylor, Soldiers ofChrist, 197. 33 primary works by du Moulin examined in this study only one, the Nouveauté du papisme, made reference to a secondary source (Machiavelli' s The Prince). Throughout the

Bouclier du Moulin rejected the language of militancy and resistance of some of his contemporaries, and instead relied on his logic training and a structure of argumentation by which he first argued his position from an historical viewpoint, followed by providing evidence for the scriptural basis of his claims. Nowhere throughout the almost 1,000 page document did du Moulin refer to a source outside of Scripture. Such a tactic was closely tied to the concern with legitimacy that drove both Protestant and Catholic polemic in the seventeenth century; since neither side had been able to firmly defeat the other in the religious wars of the sixteenth century, both sides were now hugely concerned with proving their legitimacy by virtue of their being the descendant of the primitive church, and demonstration of an expert and precise knowledge of scripture was one of the ways to do so. The appeal to historical precedent was also equally important to both Catholics and Protestants for this same reason: "Each stacked their legitimacy to the fact that each respective confession was the heir to primitive Christianity."

Du Moulin was consistent in his manner of argumentation across most of his works, and almost always presented his argument with both facts and supportive evidence from scripture and historical precedent. In his aforementioned letter to the Queen Regent, the Anti-Coton, du Moulin divided his plea into two separate arguments: one based on the history of the Jesuit order, the second based on their words or canon. He addressed each of Arnoux's accusations in much the same way in the Bouclier, disproving Arnoux's position first through historical precedent and/or followed by the scriptural evidence. In

76 Sager, "Devotion and the Political," 203. 34 an argument over the matter of what is understood by the word "Church," for example, du Moulin refuted his opponents' argument by presenting first the historical understanding of the word "church," and then supporting this with textual evidence pulled directly from Scripture: The word Church, is a Greeke word, which signifieth an assembly, and which belongeth as well to the assemblies of infidels as of the faithfull. In the 26 Psalme, verse 5 according to the vulgar translation it is said "I have hated the church of evill doers. And Acts 19.32 the assembly ofthe Pagans crying Great Diana ofthe Ephesians, is called the Church. Use hath brought in a custome 77 that the assemblies of Christians are called Churches [sic]. While du Moulin was incorrect in his etymology, his purpose here was to establish that the meaning of the word "Church" was not the property or invention of the Church of Rome and did not belong (only) to them, and by marrying historical with scriptural proofs, du Moulin presented an argument that was more difficult for his opponents to refute. In what may be a clearer example of his method, let us turn to one of the first points argued in the work: whether the books of Apocrypha are a part of Scripture. Du Moulin refuted Arnoux's accusation that the Protestants had erased these books from canon by referring to the history of the Old Testament: He argued that the Jews had never accepted the Apocrypha into the Old Testament, and that on matters regarding the Old

Testament the Jews are more credible than the Roman Church. Du Moulin then addressed each of the books named by Arnoux and delivered information at length regarding their historical conception and compared them to events described in Scripture to further prove his case.

77 Pierre du Moulin Bouclier de la Foy, or: The Buckler ofthe Faith: A defence ofthe Confession ofFaith ofthe Reformed Churches in France against the Objections ofM. Arnoux the Jésuite. 3r Ed. (London, 1631), 263. 35

In another example from the Bouclier, du Moulin combined scriptural evidence with his own background in logic to argue that "besides the places of Scripture before

78 alleged. . . reason giveth us a demonstrative proofe, grounded upon this maxime." Here du Moulin was responding to Arnoux on the question of the marks of the True Church, and while the following passage is quite lengthy, it is worthwhile to include in order to observe du Moulin's particular rhetorical style and his use of the scholastic style:

Now the definition of the true Church is that it is the assembly of true beleevers. Then before we can know which is the true church, we must know who are true beleevers, and by consequence, which is true faith. Now if we will define the Church as Bellarmine19 doth, which is that the Church is the assembly of those which are joyned together by confession of the Christian faith; we must necessarily know what is true Christian faith, before we know the true Church, seeing that true faith is a chiefe point whereby to define the Church. From thence also it followeth that we must know Jesus Christ, that is, his nature and office, before we can know the true Church; for that faith in Jesus Christ, is of the very definition of the Church.But see here a Jesuiticall Doctor, that will have us to know the true Church before we know the true doctrine: and by consequence, before we know Jesus Christ. Which is a strange conceit to imagine that a man may know which is the true Church without knowing Jesus Christ, and who are 80 true beleevers, without knowing true faith. The above passage was meant to prove the legitimacy of the Reformed faith by proving the verity of the belief "sola scriptura," and it relates back to an argument first made by du Moulin in the preface of the work. In the preface, written as an open letter to the members of the Roman Church, du Moulin argued that the Catholic Church and Papacy, by denying the laity access to scripture, denied them the very tools needed to know God and salvation. The Roman Church is thereby a church "wherein the people make profession to follow without knowledge; and to believe the Church not knowing what the

78 Du Moulin, Bouclier, 269. 79 Another of du Moulin's most popular Catholic opponents; italics are du Moulin's, who often italicises the names of people to whom he refers. 80 Du Moulin, Bouclier, 270. 36

Church ought to believe."81 Also in this passage, du Moulin singled out the Jesuits. Though this is not unusual given that his opponent is himself a Jesuit, the purpose behind du Moulin' s specific identification of his opponent's order is twofold, for as we have already seen, du Moulin was particularly alarmed and threatened by the strong Jesuit presence at the French court. The Jesuits were an order that du Moulin saw as an intended army of the Pope,82 and he reminded readers frequently throughout the Bouclier that Arnoux is a Jesuit (re: a villain and a liar) and an enemy. Du Moulin used various other methods to undermine the Jesuit position. He addressed each of Arnoux' s attacks individually, thus affording him the chance to not only refute what was incorrect, but also to provide specific instances where "the adversarle doth, as he useth to do in all other places. . . changeth the words of our Confession, and maketh us say things that we do not believe [sic]."83 Du Moulin pushed the point further to conclude that Arnoux' s reliance on twisting the Reformed confession for his own purposes "is a manifest and evident proofe that the truth of our religion is very strong, seeing that they cannot dispute against it, until they have first changed it."

As in the Bouclier, du Moulin often used historical arguments to challenge the Papacy's claim as heir to the primitive church, and he always began with the reign of Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085). Discussion of the Papacy was actually not to be found in Huguenot polemic before the 1572 massacre of Saint Bartholomew's Day because the

oc specificity of the Gallican Church made such discussion a moot point. But the events of

81 Ibid., ii. 82 Attacks against the Papacy by the Reformed ministry were common by the seventeenth century and date back to Calvin himself, who had believed that the Papacy had led the Catholic Church to ruin (see note 49). 83 Du Moulin, Bouclier, 19. 84 Du Moulin, Bouclier, 19. 85 Luc Racault, "Religioues polemic and Huguenot self-perception and identity, 1554-1619." In Society and Culture, Mentzer and Spicer eds. (2002), 38. 37 the massacre had convinced the Huguenot population of a Europe-wide, Papal conspiracy and Huguenot wariness towards the Papacy increased tremendously over the course of the next half-century. By the seventeenth century the resurgent Papacy following the Council of Trent was the body most often being attacked by Huguenot polemicists, especially du Moulin. If we review the passages that we have explored so far, we will see that du Moulin' s attacks were launched against specific enemies: the Jesuits for being the army of the Pope, the Papacy and the institutions of the Roman Church, and the Popes themselves. What this tells us is that for Pierre du Moulin the Catholic Church was not a rival to the Reformed Church. Instead, du Moulin conceived of the Papacy in Rome as the enemy of all Christians - Catholic and Protestant alike - and it was the Papacy that had become the great corruptor of Christianity. Throughout the preface to the Bouclier, du Moulin condemned the Papacy on a number of charges, though not once did address the body of Catholic believers as opponents or rivals. Instead, du Moulin tries to convince his Catholic readers that the "Romish Church" is the enemy. While the rest of the Bouclier is more focussed on disputing points of doctrine with the Jesuit Arnoux, du Moulin' s twenty-five page preface is just as telling on his opinions of Rome as his thousand page Nouveauté du papisme. Du Moulin' s own core beliefs are made clear by the order of his charges against the Papacy and the vehemence with which he discusses them. The first point on which du Moulin attacked the Papacy was for discouraging the laity from reading scripture. Du Moulin believed that this evidenced the Papacy's culpability as a corruptor because if they hide [the word of God] from the people, and hinder them from the reading thereof, it is an evident signe either that they feele themselves culpable; or that 38

instead of submitting themselves unto this rule, they would have their authority to be the supreme rule [sic]. By denying Catholics the Bible, du Moulin argued that the Papacy was purposefully perpetuating ignorance amongst its flock. Three pages later he continued to argue the same point: By taking the Holy Scriptures from you, which is the booke that maketh men wise, they have given you images, which are termed the bookes of the ignorant; 87 because by them ignorance is maintained [sic]. By raising this as his first point of contention it is clear that the Protestant belief in "sola scriptura" was of the utmost importance to du Moulin. For several pages du Moulin introduced examples from scripture to support his point: The Catholicke Epistles of Saint James, Saint Peter, and Saint John, are written to all the faithfull in generali... to alledge that some men abuse the reading thereof is as much as to accuse the Apostles of want of discretion for having written their Epistles to Christian people, without foreseeing that they might abuse them [sic]. In this passage the Papacy becomes the enemy not only of the Reformed and the Catholics alike, but of Scripture, the Apostles, and therefore God himself. Such polemical tactics were used to undermine the legitimacy of the opponent; in this case, used by du Moulin to undermine the legitimacy of the Roman Church, for how could the Roman Church be the true church when it was clearly the enemy of God? Du Moulin continued to use this tactic to great effect in attacking the ambition of the Papacy: By this word 'Church,' you understand not the Christian people, not all Pastors in generali but the Pope and a few Prélats, whose rules are called the Rules of the Church; although they tend wholly to the profile of the Clergie, and to advance the Empire of the Bishop of Rome [sic].

Du Moulin, Bouclier, ii. Ibid., v. Ibid., iii. Du Moulin, Bouclier, ix. 39

The ignorance that was perpetuated by the Papacy through the denial of scripture was thus also used to mask the secular goals of the Papacy. In this passage du Moulin also clearly singled out the Pope as the greatest enemy of Christianity. Du Moulin continued his attacks against the Pope later in the text when he argued with Arnoux over the traditions of the Roman Church,

It is manifest in the Histories to be seene that as the B[ishop] of Rome's greatnesse increased, traditions were multiplied which are much more recommended by our 90 Adversaries then the Holy Scriptures [sic]. This time du Moulin made his argument with reference to historical precedent, a tactic that we have already seen was favoured among seventeenth-century Huguenot polemicists. Finally, du Moulin made a direct comparison between the Papacy and the Reformed Church to prove the legitimacy of the Reformed Church over that of Rome:

None of us nameth himselfe an infallible interpreter. We receive no other interpretation of the word of God then that which is drawne out of the word of God. So they are not found by us, but by the word of God which is infallible [sic].r . t 91 Here du Moulin suggests that the Pope's claim to infallibility is another offence against God, for as he later argued, it is God alone who is infallible. Calvin himself had also been convinced that the Papacy in Rome had led the Catholic Church into ruin by inventing, teaching, and preaching doctrine that was not drawn from genuine scripture, and by further preventing the reading of scripture by the laity.92 As we can see, much of du Moulin' s preface to the Bouclier echoed this same sentiment, and so we see continuity between Calvin and du Moulin, despite the fifty plus years that separated their influence in the French Reformed Church. Written as an open

90 Ibid., 50. 91 Ibid., 56. 92 Randall C. Zachman, "Chapter 12: Jean Calvin." In The Reformation Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Early Modern Period. Carter Lindberg, ed. (Maiden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2002), 189. 40 letter to members of the Catholic Church, du Moulin' s preface proclaimed to the Catholic laity: "there are not many persons among you that wholly beleeve in their religion, and that find not fault with the Church of Rome [sic]."93 This belief reflected his conviction, like Calvin, that the Pope and the Papacy (and to this list may be added the Jesuits) were the great enemies of Christianity. Du Moulin thus never expressed Protestantism as a rival to Catholicism, but rather, believed that the Papacy in Rome was the corruptor.

Analysis of du Moulin's texts published while in France is illuminating on several points of du Moulin's own theological program, as well as the larger Huguenot situation in seventeenth-century France, but what can we say about who was reading him? Was du Moulin's message being read by French Protestants? Was he truly "the great champion of Reformed orthodoxy"94 among his coreligionists? Benedict and Armstrong have both produced important studies that give us a strong indication of du Moulin's popularity as an author. Benedict's study of book-readership in seventeenth-century Metz offers an excellent perspective; studies of Huguenot readership have been limited to date, mostly due to a lack of records because of the Huguenots' still precarious status in France. Benedict's work offers a thoughtful consideration of the situation in Metz as a starting point from which to draw larger conclusions about the rest of the country. In Metz, Benedict found that du Moulin was the second most published (Calvin being the first) Huguenot polemicist, and he was second by only a small margin; he surpassed both Duplessis-Mornay and Theodore Beza by a large margin.95 The popularity of du Moulin as evidenced by both Benedict and Armstrong's studies in Huguenot readership

Du Moulin, Bouclier, xxiii. Philip Benedict, Faith and Fortune, 169. Benedict, Faith and Fortune, 167. 41 demonstrates "the important place occupied by works justifying and defending the tenants of Calvinism against the champions of Rome,"96 which was du Moulin's primary motivation for his polemical activity in France. Pierre du Moulin's program of orthodoxy and polemical activities while in France evolved with the changing situation in French government. An heir to both the theological programs of Calvin and Beza, du Moulin's was a mixed bag of theology that reflected the sentiments of a larger Huguenot population that both desired to see their cause succeed, but was also wearied by the previous century's constant wars and unwilling (with the already noted exception of La Rochelle and the south) to engage in further armed conflict with the crown. When he first returned to France in 1 598 to begin his ministry at Charenton, du Moulin was concerned with the promotion of a uniform practice of Reformed doctrine. His earliest works at Charenton were shorter works such as Heraclite and Théophile (1609) that offered the reader guides to moral introspection and amendment and were "a powerful force for the standardisation of religious experience."97 Upon accepting the position at Charenton, du Moulin also took up the cause of defending the Reformed faith to the King at court in an effort to seek further legitimacy in the kingdom. Such efforts to prove their loyalty, however, brought the Huguenot polemicists of Charenton into a series of controversies, both at court and abroad. Du Moulin quickly became the foremost Huguenot polemicist in these battles, becoming the voice of the Charenton ministers in their controversies, and engaging in many of his own. His method of argumentation combined with his training in Aristotelian logic to make him a formidable opponent in France, and it was not long before his

Ibid., 170. Ibid., 246-7. 42 reputation and his desire to promote unity amongst all branches of Protestantism gained him an international audience, as well as a number of international controversies. The first of these international controversies to which du Moulin directed his attention arose out of the Oath of Allegiance conflict in England. The conflict led du Moulin to pen a defence of the English King, James I, which altered du Moulin' s own theological program, and which was to lead to a lasting relationship between the two until James' death in 1625. 43

Chapter Two Pierre du Moulin and James I

When Pierre du Moulin returned to France in 1598, after ten years of study abroad, to accept a position as minister of the Reformed Church of Paris he hoped, like many of his co-religionists, that the Edict of Nantes would prove the first step towards further concessions and, eventually, conversion of the entire country. By 1609 - even before the assassination of Henri IV - du Moulin was convinced that his hopes for widespread conversion in France were in vain. His efforts to win over the French Court from his new position in Paris were met with scathing rebuttals from the courts' Catholic, and as we have seen in the previous chapter, most especially, Jesuit polemicists. It was at this time that du Moulin turned his gaze to England. Having spent four years in England (1588-1592) studying at Cambridge, du Moulin had formed many important friendships through which he eventually gained introduction to the king himself. The controversy that erupted over James Fs Oath of Allegiance and the subsequent assassination attempt against the king - famously called the Gunpowder Plot and now celebrated as Guy Fawkes Day - afforded du Moulin the much desired opportunity to pen a defence on behalf of the English king, and the fruits ofthat labour led to a partnership in which du Moulin and James I worked to push a program for unity amongst Europe's Protestant countries. Du Moulin looked to James I as the future head of his envisioned United

Reformed Church. The controversy surrounding the Oath also afforded du Moulin another forum from which to continue his assault against the Jesuits; each of his defences composed on behalf of the English king offered a systematic attack of the historic tyranny of the Papacy, and the new tyranny arising from the Jesuit order. This chapter will 44 examine the partnership between James I and Pierre du Moulin. It will consider the circumstances in both France and England that led to the partnership, comparing the policies of the French crown to James I's own in order to discover why du Moulin chose to place his hopes on a foreign country and king. It will further consider how this partnership affected both James I and du Moulin. The Huguenot polemicist and English king maintained a steady correspondence and du Moulin also made several trips to England as the king's guest. By the time of James' death in 1625, du Moulin had been awarded three livings in England for his service. The influence of James I and English policy on du Moulin' s is most apparent in the French polemicist's gradual shift towards a preference for the Episcopal system. In the course of their relationship du Moulin also penned a handful of treatises that had originally been attributed to James. James I was a learned man in his own right, who had already begun to consider the question and complexities of Christian union, and he exercised considerable influence over the final shape of du Moulin' s plan for union. Both men gained something from the other and they benefitted mutually from the partnership, which was to last until the King's death.

The period between the 1598 Edict of Nantes and the 1685 Revocation has largely been studied from the perspective of the consolidation of the administration under Louis XIV; the historiography has therefore viewed this period as one of "stability" and "calm" in terms of the religious settlement, and has overlooked the religious battles that were now being fought with pen rather than sword. Traditionally, historians have applauded the Edict as "an innovative experiment in religious pluralism" that allowed for "peaceful 45 coexistence and the flowering of a Huguenot culture." Why, then, in 1610 was the leading voice of Protestantism in France, minister of the Reformed Church of Paris Pierre du Moulin, turning to James I of England as the saviour and future of the Protestant cause?

In 1598 the establishment of the Edict ofNantes had finally brought an end to nearly four decades of religious civil war between the Catholic majority and Huguenot minority in France. The Edict granted significant concessions to the Huguenots. In addition to freedom of worship, the two royal brevets attached to the Edict allowed the Huguenots to maintain troops in some 200 towns, half of which would be subsidized by the crown. This concession in particular led to the coining of the idea of a Huguenot "state within a state" (a term that has become popular in the historiography). While it is true that the 1598 Edict granted the Huguenot minority the security and stability it needed in order to continue to develop, the terms of the Edict had also made clear that France was, and would always be, a Catholic state. When Henri of Navarre abjured his Protestant faith for the French crown to become Henri IV of France, he also firmly committed himself to what historians have called the underlying principle of the 1598 Edict: "one king, one faith, one law."99 As Holt has illustrated, this is evidenced both by the fact that the general articles of the Edict emphasized the Catholicity of crown and state, restoring the Catholic mass to all quarters of the kingdom, but restricting areas of Huguenot worship; and by the fact that the two royal brevets, in which the most significant

98 Ryamond A. Mentzer, "The Edict of Nantes and its Institutions." In Society and Culture, Mentzer and Spicer eds. (2002): 98, 116. 99 Holt, The French Wars ofReligion (1995), 163. See also Elisabeth Labrousse, Unefoi, une loi, un roi?: Essai sur la révocation de l'édit de Nantes (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1985). 46 concessions were granted, were set to expire in eight years.100 Henri IV recognized that the sacrality of the French crown he had accepted depended on his status as the "most Christian king," which meant that the heretical Huguenot minority could not become a permanent fixture of the French state. At his sacrés Henri IV had sworn an oath, as had all French Kings before him, to protect the Church against heresy, and his legitimacy as King depended on his keeping that oath. By 1 606 Henri IV renewed the two royal brevets, but while the Huguenots maintained their status as a "state within a state," they were increasingly aware that their status within France depended entirely upon the favour and protection of the crown. Even before Henri IVs assassination in 1610, several key points of the edict were not being implemented across the country. The judicial components and various provincial parlements delayed in registering many of the edict's provisions and the financial subsidies promised to the Huguenots were never paid in the sums the edict had outlined.102 Henri IV himself put significant pressure on the Huguenot nobles to convert, and after his death in 1610, the regency of his young son, Louis XIII, was directed by the devoutly Catholic Queen Regent. Thus, despite the toleration that the edict had appeared to afford it became apparent rather quickly that the Huguenots could never be more than a heretical minority in a Catholic state. While in areas like the Huguenot stronghold of La Rochelle the French Protestants chose to respond to the situation by military means, Calvinist theologians and polemicists in France, like du Moulin, instead directed their efforts towards an international audience.

100 Holt, French Wars ofReligion, 165-166. 101 Ho\t,French Wars ofReligion, 172. 102 Ibid., 173. 47

Du Moulin' s personal experience as a minister in France proved to him that the future of the Huguenot population and the Protestant church could not be secured in France. Take, for example, du Moulin' s congregation at Charenton. The fact that the congregation was forced to establish itself outside of the walls of Paris is significant, for even though Huguenot worship was tolerated as according to the 1598 edict, the areas in which it could be practiced were severely limited. 103 Catholicism, meanwhile, could be practiced anywhere, even in Huguenot controlled towns, underscoring the fact that temporary religious unity with the ultimate goal of drawing the Huguenots back into the Catholic fold was the intent of the Edict, not permanent toleration. After the death of Henri IV and the rise of the Catholic regency, the Huguenots had begun to lose their position at court, culminating in the resignation of their sole representative on the royal council, the Duc de Sully.104 The increasing influence of the devout party at court coupled with the death or disgrace of many of Henry IVs old councillors to produce a royal policy that by the 161 Os was more hostile towards the Reformed.105 Increasingly disillusioned under Henri IV, and now struck a final blow by the establishment of a royal minority under a devoutly Catholic regent, it became clear by

1610 that du Moulin could not construct his vision of a united Protestant Church in Catholic France, where the Huguenots were little more than an officially recognized heretical minority. The encroachments against the Edict, coupled with its affirmation of France as a firmly Catholic country, and the increased Catholicity of the court under the regency meant Huguenot prospects in France were dim; they could certainly never hope

103 The Huguenots were still not officially allowed to worship within Parisian walls, as the staunchly Catholic Parisian population would never have allowed it. For an excellent discussion of the Huguenots and Catholic populations of Paris see Barbara Diefendorf Beneath the Cross (1991). 104 Holt, French Wars ofReligion, 173. 105 Benedict, Faith and Fortune, 297. 48 to establish a church as du Moulin envisioned: a united European Protestant church, led by a Protestant monarch. To overcome this obstacle, du Moulin turned to the King of

England.

When Henri IV was assassinated in 1610, Pierre du Moulin had already established strong ties in England. He had left Sedan in France in 1588 due to the uncertain religious situation there to study in England. Du Moulin was raised Protestant, and as Huguenots were not permitted to attend University in France until the Edict of Nantes, education abroad was du Moulin' s only option. He studied first in England for four years, and then Leiden for six.106 It was during his stay in England that the Reformed Church of France offered du Moulin the position in Paris, but he deferred acceptance of the post until after the completion of his studies in Leiden in 1598. His contacts abroad, established during his years of study, meant that even after his return to France, du Moulin was still interested in, and still received news regarding, the religious situation in both England and the Netherlands. It was through these networks of information that du Moulin was first brought into the controversy surrounding the Oath of Allegiance. The French Protestant population as a whole also had a history in England long before the partnership between du Moulin and James I developed. The first major influx of Huguenot immigration into England occurred in the second half of the sixteenth century as a result of the Wars of Religion.107 Although the English Church differed from the French Reformed in both form and application, both churches' conception of

106 Brian G. Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I: the Anglo-French programme," 17-29 and J. van der Meji "Pierre du Moulin in Leiden, 1592-1598." In LIAS-Sources and Documents Relating to the Early Modern History ofIdeas 14, 1 (1987): 15-40. 107 Reaman, The Trail ofthe Huguenots, (1966), 73. 49 salvation, faith, and grace were "broadly consistent" and their "sacraments and ministries [were] interchangeable for migrants."108 Under Elizabeth's rule, Calvin had demonstrated a keen interest in the development of the French Protestant congregations in England, the heart of which was located in London on Threadneedle Street. Calvin developed numerous contacts in England during his career, corresponding with leading figures of Edward VI's court and prominent churchmen during the early years of Elizabeth's reign before his death in 1564.110 James' reign introduced a new "ideological proximity" between England and Continental Protestantism; "there existed a genuine and profound sympathy between the French Protestants and the King of England," not the least of which was borne out of political concerns. Allegiance to the English king offered the Protestants a way to prove themselves against charges of sedition against kings generally, and by lending his support to the Protestant cause in France, James I could bolster his image on the continent.112 England was one of the Huguenots' strongest shields outside of France, and between the two countries there existed "a basic solidarity that stemmed from a common and deep hostility to Roman Catholics, or, more precisely. . . to 'popery.'""3 There also existed in England the presence of a significant population of Huguenot immigrants, who bore a great concern for their co-religionists back home in France. Unfortunately, a detailed breakdown of French Protestant immigration to

108 Patrick Collinson "England and International Calvinism, 1558-1640," in International Calvinism, Menna Prestwich ed., (1985), 213. 109 Ibid., 200, 204. 110 Benedict, Christ's Churches, 1 12. '" Bernard Cottret, The Huguenots in England: Immigration and Settlement c. 1550-1700. Trans. Peregrine and Adriana Stevenson. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 87. ,l2Ibid. 113 Labrousse, "Great Britain as Envisaged by the Huguenots of the Seventeenth Century." In Huguenots in Britain, Scouloudi ed. (1987), 144. 50

England in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is all but impossible because of the scarceness of records, as well as the influence of, for example, Walloon immigrants, who also attended the French Church in England because of the language.114 It is clear, however, that during the Wars of Religion of the sixteenth century, and especially during the first decade of the seventeenth century, French Protestants sought support from an international Protestant community. Immigrants in England and Huguenots in France alike were eager to seize upon James I as their leader, for he not only offered a central leader and a focal point for the European Protestant cause, but he also afforded the Huguenots in particular "the opportunity to vindicate themselves of the charge of seditious republicanism."115 In terms of England's policies, James I had long expressed hopes of his own for a broad religious settlement in Europe. On the question of cooperation with the Huguenots, James I "was determined to use the Huguenots to the best of their abilities, both to isolate the Puritans at home and to foster his Protestant image on the continent."1 16 The Huguenot relationship with England further sustained and supported James' own ambitions for a unified Protestant settlement. Official recognition from the Huguenots was a step towards achieving official recognition from all of the European Reformed Churches, which would elevate James I to a status akin to a Protestant Pope, a role some historians tell us James I would have been happy to play.117 Evidence would suggest, however, that James I was relatively moderate in actual policies, and while he may have "actively encouraged greater unity among the Protestant churches in Europe," he also

114 Scouloudi, "Introduction," in Huguenots in Britain, Scouloudi, ed. (1987), 43-45. 115 Cottret, Huguenots in England, 86. 116 Cottert, Huguenots in England, 85. 117 Emile G. Leonard, A History ofProtestantism. Trans. Joyce M. H. Reid (Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., 1961) and Cottert, Huguenots in England (1991). 51 waited to spy "a suitable opportunity for a general religious rapprochement that would include Rome."118 When du Moulin first presented his plan for union to James in 1613, James I probably thought he had found that opportunity. James I soon found, however, that while he had gained a formidable polemicist for an ally, that ally often needed to be checked in his enthusiasm. An examination of the correspondence between the two is most telling on this point; du Moulin's letters to James I far outnumber the King's own to du Moulin, and when he did write to his French friend, James I was often cautious in his wording, and urged the same caution in du Moulin.119 Nevertheless, the partnership between the two strengthened the growing international Protestant community and produced the most detailed program for Protestant unity of the first half of the seventeenth century.

Du Moulin's desire to see a united Protestant Christendom established in Europe found expression early in his career and developed in tandem with his vision of James I as its head. For Pierre du Moulin, the Huguenot status as a heretical minority in France was directly opposed to his goal of a united Protestant church, which could only succeed with a Protestant monarch at its head. Additionally, because of his own theological program, du Moulin would not petition against the French crown directly; he wrote several treaties to the French king, arguing that the French Protestant movement was not seditious, but by the beginning of the seventeenth century, Catholic sermon and

118 Patterson, James IV and 1 (1997), 123. 1 19 The letters consulted in this study were obtained from the States Papers collection of the Public Records Office (PRO) in England. Unfortunately, the letters have not yet been digitized, so copies were obtained on CD-Rom through post from the PRO. The documents themselves are fairly worn, making work with the digitized copies on CD-Rom difficult due to quality: In places the text is often worn away altogether, and other letters have been written over, making the original print difficult to read. Du Moulin's correspondences are written sometimes in French and sometimes in English; James' responses are in English. 52 devotional literature in France was closely tied with the French state and crown. The situation in France had thus forced du Moulin to place his hopes elsewhere. The choice of England and James I was a natural one, not only because du Moulin needed a Protestant monarch to head his imagined church, but because James was himself a Protestant king who had already shown an interest in the Huguenot cause in France, and had further expressed his own desire for Protestant union. Among the many important connections du Moulin made during his years of study, it was Cambridge University classmate James Montagu, a later favourite of James I, who became du Moulin' s most enthusiastic supporter at the English court and who is credited for establishing the connection between du Moulin and James I that would continue until the King's death.121 Over the course of their relationship, du Moulin wrote several treatises in defence of James' religious policy, extolling him as the guardian of Christendom. He also ghost-wrote at least two religious declarations traditionally credited

1 99 to the English king and received three church livings in England for his service. His close relationship with James was established in 1610 when he undertook his first treatise in defence of the English king on the issue of James' recently established Oath of Allegiance.123 This example is significant because not only was it the first treatise du Moulin undertook in defence of James, but it also showed that James' policy of allowing for toleration of the Catholic minority in England matched with du Moulin' s own hope that his united Protestant church would include a settlement that incorporated the

120 See Jason Sager's "Devotion and the Political" for an excellent discussion of devotional literature and French crown in France during the reigns of Henri IV and Louis XIII. 121 Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I," 22. 122 The "Declaration des Eglises Reformes de France" (1612) and the "Declaration du Serenissme Roy Jacques I" (1612 and 1615). Brian G. Armstrong, Bibliographie! Molinaei: An Alphabetical, Chronological and Descriptive Bibliography ofthe Works ofPierre du Moulin (1568-1658). (1997). Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I." 123 Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I," 23-24. 53

Catholic population who had cast off the tyrannical trappings of Rome. It further allowed du Moulin to take his battle against the Jesuits in France - which he was losing because the Jesuits were so closely tied to the crown there - to England, where much of his audience shared his distaste for the Jesuit order. In fact, after his visits to England of 1615 and 1625, du Moulin was briefly detained upon his return to France for suspected

... ]24 sedition.

The Oath itself was a response to the recent "Gunpowder Plot" of November 1605. The Oath essentially required Catholics in England to acknowledge that their first allegiance was to the King of England, not the Pope in Rome. In the dedication of his defence, titled Défense de lafoy Catholique, du Moulin clearly identifies his own cause with James, declaring to the English King that "that religion which you [James] defend is the same which we profess," and several times referring to James as his sovereign. Du Moulin also made the gesture of pledging his pen to the service of the English King: "But were it so that you had use of any man's pen, yet should you have little cause to seek further."126 While hyperbole was quite typical of seventeenth-century rhetoric, the correspondence between James I and Pierre du Moulin often exceeded conventional reverence, and in fact, such statements left du Moulin under close scrutiny by the French crown.

In the opening chapter of the Défense 's main body of text, du Moulin established James as a tolerant King who, "in the sweetness and fairness of his own nature inclined to give content unto all his subjects with free liberty of conscience. But this his inclination was over-ruled by necessity when his wisdom entered into consideration that the matter

124 Cottret, Huguenots in England (1991), 90. 125 Du Moulin, Défense de lafoy Catholique (1610), A3-5. 54 now in question was not only religion, but the peace of his estate and the security of his crown."127 By establishing that the Oath ran contrary to James' desire to unite all Christians in his kingdom, and that it was instead necessitated by the Jesuit plot to kill him, du Moulin urged lay Catholics in England to recognize the evil of the Jesuits and the Papacy for seeking first to murder the King, and then to usurp his rightful authority. In doing so, du Moulin hoped to convince the Catholic population that the King's Oath was in no way a violation, but went hand in hand with true Christian piety as according to Scripture. Even the first Catholic Cardinals, he asserted, "loved their king too well to assent. . .that the Pope may either directly or in-directly deprive him of his crown." Du Moulin argued that the Papacy's attempt to undermine and usurp the rightful place of kings was an assault on the true religion, and related the story of St. Paul who lived while Nero was Emperor and tyrant in Rome to prove the Scriptural precedent of his position: Paul would not attempt to kill or depose Nero (as the Jesuits had King James I) because Nero was Emperor by God's will.129 The implication of du Moulin's story is clear: by first attempting to assassinate the King, and then by opposing his authority in the example of the Oath, the Jesuits were opposing God Himself. The Jesuits' lasting hostility towards James served the Protestant cause well by seeming to confirm "Rome's scant regard for kings."130 Du Moulin's Défense was directed specifically at the French Dominican Nicolas Cofféteau, a Dominican at the French Court who defended the Jesuits against James G s attacks and accusations of sedition in the king's own second defence of the Oath, the Premonition. The fact that

127 Du Moulin, Défense de lafoy Catholique (1610), I: 3. 128 Ibid., II: 25. 129 Ibid., II: 22. 130 Cottrett, Huguenots in England, 88. 55 most of the opponents responding to the Oath (and the King's subsequent defence thereof) were all active Jesuit controversialists did nothing to counter the impression that the Jesuits were seditious servants of Rome. I31 Such a forceful outcry against the King on the part of the Jesuits, coupled with the fact that several moderate Roman Catholics, like George Blackwell, were allied with the King in defending the Oath, seemed only to perpetuate the belief that the Jesuits, in their enforcement of the belief "that the Pope may pull downe Kings from their Thrones [sic]" were assassins of Rome. In the Défense, du Moulin said of the Jesuits that "through all their houses, there was a certaine forme of prayer prescribed by the Priests and Jésuites, for the happy successe of this enterprise; to whom the complices did mutually binde themselves by oath, sworne upon the holy Sacrament."132 In this passage, du Moulin not only sought to expose the explicit cooperation of the Jesuits in the plot, but also to point to the perversion the Jesuits had made of Scripture by swearing their oath for the success of the plot on the Holy Sacrament. Du Moulin went on to tell his reader that of the conspirators, who have "suffered according unto law," two of them who were Jesuits were "inserted into a catalogue of Martyrs, imprinted at Rome, which is the Spring-head and Forge of all such enterprises."133 The clear intention of this passage was to show that, rather than condemn the attempted murder of a King rightfully appointed by God, the Papacy celebrated and condoned the undertaking by making the two Jesuit conspirators martyrs.134

131 Patterson, James VI and /101-102; Among James' foremost Catholic opponents Patterson lists: Cardinal Bellarmine of Italy, the Jesuit theologians Martin Becanus and Jacobus Grester in Germany, Spanish Jesuit Francisco Suarez, and in France the "vigorous controversialist" Andreas Eudaemon-Joannes. Patterson also includes the names of several other, lesser-known Jesuits, such as the Flemish Leonard Lessius, who became involved in the controversy in various capacities. 132 Du Moulin, Défense de lafoy Catholique, 5. 133 Ibid. 134 In fact, only one of the Jesuits allegedly involved, Henry Garnet, was caught and executed. Garnet was indeed considered be a martyr and was included in the 2nd appendix of the Menology ofEngland and 56

Du Moulin's attacks against the Jesuits were thus not unique to France. As we have seen in the previous chapter, though, du Moulin's protests against the Jesuits in France largely fell on deaf ears because several of the French court's key advisors and polemicists were themselves Jesuits. The Gunpowder Plot afforded du Moulin a fortuitous opportunity: his belief that the Jesuits were a seditious influence on kings now found expression in his belief that the Papacy had long sought to usurp English monarchical authority; for du Moulin, the Jesuits were merely the Papacy's latest weapon in this cause. In this, du Moulin found a wide audience in England eager to agree - even members of the Catholic community and clergy sought to firmly distinguish themselves from the Jesuits, whom they accused of sedition and political subversion135 - and du Moulin found in England support on a scale that he had never enjoyed in France. From 1611 to 1614, du Moulin pursued his goal of a united church under James I tirelessly, and was engaged in a series of polemical battles with prominent Catholic theologians, and even other Protestants, to preserve orthodoxy and to promote James as the defender of the Reformed faith.136 In 1613 he began writing letters to the king directly, suggesting the idea of Protestant union in Europe with James at its head. In one of these letters, du Moulin included a treatise on the topic of church union roughly translated as the Overture to workfor the union ofthe Christian churches in which James I was recognized, of course, as the head. As the foremost expert on du Moulin, Brian Armstrong has noted, "it is quite apparent from this text that, for du Moulin, James was

Wales in 1887. The Jesuits John Gerard and Oswald Tesimond (alias Greenway) escaped and published accounts of their involvement. Patterson, King James VI and I, 75. For the record of Garnet's martyrdom see Richard Stanton, A Menology ofEngland and Wales: or, BriefMemorials ofthe Ancient British and English Saints Arranged According to the Calendar together with the martyrs ofthe 16' and 17 centuries (London: Burns and Oates Limited, 1887), 663. 135 Patterson, James IV and I, 79. 136 Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I," 26. 57 the hope for a united, European, Reformed church."138 The Premonition of 1609, written by James I as a reissue of his 1607 defence Apologie for the Oath ofAllegiance had expressed the English king's own desires for a general council,139 and was undoubtedly the reason why du Moulin was eager to pen a defence of his own, for in fostering a relationship with the English king, he could hopefully gain support for his own program of unity. From 1611 onwards James I and Pierre du Moulin maintained a steady correspondence, though this correspondence was admittedly, at times, one sided. An examination of the letters between the two men between 1613 and 1615 shows that more often than not, it was du Moulin who initiated the correspondence, and who wrote far more frequently to the king than the king him, despite this having been a period of increased correspondence for both men because of du Moulin' s proposed plan for union.140 James' program for peace and unity within the Church of England was a point on which he and du Moulin could find common ground, for their goals of unified religious (Protestant) practice within their two countries were the same, and they exchanged thoughts and comments on the plan for unity as it pertained not only to Europe as a whole. When their ambitions were stalled in Europe (as we will see in the next chapter), they focused on the promotion of unity within England and France respectively. While du Moulin exercised a more direct influence over the promotion of unity in England because he penned a handful of treatises in James' name on the matter, James'

138 l38 Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I," 26. 139 W. B. Patterson, "Pierre du Moulin's Quest for Protestant Unity, 1613-1618." In Unity and Diversity in the Church: Papers read at the 1994 summer meeting and the 1995 winter meeting ofthe Ecclesiastical History Society; Studies in Church History 032 (London: Blackwell Publishers, 1995). 140 Based on letters exchanged between du Moulin and James I 1613-1615 found in the State Papers of the Public Records Office in England (obtained electronically). 58 direct influence over France was considerably less, and more often took the form of promises of aid for the struggling Huguenot population, particularly during the renewed hostilities of the 1620s.

Before the partnership with James I began, Pierre du Moulin had already established himself as a formidable polemicist and defender of the faith in France. He undertook to "battle" with any opponent, Catholic or Protestant, whom he saw as perpetuating a message of the Gospel that was contrary to his own, which was itself very closely based on Calvin's program. Despite the force of his rhetoric in these polemical battles, du Moulin believed that most Europeans clung to their false beliefs "not of obstinacy, but by simplicity, or by custome [sic]."141 As was later expressed in his letters to James and his program for union, only when the Protestant Churches themselves were in agreement on doctrine, would these obstacles amongst the laity be overcome. As evidenced by his reaction to new offshoots of the Protestant confession, such as the Arminian controversy, the "invention of novelties" was a danger that stirred the population to confusion and violence. Having grown up during the wars of religion, Pierre du Moulin had a very real sense of the violence that divisions over religious doctrine could produce, yet he believed that on the question of Christian unity "there is hope that the sides of this wound will in a short space close together again and men's minds will be reconciled."142

The clear articulation of du Moulin' s plans for union found in the 1613 Overtures evidences that du Moulin had given the idea a great deal of thought beforehand. Without

1 Pierre du Moulin, An Apologyfor the Holy Supper ofthe Lord (1607), II: 3. 2 Du Moulin, Anatomy ofArminianism, A4: ii. access to du Moulin' s personal writings and letters, it impossible to say when exactly the idea had begun to formulate, but it seems very likely, based on the evolution of his published writings, that the idea developed in tandem with his relationship with James. While his earlier works expressed optimism towards bringing all Protestants into agreement under the Reformed banner, it was not until after his correspondence with James that such a clear articulation of a Europe-wide plan for union appeared in his writing. Even in his 1610 Défense du Moulin' s focus was on proving the sedition of Rome and the Jesuits, and though this was an important point - for it urged Europeans to cast off the Papacy (and by implication, embrace the Protestant program) - nowhere in this treatise does du Moulin make mention of a plan for union. Furthermore, one would hardly expect that the author of such a scathing attack on the Jesuits and Rome would within three years of its publication be proposing a plan for unity that include the "rather startling final point" of a fresh approach to Rome.143 It is likely, therefore, that du Moulin' s developed after he had made contact with James, specifically after James sent du Moulin a personal copy of the Premonitions,1^ which expressed James' own desire for religious reconciliation across Europe; W. B. Patterson has admitted that "the final point of du Moulin's plan of union - rapproachement with Rome - seemed closer to James's way of thinking than du Moulin's."145 In fact, throughout his career du Moulin held fast to the belief that Rome would never accept any program of faith that was not its own, nor attend any council over which it did not have full control. The first chapter of this work has already shown us the vehemence with which du Moulin attacked Rome, and his partnership with James did nothing to lessen that; in fact, as has already been

143 Patterson, "Pierre du Moulin's Quest for Protestant Unity, 1613-1618," 235. 144 Patterson, James Vl and I, 158. 145 Ibid., 249. 60 suggested earlier, the Papacy in Rome (and the Jesuits) provided du Moulin and the English with a common enemy, and du Moulin's defence of James I and the rights of kings earned him a positive reputation in England. Du Moulin's activities in England did not escape the notice of the court in France. Pierre du Moulin remained under close scrutiny because of his public profession of devotion and service to the King of England, and after each of his lengthier stays in England - first in 1615 and then in 1625 - du Moulin was briefly detained upon his return to France.146 In 1621 du Moulin had become persona non grata in France because of his connection to England and James I and was forced to flee Paris for Sedan for a short time.147 Such obstacles, however, did not diminish the partnership, nor did it deter du Moulin's hopes of establishing a unified European Protestant church, headed by James

I.

Elisabeth Labrousse has accused the Huguenots of a "naïve ethnocentrism" in their view of England in the seventeenth century, asserting that the French Reformed clung to England because it alleviated the "psychological strain" of not belonging to the King's Church.148 However, other evidence and studies have shown that the Huguenots had a strong, sympathetic relationship with England. The steady encroachment by the crown against the terms of the Edict of Nantes, coupled with the already established Huguenot presence in England from the sixteenth-century, not to mention James G s own policies, made a partnership between the French Huguenots and English Protestants an easy one. Certainly for du Moulin, whose own plan for Protestant union could not hope to succeed in Catholic France, England and James I offered a fine alternative. Du Moulin

146 Cottret, Huguenots in England, 90. 147 Labrousse in Scouloudi, 146. I48lbid, 144, 150. 61 found in James both an ally and a leader. The writings that he undertook in defence of James propelled him to the forefront of an international Protestant (and Catholic) discourse, and indeed began his international career in earnest. After the 1610 defence of James I, Pierre du Moulin was a name repeated not just in France, but across Europe. In du Moulin, James I had found an ally and a follower whose shameless promotions of the king as "the defender of the faith" served to promote James' own international image. The two men exchanged letters and ideas on a regular basis, and it is clear that each exercised a considerable amount of influence over the other's theological program. Among French polemicists of the seventeenth century, only du Moulin embraced the English style. By the last years of the partnership, du Moulin had begun to express a clear preference for the English Episcopal system; a fact that Brian Armstrong believes is one of the foremost reasons why several Huguenots ended up Episcopalians after the 1685 revocation of the Edict of Nantes in France.

Before we conclude our study of Pierre du Moulin and the relationship with James I, there is an interesting case that bears mentioning. It has been addressed by only two other historians, but has failed to be fully considered or explained. In 1624 Pierre du Moulin wrote to James I to request that he be given the recently vacated Bishopric at Gloucester in England.149 In his study of du Moulin, Brian Armstrong dismisses the incident as an "incredible" case without saying much more on the matter.15 In her own work, Elisabeth Labrousse uses this case as evidence of the Huguenots' woefully naïve view of England; for her, du Moulin's request highlighted how the Huguenots

Labrousse in Scouloudi, 146-7. Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I." 62 fundamentally failed to grasp the Anglican Church.151 Based on what we know of the Huguenots' position in England, and of James' own policies towards the Huguenots, I think it unfair to draw such conclusions about the French population as a whole. While the incident may perhaps evidence a lack of discretion or tact on the part of du Moulin, one must also remember that by this time, du Moulin had already received two livings in England (he was also given a third in place of the bishopric) and a number of other gifts from the King. His preference for the Episcopal system may also place this episode into better perspective, and it is more than likely that the request for the bishopric reflected du Moulin's belief that he would play a key role in the implementation of the plan for union. Ultimately, and as we shall see in the next chapter, James I and Pierre du Moulin were unsuccessful in their mutual promotion of a program for unity as events on the continent conspired to keep them from setting their plan in motion. When James I died in 1625, du Moulin lost one of his strongest allies and his strongest support for the plan of union; Charles I did not choose to continue the relationship with du Moulin, despite the French minister's best efforts. The Huguenots' situation in England also changed with the death of James I as they were threatened not only by the instability of Charles' reign, but also by the program of the Archbishop William Laud, who "wished to eradicate Calvinism in England" completely.152 The death of James I therefore also signalled the death of du Moulin's hopes for establishing a unified Protestant church in Europe. Afterwards, du Moulin's career declined without the support of a monarch to push his program of unity. Du Moulin returned to his ministry at Paris, and in the later years of his life, Sedan. Nevertheless, the years during which du Moulin partnered with James I on

151 Labrousse in Scouloudi, 146-8. 152 Cottret, Huguenots in England, 99. 63 the question of unity were the most fruitful for du Moulin, not only in terms of his program for unity, but also as an international French Protestant polemicists. In order to complete our understanding of du Moulin' s career during these years, we now turn to an examination of the plan for union itself. 64

Chapter Three Protestant Unity and a Christian Reformed Church

Due to the upheaval caused by the wars of religion in the sixteenth century, the Huguenot movement did not develop a settled pattern of devotion until the post-Edict period of peace.153 During this time, Philip Benedict has observed that two categories of literature stand out amongst the French Protestant publications for their frequency of publication: the works of Jean Calvin himself, "and works of controversy written by seventeenth-century French theologians, works which seek to demonstrate the truths of the Reformed religion and the errors of papistry such as Pierre du Moulin' s Bouclier de la foi and La Nouveauté du papisme."154 As historians now seek to expand our understanding of seventeenth-century French Protestantism, analysis of these works of controversy is increasingly important. As the most prolific Protestant polemicist of the seventeenth century and the most prominent voice of the French Reformed Church, du Moulin's works are of particular significance in helping us to understand how French Protestant polemicists adjusted their message in the post-Edict period. In both Catholic and Protestant polemics of this period, defending the legitimacy of church and doctrine became the primary aim of the various polemical broadsides that were published and debated. For du Moulin, who placed the greatest importance on doctrine, a dual message emerged that included the promotion of the verity of the Reformed faith, but also the promotion of a program of unity, not just amongst Protestants, but amongst all Christians, including Catholics.

Philip Benedict, "Two Calvinisms," 220. 65

In the first half of the seventeenth century Pierre du Moulin directed himself towards promoting unity within the different Protestant churches with great zeal. He wrote not only to defend the French Reformed faith against its enemies, but also to promote a unified Protestant program across Europe. He attended a number of Protestant conventions as a representative of the Reformed Church of France, and wrote several treatises promoting his ideal of a unified, European Christendom under the French Protestant banner. In his promotion of unity, du Moulin often reacted harshly against Protestant theology that strayed too far from the orthodox program of Jean Calvin. One of the most famous episodes with which du Moulin was involved within Protestant Christianity was the controversy in the Netherlands over the ideas of Dutch Reformed theologian Jacob Arminius and his followers. Prevented by the French crown from attending the international synod at Dordrecht (1618) at which the Dutch would decide upon the issue of Arminianism, du Moulin nevertheless penned "a fiercely anti- Remonstrant account of the issues in dispute" in his 500 page The Anatomy of Arminianism}55 In it, du Moulin thoroughly condemned "the errors of all innovators" and the "ambition of some men who invent novelties that stir up the population."156 Du Moulin' s defence of orthodoxy is significant at this stage of development in the Reformed Church, for it not only points to the continually uncertain position of the Huguenot in France, but also, in order for du Moulin' s program of a united European Reformed Church to succeed, Christian doctrine needed to be harmonized.157 To this end,

155 Armstrong and Larminie. "Du Moulin, Pierre (1568-1658)." Oxford Dictionary ofNational Biography Online ed. 156 Du Moulin, Anatomy ofArminianism, ii. 157 It is significant to note that the synod at Dordrecht ultimately condemned the Arminian heresy and that at the later Synod of Ales (1620) du Moulin succeeded in getting the French Reformed Church to confirm the orthodox program of Dort. 66 du Moulin was invited to attend a number of international Protestant synods that attempted to promote uniformity in Protestant doctrine: For example, at the National Synod of Privas (1612) du Moulin, representing not only the French Reformed Church, but also James I of England, '"fusmes chargez de trauvailler à la reconciliation des principaux de nos Eglises [sic]': he also seized the opportunity to work on the matter of doctrinal unity of the various Protestant churches." Du Moulin was equally concerned with reaching a settlement with the Catholics on issues of Christian doctrine. Despite his numerous controversies and polemical battles with prominent Catholic theologians, du Moulin' s criticisms were largely reserved for the Papacy, or "Romish Church" as he preferred to call it, and the Jesuits. While it has been suggested that the overture to the Catholics was included purely for James G s benefit,159 it has been demonstrated in chapter one that in the 1610s du Moulin began to make room for the Catholic laity in his program by launching his attacks against the Catholics specifically at the Papacy and the Jesuit order, and made specific appeals, as in the Bouclier de la Foy, to convince the Catholic laity of the corruption of Rome. This chapter will consider Pierre du Moulin' s plan for union as it was outlined in his 1613 letter to James I, the Overture pour travailler à l'union des Eglises de Chrestieneté et appaiser les differens qui sont desia nez, où qui pourront naister à l 'advenir, and how this program evolved over the course of the 1610s and 1620s. Du Moulin was not the first Protestant theologian to seek cooperation amongst the various Protestant churches of Europe, and this chapter will begin by examining the precedent set by sixteenth-century Protestant theologians like Jean Calvin, Martin Bucer, and Heinrich Bullinger. This chapter will

158 Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I," 28. 159 Patterson, "Pierre du Moulin's Quest for Protestant Unity, 1613-1618," 249. 67 attempt to shed light on du Moulin' s plan for union, what differentiated it from sixteenth- century efforts, and why, ultimately, it failed.

Du Moulin' s program for unity amongst the Protestant churches of Europe differed from similar efforts in the sixteenth century, although across the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the various Reformed churches of Europe often came to one another's aid, expressing an international solidarity even before du Moulin spoke of union. The French Protestants in particular had regularly sought closer relations with other churches in the Reformed tradition. From 1578 to 1607 the national synods of the French Reformed Church took steps specifically towards developing relations even with the Lutherans.160 Such efforts on the part of the French Reformed may be attributed to their minority status in France, which saw the Huguenots both religiously and politically isolated in their own country. It also dates back to Calvin himself, who had never given up hope of seeing his homeland of France converted; the establishment of the Genevan Company of Pastors and the continued training of French pastors in Geneva ensured that the French Reformed tradition was international almost from its beginning. Jean Calvin even undertook collaborative projects with other leading European reformers in the sixteenth century, like Swiss reformer Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575). Bullinger and Calvin penned a response to the Council of Trent together, but long-term collaboration was difficult to achieve when so many doctrinal differences persisted amongst the various Reformed groups. Still, efforts at cooperation persisted. At the 1561 Colloquy at Poissy the collaboration of Theodore Beza and Italian theologian Pietro Vermigli (1499-1562, popularly known as Peter Martyr) evidenced a growing development of unity within the 160 Patterson, "Du Moulin's Quest," 249. 68

Reformed movement indicative of a measure of theological toleration later found in du Moulin' s own plan. Vermigli also formed a partnership with Bullinger, the two working most notably to lead the collaboration between the Zurich church and the Reformed church under Beza at Poissy, where the three even garnered support from the Bishop of London.161 Strasbourg reformer Martin Bucer (1491-1551) also attempted to bring the Zwinglian and Lutheran parties together, but apparently "Bullinger' s distrust of the Strasbourg reformer was so intense that there was little chance of success." Such efforts were often brief collaborations and in the sixteenth century divisions within the

Protestant world were still too many to consider long-term cooperation, much less a program of union such as du Moulin would propose in the seventeenth century. Often, sixteenth-century collaborations between reformers of different Protestant groups were undertaken when the reformers as a whole felt most threatened, as was the case when Calvin and Bullinger wrote their response to the Council of Trent. After the threat had been met, the Protestant reformers often found that theological differences amongst themselves were too great for any permanent sort of settlement, though collaborative ventures continued to take place across the sixteenth century. Given that cooperation between the various Protestant groups was difficult to achieve in any lasting way during the sixteenth century, it is astounding that du Moulin would introduce a program that proposed not only union amongst the Reformed churches, but an inter-confessional unity that included a plan for making overtures even to the Catholics. But perhaps this is not so surprising if we consider the situation in France on a local level,

161 Heinrich Bullinger: Life, Thought, Influence: Zurich, Aug. 25-29, 2004, International Congress Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575) Emidio Campi and Peter Opitz eds. (Zurich: 2007), 173. 162 Architect ofReformation: An Introduction to Heinrich Bullinger, 1504-1575. Emidio Campi and Bruce Gordon, eds. (Michigan: Baker Publishing Group, 2004), 19. 163 Ibid., 20. 69 where studies by historians like Keith Luria and Philip Benedict have indicated that the 1598 Edict of Nantes was a source not just of conflict, but also of peaceful coexistence between Protestants and Catholics. According to Luria, the picture of Protestant and Catholic coexistence has been made unclear in the historiography by those historians who emphasize either conflict or coexistence.164 While Paris continued to be an area of conflict - the Huguenots who came to worship at Charenton were often attacked by Catholic mobs165 - other areas in France were characterized by peaceful cohabitation. Such local-level coexistence often centered around the locally dominant faith, so that in areas where Catholics outnumbered Huguenots, the Huguenots found themselves adopting Catholic traditions and the opposite occurred in Huguenot dominated regions. Studies of local communities in fact show French Catholics and Protestants conducting business together, serving as each other's god parents, and even getting married. Thus, while broader, country-wide conflicts may have persisted - as was the case in the 1 620s Huguenot rebellions in the Midi - at a local level, inter-confessional cooperation was not unheard of. It was, in fact, enjoying quite a bit of success, and it becomes clearer, then, how du Moulin might have believed that reconciliation with the Catholics who forsook the trappings of Rome might be feasible. Before he could turn to incorporating the Catholics, however, du Moulin first sought to achieve unity amongst the various Protestant sects across Europe. As stated above, du Moulin' s program for unity was first introduced in 1613 in a letter composed to James I. Du Moulin' s plan contained twenty proposals, or steps towards union, the first of which

164 Keith Luria, Sacred Boundaries: Religious Coexistence and Conflict in Early-Modern France. 1 ed. (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2005). 165 Strayer, Heguenots and Camisards, 200. 166 Benedict, Faith and Fortune, 303-4. 70 addressed the role to be played by the Protestant princes and sovereigns of Europe. This point appeared as the first because du Moulin was convinced that any plan for union could "only be carried out successfully with the assistance of the Sovereign Princes of those countries which are not under the Subjection of the Pope [sic]."167 The plan went on to describe in step-by-step fashion how the Reformed Church of France and the Church of England would lead the way in bringing together the various other Protestant churches in union. Du Moulin specifically proposed that two representatives each from the Reformed churches of France, the Netherlands, and the Swiss, as well as one or two each from the Protestant principalities of Germany, meet and work towards the establishment of a common confession of faith.168 Each of the groups represented at this first stage would lay out their various confessions, agree that differences over ceremonies and ecclesiology would be tolerated, and proceed to draw up a common confession. Of course du Moulin expected that such a meeting would give rise to disagreements over any number of theological differences, but he was prepared with a number of compromises on interpretations of, for example, baptism and the nature of Christ's body in the Lord's Supper - two of the most contentious issues that remained between all Protestant groups. Overall, du Moulin believed that with such compromises as he envisioned, theological differences would not hinder his program that hoped to see all Protestant churches in Europe "being in accord in faith and true doctrine."169

167 Pierre du Moulin, Overture pour travailler a l'union des Eglises de Chrestieneté et appaiser les differens qui sont desia nez, où qui pourront naister à !'advenir. PRO, SP 78/61, fol. 68. This document was accessed together with the aforementioned letters between James I and Pierre du Moulin, referenced in chapter two, from the State Papers of the Public Records Office in England. 168 Du Moulin, Overture pour travailler a l'union des Eglises de Chrestieneté et appaiser les differens qui sont desia nez, où qui pourront naister à ¡'advenir. PRO, SP 78/61, fol. 68. 71

The second stage of du Moulin' s plan was to extend an invitation to the Lutheran churches. Once united amongst themselves, the Reformed Churches of the first stage would send delegates to meet with the Lutheran princes of Germany. The Reformed and the Lutherans would then seek accord. Again, du Moulin recognized that there were a number of important issues on which the Reformed and the Lutherans disagreed, but du

Moulin' s intent was that "on all such issues the Lutheran and Reformed Churches would agree to tolerate certain differences."170 The final point of du Moulin's plan called for the newly united Protestants to make overtures to Rome. It has already been suggested that this point was included specifically to garner the support of James I, however du Moulin's representations of Rome and the Jesuits, coupled with his appeals to the Catholic laity, suggest that du Moulin himself believed that Catholics who were no longer loyal to Rome may be included in his program for union. Du Moulin's original 1613 plan was modified and expanded to twenty-one points, the result of his collaboration not only with James I, but with Philippe Duplessis-Mornay (1549-1623) as well. The purpose of the modifications was primarily to clarify the first and second stages of du Moulin's plan, as many among the Protestants expressed misgivings over the inclusion of the Lutherans.171 It is clear from du Moulin's plan that he hoped to eventually achieve a broad consensus on fundamental issues of faith, based on the principles of the Reformation and the French Reformed confession. In addition to the program outlined in the Overture, du Moulin supported more frequent use of national and international synods amongst the Protestant churches to decide matters of doctrine and orthodoxy and to promote a program of a unified

170 Patterson, "du Moulin's Quest," 239. 171 Patterson, "du Moulin's Quest," 239. 72

Reformed faith across Europe. Even when he was unable to attend the synods himself, du Moulin exerted great influence over the program of the synods by urging unity. We know, for example, that his plan was actively discussed at synods in Tonneins (1614), Vitré (1617), Dort (1618), and Ales (1620).172 The Synod of Aies was presided over by du Moulin himself, and despite his absence, the plan of unity adopted by the Reformed churches at Tonneins (located in the south of France, between Bordeaux and Montauban) was based on the Overtures. Du Moulin was not the only Huguenot leader who urged the Protestant churches of Europe towards unity; Philippe Duplessis-Mornay, leader of the Huguenot political assembly at Saumur, had also sought to bring the French Reformed Church and other Protestant churches abroad towards closer association and, eventually, union.173 However, du Moulin appears to have been unique in his desire to "seek the accord of the Roman Church."174

One of du Moulin's strongest overtures to the Catholic laity is found in the Bouclier de la Foy, the work that came to define the seventeenth-century French Protestant doctrinal program. The Bouclier opened with a brief dedication to Prince Charles of England, followed by a twenty-five page preface dedicated to the followers "of the Church of Rome."175 It is among the first works in which du Moulin addressed himself directly to the Catholic laity, and given the vehemence with which he attacked the Catholic faith in other works, he is compelled in the beginning of his preface to convince the reader of his argument's worth:

172 The various works of both Brian Armstrong and W. B. Patterson make note of du Moulin's participation, whether in person or via letters, at each of these synods. The most in-depth account can be found in Patterson's James VI and I {\ 997). 173 Patterson, King James I and VI, 162. 174 Ibid. 175 Du Moulin, Bouclier, i. 73

Sirs, that which I intend at this time to offer unto you, it may be, would be better accepted if it were tendered unto you by another hand: howbeit I dare boldly affirme, that never any spake unto you that was either more voide of hatred or more desirous of your good and salvation [sic].176 The preface that follows appeals to the Catholic reader to reconsider their loyalty to the "Romish Church," a distinction that du Moulin is careful to make throughout:

By this word Church, you understand not the Christian people, not all Pastors in generali, but the Pope and a few Prelates, whose rules are called the Rules of the Church; although they tend wholly to the profite of the Clergie, and to advance the Empire of the Bishop of Rome [sic].177 Two things are made immediately clear in this passage: Firstly, the aforementioned distinction between what we will henceforth call "Catholic Christians," that is, the body of Christian laity who still adhered to the Catholic faith, but were excluded from participation in the "mysteries" of the church, and "Roman Catholics" who comprised the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, most especially the Prelates and Bishops of Rome. Secondly, there is the characterization of the Roman Church by du Moulin as an evil and unwanted "other;" an "Empire" unto itself that has corrupted the Christian faith for its own ends. The two, of course, are not mutually exclusive, but rather the careful distinction between Catholic Christians and Roman Catholics depends upon the characterization of Rome as the villain. For du Moulin, it was necessary to create this distinction between Catholic Christians and Roman Catholics, for only in this way could he both attack Catholic doctrine, but at the same time promote his goal of a united Christendom in which even the Catholic laity were a part. By proving to lay Catholics that Rome was the enemy that had corrupted the Christian church, du Moulin could encourage them to accept the truth of the Reformed cause. For du Moulin then, French

Ibid., ix. 74

Protestantism was not a rival to Catholicism, but it was Rome that was the enemy of all

Christians.

We know that James I likely exercised the most influence on du Moulin's policy towards the Catholics, his desire for reconciliation with the Catholics in his own country having been a major concern. However, it has also been argued that incorporation of at least the Catholic laity was not contrary to du Moulin's own beliefs and goals. It is evident from reading the Bouclier de la Foy that for du Moulin the separate Protestant churches with their separate ceremonies and traditions was not an obstacle to union; such differences could be tolerated because du Moulin believed in the concept of the "church" as a body of believers. As du Moulin understood it, the concept of "church" could have many meanings. The meaning that the Papacy employed referred specifically to the Church of Rome, but according to du Moulin The word Church in the Scripture is taken: 1. Sometime for all the assemblie of the elect, 2. Sometime for the universali visible Church, 3. Sometime for a particular Church, 4. Sometime for the people onely, 5. Sometime for the Pastors onely [sic].178 Du Moulin went on to conclude that the true Church is constituted by "the profession of Christianitie, and the sacrament of Baptisme [sic]."179 Therefore, and whatever their disputes over doctrine may be, all those who called themselves Christian and accepted the sacrament of Baptism could be incorporated into the "Church," including Catholics. Works like the preface of the Bouclier, then, were designed to isolate the Church of Rome as the enemy, and then to affirm the verity of the Protestant articles of faith, for du Moulin was only interested in accepting union "among all the Churches which have

Du Moulin, Bouclier, 265. Ibid., 266. 75 thrown off the yoke of the Pope."180 For most reformers this meant only accepting those churches that officially recognized themselves as Calvinist Protestants, and it was difficult for them to even allow for compromise with the Lutherans or Zwinglians, let alone Catholics. Du Moulin was less reserved, and he desired first a union amongst Calvinists, then a union amongst all Protestants generally: Calvinists, Lutherans, and Zwinglians specifically. Once the various Protestant sects were in agreement, then the Catholics who had rejected or distanced themselves from Rome could be approached. Du Moulin' s initial plan for unity, upon which the program at Tonneins was based, therefore originally included a first synod that would be comprised of representatives from the Reformed Church of France, the Church of England, and the Lutheran churches, but the Lutherans were subsequently removed from this first meeting by the more reserved body of Reformed ministers assembled at Tonneins, who were still unwilling to make concessions to the Lutherans.181 The program at Tonneins was revised and the Lutherans were to be invited to a subsequent synod, at which Calvinists, Lutherans, and Zwinglians all would seek to reach agreement on a common confession, broadly speaking, and "abolish the names of Lutheran, Calvinist, and Zwinglian in favour of the name Christian Reformed Churches."182 The program officially adopted at Tonneins included no mention of any plans to then make appeals to the Catholics. In fact, du Moulin had a difficult enough time trying to promote unity within that first stage of his plan: amongst the Reformed churches. Du Moulin' s reaction to the Arminian controversy in the Netherlands (or Low Countries) is an excellent example. Although the synod at Dort was a national synod of the Dutch Reformed Church, foreign

180 Patterson, James I and Vl, 160. 181 Ibid., 161, 166. 76 delegates, like du Moulin, were invited by the Dutch ministry and princes to attend and assist by offering their own advice. As previously stated, du Moulin was prevented by the French crown from attending the synod, but he sent his advice in the form of the 500 page Anatomy ofArminianism, a part of which was read aloud in open session at the synod.183 In addition to attacking the various doctrines of Arminius that opposed established Calvinist doctrine, du Moulin spent a great deal of time expounding upon the importance of establishing a unified Protestant doctrine, and praising the nobles of the Low Countries who had assembled the synod for their efforts to promote unity. In his description ofArminianism, du Moulin invoked language similar to that of the sixteenth-century Catholic "panic preachers," calling the Arminian program a "snare of Sathan [sic]," a "disease," and a "contagion" that "crept into the whole Country." That du Moulin would refer to Arminianism as a contagion and a heresy, invoking similar rhetoric to the panic preachers of the sixteenth century who had referred to the Reformed Church as a pollutant only fifty years earlier speaks volumes to du Moulin's commitment to promoting a unified, Calvinist Reformed doctrine. In the same plea du Moulin further urged the nobles to ensure that "it may be unlawfull in your Universitie [sic] . . . heareafter to teach any doctrine differing from the truth."185 The Arminian conflict was not the only internal conflict over Protestant doctrine with which du Moulin was involved; Brian Armstrong tells us that from 1611 to 1614 du Moulin was involved in two "extremely bitter and protracted" struggles to preserve orthodoxy within the Reformed church, the first with Daniel Tilenus of Sedan "which involved nearly all of the centres of Reformed

183 Armstrong and Larminie. "Du Moulin, Pierre (1568-1658)." Oxford Dictionary ofNational Biography Online ed. 184 Du Moulin, Anatomy ofArminianism, A4. 77

Protestantism," and the other over the installation of Conrad Vorstius, an Arminian supporter, as chair of theology at Leiden.186 Despite these internal conflicts, du Moulin did have the official support of James I, a monarch who equally believed in a program of unity and who had resources to devote to its cause. This was indeed a significant advantage for du Moulin over his sixteenth-century predecessors, and the partnership with James explains why du Moulin had the confidence to actively pursue his program for unity. The partnership was a good fit for du Moulin because "the English church settlement rested primarily on the principles of autonomy from Rome and royal supremacy, not on the reception of true doctrine and conformity," making England and

1 87 James I a natural focal point for the plan. Unfortunately, not all those in the Protestant camp were as supportive of the plan for union as James I and Duplessis-Mornay. At the Synod of Dort, which du Moulin and James I had hoped would begin the first stage of the plan for union, the plan was discussed only informally.188 On 22 January 1619 James I and du Moulin received word that the Synod would not consider approaching the Lutherans and a common confession was ultimately not realized. Du Moulin' s plan was also discussed at the Synod of Tonneins, but the assembly was "favourable, but inclined to be realistic," which meant that like Dort, they would not consider approaching the Lutherans, much less the Catholics. Unfortunately, because Pierre du Moulin has been studied so little, we have no data on what percentage of the French Catholic laity actually read his work or how they received his plan, however Philip Benedict's research has demonstrated that controversial

186 Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I," 26. 187 Patrick Collinson, "England and International Calvinism, 1558-1640." In International Calvinism, Prestwich ed., 198. 188 Patterson, "du Moulin' s Quest," 245-6. 189 Ibid., 241. 78 works of polemics were among the most popular publications amongst personal libraries in France.190 Both Philip Benedict and Barbara Diefendorf have tried to address this gap in the history by examining Protestant book ownership, but much work remains to be done. Nevertheless, as du Moulin was the foremost Protestant polemicist of the seventeenth century, it seems reasonable to assume that his work did reach a significant percentage of the Catholic laity; his reputation was certainly well known.

Pierre du Moulin' s program for unity, while it may be understood in the context of his partnership with James I, his own polemics, and the situation in contemporary France which saw Catholic and Protestants co-existing with greater success, must be placed in the context of how Protestant polemics evolved in the seventeenth century. From ca. 1598-1640, before the defeat of the Huguenots' political arm at La Rochelle (1629) and before the steady encroachments by the crown against the Edict of Nantes had significantly undermined the Reformed cause, Catholic and Protestant theologians in France waged a polemical battle for legitimacy. The legal recognition of the Huguenots in France provided by the Edict ofNantes had ended the civil wars of the sixteenth century, but even with Henri IVs conversion, the official recognition of the Protestant minority left France with two opposing faiths, each trying to prove that they were the true inheritor of the church of Christ. The nature of these polemical battles, however, had changed significantly from the heated rhetoric of the sixteenth century, which had seen both sides of the religious controversy go so far as to endorse disobedience to the crown and even regicide in their most extreme forms. While both sides continued to ostensibly disagree over the smallest of doctrinal issues, the extreme positions of the sixteenth 190 Philip Benedict, "Two Calvinisms." 79 century in which Catholics and Protestants each attacked the other as a body of believers had mostly dissipated. It was the important work of Natalie Zemon-Davis on the "Rites of Violence" that turned historians on to the idea of examining the sixteenth-century wars of religion in France as a conflict fought between bodies of believers (as opposed to a conflict fought over a body of beliefs), as most lay Christians at that time were largely ignorant of the Scriptures and the more complex theological issues and were therefore fighting against an heretical "other," rather than abstract questions of theology. After the Edict of Nantes ended the wars and restored a measure of peace to the kingdom by granting the Protestants legal recognition, the battle between Protestants and Catholics depended even more upon the pen, but whereas sixteenth-century polemics in the vein of eschatological fear had promoted the physical removal of the religious enemy, seventeenth-century polemics were concerned with undermining and thus eventually removing the enemy's belief system.192 The underlying implication of this new tactic was that once their belief system had been proven incorrect and consequently been removed, the enemy could therefore be (re)integrated into the fold of the true faith. Jason Sager's unpublished thesis work has demonstrated that this was the motivation behind seventeenth-century Catholic sermons, whose focus on delegitimizing the Protestant faith coupled with internal reform aimed at returning the body of Huguenot faithful to the Catholic flock.193 The same may also be said of French royal policy; after his own conversion Henri IV openly encouraged other Protestant nobles to follow suit and after 1 643 the ascension of Louis XIV and Mazarin saw the crown take an increasingly firm stance on encouraging Huguenot conversion, culminating in the introduction of the

191 Davis, "The Rites of Violence." 192 Sager, "Devotion and the Political," 134. 80 dragoons in 1681 and the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, wherein all remaining Huguenots were simply declared to be Catholic. But what of the Reformed position? How did Protestant polemicists in France react in the first half of the seventeenth century to the stability afforded by the Edict of Nantes and the new atmosphere of polemical debate? Protestant polemicists in the seventeenth-century also sought to distance themselves from the extremist rhetoric of the religious civil wars. Even though the Edict of Nantes had firmly declared that France was and would always be a Catholic state, many Huguenots still believed that the Protestant prospect in France was possible and chose to see the Edict of Nantes as a stepping stone towards further legitimacy; the King of France was a former co-religionist after all and had made room for a Protestant voice at court, and the stability afforded by the new peace meant that the Reformed Church of France could experience growth at the local and provincial levels. At least until the 1620s rebellions in the Midi, then, the Protestant prospect in France was still fairly good. Though it does not form a part of the current paper, the militant elements of the Huguenot movement in the Midi, most especially in and around La Rochelle, cannot be ignored, though it seems that Reformed ministers and polemicists outside of this region, such as du Moulin, tried to distance themselves from the more militant movement, which still expressed elements sympathetic to the monarchomachs (shorn of the regicidal message), culminating in outright rebellion against the crown in 1620. As has already been expressed above, most of the Reformed ministers of the seventeenth century outside of the Midi were like Pierre du Moulin, "essentially all

194 One such figure was Philippe Duplessis-Mornay, governor of Saumur. Patterson, King James VI and I, 162-3. 81 royalists," concerned with proving to the French crown that the Protestant faith was loyal to the monarch and not in any way seditious.195 As minister of the Paris congregation at Charenton, du Moulin naturally played a leading role in petitioning the king and engaging in polemical battles in defence of the Reformed Church. Du Moulin' s approach blended the humanism of Calvin with the new scholastic logic of the seventeenth century in order to prove the verity of Reformed doctrine. The Bouclier de la Foy in particular serves as an excellent example of du Moulin's polemics because it demonstrates that in his defence of the Reformed faith, du Moulin was not only trying to prove the verity of French Protestant doctrine, but was at the same time seeking to promote his own peculiar vision of a united European Christendom under the Reformed Church.

Throughout the first half of the seventeenth century du Moulin continued to represent the French Reformed Church at a number of national and international synods, where he pushed his program for unity, sometimes acting individually, sometimes as part of the Charenton ministry, and sometimes on behalf of James I. Despite his efforts, it was ultimately decided even amongst the Reformed Churches of France that the plan for union would only be pursued "as opportunities arose."196 By 1619, however, the Thirty Years War was already looming and the atmosphere in Europe was not conducive to implementing du Moulin's plan for union. While the plan was embraced by James I, modified with his help and the help of Duplessis-Mornay, and discussed with interest at a number of national and international synods, few were as willing to lay aside doctrinal differences as du Moulin had hoped. Once James I died in 1625, du Moulin lost his

Armstrong, "Pierre du Moulin and James I," 19. Patterson, "du Moulin's Quest," 243. 82 greatest supporter and the plan quickly faded. Unfortunately for du Moulin, James' death brought an end not only to his hopes for union, but also to the most significant period of his career: by 1625 his best works were behind him, the plan for union was no longer being discussed by an international Protestant body, and du Moulin' s career as a polemicist became drastically less active. 83

Conclusion

The 1 620s were a period of decline not only for Pierre du Moulin, but for the Huguenot movement as a whole. The 1622 peace edict at Montpellier following the rebellion there surrendered half the Huguenots' fortified towns to the king and forbade all Protestant political assemblies.197 Additionally, the royal brevets of the Edict of Nantes were terminated without renewal in 1625, decimating the Huguenots' military and political organization. In 1629, after the last of the rebellions, the Peace of Alais offered only a token recognition of the Edict, stripping the Huguenots of their independence and essentially reducing them to little more than officially recognized heretics in a predominantly Catholic country. In 1625 du Moulin came down with an illness and after his last visit to England before the death of James I he returned to Sedan in France. While he attempted to make contact with Charles I and members of his court, he never attained the same level of respect he had enjoyed with James I in England. Du Moulin now had a post at the Protestant academy in Sedan, and it was there that he remained until his death in 1658. He continued to court controversy with Europe's Catholic and Protestant leading controversialists, most notably with French theologian Moïse Amyraut, but by the mid- seventeenth century it was Amyraut' s program that dominated in France. Part of this has been attributed to the lengthiness of du Moulin's treatises which, often numbering in the hundreds of pages, were less effective than the shorter works of Amyraut. It has also been argued that by appealing to the purity of Calvin's thought, Amyraut garnered more attention and admiration from contemporary theologians and laity alike.199 Nevertheless,

Holt, French Wars ofReligion, 182. Armstrong, Calvinism and Amyraut, 8. Ibid., xvi-xviii. 84 it was Pierre du Moulin who proved to be the most influential French Protestant theologian of the first half of the seventeenth century. It was his books of instruction that French Huguenots read, his controversies that captured their attention, and his program of faith, outlined in the Bouclier, to which they adhered. By focusing on his ministry in Paris at Charenton, the first chapter of this study examined du Moulin' s polemical exercises in defence of the Reformed faith in France and argued that the unfavourable situation in France led du Moulin to place his hopes for the future of the Reformed Church elsewhere. From his position at Charenton, du Moulin engaged in constant efforts to appeal to the king on behalf of the Huguenots, as well as a number of controversies with notable Catholic figures at the French court, in an effort to improve the situation for the Reformed in France. His petitions to the king were consistent with similar efforts from other Huguenots theologians in the sixteenth and seventeenth century that attempted to convince the monarchy that the Huguenots' heterodox beliefs were not inconsistent with loyalty to the crown. After the Edict of Nantes had brought an end to the religious civil wars of the sixteenth century, both Catholics and Protestants in France were engaged in the same war for legitimacy; both parties sought to prove their loyalty to the crown, and both parties sought to prove the verity of their faith over the other. In his controversies with the Jesuits at the French court, du Moulin directed his efforts towards undermining the Catholic faith by attacking the institution of the Papacy. This allowed du Moulin to present the Pope and Papacy as an enemy distinct from the body of Catholic laity, and further allowed him to make room for an appeal to the Catholics in his plan for religious union. 85

The first chapter also offered an examination of Pierre du Moulin' s polemical style. Works such as the Bouclier de la Foy, that were published as part of his ongoing controversies, reveal a great deal about du Moulin' s style of argumentation, and where he may be situated in the larger Huguenot movement. Du Moulin' s preferred method of argumentation in his works blended the "ad fontes" approach of the previous generations of Protestant theologians who had taken their example from the humanists, and the logic- based approach of scholasticism. Du Moulin had been trained in both England and Leiden in Aristotelian logic, and he often relied upon this logic in his polemics. Brian Armstrong's various articles dealing with Pierre du Moulin, as well as his monograph on the Amyraut heresy, have identified the growing influence of scholasticism in French Protestant polemics.200 Among the growing arsenal of Protestant polemic devices was the use of historically orientated attacks followed by supporting evidence from Scripture. In the Bouclier, as in so many of his works, du Moulin attacked the abuses of the Roman Church by utilising his command of Aristotelian logic. As has already been demonstrated above, in his efforts to unify the various Protestant sects, purity of doctrine was of the utmost importance to du Moulin, and it was against Rome's perceived corruption ofthat purity that du Moulin launched his most vehement attacks. Because he engaged with and responded to a series of attacks from the Jesuit confessor at court Jean Arnoux, du Moulin first identified the article of faith that Arnoux attacked, then provided the reader with a sample of the objections that Arnoux has raised against that doctrine. After establishing the argument, du Moulin would then set about proving why the Roman Catholic position was wrong by demonstrating how the

0 See Armstrong "Influence of du Moulin," and Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy. 1 Ibid, especially Amyraut Heresy p. 9. 86 abuses of the Roman Church were either historically unprecedented or the creation of Rome and not Scripture, followed by evidence from Scripture to support his attack. Because the Church of Rome often used the argument of antiquity to prove its position, du Moulin' s historically oriented attacks could be quite effective. For example, on the question of the mark of the true Church: If they [Roman Catholics] understand that that Church is the true Church whose doctrine is most ancient of all, and that doctrine which is conformable to the Apostles times, we allow of that marke; and by it the Church of Rome will lose her suite, which hath made a thousand new additions, and every age increaseth them, all tending to the advancement of the Papali Empire [sic].202 The representation of the Papacy as an Empire was also important for du Moulin' s argument. The same arguments for the Papacy's decadence and desire for worldly power had been made a century earlier by the first reformers, but whereas those earliest attacks had been made with a desire for reform from within and did not touch on matters of doctrine, Pierre du Moulin directly related that decadence to a corruption of doctrine:

And it is manifest in the Histories to be seene that as the Bfishop] of Romes greatnesse increased, traditions were multiplied which are much more recommended by our Adversaries then the holy Scriptures [sic].203 Pierre du Moulin' s ambitions and activities while in France evolved with the changing situation in French government, and as the French crown adopted an increasingly more Catholic program and Huguenot prospects in France grew dim, du Moulin was forced to look elsewhere to secure the future for the Reformed faith that he envisioned. It was to England that he turned and the partnership that du Moulin developed with James I propelled the French Protestant polemicist to the forefront of an international Protestant dialogue. While his studies in London and Leiden meant that du Moulin was well-informed of the religious situations in both countries, the Oath of

202 Du Moulin, Bouclier, 273. 203 Du Moulin, Bouclier, 50. 87

Allegiance controversy afforded du Moulin the opportunity to become directly involved. England was one of the greatest supporters and sympathizers to the Huguenot movement outside of France, and James I offered European Protestants a central figure around whom they could rally. There was already a sizeable Huguenot presence in England - immigrants from the sixteenth-century religious wars - and the partnership between du Moulin and James I served the ambitions of both men on the point of unity. The two collaborated on a number of projects that impacted both men's programs in the push for unity, most notably du Moulin' s 1613 program. Several treatises heretofore attributed to James I were actually penned by du Moulin, and James I exercised a significant amount of influence over du Moulin's most important project, his plan for a united, European, Protestant church, under the banner of the French Reformed confession.

Aside from the Bouclier de la Foy, the program for unity was du Moulin's most significant contribution to the seventeenth-century Protestant world. Although ultimately unsuccessful, the plan for union reflected a degree of continuity with leading theologians of the previous century who had made efforts at cross-confessional cooperation. Figures like Jean Calvin, Heinrich Bullinger, Peter Martyr, and Martin Bucer had attempted to work together in the sixteenth century, but such efforts were often temporary alliances of convenience, formed to combat specific threats from Catholic opponents. Such was the case when Bullinger and Calvin collaborated to pen a response to the Council of Trent. Du Moulin's plan also differed from the earlier leagues of northern Europe and the German principalities; like individual efforts at collaboration, such leagues were often formed in response to a specific Catholic threat and often became political and military alliances, rather than confessional ones. Du Moulin's plan lacked both explicit political 88 and military goals. Du Moulin' s activities in France show that, like the other ministers at Charenton, he distanced himself from the militant factions of the Reformed, and military involvement of any kind was not included as a part of his 1613 plan for union. Nor were du Moulin' s motivations political in the sense that his first priority was to establish religious cooperation. The inclusion of the recommendation that James I serve as the secular head of a united Christian Reformed Church in Europe, while it developed in tandem with du Moulin' s relationship with the English monarch, is more accurately understood if we consider that James I was the strongest secular ruler to whom du Moulin could turn. Du Moulin' s plan required that he have a secular ruler under whom the united Protestants could rally because, just like Calvin, he believed that secular rulers were ordained by God and therefore necessary in the temporal world. Du Moulin' s program for unity was actively discussed within a growing international Protestant discourse. Synods organized in France and the Dutch principalities openly discussed the plan, and the 1617 Synod at Vitré in France appointed du Moulin, along with four others, to a commission charged with conferring with Duplessis-Mornay - the leading political figure of the seventeenth-century Huguenots - to work out further, more detailed plans for the overtures to be made to the various Protestant churches in Europe.204 Ultimately, the Protestant churches of the seventeenth century faced the same reluctance to compromise on matters of doctrine as their sixteenth-century counterparts, and serious efforts to implement du Moulin's program of unity failed to manifest. The plan was discussed, endorsed even at Tonneins in 1614, but the Reformed were loath to make overtures to the Lutherans, let alone the Catholics.

Patterson, James Vl and 1, 192-3. 89

When James I died in 1625 du Moulin lost his greatest supporter for the plan, which quickly faded, not unlike du Moulin himself.

By examining a Protestant minister who vocalized his defence of the Protestant faith in often controversial dialogues, studies of du Moulin will shed further light on the nature of seventeenth-century Protestantism, both in France, and in the context of the growing international Protestant discourse. Due to the sheer volume of du Moulin's work, this study has limited itself to the years during which du Moulin was most active as a minister, a controversialist, and as the leading voice of the Huguenots in the first half of the 1600s. As such, this study has not considered the latter years of du Moulin's life and career, a much more difficult period to characterize. On the one hand, du Moulin remained a relevant figure in the Huguenot movement even after his death: the Voyage de Beth-el, avec les Preparations Prières et Meditations, pour participer dignement à la Sainte cene was, according to Philip Benedict's study of Protestant literature, "by far the most popular Huguenot manual of preparation for communion," and from 1665 onward du Moulin's own discourse on communion was included in nine of the ten copies surveyed by Benedict. However, in the latter half of his career, du Moulin also began publishing a series of treatises that deviated from his earlier formula of argumentation as outlined here. Much more work needs to be done on du Moulin's career after 1625, especially if we want to understand why, after exercising such great influence over the Huguenot movement and having participated actively in an international Protestant discourse, du Moulin was replaced by Moïse Amyraut by the second half of the seventeenth century. If du Moulin's Bouclier de la Foy had outlined French Reformed 90 doctrine in the first half of the century, why then were the majority of French Protestant ministers after 1640 Amyrauldians? This question has not to date been addressed by the historiography. There are several other questions, raised by Brian Armstrong in his works prior to his death that have not since been addressed. Armstrong argued that a study of du Moulin would help historians of the period to understand what he identified as "perhaps the most overlooked problem in research having to do with the thought of Calvinism. . . the relationship of the thought of Calvin himself to that of his followers."205 As chapter one of this study has argued, du Moulin' s was a mixed bag of orthodoxy that never referenced Calvin directly, but clearly shared many of the same opinions, especially on the relationship between the secular and the divine. While several studies have been undertaken to investigate the relationship between Calvin and other Reformed theologians,206 The relationship between Calvin and seventeenth-century Reformed ministers has yet to be explored to the same extent, and as the leading French Reformed minister of the first half of the seventeenth century - the period immediately after the

Edict of Nantes - Pierre du Moulin is a figure worthy of such study. Armstrong further suggested in his works that Pierre du Moulin was key in

907 directing the Protestant movement towards scholasticism in the seventeenth century. Again, the first chapter of this study examined du Moulin' s method or argumentation and concluded that du Moulin did, in fact, use the scholastic method with great success. Since Armstrong's study, however, no other historian of seventeenth-century Protestantism has attempted to investigate this claim. Likewise, Armstrong's contention that the Huguenot

205 Armstrong, Calvinism and Amyraut, 90«. 206 Works comparing Calvin and Beza, for example, abound in the historiography. 207 Armstrong, "The Changing Face of French Protestantism," 146. 91 slant towards episcopacy, and the reason why Huguenot refugees following the 1685 revocation of the Edict of Nantes generally became Episcopalians, is because of du Moulin's "pro-Anglican interpretation of the ministerial call."208 At only twenty pages, Armstrong's study attempted to examine both the question of scholasticism and episcopacy within the Huguenot movement, and du Moulin's influence on both. The short length of the study leaves plenty of room to either refute or expand upon

Armstrong's work. This study has consciously avoided entering the Confessionalization debate for several reasons, not the least of which is because like Benedict, I agree that the debate has coloured the history of seventeenth-century religious development. Currently, the debate is taking on new forms within the historiography, but to date developments in the Huguenot world during the seventeenth century have been ignored or overlooked in the debate in favour of advancing the meta-narrative of the growth of the modern state. Only now is this perception being challenged. Future research into the life and career of Pierre du Moulin might help to shed more light on developments with the Huguenot world and the broader Reformed community. The most interesting direction for future research that emerges from our study of Pierre du Moulin emerges from du Moulin's plan of union. There are still numerous questions to be answered with regards to du Moulin's plan and how it was received, not only by the Reformed, but by other Protestant groups like the Lutherans, as well as the Catholics. Du Moulin's plan for union can also be studied in the context of theories of

Ibid., 144. Benedict, Faith and Fortune, 315. 92 toleration that were beginning to develop in Early Modern Europe. Philip Benedict again points the historiography in new directions when he argues: Under pressure to defend the constantly challenged rights of worship granted their minority faith, a number of Huguenot theorists contributed significantly to the development ofthe far richer and more powerful set of arguments for toleration that had emerged with the European republic of letters by the end of the seventeenth century.210

Du Moulin' s plan for union emerged in the context of the sixteenth-century attempts at cooperation by other leading Protestant ministers and controversialists. Can du Moulin' s plan for union, then, be considered a predecessor to later advocates of toleration? Already in the sixteenth century there were a number of French politicians who advocated religious freedom.211 Where does du Moulin fit on this continuum? While it would seem that there are number of questions still to be answered regarding the career of Pierre du Moulin and the shape of seventeenth-century (French) Protestantism, this study has tried to shed at least some light on a still under-studied topic. Through an examination of the career of leading French Protestant minister and polemicist Pierre du Moulin, this study has attempted to convey the changing attitude amongst Huguenot polemicists generally, who, after 1 598 when the tumultuous civil religious wars had finally ended, rejected the extreme polemical positions of their predecessors, and instead strove to promote peace and unity. International collaborations, such as that between du Moulin, Duplessis-Mornay, and James I of England, also demonstrate that the seventeenth-century French Reformed Church had entered a period of both national and international development. As minister of the Paris congregation at

210 Benedict, Faith and Fortune, 289. 211 See Malcolm C. Smith, "Early French Advocates of Religious Freedom." The Sixteenth Century Journal 25, 1 (Spring 1994): 29-51. 93

Charenton, where he was involved in a number of doctrinal disputes with both Catholics and other Protestants, du Moulin translated these new impulses within the Huguenot community into his own program for a united, pan-European Christian church based on French Reformed (Calvinist) doctrine. Clearly his goal was never realized, and in fact it was quite short-lived as the death of Henri IV in 1610, and more significantly of James I in 1625, ended any hopes for unifying the Christian churches. However, du Moulin' s attempts towards incorporating Catholics into a united Reform doctrine should not be ignored, especially as they followed so closely on the heels of the religious wars, which only half a decade earlier had threatened to tear all of France apart. 94

Bibliography

Primary Sources Calvin, Jean. Institutes ofthe Christian Religion. 1541 French Edition. Trans. Elsie Anne McKee. Michigan; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009. Du Moulin, Pierre. The Anatomy ofArminianisme. London, 1620. ------. The Anti-Coton, or, A Refutation ofCoton 's Letter Declaratorie. 1611. ------. Bouclier de la Foy, or: The Buckler ofthe Faith: A defence ofthe Confession of Faith ofthe Reformed Churches in France against the Objections ofM. Arnoux the Jésuite. 3rd Ed. London, 1631.

— -. The Christian Combate, or, A Treatise ofaffliction. London, 1623. ------. Defense de la Foy Catholicke, or: A Defence ofthe Catholic Faith: Contained in the Booke ofthe most Mightie and most Gracious King James thefirst...Against the answere ofN. Cofféteau. London, 1610. ------. Heraclitus: or Meditations upon the vanity and misery ofhumane life. Oxford, 1609.

------. The Jésuites shifts and evasions. London, 1618. ------. A Letter unto them ofthe Romish Church by Pierre du Moulin, Minister in the Reformed Church at Paris. London, 1 62 1 . ------. Nouveauté du Papisme, or, the Novelty ofPopery, opposed to the Antiquity of True Christianity Against the book ofCardinal du Perron. London, 1627. ------. The Papal Tyranny as it was Exercised over Englandfor some Ages. London, Overture pour travailler a I 'union des Eglises de Chrestieneté et appaiser les differens qui sont desia nez, où qui pourront naister à ¡'advenir. PRO, SP 78/61, fol. 68. ------. A Sermon Preached before the Kings Majesty at Greenwich the 15 ofJune 1615. London, 1620. ------. Theophilus, or Love Divine: A treatise containingfive degrees, five markes,five aides, ofthe love ofGod. Trans. Richard Goring. London, 1610. A Large Examination Taken at Lambeth According to His Majesties Direction, Point by Point, ofM. George Blackwell, Made Archpriest ofEngland by Pope Clement 8, upon Occasion ofa certaine Answere ofHis, without the Priuitie ofthe State, to a Letter Lately 95 sent unto Himfrom Cardinall Bellarmine Blaming himfor taking the Oath ofAllegiance . London: Robert Barker, 1607.

PRO SP 78/58 fol. 230, Letter, M. du Moulin to James 7(1611 Nov. 12-22).

PRO SP 78/61 fol. 66, Letter, M. du Moulin to James 7(1613 Feb. 19 - March 1). PRO SP 78/61 fol. 86, Letter, James I to M. du Moulin (1613 February).

PRO SP 78/61 fol. 123, Letter, M. du Moulin to James 7(1613 April 6-16).

PRO SP 78/63 fol. 268, Letter, M. du Moulin to James 7(1615 Aug. 7-17).

Secondary Sources Abray, Lorna Jane. The People 's Reformation: Magistrates, Clergy, and Commons in Strasbourg 1500-1598. Oxford, Eng.: Basil Blackwell Limited, 1985. Airo-Farulla, Joseph Anthony. Political Opposition ofthe Huguenots to Henry IV, 1589- 1598. Seattle: University of Washington, 1976. Armstrong, Brian G. Bibliographia Molinaei: An Alphabetical, Chronological and Descriptive Bibliography ofthe WorL· ofPierre du Moulin (1568-1658). 1997. ------. Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy: Protestant Scholasticism and Humanism in Seventeenth-Century France. Madison, Milwaukee, and London: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1969.

------. "Pierre du Moulin and James I: the Anglo-French programme." In De l 'Humanisme aux Lumières: Bayle et le pretestantisme. Mélanges en l 'honneur d'Elisabeth Labrousse. Michelle Magdelaine, Maria Cristina Pitassi, Ruth Whelan, and Anthony McKenna, eds. Oxford; Paris: Voltaire Foundation, 1966. ------. and Vivienne Larminie. "Du Moulin, Pierre (1568-1658)." In Oxford Dictionary ofNational Biography, edited by H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison. Oxford: OUP, 2004. Online ed., edited by Lawrence Goldman, October 2008. Armstrong, Megan C. Politics ofPiety: Franciscan Preachers During the Wars of Religion, 1560-1600. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2004. Baumgartner, Frederic J. Change and Continuity in the French Episcopate: The Bishops and the Wars ofReligion, 1547-1610. Durham: Duke University Press, 1986. 96

------. Radical Reactionaries: The Political Thought ofthe French Catholic League. Genève: Droz, 1975. Bayley, Peter. French Pulpit Oratory, 1598-1650: A Study in Themes and Styles, with a Descriptive Catalogue ofPrinted Texts. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Beik, William. A Social and Cultural History ofEarly Modern France. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009. ------. Urban Protest in Seventeenth-Century France: The Culture ofRetribution. Cambridge, England: New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Benedict, Philip. Christ's Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History ofCalvinism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002.

------. The Faith and Fortunes ofFrance's Huguenots, 1600-85. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2001. ------. Huguenot Population ofFrance, 1600-1685: The Demographic Fate and Customs ofa Religious Minority. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1991.

------. Rouen During the Wars ofReligion. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1981. ------, ed. Reformation, Revolt and Civil War in France and the Netherlands, 1555- 1585: Proceedings ofthe Colloquium, Amsterdam, 29-31 October 1997. Amsterdam, 1999.

Benedict, Philip, and Myron P. Gutmann, eds. Early Modern Europe: From Crisis to Stability. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2005. Boyce, Benjamin. The Polemic Character, 1640-1661: A Chapter in English Literary History. New York: Octagon Books, 1969. Briggs, Robin. Communities ofBelief: Cultural and Social Tension in Early Modern France. Oxford; New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press, 1989. ------. Early Modern France, 1560-1715. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977. Campi, Emidio and Bruce Gordon eds. Architect ofReformation: An Introduction to Heinrich Bullinger, 1504-1575. Michigan: Baker Publishing Group, 2004. 97

Campi, Emidio and Peter Opitz, eds. Heinrich Bullinger: Life, Thought, Influence: Zurich, Aug. 25-29, 2004, International Congress Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575). Zurich, 2007. Coats, Catherine Randall. Subverting the System: D 'Aubigné and Calvinism. Sixteenth Century Essays & Studies Vol. XIV. Missouri: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1990.

Conner, Philip. Huguenot Heartland: Montauban and Southern French Calvinism during the Wars ofReligion. Aldershot, Eng.: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2002. Cottret, Bernard. The Huguenots in England: Immigration and Settlement c. 1550-1700. Trans. Peregrine and Adriana Stevenson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Crouzet, Denis. Dieu en Ses Royaumes : Une Histoire des Guerres de Religion. Paris : Champ Vallon, 2008.

------. Guerriers de Dieu: La Violence au Temps des Troubles de Religion, vers 1525- 1610. Seyssel, France: Champ Vallon, 1990. Davis, Natalie Zemon. "The Rites of Violence: Religious Riot in Sixteenth-Century France." Past and Present 59 (May 1973): 51-91. ------. "The Sacred and the Body Social in Sixteenth-Century Lyon." Past and Present 90 (February 1981): 40-70. ------. Society and Culture in Early Modern France: Eight Essays. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1975. Diefendorf, Barbara. Beneath the Cross: Catholics and Huguenots in Sixteenth-Century Paris. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991. ------. "Prologue to a Massacre: Popular Unrest in Paris 1557-1572." The American Historical Review 90 No. 5 (December 1 985): 1 067- 1 09 1 . ------. "Simon Vigor: A Radical Preacher in Sixteenth-Century Paris." The Sixteenth Century Journal 18 No. 3 (1987): 399-410. Eire, Carlos M. N. War Against the Idols: The Reformation of Worshipfrom Erasmus to Calvin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Greengrass, Mark. France in the Age ofHenri IV: The Strugglefor Stability. London: Longman Press, 1984. ------. French Reformation. Oxford, UK; New York: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 1987. 98

------. Governing Passions: Peace and Reform in the French Kingdom, 1576-1585. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Gregory, Brad S. Salvation at Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999. Grell, Ole Peter. Calvinist Exiles in Tudor and Stuart England. Hants, Eng.: Scholar Press; Brookfield, USA: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1996. Gwynn, Robin D. Huguenot Heritage: The History and Contribution ofthe Huguenots in Britain. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985. Heller, Henry. Conquest ofPoverty: The Calvinist Revolt in Sixteenth-Century France. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought v.35. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1986. Heller, Henry. Iron and Blood: Civil Wars in Sixteenth-Century France. Montreal; Buffalo: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1991. Holt, Mack P. ed. Adaptations ofCalvinism in Reformation Europe: Essays in Honour of Brian G. Armstrong. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2007. ------. The Duke ofAnjou and the Politique Struggle During the Wars ofReligion. Cambridge Studies in Early Modern History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. ------. French Wars ofReligion, 1562-1629. Cambridge, England; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995. ------. "Putting Religion Back into the Wars of Religion." French Historical Studies 18 No. 2 (1993): 524-551. ------. "The Social History of the Reformation: Recent Trends and Future Agendas." Journal of Social History 37 No. 1 (Special Issue 2003): 133-144. ------. Renaissance and Reformation France, 1500-1648. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Hsia, R. Po-chia. World ofCatholic Renewal, 1540-1770. New Approaches to European History; 1. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Kelley, Donald R. Beginning ofIdeology: Consciousness and Society in the French Reformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Kingdom, Robert M. Church and Society in Reformation Europe. Collected Studies Series; CS21. London: Variorum Reprints, 1985. 99

------. Geneva and the Consolidation ofthe French Protestant Movement, 1564-1572. C. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1967. ------. Myths About the St. Bartholomew 's Day Massacres, 1572-1576. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1988. Konnert, Mark W. "Civic Agendas and Religious Passion: Chalons-sur-Marne During the French Wars of Religion, 1560-1594." Sixteenth Century Journal (1997). ------. Early modern Europe: The Age ofReligious War, 1559-1715. Peterborough, Canada; Orchard Park, USA: Broadview Press, 2006. ------. Local Politics in the French Wars ofReligion: The Towns ofChampagne, the Duc de Guise, and the Catholic League, 1560-95. St. Andrews studies in Reformation History. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2006. Labrousse, Elisabeth. Une foi, une loi, un roi?: Essai sur la révocation de l'édit de Nantes. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1985. Léonard, Emile G. A History ofProtestantism. Trans. Joyce M. H. Reid. Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., 1961. Lindberg, Carter. The European Reformations. 2 ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers, 2009. ------. European Reformations Sourcebook. Oxford, UK; Maiden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 2000. ------. The Reformation Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Early Modern Period. Maiden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2002. Luria, Keith P. Sacred Boundaries: Religious Coexistence and Conflict in Early-Modern France. 1 ed. Washington, D.C: Catholic University of America Press, 2005. Major, J. Russell and Mack P. Holt. Society and Institutions in Early Modern France. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1991. Manetsch, Scott M. Theodore Beza and the Questfor Peace in France, 1572-1598. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought Vol. 7. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2000. Mentzer, Raymond A. Sin and the Calvinists: Morals, Control and the Consistory in the Reformed Tradition. Sixteenth Century Essays & Studies Vol. 3. Kirksville, Mo.: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishing, 1994. Mentzer, Raymond A. and Andrew Spicer. Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559-1685. Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Muir, Edward. Ritual in Early Modern Europe. New Approaches to European History Vol. 1. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Neale, J. E. The Age ofCatherine de Medici. London: J. Cape, 1963. Nicholls, David J. "The Nature of Popular Heresy in France, 1520-1542. The Historical Journal 26 No. 2 (June 1983): 261-275. ------. "The Theatre of Martyrdom in the French Reformation." In Past and Present 121 (November 1988): 49-73. O'Malley, John W. Religious Culture in the Sixteenth Century : Preaching, Rhetoric, Spirituality and Reform. Collected studies; CS40. Brookfield, Vt.: Variorum, 1993. Parrow, Kathleen Ann. From Defense to Resistance : Justification of Violence during the French Wars ofReligion. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. 0065- 9746 ; vol. 83, pt. Patterson, W. B. King James VI and I and the Reunion ofChristendom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. ------. "Pierre du Moulin's Quest for Protestant Unity, 1613-1618." In Unity and Diversity in the Church: Papers read at the 1994 summer meeting and the 1995 winter meeting ofthe Ecclesiastical History Society; Studies in Church History 032. London: Blackwell Publishers, 1995. Pettegree, Andrew, Alastair Duke and Gillian Lewis. Calvinism in Europe, 1540-1620. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1994. Pettegree, Andrew, Paul Nelles and Philip Conner. The Sixteenth-Century French Religious Book. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2001. Phillips, Henry. Church and Culture in Seventeenth-Century France. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Prestwich, Menna. Ed. International Calvinism, 1541-1715. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985.

Rabb, Theodore K. Strugglefor Stability in Early Modern Europe. New York: Oxford University Press, 1975. Ramsey, Ann W. Liturgy, Politics, and Salvation : The Catholic League in Paris and the Nature ofCatholic Reform, 1540-1630. Rochester, N.Y.; Woodbridge, U.K.: University of Rochester Press, 1999. 101

Reaman, George Elmore. Trail ofthe Huguenots in Europe: The United States, South Africa and Canada. Toronto: T. Allen, 1963. Rimbault, Lucien. Pierre du Moulin (1568-1658): Un Pasteur Classique a Vage Classique. Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin, 1966. Roelker, Nancy Lyman. French Huguenots : An Embattled Minority. St. Louis, Mo.: Forum Press, 1977. Sager, Jason. "Devotion and the Political: Sermon and Devotional Literature in the Reigns of Henri IV and Louis XIII, 1598-1643." Unpublished PhD thesis, Faculty of History, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON, 2007. Salmon, J. H. M. Society in Crisis : France in the Sixteenth Century. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1975.

Schnucker, Robert V. Calviniana : Ideas and Influence ofJean Calvin. Sixteenth Century Essays & Studies Vol. 1. Kirksville, Mo.: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1988.

Scouloudi, Irene. Huguenots in Britain and their French Background, 1550-1800: Contributions to the Historical Conference ofthe Huguenot Society ofLondon, 24- 25 sep. Totowa, N.J.: Barnes & Noble Books, 1987. Smith, Malcolm C. "Early French Advocates of Religious Freedom." The Sixteenth Century Journal 25, 1 (Spring 1994): 29-51. Stanton, Richard. A Menology ofEngland and Wales: or, BriefMemorials ofthe Ancient British and English Saints Arranged According to the Calendar together with the martyrs ofthe 16th and 17 centuries. London: Burns and Oates Limited, 1887. Strayer, Brian Eugene. Huguenots and Camisards as Aliens in France, 1598-1 789 : The Struggle for Religious Toleration. Studies in Religion and Society Vol. 50. Lewiston, N.Y.: E. Mellen Press, 2001. Sutherland, N. M. Henry IV ofFrance and the Politics ofReligion, 1572-1596. Bristol, UK; Portland, OR: Elm Bank, 2002. ------. The Huguenot Struggle for Recognition. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979.

------. Princes, Politics, and Religion, 1547-1589. History Series Vol. 30. London: Hambledon Press, 1984. 102

Sypher, G. Wylie. "Taisant c qu'il leur vient a plaisir:' The Image of Protestantism in French Catholic Polemic on the Eve of the Religious Wars. The Sixteenth Century Journal 1 1 No. 2 (1980): 59-84. Taylor, Larissa. Heresy and Orthodoxy in Sixteenth-Century Paris : François le Picart and the Beginnings ofthe Catholic Reformation. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought, Vol. 7. Leiden ; Boston: Brill, 1999. ------. Preachers and People in the Reformation and Early Modern Period. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2003. ------. Soldiers ofChrist: Preaching in Late Medieval and Reformation France. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Thompson, James Westfall. The Wars ofReligion in France, 1559-1576: The Huguenots, Catherine de Medici, Philip II. New York: F. Ungar Publishing Co., 1957. Van der Meij, J. "Pierre du Moulin in Leiden, 1592-1598." LIAS-Sources and Documents Relating to the Early Modern History ofIdeas 14 No. 1 (1987): 15-40. Van Kley, Dale K. Religious Origins ofthe French Revolution : From Calvin to the Civil Constitution, 1560-1791. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996.