Calvin and his mates

Finally grabbing some time to post a new entry!

A few weeks ago, as I walked through the Parc des Bastions in central Geneva to soak up the sun, and strolled along the little wall beneath the monument to the Reformers, looking up at the smiling faces of J.C., G.F., J.K. and T.B. I noticed something which despite having walked past them countless times, I had never seen before: every single one of the four great reformers is holding a book, but not just holding a book, they are holding a page inside a book! This led me to a thought that made me chuckle to myself, imagining the ridiculous anachronism of a photographer trying to get the four camera-shy reformers all at once on camera, forcing them all to get away from their reading and to stand in one place for a moment, just to get a decent group pic… Hence the smiling faces (not!). This may seem strange, but they really are holding a page (picture proof!!!). If one looks closely, one will even notice that though Calvin is trying to do the intellectual cool guy pose by showing what he’s reading, he’s cheekily holding another page at the same time!

Now of course, this statue wasn’t built from any group photograph or painting, but the artists were smart guys, and this detail was obviously intentional.

I recently read Herman Selderhuis’ (expert on the history of the Reformation) biography on Calvin, which he wrote by using pretty much everything Calvin has ever written; loved it, he really brings Calvin to life in a realistic, non caricatured way, presenting him as a true human being, in fact, an extraordinary human being, and showing all of his personality traits in a balanced way. In speaking of him as an intellectual, he used the word “humanist”, which at first surprised me, but after some reflection it opened my eyes to something. The original concept and movement of humanism came before the “Enlightenment”, and was actually led mostly by Christians. Its original meaning and scope were not those of today, which are to “live and let live”, by placing humans at the centre of the universe. The supporters of the original humanistic movement were people who attributed value to all humans and believed that humans can change the world, and a major tool towards that, as it still is, was the education of everyone, which is why these people were avid readers, thirsty for knowledge. They were tired of the power being in the hands of the rich, who kept both temporal and spiritual knowledge for themselves and used it (or didn’t use it…) for their benefit over others. That is why the tagline of the reformation is: “Post tenebras lux”, meaning “after the darkness (of the obscurantism led by the Catholic Church), came the light" (of Christ, as people were allowed to read the Scriptures for themselves and discovered Jesus as he truly reveals himself in the Bible).

This explains why contemporary humanists and thinking Christians have very similar ways of reasoning, parallel streams of thought; is natural for their thinking patterns to look alike, when they share the same cultural ancestors.* It also explains why it is so hard for them to understand each other, and why so often they, or should I say ‘we’, are suspicious of each other! The basic assumptions are completely different and therefore the conclusions are different (quick example: Christians: “God is the centre of existence and giver of all joy, therefore humans can only find true and lasting meaning and joy in life by centring their lives on Him”; humanists: “Man’s existence is what defines the future of this planet, therefore humans can only find true and lasting meaning and joy in life by focusing their efforts on making everyone agree.” Caricatured, but generally true). There are so many similarities between the two steams of thought, and I greatly respect many humanists. We both believe in the intrinsic value of human beings. We believe in equality. We believe in the importance of education. One thing that could help open up the dialogue more would be if they could admit that they are just as exclusivist as Christians (and of course, all other monotheistic religions). Another would be to realise that the intrinsic value of human beings and equality were not invented by humanist philosophers, but are biblical values that had never existed in history before the Bible, and that obligatory education for everyone is something that was first instituted by Christians, not communists. This isn’t to knock la laïcité, which means secularism, but to note that if this value which is so held to by continental Europeans is truly respected, it has to include and honour the “laity”, which means everyone, not just the intellectual élite.

Back to our reformers, these guys basically, were readers! And contrary to what people believe, they didn’t only read the Bible. Calvin’s first book as a young man was a commentary on Seneca’s De Clementia and before he got into Theology, he was a Law student. Believing in education, with Thédore de Bèze, he started both the Collège and Académie de Genève (de Bèze is holding the Academiae curriculum in the statue).

These guys were working for change, nothing else. They weren’t there to make a name for themselves. That’s why they had a huge impact on history, and probably why today they are among the most misunderstood personalities of history.

… The other day I was showing the old town of Geneva to some mates from the UK, and we walked into the cathedral… It’s pretty boring. Nothing much to see there. Having lived in Canterbury for six years, with the stunningly beautiful cathedral at its centre, it seems truly unimpressive. Walking around that area where Calvin supposedly taught, walked, sat, slept, it looks old, but there’s nothing particularly aesthetic about it. There’s a reason for that. It was never intended to be. In the Bible, the church is the dwelling place of the presence of God, but “church” doesn’t mean “building”, it means “people”. The building, in Reformed tradition, is a purely functional place for believers to meet, not considered more holy than any other, or a place where God is more accessible than elsewhere. That’s why there are no items there to make one think so. Calvin’s biggest beef with the Catholic church was concerning idolatry (which is coincidentally one of God’s biggest beefs with Israel in the Bible!). That’s why the cathedral sucks as a museum. That’s why his house sucks as a museum. If I had to choose a museum to visit, I’d probably choose the Vatican several times over any other, because of its extravagant beauty. And even though I love the history of the Reformation, I still haven’t brought myself to visit the museum of the Reformation, right next to the cathedral: because visually, there’s nothing to see. I can read it all in a book. How weird do you think Calvin would find it that people actually visit his old house, his bed, his crapper? How weird would you find it, if you found out that after your death people came to visit your quarters? I remember the funny story of a toilet which was considered by its owner as a monument, because Sir Sean Connery had once taken a dump there… Weird. That’s idolatry.

Calvin and his mates knew that history wasn’t about them, and led unglamorous lives just like you and me. That was their joy. Contentment with what they had, and discontentment with obscurantism, elitism, malevolent dictatorship and idolatry. They made their lives to be about the glory of God and the good of mankind. Their buildings don’t shine out as some others do, but their lives and legacy shine on.

* Anyone wanting to argue about these definitions should first visit: http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/humanisme