When the lords of Berne found that their delegates had failed in their conference with the Genevese ministers, they resolved to write, on the same day, April 15, two letters: one to Calvin and Farel, the other to the council of Geneva, having no doubt that this clever contrivance would succeed. Their two missives were very nearly alike. They urged the ministers to accept the decision of the synod, without waiting for the assembly at Zurich, in order that the two Churches, united in the fundamentals of the faith, might likewise be in conformity in matters of ceremonial. And to the council they addressed entreaties to accept the same decision, ‘in the hope that Masters Farel and Calvin, although they had raised some difficulties, would advise for the best.’[596] CHAPTER X. THE COUNTER-REFORMATION PREVAILS.--CALVIN AND FAREL REFUSE TO GIVE THE LORD’S SUPPER.--THE PULPIT IS CLOSED TO THEM. (APRIL 15 TO 20, 1538.) [Sidenote: RESISTANCE OF CALVIN.] The very circumstances which inspired the confidence of Berne were exactly those which roused the resistance of Calvin. Those powerful and magnificent lords could not believe that so dignified an intervention would fail to secure submission; and Calvin could not consent that the interests of the Church of Christ should be regulated by the magistrate, like those of the highways and the soldiery. Besides, in the present case, the question was about foreign magistrates. To their intervention the citizen and the Christian could not but be equally opposed. Calvin wished to maintain the principle of religious liberty, and he requested that time should be allowed him to come to an understanding with the other Churches. However, if the letter to the ministers was unsuccessful, that sent to the council had a success so abundant that it not only surpassed the hopes of the Bernese, but crossed their desires and threw an obstacle in the way of their projects. The syndics who had been named in a spirit hostile to the reformers, and all the citizens who had placed them in office, were delighted to see variance between Berne and Calvin and Farel. For them it was a piece of real good fortune, although for the ministers it was a grievous event. The two states, Berne and Geneva, acting in unison, would soon get the better of two poor ministers. Further, the council was at this time in a bad humor. The third preacher, the aged and energetic Courault, who had remained at Geneva, had blamed the syndics in one of his sermons, and it was resolved to reprimand him. It is safe to rely, in this matter, on what the Registers state. It is not right to receive, as some have done, the burlesque and lying imputations of the notorious slanderer Bolsec, who, ‘after the example of Herostratos, chose to pass down to posterity branded with infamy.’[597] The council forbade Courault to preach. This was the state of things when the letters from Berne arrived.