Ami Bost - Divinity Studies in Geneva in the Early 1800s

Ami Bost (1790-1874) was one of the important men of the Awakening movement, which has had a significant influence on Frédéric, Adolphe and Guillaume Monod. In the following extract of his memoirs (1854) he gives an account of his divinity studies in Geneva.

*** My translation of the French original ***

“I began my theological studies in 1809.

This period was still strongly influenced by the character of the great French revolution, which had just come to an end. The doctrine – as far as the Church is concerned – and morality in general had reached a degree of laxness which one can hardly imagine today. The way in which the students lived – divinity students very much like the others – was in line with this attitude: what they said and sung, the scribbles on the benches, the behaviour of some, were beyond the tolerable.

As to the teaching, there is one major fact, which, although it may appear incredible, is true. During the four years of theological studies, except for the use of the Old Testament that was required for learning some Hebrew, by translating about a hundred psalms over the four years, we did not open the Bible in our lecture halls: this book was useless and unknown. In other words, it was not part of our courses, and apart its use for translation work you did not need to have it! I guess it was sometimes referred to, because of the beauty of some of its poetry or some oratorical movement, or in support of teachings said to belong to natural religion, comprising the resurrection and a judgment to come, but beyond that – nothing. As to the New Testament, as some of us knew the Greek language and the others were supposed to know it, this book was not used, neither for translations nor in any other way. There was no course on systematic theology, neither good nor bad, only pure deism, and I dare say, impudent deism (except for the fact that nobody was honest about it). Those were the studies and this was the atmosphere from which God has drawn, by his marvellous grace, most of the pastors and ministers who were most prominent in the awakening, among which Messrs Guers, Empeyta, Malan, Gaussen, Merle, Galland, and the author of this book. I was studying at the very same time as Mr Gaussen; Mr Malan had preceded us by two or three years; Messrs Galland and Merle followed us at a distance of one or two years.

From the scientific point of view, the situation was quite as miserable, and it could not have been otherwise. At that time the only aspect of theology that was cultivated to some extent was pulpit speaking, and even in this domain the substance was completely neglected because besides Saurin we studied a great number of Roman Catholic pulpit speakers such as Massillon, Bourdaloue, Bossuet, Réguis, and all the errors that their sermons hid under in beautiful words.

As to our spiritual education, we could only find help outside our studies, and in particular in the small assemblies to which we return all the time and which provided some slight remedy to our misery. It was about at that time (1810) that the Société des Amis, which I have already mentioned, was established. It has not lasted until the appearance of the awakening in 1816, but at that time it was a little bit more consistent than all its predecessors. We will come back on it soon. All of its – about twenty – members were male, most of them were young.

Considering this situation, you can imagine the sad effect that my theological studies had on me, [a young lad] lacking direction and full of contradictions. On the one hand, when it came to drafting sermons, I tried to exercise my oratorical skills; on the other hand, my spirit clung to the principle, which grew stronger and stronger, according to which, as far as rhetoric is concerned, the Gospel is a power from God and acts on a supernatural level, and as such has to be preached without any literary concerns and without any consideration of rhetoric. Later I found this principle expressed in Pascal’s great Art of Persuasion, where he openly says:

“I do not speak here of divine truths, which I shall take care not to comprise under the art of persuasion, because they are infinitely superior to nature: God alone can place them in the soul and in such a way as it pleases him.” […]

The outcome of this conflict in which I found myself was quite poor, and for a long time my colleagues and the public have considered me to be more narrow-minded than I really was.

Notwithstanding the decadent nature of the teaching and all my unfaithfulness, I presented myself as a defender of orthodoxy, and I was the only one in the audience to play this tiresome and dangerous part. As a matter of fact, Mr Gaussen, who was heading for the truth, still had not yet publicly expressed his opinions. That being said, I defended orthodoxy more as a theologian than as a Christian, and without any unction.

To give you an example of the contradictions that characterised my poor existence at that time, let me say that besides my reading of Virgil and Voltaire, and among many commitments, projects and futile pleasures, I drafted (from October 1 to 4, 1811) a quite elaborate and rather serious paper against dance. I still am in possession of that article […]. It begins in a very academic manner by “Sirs” but then I quickly address my listeners as “my brothers”. The article obviously is quite mediocre, but it still is an interesting document. Its amplified and monotonous style makes me smile; it certainly is not in my nature [to write in this way] but I had involuntarily adopted it by regularly reading tiresome Massillon, as I had been told to do!”

Also published on my Adolphe Monod website (here).