the execution and its message any doubts, educate the public, and, not least, prepare the condemned for salvation.Only at this moment was the condemned really ready to repent. It was also noted in the letter that Geneva may have been the only place in Europe where the time between the announcement of the upcoming execution and the execution was less than twenty-four hours. Even murderers in England had until the next day, while others got longer time, and in Holland and Bern at least twenty-four hours were given. In Bern the time could be prolonged if it was needed for the spiritual needs of the delinquent. All Germany was also mentioned as giving twenty-four hours. Therefore, the Genevan pastors asked for the executions to be postponed to the day after the announcement.281 The council then rejected the wishes of the pastors.282 The notion of the situation in Germany was hardly generally correct, although it might have been like that in some, maybe Reformed, state, but the other specific areas mentioned in the letter were clearly Reformed. From the perspective of Geneva, stressing the Catholic dimension of the Anglican Church would not be of any advantage. Thus, a minimum of twenty-four hours, which from at least a Lutheran perspective at this time was shockingly swift, was in Geneva described as the norm of the Reformed milieu. Jennifer Powell McNutt’s findings, however, gives us reason to question this description of the situation in Geneva. She has found that even if the preparation of the condemned started first in the morning of the day of execution, the pastors were given notice the day before, and at at least one occasion the notice was given a full week ahead.283 Was it possible that the pastors of Geneva were so respectful of the council of the city that they did not dare to start preparations until the sentence was 281 Memoire de la Vénérable Compagnie 20 December 1773 attached between p 702 and 703 in Registres du Conseil 274 AEG. On the situation in Geneva see Porret 1991 p 395 sqq. On this letter and its answer see also McNutt 2010 p 63 sq. 282 P 705 Registres du Conseil 274AEG. In 1769 and 1771 the pastors had criticised the council for asking the pastor accompanying a condemned before the council to remove his hat and remain standing. The council decided that the pastors since long time had worn a hat and that they therefore should continue to keep them on. Seating for the pastors was however a new custom that should be discontinued, McNutt 2013 p 243 sq. 283 McNutt 2010 p 61. 92
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=