Assertio septem sacramentorium, or, defence of the seven sacraments

ASSERTIO SEPTEM SACRAMENTOKUM

u

Hssettio
Septem Sacramentorum

OR

DEFENCE OF THE SEVEN
SACRAMENTS

BY

U)n 1 ., Iking of J£n0lanfc

RE-EDITED, WITH AN INTRODUCTION,

BY

REV. LOUIS O'DONOVAN, S.T.L.

PRECEDED BY A PREFACE

BY

HIS EMINENCE JAMES CARDINAL GIBBONS

Archbishop of Baltimore

NEW YORK, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO

BENZIGER BROTHERS

PRINTERS TO THE HOLY APOSTOLIC SEE
1908

VUbil ©bstat.

REMY LAFORT,

Censor Librorum.

Imprimatur*

•fr JOHN M. FARLEY,

Archbishop of New York.

NEW YORK, December 27, 1907.

COPYRIGHT, 1908, BY BEKZIGER BROTHERS.

Dedication

IN MEMORY OF MY FATHER,

CHARLES O'DONOVAN, M.D.,

IN LOVING GRATITUDE FOR MANY GIFTS, FIRST AND

FOREMOST AMONG THEM, THE PEARL OF

GREAT PRICE, THE FAITH DEFENDED

BY HENRY, THIS WORK IS

AFFECTIONATELY

DEDICATED.

CONTENTS

PAOK

DEDICATION ... 5

PREFACE BY His EMINENCE CARDINAL GIBBONS . 9

INTRODUCTION BY THE EDITOR . . 13

FOREWORD ... 15

SYNOPSIS OF THE "ASSERTIO" . . . 19

OCCASION, ORIGIN AND MOTIVE OF THE

" ASSERTIO '' . . . 40

AUTHORSHIP OF THE "ASSERTIO" . . 53

EDITIONS AND VERSIONS . 94

THE PRESENTATION TO THE POPE . . . 110

THE TITLE " DEFENDER OF THE FAITH''— WAS

IT TO BE HEREDITARY? .... 118

CRITICISM AND EFFECTS OF THE "ASSERTIO" . 127

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 136

THE " ASSERTIO" IN ENGLISH AND LATIN . . 145

INDEX 464

preface

THE "Assertio Septem Sacramentorum," or "Do-
fence of the Seven Sacraments," by Henry VIII., King
of England, and "Defender of the Faith," here re-
edited by Rev. Louis O'Donovan, is a rare, royal,
Catholic book. It is rare, inasmuch as it has probably
been printed but twice in nearly 200 years, and so no
wonder that lately a copy of the work was listed for sale
at $25.00. It is a royal book, by reason of its kingly
author, whose claim is shown to be, if not certain, at
least very probable. It is Catholic, because no Catho
lic could write a more orthodox treatise on the subjects
here explained by King Henry VIII. Yet he expounds
such crucial dogmas as the primacy of the Bishop of
Rome, indulgences, the mystery of the Real Presence
and the Mass, the Sacrament of Confession, divorce,
etc. And all this he has unfolded in as Catholic a man
ner as St. Thomas, or St. Francis de Sales, or St. Al-
phonsus Liguori could have done.

But besides the matter of the treatise, the period also
when it was composed — a most interesting, even if sad
dening, epoch in the history of the Church — makes the
work most valuable. For just at that date — 1521 —
the cauldron of the so-called Reformation was boiling
furiously in Germany. But in England, Henry
boasted that its horrors had not yet begun, and, more
over, he posed as the champion of the Church, to see
that Luther's novelties should not appear there. And
this freedom from the "reform" he was ready to main
tain by his sword if later need be, but at any rate now

10 Preface

by his pen. And Henry was quite well equipped for
his self-assumed task, having improved his natural tal
ents by an education intended to prepare him to be
Archbishop of Canterbury. Little wonder then that he
should have written such a book as the "Defence of the
Seven Sacraments/' which, after all, is only a simple,
plain, yet strong explanation of the Church's teachings
on some of her most vital points.

As the originator of what was in its origin a schis-
matical rather than an heretical church (however
much later on heresies developed within it), and as the
first head of that church, Henry is of special interest
to the student of religions and of Church history. In
act the first, Henry is a young, brilliant, powerful,
Catholic king with the best of Catholic women for his
queen, ruling in peace over Catholic, Merry England.
In act the second, he has become the adulterer, the
divorce, the wife-killer, and with it all, and because of
it all, he has become a schismatic, the head of a schism,
dragging his subjects away from Catholic unity, and
making them acknowledge himself not only their
earthly king, but their spiritual head. And yet it was
only a few years before that Henry had written this
book, for which Pope Leo X. had given him the title
"Defender of the Faith," a title prized and used by
every subsequent sovereign of England, down to Ed
ward VII. to-day.

In his exhaustive Introduction to Henry's work, Fr.
O'Donovan has quoted the views of many different
writers bearing on the occasion, origin and motive, the
authorship, the editions and versions, the presentation
of the book to the Pope, and the question whether or not
the title "Defender of the Faith" was intended to be
hereditary. Keferences to the places in the various
originals from which he quotes are copiously given.

Preface 11

The bibliography of over a hundred works gives the au
thors, editions, date and place of publication of the
works used.

This book, therefore, from so many points of view, is
one that must be of interest to every student of either
English history or of the history of religion in general.
The presence of the original Latin text and somewhat
old English version, together with the complementary
documents, should appeal to and reach many readers,
not only in this country but especially in England.

In England many solid works on the Reformation
period have lately appeared, and I hope that the move
ment will inspire our American scholars. Books on
this period of history have, in the past, been unduly
biassed, but a refreshing change for the better is notice
able in recent years. Such a work as the present, giv
ing the original texts of the authors who have a right
to be admitted as reliable witnesses, is a sign of the
times, for Fr. O'Donovan here brings before you King
Henry and a hundred critics and lets them speak for
themselves in their own words. He has endeavored to
place before the reader the original documents in the
case, and then allow him to draw his own conclusion.
He goes to the root of the matter of contention between
Catholics and members of the Church of England,
showing in Henry's own words that he who later be
came the first head of the Protestant Church in Eng
land was, together with all the people of England in
those olden days, truly Catholic and violently opposed
to Luther and his destructive and murderous reform.

I hope, therefore, that the work may be widely and
carefully read, especially in this country, but indeed
also in England, the land of its birth.

J. CAED. GIBBONS.
BALTIMORE,

I. SUNDAY OF ADVENT, 1906.

flntrobuctton
the EMtor

Iforeworfc

THE Eenaissance in Italy, the heart of Christendom,
sent something of a pulse even as far as that member
of the body of Europe called England. For there such
men as More, Fisher, Colet, Lilly, Linacre, and
Grocyn lived, studied, and taught. Erasmus speaks
most flatteringly of King Henry VIII., surrounded by
a chosen, able coterie of savants and litterateurs, the
modern Maecenas, who himself contended for and won
his laurels — and that from the hands of the cultured
Pope Leo X. — in reward for the royal literary feat, the
"Assertio Septem Sacramentorum," i. e., the "Defence
of the Seven Sacraments.''

"The evil that men do lives after them ; the good is
oft interred with their bones. So let it" not be with
Henry. Generally he is remembered as one who
"spared neither man in his hate, nor woman in his
lust."* But this is the roue, the non-Catholic, the Protest
ant, the schismatic Henry. Let us not forget that at least
once he had been the beau-ideal Henry; in body, tall,
straight, broad-shouldered, a master of every gentle
manly accomplishment ; in mind naturally clever, an
accomplished linguist, a learned theologian, a faithful
son of the Church. As such he wrote his famous book,
the "Defence of the Seven Sacraments." In reprint
ing this work several topics of interest seemed to need
notice and explanation, and these have grown and
shaped themselves into an Introduction grouped under
the following heads:

* Carwithen's Hist, of the Church of England, I., p. 38.

16 Foreword

1. A Synopsis of the "Assertio."

2. Its Occasion, Origin and Motive.

3. Its Authorship.

4. The Various Editions and Versions.

5. The Presentation of it to the Pope.

6. Was the Title "Defender of the Faith" Heredi
tary \

7. Criticism and Influence of the "Assertio."

8. Bibliography.

Following this Introduction comes the "Assertio"
proper, preceded by a few documents reprinted in Eng
lish, some of them in the Latin too, in the following
order :

1. The Introduction to the English version here re
printed, in English only.

2. Henry's Letter to Leo, in English and Latin.

3. The Oration of John Clark, in English only.

4. Leo X.'s Reply, in English only.

5. Leo X.'s Bull, in English and Latin.

6. Leo X.'s Letter to Henry, in English and Latin.

7. Henry's Dedicatory Epistle, in English and Latin.

8. Henry's "To the Reader," in English and Latin.

9. Henry's Two Preliminary Chapters, on Indul
gences and the Papacy, respectively, in English and
Latin.

10. Henry's "Assertio Septem Sacramentorum,"
or "Defence of the Seven Sacraments," in English and
Latin.

11. The Index to the "Assertio," in English and
Latin.

The first reason for reprinting this work is a moral
one — namely, that the readers may see, from so illus
trious an example, that loss of faith comes from loss of
morals. The second reason is that non-Catholics, those

Foreword 17

"other sheep which are not of this fold," may return to
the rich, green pastures which they left four hundred
years ago, and which are still as rich, as green, because
still watered by the perennial streams of the seven sac
raments, just as in the days of Henry; they are "ever
ancient, yet ever new."

The editor regrets that this piece of work has been
made much after the manner of the good housewife's
rag carpet — composed of pieces and patches, at differ
ent times and places, when and where a busy ministry
would permit. There is no pretence at style. Indeed,
while trying to be brief, and yet give all the testimonies
collected, the matter has, it is feared, often grown
heavy; while trying to teach one is apt to forget to
amuse. All that the editor asks is a careful reading
and indulgence for his defects.

The writer takes pleasure in acknowledging his in
debtedness to the nch treasures of the Library of the
Peabody Institute of Baltimore; the kind loan of one
edition of the "Assertio" from the Catholic University
of America; also Dr. Healy's old English version of
the "Assertio," here reprinted; above all, the encour
aging interest and learned advice of that richly gifted
historian — that gentle, hard-working teacher - - Very
Reverend Thomas J. Shahan, S.T.D., Professor of
Ecclesiastical History in the Catholic University of
America. To the Rev. Lucian Johnston, S.T.L., of
Baltimore, the writer is grateful for helpful criticism
and advice; also to the Rev. Charles Hogue, S.S., of
St. Charles' College, Maryland; to Rev. Henry J.
Shandelle, S.J., of Georgetown, and Rev. Fr. Ehrle,
S.J., of Rome. And though last, not least, most pro
foundly does the writer appreciate the graciousness of
that providential modern defender of the FAITH OF

18 Foreword

OUR FATHERS, who has been good enough in his busy,
latter days to introduce this book — His Eminence
James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore.

THE CATHEDRAL, BALTIMORE,
FEAST OF PENTECOST, 1907.

Synopsis of tbe "Hssertio"

THIS Synopsis of the "Assertio" sums up the gist of
the English version reprinted further on in extenso.

And first comes the rather quaint "Advertisement/7
bespeaking the merits of this English version. It is as
follows :

I

advertisement

ALL readers of English history know that Luther
started and Henry established "those fatal confusions,
animosities and devastations ... in these three
kingdoms."

Wealth, sloth, looseness of morals, ignorance made
a reformation of the manners of some of the clergy de
sirable. Luther's first intention to reform abuses of
churchmen was good, but later he set himself above the
whole Church to reform religion itself. The German
princes helped Luther with arms, and Catholics re
pelled force by force. Henry "had well studied philos
ophy and theology," but his style is abusive, imitating
that of his adversaries. "Luther was inflamed by the
censures of the University of Paris ;" still more by those
of Henry. Henry was a "devout Roman Catholic" till
the Pope refused him a divorce. However, "his 'De
fence of the Seven Sacraments' is a work of considera
ble merit. Its orthodoxy we cannot doubt of. ...

20 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

The work . . . may not only be very profitably pe
rused, but is also extremely curious, when we consider
its author's very remarkable and inconsistent character.
The London edition, from whence the present is taken,
has been carefully corrected throughout, in the orthog
raphy and punctuation, and the text, obscure in some
parts, has been elucidated. . . . This edition is
vastly preferable to all former ones in the English
tongue. . . . The publication of a work, hitherto so
extremely scarce, will be satisfactory to the curious."

II

" letter of 1benr? 1D111. to Xeo £

®n tbe Subject ot tbe 'Hssertto/ 1521.
"Most Holy Father:"

As We Catholic sovereigns should uphold religion,
when We saw Luther's heresy running wild, for the
sake of Germany, and still more for love of the Holy
Apostolic See, We tried to weed out this heresy.

"Seeing its widespread havoc, We called on all to
help Us to eradicate it, particularly the Emperor and
the Electoral Princes. Lest, however, this be not
enough to show Our mind on Luther's wicked books,
We shall defend and guard the Holy Roman Church
not only by force of arms, but also by Our wits. And
therefore We dedicate to Your Holiness Our first fruits,
confident that an abundant harvest will be gathered,
should Your Holiness approve Our work.

"From Our Royal Palace at Greenwich, May 21st,
1521.

"Your Holiness' most devoted and humble son,
Henry, by the grace of God King of England and
France, and Lord of Ireland."

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 21

III

"©ration of HDr* Jobn Clarft,

Orator for Dents D1Tf fl., 1?fn0 of Englano, France ano
Urelano, 2>efenDer of tbe ffaftb; on bt0 ejbilntfns
tbf0 IRoBal JBoofe, in tbe ConetetotB at "Rome, to pope
Xeof.

"Most Holy Father:"

What great troubles from the Hussites ! What from
Luther's works ! especially from " The Babylonian
Captivity of the Church/ in refuting which many grave
and learned men have diligently laboured."

"Henry VIII., most affectionate son of Your Holi
ness and of the sacred Eoman Church, hath written a
book against this work of Luther's, which he has dedi
cated to Your Holiness, . . . which I here present, but
before You receive it, most holy Father, may it please
You, that I speak somewhat of the devotion and venera
tion of my King towards Your Holiness, and this most
Holy See; as also of the other reasons which moved
him to publish this work." . . .

"Luther rends the seamless Coat of Christ, makes the
Pope a mere priest, condemns all ministers, and calls
Kome Babylon, makes the Pope a heretic and himself
[Luther] equal to St. Peter. He burnt the decrees and
statutes of the Fathers and published his Book of the
Babylonian Captivity. It condemns Pope, hierarchy
and 'the Kock' and the Church; abolishes most sacred
practices; institutes sacraments after his fancy, reduc
ing them to three, if not to none at all. What ills are
yet to be added to those started by the Hussites ? My
King moved the Emperor to exile Luther.

"My . . . England . . . hath never been behind in
. . . due obedience to the Roman Church, either to

22 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

Spain, France, Germany or Italy ; nay, to Rome itself ;
so no nation more impugns this monster. . . . King
Henry, Your Holiness' most devoted son, undertook
this pious work himself/' . . . the most learned clergy
of this realm have endeavoured to remove all doubts, "so
that amongst us the Church of God is in great tran
quillity; no differences, no disputes, no ambiguous
words, murmurings or complaints are heard amongst
the people." . . .

"The reason that moved my most serene King," who
has defended with the sword the Catholic Faith and
Christian Religion, to undertake this work, is his
piety: — "his accustomed veneration to Your Holiness;
Christian piety in the cause of God ; and a royal grief
and indignation of seeing religion trodden under foot ;"
also "the desire of glory" might have induced him "to
discover by reason the Lutheran heresies. . . . This
raging and mad dog is not to be dealt with by words,
there being no hopes of his conversion, but with drawn
swords, cannons, and other habiliments of war." And
this "work of his, though it had the approbation of
the most learned of his Kingdom; yet he resolved
not to publish until Your Holiness (from whom we
ought to receive the sense of the Gospel, by your quick
and most sublime judgment) deem it worthy to pass
through the hands of men. May therefore Your Holi
ness take in good part and graciously accept this little
Book."

IV

Xeo £/$ 1?epl?

"NOTHING could have been sent more acceptable to
Us." We praise and admire that most Christian King,
having the knowledge, will, and ability of composing

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 23

this excellent book, who "has rendered himself no less
admirable to the whole world by the eloquence of his
style, than by his great wisdom." May the Creator
bless him, and we shall do "anything that may tend to
the honour and dignity of his Majesty and to his and
his kingdom's glory."

pope's Bull

" fceo, I. JSi0bop ano Servant of tbe Servants of <3oD: Ho
our most Dear Son in Cbrtet, Ibenrg, tbe Illustrious
fcind of J£n0lano, ano Defender of tbe jfattb, eenoa
Greeting, ano 0tve0 bi0 JSeneDiction."

"As the other Roman Bishops have bestowed par
ticular favours upon Catholic Princes" for constancy in
Faith, and unspotted devotion to the Church in tem
pestuous times: so also We, for your Majesty's most
excellent works. "Our beloved son John Clark did,
in Our Consistory, in presence of Our venerable
Brethren, Cardinals of the Church, present Us a book
which your Majesty . . . did compose as an antidote
against the errors of divers heretics, often condemned
by this Holy See, and now again revived by Martin
Luther."

"Having found in this book most admirable doctrine
We thank God and beg you to enlist like workers.
We, the true successor of St. Peter, presiding in this
Holy See, from whence all dignity and titles have
their source, have with our brethren maturely delib
erated on these things ; and with one consent unani
mously decreed to bestow on your Majesty this title,
namely, 'Defender of the Faith/ ... We like
wise command all Christians, that they name your

24 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

Majesty by this title. . . . Having thus weighed . . .
your singular merits, we could not have invented a more
congruous name.

"And you shall rejoice in Our Lord, showing the
way to others, that if they also covet to be invested with
such a title, they may study to do such actions, and
to follow the steps of your most excellent Majesty,
whom, with your wife, children, and all who shall
spring from you, we bless.

"Given at St. Peter's in Rome, the fifth of the Ides
of October ; in the year of Our Lord's Incarnation 1521,
and in the ninth year of Our Papacy."

VI

"Xetter from %eo £

Go 1>enrB \Dfl1Tff. respecting tbe ' Bsaertio Septem Sacra*
mentorunV in replB to tbe booh written 'bB tbe ftfna
against Xutber.

"To Our dearest Son in Christ health and Apostolic
benediction/'

We are deeply grateful for your defence of this Holy
See, and all but welcome Luther's crime as the occasion
of Your noble championship. Such virtue must not
lose its reward. For if praise is due to those who pro
tect our liberty, as well as to those who defend our
sacraments, both of these noble virtues are united in
You.

What return can We make for Your good will
towards Us ?

Your learning, cleverness and charity should con
vince and gain back the heretics.

For Your service "for the great God, and this Holy
See, We give infinite thanks to Your Majesty, Defender
of the Faith."

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 25

"In a bull of Our Own, with the assent of Our Vener
able Brethren, We have forwarded to You this title of
'Defender of the Faith.' "

Forget not, dearest Son, to act in accordance with
Your new and honourable title, remembering that far
greater rewards, from Our Lord and Saviour, await
You in heaven. Let Your defence of the Spouse of
Christ here on earth remind You of, and prepare You
for, an eternal reward hereafter.

VII

Gbe Epistle BeMcaton?

Co Our fl&ost Dels Zoro Zeo I., cbfef JSiebop, fjenr^, Ittna
of Bnglano, ffrance ano f relano, wisbetb perpetual
•fcapptness.

"Most Holy Father:"

You will wonder at a man of war and affairs writing
against heresy, but love for the faith and respect for
You urge me, and God's grace will aid me. "Keligion
bears the greatest sway in the administration of public
affairs and is likewise of no small importance in the
commonwealth," . . . and so we have spent much time
in the contemplation thereof, and now we "dedicate to
Your Holiness what we have meditated therein. ... If
we have erred in anything, we offer it to be corrected
as may please Your Holiness."

VIII

Go tbe IRea&er

THOUGH of limited ability I feel it my duty to defend
the Church and Catholic Faith to the best of my power.
I arm myself with a twofold armour, celestial and ter-

26 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

restrial, to overcome him who perverts Scripture, the
Sacraments, ecclesiastical rites and ceremonies — the in
fernal wolf, who tries to disperse the flock of Christ
with his Babylonian Captivity. If Luther do not re
pent and "if Christian princes do their duty these
errors and himself, if he perseveres therein, may
be burned in the fire."

CHAPTEE I

©f flnbulgencea an& tbe pope's
Hutborits

"Indulg entice sunt adulatorum Romanorum ne~
quitice"*

Luther attacks not only the abuses but the doctrine
of indulgences : "they are nothing but mere impostures,
fit only to destroy people's money and God's faith."
. . . As he denies "indulgences to be profitable in this
life, it would be in vain for me to dispute what great
benefits the souls in Purgatory receive by them, . . .
whereby we are relieved from Purgatory itself." . . .
"The words of Christ remain firm: . . . 'Whatsoever
thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven.' By
which words, if it is manifest that any priest has power
to absolve men from sins, and take away eternal punish
ment due thereunto, who will not judge it ridiculous,
that the Prince of all priests should be denied the tak
ing away of temporal punishment ?"

"What concerns it me what that man admits, or
denies, who alone rejects all things which the Holy
Church has held during so many ages ?"
* Luther's words, quoted by Henry.

Synopsis of the "Asseriio" 27

CHAPTEK II

©£ tbe pope's Butborits

"Papatus est robusta Venatio Romani Pontificis.*
"First, he [Luther] denied the Pope's supremacy
to be of divine right, or law, but allowed it to be of hu
man right. But now, (contrary to himself) he affirms
it to be of neither of them. . . . He now embraces
what he then detested. ... He preached that excom
munication is a medicine and to be suffered with pa
tience and obedience: he himself being (for every good
cause) awhile after excommunicated, was so impatient
of that sentence that (mad with rage) he breaks forth
into insupportable contumelies, reproaches and blas
phemies." . . . "He cannot deny that all the faithful
honour and acknowledge the sacred Koman See for their
mother and supreme." . . . "The Indies themselves
... do submit to the See of Home. If the Bishop of
Rome has got this large power, neither by command of
God, nor the will of man, but by main force, I would
fain know of Luther when the Pope rushed into the
possession of so great riches. . . . By the unanimous
consent of all nations, it is forbidden to change, or move
the things which have been for a long time immovable.
. . . Since the conversion of the world, all churches in
the Christian world have been obedient to the See of
Rome. . . . Though the Empire was translated to the
Grecians, yet did they still own, and obey the su
premacy of the Church, and See of Rome, except when
they were in any turbulent schism.

"St. Jerome . . . openly declared . . . 'that it was
sufficient for him that the Pope of Rome did but ap
prove his faith, whoever else should disapprove it.? '
* Luther, quoted by Henry.

28 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

He is "endeavouring to draw all others with him into
destruction, whilst he strives to dissuade them from
their obedience to the Chief Bishop, whom, in a three
fold manner, he himself is bound to obey, viz., as a
Christian, as a priest, and as a religious brother. . . .
Luther . . . refuses to submit to the law of God, but
desires to establish a law of his own."

CHAPTER III

Gbe Defence of tbe Seven Sacraments

THE preceding two chapters of Luther are but a
flourish to his real work. "Of seven Sacraments he
leaves us but three ; ... of the three he takes away one
immediately after in the same book, ... he says 'that
if he would speak according to Scripture, he would have
but one Sacrament and three sacramental signs.' '

CHAPTER IV

Gbe Sacrament of tbe Hltar

"LET us begin where he began himself, with the
adorable Sacrament of Christ's Body. The changing of
the Name thereof, calling It the sacrament of bread,
shows" Luther's intentions. As "St. Ambrose . . .
says . . . Though the form of bread and wine is
seen upon the altar, yet we must believe that there is
nothing else but the Body and Blood of Christ.' " Next
comes the consubstantiation theory of Luther, who was
determined with himself to draw the people to worship
the bread and leave out Christ's Body.

Luther reopened the old sore of the Bohemian trouble,

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 29

i. e., that the people should receive Communion under
both forms. Luther's charge that the clergy forcibly
took away the chalice from the laity against their will is
disbelieved by Henry. If Luther objects to the change
from the primitive way of giving Communion, he
should object also to children not receiving at all,
and to our receiving in the morning instead of after
supper. And what authority in Scripture has he to
put water in the wine, if not tradition ? The change is
made by the Holy Ghost. "He that pretended to stand
for the communicating under both kinds recommends
the quite contrary, to wit, that it may be lawful for
them never to receive under any kind."

Luther also inculcates that "the substance of true
bread and true wine remain still after Consecration."

"He esteems this to be his greatest and chiefest argu
ment, to wit, 'That Scripture is not to be forced, . . .
but to be kept in the most simple signification that can
be.' . . . But/' says he, "the Divine Words are
forced if that which Christ calls bread be taken for the
accidents of bread, and what He calls wine for the form
of wine. . . . The evangelists so plainly write that
Christ took bread and blessed it. ... We confess
He took bread and blessed it, but that He gave bread to
His disciples, after He had made It His Body, we flatly
deny, and the evangelists do not say He did." Luther
says: "Take, eat, this, that is, this bread, (says He,
which He had taken and broken) is My Body. . . .
This is Luther's interpretation, but not Christ's words,
nor the sense of His words. ... If the rod" [of Aaron]
"could not remain with the serpent, how much less can
the bread remain with the Flesh of Christ ?"

"'Christ does not say 'Hoc est Sanguis Meus' but fH ic
est Sanguis Meus/ . . . Though wine is of the neu
ter gender, yet Christ did not say 'hoc' but fhic est

30 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

Sanguis Meus/ And though bread is of the masculine
gender, yet, notwithstanding, he says, 'Hoc est Corpus
Meum/ not fhic,' that it may appear by both articles
that He did not mean to give bread or wine, but His
own Body and Blood." So "bread is not in the Eucha
rist," concludes Henry. If the Acts speak of the
Eucharist as bread, it is because It was formerly, or
still appeared as bread; just as Aaron's rod, though
changed to a serpent, is still called a rod. Christ said
"This is My Body," not "My Body is in this," or "With
this which you see, is My Body." Luther says the word
"transubstantiation" has risen up inside the last 300
years. Henry replies that 400 years ago "Hugo de
Sancto Victore writ a Book of the Sacraments," and
said : " 'By the word of Sanctification the true substance
of bread and wine is turned or changed into the true
Body and Blood of Christ, only the form of bread and
wine remaining, and the substance passing into another
substance.' '

"Eusebius Emissenus, dyed about 600 years since,
. . . said, 'Now the invisible Priest converteth, by His
secret power, the visible creatures into His own Body
and Blood, saying, "Take and eat, this is My Body." ' "

St. Augustine: "We honour (says he) invisible
things, viz., the Flesh and Blood in the form of the
bread and wine."

"St. Gregory Nissenus says, 'That before the conse
cration it is but bread; but when it is consecrated by
mystery, it is made, and called the Body of Christ.7 '

"Theophilus . . . says, 'The Bread is not a figure
only of the Body of Christ, but is changed into the
proper Body of the Flesh and Blood of Christ. . . .
Our Lord, condescending to our weakness, preserves
the forms of the bread and wine, but changes the bread
and wine into Plis own true Flesh and Blood.' "

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 31

"St. Cyril . . . says, 'God, condescending to our
frailties, lest we should abhor flesh and blood on the holy
altars, infuseth the force of life into what is offered, by
changing them into the truth of His own proper
Flesh.' "

"St. Ambrose . . . said, 'Although the form of
bread and wine is seen, nevertheless we are to believe
that there is nothing else after the consecration but the
Body and Blood of Christ.' "

So the Fathers teach, not consubstantiation, but tran-
substantiation.

Luther "denies it [the Mass] to be a good work,"
though "he sees and confesses himself that the opinions
of the Holy Fathers are against him, as also the Canon
of the Mass, with the custom of the universal Church,
confirmed by the usage of so many ages, and the consent
of so many people. . . . He strives ... to excite
the commonalty against the nobility. . . . He says
that we ought to receive the 'Communion with faith
alone. . . . The more clear, pure, and free from
the stain of sin our consciences are, in the worse
capacity are we to receive. . . . Mass is no sacrifice :
it is only profitable to the priest, not to the people;
that it is nothing available either to the dead or the
living.' '

Henry expounds the Mass and shows "Christ to be
the eternal Priest : ... on the cross He consum
mated the sacrifice which He began in the supper. . . .
The consecration in the supper and the oblation on the
cross is celebrated and represented together in the sacra
ment of the Mass."

Henry then shows that the Mass said by priests is a
good work. "The Mass of every priest helps those to
salvation who, by their faith, have deserved." . . . The
Mass is a sacrifice, for "the priests do not only perform

32 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

what Christ did in His last supper, but also what He
has afterwards done on the cross." We must accept not
only the words of Scripture, but also the tradition of
the Church.

The Mass is a true sacrifice to God, despite Luther's
objection that it is received by the priest; for so were
all of Moses' sacrifices received by priests. St. Am
brose and St. Gregory are quoted to prove the Mass a
sacrifice, and Augustine, who says: "The Oblation is
every day renewed, though Christ has but once suf
fered." . . . "Other sacraments are only profitable
to particular persons receiving them ; this, in the Mass,
is beneficial to all, in general." Moreover, even athe
wickedness of the minister, be it never so great, is not
able to lessen or avert the benefit of It from the people."
It is to be adored, and also received at least once a year.
Henry sums up this chapter and shows that Luther
tries to draw people and even clergy from receiving
Communion.

CHAPTEK V

©f Baptism

"HE has treated of Baptism itself after such a man
ner, that it had been better he had not touched it at all."
Have faith and baptism, and then no matter what sins
you commit. "He [Luther] says, 'The baptized man

. . cannot lose his salvation, though willing to do it,
by any sin whatsoever, except infidelity.' ' Penance is
not necessary, though St. Jerome said, "Penance is the
board after shipwreck." Next Luther says that faith
without the sacrament suffices. The two theories of the
causality of sacramental grace are contradicted by
Luther; he makes faith a cloak for a wicked life; he

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 33

would undo all authority and order. "Why does he
thus reproachfully raise himself against the Bishop of
Rome? ... To demolish Christ's Church, so long
founded upon a firm rock ; erecting to themselves a new
church, compacted of flagitious and impious people."

CHAPTEE VI

©f tbe Sacrament of penance

FOEGIVENESS is no new doctrine, as Luther would
imply, but a very old and common practice indeed.

CHAPTER VII

®f Contrition

LUTHER says that "after they are loosed by the word
of man here on earth, they are absolved by God in
heaven."

If God "has promised forgiveness only to those who
are as contrite as the greatness of their crimes requires,
then Luther himself cannot (as he commands all others
to be) be assured and out of doubt that his sins are for
given him. If God has promised pardon to such as are
less contrite — attrites — by that Luther agrees with
those he but now reprehended. But if God has prom
ised it to such as have no manner of sorrow for their
sins, He has surely much more promised it to such as
are attrite. . . . If he admits but only contrition,
that is, a sufficient grief, then can nobody be assured
that he is absolved."

Besides, Luther's motives for contrition are not even
as good as those always inculcated.

34: Synopsis of the "Assertio"

CHAPTEK VIII

©f Confession

LUTHER says public sins are to be confessed; he is
not clear on private sins. Ecclesiasticus, St. John
Chrysostom, Numbers, St. James, Isaias, St. Ambrose,
St. Augustine, and custom, all prove confession of
secret sins by "the divine order of God. . . . Confes
sion was instituted and is preserved by God Himself,
not by any custom of the people, or institution of the
Fathers."

"Now Luther is condemning the reservation of some
sins . . . so as not to discern jurisdiction from Or
der. Luther says Christ's words, conferring the power
of forgiving sins, apply to the laity; Augustine, Bede,
Ambrose, the whole Church deny it; which do you be
lieve?"

CHAPTEE IX

©f Satisfaction

LUTHER says satisfaction is a renewal of life, and
asserts that the Church does not teach this. He asserts
that faith without good works suffices: "God does
nothing regard our works." Henry exhorts Luther to
repent and make satisfaction for his undervaluing
Penance, and, indeed, denying it to be a sacrament at
all.

CHAPTEE X

©f Confirmation

LUTHER denies this to be a sacrament. Tradition,
Henry shows, is authority for our faith. Then Henry
expounds the sacrament of Confirmation.

Synopsis of the " Asserlio" 35

CHAPTEK XI

©f tbe Sacrament of flDarriage

"MARRIAGE ... is ... denied by Luther to be
any sacrament at all. Luther says, 'Marriage was
amongst the ancient Patriarchs and amongst the Gen
tiles, and that as truly as amongst ns, yet was it not a
sacrament with either of them.' Divorcement was not
lawful in former times amongst the people of God."

Henry, quoting from Ephesians, declares : aHe
tells you 'that the man and wife make one body, of
which the man is the head; and that Christ and the
Church make one body, of which Christ is the head.' '
Adam's words, "A man shall leave father and mother
and cleave to his wife," show the dignity of marriage
— a "great sacrament in Christ and His Church."
Moreover, says Henry, "Observe that the Apostle's
business, in that place, to the Ephesians, is not about
teaching them how great a sacrament Christ joined with
the Church is ; but about exhorting married people how
to behave themselves one towards another, so as they
might render their marriage a sacrament, like, and
agreeable to, that so sacred a thing of which it is a
sacrament." Luther's saying the Greek word is mys
tery does not change the sense of the thing named, "see
ing it is taught so to be by the circumstance of the
whole matter. . . . There is no sacrament but what
is a mystery." Augustine and Jerome disagree with
Luther. . . . "Augustine, above a thousand times,
calls it the sacrament of marriage."

"The Apostle says, 'This sacrament is great, but I
speak in Christ and the Church.' What sacrament is
that that is great in Christ and the Church? Christ
and the Church cannot be a sacrament in Christ and

36 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

the Church; for none speaks after this manner. It is
therefore a necessary consequence that this sacrament,
which he says is great in Christ and the Church, is that
conjunction of man and wife which he has spoken of."

Luther denies that matrimony gives any grace. The
Apostle calls it "a bed unspotted/7 and Henry argues
that "marriage should not have an immaculate bed, if
the grace, which is infused by it, did not turn that unto
grace, which should be otherwise a sin."

"The Apostle saith, 'If any brother hath a wife, an
infidel, and she consent to live with him, let him not put
her away. And if any woman hath a husband, an infi
del, and he consent to dwell with her, let her not put
away her husband. For the man, an infidel, is sancti
fied by the faithful woman ; and the woman, an infidel,
is sanctified by the faithful husband; otherwise your
children should be unclean, but now they are holy.'
Do not these words of the Apostle show that in mar
riage . . . the sanctity of the sacrament sanctifies
the whole marriage, which before was altogether un
clean?"

When it is said of the first marriage, "God blessed
them [Adam and Eve], did He give no grace to their
souls?" . . .

: 'What God hath joined together, let no man put
asunder/ . . . There must be understood sure
something more holy than the care of propagating the
flesh, which God performs in marriage ; and that, with
out all doubt, is grace; which is, by the Prelate of all
sacraments, infused into married people in consecrating
marriage."

So reasoning and tradition both prove marriage to
be a sacrament.

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 37

CHAPTER XII

©f tbe Sacrament of ©rbers

LUTHER denies Orders to be a sacrament. "There
is no difference of priesthood between the laity and
priest: all men are priests alike. . . . The sacra
ment of Orders is nothing else but the custom of elect
ing a preacher in the Church . . . whose wicked
doctrine all men may see tends directly to the destruc
tion of the faith of Christ by infidelity."

aThe Church/' says Luther, "can discern the word
of God from the word of men." Luther's fundamental
reduced ad absurdum. Did not the Apostle warn
Timothy, "Impose not hands lightly upon any man" ?
Were not Aaron and his sons made priests of the Old
Law? Luther reviles St. Dionysius, who calls Orders
a sacrament. Testimonies of St. Jerome, St. Gregory
and St. Augustine as to Orders being a sacrament, and
of a permanent character. Luther shown to be wrong
in saying laymen are equal to priests, for priests only
can consecrate. Luther had even said : "That the peo
ple without the bishop, but not the bishop without the
people, can ordain priests." Why, then, says Henry,
does the Apostle warn Timothy, " 'Neglect not the grace
which is in thee, and which has been given thee by
prophecy, by the imposition of the hands of the presby
tery' ? And in another place, to the same, 'I admonish
thee that thou stir up the grace of God that is in thee,
by the imposition of my hands.' ' Resume.

38 Synopsis of the "Assertio"

CHAPTEK XIII

©f tbe Sacrament of Eytreme TUnction

"!F ever Luther was mad at any time, ... he is
certainly distracted here, in the Sacrament of Extreme
Unction," says Henry. "You see how he here endeav
ours in two ways to weaken the words of the Apostle.
First he will not have the epistle to have been writ by
the Apostle. Secondly, though it was by him written,
yet will he not have the Apostle to have authority oi
instituting sacraments. . . . They are the chief
weapons by which he intends to destroy this sacrament."
But Luther is confuted by St. Jerome and by Luther
himself. When Extreme Unction should be adminis
tered. It is a sign of grace for the soul ; not necessarily
to give health to the body. " 'This Unction/ he says,
'is no sacrament, because it does not always heal the
body.7 ' Luther has reason to deny St. James' Epistle,
for it denies Luther's teaching. But Luther goes far
ther and denies and defies the whole Church. "I ad
vise all Christians that, as the most exterminating of
plagues, they shun him who endeavours to bring into the
Church of Christ such foul prodigies, being the very
doctrine of anti-Christ. For, if he who endeavours to
move a schism in any one thing is to be extirpated with
all care, with what great endeavour is he to be rooted
out who not only goes about to sow dissension, but to stir
up the people against the chief Bishop, children against
their parents, Christians against the Vicar of Christ."
Though he shows signs of death, yet he will not let the
pious Vicar of Christ act as the Good Shepherd and
save him from the wolf of hell. If Luther had spoken
privately to the Pope of the errors he condemned, the
Pope had doubtless blessed him. But no ! He publicly

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 39

exposed and pointed to the shame of his father. "After
which he was summoned to Rome, that he might either
render reasons for his writings, or recant what he had
inconsiderately written, having any security imagin
able offered him, that he should not undergo the pun
ishment which he deserved, with sufficient expenses of
fered him for his journey. But ... he refused to
go. And . . . made his appeal to a general council,
yet not to every council, but to such as should next meet
in the Holy Ghost: that in whatsoever council he was
condemned, he might deny the Holy Ghost to be present
therein. The most conscientious shepherd has at length
been forced to cast out from the fold the sheep suffering
with an incurable disease, lest the sound sheep be cor
rupted by contact."

Henry wishes Luther might repent, and exhorts all
Christians to unity: "Do not listen to the insults and
detractions against the Vicar of Christ, which the fury
of this little monk spews up against the Pope . . .
this one little monk, ... in temper more harmful than
all Turks, all Saracens, all infidels everywhere."

©ccaeion, ©rigln anb Motive of tbe
"Hssertio"

IN this chapter the Occasion, Origin and Motive of
the royal tractate will be set forth in the words of repu
table chroniclers and historians. It is hoped that the
reader will not be repelled by the series of quotations —
their excuse is the not unreasonable one that it has cost
time and labour to bring them together, some from rare
and at times inaccessible books ; in a very few cases the
writer has been obliged to take them at second-hand.

To begin, then, with —

I. The Occasion of the "Assertio" :

Audin* tells us that across the sea "Germany now,
for the first time, beheld her ancient faith attacked, not
by arguments, but by ridicule, for that was the weapon
used by Luther." . . . That, moreover, "This apostate
monk . . . would recognize the existence of no law for
his own personal acts, either moral or physical ; . . .
that Luther . . . asserted that a single individual
might be right, though opposed to popes, councils, doc
tors, the past and the present; . . . that he com
pared the syllogism to the ass."

Luther's "Babylonish Captivity" was sent by Luther
to the Pope, "with expressions of personal respect, and
invoking him to set about a work of reformation in his
corrupt court."f

*Henry VIII., Ch. IX., pp. 88, 89.
fBeckett's English Reformation, XVII.

Occasion, Origin and Motive of the ef Assertio" 41

James Gairdner* says that "Luther in his 'Babylon
ish Captivity' repudiated the Pope's authority entirely,
attacked the whole scholastic system, . . . and declared
four of the reputed seven sacraments to be of only hu
man origin."

As to England the situation is briefly but clearly
stated by Patonif "The long reign of Henry VIII.,
1509-1547, falls practically into two periods of nineteen
years each : in the former of which he was the champion
of Popery against all comers, against Luther among
the rest, under the title still worn by our sovereigns,
'Defender of the Faith.7 "

It was in the former half of his reign that the com
position of the King's treatise took place ; a few quota
tions from the best sources will give a reliable outline
of the situation which occasioned the "Assertio." Poly-
dore Vergil, $ a contemporary Italian historian of Eng
land, says of Henry's book and its title :

"Quocirca Henricus rex, qui habebat regnum suum
maxime omnium religiosum, veritus ne uspiam labes
aliqua religionis fieret, primum libros Lutheranos, quor
um magnus jam numerus pervenerat in manus suorum
Anglorum, comburendos curavit, deinde libellum contra
earn doctrinam luculenter composuit misitque ad Leo-
nem pontificem, . . . turn Henricum defensorem
fidei appellavit, quo ille deinceps titulo usus est."

Confirming this statement of the large quantity of
Luther's books already in England, is the injunction

^English Church in the Sixteenth Century, p. 78.

f James Porter, British History and Papal Claims, Vol. I. , p. 40.

JPolydori Vergilii Urbinatis. Anglise Historic Libri Vigintisep-
tem, lib. XXVII., fol. 684. As to Polydore Vergil's reliability,
Mr. H. Ellis, in the Preface to Polydore Vergil's English History,
published by the Camden Society, says: " That Polydore Vergil's
History is entirely without mistakes cannot be asserted, but they are
very few."

42 Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio"

against their being read, sent by Leo to Wolsey ; it is as
follows :*

"Et quia dicti errores et plures alii in diversis libellis
per Martinum Lutherum hseresiarcham compositis,
continebantur, libellos ipsos in quocumque idiomate re-
periebantur, damnavimus, ne libellos, bujusmodi
errores ipsos continentes legere, imprimere, publicare,
seu defendere, aut in domibus suis, sive aliis publicis
vel privatis locis tenere quomodo prsesumerent ; qui-
nimmo illos, statim post literarum nostrarum, super his
editarum publicationem ubicumque forent per ordina-
rios et alios in dictis literis expresses diligenter qusesi-
tos, publice et solemniter in prsesentia cleri et populi,
sub posnis in iisdem literis expressis, comburentur,
ipsique Martino, ut ab omni prsedicatione desisteret,
jussimus."

The following extract describes the condemnation and
burning of Luther's books at St. Paul's Church, Lon
don, and complements the foregoing quotation ; it shows
also that the Pope's mandate was promptly and solemnly
executed. It is from the Cottonian MSS. in the British
Museum (Vitell. b. 4, p. Ill) and is entitled: "Pope's
Sentence against Martin Luther, published at London."

"The xij daye of Maye in the yeare of our Lord
1521, and in the thirteenth yeare of the Reigne of our
Soveraigne Lord Kinge Henry the eighte of that Name,
the Lord Thomas Wolsey, by the grace of God Legate
de Latere, Cardinal of Sainct Cecely and Archbishop of
Yorke, came unto Saint Paules Churche of London,
with the most parte of the Byshops of the Realme,
where he was received with procession, and sensid by

* Rymer, Fcedera, Vol. XIII. , p. 742. " Bulla Leonis X. Cardi-
nali Eborum, de potestatibus super lectione librorum Martini
Lutheri."

Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 43

Mr. Kichard Pace, then beinge Deane of the said
Church. After which ceremonies done, there were four
Doctors that bare a canope of cloth of gold over him
goinge to the Highe Alter, where he made his oblacion ;
which done, hee proceeded forth as abovesaid to the
Crosse in Paules Church Yeard, where was ordeined a
scaffold for the same cause, and he, sittinge under his
cloth of estate which was ordeined for him, his two
crosses on everie side of him ; on his right hand sittinge
on the place where hee set his feete, the Pope's embas-
sador, and nexte him the Archbishop of Canterbury:
on his left hand the Emperor's embassador, and nexte
him the Byshop of Duresme, and all the other Byshops
with other noble prelates sate on twoe formes outeright
forthe, and ther the Byshop of Rochester made a ser
mon, by the consentinge of the whole clergie of Eng
land, by the commandment of the Pope, against one
Martinus Eleuthereus, and all his workes, because hee
erred sore, and spake against the hollie faithe; and de
nounced them accursed which kept anie of his bookes,
and there were manie burned in the said church yeard
of his said bookes duringe the sermon, which ended, my
Lord Cardinall went home to dinner with all the other
prelates."

Not only was London infected with Luther's errors,
but they had reached Hereford at least, for in Wilkins'
"Concilia"* we read of Wolsey's order to the Bishop of
Hereford about Luther's books and a catalogue of forty-
two errors contained in them: it is entitled as follows:
"Mandatum cardinalis Wolseii episcopo Herefordensi,
de exquirendis libris M. Lutheri prohibitis; cum cata-
logo XLII errorum in iis contentorum ex. reg. Episc.
Heref., fol. 66."

* Vol. III., p. 690.

44 Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio"

Lord Herbert of Cherbury, a seventeenth-century his
torian of Henry VIII., says :*

"Our king, being at leisure now from wars, and for
the rest delighting much in learning, thought he could
not give better proof either of his zeal or education, than
to write against Luther. In this also he was exasper
ated, for that Luther had often times spoken contempt
uously of the learned Thomas of Aequine, who yet was
so much in request with the King, . . . that, as
Polydore hath it, he was called Thomisticus."

And Roscoe, in his Life of Leo X.,f adds to this and

"Such was the reception they [the new opinions of
the Reformation] met with in this country [England],
that Henry VIII. , who had, in his youth, devoted some
portion of his time to ecclesiastical and scholastic
studies, not only attempted to counteract their effects by
severe restrictions, but condescended to enter the lists
of controversy with Luther, in his well-known work,
written in Latin, and entitled 'A Vindication of the
Seven Sacraments.' "

Henry, then, loved theological learning in general,
and St. Thomas in particular, as its most gifted expon
ent ; for this reason alone Luther must have been odious
to the royal English theologian.

Audin^: says:

"Luther again republished his insulting tirade
against the 'Angel of the Schools' in his 'Captivity of
the Church at Babylon.' . . . All Henry's knowl
edge of theology, and he was no bad theologian, he was
indebted for to St. Thomas Aquinas, his inseparable
companion, who, beautifully bound, occupied the most

*Life and Reign of Henry VIII., p. 85.
fBchned., II., p. 231.
JHenry VHt., p. 89.

Occasion,, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 45

prominent place in his library, and which he read over
and over again, and each time with fresh ardour; and
his chief advisers, Fisher, Wolsey, and More, were as
enamoured with St. Thomas as himself. . . . Hap
pily for Henry, the monk, in his 'Captivity of the
Church at Babylon,' had created a new dogma, whence
he had excluded the sacraments of order, extreme unc
tion and penance ; indulgences, purgatory and the pa
pacy. . . . His [Henry's] address, 'Ad Lectores,'
which he placed at the commencement, might have been
taken as the production of a theologian of the twelfth
century. His aged mother had been insulted, and there
fore, as an affectionate son, he had hastened to her de
fence."

II. The Origin of the "Assertio." — On this subject
Bishop Creighton's* remarks are rich and graphic:

"But besides ecclesiastical ceremonies (in London)
and bonfires of Luther's books, Wolsey discussed with
his master (Henry VIII.) the theological aspect of Lu
ther's teaching. Henry showed such knowledge of the
subject that Wolsey suggested he should express his
views in writing. The result was that the English King
entered the lists of theological controversy. ... In
August the book was printed, though it was not pub
lished till it had been formally presented to the Pope.
Alexander received an early copy. He found the work
to be a collection of precious gems. 'If kings,' he writes,
'are of this strength, farewell to us philosophers.' . . .
Henry felt aggrieved that the English King had no
title to set by the side of 'Catholic' and 'Most Christian,'
which were enjoyed by the Kings of Spain and France.
Wolsey represented to the Pope that the English King
deserved some recognition of his piety and the claim

*History of the Papacy during the Period of the Reformation,
Vol. V., pp. 163, 164.

46 Occasion, Origin and Motive of ihe "Assertio"

engaged the serious attention of a consistory on June
10. There was no lack of suggestions: 'Faithful,'
'Orthodox/ 'Apostolic/ 'Ecclesiastical/ 'Proctor/ are
some out of the number. . . . The King's book ar
rived at Rome, and on September 14 was presented to
the Pope, who read it with avidity and extolled it to
the skies. But this was not enough to mark the impor
tance of the occasion, and it was formally presented in a
consistory. After this the Pope proposed 'Defender of
the Faith' as a suitable title; some demurred on the
ground that a title ought not to exceed a single word,
and still hankered after 'The Orthodox' or 'Most Faith
ful' ; but the Pope decided in favor of 'Defender of the
Faith/ and all agreed. . . . In a letter written by
Pace to Wolsey, November 19 (Brewer, Calendar,
1772), the King's thanks are conveyed to Wolsey for
having suggested this work. Doubtless the King con
sulted with others, chiefly with Fisher, but there is no
reason to doubt that the work was substantially his own."

Pallavicini* also declares that Cardinal Wolsey
asked the Pope for some extraordinary title for Henry.

An interesting and rare account of the origin of the
"Assertio" is given in the quaint old book entitled
"The Annals of England."f It says :

"The King having written a booke against Martin
Luther, sent it as a present to Pope Leo the
Tenth. . . .

"Henry being offended with Luther's new (as the
world then deemed them) tenets, thought it would
prove to his honour, by writing against Luther, to mani
fest his learning and piety to the world. Herupon
under his name a book was set forth, better beseeming

*Hist. du Con. deTrente, I., col. 676.

fin Latin, by Francis Lord Bishop of Hereford. Englished by
Morgan Godwyn, p. 47.

Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 47

some antient and deep divine, than a youthful prince,
(whom although he earnestly endeavoured it, yet his
affairs would not permit to bury himselfe among his
books) which many thought to have been compiled by
Sir Tho. More, some by the Bishop of Rochester, and
others (not without cause) suspected to be the worke of
some other great scholler. . . . This booke was so ac
ceptable to the Pope, that according to the example of
Alexander the Sixt, who entituled the King of Spain
Catholic; and of that Pope whosoever he were, that
gave the French King the title of Most Christian; he
decreed to grace King Henry and his successors with
that honourable one of 'Defender of the Faith/ which
severall titles are by these princes to this day."

The historian Speed* seems to belittle the worth of
the title and the King's personal merit. He says :

"Carolus, Henricus, vivant, defensor uterque,
Henricus fidei, Carolus Ecclesise.

"Why the titles Defender of the Church and Faith
were attributed unto these two Princes, is no marvell;
for Charles chosen Emperour, was scarcely confirmed,
but to purchase the Pope's favour, he directed forth a
solemne Writ of outlawry against Martin Luther, who
then had given a great blow to the Papal Crowne. And
King Henry likewise was renowned in Rome, for writ
ing a Booke against the said Luther, unpropping the
tottering or downe-cast countenance of the Pope's par
dons; which Luther shrewdly had shaken; the Pope
therefore, to show himselfe a kinde father unto those his
sonnes, gave them these titles ; which in truth were none
other, then the same which they sware unto, when the
Crownes of their empires were first set upon their heads."

Luther had said in his "Babylonian Captivity": "I
*Hist. of Great Brit., p. 991.

48 Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio"

must now deny that there are seven Sacraments, and
bind them to three — baptism, the Lord's Supper, and
penance." Apropos of this denial, Canon Flanagan
gives the following account* of the occasion of the
King's treatise:

"Henry VIII. himself, assisted, it is thought, by Wol-
sey, and Fisher the bishop of Rochester, and Sir
Thomas More, wrote a treatise upon the seven Sacra
ments against Luther. The latter speedily answered,
never being at a loss, if not for arguments at least for
fitting words. His answer was replied to by Sir
Thomas More. Again he [Luther] took up the pen.
... It was in acknowledgment of this defence of the
Church's doctrine that Henry received from the Pope
what his successors have tenaciously retained, the title
of 'Defender of the Faith.' It appears that sometime
before writing the treatise, he had sued for the title of
'Most Christian' which Julius II. had threatened to
withdraw from the schismatical Louis XII. Disap
pointed in this, he presented his treatise to Leo X. for
his examination and approval, and petitioned for the
other title, promising to be equally zealous against
Luther's followers in England as against Luther him
self. It was granted after 'mature deliberation' by Leo
in 1521, and again by Clement in 1524."

III. The Motive of the "Assertio." — As to the motive
for which the "Assertio" was composed, Mr. John
Clark, Orator for Henry VIII. , in his address to
Leo X. at the presentation of the "Assertio" at the papal
court, says:

"Only first be pleased that I declare the Reason that

moved my most serene King to undertake this Work.

For I believe it will cause Admiration in several, that

a Prince . . . should now, for the Glory of God, and

*Vol. II., pp. 24, 25, of his "History of the Church in England."

Occasion., Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 49

Tranquillity of the Roman Church, by his Ingenuity
and Pen, put a Stop to Heresies, which so endanger the
Catholic Faith.

"These, most holy Father, are the chief Reasons, of
his entering upon this Work: his accustomed Venera
tion to Your Holiness ; Christian Piety in the Cause of
God; and a royal Grief and Indignation of see
ing Religion trodden under Foot. I confess the Desire
of Glory might have been able to have induced him to
these Things ... in the field of learning against Mar
tin Luther."

Henry himself, in his "Epistle Dedicatory" to Leo,
states "the Reasons that obliged Us to take upon Us
this Charge of Writing. We have seen Tares cast into
our Lord's Harvest; Sects do spring up, and Heresies
increase, . . . also to declare Our great Respect towards
Your Holiness, Our Endeavours for the Propagation of
the Faith of Christ, and Our Obedience to the Service
of Almighty God." And in his "To the Reader,"
Henry declares: "I cannot but think myself obliged
... to defend my Mother, the Spouse of Christ."

In the "Archseologia," Vol. XXIII., page 69, Ellis,
quoting John Bruce, says: "Henry's book was not
written to get the title but was seized upon as a clinch
ing argument for obtaining the title which had been
asked — the book being all the while in preparation, but
not formally for that purpose."

Father Bridgett thinks that Henry acted from a
high and pure intention, i. e., the defence of the Church.
He says:* "In 1520 Luther published his treatise
called 'The Babylonian Captivity,' in which he finally
broke with the Church, railed at the Pope, and called
on the world to embrace an entirely new religion, under
the name of genuine Christianity.

*Sir Thomas More, pp. 210-213-

50 Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio"

"In 1521, Henry printed his book called 'Defence of
the Seven Sacraments.7 Luther replied in a treatise so
scurrilous that it has probably no parallel in literature.
Certainly such language had never before been ad
dressed to a King or Prince. It cannot be said that
Henry had drawn this upon his own head. He had not
attacked Luther, but stepped in as the Church's cham
pion, to ward off the blows Luther was aiming at her.
On the whole his defence is dignified, and he uses lan
guage no stronger than had been used in all ages, by
saints and doctors, against inventors of novelties and
disturbers of unity. In this book of Henry's More had
no other share than that, after it was written, he had
arranged the index. But against his will he was
drawn into the controversy. . . . The King, however,
in all probability, himself suggested to More that his
wit would be well employed in chastising the insolent
friar. This I gather from More's own words: . . .
'Nothing could have been more painful to me than to
be forced to speak foul words to pure ears. But there
was no help for it.' . . . His book is not a treatise
on Lutheranism, for Lutheranism as a system had not
yet been enunciated, and was still incomplete in the
brain of its author. He refutes indeed both the denials
and assertions of Luther as they occur, but it is with
Luther himself and Luther's language to Henry that he
is dealing. . . . He did not consider that his own book
was to have any permanent value."

Finally as to Henry's motive in writing the "As-
sertio" a most clever and interesting piece of literary
detective work, whether convincing or not, has been
done by Seebohm. It is this : G-airdner, in his "History
of the English Church,"* says that Henry "declared
to More a secret reason for maintaining it [the Pope's

*P. 79.

Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 51

supremacy] so strongly; of which reason Sir Thomas
had never heard before, and which must remain to us
a matter of speculation."

Seebohm has tried to fathom this secret. He says:
"I propose in this paper* to inquire what was the mo
tive which induced Henry VIII. to write his celebrated
book against Luther. The motive hitherto assigned —
that of earning the title of 'Defender of the Faith' —
does not, upon consideration, seem to me a sufficiently
strong one. . . . Henry, knowing that the validity
of his own marriage [with Catharine of Aragon] and
Mary's legitimacy depended upon the validity of the
Papal power of dispensation, would be likely to regard
the attack of Luther upon the Papal power, when in
1521 it assumed so dangerous an attitude, as a ques
tion of personal importance to himself. He had, in
deed, abundant reason to insert in his book against
Luther passages which appeared unwisely strong to the
mind of Sir Thomas More, as yet uninitiated into royal
secrecy, and at the same time skeptical of the divine
authority of the Papal jurisdiction. What, then, was
this 'secret cause7 of which More 'had never heard be
fore/ and which, when divulged, proved the turning-
point in his views on this subject? The conjecture
may at least be hazarded that it also related to the
King's marriage. It is not only possible, but also most
probable, that More, relying upon Catharine's asser
tion previous to her marriage, shared in the popular
view that the impediment to the marriage was one
merely of ecclesiastical law, and not an impediment
'jure divino.' And it is obvious that in this popular
view of the nature of the impediment it was one which

*In the Fortnightly Review, edited by John Morley, vol. for Jan.
—June, pp. 509 and fol., 1868, " Sir Thomas More and Henry VIII. 's
Book against Luther," by Frederic Seebohm.

52 Occasion,, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio"

the Pope could well be considered as able to dispense
with by virtue of the power vested in him by the com
mon consent of Christendom, whether the Papal su
premacy were of divine institution or not. The secret
which Henry divulged to More may therefore have
been, what afterwards became the ground for the di
vorce, viz., that the previous marriage with Prince
Arthur having been consummated was an impediment
'jure divino/ and consequently, could not be dispensed
with by the Pope unless the Papal power of dispensa
tion were held to be 'jure divino.' "*

Mr. Brownf seems inspired by the same idea when
he writes that Henry was not sincere in his book, espe
cially about the authority of the Pope, but that he had
an "ulterior aim."

What truth is in this alleged motive it is surely diffi
cult, not to say impossible, to decide, for while Henry's
after life would incline one to believe him capable of a
deep ulterior purpose, his earlier life would lead one to
believe him sincere and earnest. Was his motive in
writing the "Assertio" to save his own English people
and Europe from the new religious movement? Was
it to check Luther, or at least to be avenged on him?
Was it to obtain a Papal title? Was it to strengthen
the foundation of the Papal authority ? The latter may
have been the predominant motive in the King's mind,
without exclusion of the others; the relative force of
each it would be difficult now to estimate with any de
gree of accuracy.

*Conf. "The Era of the Protestant Revolution," by Seebohm,
pp. 172 and fol., Scribner's, 1874. The execution of the Duke of
Buckingham at this time by Henry is attributed by Seebohm to
Buckingham's having spoken of the invalidity of Henry's marriage
with Catharine.

fBoy. Hist. So. Transactions, VIII., 257.

Hutborebip of tbe "asaertlo"

WHO wrote the "Assertio" ? That is, who composed
or compiled it? For the authorship is far from a
settled question.

The chief testimonies adverse to Henry's authorship
are first given and then those maintaining it, that the
reader may be convinced by both the greater authority
and number of the latter that, to say the least, it is
more probable that Henry wrote the book: very prob
able that he compiled it, at any rate.

Eirst, then, the testimonies against Henry's author
ship. In the "Calendar of State Papers between Eng
land and Spain,'7* edited by Bergenrath, we read the
following :

"The King of England has sent a book against
Martin Luther to the Pope. It is said that all the
learned men in England have taken part in its com
position. Hears that it is a good book. The Pope has
given to the King of England the title of 'Defender of
the Christian Eaith.' This title prejudices no one, as
all Christian princes are, or ought to be, defenders of
the faith.

"[Written on the margin by Gattinara:] It is true
that all princes ought to be defenders of the Christian
faith. As, however, this title has been given to the
King of England, it makes it seem as if he deserved it
more than others, and as if others do not defend the
faith so well as he does."f

•Henry Vin., Vol. H.,p. 381.

fSee also Lives of the English Cardinals, by Folkstone Williams,
Vol. II., p. 870, note, who quotes: "Juan Manuel writes, 17th
October, 1521 : ' The King of England has sent a book against Mar-

54 Authorship of the "Assertio"

While personally Pocock believes Henry to be the
author, yet he is fair and honest enough to quote the
following :*

"A letter of Cardinal Wolsey's to King Henry with
a copy of his book for the Pope. An original.

". . . 'I do send Mr. Tate unto your Highness with
the book bound and dressed which ye purpose to send
to the Pope's holiness. . . . I do send also unto your
highness the choice of certain verses to be written in the
bock to be sent to the Pope of your own hand : with the
subscription of your name. . . . By your
'Most humble chaplain,

<T. CARLIS EBOR.' "

This is certainly rather strong testimony, and ad
verse to Henry's authorship. And yet its corrective
swung PococFs decision to the other side of the ques
tion.

But judgment must be suspended till all the evidence,
both against and for Henry, is fully and fairly heard.
So, then, to proceed.

Audinf says : "The literati of the day were supposed
to have had a hand in the composition of the work," and
he continues, in a note, saying that Calvin said : "This
book was written by some monk well versed in cavilling,
and the King, having been influenced by his advisers,
consented that it should be printed in his name, and
though he has since repented of his rash and incon
siderate act, he allowed it to pass under his name for
thirty years."

tin Luther to the Pope. It is said that all the learned men of England
have taken part in its composition. He hears that it is a good book.
The Pope has given to the King of England the title of " Defender
of the Christian Faith." ' Written on the margin by Gattinara."—
London, Allen, 1868.

*Burnet's Reformation, by Pocock, Vol. VI., No. 3.
fHemy VIII., p. 92.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 55

A humorous confession, in frankness characteristic of
its authors, is said by Worsley* to have been made by
Luther's countrymen. It is as follows:

"To the Germans especially it appeared marvellous
that a crowned head should contain so much learning."

In the "Catalogue of the Noble and Royal Authors
of England," in two volumes (London, MDCCLIX.),
Vol. L, p. 9, we read an insidious innuendo:

"HENBY THE EIGHTH. As all the successors of this
Prince owe their unchangeable title of Defender of the
Faith to his piety and learning, we do not presume to
question his pretensions to a place in this catalogue.
Otherwise a little skepticism on his Majesty's talents
for such a performance, mean as it is, might make us
question whether he did not write the defence of the
Sacraments against Luther, as one of his Successors
[Charles L] is supposed to have written the EzVcwv
Baffi/iiicri ; that is, with the pen of some court-prelate."

Mr. Richard Watson Dixon, in his "History of the
Church of England," Vol. L, page 4, says rather
disparagingly of Henry, that he was "a man of force
without grandeur, ... of great ability but not of
lofty intellect, . . . cunning rather than sagacious."
In other words, that on the principle "nemo dat quod
non habet," Henry did not write the "Assertio."

How did it come about then ? How did Henry's
name get to be popularly appended to it as the author ?
Here is one answer :f "Cardinal Wolsey, having a mind
to engage the King to act against Luther, whose opin
ions daily spread and got ground here in England, con
trived that an answer should be written to this book,
which the King should own for his, and be presented
to the Pope in his name." This is also stated by

*Worsley, Dawn of the Reformation, p. 160.
fLewis's Fisher, Vol. I., p. 107.

56 Authorship of the "Assertio"

Turner in his "History of England/7* where he says
that Henry's book "is not unlikely to have originated,
less from Henry's literary conscience, than from Wol-
sey's crafty contrivances."

The famous John Foxe, in his "Acts and Monu-
ments,"f says:

"This book, albeit it carried the King's name in the
title, yet it was another that administered the motion,
another that framed the style."

And here ends the direct testimony against Henry's
authorship. For though what follows — i. e., the
grounds 011 which rest the claims of others to be the
author of the " Assert io" — might at first sight be ex
pected to tell against Henry, yet eventually it will prove
in favour of the King of England. Because as none of
these other claims can be substantiated, they only add,
by elimination, a new indirect argument in favour of
Henry's being the author.

But if not Henry who else could have composed the
"Assertio" ? Passing by the allusion to Wolsey's hav
ing a hand in the authorship, as not sustained by au
thorities, Blessed John Fisher, the Bishop of Kochester,
is the most likely, and for the following reasons: The
"Assertio" is bound up with his works in the Wirce-
burg edition.:):

Pallavicini says:§ "Some have attributed to him
[Fisher] the book which King Henry had had printed
against Luther."

The Bishop of La Kochelle, Clement Villecourt, says

*Henry VIII., Vol. I, p. 280.

fVol. IV., p. 293.

JR.D.D. Joannis Fischerii Roffensis in Anglia episcopi opera
(Wirceburgi, 1597): "Assertio Septem Sacramentorum adversus
Martinum Lutherum, ab Henrico VIII., Angliee Rege, Roffensis
tamen nostri hortatu et studio edita."

§Tome I., col. 848.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 57

most decidedly that Henry was not the author, but that
Fisher very probably was. His words are: "Je crois
volontiers qu'il [Henri] est mort sans en avoir bien
connu une seule page [de la Captivite de Babylone].

"Si la Defense des sept Sacrements a ete ecrite par
ce prince [Henri], ma conviction bien prononcee est
qu'il n'en a ete que le copiste, ou qu'il s'est borne a
1'ecrire sous la dictee de quelqu'un.

"Ce n'est pas a quinze ans, et avant cet age, qu'on
peut etre capable de quelque succes dans celle etude.

"Je suis persuade qne Henri n'a jamais ouvert un
volume du docteur angelique."

Further, the bishop says that Fisher could write the
"Assertio" in a few months, whereas it would take
Henry as many years ; that Henry's life was so different
from the principles of the "Assertio" that he could not
have written it.

With this unhesitating statement of Yillecourt,
Thomson, in his "Memoirs of the Court of Henry
VIII.,"* agrees partly, adding another name to the
list of probable authors. He says: "The world . . .
has attributed all that is valuable in this work to the as
sistance of Bishop Fisher and of Sir Thomas More."

So much for Fisher's claims; those of More may be
given next. And there are indeed strong testimonies in
favour of More's authorship, as may be seen from the
following citations.

The "Annals of England"f says of More : "Thomas
More . . . cultivated literature, and being introduced
at court about 1521, he soon became a favourite with
the King, whom he assisted in the composition of his
work against Luther."

But this is not the only testimony in favour of More's

*Vol. I., p. 380.

f8 7ols., Oxford, 1856, Vol. II., p. 137, note.

58 'Authorship of the "Asscrtio"

authorship. In the "Archeeologia," published by the
Society of Antiquaries of London, in Volume XXIII.
there is a transcript of an original MS. containing a
memorial from Geo. Constentyne to Thos. Lord Crom
well, etc. (p. 55 and note). It speaks of "the doubt
which he entertains as to the authorship of the book
against Luther, which bears Henry's name — a doubt
which appears to have arisen partly from common re
port, but more directly from his knowledge of the extent
of the King's scholarship. It may be seen that he at
tributes the work to Sir Thomas More."

Again W. H. Hutton, in his "Sir Thomas More,"*
says: "He [More] had assisted him [Henry] in his
book against Luther."

A fourth author, or co-worker at least, has been sug
gested. Schafff says: "Henry VIII. wrote in 1521
(probably with the assistance of his chaplain, Edward
Lee) a scholastic defence of the seven Sacraments,
against Luther's 'Babylonish Captivity.' ' Schaff prob
ably bases this statement on the words of Luther, who
"believed it to be the book of Dr. Edward Lee, after
wards Archbishop of York, . . . and he struck at Lee
through the King.":): Luther says:§ "There are some
who believe that Henry is not the author of the work.
. . . My opinion is that King Henry, perhaps, gave
one or two yards of cloth to Lee, . . . and that Lee had
made thereof a cape, to which he has sewed on a lining.
What is there so wonderful in a King of England hav
ing written against me ? ... If a King of England spits
forth his lying insults in my face, I have the right, in
self-defence, to thrust them down his throat."

*P. 189.

t History of the Christian Church, VI., § 70.
JGairdner, English Church in Sixteenth Century, p. 80.
gAudin, Henry VIII., pp. 96, 97.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 59

To the names of Wolsey, Fisher, More and Lee a fifth
one, Gardiner, is added by Fuller in a pretty, even if not
very serious way. "King Henry had lately set forth
a book against Luther, endeavouring the confutation of
his opinions as novel and unsound. None suspect this
King's lack of learning (though many his lack of leisure
from his pleasures,) for such a design; however, it is
probable that some other Gardiner gathered the flowers,
(made the collections,) though King Henry had the
honour to wear the posey, carrying the credit of the title
thereof."*

A sixth probable associate-author is presented because
of his style, the claimant being Pace, and his sup
porter being Hutton, who "thinks that the aid of More
and Pace 'at most extended to the composition and cor
rection of the Latin style/ "f

Indeed, a seventh candidate might be added, were it
not that the principal himself withdraws his claim ; for
Erasmus says (Epist. Jo. Glapioni, Edit. Leid. p. 743)
that "in Germany he [Erasmus] was thought to be the
author of it." But in the preface of Jortin's edition his
apologies and refutation of this statement may be seen.

Such are the statements supporting these different
claimants: now for their sifting, criticism and refuta
tion.

And first of all, to be the author of a book need
not mean that one has no quotations from others, no
ideas from others, no suggestions, criticisms and helps
of this kind. It must be admitted that Henry was very
probably helped, that he has many quotations from the
Bible and the Fathers, that it seems likely that More as
sorted, and not improbably made the index to the "As-
sertio."

*Church History of Britain, by Thomas Fuller, Vol. II., p. 13.
fOverton, The Church in England, Vol. I., p. 357, note 3.

60 Authorship of the "Assertio"

"Quoique Henri se reputat un des plus solides theo-
logiens de son temps, il avait, avant de le publier, soumis
son ecrit a 1'examen et a la correction du cardinal Wol-
sey, de Fisher, eveque de Rochester, et surtout du sa
vant Chancelier Thomas Morus."* This is admitted,
but it would be a groundless deduction to conclude that
Henry did not write the "Assertio."

We are told by the most recent and decided of
Henry's adversaries, the Bishop of La Rochelle, that be
fore Henry was fifteen he was too young to have ac
quired the knowledge; that after that age he had not
leisure from his duties of state. As to the first, remem
bering that Henry had wise, capable parents, and would
have the best tutors and aids that the kingdom could
give, that he had been prepared, at least remotely, to be
Archbishop of Canterbury, that if he simply knew the
sources where to go for his materials and arguments,
e. g., St. Thomas's "Summa," that with this granted —
and it is certainly probable enough — one can see, if he
will read the "Assertio," no very great difficulty in
Henry's authorship. As to the objection of the Bishop
of La Rochelle, that it would take Henry three years
to write the "Assertio," this is exactly what Mr. Hutton
and Mr. Brewer say was the case, i. e., that as early as
1518 Henry had begun the work, and finished it in
1521. After all, it is a simple treatise, probably almost
all culled from some standard work, e. g., St. Thomas,
St. Bonaventure, Peter Lombard, etc., as D'Aubigne
says, some breviary of collected texts on the subjects
treated.

But to answer the suggested authorships other than
that of Henry: Wolsey can hardly claim a refutation.
As to Fisher being the author, it is to be supposed that

*Dictionnaire de la Theologie Catholique, Wetzer et Welte, art.
Henri VIII.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 61

he ought himself to know whether he wrote it ; and as he
was a man who laid down his life for the truth, it is to
be further supposed that we may believe him when he
denies emphatically that he is the author.

"It had been rumoured abroad that the prelate had
dictated while Henry wrote; 'this/ exclaimed Fisher
indignantly, 'is a calumnious falsehood. Let Henry en
joy his meed of praise without any participation in it.' '

As to the "Assertio" being bound up with Fisher's
works, at least in the Wirceburg edition, and while it
is said to be edited by "the care and zeal of ours of
Rochester," yet it is said first to be by the King of
England : "Assertio . . . Anglise Rege, Roffensis tamen
nostri hortatu et studio edita."

Moreover, if Fisher, not Henry, were the author,
Fisher, not More, would have been "the sorter-out and
indexer," for the humble bishop would hardly ask
the Chancellor of England to make an index for him.
And yet More says that he [More] was the "sorter-
out,"* etc.

Furthermore Collier criticized the style of the "As
sertio," saying that the King "leans too much on his char
acter as monarch, argues in his garter robes, and writes,
as it were, with his sceptre." Now surely the gentle
Fisher would write in any style but this, would not rely
on character, but give a cold, calm reason for the faith
that was in him, as his other works show he did.

But if not Fisher, More, the glory of the age,f was
perhaps the author, for "French and English, keen
logic, wide knowledge, merciless wit make More an un
surpassed controversialist of his kind.":): In rebuttal

*Audin, Henry VIII., p. 92, quotes Saconay's introduction to the
" Assertio."

tPocock's Burnet's Reformation, Vol. III., p. 172.
JMore, by Mason, p. 85.

62 Authorship of the "Assertio"

of this, More, who, if anything, was an honest, "plain,
blunt man," replied : "I was only a sorter-out and placer
of the principal matters therein contained." So he is
quoted by his son-in-law, Wm. Roper, Esq.*

Pocock, in his edition of Burners "Reformation,"
says :f "It is plain More wrote it not."

e/ I

A long, full passage in Collier:}: is interesting and
strong, and is quoted here at length :

"Fisher and More are reported by several of the
Church of Rome to have made the book which goes un
der King Henry's name against Luther; but the Lord
Herbert is not of this opinion. He only thinks they
might look it over at the King's instance, and interpose
their judgment in some passages. But that the King
after all was governed by his own sentiment, and that
More had no hand in the composition appears pretty
plainly from this gentleman's letter to Cromwell dated
March, 1533. He acquaints this minister 'twas for
merly his opinion that the Pope's supremacy stood only
on Councils and prescription, and was not jure divino.
That when the King showed him his book against Mar
tin Luther he desired his Highness either to omit the
point of the Papal supremacy or touch it more tenderly
at least. For the asserting the privilege of the Pope's
see to that height might afterwards prove unserviceable,
in case any disputes should happen between the court
of Rome and his Highness : that the stretch of the Pope's
pretensions had been unfortunate to some princes, and
that it was not impossible the same occasions might be
revived.

*Life of Sir Thomas More, Singer, p. 65. See also Lewis's Fisher,
Vol. I., pp. 109,110.
fill., p. 171.
tPt. II., Bk. II,, p. 99. See also Turner, Henry VIII., Vol. I.,

p. 281, note.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 63

"To this the King answered he had resolved not to
alter anything upon that head, and gave Sir Thomas
a reason which was altogether new. This book of the
King's, it seems, and his farther reading upon the con
troversy, made him change his opinion in some measure,
and rather conclude, the Pope held his Primacy by di
vine right. However, as he continues, he still thought
the Pope under the jurisdiction of a general council,
and that he might be deposed, and another set up, at
the pleasure of such an assembly. By this letter it ap
pears More had no share in the book against Luther:
and that he believed the King the author of that tract."

Finally, as summing up, we quote from Mr. Brown,
who says:*

"Mr. Brewer seems to believe the book to have been
written by Henry because it is so bad. The Bishop of
La Eochelle, who wrote an introduction to the French
edition of 1850, considers it impossible that he could
have produced the work, because it is so good. Horace
Walpole pronounces the book a bad one, and yet too
good for Henry to have written." May not these three
opinions be explained on the ground of subjective re
ligious bias? Mr. Brewer deeming it "bad" for
Protestants because so Catholic; the Bishop of La Ro-
chelle "good" for Catholics because so Catholic ; and Mr.
Walpole "bad" because against Protestants, and yet too
"good? for Henry, lest Henry be shown to have been
so thoroughly Catholic.

As for the claims of Lee, Gardiner, Pace and Eras
mus — if Luther believed Lee to have written it, why did
Luther excoriate not Lee, but the King? For Luther
needed the King's aid in the new religious fight, and if
he did not believe Henry an enemy of his, in all shrewd
ness he should have tried not only not to attack him un-
*In Royal Historical Society's Transactions, Vol. VIII.

64: Authorship of the "Assertio"

necessarily, but to placate him. Besides Luther later
apologized to Henry, showing that he believed him and
not Lee to be the author.

As to Gardiner's claim — it is a mere pretty pun. And
Pace was only hinted at by Hutton as possibly, with
More, having corrected the Latin mistakes.

Erasmus, as said above, disclaimed the authorship,
and, besides, we may add, by way of explanation, that
Erasmus had visited Henry when Henry was nine years
old and Henry studied Erasmus as a master and model,
hence the similarity of Henry's style to that of Erasmus
might be explained, if indeed there be any need of an
explanation.

These are the main reasons why neither Fisher, nor
More, nor Lee, nor Gardiner, nor Pace, nor Erasmus
wrote the "Assertio." Probably not all objections have
been answered: difficulties may still exist in some
minds; doubtless not all are convinced; but Henry's
claims have not yet been presented. This will now be
done. For the sake of clearness the various testimonies
have been grouped under the following heads of proof:

I. Henry's own statements, found in his writings
most closely connected with the "Assertio."

II. Statements of others in documents closely con
nected with the "Assertio."

III. Other works of Henry, showing in a general way
his ability to have written the "Assertio."

IV. The great number of witnesses declaring that
Henry wrote the "Assertio."

V. A summary of the arguments.

I. As to Henry's own words in the documents most
closely connected with the "Assertio," the following quo
tation is taken from Henry's letter to Leo X., printed
elsewhere in this volume. He says :

"We have thought that this first attempt of our

Authorship of the "Assertio" 65

modest ability and learning could not be more worthily
dedicated than to your Holiness."

In the "Epistle Dedicatory" sent with the "Assertio"
to Leo is found the following passage, unquestionably
claiming the authorship for Henry :

aWe . . . now undertake the task of a man that
ought to have employed all his time in the studies of
learning. . . . We . . . have proposed to ourself to
employ our force and power in a work so necessary and
so profitable. . . .

"Though We know very well, that there are every
where several more expert, especially in Holy Writ, who
could have more commodiously undertaken this great
work, and performed it much better than We, yet are
We not altogether so ignorant as not to esteem it our
duty to employ with all our might, our wit and pen in
the common cause. For having, by long experience,
found that religion bears the greatest sway in the ad
ministration of public affairs, and is likewise of no small
importance in the commonwealth, We have employed
no little time, especially since We came to years of dis
cretion, in the contemplation thereof ; wherein We have
always taken great delight : and though not ignorant of
our small progress therein made; yet, at least, it is so
much, as, We hope, . . . will suffice for reasons to dis
cover the subtleties of Luther's heresy. We have there
fore . . . entered upon this work, dedicating to your
Holiness what we have meditated therein. . . .

"If We have erred in any thing, We offer it to be
corrected as may please your Holiness."

The next quotation, likewise clearly and strongly im
plying that Henry wrote the "Assertio," is from Henry's
"To the Eeader." It says: "I cannot but think my
self obliged ... to defend my mother, the Spouse of
Christ. Which, though it be a subject more copiously

66 Authorship of the "Assertio"

handled by others, nevertheless I account it as much
my own duty, as his who is the most learned, by my ut
most endeavours, to defend the Church, and to oppose
myself to the poisonous shafts of the enemy."

That there were disputes as to the author of the work
even in Henry's own day is clear from what we have
already quoted and that, when Henry's own ears had
heard them, he promptly took occasion flatly to deny
these reports is clear from the following quotation from
the King's letter to Luther. He says :* "And although
ye sayne your self to thynke my boke nat myne owne,
but to my rebuke (as it lyketh you to affyrme) put out
by subtell sophisters, yet it is well knowen for myn, and
I for myne avowe it." And again from the same docu
ment, quoted by Audinif "As to my letter, which in
your opinion was the work of a captious sophist, it is
my own production, as many witnesses worthier of
credit than yourself can testify, and the more it dis
pleases you, the greater pleasure do I feel in acknowl
edging myself its author."

So that Henry's own words show that he claimed, and
proved, or certainly tried to prove, that he was the au
thor of the "Assertio."

II. And to confirm this may be adduced in the second
place the words of others who were very close to Henry
and knew the inner history of the writing of the "As
sertio." These words are found in the documents con
nected with the "Assertio," and published in full else
where in this volume. Here are a few passages from
Mr. John Clark's Oration at the presentation of the
"Assertio" to Leo X. : Henry, "under the charge of the
best tutors, and a father none of the most indulgent,

*Dibdin, II., pp. 488 and fol., No. 619, "A copy of the letter,
etc.," of Henry to Luther.
fHenry VIII., p. 101.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 67

having passed his younger days in good learning, and
afterwards so well versed in Holy Scriptures that, con
fiding in his own abilities, he often (not without great
glory) disputed with the most learned in Britain." . . .

"My most serene and invincible Prince, Henry VIII.,
King of England, France and Ireland, and most affec
tionate son of Your Holiness and of the sacred Roman
Church, hath written a book against this work of
Luther's which he has dedicated to Your Holiness." . . .

Henry "undertook this pious work himself," . . .
and, Clark continues: "The pious, and Your most de
voted Prince, has, with all his power, endeavoured . . .
and hopes to have acquitted himself." . . .

Lastly, says Clark : "I believe it will cause admiration
in several that a prince . . . should undertake such
things [as this book] as, according to the common say
ing, might require to employ wholly all the thoughts of
a man. . . . By his ingenuity and pen [he] put[s] a
stop to heresies."

So much from Henry's ambassador, Clark; now for
the Pope himself. In his reply to Clark's Oration, Leo
implies that the form as well as the substance, the style
as well as the matter were Henry's. He said :

"His Majesty, having the knowledge, will and ability
of composing this excellent book, against this terrible
monster, has rendered himself no less admirable to the
whole world, by the eloquence of his style, than by his
great wisdom."

In Leo's letter to Henry, acknowledging the book
written by the King against Luther, several passages
may be used to prove Henry's authorship.

The very title itself contains the first : "De gratiis pro
libro per regem contra Lutherum scripio" And in the
body of the letter the Pope says of Henry : "Tu fidem
Christianam thesauris tuce et pietatis et scientiae adrer-

68 Authorship of the "Assertio"

sum impias haereses munitam esse voluisti." And the
Pope further speaks of the book as a "Nobilem partum
ingenii tui" And again he goes on to say that men
"tuis scriptis ad sanitatem debeant reduci." Finally,
exhorting Henry to continue ever faithful, the Holy
Father says: "Fides quoque Christiana quse nunc doc-
trinse tuce clypeo adversus sceleratas hsereticorum in-
sanias communita est."

This personal, spontaneous and therefore very strong
testimony is confirmed by Leo's Bull to Henry,
"Bulla de gratiis pro libro per regem contra Lutherum
scripto."* In this Bull Leo wrote apropos of Henry's
authorship :

"John Clark ... in our consistory . . . did present
unto Us a book which your Majesty . . . did com
pose." . . .

"Your Majesty has with learning and eloquence writ
against Luther." . . .

"Render your Majesty so illustrious and famous to
the whole world, as that our judgment in adorning you
with so remarkable title may not be thought vain or
light by any person whatsoever."

Really, these documents should be first-class proofs,
and they could scarcely be stronger and clearer in try
ing to show that Clark and Leo believed the author of
the "Assertio" to be Henry.

III. In the third place, besides the "Assertio," there
are other works attributed to Henry, and showing that
consequently he might well have written the "Assertio"
also. In Dibdinf and the "Dictionnaire de Biblio
graphic Catholique":}: we read of "Henrici VIII. , An-
glise regis, ad Saxoniae principes de coercenda abigen-

*Rymer, Fcedera, printed elsewhere In this volume.

fll., p. 485.

JTome I., col. 868 ; Tome III., col. 431, and Tome III., col. 675.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 69

daque Lutherana factione, et Luthero ipso epistola;
cum Georgii, Saxonise ducis, ad eundem rescriptione ;
Argentorati, 1523 in 4to." Also Leipsia3 (sine anno)
in 4to. That is, "The epistle of Henry VIII. , King of
England, to the princes of Saxony about checking and
doing away with the Lutheran faction, and Luther him
self : with the reply of George, Duke of Saxony, to the
same."

Again Dibdin* records: "Henrici Octavi Regis An-
gliaa et Francise. . . . Ad Carolum Csesarem Augus-
tum,' ' etc. "An Epistle of ... Henry VIII. . . .
to the Emperour's Maiestie, to all Christian princes,"
etc.

Then there are other works by Henry recorded :f
"Exeniplum litterarum Henrici VIII. ad Lutherum, et
Lutheri ad ipsum; 1525 in 4." Also edited by Pynson
in 1526, small Svo, and by Pynson 1527, in small 8vo,
and at Cologne by Quentell in 1527, in 4to.J

Besides these, in the "Dictionnaire de Bibliographic
Catholique," we read:§ "Opus eximium de vera differ
entia regia3 potestatis et ecclesiastics, et quse sit ipsa
veritas ac virtus utriusque; Londini, in sedibus Thorn.
Bertheleti, 1534, pet. in 4 de 63 ff. Ouvrage attribue
par Bale a Henri VIII., roi d'Angleterre, et par Leland
a Fox, eveque de Winchester. Brunet."

Gasquet, "Eve of the Reformation," p. 101, note 1,
refers to a book called "A Glass of Truth," written in
favour of the divorce, and says: "The work was pub
lished by Berthelet anonymously, but Richard Croke,
in a letter written at this period (Ellis, Historical Let-
nil., p. 303, Nos. 1207, 1208.

fDic. deBib. Cath., I., 868.

JLowndes, Biog. Manual, Part IV., p. 1039. See also Dibdin, II.,
016.

§TomeIII.f col. 1099.

TO Authorship of the "Assertio"

ters, 3d Series, II., 195), says that the book was writ
ten by King Henry himself. It was generally said that
Henry had written a defence of his divorce."

Watts speaks of it in the following entry as Henry's
work : "Opus eximium de vera differentia regise potesta-
tis et ecclesiastics, et qua? sit ipsa veritas, ac virtus
utriusque, Henrico VIII. , Anglise reg. auctore. Lond.
1534, 4to."

"A necessary doctrine and erudition for any Chris
tian man. Lond. 1543, 4to. Lond. 1545, 8vo. In
Latin, Lond. 1544, 4to."

So that from these several writings, stated on good
authorities to be Henry's, we may conclude that Henry
might well have written the "Assertio," thus solidifying
and confirming the direct statements of Henry himself,
as well as those direct or implied statements made by
Clark and Leo.

IV. In the fourth place come the great number of
first-class testimonies of historians of recognized abil
ity and trustworthiness, who either imply or say di
rectly that Henry is the author of the "Assertio." And
first of all should be placed the following statement in
the "Advertisement" to the old English translation of
the "Assertio" that is here reprinted. It says : "Henry
the Eighth was a Prince of great learning, considering
the age in which he lived. He had well studied both
Philosophy and Divinity in his youth, his father, Henry
the Seventh, having intended him for the ecclesiastical
state. His writings against Luther (I mean the fol
lowing work, so much approved of by Leo the Tenth),
shew a fund of ecclesiastical erudition, and a strength
of understanding uncommon in persons in his high
station."

"Next should come the remarks of Gabriel de Saconay
in his Preface to his Latin reprint of the "Assertio,"

Authorship of the "Assertio" 71

done at Lyons, 1561. In his title Saconay wrote:
"Henricus, octavus Anglise Rex, inter paucos reges lite-
rarum et multarum rerum cognitione commendabilis,
hunc librum conscripsit. Lugduni, apud Guliel. Rovil-
lium sub scuto Veneto. MDLXI."

On page LXXI he says : "Christiana tune pietate il-
lustrissimus Anglorum rex Henricus, hujus nominis
octavus raro nimis, et cunctis seculis admirando ex-
emplo, ex regali f astigio in literariam descendit arenam,
contra maledicum decertaturus mendicantium fratrum
apostatam. Scripsit itaque assertionem septem sacra-
mentorum adversus captivitatem Babylonicam Lutheri
ad Leonein, hujus nominis decimum Papam, adeo sane
diserte, erudite ac copiose, ut eo labore promeruerit ip-
sius Papse omniumque cardinalium judicio, perpetuae
laudis titulum, ut publica deinceps appellatione, fidei
catholicse defensor nuncuparetur." On p. LXXII
Saconay quotes Luther as saying : "Hie insulto papistis,
Thomistis, Henricistis, . . . divina majestas mecum
facit ut nihil curem si mille Augustini, mille Cypriani,
mille ecclesise Henriciance, contra me starent." . . .
And p. LXXIII: "Itaque extorsimus, et triumphamus
adversus assertorem sacramentorum. . . . Quis est ipse
Henricus novus Thomista? ... sit ipse defensor
ecclesise, sed ejus ecclesise, quam tanto libro j act at et
tuetur."

On p. LXXIV Saconay continues to quote Luther:
"Recte conjungitur simul Papa, et Henricus de Anglia :
ille papatum suum tarn bona habet conscientia, quam
hie suum possidet regnum. Interea dum sic fureret
Lutherus, quidam Germani, piam et eruditam regis An-
glice assertionem coeperunt a Lutheranis calumniis as-
serere."

On p. LXXVIII Saconay says : "Hsec sunt qusB huic
libello prseponenda duxi, ut noscas, lector, quo impulsu

72 Authorship of the "Assertio"

Rex iste manum huic operi apposuerit." On pp.
LXXXIII and LXXXIV Saconay says: "Perlege
igitur, lector, hoc opusculurn antequam aliquod judi-
cium temere feras, videbis principis animum,, qui mul-
tum ornavit nostra studia, et religionis causam et pie
suscepit, et diserte defendit. Olim summa pietas judi-
cabatur, si Reges armis tutati fuissent Christianam
tranquillitatem, hie autem ingenio et calamo propug-
navit. Quomodo ergo non pudeat ecclesiasticos pleros-
que tarn ociose vitam degere ? cum videant tantum
principem in his studiis eo progressnm esse, ut libris
etiam editis catholics religioni patrocinaretur. Ac-
cipe itaque piam saeramentorum assertionem." . . .

This encomium of Henry's ability is confirmed by
Speed in his "History of Great Britain/'* where he
says of Henry: "His youth so trained up in literature
that he was accounted the most learned Prince of all
Christendom, indued with parts most befitting a
king. . . .

"His Councellors hee chose of the gravest Divines,
and the wisest nobility, with whom hee not onely often
sate, to the great encrease of his politicke experience,"
etc., etc.

And Hutton, in his "Sir Thomas More," says that
among such chosen ones the lovable, religious More was
the favourite. His words are :f "So from time to time
was he [More] by the Prince [Henry VIII. ] advanced,
continuing in his singular favour and trusty service
twenty years and above. A good part whereof used the
King upon holidays, when he had done his own devo
tions, to send for him into his travers, and there some
time in matters of Astronomy, Geometry, Divinity,
and such other Faculties, and sometime in his worldly
affairs, to sit and confer with him."

*Pp. 982, 983. IP. 93.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 73

Paradoxical as it may seem, we might say that even
after death More affords testimony to Henry's author
ship, for to the tomb of More was affixed an inscription
composed by Erasmus, and in it Henry VIII. is
spoken of: "To whom alone of all kings the hitherto
unheard of glory has happened that he should be
deservedly called the 'Defender of the Faith/ and he
has proven himself to be such both by the sword and
the pen."*

Moreover, in More's reply to Luther in defence of
Henry's "Assertio" Henry is spoken of as "Invictissi-
mum Angliae Galliaeque regem, Henricum ejus nominis
octavum, Fidei Defensorem, haud litteris minus quam
regno clarum." As Henry was indeed a great king,
probably in one sense the most influential England
had ever seen, this statement of More surely im
plies that Henry had written something more than
ordinary letters — that he was the author of the
"Assertio."

"When one sees the various MSS. in the British
Museum," says Audin,f speaking of Henry, "it is im
possible to doubt the theological attainments of the mon
arch . . . who knew the Bible by rote." Henry's al
leged inability as a Latinist has been made an argument
against the possibility of his having written the "As
sertio," but the following will show that Henry was
quite proficient in this language, surely enough to have
written the simple Latin of the "Assertio." First, as
to his tutor and Latin master, Tytler^: says :

*See Erasmi Opera, III., pars 2, col. 1441, Epistola MCCXXIIL,
Thomas MorusErasmo Roterodamo : " Tabula afflxa ad sepulchrum
Thomse Mori. . . . Ab invictissimo Rege, Henrico octavo, cui uni
Regum omnium gloria prius inaudita contigit, ut fidei defensor,
qualem et gladio se et calamo vere prcutitit, merito vocaretur."

fHenry VIII., pp. 91, 92, note e. JHenry yill., p. 29.

74: Authorship of the "Assertio"

"Linacre, a man infinitely superior to Andre [Ar
thur's tutor], who had studied the purest models in
Italy, was afterwards selected by Henry the Eighth as
his own master; but the monarch, although an able
Latinist, does not appear to have made much progress
in the other language" [Greek] .

Although perhaps a bit flattering, yet the following
testimonial to Henry's ability and even fluency in Latin
is very interesting, coming as it does from no less a per
sonage than Giustinian, the Venetian ambassador at
the court of Henry VIII. He says:* "His majesty
[Henry VIII.] is twenty-nine years old and extremely
handsome ; nature could not have done more for him ;
. . . he is very accomplished ; . . . speaks good French,
Latin, and Spanish; is very religious; hears three
Masses daily when he hunts, and sometimes five on
other days ; he hears the office every day in the Queen's
chamber, that is to say, vespers and compline."

Id. p. 77, fol. Letter of Secretary of Sebastian Gius
tinian, Knight Ambassador in England, to Alvise Fos-
cari, May, 1515 : "His Majesty [Henry VIII. ] sent for
the ambassadors, and addressed their magnificences,
partly in French and partly in Latin, as also in
Italian."

Id. p. 86, Giustinian's letter saying of Henry VIII. :
"He speaks French, English and Latin, and a little
Italian."

"To the Council of Ten, London, July 3, 1515:

"The King [Henry VIII. ] answered us very suit
ably in Latin/' . . .

In general, several quotations of the King speaking
Latin, or quoting Scripture in Latin, are given in this
same work.f

*Vol. I., pp. 26,27.
tld., p. 101.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 75

Probably basing his remarks on the authority of
Giustinian, Brewer, in his "Keign of Henry VIII.,"*
says: "He [Henry VIII. ] spoke French, Italian, and
Spanish. Of his proficiency in Latin a specimen
has been preserved among the letters of Erasmus.
All suspicion of its genuineness is removed by the
positive assertion of Erasmus, that he had seen
the original and corrections in the Prince's own
hand.7'

Jeremy Collierf agrees with and even adds to these
statements, saying: "He was a very promising prince,
both as to person, capacity, and improvement. . . . His
genius was lively, and his education push'd, and well
managed ; for besides the customary exercises and accom
plishments of a prince, he had made considerable ad
vances in learning. He was a good Latinist, a philoso
pher and divine ; and as for music, his progress in that
science was so unusual, that two entire Masses of his own
composing were sung in his chapel. His inclination to
letters was early perceived, and if his elder brother had
lived, 'tis said his father design'd him for the see of
Canterbury."

To add to this and recount briefly what many other
weighty writers have said on the subject, Lilly, in his
"Renaissance Types," saysj of Henry : "He was highly
educated, according to the standard of the times ; a good
Latin scholar, well versed in theology, the scholastic
philosophy and the canon law."

John Richard Green, in his "History of the Eng
lish People," § says: "He was a trained theologian and

*Vol. I., p. 4.

fEccles. Hist, of Gt. Britain, Part II., Bk. I., beginning.
JCh. VI., p. 328.

§Vol. II., p. 124. See also A. L. Moore, Lectures and Papers
on the Reformation, p. 25.

76 Authorship of the "Assertio"

proud of his theological knowledge." He "liked the soci
ety of men of letters."*

"He received the benefit of as learned an education as
the age could bestow, the King [Henry VII. ] con
templating his accession to the primacy of England."f

Thomson, in his "Memoirs of the Court of Henry
VIII.," says :$ "The instructions bestowed upon Prince
Henry by his preceptor, Skelton, were calculated to ren
der him a scholar and a churchman, rather than an en
lightened legislator. He was tutored in the philosophy
of the schools, especially the Aristotelian, then the most
in credit with the learned ; he was skilled in the Latin.
. . . To theological studies Henry devoted his atten
tion in early life with ardour, and with success ; at least
this part of his attainments is not to be despised, since
it enabled him in after times to procure for himself and
his successors the title of Defender of the Faith."

Beckett, in his "English Keformation," says:§ "He
[Henry] had been carefully educated by good scholars,
and he believed himself to be a special master of theol-

ogy-"

Henry William Herbert, in his "Memoirs of Henry
VIIL,"|| says: "He had been studiously educated a
theologian ; ... he really was more than a tolerable di
vine." Again :fl "Henry VIII. . . . received a
learned education. Having been destined for the
Church, he had studied the writings of Aquinas and cul
tivated a taste for controversial divinity, which sharp
ened his intellect."

*Lilly, Renaissance, Ch. III., p. 135.

fSir Thomas More, W. J. Walter, Baltimore, p. 29.

JVol. I, p. 218.

§Ch. XV.

gP. 121.

YTytler, Henry VIII., p. 111.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 77

]N~ot only had Henry had able schoolmasters and
wisely selected studies to make him a theologian, but he
had profited by the opportunities and delighted to use
his powers: "He was fond of learned discussions and
scholastic sophistry."*

James Gairdner, in his "English Church in the Six
teenth Century,"f says :

"From early days Henry had shown a taste for theo
logical discussion, and the story that his father had in
tended once to make him Archbishop of Canterbury is
not at all incredible. In 1518, as we learn from Eras
mus and some allusions in State papers, he composed a
treatise on the question whether vocal prayer was neces
sary to a Christian. . . . Indeed, putting tradition
aside, we know quite well that Henry VIII. had all his
days a taste for theological subtleties, and probably could
not have done the things he did but that he was fully
competent to argue points — of course with most royal
persuasiveness — against Tunstall, Latimer, Cranmer,
and any divine in his kingdom."

Overton, in his "Church in England,":}: says :

"His abilities and attainments were so much above
the average that long before he had reached the prime of
life, he could contend on equal terms with the ablest
and most learned writers of the day."§

Samuel Gardiner, in his "English History for Stu
dents," || says Henry "took a real interest in learning."

*Hausser, Period of the Reformation, Vol. I., p. 212.

fPp. 78 and 5.

JVol. I., p. 335.

§" More writes to Erasmus in the early part of Henry's reign,
when he had become connected with the court : ' Such is the virtue
and learning of the King, and his daily increasing progress in both,
that the more I see him increase in these kingly ornaments, the
less troublesome the courtier's life becomes to me.'"

I By Mullinger, p. 105.

78 Authorship of the "Assertio"

This seems true of even his youngest days, for Erasmus
was "presented to Henry VIII., then a boy of nine
years old, who asks for a tribute of verses, afterwards
duly paid. . . . He came back to England again, in the
hope, which proved delusive, of patronage and employ
ment from the young Henry VIII., in whose love of
learning all humanists put their trust."* And yet he
was sometimes more generous in reward of literary ef
fort, for the "Censura Literaria"f says: "And King
Henry the Eighth . . . for a few psalmes of David
turned into English meetre by Sternbold, made him
groome of his privy chamber and gave him many other
good gifts."

"'Henry had been educated to some extent in the new
learning. "$ No wonder, then, that "there was a mo
ment in the reign of Henry VIII. when it appeared not
impossible that English scholars might, north of the
Alps, lead the van in the restoration of the new learn
ing. . . . King Henry, too, was within an ace of gath
ering into our libraries those treasures of Greek manu
script which Francis I. secured and placed at Fontaine-
bleau."§

Naturally enough, "the Classicists might expect
everything from one who at nine years old had written
good Latin, uncorrected by tutors, the church reformers
from a prince with so strong a turn for theology." ||

And he was practical, preparing the way, laying a
foundation in the young by establishing lower schools at
the same time that he encouraged the universities. In
deed he had the most recent American ideas of educa-

*Martin Luther and the Reformation in Germany, Charles
Beard, p. 87.

fVol. I., p. 342.

jOxford Reformers of 1498, S«ebohm, p. 124.

§01d English Bible, Gasquet, p. 314.

|The Early Tudors, Moberly, p. 100.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 79

tion — that of subsidizing students to go abroad to study,
as we learn from Collier :*

"Henry founded a great many grammar schools ; . . .
he likewise founded lectures in both universities, where
those who read in the faculties of divinity, law and
physic were encouraged with a considerable settlement.
The same countenance was likewise given to professors
of Greek and Hebrew. . . . He built and endowed the
famous Trinity College in Cambridge. . . . Lastly, he
maintained a great many young scholars in foreign
countries."

The brightest star of the new learning was Erasmus,
and this star is drawn to be a satellite of Henry and
to sound his praises and declare that he believed Henry
truly to be the author of the "Assertio." Worsleyf says
of him in connection with the "Assertio" :

"Erasmus believed, or affected to believe, that Henry
himself was 'parent and author.7 'His father/ he
[Erasmus] wrote, 'was a man of the nicest judgment;
his mother possessed the soundest intellect, etc. When
the King was no more than a child he was sent to
study.' ' But whoever will take up Erasmus's own
works will see that he praises Henry's ability, as well as
his actual work, implying that Henry wrote the "As
sertio/' and answering objections against the King's au
thorship, by denying any help from his — Erasmus's —
hands, either as to matter or style. Here are his words :

"Tom. iiius., Pars la, col. 7. Epistola X. Guliel-
mus Montjoius Erasmo Roterodamo S. D.

"Verum si scias^: . . . quam sapienter se gerat . . .
quod studium in literatos prse se ferat. . . . Foster Rex

*Pt. II , Bk. III., p. 214.
fDawn of the Reformation, p. 160, note.

JDesiderii Erasmi Roterodami Opera Omnia. Lugduni Bata-
vorum, cura et impensis Petri Van der Aa, MDCCIII.

80 Authorship of the "Assertio"

non aurum, non gemmas, non metella, Bed virtutem, sed
gloriam, sed seternitatem concupiscit."

Id. col. 145, Erasmus calls Henry "aurei saeculi
parentem."

Id. col. 187, he says of Henry, "Nee ipse literarum
imperitus."

Id. col. 253, Erasmus writes to Henry: "Nullus tibi
pene dies abeat, in quo non aliquam temporis portionem
libris evolvendis iinpertias, cumque priscis illis sapien-
tibus colloqui gaudeas." . . .

Id. col. 402, Erasmus to Paul Bombasius says of
Henry, "bonis libris delectatur."

Id. col. 440, Erasmus to Henry, Antwerp, May 15,
1519 : "Et tamen in literis quas olim, felicissime degus-
tavit tua majestas, . . . ut eruditissimis etiam theologis
miraculo sit sanitas et acumen ingenii tui. Siquidem in
disputatione, quam nuper animi causa tua majestas in-
stituit cum acutissimo sirnul et doctissimo theologo, de-
fendans. . . . Quis invenire poterat argutius? quis col-
ligere nervosius? quis explicare venustius."

Id. col. 463, Erasmus writes to Jacob Banisius:
"Triumpharent bonse liters, si Principem haberemus
domi, qualem habet Anglia. Rex ipse non indoctus,
turn ingenio acerrimo, palam tuetur bonas literas, rabu-
lis omnibus silentium indixit. . . . Aula Regis plus
habet hominum eruditione prsestantium, quam ulla
Academia." Bruxellis, 21 Junii, anno 1519.

Id. col. 533, Erasmus to John Faber, Vicar of the
Bishop of Constance, writes : "Ipse Rex felicissime phil-
osophatur. Regina literas amat, quas ab infantia felici-
ter didicit."

Id. col. 660, Erasmus writes to Richard Pace: "Li-
~brum, quern Regia majestas conscripsit adversus Luther^
umf vidi tantum in manibus Marini nuncii Apostolici.
Vehementer aveo legere. Nee enim dubito quin dig-

Authorship of the "Assertio" 81

nus sit illo longe felicissiino ingenio, quod mire valet,
ubicunque sese intenderit. . . . Henricus octavus in
genio, calamoque propugnat pro Christi sponsa. . . .
Porro, confido fore ut hoc pulcherrimum planeque ra-
rissimum exemplar multos principes provocet ad semula-
tionem. An non pudebit post hoc sacerdotes, monachos,
episcopos nihil scire rei theologicse, quum viderint Re-
gem tantum juvenem, tot negociis districtum, eo pro-
gressum in cognitione sacrarum Literarum, ut libris edi-
tis periclitanti Christiana religioni patrocinetur ?"
Brugis, 23 Augusti, 1521.

Id. col. 732, Erasmus Roterodami Georgio duci
Saxonise. "In scholasticorum theologorum libris versari
gaudet, et in conviviis aliquid de re theologica disserere
solitus est. Nonnunquam in multam noctem profertur
contentio literata. Habet Reginam eleganter doctam.
Quod si qua in parte fuisset adjutus in eo libro, nihil
erat opus meis auxiliis, quum aulam habeat eruditis-
simis pariter ac eloquentissimis viris differtam. Quod si
stylus habet aliquid non abhorrens a meo, nihil mirum
aut novum, quum ille puer studiose volverit meas lucu-
brationes." . . .

Lastly, among the proofs showing in a general way
Henry's ability to have written the "Assertio," are the
records of his interest in, and use of, books. Although
these instances occurred some years later and in an
other connection, yet they may fairly be adduced as in
dicating his trend of mind and ability. There are
many entries for books brought to King Henry VIII.,
or inventories of books, or books bound for him, or
for vellum, etc., told of in detail in ~N. H. Nicolas's
"Privy Purse Expenses of King Henry VIII."*

And now for the more definite and formal statements
of Henry's authorship, though it is difficult to draw a line
"London, 1827.

82 Authorship of the "Asseriio"

accurately separating these many witnesses into distinct
classes.

D'Aubigne, in his "Reformation," says:* "Henry
the Eighth had just composed a book against the monk
of Wittemburg.

"The King himself was no stranger to the Romish
doctrines. Indeed, it would appear that if Arthur had
lived, Henry would have been destined to the archiepis-
copal see of Canterbury. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bona-
venture, tournaments, fetes, Elizabeth Blount, and other
court ladies, were all mingled together in the thoughts
of this monarch, while masses of his own composition
were being sung in his chapel. . . . He searched
through Thomas Aquinas, Peter Lombard, Alexander
de Hale, and Bonaventure."

"Doubtless the King consulted with others, chiefly
with Fisher, but there is no reason to doubt that the
work was substantially his own."f

Hutton, in his "'Sir Thomas More,":): has an original
and interesting statement: "As early as 1518 Henry
VIII. had been preparing a book against the heretics,
which, if the conjecture of Mr. Brewer be correct, was
the original draft of the attack upon Luther, published in
1521. It was natural that Pace and More should be
frequently consulted during the progress of this work,
but it does not appear that they took any actual part in
the authorship, their aid extending at most to the com
position and correction of the Latin style."

The following from Lord Herbert of Cherbury is
about as strong and clear a declaration of Henry's au
thorship as could be asked :§

*Translated by Gill, Part m., Oh. IV.

fCreighton, History of the Papacy, pp. 168, 164, note 8.

JP. 196, ed. London, 1895.

^England under Henry VIII. , published by Murray, London, 1870.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 83

'^Besides his being an able Latinist, philosopher and
divine he was ... a curious musician." (P. 110.)

"Our King thereupon compiles a book, wherein he
strenuously opposes Luther in the point of indulgences,
number of sacraments, the papal authority, and other
particulars, to be seen in that his work, entitled 'De
Sept. Sacramentis' ; a principal copy whereof, richly
bound, being sent to Leo, I remember myself to have
seen in the Vatican Library." (P. 199.)

Dodd,* in his "Church History of England,"
says: "They [the clergy consulted about Henry's
divorce] appealed to his own book against Luther,"
etc.

In the "Annals or General Chronicle of England,
begun by John Stow, by Edmund Howes, Gent.,"f it
is said:

"King Henry wrote a book against Luther in Ger
many and therefore Pope Leo the Tenth named him
Defender of the faith. To the which book Luther an
swered very sharply, nothing sparing his authority or
majesty."

In Burners "Reformation":): it is said: "When
King Henry wrote this book of the seven sacraments it-
seems it was at first desired to send it over in manu
script," etc.

Arthur Mason, in his "Lectures on Colet, Fisher and
More,"§ says: "Henry VIIL, who was well read in
theology for a layman of those days, had been negotiat
ing at Rome for some complimentary title. ... He
composed, the next year [1521], a work on the seven
sacraments against Luther."

*Vol. I., p. 95, col. 1, Bruweli, 1787.
fLondini, impensis Ricardl Meighen, 1681, p. 514.
tPart III., Bk. I., 18, Oxford, 1865.
§P. 81.

84: Authorship of the "Assertio"

Bossuet speaks of "Henry VIII., King of England,
who refuted his [Luther's] book."*

Kohrbacher declares flatly :f "Le roi d'Angleterre,
Henri VIII., fit plus encore; 1'anne suivante (1521) il
composa lui-meme une defense des sept sacrements
contre Fouvrage de Luther, de la Captivite de Baby
lon."

Moberly says::j: "Before the end of 1521 Henry
VIII. wrote his book on the Seven Sacraments. . . .
The King . . . was stimulated to authorship."

Audin graphically expresses the situation :§ aCloseted
with his chancellor, the archbishop of York; with
Fisher, bishop of Rochester, and other prelates, he
wrote the Defence of the Seven Sacraments."

"Henry was at the acme of animation while defend
ing the Papacy." 1 1

In Seckendorf's "History of Lutheranism" we
read :fl "Rescivit etiam, Henricum VIII. Anglise regem
pulchrum librum a se pro septem sacramentorum de-
f ensione, adversus tractatumLutheri decaptivitateBaby-
lonica conscriptum pontifici misisse, quo meritus est,
ut condita ob id bulla gloriosum defensoris fidei titu-
lum acciperet." . . .

Another source says:** "Ayant dans sa jeunesse
etudie les sciences pour embrasser Tetat ecclesiastique,
a une epoque ou vivait encore son frere aine, il voulut
donner au monde une preuve de son merite scientifique

*History of the Variations of the Protestant Church, Kenedy,
1896, Vol. I., p. 47.

tHist. Univ. de I'tiglise Oath., XII., 105.

^Epochs of Mod. Hist., Early Tudors, p. 151.

gAudin's Luther, Vol. II., p. 50, in Alzog's Universal Ch. Hist.,
III., p. 62.

flAudin, Henry VIII., p. 91.

IfComment. de Lutheranismo, lib. I., § CXII.

**Price, Vol. I., p. 13, quotes Lingard, VI. , 142.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 85

dans une cause si celebre. II composa done un livre
savant centre beaucoup des propositions erronees de
Martin Luther, le fit presenter au pontife en consis-
toire le second jour d'octobre, par son ambassadeur, et
le termina par ce distique, dont nous n'avons pas a juger
le merite :

Anglorum rex Henricus, Leo decime,
Hoc opus, et fidei testem, et amicitise.

(Bzovius.)"

This statement is found in Price's "Nonconformity,"
taken from Lingard:* "After all, the probability is
that the basis of the work was supplied by Henry ; . . .
his explicit assertion of the fact, in his reply to Luther's
answer, requires an admission to this extent. Had it
been wholly the work of others the King would scarcely
have ventured so open an assertion of his authorship."

Gairdner in the "Dictionary of National Biography,"
article "Henry VIII.," says : "As an author, Henry was
by no means contemptible. His book against Luther
('Assertio Septem Sacramentorum,' published in 1521)
was a scholastic performance of a rather conventional
type, but it was the coinage of his own brain."

A rich and rare old book is Polydore Vergil's "His
tory of England." In it we read :f

"Quocirca Henricus rex, qui habebat regnum suum
maxime omnium religiosum, veritus ne uspiam labes
aliqua religionis fieret, primum libros Lutheranos,
quorum magnus jam numerus pervenerat in manus
suorum Anglorum, comburendos curavit, deinde libel-
lum contra earn doctrinam luculenter composuit, misit-
que ad Leonem Pontificem. Delectavit multum opus

*Price, Vol. I., p. 18, quotes Lingard, VI., 142.
fPolydori Vergilii Urbinatis. Anglise Histories Libri Viginti-
septem, Henrici VIII., lib. XXVII.

86 Authorship of the "Assertio"

Leonis animum, partim quia plenum erat ipsius defen*
sionis causse, partim vero ob tale patronum consecutus
foret, qui librum sua auctoritate probavit, legendumque
decrevit, ac ut memoria tam grati beneficii aliquo
nomine perpetuaretur, turn Henricum regem deferv-
sorem fidei appellavit, quo ille deinceps titulo usus
est."

Audin gives a graphic picture of the inside history
of the making of the "Assertio": "Henry, divested of
the insignia of royalty, shut up in his study, was spend
ing the night in consulting the great doctors of the
Catholic schools."* As to the style, the same author
says :f "The formal language of the schools might have
crippled him, and consequently Skelton's pupil cast
it off, and fell back on ancient history, for it was highly
necessary that Luther should be aware that Henry knew
something more than the 'Summa' of St. Thomas,"
for "... he knew the Bible by rote.":):

"Henry repeatedly amused his friends by reading to
them portions of his MSS. More was one of his favour
ites, but he did not always flatter his royal master.
'Your Grace should be guarded in your expressions/ re
marked More one day, 'for the Pope, as a temporal sov
ereign, may one day be opposed to England, and here is
a passage wherein you exalt the authority of the Holy
See to too high a pitch, and which Home would surely
adduce in case of a rupture/ '!N"o, no/ rejoined
Henry, 'that expression is by no means too strong,
nothing can equal my devotion to the Holy See, and no
language can be sufficiently expressive, in my opinion,
to speak my sentiments.' 'But, Sire, do you not remem
ber certain articles in the Prsemunire ¥ 'What matter/

*Henry VIII.,p. 88.
fP. 90, id. op.
$P. 91, id. op.

AuthorMp of th* "Aseertio" 87

retorted Henry, 'do I not hold my crown from the Holy

See?'"*

So that Henry's views, private whims even, are ex
pressed in the "Assertio," and that without brooking
the censnre of even his nearest counsellor.

Seebohm, in his "Era of the Protestant ^Revolution,"
says: "Whilst the Diet of Worms was sitting, he
[Henry] wrote his celebrated book against Luther and
in defence of the divine authority of the Pope, for do
ing which the Pope rewarded him with the title of 'De
fender of the Faith.' "

Natalis Alexander speaks of the Pope's rewarding
Henry for having written the book in the following
terms: "Henricum VIII. Anglise Regem, ob egregium
Librum contra Martini Lutheri Hseresim editum, il-
lustri titulo Defengoris Fidei donavit, Diplomate dato
quinto idus Octobris ejusdem anni (1521). Has con-
stitutiones et diplomat a legere est Tom II Bullarii."f

Pallavicini most briefly says of Henry: "II com-
posa done un livre savant.":): Though Sample, in his
"Beacon Lights of the Reformation," § is as short, de
claring that Henry "sat down and wrote a book."

Milner, in his "History of the Church of Christ,"
says that Henry "wrote in Latin his book on the seven
sacraments." 1 1

Hergenroether, in his "Histoire de PEglise," Tome
V., p. 246, says: "II fit presenter son ouvrage a
Leon X."

Charles Butler declares that "considering his theo
logical and classical education it is not to be wondered

*Henry VIII., p. 92.

fHistoria, Vol. IX., p. 28.

JTrente, Tome I. , col. 675. Migne, 1844.

§P. 199.

|Vol. V., p. 161.

88 Authorship of the "Assertio"

at that the spirit of authorship should fall upon the
monarch; or that he should choose for his subject a
theological theme.7'* More indirectly Janssen, in his
"History of the German People," says: "So, too, the
King of England vaunts himself that he is a protector
of the Christian Church and people."f

So that really one could hardly ask for more or
weightier testimonies than these presented, declaring
that Henry wrote — composed — was the author of the
"Assertio." Let it not be forgotten, however, that there
are those who qualify somewhat the sense of the word
"author"; for while Hallam says::): "Henry had
acquired a fair portion of theological learning, and on
reading one of Luther's treatises, was not only shocked
at its tenets, but undertook to refute them in a formal
answer," yet a foot-no te§ qualifies this, particularly
in regard to the diction : "From Henry's general charac
ter and proneness to theological discussion it may be in
ferred that he had at least a considerable share in the
work, though probably with the assistance of some who
had more command of the Latin language."

Then, too, in Allies's "History of England,"|| it is
said :

"The pen at least was Henry's own, and did the work
well. Sir Thomas More furnished it with an index,
which was his sole part in the book. ... As far as
genuine authorship went Henry had fairly won his hon
ours. He possessed sufficient theological knowledge and
acumen to explain the seven sacraments dogmatically.

*Historical Memoirs respecting the English, Irish and Scottish
Catholics, Vol. I., p. 23.
fVol.IV., pp. 41, 42.
^Constitutional History, p. 44.
§Id. op., p. 80.
IP. 13.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 89

. . . His example belied his pen." And yet this is
but a slight qualification of the term.

Du Pin does not say Henry actually wrote it, but that
he might have :*

"Henry VIII., King of England, made most rigorous
Acts to hinder the heresy [of Luther] from coming into
his realm. This prince did something more to show his
zeal for religion and the Holy See, for he caused to be
made in his own name a treatise about the Seven Sacra
ments. . . . But Henry VIII. might very well write
it, having studied divinity in his younger years."

Pocock's Burnet's "Reformation" gives a good argu
ment in favour of Henry's authorship ; at first stating an
objection, but then also an answer to it :f

"It was also a masterpiece in Wolsey to engage the
King to own that the book against Luther was written
by him, in which the secret of those who, no doubt, had
the greatest share in composing it was so closely laid,
that it never broke out. Seckendorf tells us, that Lu
ther believed it was written by Lee, who was a zealous
Thomist, and had been engaged in disputes with Eras
mus, and was afterwards made Archbishop of York.
If any of those who still adhered to the old doctrines
had been concerned in writing it, probably, when they
saw King Henry depart from so many points treated of
in it, they would have gone beyond sea, and have robbed
him of that false honour and those excessive praises
which that book had procured him."

If Luther assailed Henry so, he must have been the
author of the "Assertio," or at least been believed such
by Luther, for Luther would hardly attack the King of
England unless he believed it to have been Henry who

*Ecclesiastical History of the Sixteenth Century, Bk. II., Ch.
XII.

fVol. III., p. 171.

90 Authorship of the "Assertio"

•truck at him in the "Assertio." If Henry were not
the author, Luther would probably have heard, at least
by a secret hint from England, but yet, aa few years
afterwards," when Luther began to suspect that the
King was not indisposed to favour his opinions, he
wrote to him to excuse the violence and abuse con
tained in his book, which he attributed to the advice of
others.*

Indeed, Du Pin saysf that "the King of England
was chiefly angry because he [Luther] had said that his
book upon the Sacraments was made by another, and
put out in his name.'7 . . .

The case is summed up thus by Lingard, in his "His
tory of England" 4 "That the treatise in defence of the
Seven Sacraments, which the King published, was his
own composition, is forcibly asserted by himself; that
it was planned, revised and improved by the superior
judgment of the cardinal and the bishop of Rochester,
was the opinion of the publick."§

As for the author, then, of the "Assertio," it must be
admitted that there are some difficult objections and
weighty names against Henry's having written it ; that
not all of these objections have been satisfactorily an
swered, and by the very nature and circumstances
of the case they could not be answered. However, the
great weight of the evidence is decidedly on the side of
Henry's claim. Certainly, he approved and claimed the
work and in this sense no one will deny his author
ship. Very probably he selected and composed the ma-

*Roscoe's Leo X., Vol. II., p. 231, note 168.

fBk. II., Ch. XVIII.

tVol. IV., p. 466.

§" Sir Thomas More confirms this opinion by saying that ' by his
grace's appointment, and consent of the makers of the same, he was
only a sorter-out and placer of the principal matters therein con
tained.' See a note on this subject by Mr. Bruce, Arch., XXIV., 67."

Authorship of the "Assertio" 91

terials. Indeed, it if quite likely that the rerj ityle is
Henry's.

V. And now, in the fifth place, here are several sum-
mings up of the arguments for Henry's authorship.

J. M. Brown, in the "Transactions of the Koyal His
torical Society," VIII., says that "we have the opinion
of Erasmus (Jortin's Erasmus, Vol. I., p. 254 and fol.)
that the King was capable of writing as good Latin as
was contained in the disputed book." He quotes Lord
Herbert of Cherbury (Hist, of H. VIIL, fol. 85) as
saying: "Henry was so associated with St. Thomas
Aquinas as to be nicknamed Thomisticus."

"All those who could know anything about what was
doing at court say that the book was the King's, with
qualifications. If any one knew who wrote the 'Assertio'
Fisher must have, and he says in the 'Defense' of the
'Assertio,' 'We may here remark the wonderful ingenu
ity of the King's mind.' '

"The only man besides the King whom we know
positively to have had any hand in the book is More,
the 'sorter-out and placer.'" (P. 257.) Thus far
Brown.

In the "Archseologia," Ellis quotes from John Bruce
and sums up a number of the weightiest reasons for
Henry's authorship. He says:* "There is very little
evidence upon which the authorship of this volume can
be assigned to any particular person. . . . On the part
of those who maintain the King's proper authorship
there are : The book itself, and the King's reply to Lu
ther's letter to him, in both of which the whole merit is
assumed by the King. On this side of the question may
also be produced the authority of Polydore Vergil
(Angl. Hist, p. 664, edit. 1570); Speed (Hist.,
p. 759, edit. 1611) ; Fisher, who published a defence
*P. 67 and fol.

92 Authorship of the "Assertio"

of the work, and attributes it to the King of England
'not less famous in arms than in letters' (Defensio Reg.
Ass. dedicat); Herbert (Life of Henry VIII., p. 94,
ed. 1672) ; Holinshed, who . . . does not seem to im
peach Henry's authorship (Vol. II., p. 872, edit. 1587) ;
Strype (Eccles. Mem., Vol. I., p. 33) and many other
authors, who treat the 'Assertio' as the work of him
whose name it bears, without even mentioning any
rumour of a doubt upon the subject.

"The circumstances under which the book was
written . . . will be found to support Henry's claim
to the authorship.

"Pace, in a letter addressed to Wolsey (Cotton MSS.
Vitellus, B, IV., No. 59), dated 15th April without
any year, but evidently written in 1521, gives an ac
count of an interview he had that day had with the
King. Pace found his Majesty 'lokyng upon a book
of Luther's, and upon such dispraise as his Grace did
give unto the said book,' Pace took occasion to deliver
a Bull which he had lately brought from Rome. . . .

"The King remarked 'that it was joyous to have this
tidings from the Pope's Holiness at such time, as he
had taken upon him the defence of Christ's Church,
with his penne.' . . . The King promised 'to take more
pain to make an end' of his book within a specified
time.

"In a letter from Wolsey to Clerk the Cardinal tells
of 'what pain, labour, and studie his Highness hath
taken in devising and making a book for the confutacion
of his [Luther's] said erroneous opinions;' . . . 'the
said booke is by his Highness perfected;' . . . 'the
King's Highness has this [way] declared himself as the
veray defender of Catholique faith [of] Crist's
Churche as well w* his preysence as w* his lernyng.' '

So far Ellis's summary.

Authorship of the "Assertio" 93

Lewis, in his "Fisher,"* by way of summing up the
argument for Henry's authorship of the "Assertio" says
that:

I. Henry in his letter to Luther owns it to be his.

II. More to Cromwell says he knows it to be by
Henry's own pen and that "in the composition of it he
was governed by his own sentiment."

III. Erasmus says : (a) "he could never find out by
whose labour the King was assisted;" (6) "that the
phrase was his own" [Henry's] ; (c) "that he had a
happy and ready genius for everything ;" (d) "that but
a few years before he wrote a theological disputation on
the question 'whether a lay-man was obliged to vocal
prayer';" (e) "and took delight in the books of the
school divines, and would often at meals discourse on
subjects in divinity."

So that while it is not a settled question, yet, con
sidering Henry's own statements, those of others con
nected with the "Assertio," Henry's other works, and
the statements of very many historians, it is more
probable that Henry wrote, composed, was the author of
.the "Assertio." Not that he had no help, took no coun
sel, consulted no one (though it is known how he re
jected More's advice about the strong praise and divine
origin Henry attributed to the Primacy of the Pa
pacy), but, as Mr. Overtonf says of the "Assertio":
"It at any rate expressed Henry's sentiments and he
was quite competent to write it."

*P. 109.

j-Church in England, Vol. I., p. 857.

J6&ition$ anb IDersione

IT is of primary interest to know where the " As
sert io" has appeared in print; and, first of all, where
the original that Henry sent Leo now is.

Roscoe* answers the query. He says: "The original
in an elegant MS. is still preserved in the Library of
the Vatican, and is usually shown to Englishmen on
their visits to Rome. Vide Dr. Smith's 'Tour of the
Continent/ Vol. II., p. 200."

Strypef tells us of the book : "This book the King, by
the Cardinal's advice, thought fit to have presented to
Pope Leo. . . . This was brought about by the means
of Cardinal Wolsey; who procured some copies of the
book to be written in a very fair and beautiful charac
ter; and one of them to be bound up splendidly,
namely, that that was to be sent to the Pope; and the
said Cardinal sent that especially to the King, for his
liking of it, before it went."

Perhaps no less interesting is what Rohrbacher
writes :$ "C'est un beau volume in quarto sur velin, ecrit
par une calligraphe d'une rare habilete. Le roi se fait
peindre sur la premiere page du manuscrit ; il est dans
1' attitude de la devotion, a genoux; Leon X, sur son
trone, semble ecouter I'enf ant qui vient offrir a son pere
le livre qu'il a compose pour la gloire du Christ. L'acte
d'hommage est signe de la main du prince. A la fin du
volume sont deux vers latins dont le sens est : 'Leon X !

*LeoX., p. 167.

fjolm Strype, Ecclea. Memorials, Vol. I., p. 51.

fHistoire Eccles., Vol. XII., p. 112.

Editions and Versions 95

Ce roi dee Anglais, Henri, vous envoie cet ouvrage,
temoin de sa foi et de son amitieV . . . Un autograph
du Pape Leo X, date de Saint Pierre, le 11 Octobre
1521, et que Ton conserve dans les archives de la cour-
onne d'Angleterre, donne a Henri VIII et a ses suc-
cesseurs le titre de Defenseur de la Foi."

From this original an early copy was printed, as the
following notices of Dibdin* show :

"613. Assertio Septem Sacramentorum adversus
Martin. Lutheru, etc. Apud inclytam urbem Londinum
in aedibus Pynsonianis. An. MDXXI. Quarto Idus
Julij. Cum privilegio a rege indulto. Quarto."

To this Brunet addsif "Edition tres rare; la prem
iere de cet ouvrage celebre ; . . . de 78 ff. . . .

"Jos Van Praet en cite trois exemplaires imprimes
sur velin."

And to this again Watts:): adds a notice of apparently
two other editions of the same year 1521, and in Lon
don ; he says : "Et cum epistola ad Saxonire duces pie ad-
monitoria. Lond. 1521, 4to;" and also: "Et cum
summa indulgentiarum libellum ipsum legentibus con-
cessarum. Lond. 1521, 4to."

Dibdin gives us details of the contents of one of the
London editions of 1521. He says:§

"615. Libello huic Regio insunt, etc. Apud in
clytam urbem Londinum in sedibus Pynsonianis
MDXXI. Quarto.

"Herbert seems to have been indebted to Ames for the
following account of this volume :

*Typograph. Antiq., Vol. II., p. 484. See also Audin's Henry
VIII., note to p. 92. Alzog, Univers. Church Hist., Vol. III.,
p. 82, note 8. Worsley's Dawn of the Reformation, p. 159, note.

f Jacques Charles Brunet, Manuel du Libraire, Tome III.,
col. 100.

JBlblioth. Britannica, Vol. I., Authors— article Henry VIII., King.

gTypograph. Antiq., Vol. II., p. 484.

96 Editions and Versions

" 'Libello huic regio haec insunt.

" '1. Oratio Joannis Clerk apud Ko. pon. in exhibi-
tione operis regii.

" '2. Responsio roman. pont. ad eundem ex tempore
facto.

" '3. Bulla ro. pon. ad regiam majestatem, pro ejus
operis confirmatione.

" '4. Summa indulgetiarum libellum ipsum regium
legentibus, concessarum.

" '5. Libellus regius adversus Martinum Lutherum
haeresiarchon.

" '6. Epistola regia ad illustrissimas saxonise duces
pie admonitoria.' The colophon as above. In the pub
lic library, Cambridge."

Lastly, Thomson says* of this 1521 London edition:
"It was printed in 1521 by Kichard Pynson, in
FEENCH, in Latin and in English, by order of the
King."

So much for the publications of the "Assertio" that
year in London; down in Rome Brunetf says it was
printed, and an indulgence of ten years and ten quaran
tines was granted the readers of it. Here are his words :
"Panni les nombreuses reimpressions qui ont ete faites
de cette refutation de Luther, une de plus rares, et sans
doute la plus remarquable, est celle de Rome, opera
Steph. Guilliereti, 1521, in 4, dont le titre porte: 'Li-
brum hunc Anglise regis fidei defensoris . . . legenti
bus, decem annorum et totidem XL indulgentia apos-
tolica authoritate concessa est.' '

Panzer, "Annales Typographici," also mentions this
edition of Rome 1521 as in quarto.

I may add that a recent catalogue of second-hand

*Court of Henry VIII., Vol. I., p. 381, note.
fManuel du Libraire, Tome III., col. 100.

Editions and Versions 97

books rates a copy of this edition at 130 lire, though
Lowndes* mentions one sold for £3. 13. 6.

In 1522 there were several editions. Lowndesf
and BrunetJ mention one in 4to of this date in
London.

Lowndes§ and Roscoe|| speak of one at Antwerp, the
former (Lowndes) saying it was in 4to. The catalogue
of the British Museum says this edition was printed by
Hillen (see "Henry VIIL").

Lowndes,1f Dibdin** and the "Bibliotheca Eras-
miana"f f tell of one of the same year at Strasburg with
a commendatory epistle by Erasmus; Lowndes adds
that Archbishop Warham also commended it. Dibdin
and the "Bibliotheca Erasmiana" say it was in 4to ; and
the "Bibliotheca" also says of it: "cum registro nuper
addito."

Dibdin further says that Ames speaks of an edition
"at Bruges by Erasmus," and that "Earl Spencer pos
sesses a magnificent copy of this book, printed upon vel
lum, with the title-page elegantly illuminated. I have
seen an edition," he says, aof the date 1522, XVII Ka-
lendas Eebruarij cum privilegio a rege indulto."^

Audin speaks of "two editions at Antwerp, with re
prints at Frankfort, Cologne and many other places." §§

A 1523 edition is spoken of by Lowndes,|||| no place
given, in 4to, £1. 10. 0 in price. Twenty years
later it was published at Rome, according to Lingardfllf

"Bibliographical Manual of English Literature, by Wm. T.
Lowndes, London, 1859, Part IV., p. 1039.
fOpus citat. **Loco cit.

JOpus citat. ff3e Serie, p. 28.

§Loco citato. #Op. cit., p. 485.

I Leo X., loco citato. §§Henry VIII., p. 92, note e,

IfLoco cit. II I Loco citato.

flfHist. of England, IV., 468.

98 Editions and Versions

and Walter,* Koecoef adding that "From this" [i. e.,
the original copy sent to Leo X.] "copy it was printed
at Rome, in sedibus Francisci Priscianensis Florentini,
1543, as appears by the colophon."

Eighteen years later at Lyons another edition was
brought out by Gabriel de Saconay, "prsecenteur" of the
cathedral at Lyons. The "Dictionnaire de Bibliogra
phic Catholique" of Migne^ says: "Prsefixa est Gab.
de Saconay praefatio: accedunt exempla litterum Hen-
rici VIII. ad Lutherum, et Lutheri ad Henricum ; Lug-
duni, Guill. Rovillius 1561, in 4to." And Lowndes§
calls it a "valuable historical preface."

The editor has been able to locate only two copies of
this edition, one in the British Museum and the other
in the Vatican Pontifical Library respectively. From
the latter he has had a manuscript copy made, and finds
that, for the present purpose, out of the 84 pages of
Saconay^s Preface p. Ixxi is the first after the title-page
that speaks very distinctly of Henry's "Assertio." And
on p. Ixxviiii he says that Henry's book had be
come so scarce "quod jam pene de manibus omnium
elapsum, et ab amico non obscura erga me benevolentia
cornparatum, rursus in lucem emisi."

The next year, 1562, it was printed at Paris by Will
iam Desboys, in 12mo, "cui subnexa est ejusdem regia
epistola, assertionis ipsius contra eumdem defensoria;
accedit quoque P. Joan. Roffensis contra Lutheri
captivitatem Babylonicam assertionis regise de-
fensio."||

It may also be seen at the beginning of the "Opera"

*8irThomas More, by W. J. Walter, published by Lucas, Baltimore.

fLeo X., note 167.

iTomeL, col. 751.

§Op. cit.

|Migne, Die. de Bibliog. Cath., Tome I., col. 751.

Editions and Versions 99

of Bishop Fisher's works, published by Fleischman at
Wiirzburg 1697.

Another edition appeared at Naples 1728, in 12mo.

Lowndes* speaks of a 16mo edition without place or
date, and then says there are several other editions.

In 1850, at Angers, in France, it was published by
Pettier in both Latin and French, 8vo, with an intro
duction on the authenticity of the "Assertio" by Clem
ent Villecourt, the Bishop of La Rochelle.

The editions of Paris 1562, f Naples 1728, Angers
1850, and the English editionj to be described later
have been used in this re-edition.

The "Assertio" was translated from the Latin into
several of the modern languages. Luther reproduced it
freely in German ; Walch gives a translation by Frick,
in 1522 ; Hergenroether§ mentions a translation in
German this same year by H. Emser. Saconay in his
Preface, p. Ixxii, also speaks of "hoc libro regio, per
Hieronymum Empserum in linguam Germanicam
translato."

The catalogue of the British Museum, under "Henry
VIII.," records this: "Schutz und handthabung der
siben Sacrament. Wider M. Luther, etc. [Translated
from the Latin by H. Emser.] Erfurt? 1522. 4°."

Audin's mention (Calvin, II. , 425) of a French ver
sion is questioned, for the first and only French transla
tion, except that mentioned by Thomson, || that Henry
himself had it put into French, seems to have been that
of Pettier, for although, as the Bishop of La Rochellefl

*Loco citato.

f Kindly loaned by the Catholic University at Washington.

{Dr. Healy, of the Catholic University, kindly loaned this, and
allowed it to be reprinted.

§Hist. del'fcglise, V.. p. 247.

[Court of Henry VIII., Vol. I., p. 381, note.

IXIX.. 158 seq.

100 Editions and Versions

says in his Introduction to it, "vit-on bientot non-seule-
ment 1'Angleterre, mais 1'Italie, FAllemagne et la
France reproduire ce chef-d'oeuvre," yet he also says:
"Je ne connais aucune traduction franchise de
1'ouvrage, qui fut public en 1521, a Londres, sous le
nom de Henri VIII., roi d'Angleterre."

Gabriel de Saconay had reprinted, but not translated
the "Assertio" at Lyons. Moreri* in his "Grand
Dictionnaire Historique" says: "Des 1'an 1561, il
avoit fait reimprimer 1'ouvrage de Henri VIII. ,
centre Luther, avec une belle et longue preface de sa
fagon."

After considerable patience and expense the editor
has been able to confirm this statement, having at length
secured a manuscript copy of Saconay's "Introduction"
to the "Assertio."

The French version mentioned by Audin,f Main-
waring Brown, ^ Brunet,§ and the "Dictionnaire de
Bibliographic Catholique,"|| is thus entitled on its fly
leaf:

"Defense des Sept Sacrements publiee centre Martin
Luther par Henri VIII., Roi d'Angleterre et Seigneur
d'Irland, traduite par R. J. Pettier, Licencie es-lettres.
Precedee d'une preface par L'Abbe Maupoint, Vicaire-
General du diocese de Rennes. D'une Introduction sur
1' Authentieite de ce livre, par Mgr. 1'Eveque de la
Rochelle. Et suivie de la Constitution de Pie VI.,
'Auctorem fidei,' traduite par le meme prelat. Angers :
Imprimerie et Libraire de Laine Freres 1850."

*Tome IX., Saconay.
tHenry VIII., p. 92, note b.

{Henry VIII. 's Book, etc., in the Royal Hist. So.'s Transactions,
VIII., p. 242 and fol.
§Op. cit., III., col. 100.
||Migne, Tome I., col. 507.

Editions and Versions 101

And now, last, but not least, the English versions!
Collier* has this entry: "Henry the Eighth. — A copy
of the letters, wherein the most redouted and mighty
price, our souerayne lorde, Kyng Henry the eight,
Kyng of Englande and of France, defesor of the faith,
and lord of Irlade ; made answere unto a certayne letter
of Martyn Luther, sent unto hym by the same, and also
the copy of ye foresayd Luther's letter, in suche order
as here after foloweth. B. L. 8vo. 49 leaves.

"The colophon to this volume runs thus: 'Imprinted
at London in Fletestrete by Richarde Pynson.' . . .
At the back of the title-page is the list of contents.

" 'Fyrst a preface of our souerayne lorde the
Kynge . . .

" 'Copye of the letter, whiche Martin Luther had
sent.

" 'The copye of the answere of our sayd souerayne
lorde.' . . . The preface fills the first fifteen, and
Luther's letter the next seven, pages. The answer of
Henry VIII. occupies the rest of the volume."

An edition in 1687 in 4to is mentioned by Gasquetf
and Watts ;:(: and Lowndes§ in this connection has the
following entry: "Assertion of the Seven Sacraments
with his epistle to the Pope, Mr. John Clark's oration,
the Pope's answer and Bull, etc., translated by T. W.
Lond. 1687, 4to. Bindley, pt. II., 518, date 1688,
morocco, 18s. 6d."

Substantiating the correctness of this is the entry in
the catalogue of the British Museum, wherein, under
article "Henry VIII.," one may read : "Assertio Septem

*A Biographical and Critical Account of the Rarest Books in the
English Language, J. Payne Collier, F.S.A., Vol. I., p. 368.
t Eve of Reformation, p. 95, note.
JUbi supra.
§Bibliog. Man., loco citato.

102 Editions and Versions

Sacramentorum : or, an assertion of the seven sacra
ments, against Martin Luther by Heury the VIII. . . .
To which is adjoyn'd his epistle to the Pope; Mr. J.
Clark's oration; and the Pope's answer thereunto. As
also, the Pope's Bull, by which his Holiness was pleased
to bestow upon K. H. VIII. . . . that most illustrious
. . . title of Defender of the Faith. Faithfully trans
lated into English by T[homas] W[ebster]. Gent.
pp.133. Eug.N. Thompson: London, 1687. 4°." And
also a "Second edition, revised and corrected. London,
1688. 12°."

As for other English versions, the writer knows of
none printed in England, for this English version, now
and here reprinted, was, he believes, done in Ireland;
and this belief is based on the following reasons:
1. One might readily suspect that after Henry had
changed his morals — even if not his faith — and had not
only left, but shamefully pillaged and assaulted, the
Church, naturally he would not allow the "Assertio" to
be printed.* Neither would any subsequent sover
eign, save Mary, in her brief and busy reign, and that
for the same obvious reasons. 2. In the "Advertise
ment" of the present edition, here reprinted, the writer
speaks of "The London edition from whence the present
is taken." Now, that sounds as if this edition were
not done in London, but somewhere else; and where?
3. In this same "Advertisement," page 247, note (a),
the writer refers to the "Historical Account of the
Eeformation (from Fleury's Ecclesiastical History)
printed in Corke 1764." Now, at this date in Eng
land one would hardly expect to see a Catholic so dar
ing as to break the laws and not only have, but print, a
book so decidedly pro-Catholic as the "Assertio." And

*The version just told of, by " T. W.," would seem to be the excep
tion that proves the rule. It had doubtless been done surreptitiously.

Editions and Versions 103

if it were some non-Catholic, he would hardly quote
Fleury, a Catholic and a Frenchman. Furthermore,
whether Catholic or not, if an Englishman, he would
not likely use an edition of Fleury "printed in Corke."
4. This English edition here reprinted, kindly loaned
by Dr. Healy, of the Catholic University of America,
was presented to him by an Irishman in Ireland.

Now, while this is not an apodictical argument, yet it
gives a great probability that the edition here reprinted
was printed not in England, but in Ireland. This edi
tion seems to be simply a reprint from the first English
version, for the writer has compared several passages
quoted by Foxe, in his "Book of Martyrs"* (who, in all
probability, quoted from the first English version),
with the corresponding passages in the edition here re
printed, and the wording agrees perfectly.

As the first few pages and the last page are missing
in this copy of Dr. Healy's no further or surer details of
place or date or printer of the edition here reprinted
can be given save that it is the second half of a second
volume in 12mo, with, of course, the spelling "our,"
long s's, a guide-word at the foot of each page, and capi
tals to nouns within sentences, even though not proper
names. It is bound in leather, and preceding it in the
same volume is a "Discourse on the Seven Sacraments,"
but without any clue as to author, place or date. The
writer knows nothing of the first volume, but this second
volume is entitled "Sacraments Explained."

Note. Since the above was written the editor has
found in the British Museum catalogue, article "Horni-
hold," the following entry :

"Hornihold (John), Bishop of Philomel. The Com
mandments and Sacraments Explained in fifty two
discourses, to which is added, King Henry the Eighth's
*Edited by Cummings, Vol. II., p. 79, note.

104 Editions and Versions

Defence of the Seven Sacraments, against Martin
Luther. 2 vols. Dublin, 1821. 12°."

The same catalogue makes entries of "[another edi
tion] Dublin 1836, 12°," and " [another edition] Balti
more [1858 ?], 8°" and "The Decalogue explained, etc.,
1750, 12°." From the library of St. Mary's Seminary,
Baltimore, the editor has secured a copy of the 1821
edition, entitled "The Commandments and Sacraments
Explained in Fifty two Discourses by the Rt. Rev. Doc
tor Hornihold, to which is added, King Henry the
Eighth's Defence of the Seven Sacraments against Mar
tin Luther. In two volumes. Dublin : Richard Coyne,
16 Parliament St., Catholic Bookseller. 1821. Price
lls. 4%d." The work is in 16mo and bound in calf. On
page 215 of \7olume II. is the following: "Assertio Sep-
tem Sacramentorum, or a Defence of the Seven Sacra
ments against Martin Luther, by Henry the Eighth,
King of England, France and Ireland, to which are ad
joined His Epistle to the Pope, The Oration of Mr.
John Clark, (Orator to His Majesty) on the Delivery of
this Book to His Holiness, and the Pope's Answer to the
Oration, as also the Pope's Bull, by which His Holi
ness was pleased to bestow upon that King (for compos
ing this book) that most illustrious, splendid, and most
Christian-like title of Defender of the Faith. Faith
fully translated into English from the original Latin
edition. By T. W. Gent."

This edition of Dr. Hornihold's work is different
from the one which is here reprinted, though the latter
is evidently by Dr. Hornihold.

The catalogue of the British Museum says there was
"another edition of Hornihold, Dublin, 1836, 12°."
Probably this latter is the edition here reprinted. The
same catalogue records "another edition, Baltimore,
1858 (?), 8°."

Editions and Versions 105

From this narration of the various editions we may
readily see how widely spread and read the "Assertio"
was.

"Copies were sent to all the principal courts of Eu
rope and to the universities. Two copies . . . are still
in the Vatican Library."*

This statement must yield to a personal letter from
Rev. Fr. Ehrle, S.J., from the Vatican Library, where
in he says there are now in the Vatican four copies of
the edition of London 1521, all printed on parchment,
and also the editions of Antwerp 1523, Florence 1543,
Lyons 1561, and Paris ( ? ) 1562 ( ? ).

In the British Museum there are sixteen editions and
ten copies of dates as follows: 1521, two editions and
two copies; 1522, five editions and three copies; 1543,
one edition; 1561, one edition and one copy; 1562,
one edition and two copies; 1687, one edition and two
copies; and one edition for 1688, 1821, 1836, 1850,
and 1858.

Here at the end of the list of the editions of the "As
sertio," for the sake of clearness and by way of supple
ment, is inserted a chronological summary taken from
Walter's "More."

1521. May, "Assertio" begun. ( ? )
October, "Assertio" published.

1522. July, Luther replied to Henry.

Henry complained to the Elector, f
1525. September, at the entreaty of Christian, King of
Denmark, Luther apologized to Henry.

*English Catholic Truth So.'s publication, "Popery on Every
Coin of the Realm."

fAudin, Henry VIII., p. 101, gives the title of the letter of
Henry to the Princes complaining about Luther, as follows:
"Contra Lutherum ejusque hseresim epist. scr. regis Ang. ad
illustrissimas Saxoniae duces pie admonitoria."

106 Editions and Versions

1526. More's "Vindicatio Henrici VIII. a oalummis
Luther!" by "Gulielmus Rosseus."

So that besides the "Assertio" Henry sent out as his
other documents, for Henry wrote a reply to Luther.*
. . . "These letters have been published without note
of place or date, and are prefixed, in the copy, now be
fore the writer, of the treatise of Henry on the seven
sacraments, "f

As for Luther's writings in reply to the "Assertio,"
Roscoe, in his "Leo X.," says :$

"Luther replied to this book in his treatise 'Contra
Henricum VIII. Anglise Regem' ; which he addressed
to Seb. Schlick, a Bohemian nobleman, in a dedication
which bears date 15th July, 1522. In this work he
treats the King, without any ceremony, as a liar and a
blasphemer. 'E"unc quum prudens et sciens mendatia
componat adversus mei Regis majestatem in ccelis,
damnabilis Putredo ista et Vermis, jus mihi erit pro
meo Rege, majestatem Anglicam luto suo et stercore
conspergere, et coronam istam blasphemam in Christum
pedibus conculcare.' But whilst he stigmatizes the
book of Hen^y VIII. as stolidissimum and turpissi-
mum, he acknowledges it to be 'inter omnes qui contra
se scripti sunt latinissimum/ He insinuates, however,
that it was written by some other person in the name
of the King."

This criticism is not peculiar to Roscoe: Hutton, in
his "More,"§ speaks of "an answer from Luther which
no one denies to be violent and indecent to the last de-

* "Invictissimi principis Henrici VIII., regis Angliae et Francise,
ad Martini Lutheri epistolam responsio. "
fRoseoe, Leo X., Vol. II., note 168.
{Note 168.
§P. 198.

Editions and Versions 107

gree." Stapleton* says of Luther's reply, "spurcissi-
mum librum spurcus Lutherus evomuerat."

As to this letter, it is worth while noting that : "His
[Erasmus7] best friends . . . and some in England,
suspected that Erasmus7 hand and spirit were to be de
tected in the reply that Luther made to King Henry's
book against him [L.]."f

As said above, Luther's apology to Henry was sent
September, 1525 ; it was printed in German and after
wards also in Latin. Hallam attributes this recantation
of Luther's to some derangement of the intellectual fac
ulties.^: Audin assigns some other reason.

But now turn back from this unhappy German to the
quiet peaceful Englishman — Sir Thomas More.

Roscoe§ says that "An answer to the work of Luther
was published or re-published, London, 1523, under the
following title : 'Eruditissimi viri Gulielmi Rossei opus
elegans, doctum, festivum, pium, quo pulcherrime rele-
git ac refellit insanas Lutheri calumnias ; quibus invec-
tissimum Anglia?, Galliseque Regem Henricum ejus
nominis octavum, Fidei defensorem haud litteris minus
quam regno clarum scurra turpissirnus insectatur,' etc.
In this work, which is attributed to Sir Thomas More,
the author has not only endeavoured to refute the argu
ments, but to equal the abuse of the German reformer.
... A few years afterwards . . . Luther wrote to him
to excuse the violence in his book, which he attributed to
the advice of others. ... To this Henry condescended
to write a long and argumentative reply, in which he ad
vises Luther to retract his errors. . . . These letters
have been published without note of place or date, and

*Tres Thomae, p. 186.
f Gasquet, Eve of Reformation, p. 185.
{Note to Audin's Henry VIII., p. 101.
§Op. citato, note 168.

108 Editions and Versions

are prefixed, in the copy now before me, to the treatise
of Henry on the Seven Sacraments."

This work of More was in Latin,* and, says Burnet,f
"He wrote according to the way of the age, with much
bitterness." However, MaitlandJ may be quoted, who
says : "I do not want to defend the Romish writers and
I hope I have no partiality for them, . . . but it really
appears to me only simple truth to say that, whether
from good or bad motives, they did in fact abstain from
that fierce, truculent, and abusive language, and that
loathsome ribaldry, which characterized the style of too
many of the Puritan writers. "§

Besides Sir Thomas another wise and holy man de
fended the King: that was John Fisher, Bishop of
Rochester, who wrote also in 1523. || Lingardfl says:
"Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, in a more argumentative
style, undertook the defence of the King in his work,
entitled T)efensio Assertionum regis Angliae de fide
Catholica adversus Lutheri Captivitatem Babylon-
icam.7 ' Audin says of it:** "It is a controversial
work, where no passionate expression can be perceived,
and were the bishop alive nowadays, and about to pub
lish it, he would not require to erase a single word.
Luther must have suffered most acutely on reading a
work of such candour and merit." Fisher's argument
is that "men may err in interpreting Scripture, and
therefore they must obey the Holy Ghost, Who ex-

*Eve of Reformation, p. 90.

fHist. of Reformation, Vol. I., p. 31.

{The Reformation, p. 48.

§Conf. Lingard, Hist, of Eng., IV., p. 468, note 2. Stewart,
Life and Letters of Sir Thomas More, p. 119. Henri Bremond,
Thomas More, Ch. V., note 2.

|Mason, p. 81, op. cit. in Bibliog.

fHist. of England, Vol. IV., p. 468.

**Hemy VIII., pp. 99, 100.

Editions and Versions 109

pounds Scripture infallibly in the Church by the mouths
of the Fathers and Councils and Tradition."

Besides More and Fisher we are told that in 1523
"appeared [Wolsey's] elaborate defence of Henry VIII.
entitled 'Adsertionis Lutheranse confutatio,' and also
Powell's Tropugnaeulum.' "* Of this latter, Collier
tells us :f

"One Dr. Powell of Oxford was a second to the King
in this controversy. . . . The tract was divided into two
books; the first was entitled T)e summo Pontifice et
Eucharistise sacramento;' the other 'De Sex Sacra-
mentis.' The King was extremely pleased with
Powell's management. . . . But he lost the King's
favour by appearing strongly against the divorce and
the new supremacy."

Over the Channel, even in the land of the enemy,
Henry had apologists. Du Pin, in his "Ecclesiastical
History," says 4

"Several divines thought it an honour to defend the
King of England, by confuting Luther's book, which he
wrote against him. In Germany, John Eckius an
swered it in Latin, and Thomas Muncer in High-
Dutch."

*Hard wick's Christian Church, p. 165, note 1.
fOp. cit., Pt. II., Bk. I, 17.
{Sixteenth Century, Bk. II., Ch. XIV.

presentation to tbe pope

THOUGH I have found nothing in the records, yet one
may fancy the feelings of Henry as he waited in Eng
land for news of how his book had been received at
Rome.

Lingard, in his "History of England," tells something
of the outward presentation and of the inward private
history, too. He says* that "Clark, dean of Windsor,
carried the royal production to the pontiff, with an as
surance, as his master had refuted the errors of Luther
with his pen, so was he ready to oppose the disciples of
the heresiarch with his sword, and to array against them
the whole strength of his kingdom. Leo accepted the
present, . . . but Henry looked for something more
pleasing to his vanity than mere acknowledgments.
The Kings of France had long been distinguished by
the appellation of 'Most Christian/ those of Spain by
'Catholic.' When Louis XII. set up the schismatical
synod of Pisa it was contended that he had forfeited his
right to the former of these titles, and Julius II. trans
ferred it to Henry, but with the understanding that the
transfer should be kept secret till the services of the
King might justify in the eyes of men the partiality of
the pontiff. After the victory of Guinegate Henry de
manded the publication of the grant; but Julius was
dead; Leo declared himself ignorant of the transaction,
and means were found to pacify the King with the
promise of some other, but equivalent, distinction. Wol-
*IV., 446.

The Presentation to the Pope 111

sey had lately recalled the subject to the attention of the
papal court; and Clark, when he presented the King's
work, demanded for him the title of 'Defender of the
Faith.7 This new denomination experienced some op
position ; but it could not be refused with decency ; and
Leo conferred it by a formal bull on Henry, who pro
cured a confirmation of the grant from the successor of
Leo, Clement VII."

Another very interesting and somewhat different ac
count is that given by Roscoe.* He says :

"This work Henry dedicated to Leo X., and trans
mitted a copy to Rome with the following distich :

'Anglorum Rex Henricus, Leo Decime, mittit
Hoc opus, et fidei testem et amicitiae.'

It was presented to the pontiff in full consistory, by
the ambassador of the King, who made a long and pom
pous oration ; to which the Pope replied in a concise and
suitable manner. The satisfaction which Leo derived
from this circumstance, at a time when the suprem
acy of the Holy See was in such imminent danger, may
be judged of by the desire which he showed to express
to the King his approbation of the part he had taken.
After returning him ample thanks, and granting an
indulgence to every person who should peruse the book,
he resolved to confer upon him some distinguishing
mark of the pontifical favour, and accordingly proposed
in the consistory to honour him with the title of De
fender of the Faith. This proposition gave rise, how
ever, to more deliberation, and occasioned greater diffi
culty in the Sacred College than perhaps the Pope had
foreseen. Several of the Cardinals suggested other
titles, and it was for a long time debated whether, in
stead of the appellation of Defender of the Faith, the
•Leo X., IL, 881.

112 The Presentation to the Pope

sovereigns of England should not, in all future times, be
denominated the Apostolic, the Orthodox, the Faithful,
or the Angelic.* The proposition of the Pope, who had
been previously informed of the sentiments of Wolsey on
this subject, at length, however, prevailed, and a bull
was accordingly issued, conferring this title on Henry
and his posterity;! a title retained by his successors to
the present day, notwithstanding their separation from
the Roman Church; which has given occasion to some
orthodox writers to remark that the Kings of this coun
try should either maintain that course of conduct in re
ward for which the distinction was conferred, or relin
quish the title.":]:

Audin adds that Pace also went with Clark ato the
Vatican to present the 'Assertio' to His Holiness."§

Pallavicini, in his "History of the Council of Trent,"||
says : "II composa done un livre savant contre beaucoup
des propositions de Martin Luther, le fit presenter au
pontife en consistoire, le second jour d'octobre, par son
ambassadeur. . . . Ce fut pour Leon le sujet d'une
grande joie."

He further tells us that among the titles suggested as
a reward for Henry were "Apostolic/7 "Orthodox,"
"Faithful," "Angelic" (Anglican), "Most Faithful,"
"Glorious"; . . . that on the 26th of October, 1521,
the Consistory agreed on the title "Defender of the
Faith."

"Thereupon a bull was drawn up on this subject, and
a brief which was to be joined to the bull, . . . and these
two pieces were approved in a consistory 26 Oct.

*Pallavic., Concil. di Trento, lib. II., cap. 1, Sec. VIII., p. 177.

fVide App., No. X.

JSeckend., lib. I., p. 183. (Luther Op.)

§Henry VIII., p. 93.

|Bk. II., Ch. I., par. 7.

The Presentation to the Pope 113

1521."* Pope Clement confirmed the title in a bull of
March 5, 1523.f

Humanly speaking, what a boon this book of Henry's,
and all that it stood for in the eyes of the world, must
have been to the Pope! Protestantism was about to
break out in Germany, and this embassy from England
must have indeed cheered the drooping spirits of the
Sovereign Pontiff. This is well put by Speed :J "But
with what acceptance his Holinesse received King
Henrie's booke, his own oration solemnly made at the
delivery thereof unto M. John Clarke, the presenter and
King's ambassador, in his Consistory, and in the pres
ence of his Cardinals, sufficiently doth show, the trans
lation whereof we have inserted as we find it in the
Originall it selfe." [Translation follows.]

"To manifest which his readinesse, himself among
his Cardinals decreed an augmentation unto King
Henries royall style, to bee annexed unto his others ; con
firming the same by his Bull, which that it perish not by
the devouring teeth of time wee have here published
from the originall Parchment, and Leaden Seale it selfe,
as follows: . . . r

Last, but not least, is Brewer's edition of the "Letters
and Papers, Foreign and Domestic,"! concerning Henry
VIII. 's book being presented to the Pope. The account
says:

"1592. Campeggio to Wolsey:
"1521 "Is overcome with joy at reading the

19 Sept. King's 'aureus libellus.' All who have seen
R. O. it say that, though so many have written
on the same subject, nothing could be bet
ter expressed or argued, and he seems to have been in-
*PartI., Bk. II., Ch. I.
fSchaff, Christian Church, Ch. VI., § 70.
JHist. of Great Britain, p. 992.
§Vol. Ill, Part II.

114 The Presentation to the Pope

spired more by an angelic and celestial than by a human
spirit. We can hereafter truly call him 'Lutheromas-
tica.' I send also congratulatory letters to the King.
You will hear the account of the war in Italy from the
King's ambassador and the Pope's nuncio with you.
Kome 19 Sept. 1521. Signed. Lat. p. 1, Add."

So much for the preliminary presentation. As to the
presentation in Consistory the records say :*

"1607. Clerk to Wolsey:

"The Pope has appointed next week for receiving the

King's book in open Consistory. Would have sent a

copy of his proposed oration, but was prevented by the

hasty departure of the carrier. Rome. 25 Sept. 1521.

"Hoi. My Lord Cardinal's grace."

However, we have soon after the omitted speech, at
least in substance; it runs thus:f

"1656. JOHN CLABK.

"His speech in the consistory on presenting the
King's book.

"The King has written this book to counteract the
pernicious and widespread heresies of Martin Luther,
and commissioned the speaker to offer it to his Holiness.
Enlarges on the virulence of Luther and his disrespect
for the Pope, his making himself equal to St. Peter, and
his contempt for the authority of the Fathers. Luther
has broken the rule of continence and reduced the sacra
ments to 3, 2, 1, would probably reduce them to nothing
some day. Points to the misery of Bohemia caused by
the Hussite heresy, as a warning. The new enemy
equals all heresiarchs in learning, exceeds all in wicked
ness of spirit.

"The Pope, however, has done his best to stifle the
flames, aided by learned men in all countries, of which

*Brewer, State Papers.

fBrewer, op. cit. 13th Henry VIII.

The Presentation to the Pope 115

England, though most remote, is not the least devout.
There, among other fast friends of the Holy See, the
most conspicuous is Wolsey, a member of that college,
who has caused the Pope's rescript against Luther to be
published everywhere, and Luther's book to be burned,
called an assembly of learned men to write against him,
and supported them at his own cost for some months.
In more simple times error was plucked up by the roots,
and the quiet of the Church was undisturbed. Many
wonder how a prince so much occupied was led to at
tempt a work that demanded all the energies of a veteran
man of letters ; but having already defended the Church
with his sword, Henry felt it needful to do so with his
pen, now that she is in much greater danger. Not that
he thought it glorious to contend with one so despicable
as Luther, but he wished to show the world what he
thought of that horrible portent, and to induce the
learned to follow his example, by which Luther might
be compelled himself to retract his heresies. The King,
however, has no hope of convincing him; he should be
assailed with those weapons which, if the time per
mitted, the King would use against the Turks.

"Finally, the King desires the work not to be pub
lished otherwise than with the approval of the Pope,
from whom we ought to receive the sense of the gospel.

"The Pope's answer, saying that he thanked God
the Holy See had found such a prince to defend it."

Further items are also entered :

"11 Oct. 1659. Fidei Defensor.

"Bull of Leo X. conferring upon the King, in full
Consistory, the title of 'Fidei Defensor/

"Kome 5 id Oct. 9 pont 1521. Signed by the Pope
and Cardinals. Vellum, mutilated.

"Wolsey's speech on presenting the bull for the title
of Defender of the Faith.

116 The Presentation to the Pope

"When John Cl[erk], the King's ambassador at
Rome, presented the King's book against Luther to the
late Pope Leo X., in presence of the College of Cardinals,
it was beautiful to hear with what exultation the Pope
and Cardinals broke out into the praises of Henry, de
claring that no one could have devised a better antidote
to the poison of heresy, and that Henry had with great
eloquence completely refuted Luther by reason, Scrip
ture and the authority of the Fathers. He had thus
devoted his learning to the support of religion, and
shown an example to Christian princes. As an imper
fect acknowledgment of this service, the Pope, with the
unanimous assent of the Cardinals, a little before his
death, ordained, by letters under the hands of himself
and them, that Henry should henceforth be called 'De
fender of the Faith/ and ordered a bull to be sent,
which Wolsey now presents. Congratulates Henry on
the honour, and himself on having induced him to
undertake the work.

"Lat. pp. 2 mutilated."

It is pertinent to ask about the Bull now, which was
conveyed to Henry with such "fulsome parade and
pomp."'3 It "is still in the British Museum, as also an
autograph letterf from the Pope praising Henry and
his work in the highest terms.":):

Fuller, in his "Church History of Britain," Vol. II.,
p. 13, says:

"There is a tradition that King Henry's fool, . . .
coming into the court, and finding the King trans
ported with an unusual joy, boldly asked him the cause
thereof ; to whom the King answered it was because that

*Worsley, Dawn of the Reformation, p. 160.
fSee Pope's Letter to Henry, p. 175.

^English Catholic Truth Society, pamphlet "Popery on Every
Coin of the Realm."

The Presentation to the Pope 117

the Pope had honoured him with a style more eminent
than any of his ancestors. 'O good Harry/ quoth the
fool, 'let thou and I defend one another, and let the faith
alone to defend itself.7 "

Finally, there is an amusing as well as interesting
statement made by Lowndes,* who says that the Roman
edition of 1521 had four leaves prefixed, declaring:
"Librum hunc Invictiss Anglise Regis, Fidei Defensoris
contra Mart. Lutherum Legentibus, decem annorum et
totidem XL Indulgentia apostolica Auctoritate concessa
est."

*Biograph. Manual, Part IV., p. 1039.

Eitle "SJefen&er of tbe faitb
flt to be Iberebitars ?

EDWABD VII. is the seventeenth "English sovereign
who has borne that title. . . . It is the only title be
sides that of 'King* of England he thinks it worth while
to put on his coinage. In other words, his proudest
title, after 'King of England/ is that given by the
Pope— 'Defender of the Faith.' "*

Now, the question is, has the present King, had any
king or queen other than Henry VIII., the right to the
title "Defender of the Faith" which the Pope gave
Henry ?

The question must be divided in two, thus :

1. Did the King of England ever have this title be
fore Henry VIII. ?

2. Was Henry VIII/s title given to him by the Pope
to be hereditary ?

1. As to the first, there are several reliable witnesses
for the affirmative.

In the "Archseologia," published in London, Vol.
XIX., p. 1, Luders presents very interesting testimony.
He says: "According to Henault, Pepin had received
the title of 'Most Christian7 in A.D. 755 from the Pope,
and Charles the Bald in 859 from a Council. Charles
the Sixth, in a charter of 1413, refers to ancient usage
for the same." Continuing, he says that Richard II.
and Henry IV. both speak of themselves as "Defenders
of the Faith."

*English Catholic Truth Society, pamphlet "Popery on Every
Coin of the Realm."

The Title "Defender of the Faith" 119

Further proof of this assertion is found in the work
"A History of the Christian Church during the Ref
ormation, by Charles Hardwick, M.A., [edited] by
W. Stubbs, M.A."* Apropos of Henry's title, it is
said that "the title itself, however, was not new, hav
ing been applied to previous kings, e. g., to Henry IV.
(1411)."

Confirming this statement, that Henry IV. used the
title, is the following extract from Wilkins' "Concilia,"
Vol. III., p. 334, wherein under the title "Convocatio
Prselectorum et Cleri Prov. Cant. Anno Christi 1411.
Reg. Anglioe Henric. IV. 13. Primo die Decembris in
ecclesia S. Pauli, London. Ex reg. Arundel II., fol.
22," we read that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas
Arundel, says: "Quod ipse [Thomas Arundel] pro parte
sua, singulique confratres sui, et tota ecclesia Anglicana
tenebantur, et semper tenerentur cum omni devotione
specialius et devotissime habere recommissum pros-
perum statum domini regis, tamquam pugilis, athletse,
et prsecipui defensoris fidei orthodoxse; qui maxime ad
extirpandum errores et hsereses, ac herbas venenosas, et
plantulas infectivas, jam nimis diu per regni latitudi-
nem seccrescentes, novitatis Lollardicae pravitatis ani-
madversionem suse regise majestatis, tamquam rex
catholicus, cum omni assistentia prebuit gratiosam."

Again, in Lewis' "Fisher" •)• it is said : "And yet it's
certain this was no new title, but had been claimed and
used long before by King Richard II. in the commis
sions granted by him for the apprehending and im
prisoning those who taught or maintained the conclu
sions of Dr. Wiclif. Nos zelo fidei Catholicse cujus
sumus et esse volumus Defensores in omnibus commoti."

Further, Croly, in his "Luther and the Reforma
tion,"^: speaks of "The title of 'Defender of the Seven
*P. 165, note 3. fVol. I., p. 108. JP. 222.

120 The Title "Defender of the Faith"

Sacraments/ a title which had been borne by former
kings, but which he [Henry VIII. ] exulted in as a per
sonal distinction."

So that one may reasonably conclude that the title
"Defender of the Faith," or at least a title similar in
wording, if not in idea, was used before Henry VIII.
received it from Leo. And, moreover, while it is not
so stated in the authorities consulted, yet this title, used
before the time of Henry, would seem to have been
hereditary.

2. And now as to the second part of the question:
Was the title given by the Pope to Henry VIII. in
tended by the Pope to be perpetual and hereditary ?

The evidence is not all on one side, and hence the
testimonies declaring the title hereditary are here given
first.

Butler, in his "Church History of Britain,"* says of
Henry VIII. : "To requite his pains the Pope honoured
him and his successors with a specious title, 'A Defender
of the Faith/ "

Thomson agrees with this in his "Court of Henry
VIII.," f and says : "His theological attainments enabled
him in after times to procure for himself and his suc
cessors the title of 'Defender of the Faith.' '

So, too, Lewis, in his "Life of Dr. John Fisher,":):
speaks of "An Acte in bull under lead declaring His
Grace to be the 'Defender of the Christian Faith' and
his successors forever"

The "Annals of England," page 47, says of Leo: "He
decreed to grace King Henry and his successors with
that honourable one of Defender of the Faith."

Concurring with this is Cobbett in his "History of
the Protestant Eeformation in England and Ireland,"§

•Vol. II., p. 13. jVol. I., p. 108.

fVol. I., p. 8. §Phila., 1825, p. 69.

The Title "Defender of the Faith" 121

who makes the translation of the Pope's Bull declare
that he, the Pope, does "grant unto Your Majesty, your
heirs and successors/' the title.

In Edward Hall's "Lives of the Kings"* is the fol
lowing very interesting and detailed entry : "The second
day of February, the Kynge beyng at Grenewiche, came
thether the Cardinall with a legacion from Leo, bishop
of Rome. . . . And finally the Cardinall declared how
the sayd bishop of Rome had sent his highnes an Acte
in Bull under leade, declaryng therein his grace to be
defender of the Christian fayth, and his successors for
evermore. And when his grace had received the sayd
Bull and caused it to be redde and published, he went
to his chapell to heare Masse."

"Holinshed's Chronicle of England, Scotland, and
Ireland" f has the following to say on the title being
hereditary : "On the second daie of Februarie, the King,
as then being at Greenewich, received a bull from the
Pope, whereby he was declared Defender of the Chris
tian faith, and likewise his successors forever. . . .

"The title was ascribed unto the King because he had
written a booke against Luther in Germanie ; whereunto
the said Luther answered verie sharpelie, nothing spar
ing his authoritie nor majestie. Of which booke pub
lished by the King, I will not (for reverence of his
roialtie), though I durst, report what I have read:
bicause we are to judge honourablie of our rulers, and
to speake nothing but good of the princes of the people.
Onelie this brief e clause or fragment I will adde (least
I might seeme to tell a tale of the man in the moone)
that King Henrie in his said booke is reported to rage
against the divell and antichrist to cast out his some
against Luther, to raise out the name of the Pope, and

*Henry VIII., Vol. I., p. 235.
t Vol. III., England, p. 675.

122 The Title "Defender of the Faith"

yet to allow his law, etc. I suppresse the rest for shame,
and returne to our historic."

John Foxe, in his "Acts and Monuments,"* says the
same: "But whosoever had the labour of this hook, the
King had the thanks and also the reward; for conse
quently upon the same the bishop of Rome gave to the
said King Henry, for the style against Luther, the style
and title of 'Defender of the Christian Faith/ and to
his successors forever"

Baronius, in his "Annales Ecclesiasticse,"f sides
with the foregoing: "Tarn gratum accidit Leoni id
munus Henrici Regis, ut non modum ilium laudibus
celebrarit, verum etiam defensoris Ecclesia? titulo deco-
raverit, quern veluti perpetuum et immortale regise
glorias monumentum in ejus posteras transfundendum
const ituit."$

This is certainly a rather formidable array of his
torians in favour of the title being hereditary, and yet
there are others, best of all the Bull itself, in comparison
with which all other witnesses are of little weight, which
seem to disprove the hereditary character of the
title, at least in the Pope's intention as implied in the
Bull.

Mainwaring Brown, in the Royal Historical Society's
Publications, Vol. VIII. , has an article on "Henry
VIII. 's Book, 'Assertio Septem Sacramentorum/ and
the Royal Title of 'Defender of the Faith.' " He says:
"Old writers, such as Holinshed, Lever, etc., say that it
[the title] was granted to the King and his successors,
but the words of the bull" are [see elsewhere in this
volume]. "This bull, then, so far from making the title
hereditary, especially set forth that it was not so, and

•Vol. IV., pp. 293, 294.

fCum Pagi, Tom. XXXI., p. 843, ad an. 1521, parag. LXXIV.

JIV., 468, note 1.

The Title "Defender of the Faith" 123

that if Henry's successors desired to bear it they must
earn it as he had done. . . .

"Henry did not at first see that the personal title
which he held from Rome was inferior in dignity to
the hereditary titles which they [Kings of France and
Spain] held."

And he furthermore says: "In 1523 the King ob
tained a confirmation of [the title] from Clement VII.
The original grantor, Leo X., had died before the bull
containing the title reached England. ... It is likely
that Henry desired to have the title made hereditary.
. . . Several old writers (e. g., Burnet) speak of the
second bull actually making it so. ...

"The Pope so ambiguously worded [the bull] that
Henry might be privately told that he could make the
title hereditary on its authority.

"It must not, however, be forgotten that there is no
evidence more than presumptive in favour of this
view. . . .

" . . . Henry will keep a title which he ought to have
dropped, and will grant to his descendants a distinction
which neither he nor his Parliament had any right to
bestow. . . .

"There is a vast difference between the authority
which granted the title and that which made it heredi
tary. The Pope commanded all Christian people to call
Henry Defender of the Faith ; the English Parliament
could only require his own subjects to address him by
that title."

Lastly, from this same author we read the following :
"Titulum ilium et cognomen Fidei Defensoris . . .
approbamus confirmanius tibique perpetuum et pro-
prium deputamus."

Circumstances confirm this interpretation, for the
Pope would hereby please Henry by his title, yet not

124 The Title "Defender of the Faith"

arouse the jealousy of the others by a hereditary one.
Strangely enough, Parliament declared the title heredi
tary (see State Papers, 35 Hen. VIII., c. 3). It was
repealed by Parliament in 1554, yet the crown still used
it. Elizabeth revived it by act of Parliament.

But the weightiest witness in this question is surely
the Pope's Bull itself ; so that we should carefully read
the following passage of it, which decides that the title
is not hereditary :

"As we have by this title honoured you, we likewise
command all Christians that they name your Majesty
by this title, and that in their writings to your Majesty,
immediately after the word King they add Defender of
the Faith. Having thus weighed and diligently con
sidered your singular merits, . . . which [title] as
often as you hear, or read, you shall remember your
own merits and virtues ; nor will you, by this title, exalt
yourself, . . . but become more strong and constant in
your devotion to this Holy See, by which you were
exalted. And you shall rejoice in our Lord, who is the
Giver of all good things, for leaving such a perpetual
and everlasting monument of your glory to posterity,
and showing the way to others that if they also covet to
be invested with such a title, they may study to do such
actions, and to follow the steps of your most excellent
Majesty; whom, with your wife, children, and all who
shall spring from you, we bless with a bounteful and
liberal hand."

Leo's other communication to Henry, dated Rome,
Nov. 4, 1521, and found elsewhere in this volume in
both Latin and English, does not say that the title was
to be hereditary. Certainly, if the Pope had meant it
to be hereditary, one cannot but think that he would
have said so, as he seems overflowing with .kindness and
marks of affection for Henry. Besides, the Bull alludes

The Title "Defender of the Faith" 125

to the title and hopes "that you may be able to sustain
that singular and indescribable glory, which your
Majesty has quite justly merited by your very great
deeds, even to the very last day of this life, and leave it
to be told of to all your posterity [et earn in omni pos-
teritate prsedicandam relinquere]."

Peter Heylin, in his "Ecclesia Restaurata" (2 vols.,
Cambridge, 1849), Vol. I., p. 44, says of the heredi-
tariness of the title: "But then, considering with him
self that it was first granted by that Pope as a personal
favour, and not intended to descend upon his posterity"
etc.

In the "Archreologia," Vol. XIX., p. 1 and fol., pub
lished in London 1819, Luders writes: "Our Kings do
not bear this title under the authority of Leo X.'s bull
to Henry VIII., or that of Clement VII., his successor,
who confirmed it. ... This grant, we should say, ac
cording to our law, has no proper words of limitation
and inheritance, for the blessing alone is conferred upon
the wife and children, and not the title. The inheritance
seems not to be conveyed. So that none but the King
himself could claim the honour, as peculiar to his per
son, unless in the opinion of His Holiness the descend
ant should be thought to inherit the virtues of his
ancestor.

"The Bull of confirmation, granted two years after
wards by Clement VII., ... in respect of the title
earned by his extraordinary merits, simply confirms
the grant of Leo to the King himself: 'Approbamus,
confirmamus, Tibique perpetuum et proprium depu-
tamus.' "

How, then, can the statements of so many historians
who declare the title hereditary be explained ? Possibly
flattery was their motive; very probably assumption,
not having carefully read the Bull ; or perhaps the wish

126 The Title "Defender of the Faith"

was father to the thought. So for the older historians.
For the later ones, the continued use of the error would
lead these to fancy that their monarch had a perfect
right not only "de facto" but "de jure," and con
sequently they would infer that the Pope had made it
hereditary.

At any rate, there is one very reliable historian who
stands against the title's being hereditary "de jure" ; it
is Lingard, who, in his "History of England," says most
plainly and decidedly: "It should be observed that in
neither of the bulls is there any grant of inheritance.
The title belonged to the King personally, and not to
his successors — Tibi perpetuum et proprium . . . Ibid.
But Henry retained it after his separation from the
comimmion of Rome, and in 1543 it was annexed to the
crown by act of Parliament, 35 Henry VIII., 3."

It might be added by way of negative argument, that
as Polydore Vergil says nothing of the hereditary char
acter of the title, we might also conclude that it was
for Henry alone and personally.

So that, though athe King's grace would not lose that
stile (defender of the faith) for all London and twenty
miles round about,"* yet even this he had no right to
hand down to posterity ; the assumption of the title by
the subsequent sovereigns of England was without right
and without good taste.

^Christopher Wordsworth, Ecclesiastical Biography, Vol. II.,
p. 476, note 2, of London edition, 1837.

Criticism ant> Effects of tbe "Hssertio"

As to the merits of the "Assertio," critics differ
widely, apparently somewhat influenced by religious
bias. "Henry VIII.'s treatise 'Assertio Septem Sacra-
mentorum' is an example of exactly the opposite dis
position [to Dean Colet's treatise on the seven sacra
ments], that of adhering exactly to received tradition.
It has no particular merit, literary or theological."*
So wrote Blunt.

Collier f is a little more favourable : "As to perform
ance, the King seems to have the better of the contro
versy ; and, generally speaking, to be much the sounder
divine. Generally speaking, I say, his principles are
more catholic, and his proofs more cogent. He seems
superior to his adversary in the vigour and propriety of
his style, in the force of his reasoning, and the learning
of his citations. But then, with due regard to his
memory, it must be said that his manner is not alto
gether unexceptionable. He leans too much upon his
character, argues in his garter robes, and writes as
'twere with his sceptre. He gives rough language some
times, treats Luther with contempt, and drives his in
vective pretty strong upon him. ..."

The greater part of the criticism is favourable :

Butler J says : "It is written with order and perspicu
ity."

*The Reformation of the Church of England, by J. H. Blunt,
M.A.,F.S.A., Vol. I., p. 429.

fEccles. Hist, of Great Britain, Part II., Book I.
{Historical Memoirs, Vol. I., p. 24.

128 Criticism and Effects of the fe Assertio"

Leo calls the doctrine set forth in the "Assertio"
"remarkable/' and "permeated with the dew of heavenly
grace," and he "thanked Almighty God most deeply,
Who moved your mind, so able and prone to every good
work, and, as it were, designed to pour grace from
above into your mind, that you should write these
things."*

"It was throughout an appeal to authority,"-)- is the
criticism of a professor in a great American university,
which he intended to be unfavourable, but which appears
quite the contrary to one who believes that every good
comes down from the Father of light and the Giver of
all good gifts, and knows that every one should be sub
ject to authority.

Hergenroether's estimate is calm and just: "Get
ouvrage, qu'on a beaucoup surfait de son temps, etait
con§u dans une forme populaire, et faisait habilement
ressortir les contradictions de Luther sur la confession,
les indulgences et la primaute."^:

Saconay, on p. Ixxii of his Preface to the "Assertio,"
says: "Postea quam autem sensit Lutherus hoc libro
regio, per Hieronymum Empserum in linguam Ger-
manicam translate, multum existimationis apud Ger-
manos detrahi evangelio suo."

One who reads the "Assertio" cannot fail to be im
pressed with the common sense and cool reason dis
played, and will not unlikely be won over to Henry and
the faith he defends. He quotes the Scriptures very
frequently, and several of the Fathers and theologians
aptly and tellingly. To be more accurate, he quotes
the Old Testament forty-two times: Genesis 5, Exodus

*Bull of Leo, printed In this volume.

fQeorge Fisher, Prof. Eccles. Hist, in Yale, in his " The Refor
mation," p. 126.

JHist. de 1'fcglise, V.. 247.

Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 129

3, Leviticus 1, Numbers 1, Deuteronomy 3, I. Kings 2,
Psalms 9, Proverbs 3, Wisdom 1, Ecclesiasticus 2, Ec-
clesiastes 1, Ezechiel 4, Isaias 3, and Zachary 1. The
New Testament is quoted one hundred and one times:
Matthew 11, Mark 3, Luke 10, John 18, Acts 4, Komans
7, I. Corinthians 12, Galatians 1, I. Thessalonians 1,
Colossians 1, Ephesians 3, I. Timothy 10, II. Timothy
2, Titus 2, Hebrews 4, James 8, I. Peter 2, I. John 1,
Apocalypse 1.

The style is simple and direct, and appropriate to
the subject.

Disparaging criticism can easily come from the
biassed prejudice and a priori decision of one who has
not read it, or who hates the faith Henry so well de
fends, or who would expect too much of an amateur.

No wonder, then, that so able and practical and
timely a work should have had the effect that it did.
Audin* says : "Never did a controversialist, even to this
hour, win such laurels of glory as Henry ; . . . praise
daily laid at his feet from Germany, Italy, France, the
Netherlands, and Spain." And in his "Calvin" (II.,
424) the same author asserted: "Or, TAssertio septem
sacramentorum du monarque anglais, accueillie a Rome
avec enthousiasme, avait emu le monde theologique."

The Bishop of La Rochelle, in his Introduction to
the "Assertio," says as much and even more : "Un livre
qui fit tant de bruit dans FlSurope entiere, qui excita
tant de joie dans 1'Eglise, qui produisit, parmi les
savants, une admiration si general, et qui jet a la terreur
dans le camp de I'heresie."

As to the reception it received at the Court of Rome,
Pallavicinif says: "Ce fut pour Leon le sujet d'une
grande joie."

* Henry VIII, p. 92.

fTrente, Bk. I., Ch. I., sec. 8, par. 177.

130 Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio"

Better still, we have a really beautiful, fatherly criti
cism of the worth of the "Assertio" in the Pope's Bull
of November 4, 1521, wherein he says so many kind
things in such a beautiful way. The Bull is printed
elsewhere in this volume in both Latin and English,
so I quote from it only a few lines : "What seriousness
in the theme itself ! What order ! How great force of
eloquence, so that the Holy Spirit seems to be in it!
Everything is full of judgment, of wisdom, of piety;
there is kindness in teaching, meekness in admonishing,
truth in arguing," etc.

As to the effects it had at Rome, Sample* says : "He
accomplished his main purpose, for he received from
the Pope the title of T)ef ender of the Faith.' ':' However,
this was not done hurriedly and without forethought,
for Brewerf says that only "after months spent in de
liberation, Henry, the new candidate for spiritual
honours, was admitted into the narrow and exclusive
orbit of the Church's patrons : 'Def ender of the Faith/ '

A less selfish, more generous, and far wider purpose
is attributed to Henry by Worsley in his "Dawn of the
Reformation.":): He says: "As a theological work,
although not destitute of polemical ingenuity in argu
ment, it missed the main point [stopping Luther and
the Reformation]. It was hailed as a prodigy. To
the Germans especially it appeared marvellous that a
crowned head should contain so much learning."

Still, Henry is declared to have deeply influenced a
great — and very great — man, his own Prime Minister,
for "There is no reason to doubt the statement that at
least one illustrious convert [More] was brought over
to a belief in the Pope's supremacy by the very con-

*Beacon Lights of the Reformation, p. 199.
f Reign of Henry VIII., Vol. I., p. 302.
JP. 160.

Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 131

troversialist who was afterwards to behead him for re
taining it.'7* And this despite the statement that "Sir
Thomas [had] spent seven years considering the claims
of the Papacy to be a divine institution/' as says Mary
Allies, f

As to Henry's faith, Gairdner, in the "Dictionary of
National Biography," article "Henry VIII.," says:
"Henry showed himself every day more zealous for
ancient doctrine. In November, 1537, he issued a
proclamation for Anabaptists to quit the kingdom. In
the same month he signally illustrated his position as
head of the Church by hearing personally an appeal from
the Archbishop of Canterbury by a heretic named John
Lambert, otherwise called Nicholson, who denied the
corporeal presence in the sacrament. From the ac
count of an eye-witness, preserved, and certainly not
weakened in effect, by Foxe (Acts and Monuments, ed.
Townsend, 1838, V., 230-6), he seems to have shame
fully browbeat the accused. Cromwell, on the other
hand, in a contemporary despatch, reports with admira
tion how benignly His Grace essayed to convert the
miserable man. Collier's 'Ecclesiastical History/ ed.
1852, IV., 428."

But Henry did not live up to his ideals, and this
failing to practise what he preached has been assigned
as the reason of his inability to check the cataclysm of
the Reformation, for Henry "answered Luther by his
pen, not by his life, and this is the whole secret of his
failure." J He still had faith; indeed, it seems to be
admitted that to his death Henry was a Catholic in
belief, for "To his doctrine on the sacraments Henry
consistently held fast for the rest of his life."§

*Epochs of Mod. History, Moberly, p. 152.
fThe Church in England, A.D. 1509-1603, p. 10.
JM. Allies, Ch. in Eng., p. 13.
§Worsley's Dawn of the Reformation, p. 159.

132 Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio"

As to Henry's faith outwardly manifested even at the
end of his life, Luders, in the "Archseologia," XIX.,
p. 1 and fol., says: "Our Henry indeed proved an un
grateful child of the Holy See, but his character had
nothing to disgrace the donor at the time of the gift;
and though he renounced the Pope, he may be said to
have defended the Catholick faith to the last."

And Sander* has the following interesting notice:
"In the year of our Lord 1541 the imperial Diet was
held in Ratisbon, and thereto the King [Henry VIII.],
weary, after the manner of the world, not only of the
wickedness of others, but also of his own, sent Sir
Henry Knyvett, and Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Win
chester, a man of great learning and marvellous
sagacity. One of his reasons for sending them was his
desire to justify his caution in matters of religion before
certain princes of Germany, who were charging him
with being lukewarm in his prosecution of the new
gospel. But his chief reason was this : He knew that if
neither Catholics nor Protestants were satisfied with
him, seeing that he fully agreed with neither, he there
fore determined that his ambassadors should, in concert
with the emperor, devise some means by which he might
be reconciled to the Roman Pontiff, and openly observe
the perfect rule of the Catholic faith, which he knew
to be more true and more certain than any other. He
was driven to this by the pressure of his conscience,

*Rise and Growth of the Anglican Schism. Notes by David
Lewis, pp. 152, 153. As to Sander's trustworthiness, Nicholas
Pocock, in his Preface to "The Pretended Divorce between Henry
VIII. and Catharine of Aragon," in the Camden Society's Transac
tions, 1878, has the following tribute to Sander: "Whom it has
been the fashion ever since the days of Burnet to disparage as
eminently untrustworthy. At one time I was of the same opinion,
but the more intimately I became acquainted with Sander's work
the more reason I found to change my judgment about him."

Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 133

which, as the ancients have justly observed, is equal to
a thousand witnesses."*

But these pretty speculations are well-nigh vain now.
Poor Henry! What a change from the "Defender of
the Faith" to him who drew England — the land of
Augustine, Bede, Lanfranc, Anselm and Thomas —
away from the pulsing heart of unity and the sacra
mental system, of grace !

In "A Treatise on the Pretended Divorce between
Henry VIII. and Catharine of Aragon, by Nicholas
Harpsfield, LL.D., by Nicholas Pocock, M.A.," the
Camden Society's publication for 1878, is an interest
ing domestic scene and a prophecy said to have been
made by Henry VII. respecting the gigantic mischief
his son was to consummate. It says : "I credibly under
stand himself [Henry VIII. ] was beaten of his father,
saying to Alcock, Bishop of Ely, then present and en
treating for him : 'Never entreat for him, for this child
shall be the undoing of England.' '

And yet, despite his bad life, Green says of him in
his "History of the English People" :f ". . . To the
end his convictions remained firmly on the side of the
doctrines which Luther denied."

In the "Chronicle of King Henry VIII. of England,
written in Spanish by an unknown hand, translated with
notes and instructions by Martin A. Sharp Hume,

*"Burnet (Hist. Reform., IV., 578, ed. Pocock) says that 'this
is another ornament of the fable, to show the poet's wit; but it
is as devoid of truth as any passage in Plautus or Terence is.'
. . . Sander had better opportunities of learning the truth on
this point, both in Rome and in Spain, and Gardiner confesses it
(Foxe, VI., 578) : 'Master Knevett and I were sent ambassadors
unto the emperor to desire him that he would be a mean between
the Pope's Holiness and the King, to bring the King to the obedi
ence of the See of Rome.' "

fVol. II., p. 124.

134 Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio"

Knight of the Koyal Spanish Order of Isabel the
Catholic, London, 1889," p. 152, it is said of Henry on
his death-bed : "The next day he confessed and took the
Holy Sacrament, and commended his soul to God." A
foot-note amplifies and confirms this statement. And
this firm faith was probably, in part at least, the effect of
the "Assertio," the studying out and composing of which
so clearly and deeply convinced Henry of the truth of
the faith he then defended that even after his morals had
changed yet his faith was in much still staunch and
true. The English Catholic Truth Society's tract,
"Popery on Every Coin of the Kealm," says : "Protest
antism can claim the last and worst part of his [Henry
VIII.'s] life; but in his earlier and better years, both
as prince and king, he was a staunch Catholic."

Those earlier, better, Catholic days were looked back
to with pleasure by the people who later saw and suf
fered by his unhappy change. To quote the great Cath
olic historian of Henry VIII. and the Keformation,
Dom Gasquet, in his "Henry VIII. and the English
Monasteries":* "They remembered Henry in his
earlier days, when he was never so immersed in business

*Vol. II., pp. 331, 332.

By way of parenthesis it may be interesting to recall the various
wives of Henry and their respective children, who later succeeded to
the throne.

Henry's six wives (?) and children : Catharine of Aragon, re
pudiated 1533— Mary ; Anne Boleyn, beheaded 1536— Elizabeth ;
Jane Seymour, died 1537 — Edward VI. ; Anne of Cleves, repudiated
1540 ; Catharine Howard, beheaded 1541 ; Catharine Parr, died 1548.

Apropos of Catharine's "divorcement" by Henry, Mr. John Strype,
in his "Memorials of Thomas Cranmer," Vol. I., p. 4 and fol., has
the following interesting details : " Not long after this, King Henry
being persuaded that the marriage between him and Queen Cath
arine, daughter to King Ferdinand of Spain, was unlawful and
naught, by Dr. Langland, Bishop of Lincoln, his confessor, and
other of his Clergy ; he sent to six of the best learned men of

Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 135

or pleasure that he did not hear three or five Masses a
day. ... He had at bottom a zeal for the faith." So
that the "Assertio" affected Henry himself. But, more
over, it doubtless had an influence on thousands, millions
of others who, during those days that tried men's
souls, were defended and strengthened and calmed in
their old, Catholic faith by the "Assertio Septem Sacra-
mentorum."

May it not be hoped that his work, now reprinted,
may perhaps be in some way helpful in leading back
again some of those whose forefathers Henry led or
drove from the Church ?

Cambridge, and as many of Oxford, to debate this question,
Whether it were lawful for one brother to marry his brother's wife,
being known of his brother ? . . . These learned men agreed fully,
with one consent, that it was lawful, with the Pope's dispensation,
so to do." And page 6 : " This was about August, 1529. Henry
learning of Cranmer's opinion, that the devines should leave it to
the King, sent for him and lodged him with the ' Earl of Wiltshire
and Ormond,' named Sir Thomas Bolen, . . . esteeming him a fit
person for Cranmer to reside with, who had himself been employed
in embassies to Rome and Germany about the same matter. "

As to Cranmer's opinion, it was as follows : " There is but one
truth in it ; which no men ought, or better can discuss than the
devines ; whose sentence may be soon known, and brought so to pass
with little industry and charges, that the King's conscience may
thereby be quieted and pacified. Which we all ought to consider,
and regard in this question of doubt; and then his highness, in
conscience quieted, may determine himself that which shall seem
good before God. And let these tumultuary processes give place
unto a certain truth." Id., p. 5.

/. Sources

Assertio VII. Sacramentorum adversus Mart. Lu-
therum. HenricoVIII. Anglise RegeAuctore. [Here
in reprinted.]

Assertionum Kegis Anglise de Fide Catholica adversus
Lutheri Babylonicam Captivitatem defensio. Au-
thore R. D. Johanne Roffensi Episcopo. [To be
found in Fisher's Works, and also bound up with
many editions of the Assertio, e. g., that of Paris
1562.]
Brewer. Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic.

Henry VIII. Longmans, 1867.
Bullarium Magnum Romanum. Tom. I., col. 620.

Luxemburgi 1727.

Clark, John. Oration to Leo X. [Herein reprinted.]

Erasmiana Bibliotheca, 3e Serie. Erasmus, Desiderius.

Roterodami: Opera Omnia. Lugduni Batavorum.

Cura et impensis Petri Van der Aa. MDCCIII.

Fischerii, Joannis Roffensis, in Anglia Episcopi.

Opera. Wirceburgi 1597.

Giustinian. Court of Henry VIII. London 1854.
Henry's Letter to Leo X. [Herein reprinted.]
Henry's Letter to Luther. [Herein reprinted.]
Leo X.'s Reply to Clark's Oration. [Herein reprinted.]
Leo X.'s Letter to Henry. [Herein reprinted.]
Leo X.'s Bull to Henry. [Herein reprinted.]
Polydori Vergilii Urbinatis. Anglise Historise Libri
Vigintiseptem. Basilise, apud Mich. Isingrinium:
Anno MDLV.

Bibliography 137

Roper, William. Life of Sir Thomas More, by his son-
in-law, by Singer. Chiswick 1822.

Rymer, Thomas. Feeder a. Churchill, London
MDCCXIL

State Papers between England and Spain, Calendar of.
Vol. II., Henry VIII. Edited by Bergenroth.
Longmans, London 1866.

Wilkins. Concilia Magnae Britannise et Hibernise.
Londini 1737.

II. Secondary Literature

Allies, Mary A. The Church in England, 1509-1603.
London 1895.

Alzog, John. Manual of Universal Church History.
3 vols. Clarke, Cincinnati 1874.

Annals of England. 3 vols. Oxford 1856.

Annals of England. Henry VIII., Edward VI., Queen
Mary. In Latin, by Francis, Lord Bishop of Here
ford. Englyshed by Morgan Godwyn. Islyp Stansby,
London 1630.

Annals or General Chronicle of England; begun by
John Stow; by Edmund Howes, Gent. Impenses
Ricardi Meighen, Londini 1631.

Archseologia. Society of Antiquaries of London.

Audin. Henry VIII. Dolman, London 1852.
Life of Luther. London 1854.
Calvin. 2 vols. Paris 1843.

Baronii. Annales Ecclesias. Cum Pagii. Tom.
XXXL, pag. 343. Lucse 1755.

Beard, Charles. Martin Luther and the Reformation
in Germany. London 1889.

Beckett. English Reformation. London 1890.

Blunt, J. H. The Reformation of the Church of Eng
land. Rivington, London 1882.

138 Bibliography

Bossuet. History of the Variations of the Protestant
Church. 2 vols. Kenedy, New York 1896.

Bremond, Henri. Thomas More. Licoffre, Paris 1904.

Brewer. Reign of Henry VIII. 2 vols. Murray ,
London 1884.

Bridgett. Sir Thomas More. Burns & Gates, London
1891.

Brown, J. Mainwaring. "Henry VIII.'s Book 'Assertio
Septem Sacramentorum/ " in the Royal Historical
Society's Transactions, Vol. VIII., p. 242 and fol.

Brunet, Jacques Charles. Manuel du Libraire. Tomes
V. Didot Freres, Paris 1862.

Burnet. History of the Reformation. Oxford 1865.

Butler, Charles. Historical Memoirs Respecting the
English, Irish, and Scottish Catholics. 2 vols. Lon
don 1819.

Carwithen. History of the Church of England. Parker,
Oxford 1849.

Catalogue of the British Museum.

Catalogue of the Noble and Royal Authors of England.
2 vols. London MDCCLIX. Vol. I.

Censura Literaria. London 1805.

Cobbett, William. History of the Protestant Reforma
tion in England and Ireland. Philadelphia 1825.

Collier, Jeremy. Ecclesiastical History of Great Brit
ain. Keble, London 1714.

Collier, J. Payne. A Biographical and Critical Ac
count of the Rarest Books in the English Language.
2 vols. Lilly, London 1865.

Craly. Luther and the Reformation. London 1858.

Creighton, M. History of the Papacy during the
Period of the Reformation. Oxon. and Cambridge
1882.

D'Aubigne. The Reformation. Translated by Gill.
London 1890.

Bibliography 139

Dibdin, Thomas Frognall. Typographical Antiquities,
or The History of Printing in England, Scotland,
and Ireland, by Joseph Ames, William Herbert, etc.
London 1812.

Dixon, Richard Watson. History of the Church of
England. London 1884.

Dodd. The Church History of England. 3 vols. Brus
sels 1737.

Du Pin. Ecclesiastical History of the Sixteenth Cen
tury. London 1703.

Ellis, H. Preface to Polydore Vergil's English His
tory, in the Camden Society's Publications.

English Catholic Truth Society. Popery on Every Coin
of the Realm.

Facciolati, Eorcellini. Totius Latinitatis Lexicon. 4
vols. Patavii 1771.

Fisher, George P. The Reformation. Scribner, ~New
York 1884.

Flanagan, Thomas. A History of the Church in Eng
land. Baker, London 1857.

Foxe, John. The Acts and Monuments of. 8 vols.
Religious Tract Society, London.

Fuller. Church History of Britain. 3 vols. London
1842.

Gairdner, James. History of the English Church in
the Sixteenth Century. Macmillan, London 1903.

Gardiner, Samuel R. English History for Students, by
J. Bass Mullinger. Holt, New York 1881.

Gasquet, Francis Aiden. The Eve of the Reformation.
Nimmo, London 1900.

Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries. 2 vols.
Hodges, London 1893.

Old English Bible. Nimmo, London 1897.

Green, John Richard. History of the English People.
Macmillan, London 1878.

140 Bibliography

Griininger, Jean. Repertoire Bibliographique Stras-
bourgeois. Jusque vers 1530.

Hall, Edw. Henry VIII. 2 vols. Grafton Press,
New York and London 1905.

Hallam. Constitutional History of England. New
York 1857.

Hardwick, Charles, M.A. A History of the Christian
Church during the Kef ormation : by W. Stubbs, M.A.
Macmillan, 1877.

Harpsfield, Nicholas, by Pocock. A Treatise on the
Pretended Divorce between Henry VIII. and Cath
arine of Aragon. Camden So., 1878.

Hausser, L. The Period of the Eeformation. 2 vols.
London 1873.

Henry VIII. of England, Chronicle of King. Trans
lated by Martin A. Sharp Hume. London 1889.

Herbert of Cherbury, Lord. England under Henry
VIII. London 1870.

Life and Eeign of Henry VIII. London 1741.

Herbert, Henry William. Memoirs of Henry VIII.
Porter & Coates, Philadelphia 1880V

Hergenroether, Joseph. Histoire de PEglise. Tomes 8.
Delhomme et Briguet, Paris et Lyon 1894.

Heylin, Peter. Ecclesia Kestaurata. 2 vols. Cam
bridge 1849.

Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ire
land. 6 vols. London 1808.

Hutton, W. H. Sir Thomas More. London 1895.

Janssen. History of the German People. St. Louis
1903.

Lewis, John. Life of Dr. John Fisher. 2 vols. Lon
don 1855.

Lilly. Renaissance Types. Longmans, New York
1901.

Lingard. History of England. Dolman, London 1849.

Bibliography 141

Lowndes, William T. Biographical Manual of English

Literature. In 8 parts, 4 vols. London 1859.
Luders, in Archseologia, XIX., p. 1.
Maitland, S. K. The Keformation. Eivington, Lon
don 1849.
Mason, Arthur J. Letters on Colet, Fisher, and More.

London 1895.

Mayor. Fisher's Works. London 1876.
Migne. Dictionnaire de Bibliographie Catholique.

Tom. I. Paris 1858.
Milner. History of the Church of Christ. 5 vols.

Mallory & Co., Boston 1811.
Moberly. Epochs of Modern History. The Early

Tudors. Longmans, London 1887.
Moore, A. L. Letters and Papers on the History of the

Reformation in England and on the Continent.

Kegan Paul, Trench, Triibner & Co., London 1890.
Moreri, Louis. Le Grand Dictionnaire Historique. 10

vols. Paris 1759.
Natalis, Alexandri. Historia Ecclesiastica. Tom. X.

Venetiis 1778.
Nicolas, 1ST. H. Privy Purse Expenses of King Henry

VIII. London 1827.
Overton. The Church in England. Gardner, London

1897.
Pallavicini. Histoire du Concile de Trente. Tomes

III. Migne 1844.
Panzer, G. W. Annales Typographic!. 11 vols. Norem-

bergse 1803.
Paton, James. British History and Papal Claims. 2

vols. London 1893.

Pocock, Nicholas. Burners History of the Reforma
tion. Oxford 1865.

Preface to "The Pretended Divorce between Henry

VIII. and Catharine of Aragon." Camden So., 1878.

142 Bibliography

Price, Thomas. History of Protestant Nonconformity

in England. 2 vols. London 1838.
Rohrbacher, Renatus. Histoire Universel de 1'Eglise

Catholique. Cinquieme edition. Gaume Freres et

Duprey, Paris 1868.
Roscoe, William. The Life and Pontificate of Leo X.

2 vols. Bonn, London 1885.
Saconay, Gabriel de. Preface to the Assertio. Lyons

1561.

Sample. Beacon Lights of the Reformation. Philadel
phia 1889.
Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. New

York 1895.
Seckendorf. Lutheranismi Historia. Francofurti et

Lypsi* MDCXCII.
Seebohm, Frederick. Oxford Reformers of 1498.

Longmans, 1867.

Sir Thomas More and Henry VIII. 's Book against

Luther. Fortnightly Review, Vol. III., new series,

January — June, 1868.

The Era of Protestant Revolution. Scribner, New

York 1874.
Speed, John. The History of Great Britain. Dawson,

London 1632.
Stapleton, Thomas. Tres Thomse Coloniae Agrippinse.

MDCXII.
Steuart, Agnes M. Life and Letters of Sir Thomas

More. London 1876.

Strype, John. Ecclesiastical Memorials. 6 vols. Ox
ford 1822.

Memorials of Thomas Cranmer. 2 vols. Oxford

1840.
Thomson, A. T. Memoirs of the Court of Henry VIII.

2 vols. Longmans, 1826.
Turner. Henry VIII. London 1827.

Bibliography 143

Tytler. Henry VIII. London 1854.

Walter, W. J. Sir Thomas More. Lucas, Baltimore.

Watts, Kobert. Bibliotheca Britannica. In 2 parts.

Edinburgh 1824.
Wetzer et Welte. Dictionnaire de la Theologie Catho-

lique. Vol. X. Paris 1864.
Williams, Folkstone. Lives of the English Cardinals.

Allen, London 1868.
Wordsworth, Christopher. Ecclesiastical Biography. 4

vols. 3d edition. London 1839.
Worsley. Dawn of the Reformation. London 1890.

THE "ASSERTIO"

IN
ENGLISH AND LATIN

advertisement

EVERY Person in the least conversant with ecclesias
tical History, or indeed with the civil History of Eng
land, must know that Martin Luther himself, remark
able a Man as he was, was not more so than the royal
Author of the following Work: Nor can a Reader of
either Species of History be unacquainted with those
fatal Confusions, Animosities and Devastations, that
were consequent of, and owed their Rise to, that Mode
of Religion introduced by the former, and in a great
Measure established by the latter in these three King
doms.

We shall not enter into a Detail, at large of those
Springs and Motives that were the efficient Cause of
the Reformation (as it is called) in the old Religion:
We shall only observe, very briefly, that, antecedently
to that most remarkable Revolution, some of the Clergy,
sunk in that Sloth which great Affluence is but too apt
to generate in the human Mind, became so relaxed in
Discipline, and in the Duties in general of their holy
Profession, that there was a real Necessity for a Refor
mation of Manners. Pampered Sloth not only begets a
Looseness of Morals, but is often the Father of Ignor
ance ; and thus too many of the sacred Order, not only
did not practise, but were really, even in Speculation
and Knowledge, Strangers to their Duty. The few
(comparatively the few) Learned and Virtuous saw and
lamented the almost general Depravity of the Times;
and it is probable that Luther, at first, meant no more
than to expose and correct the Enormities which he
every where saw practised : But, puffed up with a Con-

148 'Advertisement

ceit of his own Abilities ; (which indeed were far from
being contemptible) he, from endeavouring to reform
particular Abuses, which no way concerned the Essence
of Religion, (though they threw a Stain on many of its
Members) at length set about a Reformation of Religion
itself; and came to think his own Knowledge in Divin
ity superior to that of the whole aggregate Church. The
Ambition of, and Contests between some of the Ger
manic Princes, concerning Matters of a civil Nature,
were favourable to his Views ; and, in the Career of his
newly-broached Opinions, inconsistent as they were, one
with the other, he prevailed so far as to engage the
Power of Magistracy in their Propagation and Defence.
All Europe stood astonished, when it beheld Armies of
military Apostles enforcing an Obedience to the wild
and incoherent Notions of a vain, obstinate, self-willed
and enthusiastic Clergyman. The People that were de
termined not to quit the old Road to Heaven, thought
themselves obliged to defend the antient Religion, by
the like Means; and thus a general Warfare sprang,
from the Petulancy and fiery Zeal of an Individual.
The learned and virtuous Part of the Clergy employed
their Zeal, and exerted their Talents, on this alarming
Occasion; and demonstrated to the World, that the
Deviations from good Morals could be no just Founda
tion for a Separation from that Religion, which had the
Promise of Christ for its Support and Existence, whilst
the World should last.

Henry the Eighth was a Prince of great Learning,
considering the Age in which he lived. He had well
studied both Philosophy and Divinity, in his Youth;
his Father, Henry the Seventh, having intended him for
the ecclesiastical State. His Writings against Luther,
(I mean the following Work, so much approved of by
Pope Leo the Tenth) shew a Fund of ecclesiastical
Erudition, and a Strength of Understanding, uncom-

Advertisement 149

mon in Persons of his high Station. It must, indeed,
be acknowledged, that they breathe too much of the
Spirit of Acrimony, and run into a Latitude of Abuse,
ever disgustful to Readers of Taste, Moderation and
Candour : But let it be remembered, at the same Time,
That extreme Virulency, Insolence and Self-sufficiency,
almost every where, mark the Writings of Luther and
his Fellow-reformers: That those Reformers having
thus led the Way, their Opponents thought themselves
justified in retaliating the Abuse, with which they had
been attacked: And that the Manners of those distant
Times, wherein polemical Disputes about Religion were
so strongly and warmly agitated, differ very widely
from those of the present more enlightened and more
moderate Age.

Luther was not less inflamed, by the Censure of the
University of Paris (a), to whose Judgment he had
submitted his Writings, with great Elogies, and who
had condemned his Doctrine in above an hundred Prop
ositions ; than he was to find that the King of England
had written against him. His Answer abounds with
(b) "heinous Affronts and injurious Lies, in almost

every Page. This Writing did its Author no

Honour, even among those of his own Party ; even his
Friends were scandalized at the injurious Contempt,
with which he treated all that was most august in the
Universe, and at the whimsical Manner, in which he
judged of Points of Doctrine."

Henry was a pious and zealous Roman Catholic, until
such Times as he suffered himself to be borne away by
an immoderate Passion for Women, and found his
Solicitations at Rome for a Divorce from his Queen,
Katherine of Arragon, absolutely fruitless. Then it
was that he broke all Measures with the holy See ; and

(a) Historical Account of the Reformation (from Fleury's Ecclesi
astical History,) printed in Corke, 1764. (6) Id. p. 136.

150 Advertisement

he, who had been a powerful and firm Defender of the
Church, became the Corner-stone, in England, of that
Keformation which he had so warmly and strenuously
opposed.

Notwithstanding this Falling-off, however, his De
fence of the seven Sacraments is a Work of considerable
Merit. Its Orthodoxy we cannot doubt of, when we
read the Pope's Bull, granting him the most honourable
and glorious Title of DEFENDER OF THE FAITH;
a Title still retained by his Successors on the Throne,
though of a contrary Religion. Although it is not to be
doubted but that subsequent Writers have handled the
Subject-matter of this Book with more Accuracy, Clear
ness and Precision; yet the Work before us may not
only be very profitably perused, but is also extremely
curious, when we consider its Author's very remarkable
and inconsistent Character. The London Edition, from
whence the present is taken, has been carefully corrected
throughout, in the Orthography and Punctuation, and
the Text, obscure in some Parts, hath been elucidated,
without deviating, however, from the Sense of the
Author. Upon the Whole, we may venture to affirm,
that this Edition is vastly preferable to all former Ones,
in the English Tongue ; and we flatter ourselves with the
Hope, that the Pains we have taken, in the Publication
of a Work, hitherto so extremely scarce, will be satis
factory to the Curious.

1D1F1F1!,'0 letter to %eo £. on tbe
Subject of tbe "Hesertio"

Most Holy Father: I most humbly commend myself
to you, and devoutly kiss your blessed feet. Whereas
we believe that no duty is more incumbent on a Catholic
sovereign than to preserve and increase the Christian
faith and religion and the proofs thereof, and to trans
mit them preserved thus inviolate to posterity, by his
example in preventing them from being destroyed by
any assailant of the faith or in any wise impaired, so
when we learned that the pest of Martin Luther's heresy
had appeared in Germany and was raging everywhere,
without let or hindrance, to such an extent that many,
infected with its poison, were falling away, especially
those whose furious hatred rather than their zeal for
Christian truth had prepared them to believe all its
subtleties and lies, we were so deeply grieved at this
heinous crime of the German nation (for whom we have
no light regard), and for the sake of the Holy Apostolic
See, that we bent all our thoughts and energies on up
rooting in every possible way, this cockle, this heresy
from the Lord's flock. When we perceived that this
deadly venom had advanced so far and had seized upon
the weak and ill-disposed minds of so many that it
could not easily be overcome by a single effort, we
deemed that nothing could be more efficient in destroy
ing the contagion than to declare these errors worthy of
condemnation, after they had been examined by a con
vocation of learned and scholarly men from all parts of
our realm. This course of action we likewise recom-

letter to %eo f. on tbe Subject of tbe

1521

Beatissime pater. — Post humillimam commenda-
tionem et devotissima pedum oscula beatomm. Quoniam
nihil magis ex Catholic! principis officio esse arbitra-
mur, quam ut christianam fidem et religionem atque
documenta ita servet et augeat, suoque exemplo posteris
sic intemerate servanda tradat, ut a nullo fidei eversore
tolli, seu quovis pacto ea labef actari sinat ; ubi primum
Martini Lutheri pestem atque hBeresim in Germania
exortam, ubique locoruni cohibente nullo sensimus
debacchari, adeo ut suo veneno infecti plures contabes-
cerent, et hi prsesertim qui odio potius intumentes quam
christianse veritatis zelo ad ipsius versutiis atque men-
daciis credendum omni se ex parte aptaverant; atrox
istud scelus turn germanicse nationis (cui non medio-
criter afficimur), turn vero sacrosanctse apostolicse sedis
gratia sic indoluimus ut cogitationes omnes nostras,
studium et animum eo diverteremus, hanc zizaniam,
hanc hseresim e dominico grege, quacumque ratione fieri
posset, funditus tollere nitentes. Sed cum exitiale hoc
virus eo progressum imbecillosque multorum ac male
affectos animos sic jam occupasse videremus, ut uno im-
petu haud facile tolli posset; nihil seque huic delendse
pesti censuimus expedire, quam si doctoribus eruditiori-
busque hujus regni viris undique excitis trutinandos hos
errores, ac dignos qui perderentur esse declararemus,
aliisque compluribus hoc idem faciendum suaderemus;
in primisque Csesaream Majestatem, ob fratemam quam
illi gerimus aifectionem, omnesque principes electores ut

154 Henry s Letter to Leo

mended to a number of others. In the first place, we
earnestly entreated His Imperial Majesty, through our
fraternal love for him, and all the electoral princes, to
bethink them of their Christian duty and their lofty
station and to destroy this pernicious man, together with
his scandalous and heretical publications, after his re
fusal to return to God. But convinced that, in our
ardor for the welfare of Christendom, in our zeal for
the Catholic faith and our devotion to the Apostolic See,
we had not yet done enough, we determined to show
by our own writings our attitude towards Luther and
our opinion of his vile books ; to manifest more openly
to all the world that we shall ever defend and uphold,
not only by force of arms but by the resources of our
intelligence and our services as a Christian, the Holy
Roman Church. For this reason we have thought that
this first attempt of our modest ability and learning
could not be more worthily dedicated than to your
Holiness, both as a token of our filial reverence and an
acknowledgment of your careful solicitude for the weal
of Christendom. We feel assured that our first fruits
will be enhanced in value if it be approved by the whole
some judgment of your Blessedness. May you live long
and happily! From our royal palace at Greenwich,
the twenty-first day of May, 1521. Your Holiness'
most devoted and humble son, Henry, by the grace of
God King of England and France, and Lord of Ireland.

Henry's Letter to Leo 155

christiani officii suique splendoris meminisse, pestifer-
umque hunc hominem, una cuin f acinorosis hsereticisque
libellis, postquam ad Deum ainplius redire spernit,
radicitus vellent extirpare, studiose rogavimus. Sed
nostro in Christianam rempublicam ardori, in catholi-
cam fidem zelo, et in apostolicam sedem devotioni non
satis adhuc fecisse existimantes, propriis quoque nostris
scriptis quo animo sumus in Lutheruin, quodve de im-
probis ejus libellis nostrum sit judicium, innuere volu-
imus, omnibusque apertius demonstrare, nos sanctam
Eomanam Ecclesiam non solum vi et armis, sed etiam
ingenii opibus., christianisque oflBciis in omne tempus
defensuros ac tutaturos esse. Primam ideo ingenii nos-
traeque mediocris eruditionis feturam nemini magis
quam Vestrse Sanctitati dicandam consecrandamque esse
duximus ; turn ob filialem nostram in earn observantiam,
turn etiam ob solicitam ipsius christianse reipublicse
cur am. Hujusmodi autem primitiis nostris plurimum
accessum iri judicabimus, si sano vestrse beatitudinis
judicio quse comprobentur dignse habitse fuerint. Et
felicissime ac diutissime valeat ! E regia nostra Green-
wici, die XXI. Maii, 1521. E. V. Sanctitatis. Devo-
tissimus atque obsequentissimus filius Dei gratia Anglise
et Francise rex ac Dominus Hibernise, Henricus.

©ration of flDr, 3obn Clarfc,

©rator for Ibenn? TPTirf. Iking of EnglanD, ^France ano
frelano, BefenDer of tbe ffaftb; on bis exhibiting tbis
TRo^al aBooft, in tbe Consistory at IRome, to pope

Most Holy Father:

What great Troubles have been stirred up, by the
pernicious Opinions of Martin Luther; which of late
Years first sprung out of the lurking Holes of the Hussi-
tanian Heresy, in the School of Wittenberg in Ger
many; from thence spreading themselves over most
Parts of the Christian World; how many unthinking
Souls they have deceived, and how many Admirers and
Adherents they have met with; because these are all
Things very well known ; and because, in this Place, a
Medium is more requisite, than Prolixity; I care not
for relating. Truly, although many of Luther's Works
are most impiously, by his Libels, spread abroad in the
World: Yet none of them seems more execrable, more
venomous, and more pernicious to Mankind, than That,
entituled, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church; in
refuting which, many grave and learned Men have dili
gently laboured.

My most serene and invincible Prince, Henry VIII.
King of England, France and Ireland, and most affec
tionate Son of Your Holiness, and of the sacred Roman
Church, hath written a Book against this Work of
Luther's, which he has dedicated to Your Holiness ; and
hath commanded me to offer, and deliver the same;

The Oration of Mr. John Clark 157

which I here present: But before You receive it, most
holy Father, may it please You, that I speak Somewhat
of the Devotion and Veneration of my King towards
Your Holiness, and this most holy See ; as also, of the
other Reasons which moved him to publish this Work.
Nor is it amiss to take Notice, in this Place, of this
horrid and furious Monster; as also of his Stings and
Poisons, whereby he intends to infect the whole World,
and to delineate him before Your Holiness in his own
proper Colours ; that the more formidable the Enemy is,
and the greater the Danger appears, the more glorious
may the Triumph shew when that is overcome, and this
removed. But, O immortal God ! what bitter Language !
what so hot and inflamed Force of Speaking can be in
vented, sufficient to declare the Crimes of that most
filthy Villain, who has undertaken to cut in Pieces the
seamless Coat of Christ, and to disturb the quiet State
of the Church of God ! When, like an excellent
Esteemer of Things, he attributes to Your Holiness no
more Power in the Church of God, than to any of the
least Priests amongst the People; but, like a third
Cato, fallen from Heaven, most unseasonably condemns
the Behaviour of all the Ministers in the Church; calls
Rome a Sinner, wretched, an Adulteress; and lastly,
Babylon itself! He accuses Your Holiness of Heresy,,
and makes himself (thrice Apostate) as often as there
is Question in the Explication of the Christian Faith;
equal in Authority to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles !
And that he may the better demonstrate himself as great
an Enemy to Religion, as to Manners, his most impure
Hands have burnt the Decrees and most holy Statutes
of the Fathers, in which were contained the true Disci
pline of a good Life. And, as one most audacious, leav
ing Nothing unattempted ; he at last publishes this Book
of the Babylonian Captivity. In which, good God!

158 The Oration of Mr. John Clark

what and how prodigious Poison, what deadly Bane,
how much consuming and mortal Venom this poisonous
Serpent has spewed out, not only against the wicked
Manners of our Age, which in some Manner might have
been borne with; not only against Your Holiness, but
also against Your Office; against ecclesiastical Hier
archy, this See, and against that Rock established by
God himself: finally, against the whole Body of the
Church of God ! Here, the Bond of Chastity is broken,
holy Fasts, religious Vows, Rites, Ceremonies, Worship
of God, Solemnity at Mass, &c. are abolished, and ex
terminated, by the strangest Perfidiousness that ever
was heard of. This Man institutes Sacraments after his
own Fancy, reducing them to three, to two, to one ; and
that One he handles so pitifully, that he seems to be
about the reducing of it at last to Nothing at all. O
Height of Impiety ! O most abominable and most exe
crable Villainy of Man ! What intolerable Blasphemies,
from an Heap of Calumnies and Lyes, without any
Law, Method, or Order, does he utter against God, and
his Servants, in this Book ! Socrates, a Man judged by
Apollo's Oracle, to be the wisest of Men, was by the
Athenians poisoned for disputing against the commonly-
received Opinion they had of God, and against that
Religion which was at that Time taught to be the best
on Earth. Could this Destroyer of Christian Religion
expect any better from true Christians, for his extreme
Wickedness against God ? But indeed he did not look
on it; who, when dreading Punishment (which he well
deserved) fled, with a Mischief, into his perpetual lurk
ing Holes in Bohemia, the Mother and Nurse of his
Heresies. If he had remained, and had not by Your
Holiness been prohibited the free dispersing abroad of
his Errors ; what Danger, what devouring Conflagration
this Plague had brought to all Christendom; let the

The Oration of Mr. John Clark 159

Hussitanian Heresy evince ; which though, contented at
first with small Beginnings, yet, through the Neglect of
Superiors, increased to such a Height, that at last it
turned, not only Cities, and People, but also that most
populous Kingdom of Bohemia, from the Christian
Faith; reducing it to that Misery, under which it now
languishes. What can we think would be the End of
this raging Mischief, which is carried on with such
Violence and unbridled Fury, in his Prceludiums, as he
calls them ; as if some Erynnis were sent from Hell in a
Trice to confound all before it, and so rapidly trans
ported, as if it would seem to leave Nothing whereon to
exercise future Fury? which, tracing the Steps of the
Hussites, has added so much Poison to them, that now
the Enemy appears more formidable, by how much
more he equalizes all Arch-heretics in his Doctrine, and
surpasses them in his malicious and wicked Intentions :
Indeed the Danger is also so much the greater, as it is
easier to add worse Proceedings to bad Beginnings, than
to begin 111 ; and to increase Inventions, than to invent.
But Your Holiness, most blessed Father, has circum
spectly taken Care of your Flock; and meeting the
Smoak, ready to break into open Conflagration and
Flame, omitted Nothing that might avail to the prevent
ing so great Evils ; or at first to the Reconciliation of
their Author; afterwards to his Punishment and Ex
termination. The great Indignity of this Matter, as also
Your Holiness's, and the King my Master's Letters,
moved the Emperor to send this Man, swelled with Con
tumelies, into Exile. Learned Men, on all Sides, have
in their Works opposed themselves, as so many Buck
lers, for the Christian Faith, against the Darts of this
pernicious Reprobate.

Let others speak of other Nations, certainly my
Britainy (called England by our modern Cosmogra-

160 The Oration of Mr. John Clark

pliers) situated in the furthermost End of the World,
and separated from the Continent by the Ocean; as it
hath never been behind in the Worship of God, and true
Christian Faith, and due Obedience to the Roman
Church; either to Spain,, France, Germany, or Italy;
nay, to Rome itself; so likewise, there is no Nation
which more impugns this Monster, and the Heresies
broached by him, and which more condemns, and detests
them. In which Sort of most excellent Praise, I can
prefer none to him, whom I have now recorded, King
Henry, Your Holiness's most devoted Son ; who, as soon
as he understood, that the Dignity of that Government,
illustrated by Your Integrity and Virtue, and enlarged
by Your great Actions ; was, together with the Universal
Church, so bitterly inveighed against, by this Son of
Perdition ; not only undertook this pious Work himself ,
whereby he has learnedly confuted the Errors of this
impious Man; but likewise the most learned Clergy of
this Realm, have, to the utmost of their Powers, en
deavoured, with all Diligence, to remove from the
Hearts of the People all Doubts, Fears and Scruples,
that might in any wise happen to possess, or trouble the
Minds of the weaker Sort; so that, amongst us, the
Church of God is in great Tranquillity ; no Differences,
no Disputes, no ambiguous Words, Murmurings or Com
plaints, are heard amongst the People : All Troubles of
Mind, all Renovations in the World, all vain Horror of
Antichrist's Reign, are now vanished.

But now, lest my Discourse may seem too prolix, or
tedious to the diligent Attention Your Holiness is
pleased to give ; I shall presently come to a Conclusion.

Only first be pleased, that I declare the Reason that
moved my most serene King to undertake this Work.
For I believe it will cause Admiration in several, that a
Prince, so much busied with the Cares of his own King-

The Oration of Mr. John Clark 161

dom, both at home and abroad ; and whose Affairs afford
him so little Respite, should undertake such Things, as,
according to the common Saying, might require to em
ploy wholly all the Thoughts of a Man, and indeed, of
such a one, as is no E~ovice neither ; but rather for his
whole Time experienced in the Studies of Learning:
Yet, notwithstanding all this, he that considers his great
Actions done for the Faith of Christ, and his accus
tomed Reverence towards this holy See, will not think
it so strange that he, who, with his Forces and revenged
Sword, has formerly defended the Church of Rome,
when in greatest Dangers and Calamities of Wars;
should now, for the Glory of God, and Tranquillity of
the Roman Church, by his Ingenuity and Pen, put a
Stop to Heresies, which so endanger the Catholic Faith.

If no sincere Christian could suffer so great Evils to
creep into the Church, without opposing all his Forces
and Studies against them ; what ought not a Prince to
do, and such a Prince, as, by divine Providence, is ad
vanced to that Honour and Dignity, as it were, for that
very Cause, that he might protect the Catholic Faith,
and maintain the Christian Religion inviolable from
all pestilential Endeavours ?

Shall we admire, that Piety should extort from him
(being both a Christian and a Prince,) what is but the
Duty of every Christian ? These, most holy Father, are
the chief Reasons of his entering upon this Work ; his
accustomed Veneration to Your Holiness; Christian
Piety in the Cause of God ; and a royal Grief and In
dignation of seeing Religion trodden under Foot. I
confess the Desire of Glory might have been able to have
induced him to these Things ; that as he, who, under the
Charge of the best Tutors, and a Father none of the
most indulgent, having passed his younger Days in good
Learning, and afterwards so well versed in Holy Scrip-

162 The Oration of Mr. John Clark

tures, that confiding in his own Abilities, he often, (not
without great Glory) disputed with the most Learned
in Britain; might now also, for Glory's Sake, fight in
the Field of Learning against Martin Luther; a Man
indeed not illiterate.

Nor do I see in what else he could, with more Glory
and Applause, have employed this Treasure of Knowl
edge ; a Talent, doubtless, given him by God himself for
this very End. But yet the pious Prince himself does
modestly acknowledge, in his Preface, how little he at
tributes to the Force of his own Wit, which is so much
esteemed by others: For, excusing his Insufficiency in
Learning, in that Preface, he arrogates no more to him
self, than to confess that this Task might have been
much better performed by many others; and that he
himself, (much unfit, confiding only in the Assistance
of the divine Goodness) had, through the Instigation of
Piety, and Grief of seeing Religion so much abused, at
tempted to discover, by Reason, the Lutheran Heresies:
Not that he thought it honourable to contend with
Luther, who is so much despised, hissed at, and cried
down over the whole World; but that, amongst other
Things, he might testify to the World what his Opinion
was of this prodigious Monster, and his Followers;
thinking himself concerned to publish that in Writing,
not so much, lest Scruples of Conscience should follow
his Silence, as, by his Example, to induce others to the
like Undertakings, who had received a richer Gift of
Science from the Giver of Light. I confess what the
Godly Prince has writ against the Errors of Luther
might compel Luther himself (if he had the least Spark
of Christian Piety in him) to recant his Heresies, and
recall again the straying and almost forlorn Flock, not
only from Errors, but from Hell itself, where it miser
ably runs head-long. But what can be done, where

The Oration of Mr. John Clark 163

Pharaoh's Heart is hardened ; where the Wound
stinks with Putrefaction ; where Wickedness, Lying
to itself, is become miserable ? being unwilling to hear
that it should understand, or to understand that it
should do well. The Change of his Mind, and altering
his Councils to better, must be a great Miracle of Al
mighty God; for what learned Men have writ against
him as yet, does but only irritate him to grow every
Day worse and worse. Truly, my most serene King is
so far from expecting any Good from this Idol and vain
Phantom, that he rather thinks this raging and mad
Dog is not to be dealt with by Words, there being no
Hopes of his Conversion, but with drawn Swords, Can
nons, and other Habiliments of War ; (such as he would
use against the Turks themselves; if Time permitted,)
that, being constrained by due Punishment, he might be
reduced, if not to Amendment, at least to Fear. And
because, most Holy Father, the King could not revenge
with the Sword, God's Cause and Yours ; He takes other
Arms, and enters the Field of Learning; not in this
Kind of Combat, like another Hercules, to fight against
this Hydra; but because this Viper's Madness rages no
where more to the Dishonour of God, than in his Book
of the Babylonian Captivity ; nor seems he, any where
else, by his deceitful Arguments, more to endanger
weaker Judgments. Having therefore begun to batter
down this Work, he assaults it with the Force and En
gines of his Arguments ; therein performing the Office of a
pious, magnanimous General, whose Duty in military Dis
cipline, is to supply his Soldiers with most Auxiliaries,
where the Enemy presses on with greatest force. Which
Work of his, though it had the Approbation of the most
Learned of his Kingdom ; yet he resolved not to publish
until Your Holiness (from whom we ought to receive
the Sense of the Gospel, by Your quick and most sub-

164 The Oration of Mr. John Clark

lime Judgment) deem it worthy to pass through the
Hands of Men. May therefore Your Holiness take in
good Part, and graciously accept this little Book, sent
and submitted to Your Examination: In which, the
pious, and Your most devoted Prince, has, with all his
Power, endeavoured to procure, in some Manner, that
weaker Understandings should not be drawn out of the
Way, by the most wicked Works of this perverse Man ;
and hopes so to have acquitted himself, as at least he
may appear to have demonstrated his Veneration
towards the Christian Keligion, and towards Your Holi
ness.

flfeost 1bol$ Bisbop Hnevoeret) in
Gbese Morfcs

WE receive this Book with great Joy: Truly it is
such, as nothing could have been sent more acceptable
to Us, and our venerable Brethren. But, indeed, we
know not whether more to praise, or to admire, that
most potent, prudent and truly most Christian King;
who, with his Sword, has totally subdued the Enemies
of Christ's Church, Enemies, who like the Heads of the
Hydra, often cut off, and forthwith growing up again ; )
have often endeavoured to tear in Pieces the seamless
Coat of Christ; and, at Length, the Enemies being van
quished, hath settled in Peace the Church of God, and
this Holy See. And now, his Majesty having the
Knowledge, Will, and Ability of composing This excel
lent Book against this terrible Monster, has rendered
himself no less admirable to the whole World, by the
Eloquence of his Style, than by his great Wisdom. We
render immortal Thanks to our Creator, who has raised
up such a Prince, to defend His Church and this Holy
See; most humbly beseeching Him bountifully to bestow
on this Great Prince, a most happy Life, and all other
good Things that he can wish for; and after his Exit
from this transitory Life, to crown him in his coalestial
Kingdom, with a Crown of Eternal Glory. We, to our
Power, by God's Assistance, shall not be wanting in the
Performance of any Thing, that may tend to the
Honour and Dignity of his Majesty, and to His and
his Kingdom's Glory.

pope's Bull

fceo, £ . JBisbop an& Servant of tbe Servants of <5oo : Go
our rnoet oear Son in Cbrist, "fcenrB, tbe illustrious
fting of Bnglano, ano H>efenoer of tbe ffaitb, senos
Greeting, ano gives bis JSeneoiction.

BY the good Pleasure and Will of Almighty God,
presiding in the Government of the Universal Church,
though unworthy so great Charge. We daily employ all
our Thoughts, both at home and abroad, for the con
tinual Propagation of the Holy Catholic Faith, without
which none can be saved. And that the Methods which
are taken for repressing of such as labour to overthrow
the Church, or pervert, and stain her by wicked Glosses,
and malicious Lies ; may be carried on with continual
Profit, as is ordered by the sound Doctrine of the Faith
ful, and especially of such as shine in the regal Dignity :
We employ with all our Power, our Endeavours, and all
the Parts of our Ministry.

And as the other Roman Bishops, our Predecessors,
have been accustomed to bestow some particular Favours
upon Catholic Princes, as the Exigencies of Affairs and
Times required, especially on those who, in tempestuous
Times, and whilst the rapid Perfidiousness of Schis
matics and Heretics raged, not only persevered con
stantly in the true Faith, and unspotted Devotion of the
holy Roman Catholic Church; but also as the Legiti
mate Sons and stoutest Champions of the same, have
opposed themselves, both spiritually and temporally,
against the mad Fury of Schismatics and Heretics: So
also, We, for your Majesty's most excellent Works, and

ffiulla pro ftitulo Defensoris ffod*

Xeo ;6pf0copu0 Senws Servorum Dei, Cartesfmo in Cbti6to
ffilio, Denrico Bn0U*e 1Re0f, ffi&ei S>efensori, Salutem
et Bpoatoltcam JBcneDtctionem.

Ex supernae dispositionis arbitrio, licet imparibus
meritis, Universalis Ecclesia? Eegimini Prsesidentes, ad
hoc cordis nostri longe lateque diffundimus cogitatus,
ut Fides Catholica, sine qua nemo proficit ad Salutem,
continuum suscipiat Incrementum, et ut ea, quse pro
cohibendis conatibus Ilium deprimere aut pravis men-
dacibusque comentis pervertere et denigrare molien-
tium, sana Christi Fidelium, prsesertim Dignitate
Eegali Fulgentium, Doctrina sunt disposita, continuis
perficiant Incrementis, Partes nostri Ministerii et
Operam impendimus efficaces.

Et, sicut alii Komani Pontifices, Prsedecessores
nostri, Catholicos Principes (prout Rerum et Tem-
porum qualitas exigebat) specialibus favoribus prosequi
consueverunt, illos praBsertim, qui procellosis tempori-
bus, et rapida Scismaticorum et Hsereticorum fervente
perftdia, non solum in Fidei Serenitate et Devotione
illibata Sacrosanctae Romans Ecclesiss immobiles per-
stiterunt verum etiam, tanquam ipsius Ecclesiae legitimi
Filii, ac fortissimi Athleta?, Scismaticorum et Hsereti-
corum insanis Furoribus spiritualiter et temporaliter
se opposuerunt ; ita etiam nos Majestatem tuam, propter
Excelsa et Immortalia ejus erga Nos et hanc Sanctam
Sedem, in qua, Permissione Divina, sedemus, opera et
*Rymeri Feeders, Tom. VI., par. I., p. 199.

168 The Popes Bull

worthy Actions done for Us, and this Holy See, in
which by divine Permission we preside; do desire to
confer upon your Majesty, with Honour and immortal
Praises, That, which may enable and engage you care
fully to drive away from our Lord's Flock the Wolves;
and cut off with the material Sword, the rotten Members
that infect the mystical Body of Jesus Christ, and con
firm the Hearts of the almost discomforted Faithful in
the Solidity of Faith. Truly when our beloved Son
John Clark, your Majesty's Orator, did lately in our
Consistory, in presence of our venerable Brethren, Car
dinals of the sacred Roman Church, and divers others
holy Prelates; present unto Us, a Book, which Your
Majesty, moved by your Charity, (which effects every
Thing readily and well,) and enflamed with Zeal to the
holy Catholic Faith, and Fervour of Devotion towards
Us, and this Holy See; did compose, as a most noble
and wholesome Antidote against the Errors of divers
Heretics, often condemned by this Holy See, and now
again revived by Martin Luther : When, I say, he offered
this Book to Us, to be examined, and approved by Our
Authority; and also declared, in a very eloquent Dis
course, That, as Your Majesty, had by true Reasons,
and the Undeniable Authority of Scripture, and
holy Fathers, confuted the notorious Errors of LUTHER ;
so you are likewise ready, and resolved to prose
cute, with all the Forces of your Kingdom, those
who shall presume to follow, or defend them; having
found in this Boole most admirable Doctrine, sprinkled
with the Dew of Divine Grace; We rendered infinite
Thanks to Almighty God, from whom every good Thing,
and every perfect Gift proceeds, for being pleased to
fill with his Grace, and to inspire your most excellent
Mind, inclined to all Good, to defend, by your Writings,
his Holy Faith, against the new Broacher of those con-

Bulla pro Titulo Defensoris Fidei 169

gesta, condignis et immortalibus prseconiis et laudibus
efferre desideramus, ac ea sibi concedere propter quse
invigilare debeat a Grege Dominico Lupos arcere, et
putida membra, quas Mysticum Christ! Corpus inficiunt,
ferro et material! gladio abscindere, et nutantium corda
Fidelium in Fide! soliditate confirmare.

Sane cum nuper Dilectus Filius Johannes Clerk,
Majestatis tuse apud 'Nos Orator, in Consistorio nostro,
coram Venerabilibus Fratribus nostris Sanctse Romanes
Ecclesise Cardinalibus, et compluribus aliis Romanae
Curise Prajlatis, Librum, quem Majestas tua, charitate
quse omnia sedulo et nihil perperam agit, Fideique
Catholicse zelo accensa, ac Devotionis erga Nos et hanc
Sanctam Sedem fervore innammata, contra Errores
diversorum Hsereticorum, ssepius ab hac Sancta Sede
Damnatos, nuperque per Martinum Lutherum susci-
tatos et innovates, tanquam nobile ac salutare quoddam
antidotum, composuit, isTobis examinandum, et deinde
Auctoritate nostra approbandum, obtulisset, ac lucu-
lenta Oratione sua exposuisset, Majestatem tuam para-
tarn ac dispositam esse ut, quemadmodum veris Ration-
ibus ac irrefragabilibus Sacrse Scripturse et Sanctorum
Patrum Auctoritatibus notorios Errores ejusdem Mar
tini confutaverat, ita etiam omnes eos sequi et defensare
prassumentes totius Regni sui viribus et armis perse-
quatur :

Nosque ejus Libri admirabilem quandam et co3lestis
Gratia3 rore conspersam, Doctrinam diligenter accu-
rateque introspeximus, Omnipotent! Deo, a quo omne
Datum optimum et omne Donum perfectum est, im-
mensas Gratias egimus, qui optimam et ad omne bonum
inclinatam mentem tuam inspirare, eique tantam
Gratiam superne infundere dignatus fuit, ut ea
scriberes quibus Sanctam ejus Fidem contra novum
Errorum Damnatorum hujusmodi Suscitatorem defen-

170 The Pope's Bull

demned Errors; and to invite all other Christians, by
your Example, to assist and favour, with all their
Power, the orthodox Faith, and evangelical Truth, now
under so great Peril and Danger.

Considering that it is but Just, that those, who under
take pious Labours, in Defence of the Faith of Christ,
should be extolled with all Praise and Honour; and
being willing, not only to magnify with deserved Praise,
and approve with our Authority, what your Majesty
has with Learning and Eloquence writ against Luther;
but also to Honour your Majesty with such a Title, as
shall give all Christians to understand, as well in our
Times, as in succeeding Ages, how acceptable and wel
come Your Gift was to Us, especially in this Juncture
of Time: We, the true Successor of St. Peter, (whom
Christ, before his Ascension, left as his Vicar upon
Earth, and to whom he committed the Care of his
Flock) presiding in this Holy See, from whence all
Dignity and Titles have their Source; have with our
Brethren maturely deliberated on these Things; and
with one Consent unanimously decreed to bestow on
your Majesty this Title, viz. Defender of the Faith.
And, as we have by this Title honoured you ; we likewise
command all Christians, that they name your Majesty
by this Title; and that in their Writings to your Maj
esty, immediately after the Word KING, they add,
DEFENDER OF THE FAITH. Having thus
weighed, and diligently considered your singular Mer
its, we could not have invented a more congruous Name,
nor more worthy Your Majesty, than this worthy and
most excellent Title; which, as often as you hear, or
read, you shall remember your own Merits and Virtues :
Nor will you, by this Title, exalt yourself, or become
proud, but, according to your accustomed Prudence,
rather more humble in the Faith of Christ; and more

Bulla pro Titulo Defensoris Fidel 171

deres, ac reliquos Reges et Principes Christianos tuo
exemplo invitares lit ipsi etiam Orthodoxse Fidei et
Evangelicse Veritati, in periculum et discrimen ad-
ductse, omni ope sua adesse opportuneque f avere vellent ;
sequum autem esse censentes eos, qui pro Fidei Christi
hujusmodi Defensione pios Labores susceperunt, omni
Laude et Honore afficere; Volentesque non solum ea,
qua3 Majestas tua contra eundem Martinum Lutherum
absolutissima Doctrina nee minori Eloquentia scripsit,
condignis laudibus extollere ae magnificare, Auctori-
tateque nostra approbare et confirmare, sed etiam Ma-
jestatem ipsam tali Honore et Titulo decorare, ut
nostris ac perpetuis futuris temporibus Christi Fideles
omnes intelligant quam gratum acceptumque Nobis
fuerit Majestatis tuce munus, hoc prsesertim tempore
nobis oblatum ;

~Nos qui Petri, quem Christus, in coalum ascensurus,
Vicarium suum in Terris reliquit, et cui curam Gregis
sui commisit, veri Successores sumus, et in hac Sancta
Sede, a qua omnes Dignitates ac Tituli emanant,
sedemus, habita super his cum eisdem Fratribus nostris
matura Deliberatione, de eorum unanimi Consilio et
Assensu, Majestati iuoe Titulum hunc (videlicet) FIDEI
DEFENSOEEM donare decrevimus, prout Te tali Titulo
per Prgesentes insignimus; Mandantes omnibus Christi
Fidelibus ut Majestatem tuam hoc Titulo nominent, et
cum ad earn scribent, post Dictionem Regi adjungant
FIDEI DEFENSOKI.

Et profecto, hujus Tituli excellentia et dignitate ac
singularibus Meritis tuis diligenter perpensis et con-
sideratis, nullum neque dignius neque Majestati tuce
convenientius nornen excogitare potuissemus, quod quo-
tiens audies aut leges, totiens proprise Yirtutis opti-
mique Meriti tui recordaberis ; nee hujusmodi Titulo
intumesces vel in Superbiam elevaberis, sed solita tua

172 The Popes Bull

strong and constant in your Devotion to this Holy See,
by which you were exalted. And you shall rejoice in
our Lord, who is the Giver of all good Things, for leav
ing such a perpetual and everlasting Monument of your
Glory to Posterity, and shewing the Way to others, that
if they also covet to be invested with such a Title, they
may study to do such Actions, and to follow the Steps
of your most excellent Majesty; Whom, with your
Wife, Children, and all wrho shall spring from you, We
bless with a bountiful and liberal Hand ; in the Name of
Him from whom the Power of Benediction is given to
Us, and by whom Kings reign, and Princes govern; and
in whose Hands are the Hearts of Kings :

Praying, and beseeching the most High, to confirm
your Majesty in your most holy Purposes, and to aug
ment your Devotion ; and for your most excellent Deeds
in Defence of his Holy Faith, to render your Majesty
so illustrious and famous to the whole World, as that
our Judgment in adorning you with so remarkable a
Title, may not be thought vain, or light, by any Person
whatsoever; and finally, after you have finished your
Course in this Life, that he may make you Partaker of
his eternal Glory. It shall not be lawful for any Person
whatsoever, to infringe, or by any rash Presumption
to act contrary to This Letter of Subscribing, and Com
mand. But, if any one shall presume to make such
Attempt ; let him .know, that he shall thereby incur the
Indignation of Almighty God, and of the holy Apostles,
Peter and Paul.

Given at St. Peter's in Home, the fifth of the Ides of
October; In the Year of our Lord's Incarnation 1521,
and in the ninth Year of our Papacy.

Build pro Tiiulo Defensoris Fidel 173

Prudentia humilior, et in Fide Christ! ac Devotione
hujus Sanctse Sedis, a qua exaltatus fueris, fortior et
const antior evades, ac in Domino bonomm omnium
Largitore Isetaberis perpetuum hoc et immortale Glorise
tuse Monumentum Posteris tuis relinquere, illisque viam
ostendere ut, si tali Titulo ipsi quoque insigniri opta-
bunt, talia etiam Opera efficere, prseclaraque Majestatis
iuo3 Vestigia sequi studeant, quam, prout de Nobis et
dicta Sede optime merita est, una cum Uxore et Filiis,
ac omnibus qui a Te et ab Illis nascentur, nostra Bene-
dictione, in Nomine illius, a quo illam concedendi
Potestas JSTobis data est, larga et liberal! Manu Bene-
dicentes, Altissimum ilium, qui dixit, per Me Reges
regnant et Principes imperant, et in cujus manu Cor da
sunt Regum, rogamus et obsecramus ut earn in suo
Sancto Proposito confirmet ej usque Devotionem multi-
plicet, ac prseclaris pro Sancta Fide gestis ita illustret,
ac toti Orbi Terrarum conspicuam reddat ut Judicium,
quod de ipsa fecimus, earn tarn insigni Titulo deco-
rantes, a nemine falsum aut vanum judicari possit;
Demum, mortalis hujus Vitse finito Curriculo, sempi-
ternse illius Glorisc consortem atque participein reddat.

Dat. Rornce apud Sanctum Petrum, Anno Incarna-
tionis Dominicse Millesimo, Quingentesimo, Vigesimo
Primo, Quinto Idus Octobris Pontiiicatus nostri anno
Nono.

EGO LEO DECIMUS, Catholicce Ecclesice Episcopus.
Locus Signi.

letter from Xeo £ to Tbenr? 1DTI1.

respecting tbe "IDefence of tbe

Seven Sacraments"

1Tn BcfcnowleOement of tbe 3Boofc Timritten bg tbe
against Xutber

Most dear Son in Christ, Health and Apostolic Bene
diction :

Some days ago, when the envoy of Your Serenity,
Our beloved Son, John Clark, Dean of the Chapel
Eoyal, publicly in Consistory presented us the book
which Your Serenity has published against the impious
teachings and sect of Martin Luther, and in a brilliant
address, exceedingly appropriate to the occasion, de
clared, in the presence of a number of Prelates of the
Roman Court, your readiness to aid Us and the Holy
See with sword and pen, our soul was filled with joy.
Not We alone, but all Our venerable brethren rejoiced,
as though deeming that Luther's impiety had, not with
out the divine permission, assailed the Church of
Christ, so that to her greater glory she might be fortu
nate enough to find such a champion and defender.

Hence We have resolved, and all agree in Our de
cision, that your exceptional virtue and piety should be
made memorable by some mark of Our love and appre
ciation. For if it has often been, most dear Son, a
source of honour to great monarchs to take up arms to
safeguard the liberty and tranquillity of the Holy Apos
tolic See, how much more glory and reverence should
accrue from employing the weapons of the Spirit of
God and of heavenly science to remove from the faith

letter from %eo f. to "Ibenrs ID1I1I1K
respecting tbe "Hssertio Septem
Sacramentorum"

De <5ratits pro fcibro per TRegem Contra Xutberum
Scripto

CHAEISSIME in Christo fill noster, salutem et apos-
tolicam benedictionem. His prseteritis diebus, cum tuse
serenitatis Orator dilectus Filius Johannes Clerke
Capellse regise Decanus in Consistorio nostro palam
librum eum nobis obtulisset, quern serenitas tua contra
impiam Martini Lutheri et mentem et sectam edidit,
atque ipse luculenta maximeque tempori et loco accom-
modata oratione, prsesentibus etiam pluribus romanse
CuriaB Praelatis promptum animuni tuum ad nos sanc-
tamque sedem hanc armis pariter et literis juvandam
exposuisset, summa anim&e laetitia fuimus affecti ; neque
nos solum sed omnes venerabiles fratres nostri, quasi
reputantes non sine permissu divino erupisse adversus
Christi Ecclesiara Luterianam hanc impietatam, ut ipsa
ma j ore sua eum gloria talem propugnatorem ac defen-
sorem sortiri possit.

Visum itaque fuit cunctis, nobisque ita decernentibus
ab omnibus est assensum singularem hanc tuam et vir-
tutem et pietatem aliquo et amoris nostri et grati animi
monumento esse illustrandam. Etenim, charissime fili
noster, si arma sumere ut sanctse sedis apostolicse status
in sua libertate et tranquilitate permaneret tutus,
magnis ssepe Principibus honori summo fuit, quanto
magis arma spiritus Dei coelestisque scientise capere, ut
ea fide Christi tanta labes depellatur, sacramentaque ea

Pope Leo's Letter to Henry

of Christ so great a stain, and to preserve inviolate those
sacraments by which the salvation of souls is secured.

These two functions, which hitherto We have always
found separate, have been united in you alone, a mighty
sovereign, in a most eminent degree ; for you have both
vindicated the liberty of the Church with your arms,
and you have evinced your desire to fortify the Chris
tian faith against impious heresy by the treasures of
your piety and learning. The one is an evidence of
invincible and lofty courage, the other of a spirit and
sense of religion tender, devout, and orthodox.

In what words, then, or by what manner of eulogy
shall we praise this piety, this plenitude of doctrine,
overflowing as though from a celestial fountain ? What
fit return can we make for your kindness in dedicating
to us so noble a product of your intellect ? Both con
siderations exceed the powers of language, or even of
thought ; nor can we reflect on your services and deserts
without being overcome.

What love, what zeal is yours for the defence of
Christian faith! What benevolence in Our regard!
And in the book itself, wrhat solidity of matter, clear
ness of method, force of eloquence, wherein the Holy
Spirit Himself shows visibly! It is thoroughly judi
cious, wise, and pious; charitable in instruction, gentle
in admonition, correct in argument. If there be any
of your opponents who have not fallen entirely into the
power of the Prince of Darkness, they must be drawn
by your writings to a saner condition of mind, if any
chance for sanity be left.

These are distinguished and admirable achievements ;
and as they have been wrought in a new fashion, by a
princely favour, for Almighty God and the Holy See, we
render you, "Defender of the Faith, unbounded thanks.
The Apostolic See thanks you ; all who worship Christ

Pope Leo's Letter to Henry 177

quibus animarum salus, inviolata serventur, et laudem
afferre debet et celebritatem.

Quamquam hsec duo, quae duximus antea semper
divisa, in te uno maximo rege praestantissima fuerunt
conjuncta; idem enim tu et libertatem ecclesiasticam
tuis armis vindicasti, et tu idem fidem christianam
thesauris tuae et pietatis et scientiae adversiis impias
haereses munitam esse voluisti, quorum alterum invictae
et excelsae animi fortitudinis-, alterum pise et sanctae et
verse mentis ac religionis fuit; sed nos quibus tandem
verbis, quo laudum genere, vel hanc pietatem tuam, hanc
uberrimam velut ex ccelesti fonte doctrinae copiam com-
mendabimus ; vel tuae erga nos voluntati, qui nobis ipsis
tarn nobilem partum ingenii tui dicasti, gratias agemus ?
superat hoc utrumque non solum verba sed etiam cogita-
tiones nostras nee vero de tuis officiis ac meritis tantum
possumus animo ooncipere, quin a re vincamur ipsa.
Qui enim in te amor, quod studium defendend»3 chris-
tiana? fidei ? Quanta erga nos ipsos benevolentia ? quas
denique operis ipsius gravitas ? qui ordo ? quanta vis
eloquentise ut sanctum affuisse spiritum appareat;
omnia plena judicii, plena sapientiae, plena pietatis; in
docendo charitas, in admonendo mansuetudo, in redar-
guendo veritas ; ut si homines sint qui a te ref elluntur,
ac non omnino in pessimi Daemonis potestatem abierunt,
tuis scriptis ad sanitatem debeant reduci, si modo ullus
relictus est sanitatis locus.

Sunt hsec praeclara omnino et admirabilia, quae quo-
niam a te nova ratione, magnifico munere, Deo maximo
et huic sanctae sedi elaborata sunt, agimus Majestati
tuse infinitas gratias, o fidei def ensor ! Agit sedes apos-
tolica, agunt omnes qui Christum colunt et in ejus fide
consentur.

Et nos quidem titulum hunc defensoris fidei, de
eorumdem venerabilium fratrum nostrorum assensu.

178 Pope Leo's Letter to Henry

and unite in His faith thank you. We, for Our part,
with the concurrence of Our venerable brothers, bestow
on you, in other letters sealed with lead, as you will find
from their perusal, this title of Defender of the Faith.
For your part, most dear Son, however you may con
sider great and desirable these honours which the Holy
Apostolic See grants you as a reward of eminent virtue
and a mark of its grateful appreciation, realize that
greater and more glorious compensation is prepared for
you in heaven by Our Lord and Saviour. In upholding
His cause and His spouse by every means of defence you
have displayed your spirit and your virtue; and while
you review those titles which you have acquired on earth
and in heaven, remember by what claims you have
gained them. Show yourself hereafter such as you have
been heretofore. Let your later deeds be equal to your
sublime and glorious beginnings. Let the Apostolic
See, once defended by your arms, and the Christian
faith, now fortified by the shield of your doctrine against
the criminal frenzy of heretics, find and prove you ever
a helper in all their perils, so that this extraordinary
and unspeakable glory which Your Majesty has most
mightily merited by your great efforts may continue to
the last day of your life and endure to all future time
as a theme of eulogy.

Given at Kome, at St. Peter's, under the seal of the
Fisherman, the fourth day of November, 1521, the
ninth year of Our Pontificate.

On the back :

8ADOLETU8

To Our Most Christian Son in Christ, Henry, King
of England, Illustrious Defender of the Faith.

Pope Leo's Letter to Henry 179

tibi per alias nostras sub plumbo literas contulimus, ut
ex ipsis potuisti cognoscere; sed tu, charissime fill, ita
hos honores quos tibi in prsemium tuse prseclarissimae
virtutis, in signum suse erga te gratse voluntatis, sancta
sedes defert apostolica, et magnos et expetendos esse
puta, ut tamen illis longe major a et prsestantiora arbit-
rere tibi in ccelo a Domino et Salvatore nostro parata
prasmia, ejus tu causam et sponsam defendendo omni
genere tutela? et animum et virtutem tuam adhibuisti;
ut dum hos in terris quos adeptus es, titulos recensebis,
et coelestia ilia cogitabis, tecum ipse recordere quibus es
meritis ista consecutus, talemque te imposterum qualem
antea prsestes, ac principiis sublimibus et gloriosis pares
sint exitus, ipsaque sedes apostolica quse olim tuis de-
fensa armis, fides quoque Christiana qua3 nunc doctrinse
tuae clypeo adversus sceleratas haereticorum insanias
communita est, sentiant te eundem semper experian-
turque adjutorem in periculis suis omnibus, ut istam
singularem et inenarrabilem gloriam quam majestas
tua, maximis suis operibus jure optimo promerita est
ad extremum usque hujus vitse diem et producere possis,
et earn in omni posteritate pra3dicandam relinquere.

Datum Roma37 apud Sanctum Petrum, sub annulo
piscatoris, die quart! novembris, millesimo quingen-
tesimo vicesimo primo, pontificatus nostri anno nono.

Dorso :

SADOLETUS

Charissimo in Christo filio nostro Henrico Angliae
regi, illustri fidei defensori.

(Tbe lEpistle Dedicator?

Go our moat 1bolB %oro Xeot £, cbfef 3Bf8bopt f>enrst
"King of Enslano, prance, anD ITrelano, wfsbetb
perpetual Ibappiness.

Most Holy Father:

Perhaps it may appear strange to Your Holiness,
that Part of our Youth being spent in martial Affairs,
and Part in the Studies of Things belonging to the
Common-wealth ; we should now undertake the Task of
a Man, that ought to have employed all his Time in the
Studies of Learning; in opposing Ourself against this
growing Heresy. But Your Holiness (I suppose) will
the less admire, when You consider the Reasons that
obliged Us to take upon Us this Charge of Writing. We
have seen Tares cast into our Lord's Harvest ;* Sects do
spring up, and Heresies increase so much as almost, to
overthrow the Faith of Christ : And such Seeds of Dis
cord are sown abroad in the World, that no sincere
Christian, can suffer, or endure any longer their spread
ing Mischiefs, without an Obligation of employing all
his Studies and Forces to oppose them. Your Holiness
ought not therefore to wonder, if We (not the greatest
in Ability, yet in Faith and Good- will inferior to none,)
have proposed to Ourself, to employ our Force and
Power in a Work so necessary, and so profitable, that it
cannot lightly be omitted by any, without Offence ; also
to declare Our great Respect towards Your Holiness,
Our Endeavours for the Propagation of the Faith of
Christ, and Our Obedience to the Service of Almighty
*Matt. xiii. 25.

IRegis ab Summum pontificem Cptatola

Sanctisalmo Domino IRoetro, Domino Xconi I, ponttficf
fl&ajfmo, Ibenrfcue, Dei gratia res Bngliae ac Domtnua
fjtbernta:, perpetuam1 f elicftatem.

Beatissime Pater:

QUUM partim bellicis, partim aliis longe diversis
studiis reipublicse causa adolescent! am nostram insue-
verimus, miraturum te, Beatissime Pater, non dubita-
mus, quod ejus nunc hominis partes nobis sumpserimus,
qui omnem potius setatem consumpsisset in litteris, ut
gravem scilicet hasresim pullulantem comprimamus. Sed
desinet, opinor, Tua Sanctitudo mirari, postquam cau-
sas expenderit, qua3 nos subegerunt ut hoc scribendi
onus, quanquam non ignari quam sumus impares, su-
bierimus. Vidimus siquidem in messem Domini jacta
zizaniaB semina pullulare sectas, ha3reses in fide succres-
cere, et tantam per orbem totum Christianum semina-
tam discordise materiam, ut nemo, qui sincera mente
Christianus sit, hsec tanta mala, tarn late serpentia,
ferre diutius possit, quin et studium cogatur, et vires,
qualescumque possit, opponere.

Minim igitur videri non debet, si nos quoque, tametsi
potestate non maximi, fide tamen ac voluntate nemini
secundi in opus tarn pium, tarn utile, tarn necessarium,
ut a nemine ferme possit absque piaculo prsetermitti, et
nostram erga Tuam Sanctitatem observantiam, et erga
religionem Christi studium, erga Dei cultum obsequium
nostrum declarare constituiuius : maxime fidentes, etsi
eruditio nostra sit tarn exigua, ut propemodum nulla,
gratiam tamen Dei sic cooperaturam nobiscum, ut,

182 The Epistle Dedicatory

God: Greatly confiding, that although our Learning is
not much, nay in Comparison, even Nothing; yet His
Grace will so co-operate with Us, that what we are not
able thereby to effect, He, by his Benignity and Power,
may more fully perform, and by his Strength supply
Our Weakness therein. Though we know very well,
that there are every-where several more expert, espe
cially in Holy Writ, who could have more commodiously
undertaken this Great Work, and performed it much
better than We : Yet are We not altogether so ignorant,
as not to esteem it Our Duty, to employ, with all Our
Might, Our Wit and Pen in the common Cause. For
having, by long Experience, found, that Religion bears
the greatest Sway in the Administration of Public Af
fairs, and is likewise of no small Importance in the
Commonwealth; We have employed no little Time, espe
cially since We came to Years of Discretion, in the Con
templation thereof; wherein We have always taken
great Delight: And though not ignorant of Our small
Progress therein made; yet, at least, it is so much, as,
We hope, (especially with the Help, or rather Instiga
tion of such Things as can instruct the most Ignorant,
viz. Piety, and the Grief of seeing Religion abused,)
will suffice for Reasons to discover the Subtilties of
Luther's Heresy. We have therefore, (confiding in
those Things,) entered upon this Work; dedicating to
Your Holiness what We have meditated therein; that,
under Your Protection, who are Christ's Vicar upon
Earth, it may pass the public Censure. For we are per
suaded that this Heresy, having for some Time exer
cised its Rage amongst Christians; and being by Your
most weighty and wholesome Sentence condemned, and,
as it were, by Force plucked out of Men's Hands, if any
Thing remains hidden in the Bowels of it, fed by Flat
tery and fair Promises; it is to be rooted out by just

Regis ad Summum Pontificem Epistola 183

quod doctrina nequivimus perficere, id ipse pro sua
benignitate summaque potentia plenius absolvat,
ac nostram in litteris imbecillitatem suo vigore sup-
pleat.

Quanquam in litteris quoque, prsesertim sacris, etsi
certo sciamus nusquam non esse multos, qui hoc scri-
bendi munus et obire commodius, et praestare potuissent
uberius, tamen non usque adeo rudes sumus, ut in com-
muni causa dedeceat nos quoque, pro nostra virili,
calamo quid possemus, quantulum id cumque fuerit, ex-
periri.

Postquam enim in administranda republica maxi-
mam semper vim, niaximumque momentum religionem
habere multo usu advertimus, ut primum maturiores
annos attigimus, cospimus ejus contemplationi non nihil
studii impendere. Plurimum profecto, postquam coepi-
mus, in eo delectati; consecuti tamen, non nos latet,
quam exiguum, tantum tamen, ut speramus, quantum,
adjuvantibus praasertim, vel potius instigantibus iis,
quse vel admodum rudem abunde reddere instructum
possent, pietate scilicet, et Isesse religionis dolore, ad
Lutherana3 hseresis fraudes rationibus detegendas sit
satis.

Itaque etiam hac fiducia rem tentavimus, et quae in
ea meditati sumus, Sanctitati Tuse dedicavimus, ut sub
Tuo nomine, qui Christi vicem in terris geris, publicum
judicium subeant. Sic enim nobis persuasimus, quum
ea bseresis aliquandiu inter Christianos grassata gravis-
simaB saluberrimaique sententise tuaa vi e manibus
hominum sit excussa, si quid ejus in pectoribus vel
captione aliqua deceptis, vel blandis pollicitationibus
inescatis, adhuc resedit, id esse justis rationibus ex-
imendum. Sic enim futurum, ut quum duci quam
trahi se ingenia libentius patiantur, non desit his
mitioris quoque remedii ratio ; in qua promoverimus-ne

184 TJie Epistle Dedicatory

Reasons, and Arguments; that, as Men's Wits suffer
themselves, more willingly to be led than drawn; so
Reason also may supply these with the mildest Reme
dies. Whether or no any Thing is effectually done in
this, shall rest to Your Holiness's Judgment: If We
have erred in any Thing, We offer it to be corrected as
may please Your Holiness.

Regis ad Summum Pontificem Epistola 185

nos quicquam, an non, Beatitudinis Tuse judicium erit.
Cujus etiam arbitrio, si quid est a nobis erratum, corri
gendum oiferimus.

Go tbe IReafcer

ALTHOUGH I do not rank myself amongst the most
Learned and Eloquent; yet (shunning the Stain of In
gratitude, and moved by Fidelity and Piety;) I cannot
but think myself obliged, (would to God my Ability to
do it, were equal to my good Will!) to defend my
Mother, the Spouse of Christ: Which, though it be a
Subject more copiously handled by others ; nevertheless
I account it as much my own Duty, as his who is the
most learned, by my utmost Endeavours, to defend the
Church, and to oppose myself to the poisonous Shafts of
the Enemy that fights against her : Which this Juncture
of Time, and the present State of Things, require at my
Hand. For before, when none did assault, it was not
necessary to resist; but now when the Enemy, (and the
most wicked Enemy imaginable,) is risen up, who, by
the Instigation of the Devil, under Pretext of Charity,
and stimulated by Anger and Hatred, spews out the
Poison of Vipers against the Church, and Catholic
Faith; it is necessary that every Servant of Christ, of
what Age, Sex, or Order soever, should rise against this
common Enemy of the Christian Faith; that those,
whose Power avails not, yet may testify their good Will
by their cheerful Endeavours.

It is now therefore convenient, that we arm ourselves
with a two-fold Armour : the one Celestial, and the other
Terrestrial. With a celestial Armour; That he, who,
by a feigned and dissembled Charity, destroys others,
and perishes himself, being gained by true Charity,
may also gain others ; and that he who fights by a false

Hfc lectores

MOTUS quidem fidelitate ac pietate, quanquam mihi
nee eloquentia sit, nee scientise copia, cogor tamen, ne
ingratitudine maculer, matrem meam, Christ! sponsam,
utinam tanta facilitate, quanta cum voluntate de-
fendere. Quod licet alii prsestare possint uberius ac
copiosius, mei tamen officii esse duxi, ut ipse quoque,
quantumvis tenuiter eruditus, quibus rationibus possem,
Ecclesiam tuerer, meque adversus venenata jacula
hostis earn oppugnantis objicerem.

Quod ut faciam, tempus ipsum, et prsesens rerum
status efflagitat: nam antea quum nemo oppugnaret,
nemini propugnare necesse erat. At quum jam hostis
exortus sit, quo nullus potuit exoriri malignior, qui
dsemonis instinctu charitatem prsetexens, ira atque odio
stimulatus, et contra Ecclesiam, et contra catholicam
fidem vipereum virus evomuit, necesse sst adversus
hostem communem Christianae fidei omnis Christi
servus, omnis setas, omnis sexus, omnis ordo consurgat :
ut qui viribus non valent, omcium saltern alacri testen-
tur aifectu.

Nunc itaque convenit ut duplici armatura muniamur,
coelesti scilicet ac terrestri. Coslesti, ut qui ficta
charitate et alios perdit, et perit ipse, vera charitate
lucrifactus, alios lucrifaciat, et qui falsa doctrina
depugnat, doctrina vera vincatur. Terrestri vero, ut si
tarn obstinatse malitise sit, ut consilia sancta spernat, et
corruptionem piam contemnat, merito coerceatur sup-
plicio : ut qui bene f acere non vult, desinat male f acere,
et qui nocuit verbo malitise, supplicii prosit exemplo.

188 To the Reader

Doctrine, may be conquered by true Doctrine: With a
terrestrial; that, if he be so obstinately malicious, as to
neglect holy Councils, and despise God's Reproofs, he
may be constrained by due Punishments; that he who
will not do Good, may leave off doing Mischief;* and
he that did Harm by the Word of Malice, may do Good
by the Example, of his Punishments. What Plague so
pernicious did ever invade the Flock of Christ? What
Serpent so venemous has crept in, as he who writ of the
Babylonian Captivity of the Church; who wrests Holy
Scripture by his own Sense, against the Sacraments of
Christ; abolishes the ecclesiastical Rites and Cere
monies left by the Fathers; undervalues the holy and
antient Interpreters of Scripture, unless they concur
with his Sentiments ; calls the most Holy See of Rome,
Babylon, and the Pope's Authority, Tyranny; esteems
the most wholesome Decrees of the Universal Church
to be Captivity; and turns the Name of the most Holy
Bishop of Rome, to that of Antichrist ? O that detest
able Trumpeter of Pride, Calumnies and Schisms!
What an infernal Wolf is he, who seeks to disperse the
Flock of Christ ?f What a great Member of the Devil
is he,:): who endeavours to tear the Christian Members of
Christ from their Head ?

How infectious is his Soul, who revives these detest
able Opinions and buried Schisms; adds new ones to
the old, brings to Light (Cerberus-like, from Hell) the
Heresies which ought to lie in eternal Darkness; and
esteems himself worthy to govern all Things by his own
Word, opposed against the Judgments of all the
Antients; nay also to ruin the Church of God! Of
whose Malice I know not what to say. For I think
neither Tongue nor Pen can express the Greatness of it.
Wherefore, before I exhort, pray, and beseech, through
*Rom. xiii. 3, 4. fMatt. vii. 15. tJohn viii. 44.

Ad Lectores 189

Quse pestis unquam tarn perniciosa invasit gregem
Christi ? Quis serpens unquam tarn venenatus irrepsit,
quam is, qui de Babylonica Captivitate Ecclesise
scripsit, qui Scripturam sacram ex suo sensu contra
Christi sacramenta detorquet, traditos ab antiquis
Patribus ecclesiasticos ritus eludit, sanctissimos viros,
vetustissimos sacrarum litterarum interpretes, nisi qua-
tenus ipsius sensui conveniunt et consentiunt, nihili
pendit, sacrosanctam sedem Romanam Babylonem ap-
pellat, summum Pontificium vocat tyrannidem, totius
Ecclesise decreta saluberrima captivitatem censet, sanc-
tissimi Pontificis nomen in Antichristum convertit. O
detestabilis arrogantise, contumelise, ac schismatis buc
cinator ! Quantus inferorum lupus est iste, qui Christi
gregem dispergere quserit ! Quantum diaboli mem-
brum, qui Christianos Christi membra quserit a capite
suo decerpere ! Quam putris hujus animus, quam
execrabile propositum, qui et sepulta ressuscitat schis-
mata, et vetustis adjicit nova, et haereses seternis abden-
das tenebris velut Cerberum ex inferis producit in
lucem, dignumque ducit se, cujus unius verbo, post-
habitis antiquis omnibus, universa regatur, imo sub-
vertatur Ecclesia! De cujus ego malitia quid dicam,
nescio: quam tantam censeo, quantam neque lingua
cujusquam, neque calamus exprimere possit.

Quamobrem vos omnes Christi fideles hortor, oro, et
per Christi nomen, quod professi sumus, obtestor, ut
qui Lutheri opera (si modo is Babylonicse Captivitatis
sit auctor) omnino velint inspicere, caute illud, et cum
judicio faciant, ut, quemadmodum Virgilius aurum se
colligere dixit e stercore Ennii, sic e mediis malis
colligant bona. Nee ita, si quid arridet ipsis, affician-
tur, ut cum melle simul imbibant venenum. Multo
enim satius fuerit utroque carere, quam utrumque
glutire.

190 To the Reader

the Name of Christ (which we will profess) all Chris
tians, who are willing to look upon, and read Luther's
Works, especially the Babylonian Captivity, (if he be
Author of it) to do it warily, and very judicially ; that,
as Virgil said, lie gathered Gold out of the Dross of
Ennius; so they may also gather good Things out of
Evil : And if any Thing please them, let them not be so
taken with it, as to suck the Poison with the Honey;
for it is better to want both, than to swallow both. To
hinder which, I wish the Author may Repent, be con
verted, and live;* and, in Imitation of St. Augustine,
(whose Rule he professed) correct his Books, filled with
Malice, and revoke his Errors. If Luther refuses this,
it will shortly come to pass, if Christian Princes do
their Duty, that these Errors, and himself, if he perse
veres therein, may be burned in the Fire. In the mean
while, we thought it fit to discover to the Readers some
chief Heads or Chapters in the Babylonian Captivity,
which have the most Venom in them, by which it will
appear, very clearly, with what exulcerated Mind he
began this Work ; pretending the public Good, but writ
ing Nothing but malicious Inventions.

We need not seek any foreign Testimonies for
proving what we have said; for Luther (fearing that
any one should go up and down in Search of such,) dis
covers himself, and his Mind, of his own Accord, in his
very Beginning. For who should doubt of what he
aimed at, when he reads this one Sentence of his ?
*Ezech. xxxiii. 11.

Ad Lectores 191

Quod ne accidat, utinam auctor aliquando resipiscat,
ut convertatur, et vivat! ac suos libros omni malitia
refertos, exemplo Augustini, cujus regulam profitetur,
retractet, erroresque revocet ! Quod si recuset Lutherus,
brevi certe fiet, si Christian! principes suum officium
feoerint, ut errores ejus, eumque ipsum, si in errore
perstiterit, ignis exurat. Interea nobis visum est in
Captivitate Babylonica quasdam loca commons trare
lectoribus, in quibus prsecipuum latet venenum. Ex
quibus aperte satis constabit quam exulcerato animo
agressus sit opus, qui, quum publicum bonum pra3-
tendat, nihil prseter malitiam ad scribendum afferat.

Ut ha3C doceamus, qua3 diximus, baud longe nobis
petenda? probationes sunt : nam ne quis ob earn rem
sursum deorsum cursitet, Lutherus ultro sese atque
animum suum primo statim principio prodit. Quis
enim dubitet quo tendat, quo se proripiat is, cujus vel
hunc unum versum legerit ?

CHAP. I

©f flnbulgences, anb tbe pope's Hutborit?

Indulgeniice suni adulaiorum Romanorum nequitiw.

As every living Creature is known chiefly by its Face,
so by this first Proposition it evidently appears, how
corrupt and rotten his Heart was, whose Mouth, being
filled with Bitterness, broke out into such a Corruption ;
for what he said of INDULGENCES in Times past, seemed
to many, not only to detract much of the Roman
Bishop's Power, but also to lessen the good Hope and
holy Consolation of the Faithful, and mightily to excite
Men to confide in the Riches of their own Penitence,
and despise the Treasures of the Holy Church, and the
Bounty of God : And yet what he then writ, was favour
ably interpreted, because he only disputed many of
them, but did not affirm them; desiring to be taught,
and promising to obey him that would instruct him
better. But what this new Saint, (who refers all
Things to the Holy Spirit, which cannot brook any
Thing of Falsehood,) did then write with a simple
Intention, is easily discovered: For as soon as he had
any Thing of wholesome Advice given him, he immedi
ately vomited his Malediction against those, who en
deavoured his Good, reviling them with Reproaches and
Quarrels ; for which it is worth our While to see what
Height of Folly he is come to at last. He confessed
before that Indulgences were good, at least to absolve us,
besides the Crime, from the Punishments also which
should be enjoined us by the Order of the Church, or.

CAP. I

Sunt adulatorum Romanorum nequitice.

QUEMABMODUM animal omne potissimum ex facie
dignoscitur, ita ex hac quoque prima propositione
clarescit quam suppuratum ac putridum is habeat cor,
cujus os, amaritudine plenum, tali exundat sanie. Nam
quse de Indulgentiis olim disseruit, ea plserisque multum
videbantur adimere non modo de potestate Pontificis,
verum etiam de bona spe ac sancta consolatione fidelium,
hominesque vehementer animare, ut in poenitentise suse
confisi divitiis, Ecclesise thesaurum, et ultroneam Dei
benignitatem contemnerent : et tamen ea, quae turn
scripsit, omnia, idcirco mitius accepta sunt, quia plse-
raque disserebat duntaxat, non asserebat, subinde etiam
petens doceri, seseqne pollicens meliora docenti pari-
turum. Verum istud quam simplice scripsit animo
homo sanctulus, et omnia referens ad spiritum, qui
fictum effugit, hinc facile deprenenditur, quod simul
atque a quoquam salubriter est admonitus, ilicet pro
benefacto regessit maledictum, conviciis et contumeliis
insaniens : quibus operse pretium est videre, quo vesanise
tandem provectus est. Ante fassus est Indulgentias
hactenus saltern valere, ut prseter culpam etiam a poenis
absolverent, quascumque videlicet vel Ecclesia statuerat,
vel suus cuique sacerdos injunxerat. Xunc vero non
eruditione, ut ipse inquit, sed malitia tantum profecit,
ut sibi ipsi contrarius, Indulgentias in universum con-
demnet, ac nihil aliud eas dicat esse, quam meras im-

194 Of Indulgences, and the Pope's Authority

by our particular Priest: But now it was not by Learn
ing, (as he says himself,) but by mere Malice that he
wrought; and, contradicting himself, he condemns In
dulgences; and says, That they are nothing but mere
Impostures, fit only to destroy People's Money, and
God's Faith. Every Man may see how wickedly and
furiously he rails in this Matter : For, if Indulgences, as
he says, are but mere Impostures, and good for Nothing,
then it follows, that not only our Chief Bishop, LEO X.
(whose innocent, unspotted Life, and most holy Con
versation are well known through the World, as Luther
himself confesses in a Letter of his to the Pope) is an
Impostor; but also all Roman Bishops in so many past
Ages, are so, wrho, as Luther himself says, did use to
give Indulgences; some a Year's Remission; some three
Years; some to forgive a Lent's Penance; some a certain
Part of the whole Penance, as the Third, or one Half;
at least Something., as to plenary, or full Remission of
the Sin and Punishment.

Then were they all Impostors, if Luther be true : But
how much more Reason is there to believe, that this
little Brother is a scabbed Sheep, than that so many
Pastors were treacherous, and unfaithful ? For Luther,
as is said above, shews what Kind of Man he is, and
how uncharitable, when he blushes not, to lay such a
Crime against so great, and so holy Bishops. If God
(in Leviticus) says to all, Thou shalt not be an Accuser,
or Backbiter amongst the People;* what may we think
of Luther, who casts such a foul Scandal, not only on
one Man, but on so many, and so venerable Prelates?
And this he whispers, not only in one City, but pub
lishes to the whole World. If he be accursed (as in
Deuteronomy) who shall privately smite his Neigh
bour;-^ with how great a Curse shall he be strucken, who
*Levit. xix. 16. fDeut. xxvii. 24.

I ndulg entice 195

posturas, ad nihil omnino valere, prseterquam ad per-
dendam hominum pecuniam, ac Dei fidem.

Qua in re quam non scelerate modo, verum etiam
f uriose bacchatur, nemo est qui non videt. Nam si nihil
omnino valent Indulgentise, sed merge sunt, ut Lutherus
ait, imposturse, tune necesse est impostores fuerint, non
hie tantum Pontifex Leo decimus, cujus innocens et in-
culpata vita moresque sanctissimi ab ineunte setate per
orbem totum satis explorati sunt, quemadmodum in
epistola quadam ad Pontificem Lutherus etiam ipse
fatetur, verum etiam tot retro sseculis omnes Romani
Pontifices, qui, quod Lutherus ipse commemorat, in-
dulgere solebant, alius remissionem annuam, alius
triennem, quidam aliquot condonare quadragesimas,
nonnulli certam totius poenitentise partem, tertiam puta,
vel dimidiam: aliqui demum remissionem indulserunt
et poena?, et culpa9 plenariam. Omnes ergo, si vera dicit
Lutherus, fuerunt impostores.

At quanta magis cum ratione creditur hunc unum
fraterculum morbidam esse ovem, quam tot olim Pon-
tifices perfidos fuisse pastores ? Nam Lutherus, ut dixi,
cujusmodi vir sit, quam nihil omnino charitatis habeat,
evidentissime declarat, quum non vereatur tot summis,
tot sanctis Pontificibus tantum crimen impingere. Si
Deus in Levitico dicit omnibus : "Non eris criminator,
nee susurro in populis" quid de Luthero censendum
est? qui tarn immane crimen non in unum aliquem
hominem, sed in tarn multos, tarn venerandos spargit
antistites, idemque non in una quapiam urbe susurrat,
sed per totum buccinat orbem? Si maledictus in
Deuteronomio dicitur, qui clam percusserit proxi-
mum, quanta maledictione percutitur, qui palam
tantis opprobriis insultat in prsepositos ? Denique
si "homicida est/' ut ait evangelista, ffnec vitam
Jiabet ceternam, qui odit fratrem" annon hie aeterna

196 Of Indulgences, and the Pope's Authority

insults over his Governors with such Reproaches?
Finally, Jf, (as the Gospel says) lie be a Murtherer, and
has not Life everlasting, who hates his Brother;* does
not this Parricide deserve everlasting Death, who, with
Hatred pursues his Father? Seeing he is come to that
Pass, as to deny Indulgences to be profitable in this
Life ; it would be in vain for me to dispute what great
Benefits the Souls in Purgatory receive by them : More
over, what would it avail us to discourse with him of the
great Helps, whereby we are relieved from Purgatory
itself ? Not able to endure to hear of the Pope's deliver
ing any Person out of it, he presumes to leave none
there himself.

What Profit is there to dispute, or fight against him,
who fights against himself? What should my Argu
ments avail me, though I force him to confess what he
before denied, since he now denies what before he con
fessed? But admit the Pope's Indulgences were dis
putable; yet it is necessary that the Words of Christ
remain firm, by which he gave the Keys of the Church
to St. Peter, when he said, Whatsoever thou shalt bind
on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever
thou shalt loose on Earth, shall be loosed in Heaven:^
Likewise, Whose Sins ye forgive, shall be forgiven unto
them, and whosoever Sins ye retain, shall be retained.^.
By which Words, if it is manifest that any Priest has
Power to absolve Men from Sins, and take away eternal
Punishment due thereunto ; who will not judge it ridicu
lous, that the Prince of all Priests should be denied the
taking away of temporal Punishment ?

But perhaps some may say, that Luther will not ad
mit that any Priest has Power of binding, or loosing
any Thing; or that the Chief Bishop has any greater
Power than other Bishops or Priests: But what con-
*I. John iii. 15. fMatt. xvi. 19. {John xx. 22.

Indulgentice 197

dignus morte parricida est, qui odio prosequitur
patrem ?

Qui quum eousque progreditur, ut neget Indulgentias
quicquain valere in terris, frustra cum eo disputem
quantum valeant in purgatorio. Prseterea quid pro-
fuerit cum illo loqui quibus subsidiis liberemur a purga
torio, qui totum f erme tollit purgatorium ? Unde quum
pati non possit ut Pontifex quemquam eximat, ipse sibi
tantum sumit, ut neminem ibi relinquat. Quid attinet
cum eo pugnare, qui pugnat ipse secum? Quid argu-
mentis promo v earn si cum eo agam, ut donet quod
ante negavit, qui nunc id ipsum negat, quod ante dona-
verat ?

Verum, quantuinvis disputentur Indulgentise Pon-
tificis, necesse est inconcussa maneant verba Christi,
quibus Petro claves commisit Ecclesise, quum dixit:
"Quidquid ligaveris super terrain., erit ligatum et in
ccelo; et quidquid solveris super terram, erit solutum et
in ccelo." Item: "Quorum remiseritis peccata, remit-
tentur; et quorum retinueritis peccata, retinebuntur."
Quibus verbis si satis constat sacerdotem quemlibet
habere potestatem a mortalibus absolvendi criminibus,
et seternitatem poenaB tollendi, cui non videatur absur-
dum sacerdotum omnium principem nihil habere juris
in poenam temporariam ?

Verum aliquis f ortasse dicet : "Lutherus ista non ad-
mittet, sacerdotem ullum quicquam ligare, vel solvere,
aut Pontificem summum plus habere potestatis, quam
alium quemvis episcopum, imo quam quemlibet sacer
dotem." At quid id mea, quid admittat, aut quid non
admittat is, qui quorum nihil admittat nunc, eorum
plseraque paulo prius admisit, quique omnia nunc reji-
cit solus, quse tota tot sseculis admisit Ecclesia ? ]STam,
ut csetera taceam, quse novus iste Momus reprehendit,
certe Indulgentias, si Pontifices peccavere, qui conces-

198 Of Indulgences, and the Pope's Authority

cerns it me, what that Man admits, or denies, who
granted many Things a while ago, which now he denies,
and who, alone, rejects all Things which the Holy
Church has held during so many Ages ? For (to omit
other Things which this new Momus, or feigned Deity
censures) certainly if the Popes have erred, who granted
Indulgences; the whole Congregation of the Faithful
were not free from Sin, who received them for so long
a Time, and with so great Content : In whose Judgment,
and in the Custom observed by the Saints, I doubt not
but we may rather acquiesce, than in Luther alone, who
furiously condemns the whole Church, whose Chief
Bishops, he not only loads with mad Reproaches, but
also fears not to publish, that this Supremacy of the
Pope is but a vain Name, and is effectually Nothing but
the Kingdom of Babylon, and the Power of Nimrod,
that strong Hunter; and desires his Readers, and the
Book-binders, that (burning whatsoever he first writ of
Papacy,) they may reserve this one Proposition, &c.

Indulgentice 199

serunt, immunis a peccato non erat tota congregatio
fidelium, qui eas tamdiu tanto consensu susceperunt:
quorum ego judicio, et observatae sanctorum consuetu-
dini non dubito potius acquiescendum, quam Luthero
soli, qui totam Ecclesiam tarn furiose condemnat. Qui
non modo summum Pontificem conviciis insanis in-
cessit, verum etiam proclamare non veretur: Ponti-
ficium ipsum inane prorsus nomen esse, nee re quicquam
aliud esse censendum, quam regnum Babylonis, et
potentiam Nemrod robusii venatoris: eoque lectores
orat, orat libraries, ut omnibus, quae prius de Pa-
patu scripsit, exustis, hanc unam propositionem
teneant.

CHAP. II

©f tbe pope's authority

Papatus est robusta Venatio Romani Pontificis.

INDEED it is no ridiculous Desire in him, to wish the
Things he writ before should be burned ; because many
of them deserved it; yet much more this Proposition,
which he desires may be preserved after the rest are
burned, as if worthy of Eternity. What Man, if he had
not known his Malice, but would have admired his In
constancy in this Place ? For first, he denied the Pope's
Supremacy to be of divine Right, or Law, but allowed
it to be of human Right: But now, (contrary to him
self) he affirms it to be of neither of them ; but that the
Papacy, by mere Force has assumed, and usurped
Tyranny. Formerly he was of Opinion, That Power
was given to Roman Bishops over the Universal Church
by human Consent, and for the public Good: And so
much was he of that Opinion, that he detested the
Schism of the Bohemians, who denied any Obedience to
the See of Rome; saying, That they sinned damnably
who did not obey the Pope: Having written these
Things so little Time before, he now embraces what then
he detested. The like Stability he has in this: That
after he preached, in a Sermon to the People, That Ex
communication is a Medicine, and to be suffered with
Patience and Obedience; he himself, being (for every
good Cause,) a while after excommunicated, was so im
patient of that Sentence, that (mad with Kage) he
breaks forth into insupportable Contumelies, Re-

CAP. II

Ipapatus

Est robusta venatio Romani Pontificis.

LLLUD, hercle, non absurdum votum est, quod quse
ante scripsit, flammis optat absumi. Erant enim
pleraque flammis digna: sed multo tamen ipsa propo-
sitio dignior, quam, exustis illis, jubet velut dignam
seternitate substitui.

Quanquam, quis non hie quoque, nisi qui malitiam
norit, miretur inconstantiam ? Nam prius Papatum
negaverat esse divini juris, sed humani juris esse con-
cesserat. !N~unc vero, secum dissidens, neutrius juris
esse confirmat, sed Pontificem sibi mera vi sumpsisse
atque usurpasse tyrannidem. Sentiebat ergo pridem,
humano saltern consensu, propter bonum publicum Ro
mano Pontifici super Ecclesiam catholicam delatam esse
potestatem. Idque usque adeo sentiebat, ut Boemorum
quoque schisma detestaretur, quod se ab obedientia
Eomanse Sedis abscinderent ; pronuncians eos peccare
damnabi liter, quicumque Papse non obtemperarent.
Ha3C quum baud ita pridem scripserit, nunc in idem
quod turn detestabatur, incidit.

Quin istud quoque similis est constantise : quod quum
in concione quadam ad populum excommunicationem
doceat esse medicinam, et obedienter patienterque
ferendam, paulo post excommunicatus ipse, idque
meritissimo jure, sententiam tamen tarn impotenter
tulit, ut rabie quadam furibundus in contumelias, con-
vicia, blasphemias, supra quam ullse possint aures ferre,

202 Of the Pope's Authority

proaches and Blasphemies: So that by his Fury, it
plainly appears, that those who are driven from the
Bosom of their Holy Mother the Church, are immedi
ately seized, and possessed with Furies, and tormented
by Devils. But I ask this ; he that saw these Things so
short a while since, how is it that he becomes of Opinion,
that then he saw Nothing at all ? What new Eyes has
he got? Is his Sight more sharp, after he has joined
Anger to his wonted Pride, and has added Hatred to
both? Does he see farther with these so excellent
Spectacles ?

I will not wrong the Bishop of Rome so much, as
troublesomely, or carefully to dispute his Right, as if
it were a Matter doubtful ; it is sufficient for my present
Task, that the Enemy is so much led by Fury, that he
destroys his own Credit, and makes clearly appear, that
by mere Malice he is so blinded, that he neither sees,
nor knows what he says himself. Eor he cannot deny,
but that all the Faithful honour and acknowledge the
sacred Roman See for their Mother and Supreme, nor
does Distance of Place or Dangers in the Way hinder
Access thereunto. For if those who come hither from
the Indies tell us Truth, the Indians themselves (sepa
rated from us by such a vast Distance, both of Land and
Sea,) do submit to the See of Rome. If the Bishop of
Rome has got this large Power, neither by Command of
God, nor the Will of Man, but by main Force ; I would
fain know of Luther, when the Pope rushed into the
Possession of so great Riches ? for so vast a Power, (es
pecially if it begun in the Memory of Man,) cannot
have an obscure Origin. But perhaps he will say, it is
above one or two Ages since ; let him then point out the
Time by Histories: Otherwise, if it be so antient that
the Beginning of so great a Thing is quite forgot; let
him know, that, by all Laws, we are forbidden to think

Papatus 203

proruperit sic, ut suo furore plane perspicuum fecerit
eos qui pelluntur gremio matris Ecclesise statim Furiis
corripi, atque agitari dsemonibus.

Sed istud rogo: qui ilia tarn nuper vidit, unde nunc
subito videt nihil se tune vidisse ? Quos novos oculos
induit ? An acutiore cernit obtutu, postquam ad super-
biam solitam ira quoque supervenit, et odium? Et
longius videlicet prospicit, usus tarn prseclaris con-
spiciliis ?

Non tarn injurius ero Pontifici, ut anxie ac sollicite
de ejus jure disceptem, tanquam res haberetur pro
dubia. Satis est ad prsesens negotium, quod inimicus
ejus ita furore provehitur, ut sibi fidem deroget ipse, ac
dilucide se ostendat prse malitia neque constare secum,
neque videre quid dicat. Nam negare non potest quin
omnis Ecclesia fidelium sacrosanctam Sedem Romanam
velut matrem primatemque recognoscat ac veneretur,
qusecumque saltern neque locorum distantia, neque peri-
culis inter jacentibus prohibetur accessu. Quanquam,
si vera dicunt qui ex India quoque veniunt hue, Indi
etiam ipsi, tot terraruin, tot marium, tot solitu-
dinum plagis disjuncti, Komano tamen se Pontifici
submittunt.

Ergo si tantam ac tarn late fusam potestatem, neque
Dei jussu Pontifex, neque hominum voluntate con-
secutus est, sed sua sibi vi vendicavit, dicat velim Lu-
therus quando in tantas ditionis irrupit possessionem.
Non potest obscurum initium esse tarn immensse poten-
tise, prsesertim si intra memoriam hominum nata
sit. Quod si rem dixerit unam fortassis aut duas
setates superare, in memoriam nobis rem redigat ex
historiis.

Alioqui, si tarn vetusta sit, ut rei etiam tantse oblit-
erata sit origo, legibus omnibus cautum esse cognoscit,
ut cujus jus omnem hominum memoriam ita super-

204 Of the Pope's Authority

otherwise, than that Thing had a lawful Beginning,
which so far surpasses the Memory of Man, that its
Origin cannot be known. It is certain, that, by the
unanimous Consent of all Nations, it is forbidden to
change, or move the Things which have been for a long
Time immoveable. Truly, if any will look upon antient
Monuments, or read the Histories of former Times, he
may easily find, that since the Conversion of the World,
all Churches in the Christian World have been obedient
to the See of Borne. We find, that, though the Empire
was translated to the Grecians, yet did they still own,
and obey the Supremacy of the Church, and See of
Rome, except when they were in any turbulent Schism.

St. Hierome excellently well demonstrates his good
Esteem for the Roman See, when he openly declares,
(though he was no Roman himself ,) that it was suffi
cient for him, that the Pope of Rome did but approve his
Faith, whoever else should disapprove it.

When Luther so impudently asserts, (and that
against his former Sentence,) That the Pope has no
Kind of Right over the Catholic Church; no, not so
much as human; but has by mere Force tyrannically
usurped it; I cannot but admire, that he should expect
his Readers should be so easily induced to believe his
Words ; or so blockish, as to think that a Priest, without
any Weapon, or Company to defend him, (as doubtless
he was, before he enjoyed that which Luther says he
usurped,) could ever expect or hope, without any Right
or Title, to obtain so great a Command over so many
Bishops, his Fellows, in so many different, and divers
Nations. How could he expect, I say, that any Body
would believe, (as I know not how he could desire they
should,) that all Nations, Cities, nay Kingdoms and
Provinces, should be so prodigal of their Rights and
Liberties, as to acknowledge the Superiority of a strange

Papatus 205

greditur, ut sciri non possit cujusmodi habuerit initium,
censeatur habuisse legitimum; vetitumque esse constat
omnium consensu gentium, ne, quse diu manserunt im-
mota, moveantur.

Certe si quis rerum gestarum monumenta revolvat,
inveniet jam olim, protinus post pacatum orbem,
plerasque omnes Christiani orbis Ecclesias obtem-
perasse Romanse. Quin Grseciam ipsam, quanquam ad
ipsos commigrasset imperium, reperiemus tamen, quod
ad Ecclesiae primatum pertinebat, prseterquam dum
schismate laborabat, Ecclesise Romanse cessisse. Beatus
vero Hieronymus quantum Romanse Sedi censeat defer-
endum vel inde luculenter ostendit, quod quum Ro-
manus ipse non esset, tamen aperte fatetur sibi satis
esse, si suam fidem, quibusvis improbantibus aliis, com-
probaret Papa Romanus.

Cui quum Lutherus tarn impudenter pronunciet,
idque contra suam pridem sententiam, nihil omnino
juris in Ecclesiam catholicam, ne humano quidem jure,
competere, sed Papam mera vi meram occupasse tyran-
nidem, vehementer admiror quod aut tarn faciles, aut
tarn stupidos speret esse lectores, ut sacerdotem credant
inermem, solum, nullo septum satellitio, qualem fuisse
eum necesse est, priusquam eo potiretur, quod eum Lu
therus ait invasisse, vel in spem venire unquam
potuisse, ut nullo jure fultus, nullo fretus titulo, in tot
ubique pares episcopos, apud tarn diversas, tarn procul
disjectas gentes, tantum obtineret imperium. Nedum
ut credat quisquam populos omnes, urbes, regna, pro-
vincias, suarum rerum, juris, libertatis fuisse tarn pro-
digos, ut externo sacerdoti, cui nihil deberent, tantum
in sese potestatis darent, quantum ipse vix esset ausus
optare.

Sed quid refert quid in hac re Lutherus sentiat, qui
prse ira atque invidia non sentit ipse quid sentiat, sed

206 Of the Popes Authority

Priest, to whom they should owe no Subjection ? But
what signifies it to know the Opinion of Luther in this
Case, when (through Anger and Malice,) he himself is
ignorant of his own Opinion, or what he thinks ? But
he manifestly discovers the Darkness of his Understand
ing and Knowledge, and the Folly and Blindness of his
Heart, abandoned to a reprobate Sense, in doing and
saying Things so inconsistent. How true is that saying of
the Apostle ? Though I have Prophecy, and understand
all Mysteries, and all Knowledge; and though I have
all Faith, so as to remove Mountains, and have not
Charity, I am Nothing.* Of which Charity Luther not
only shews how void he is, by perishing himself through
Fury; but much more by endeavouring to draw all
others with him into Destruction, whilst he strives to
dissuade them from their Obedience to the Chief
Bishop, whom, in a three-fold Manner, he himself is
bound to obey, viz. as a Christian, as a Priest, and as a
religious Brother; his Disobedience also deserving to be
punished in a treble Manner: He remembers not how
much Obedience is better than Sacrifice ;f not does he
consider how it is ordained in Deuteronomy, That the
Man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken
unto the Priest, (that stands to minister there before
the Lord thy God,) or unto the Judge, even that Man
shall die:$ He considers not, I say, what cruel Punish
ment he deserves, that will not obey the chief Priest
and supreme Judge upon Earth. For this poor Brother,
being cited to appear before the Pope, with Offers to pay
his Expences, and Promise of safe Conduct ; he refuses
to go without a Guard; troubling the whole Church as
much as he could, and exciting the whole Body to rebel
against the Head ; which to do, is as the Sin of Witch
craft; and in whom to acquiesce, is as the Sin of Idol-
*I. Cor. xiii. 2. f I. Kings xv. 22. JDeut. xvii. 12.

Papatus 207

bene declarat offuscatam scientiam suam, ei cor ipsius
insipiens obscuratum, traditumque in reprobum sensum,
ut faciat ac dicat ea quce non conveniunt. Quam verum
est illud Apostoli : "8i habuero prophetiam, et noverim
omnia mysteria, et omnem scientiam, et si habuero
omnem fidem, ita ut monies transferam, charitatem
autem non habuero, nihil sum!" A qua quam longe
abest iste, non illud tantum ostendit, quod prae furore
perit ipse, sed istud multo magis, quod universes secum
trahere conatur in perditionem, dum omnes ab obedi-
entia summi Pontificis laborat avertere : cui ipse triplici
vinculo tenetur astrictus, utpote Christianus, sacerdos,
et postremo fraterculus, tripliciter a Deo vicissim
puniendus.

Neque meminit quicquam, quanto melior est obedi-
entia quam victimce. Xeque considerat, si in Deuter-
onomio cavetur ut qui superbierit, nolens obedire sacer-
dotis imperio, qui pro tempore ministrat Domino Deo
suo, et decreto judicis, moriatur, quam atroci sit sup-
plicio dignus is, qui sacerdoti omnium summo, eidemque
supremo in terris judici non paruerit. Nam et quum
vocaretur ad Pontificem, oblatis expensis, et data fide,
venire tamen fraterculus, nisi munitus prsesidio, con-
tempsit; et jam, quoad potest, totam perturbat Eccle^
siam, corpusque totum sollicitat ad rebellandum capiti,
cui quasi peccatum ariolandi est repugnare, et quasi
scelus idolatries nolle acquiescere.

Quamobrem quum Lutherus, odio provectus, se prse-
cipitet in perniciem, et legi Dei recuset esse subjectus,
suam nimirum quserens constituere, nos vicissim Chris-

208 Of the Pope's Authority

atry* Seeing therefore that Luther , (moved by Hatred)
runs head-long on to Destruction, and refuses to submit
to the Law of God, but desires to establish a Law of his
own; it behoves all Christians to beware, lest (as the
Apostle says) through the Disobedience of one, many be
made Sinners ;\ but on the contrary, by hating and de
testing his Wickedness, we may sing with the Prophet,
I hated the wicked, and loved your Law.\

*I. Kings xv. 23. fRom. v. 19. {Ps. cxviii. 113.

Papatus 209

ticolae caveamus ne, quod Apostolus ait, "per inobedi-
entiam unius hominis peccatores constituti simus
multi;" sed illius iniquitatem perosi, Domino cum
propheta canamus: "Iniquos odio habui, legem autem
tuam dilexi."

CHAP. Ill

Gbe Defence of tbe Seven Sacraments

BUT these two Chapters, (of abrogating Indulgences,
and taking away all Authority of the chief Bishop,) of
which we have already given our Opinion ; tho7 they are
wicked, yet are they but the Flourishings or first Essays
of Luther, who now begins to murder and destroy the
Sacraments, which in his Book he goes about to do ; all
which whole Book, he confesses to be but a Flourish, to
I know not what Work : I suppose it is some Work, in
which he intends to fight more seriously against our
most holy Faith, yet I much admire he should think to
compose any Thing whatsoever, more stuffed with
Venom, than is this whole Preface, or Flourish of his :
In which of seven Sacraments, he leaves us but three,
nor them neither, unless for a Time ; giving us to under
stand, that he shall soon also take them from us ; for of
the three, he takes away one immediately after in the
same Book; whereby he plainly shews us what he in
tends to do with the rest.

To which Undertaking it seems he prepares the Way,
when he says, That if he would speak according to
Scripture, he would leave but one Sacrament and three
Sacramental Signs. If any one do but diligently ex
amine how he handles these three Sacraments, (which,
for the present, he puts as three Sacraments, or under
three Signs) he may perceive that he treats of them in
such a Manner, as that none should doubt, but that when
he sees his own Time, and at his own Pleasure, he in
tends wholly to deprive us of them all.

CAP. Ill

5)e Sacramentte

AT ista duo capita de tollendis prorsus Indulgentiis,
et auferenda potestate summi Pontificis, de quibus quid
nobis videtur exposuimus, quantumvis impia sint, Lu-
theri tamen non nisi praeludia sunt ad Sacramenta peri-
menda, quod toto agit libro. Quern librum totum f atetur
prseludium, ad operis, opinor, quippiam, in quo decrevit
serio moliri totius expugnationem fidei. Quanquam
vehementer admiror, si quicquam edet unquam tarn
serium, ut plus tumere veneno queat, quam totum hoc
turget prseludium. In quo protinus, ex sacramentis sep-
tem, tantum relinquit tria, nee ea tamen, nisi pro
tempore, nimirum significans ilia etiam ipsa propediem
sese sublaturum: nam e tribus unum aufert paulo post
eodem libro, quo plane declaret quid proponet in
reliquis.

Quam in rem viam etiam videtur prsestruere, quum
ait se, si Scripturarum more loqui velit, non nisi unum
sacramentum, et tria signa sacramentalia positurum.
Quod si quis diligenter inspiciat quo pacto tractet hsec
tria sacramenta, quse, seu tria, seu, tribus sub signis,
unum ponit pro tempore, videbit ea sic ab illo tractata,
ut nemini relinquat dubium id ilium in animo moliri,
ut omnia tria possit suo rursus tempore prorsus amo-
liri.

212 The Sacrament of the Altar

Let the Reader diligently observe his Steps, and look
to his own, that he may discover the Subtilties of this
Serpent; and let him not, with too much Security,
thrust himself amongst these Thorns, Brambles, and
Dens, but warily walk round his Caverns, fearing lest he
should secretly strike his mortal Sting into his Heel:
This hideous Monster being caught, will become be
numbed, and pine away by his own Venom.

CHAP. IV

Sacrament of tbe altar

LET us therefore begin where he began himself, with
the adorable Sacrament of Christ' s Body. The changing
of the Name thereof, calling it, The Sacrament of
Bread, shews that this Man cannot well endure, that we
should be put in Mind of Christ's Body, by the Name of
the Blessed Sacrament; and that, if under any fair Pre
text, it were possible for him, he would give it a worse
Name. How much differs the Judgment of St. Ambrose
from this Man's, when he says, Though the Form of the
Bread and Wine is seen upon the Altar, yet we must
believe, that there is Nothing else but the Body and
Blood of Christ: By which Words it clearly appears,
that St. Ambrose confesses no other Substance to remain
with the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament,
when he says, That which is seen under the Form of
Bread and Wine, is Nothing else but the Body and
Blood of Christ. If St. Ambrose had only said Flesh
and Blood, without adding any Thing more, perhaps
Luther would have said, that the Bread and Wine were
there also ; as Luther himself says, That the Substance
of the Flesh is with the Bread, and the Substance of the

De Sacramento Eucharistice 213

Quas colubri istius astucias quo f acilius, lector, possis
deprehendere, observa diligenter singula vestigia ejus, et
suspende gressus tuos, neque nimium securus inter
vepres ac tribulos, latebras et speluncas ejus obambula,
ne, ex occulto insidiatus, calcaneo tuo exitiale virus in-
stillet. Deprehensus enim torpebit ignavus, et suo ipse
veneno tabescet.

CAP. IV

Be Sactamento

INCIPIAMUS ergo, unde ipse incepit, a venerabili sac-
ramento corporis Christi. Cujus primo quod nomen
mutet, ac vocari velit sacramentum panis, indicat homi-
nem non valde bene ferre, quod ipso sacramenti nomine
admoneamur corporis Christi, et sicubi reperire colorem
potuisset, quo nomen dare potuisset deterius, libenter
fuisse daturum. Cujus ab animo perquam longe dissidet
ac dissentit beatus Ambrosius, quum dicit : "Licet figura
panis et vini in altari videatur, nihil tamen aliud, quam
caro et sanguis Christi, credenda est." Ex quibus verbis
evidentissime clarescit Ambrosium fateri nullam aliam
substantiam cum Christi corpore manere permixtam,
quum dicat nihil aliud esse quam corpus et sanguinem
Christi id quod figura panis videtur, et vini. Si tantum
dixisset Ambrosius: caro et sanguis, potuisset fortasse
Lutherus dicere quod Ambrosius, fatendo esse carnem
et sanguinem, non negaret tamen panem simul esse ac
vinum; quemadmodum Lutherus ipse dicit carnis sub
stantiam cum pane, et sanguinis una cum vino sub-
sistere. Sed quum Ambrosius dicat nihil esse aliud,
quam carnem et sanguinem, aperte contradicit Luthero,

214 The Sacrament of the Altar

Blood along with the Wine: But seeing St. Ambrose
says, That there is Nothing else but the Flesh and
Blood, it appears that he is manifestly against Luther,
who affirms, That the Bread is with the Flesh, and the
Wine with the Blood.

And though this which Luther says, were as true
as it is false, viz. That the Bread should remain
mingled with the Body of Christ; yet was it not
necessary for him to blot the Name of the Body of
Christ out of the Sacrament, in which he confesses
that the true Body of Christ is. For if the Sub
stance of Bread should be with the Body of Christ, (as
he contends,) yet there is no Reason that the inferior
Substance should take away the Name from the more
worthy: Because, though the Apostle, (conforming him
self to the Understanding of the Auditors, then ignorant
People,) called it Bread; yet now, after the Faith has
been so long established, it was not fit or convenient to
change this so adorable a Name, (which represents to
the Hearers, the Thing in the Sacrament,) into such a
Name as would have turned their Minds from the Body
to the Bread; neither would Luther, without Doubt,
have changed it, if he had not determined with himself
to draw the People to worship the Bread, and leave out
Christ's Body; from which he himself is divided; con
cerning which, I shall presently speak more fully.

Sacrament of tbe Bucbarist un&er ®ne fform onlg
Bominfsterefc to tbe

IN the mean while, let us truly examine how subtilely,
under Pretence of favouring the Laity, he endeavours
to stir them up to an Hatred against the Clergy: For
when he resolved to render the Church's Faith sus
picious, that its Authority should be of no Consequence
against him; (and so, by opening that Gap, he might

De Sacramento Eucharistice 215

qui simul cum carne dicit esee panem, et simul cum
sanguine vinum.

Quanquam si id, quod Lutherus dicit, tarn verum
esset quam falsum est, pane cum Christi carne simul
manere permixtum, tamen ne sic quidem necesse fuit
Luthero delere nomen corporis Christi ex sacramento in
quo fatetur verum Christi corpus esse. Nam si panis
etiam substantia simul cum Christi corpore adesset,
quemadmodum iste contendit, non est tamen ratio cur
inferior substantia nomen prajripiat digniori. Nam etsi
rudibus adhuc populis, ad auditorum captum se de-
mittens Apostolus panem vocavit, nunc tamen tamdiu
stabilita fide, nomen tain venerabile, quod rem sacra-
menti repraesentet audientibus, in id nomen, quod audi
torum animos a corpore in panem averteret, non
oportebat immutari. Nee immutasset haud dubie Lu
therus, nisi secum statuisset populum paulatim a Christi
corpore, a quo ipse jam prsecisus est, in panis vene-
rationem traducere, qua de re paulo post dicemus
uberius.

De Sacramento JEucbartstfac sub Tuna 3antum Specie
Xalcte

INTERIM vero libet excutere quam fraudulenter per
speciem f avoris in laicos conetur eorum odium concitare
in sacerdotes. Nam quum decrevisset Ecclesise fidem
suspect am redder e, ne quid ponderis ejus haberet auc-
toritas, atque ita facta via, prsecipua quseque Christiana?
religionis evertere, ab ea re sumpsit initium, cui popu-

216 The Sacrament of the Altar

destroy the chief est Mysteries of Christianity,) he be
gan with that Thing, which he foresaw would be praised
and applauded by the People: For he touched the old
Sore, by which Bohemia had been formerly blistered,
viz. That the Laity ought to receive the Eucharist under
both Kinds. When first he began to handle this Point,
he only said, That the Pope would do well, to have it
ordained by a general Council, that the Laity should re
ceive the Sacrament under both Kinds; but that being
by some disputed with him, and denied, he contented
not himself to stop there, but grew to such a perverse
Height, that he condemned the whole Clergy of Wicked
ness, for not doing it without staying for any Council.
For my Part, I do not dispute the first : And though to
me, no Reason appear why the Church should not or
dain, that the Sacrament should be administered to the
Laity, under both Kinds ; yet doubt I not, but what was
done in Times past, in omitting it, and also in hindering
it to be so administered now, is very convenient. Nor
can I believe the whole Clergy, (during so many Ages,)
to have been so void of Sense, as to incur eternal Pun
ishment for a Thing by which they could reap no tem
poral Good. It further appears not to be a Thing of
any such Danger; because God, not only bestowed
Heaven upon those Men, who did this Thing themselves^
and writ that it ought to be done; but likewise would
have them honoured on Earth, by those by whom he is
adored himself: Amongst whom (to omit others,) was
that most learned and holy Man Thomas Aquinas, whom
I the more willingly name here ; because the Wickedness
of Luther cannot endure the Sanctity of this Man, but
reviles with his foul Lips, him whom all Christians
honour. There are very many, though not canonized, who
are contrary to Luther's Opinion in this ; and to whom, in
Piety and Learning, Luther is in no wise comparable:

De Sacramento Eucharistice 217

lum sperabat alacriter applausurum. Tetigit enim
vetus ulcus, quo pridem ulcerata est Boemia, quod laid
sub utraque specie non recipiant Eucharistiam. Earn
rem quum prius ita tractasset, ut duntaxat diceret recte
f acturum Pontificem, si curaret communi concilio statu-
endum ut sub utraque specie laici communicarent, post,
ubi nescio quis illud ei negavit, non contentus in eo
manere, quod dixerat, sic profecit in pejus, ut totum
clerum condemnet impietatis, quod istud non faciant,
non expectato concilio.

Ego de primo non disputo. Cseterum, etiam si causas
non viderem, cur non decernat Ecclesia ut utraque
species ministretur laicis, tamen dubitare non possem
quin sint idoneae quse et olim f ecerunt ut id omitteretur,
et nunc quoque faciunt ne redintegretur. ^Tec plane
assentior totum clerum per tot ssecula fuisse tarn stoli-
dum, ut se obstrinxerit seterno supplicio propter earn
rem, unde nihil reportaret commodi temporalis: imo
vero, quam nihil sit talis periculi, vel hoc evidenter
ostendit, quod eos qui non tantum istud fecerunt, verum
etiam qui scripserunt esse faciendum, Deus non modo
suscepit in ccelum, verum etiam voluit esse venerandos
in terris, et ab hominibus honorari, a quibus honoratur
ipse. Inter quos fuit (ut de aliis interim taceam) vir
eruditissimus, et idem sanctissimus divus Thomas
Aquinas, quern ideo libentius commemoro, quoniam ejus
viri sanctitatem Lutheri ferre non potest impietas, sed
quern omnes Christiani venerantur, pollutis labiis
ubique blasphemat. Quanquam sunt permulti, qui,
etiam si pro sanctis recepti non sunt, tamen, sive doc-
trina, sive pietate spectentur, tales sunt, ut Lutherus eis
comparari non possit, qui hac in re contrarium Luthero

218 The Sacrament of the Altar

Among whom are the Master of the Sentences, Nich
olas de Lyra, and many others; to each of whom it
behoves all Christians to give more Credit, than to
Luther.

But pray observe how Luther staggers, and contra
dicts himself : In one Place, he says, That Christ, in his
last Supper, not only said to all the Faithful, as per
mitting, but as commanding, Drink ye all of this:* Yet
afterwards, (fearing to offend the Laity, whom he flat
ters, with a View to stir up their Hatred against the
Priests,) he adds these Words, not that they, who use
but one Kind do sin against Christ, seeing Christ did
not command to use any Kind, but left it to every Man's
Discretion, saying, As often as ye do this, do it in Re
membrance of me : But, says he, they sin who forbid to
give both Kinds to such as are willing to receive them:
The Blame, says he, lies on the Clergy, and not on the
Laity. You see how clearly he first holds it for a Con-
mand, and then says, it is no Commandment, but a
Thing left to every Man's Discretion. What need we
contradict him, who so often contradicts himself ?

And yet before, when he speaks of all, in general, he
does not defend the Laity well, if any Body would urge
the Matter: And he proves no Sin to be in the Priests,
whom he accuses most bitterly : For, he says, the Sin con
sists in the Priest's taking the Liberty of one Kind from
the Laity: If any Body should ask him here, how he
knows that Custom to have been practised against the
People's Will ? I believe he cannot tell it. Why then
does he condemn the whole Clergy, for having taken the
Laity's Right from them by Force, seeing he cannot by
any Testimony prove that this was forcibly done ? How
much more reasonable should it be, to say, that the Con
sent of the People did concur with this Custom for so
*Matt. xx vi. 27.

De Sacramento Eucliaristice 219

sentiunt. Inter quos sunt Magister sententiarum, et
jSTicolaus de Lira, et complures alii, quorum cuilibet
magis expedit Christianos omnes, quam Luthero,
credere.

At vide, quaeso, quam vacillat ac sibi repugnat Lu-
therus. Uno loco dicit Christum in Ccena omnibus
omnino fidelibus, non permittendo, sed prsecipiendo
dixisse: "Bibite ex eo omnes/' Postea vero timens ne
laicos, quibus in sacerdotum odium adulatur, offenderet,
hsec verba subjungit: "Non quod peccent in Christum
qui una specie utuntur, quum Christus non prseceperit
ulla uti, sed arbitrio cujuslibet reliquerit, dicens : Quo-
tiescunque hcec feceritis, in mei memoriam facietis; sed
quod illi peccant, qui hoc arbitrio volentibus uti pro-
hibent utramque dari, culpa non est in laicis, sed in
sacerdotibus." Videtis aperte, quod primo dixit esse
prseceptum, hie dicit non esse prseceptum, sed cujuslibet
arbitrio relictum. Quid opus est ergo nos illi contra-
dicere, qui sibi toties contradicit ipse ?

Et tamen quum dixit omnia, laicos non satis def endit,
si quis rem urgeret, et in sacerdotibus, quos tarn atro-
citer accusat, nihil probat esse peccati. ISTam in eo dicit
totum esse peccatum, quod sacerdotes alterius speciei
laicis invitis adimerent libertatem. Hie igitur si quis
eum percontetur qui sciat istum ritum inolevisse reni-
tente populo, non potest, opinor, docere. Cur ergo
totum condemnat clerum, quod laicis invitis ademerit
suum jus, quum id invitis esse f actum nullo possit docu-
mento probare ? Quanto f uit a;quius, si, nisi volentibus
illis, recte nequivifc institui, pro nunciare, pro tot ssecu-
lorum consuetudine, plebis intervenisse consensum?
Ego certe, qui video quas res a plebe clerus obtinere non
potest, ne tantum quidem, quin ferme sub ipso altari

220 The Sacrament of the Altar

many Ages, if it could not be justly established but with
their Pleasure ? For my Part, when I see what Things
the Clergy cannot obtain from the Laity, (not even an
Exemption from burying their Dead almost under their
Altars') I cannot easily believe that they should suffer
themselves to be injuriously, and by Force, deprived of
any such great Part of their Rights ; but that rather this
was instituted for some reasonable Causes, and with the
Consent of the Laity.

What I most admire, is, that Luther should be so
angry and passionate, for having one Kind taken
away from the Laity in the Communion; but is
Nothing at all moved that Children should be de
barred from both: For he cannot deny, but that
Children, in the primitive Times, did receive the
Communion: Which Custom, if it was justly omitted,
(though Christ said, Drink ye all of this*) and that,
without Doubt, for very good Reasons, (though no Body
can now remember them) why should we not think that
it was for good and just Reasons, unknown at this Time,
the primitive Custom of the Laity's receiving the Sacra
ment in both Kinds, (which perhaps continued not for
any considerable Time,) was taken away?

Moreover, if he examines the strict Form of the
Evangelical Narration, and leaves Nothing in this Mat
ter to the Church ; why does he not command the Sacra
ment to be always received at Supper-time, or rather
after it ?

Finally, it should not be esteemed less inconvenient to
do any Thing in the Manner of receiving this Sacra
ment, which ought not to be done. If therefore the
Custom of the whole Church does not well, in denying
to the Laity the Communion under the Form of Wine,
by what Reason durst Luther put Water into the Wine ?
*Matt. xxvi. 27.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 221

suorum condant cadavera, non facile credo populum
fuisse passurum ut inviti per contumeliam, in tanta
re, ab ulla juris sui parte pellerentur, sed causis
aliquot idoneis, e laicorum quoque voluntate, consti-
tutum.

At istud miror, tarn vehementer indignari Lutherum
laicis ademptam alteram, quum nihil eum permoveat,
quod utraque species adimatur infantibus: nam illos
olim communicasse nee ipse negare potest. Qui mos si
recte fuit omissus, quanquam Christus dicat: "Bibite
ex hoc omnes" nee quisquam dubitat quin causae fuerint
magna3, etiam si nunc earum nemo meminisset, cur non
etiam cogitemus bonis justisque rationibus, quantumvis
nunc ignoratis, abolitam esse consuetudinem qua laici
olim, nee id fortasse diu, sub utraque specie solebant
recipere sacramentum ?

Praeterea, si earn rem ad exactam evangelicse narra-
tionis formam revocat, neque quicquam prorsus per-
mittit Ecclesise, cur Eucharistiam non jubet semper in
coena recipi, imo vero post coenam ?

Denique non minus incommodi fuerit in hoc sacra-
mento facere, si quid fecisse non debeas, quam si quid
non facias, quod fecisse debueras. Ergo si totius Ec-
clesiae consuetudo rectum non f acit ut in laicis omittatur
species vini, qua ratione aquam in vinum audet Lu-
therus infundere ? Neque enim tarn audacem puto, ut
sine aqua consecret, quam tamen ut admisceret, neque
exemplum habet ex Coena dominica, neque ex Apostoli

222 The Sacrament of the Altar

for I do not think that he is so bold as to consecrate
without Water; yet has he no Example in our Lord's
Supper, nor any certain one, of the Apostles Tradition,
of mingling the Wine with Water: But he learned it
only by the Custom of the Church; to which, if he
thinks himself obliged to be obedient in this Part, why
does he so arrogantly oppose it in the other ?

Whatever Luther chatters concerning this Matter;
for my Part I judge it more safe, to believe that the
Laity do rightly communicate, though under one Kind ;
than that the Clergy, for so many Ages, were damned,
for omitting both, (as he disputes;) for he calls them
all wicked, and so wicked, that they all were guilty of
the Crime of Evangelical Treason, // (says he) we must
name them that are Heretics and Schismatics ; it is not
the Bohemians, or Grsecians, (for they endeavour to fol
low the Gospel) but the Romans who are the Heretics
and Schismatics, and, by their Fictions, presume against
the evident Truth of Scripture.

If Luther admits Nothing else, but the evident and
plain Text of Scripture, why does he not (as I said) com
mand the Eucharist to be received at Supper-time ? For
the Scriptures mention that Christ did so. How much
better should Luther believe, that this Institution of the
Church, in giving the Communion to the Laity under
one Kind, was done by the Authority of God, not by any
human Invention, as it was by God's Authority insti
tuted that it should be received when the People are
fasting: For as St. Augustin says, It has pleased the
Holy Ghost, that the Body of our Lord, which, by the
Apostles, was received after other Meats, should, in the
Church, be received fasting, before any other Meats?
It is very probable, that the Holy Ghost, which governs
the Church of Christ, as he has changed the Time of re
ceiving the Sacrament, from Supper, to the Morning,

De Sacramento Eucharistice 223

traditione compertum, sed sola Ecclesise consuetudine
didicit : cui si putat hac in parte parendum, cur earn in
altera tarn arroganter oppugnat ?

Qua de re, quicquid Lutherus obgannit, ego certe
tutius opinor credere laicos recte sub altera tantum
specie communicatos, quam per tot saecula totum clerum,
quod iste disputat, hac una de causa fuisse damnatum.
ISTam omnes appellat impios, et tales ut in crimen inci-
derint Isesse majestatis evangelicse. "Quod si utri sint,"
inquit, ahaeretici et schismatici nominandi, non Boemi,
non Grseci, quia evangeliis nituntur, sed vos, Romani,
estis hasretici et impii schismatici, qui solo vestro
figmento prsesumitis contra evidentes Dei Scrip-
turas."

Si Lutherus nihil admittit aliud quam evidentes Dei
Scripturas, cur non jubet Eucharistiam, uti dixi, sumi
a coenantibus ? ISFam sic f actum a Christo Scriptura
commemorat. Quanto melius crederet Lutherus, non
humano figmento, sed eodem auctore Deo factum in
Ecclesia ne laici sub utraque specie reciperent Eucharis
tiam, quo auctore factum est ut reciperetur a jejunis ?
"Placuit enim," ut ait beatus Augustinus, "Spiritui
sancto, ut corpus Domini, quod post alios cibos ab apos-
tolis in Coana receptum est, ante alios cibos a jejunis
reciperetur in Ecclesia." Videtur ergo verisimile quod
Spiritus sanctus, qui Christi regit Ecclesiam, sicut
Eucharistise sacramentum mutavit a coenantibus ad
jejunos, ita laicos ab utraque specie deduxit in alteram.

224 The Sacrament of the Altar

fasting, has also changed the Laity's receiving under
both, to the communicating under one Kind: For he
that could change the one, why could he not also alter
the other.

Luther shews plainly in this Place, that his Inten
tion is to flatter the Bohemians, whose Perfidious-
ness he before detested : For none of those, whom he calls
Papists, and Flatterers of the Pope, do so much flatter
the Roman Prelates, as Luther flatters the very Scum of
the Bohemian Commonalty ; and not without Reason in
deed ; for he foresees that the Germans, (whom he for
merly deceived under the Form of a simple Sheep,)
would reject him, as soon as they should perceive him to
be a devouring Wolf. And therefore he insinuates him
self into the Esteem of the Bohemians, and makes him
self Friends of the Mammon of Iniquity* (as much as
he is able,) that when he is banished his own Country,
he may pass into that of those, into whose Errors he has
already entered.

And that some remarkable Action may render him
more commendable to them when he goes, he endeavours
to extinguish all the Force and Authority of Ecclesiasti
cal Customs, and so, in the Conclusion, to ruin all, if
his Designs should take ; which God forbid !

He aims at greater Things than he can expect to ac
complish ; and therefore pleads for the Laity, though his
Thoughts are quite contrary to what he pretends; for
though he sweetly offers them Bread in the one Hand,
yet he holds a Scourge-^ for them in the other. In the
first Place, he is altogether for the Laity's being admitted
to receive under both Kinds : (And who would not think,
that he thereby endeavours to increase their Devotion
towards the Sacrament f ) But look a little further what
he drives at : For at last he brings his Business so far, as
*Lu. xvi. 9. fLu. xi. 11.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 225

Nam qui alterum mutare potuit, cur non alterare
potuerit et alterum ?

Hoc loco plane se ostendit Lutherus, quid agitet in
ammo, quum Boemos, quorum perfidiam pridem exe-
crabatur, nunc tarn bland e vicissim demulceat. Neque
enim quisquam eorum quos ille papistas appellat, et
adulatores Pontificis, ita Komano blanditur antistiti,
quomodo Lutherus etiam fseci Boemicae plebis adulatur.
Nee id tamen ab re : videt enim brevi fore ut Germani,
quibus pridem per speciem ovinae simplicitatis imposuit,
agnitum tandem lupum sint ejecturi ; atque ideo Boemis
ante se insinuat, ac sibi, quoad potest, amicos facit de
mammona iniquitatis, ut in quorum immigravit errores,
extorris aliquando sua, illorum immigrare sinatur in
patriam. Ad quos ut ob facinus aliquod insigne veniat
commendatior, conatur interim ecclesiastics consuetu-
dinis omnem -vim atque auctoritatem extinguere ; post,
si id (quod omen avertant Superi!) feliciter ei cesserit,
concussurus omnia.

Longius enim destinat, quam quo putatur tendere;
atque ita causam agit laicorum, ut longe meditetur
aliud, quam pra? se f ert : quibus quantumvis blande por-
rigat altera maim panem, altera tamen gestat scor-
pionem. Nam multis primum verbis agit ut laici per-
mittantur utramque speciem sumere. Et quis nunc non
credet hoc eum conari, ut laicorum cultum erga sacra-
mentum adaugeat ? Verum paulisper observa quo
tendat : nam tandem sic rem totam claudit, ut id quoque
permitti postulet, ne laici communicare cogaiitur in
Paschate, neve ullum eis sumendse Eucharistise tempus
indicatur, sed liber quisque suo relinquatur arbitrio;
imo vero, ut ne sa3pius in tota vita quisquam sumat,
quam semel, idque non ante extremum vitee diem, qui et

226 The Sacrament of the Altar

to desire, that they may not be obliged to receive at
Easter; and that no Time may be appointed them for
receiving, but that every Man may be left to his own
Discretion ; nay further, That none should receive more
than once, in his whole Life, and that at the Day of his
Death; which is uncertain, and at which many are not
able to receive. So, he that pretended to stand for the
communicating under both Kinds, recommends the quite
Contrary, to wit, That it may be lawful for them never
to receive under any Kind ; and he esteems it an excel
lent Liberty, that the People may be altogether freed
from receiving the Sacrament at all.

Wherefore, though this Serpent seems to flatter you
with an amiable Aspect ; yet that venomous Tail of his
seeks to sting you : For he makes it plainly appear, that
he is more concerned for the People's receiving under
one Kind, than for their abstaining from both. And
even as the old Serpent, being cast out of Heaven, en-
vyed Man's Happiness in Paradise; so Luther, being
fallen, by his own Sin, under the Penalty of Excom
munication, (and thereby deprived of the wholesome
and life-giving Communion under both Kinds,) en
deavours to entrap all others in the same Snare; in
Order, that, being freed from the Obligation of receiv
ing under both Kinds, they may, by little and little,
bring themselves under no Kind at all. And the further
you advance in reading his Libel, the more you will
discover this detestable Fetch of his.

Bbout 3ran0ut>£tantiation

HE makes it a second Captivity, that any Man should
be forbidden to believe, that the true Bread and true
Wine remain after Consecration : So that in this, (con-

De Sacramento Eucharistice 227

incertus est, et quum ad eum ventum est, sumere
plerique non sustinent. Ita, qui videbatur id agere, ut
laici recipere sinerentur utrumque, id oblique procurat,
ut impune liceat ne speciem unquam quisquam sumat
ullam; et hanc praeclaram libertatem ducit, ut populus
in toto a suscipiendo sacramento liberetur !

Quamobrem utcumque serpens amico blandiatur
aspectu, certe venenata ista cauda spiculum quaBrit in-
figere, facitque perspicuum hoc magis ilium torquere,
quod populus alteram speciem recipiat, quam quod
altera abstineat. ^"am quemadmodum serpens antiquus,
ejectus e coelo, invidit homini Paradisum, ita Lutherus
quoque, postquam sua culpa sic in excommunicationis
incidit laqueum, ut utriusque speciei salubri com-
munione privetur, reliquos omnes eodem laqueo cupit
implicare, ut utriusque recipienda3 vinculo soluti, neu-
tram paulatim assuescant recipere. Quod illius ex-
secrandum propositum, quo magis in libello progrederis,
eo magis magisque pellucet.

De Granssubetantfatione

secundam Captivitatem facit, quod quisquam
vetetur credere verum panem verumque vinum restare
post consecrationem. Qua in re contra quam totus jam

228 The Sacrament of the Altar

trary to the Belief of the whole Christian World, both
now, and for so many Ages past,) he endeavours to per
suade, that the Body and Blood of Christ are after such
a Manner in the Eucharist, that the Substance of true
Bread and true Wine remains still after Consecration.
I suppose, afterwards, when it pleases him, he will deny
the Substance of the Body and Blood to be there, when
he has a Mind to change his Opinion, as he has three
Times done already; and yet he feigns that he teaches
those Things, as being moved with Pity towards the
Captivity of the Israelites, in which they are kept Slaves
to Babylon. Thus he calls the whole Church, Babylon,
and the Faith of Christ, Slavery: And this merciful
Man offers Liberty to all those, who will divide them
selves from the Church, and become corrupted with the
Infection of this rotten and separated Member : But it
is worth our While to know by what Means he invites
People to this more than servile Liberty.

He esteems this to be his greatest and chiefest Reason,
to wit, That Scripture is not to be forced, either by Men
or Angels; but to be kept in the most simple Signifi
cation that can be: And (says he) unless for some mani
fest Circumstances requiring, it is not to be taken other
wise than in its proper and grammatical Sense; lest
Occasion should be given to the Adversaries to under
value the whole Scriptures: But (says he) the Divine
Words are forced, if that which Christ called Bread, be
taken for the Accidents of Bread; and what he called
Wine, for the Form of Wine : Therefore, by all Means,
the true Bread and true Wine remain upon the Altar,
lest Violence be done to Christ's Words, if the Species
be taken for the Substance. For, (says he) seeing that
the Evangelists so plainly write, that Christ took Bread,
and blessed it; and, afterwards, in the Book of the
Acts, and by Paul, it is called Bread, we ought to take

De Sacramento Eucharistice 229

credit Christianus orbis, ac multis retro sseculis credidit,
persuadere conatur Lutherus in Eucharistia sic esse
Christi corpus et sanguinem, ut tamen substantia veri
panis verique vini remaneat; posthac, opinor, quum
libebit, corporis aliquando substantiam sanguinisque
negaturus, tanquam post in melius mutata sententia,
quemadmodum ter ante jam fecit, nempe in Indul-
gentiis, in potestate Pontificis, et communione laicorum.
Interea se fingit ista docere, motum videlicet miseri-
cordia captivitatis, qua populus Israeliticus serviat
Babyloni. Ita totam Ecclesiam appellat Babylonem;
Ecclesise fidem vocat servitutem, et homo misericors
offert libertatem omnibus qui velint ab Ecclesia sepa-
rari, et istius putridi et abscisi membri contagione
corrumpi. At quibus modis invitat in hanc plus
quam servilem libertatem, operse pretium est cognos-
cere.

Magnam censet ac primariam rationem, quod verbis
divinis non est ulla facienda vis neque per hominem,
neque per angelum, used quantum fieri potest," inquit,
ain simplicissima significatione servanda sunt, et, nisi
manifesta circumstantia cogat extra grammaticam et
propriam, accipienda non sunt, ne detur adversariis oc-
casio universam Scripturam eludendi. At vis," inquit,
"fit verbis divinis, si, quod Christus ipse vocat panem,
boc nos dicamus intelligi panis accidentia, et, quod ille
vinum vocat, hoc nos dicamus esse tantum vini speciem.
Omnibus ergo modis verus panis, ac verum vinum restat
in altari, ne verbis Christi fiat vis, si species sumatur
pro substantia. jSTam quum evangelistse clare scribant,"
inquit, "Christum accepisse panem, ac benedixisse, et
Actuum liber, et Paulus panem deinceps appellent,
verum oportet intelligi panem verumque vinum, sicut

230 The Sacrament of the Altar

it for true Bread, and true Wine, as a true Chalice.
For they do not say themselves, that the Chalice is
transubstantiated.

This is Luther's great, and (as he says) his chief
Reason; which I hope so to handle, as to give all Men
to understand, of how little Consequence it is. For in
the first Place, though the Evangelists had plainly said,
what he says they did ; yet that does not prove any Thing
clearly for him ; but on the Contrary, they say nothing
in any Place that may seem to favour his Side. Do not
they write (says he) that he took Bread, and blessed it?
And what does that argue ? We confess he took Bread,
and blessed it ; But that he gave Bread to his Disciples,
after he had made it his Body, we flatly deny ; and the
Evangelists do not say he did : That this may more evi
dently appear, and that there may be less Room left for
Wrangling ; let us hear the Evangelists themselves :

St. Mathew's Words are these, While they were at Sup
per, Jesus took Bread and blessed it, and brake it, and
gave it to his Disciples, saying, take, and eat, this is my
Body: And taking the Chalice, he gave Thanks, and
gave it to them, saying, drink ye all of this; This is my
Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many,
for the Remission of Sins.* But St. Mark's Words are
these, And while they were eating, Jesus took Bread,
and blessed and brake it, and gave to them, and said,
take, eat, This is my Body : And when he had taken the
Chalice, and given Thanks, he gave it to them; and
they all drank of it : And he said unto them, This is my
Blood of the new Testament which is shed for many.^
St. Luke has it after this Manner, And he took Bread,
and gave Thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them,
saying, This is my Body which is given for you: This
do in Remembrance of me; likewise also the Chalice,
*Matt. xxvi. 26-29. fMk. xiv. 22-24.

De Sacramento EucTiaristice 231

verum calicem. Non enim calicem transsubstantiari
etiam ipsi dicunt."

Hsec est ergo magna, et, quemadmodum ait ipse, pri-
maria Luther i ratio, quam ego me spero facturum ut
omnes quam primum intelligant nihil magni habere
momenti. Nam primum id, quod ait evangelistas dare
dicere, quantumvis clare dicant, pro Luthero tamen
nihil clare probat ; contra vero, quod pro illo probaret,
hoc nusquam dicunt. "An non scribunt," inquit, "ac-
cepisse panem, et benedixisse ?" Quid turn postea ?
Accepisse panem et benedixisse etiam nos fatemur;
panem vero dedisse discipulis, postquam inde suum cor
pus confecerat, hoc et nos instanter negamus, et evan-
gelistse non dicunt.

Qua? res quo fiat apertior, et tergiversandi minus
pateat locus, evangelistas ipsos audiamus. Matthseus
ergo sic narrat: "Coenantibus autem eis, accepit Jesus
panem, et benedixit, ac fregit, deditque discipulis, et
ait: Accipite, et comedite, hoc est corpus meum. Et
accipiens calicem, gratias egit, et dedit illis dicens:
Bibite ex hoc omnes; hie est sanguis meus novi testa-
menti, qui pro multis effundetur in remissionem pecca-
torum" Marci vero verba sunt ista: "Et manducan-
tibus illis, accepit Jesus panem, et benedicens fregit, et
dedit eis, et ait: Samite, hoc est corpus meum. Et
accept o calice, gratias agens dedit eis; et biberunt ex
illo omnes, et ait illis: Hie est sanguis meus novi testa-
menti, qui pro multis effundetur/' Lucas denique nar
rat hoc pacto: f'Et accepto pane gratias egit, ac fregit,
et dedit eis, dicens: Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro
vobis tradetur: hoc facite in meam commemorationem.
Similiter et calicem, postquam ccenavit, dicens: Hie est

232 The Sacrament of the Altar

after Supper, saying, This Chalice is the New Testa
ment of my Blood, which is shed for you.*

In all these Words of the Evangelists, I see none,
where, after the Consecration, the Sacrament is called
Bread and Wine; but only Body and Blood. They say,
That Christ took Bread in his Hands., which we all con
fess ; but when the Apostles received it, it was not called
Bread, but Body. Yet Luther endeavours to rest the
Words of the Gospel, by his own Interpretation. Take,
eat; this, that is, this Bread, (says he, which he had
taken and broken,) is my Body. This is Luther's Inter
pretation; not Christ's Words, nor the Sense of his
Words. If he had given to his Disciples the Bread
which he took, as he took it ; without converting it into
Flesh, before he bad them (in giving it) take and eat;
it had been rightly said, that he gave what he took in
his Hands; for then he had given Nothing else: But
seeing he turned the Bread into his Flesh, before he
gave it the Apostles to eat; they now receive, not the
Bread which he took, but his Body, into which he had
turned the Bread; as if one who had taken Seed, should
give to another the Flower sprung thereof: He would
not give what he had taken, though the common Course
of Nature had made the one of the other. So likewise,
much less did Christ give the Apostles what he took in
his Hand, when, by so great a Miracle, he turned the
Bread which he took, into his own Body ; unless, per
haps, some will say, because Aaron took a Rod in his
Hand, and cast a Rod from him,f that the Substance of
the Rod remained with the Serpent, and the Serpent's
Substance with the Rod, when it was restored again:
If the Rod could not remain with the Serpent, how
much less can the Bread remain with the Flesh of
Christ, that incomparable Substance ?

*Lu. xxii. 19, 20. fEx vii. 12.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 233

calix novum testamentum in sanguine meof qui pro
vobis fundetur."

Ex omnibus his evangelistarum verbis nullum video
locum, in quo post consecrationem sacramentum vocetur
panis aut vinum, sed tantum corpus et sanguis. Dicunt
in manus Christum sumpsisse panem, id quod etiamnunc
f atemur omnes ; at quum reciperent apostoli, non panis
nominatur, sed corpus. At Lutherus evangelistse verba
in suam partem conatur interpretatione torquere: "Ac-
cipite, manducate, hoc," id est, hie panis, inquit is, quern
acceperat et fregerat, "est corpus meum" Sed hsec est
interpretatio Lutheri, non verba Christi, neque verbo-
rum sensus. Si panem quern accepit, quemadmodum
accepit, sic tradidisset discipulis, nee ante convertisset
in carnem, ac porrigendo dixisset: Accipite, et mandu
cate, recte diceretur porrexisse quod in manus ac
ceperat : nihil enim fuisset aliud, quod porrigeretur. At
quum, priusquam daret Apostolis manducandum,
panem convertit in carnem, non jam accipiunt panem,
quern ille susceperat, sed corpus ejus, in quod panem
converterat. Quemadmodum si quis, quum semen ac-
cepisset, alii daret inde natum florem, non id dedisset,
quod acceperat, quanquam naturae communis ordo alte-
rum fecisset ex altero, ita multo minus porrexit apostolis
id quod in manus acceperat Christus, quum panem sus-
ceptum in suam ipse carnem tanto vertisset miraculo:
nisi quis contendat, quoniam Aaron virgam sumpsit in
manum, et virgam projecit e manu, ideo cum colubro
quoque virgse restitisse substantiam, aut colubri denuo
cum recepta virgula. Quod si cum colubro virga restare
non potuit, quanto minus restare potest panis cum carne
Christi tarn incomparabili substantia ?

234 The Sacrament of the Altar

As for what Luther argues, or rather trifles, to shew
the Simplicity of his own Faith ; when of the Wine,
Christ does not say, Hoc, est Sanguis meus, but, Hie,
est Sanguis meus: I wonder why it should enter into
any Man's Mind to write thus: For who sees not that
this makes Nothing at all for him, nay, rather, does it
not make against him? It had seemed more for his
Purpose, if Christ had said, Hoc est Sanguis meus: For
then he might have had some Colour at least, whereby
he might have referred the Article of Demonstrating to
the Wine. But now, though Wine is of the neuter Gen
der; yet Christ did not say Hoc, but Hie est Sanguis
meus. And though Bread is of the masculine Gender,
yet, notwithstanding, he says, Hoc est Corpus meum,
not Hie; that it may appear, by both Articles, that he
did not mean to give either Bread or Wine, but his own
Body and Blood. Is it not very ridiculous, that Luther
should imagine this Pronoun Hoc, not to be by Christ's
Intention referred to the Body, but only for the Con-
veniency of the Greek and Latin Tongues; and there
fore sends us back to the Hebrew? For the Hebrew, if
it has not the neuter Gender, cannot so conveniently de
clare to what Christ has referred this Article, as the
Greek or Latin can do.

For though in the Hebrew, the Article should be of
the masculine Gender, that is, Hie est Corpus meum;
nevertheless, the Matter would be left doubtful, because
that Speech might seem forced by the Necessity of the
Language, which has no neuter Gender. But because
Bread and Body are of different Genders in the Latin;
he that translated it from the Greek should have joined
the Article with Panis, if he had not found that the
Evangelical Demonstration was made of the Body.
Moreover, when Luther confesseth that the same Differ
ence of Gender is in the Greek, he might easily know

De Sacramento Eucharistice 235

Nam quod argutatur, imo nugatur Lutherus pro suse
simplicitate fidei facere, quum de vino dicat Christus,
non: Hoc est sanguis meus, sed Hie est sanguis meus,
miror quid homini venerit in mentem, quum istud scri-
beret. Quis enim non videt quam nihil ornnino facit
pro eo ? Imo contra, videretur magis pro eo f ecisse si
dixisset Christus : Hoc est sanguis meus; habuisset enim
ansam saltern Lutherus, qua demonstrandi articulum
referret ad vinum. Nunc vero quum vinum sit neutri
generis, Christus ait, non: Hoc, sed Hie est san
guis meus; et quum panis sit generis masculini, ait
tamen: Hoc est corpus meum, non Hie, ut uterque
ostendat articulus Christum neque panem propi-
nare, neque vinum, sed suum ipsius corpus, et sangui-
nem.

Nam quod videri vult Lutherus pronomen hoc ad
corpus referri, non Christi proposito, sed occasione lin-
guarum, nempe latinse et grsecse, ac proinde nos remittit
ad hebraicam, annon ridiculum est? Nam hebrsea
lingua si neutrum genus non habet, non potest tarn
aperte declarare ad utrum Christus retulit articulum,
quam latina, vel grseca. Nam in hebrsea lingua si arti
culus f uisset masculus, tanquam diceret : Hie est corpus
meum, tamen res relinqueretur ambigua, quia potuisset
ea locutio videri coacta necessitate linguae non habentis
neutrum. Sed quum apud Latinos panis et corpus sint
diversi generis, is qui transtulit e grseca articulum con-
junxisset cum pane, nisi apud evangelist am reperisset
demonstrationem factam de corpore. Prseterea, quum
Lutherus fateatur idem generis discrimen esse et

236 The Sacrament of the Altar

that when the Evangelists writ in Greek, they would
have put in the Article relating to the Bread, if they
had not known our Lord's Mind ; but they were willing
to teach the Christians, by the Article relating to the
Body, that, in the Communion, Christ did not give
Bread to his Disciples, but his Body.

Wherefore, when Luther, to serve his own Turn, in
terprets the Words of Christ, 'take, and eat, this is my
Body/ that is, this Bread he had taken ; not I, but Christ
himself teacheth us to understand the Contrary, to wit,
That what was given them, and seemed to be Bread, was
not Bread, but his own Body; if the Evangelists have
rightly delivered us the Words of Christ : For otherwise
he should say, not Hoc, that it might be expounded for
Hie,) but, more properly, Hie Panis est Corpus meum:
By which Saying he might teach his Disciples, what
Luther now teaches to the whole Church, to wit, 'That
in the Eucharist the Body of Christ, and the Bread are
together.' But our Saviour spoke after that Manner,
that he might plainly manifest, that only his Body is in
the Sacrament, and no Bread.

How magnificently Luther brings in this for his Argu
ment, 'That Christ speaks of the Chalice, which no body
holds to be transubstantiated P I admire the Man is not
ashamed of so unmeasurable a Folly. When Christ
says, This Chalice of the New Testament is my Blood,
what does that make for Luther? For what else does it
signify, but that what he gave his Disciples to drink,
was his own Blood? Will Luther make appear, by those
Words of Christ, that the Substance of Wine remains,
because Christ speaks of Blood? Or that the Wine can-

De Sacramento Eucharistice 237

Grsecis, facile potuisset cognoscere evangelistas, qui
scripserunt graece, articulum fuisse posituros, qui refer-
retur ad panem, nisi quod conscii mentis dominicse,
voluerunt admonere Christianos articulo corporis,
Christum non panem communicasse discipulis, sed
corpus.

Quamobrem quod Lutherus interpretatur in suam
partem verba Christi: "Accipite et manducate, hoc est
corpus meum" id est, hie panis quem acceperat, non ego,
sed ipse Christus, contra docet sua verba intelligi, nempe
hoc, quod eis porrigebat, non esse quod ipsis videbatur
panem, sed suum ipsius corpus (si recte Christi verba
recensent evangelistae). Nam alioqui poterat dicere,
non: Hoc, quod exponeretur id est Hie, sed aperte
potius: Hie panis est corpus meum; quo sermone doce-
rentur discipuli id quod nunc Lutherus docet Ecclesiam,
nempe in Eucharistia pariter et Christi esse corpus, et
panem. Nunc vero sic locutus est, ut ostenderet mani-
feste corpus duntaxat, non panem.

Item quod tarn magnifice transfert ad se Lutherus
quod Christus etiam loquitur de calice, quem nemo dicat
esse transsubstantiatum, miror hominem non pudere
tarn intemperantis ineptise. Quum dicit Christus : "Hie
calix novi testamenti in meo sanguine" quid facit pro
Luthero? Quid enim significat aliud, quam id, quod
discipulis propinabat in calice, suum esse sanguinem?
An ex his Christi verbis ostendet nobis Lutherus manere
vini substantiam, quia Christus loquitur de sanguine,
aut vinum in sanguinem non posse mutari, quia adhuc

238 The Sacrament of the Altar

not be changed into Blood, because the Chalice is still
there? I wish he had chosen to himself some other
Matter in which he might have played and sported with
less Danger. For when he so much excuses the Bohe
mians and Greeks from Heresy; as to call all the Roman
Catholics Heretics, he shews himself to be a worse
Heretic than either of those; who not only deny the
Faith which the whole Church believes, but also per
suades People to believe worse than the Greeks or Bohe
mians ever did. I have thus far disputed these Things,
that I might make appear, that what he brags himself
to make out, cannot be shewn by the Words of Christ,
and the Evangelists; nay in them the quite contrary is
very clear, to wit, that Bread is not in the Eucharist.
Luther speaks of the Eucharist's being called Bread,
in the Acts of the Apostles: I desire he would shew us
the Place : For my Part, I find none that is not ambigu
ous, and which seems not rather to speak of a common
Banquet, than the Sacrament. Yet I confess the Apostle
speaks more than once of Bread, following the Custom
of Scripture (which sometimes calls a Thing, not by the
Name of what it is, but of what it was before ; as when
it says, the Rod of Aaron devoured the Rods of the
Magicians ;* which then were not Eods, but Serpents) or
else perhaps content to call it what in Species it ap
peared to be; deeming it sufficient to feed the People
with Mil.k,f who as yet were but inexpert in Faith; and
at first to exact Nothing of them, but even to believe that
the Body of Christ was, after any Manner whatsoever,
in the Sacrament; but afterwards, by little and little,
to feed them with more solid Meat, as they gathered
more Strength in Christ. He might as well have also
touched, in the Acts of the Apostles, at that Place where
St. Peter, speaking to the people, and insinuating into
*Ex vii. 12. fHeb. v. 12.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 239

restat calix? Utinam prgeludium delegisset sibi Lu-
therus ex alia materia, in qua minore periculo potuisset
ludere. Islam quum Boemos et Grsecos sic excuset ab
hseresi, ut hsereticos clamet omnes esse Romanes, multo
magis ostendit se Lutherus hsereticum, qui non solum
fidem abnegat, quam tota credit Ecclesia, sed etiam de-
teriora credi suadet, quam aut crediderunt Grseci, aut
unquam credidere Boemi.

Hactenus ista disserui duntaxat, ut ostenderem ex
ipsius Christi verbis et evangelistarum ostendi non posse
quod iste se jactat ostendere, imo contra liquere per-
spicue in Eucharistia panem non esse.

Quod in Actis apostolorum ait Eucharistiam appel-
lari panem, vellem protulisset locum: ego nullum
reperio, qui non sit ambiguus, et potius videatur de com-
muni convivio dicere, quam sacramento. Apostolus
tamen, fateor, panem non semel appellat, vel Scripturse
secutus in sermone morem, quae solet interdum vocare
quippiam, non id quod est, sed quod ante fuerat, ut
quum ait: "Virga Aaron devoravit virgas magorum"
quaa tamen tune virgse non erant, sed serpentes ; vel con-
tentus fortasse vocare quod specie prse se ferebat, quum
satis haberet rudem adhuc in fide populum lacte pascere,
nee primum aliud exigere, quam ut quocumque modo
crederent in sacramento esse corpus Christi : postea
paulatim solidiore cibo pasturus, postquam adolevissent
in Domino. Idem potuit et in apostolorum Actis contin-
gere, ubi nee beatus Petrus alloquens populum, et illis
Christi fidem insinuans, ausus est adhuc aperte quic-
quam de ejus divinitate dicere; ita abdita, et populis
dubia mysteria non temere proferebant ! At Christus
apostolos suos, quos tamdiu sua doctrina formaverat,
ipso sacramenti instituendi principio docere non dubi-

240 The Sacrament of the Altar

them the Faith of Christ; yet durst not as yet say any
Thing openly of his Divinity : So cautious were they then
of exposing rashly the sacred Mysteries to the People.
But Christ made no Difficulty to teach his Apostles,
(whom he had for so long Time instructed in his own
Doctrine,) the very first Time he instituted the blessed
Sacrament, that the Substance of Bread and Wine re
mained no longer in the Sacrament ; but that the Forms
of both remaining, the Substance was changed into his
Body and Blood : Which he so plainly taught, that it is
a very strange Thing that any Body should ever after
call in Question a Thing so clear in itself.

For how could he have more properly said, that no
Bread and Wine remain in the Sacrament, than when he
said, This is my Body ? for he did not say, my Body is in
this, or, with this which you see, is my Body ; as if it
should consist in the Bread, or with the Bread ; but this
(says he) is my Body, manifestly declaring, (to shut the
Mouth of every yelping Fellow) what he then gave, to
be his Body. And though he had called what he gave to
the Apostles, by the Name of Bread, (which he did not)
yet, when he should teach them that were present, that
what he called Bread, was no other Thing but his Body,
(into which, by his Will, the Bread was changed) none
could doubt what Christ would have us understand by
the Name of Bread. And that very Circumstance (for
Luther admits Circumstances) evidently declares, that
the Word Bread, when the Bread is turned into Flesh,
signifies, (without any Violence to the Text,) the
Species, not the Substance of Bread ; unless Luther will
stick so closely to the Propriety of Words, as to believe,
that Christ was wheaten, or barley Bread in Heaven;
because he says of himself, I am the Bread which de
scended from Heaven;* or that he was a Vine laden
*John vi. 41.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 241

tavit, panis vinique non amplius restare substantiam,
sed manente utriusque specie, utrumque tamen, et
panem, et virmm in corpus et sanguinem suum esse con-
versum. Quod tarn aperte docuit, ut plane mirandum
sit exortum quemque postea, qui rem tarn claram rursus
vocaret in dubium.

Quomodo enim potuisset apertius dicere nihil illic
remanere panis, quam quum dixit: "Hoc est corpus
meum?" Non enim dixit: In hoc est corpus meum,
aut : Cum hoc, quod videtis, est corpus meum, tanquam
in pane, aut simul cum pane consisteret, sed : "Hoc est/'
inquit, "corpus meum" nimirum declarans manifeste,
ut os cujusque gannientis obstrueret, hoc totum, quod
porrigebat, ipsius corpus esse. Quod ita porrectum
apostolis, etiamsi, quod non fecit, nomine panis appellas-
set, tamen, quum simul admoneret audientes idipsum,
quod vocaret panem, nihil aliud esse, quam suum
corpus, in quod totus fuerat, ipso mutante, conversus,
nemo potuisset dubitare quid Christus vellet panis ap-
pellatione significare; eoque circumstantia ipsa (nam
circumstantiam Lutherus admittit) declarat evidenter
vocabulum panis, quum panis mutatur in carnem absque
ulla violentia facta verbo divino, panis significare
speciem, non substantiam: nisi Lutherus adeo inhsereat
proprietati verborum, ut Christum credat in coelis
quoque fuisse panem triticeum, aut hordeaceum, prop-
terea quod ipse dicit de se : "Ego sum panis, qui de coelo
descendi;" aut veris uvis onustam vitem, quia dixit
ipse: "Ego sum vitis vera et Pater meus agricola est;"

242 The Sacrament of the Altar

with real Grapes, because he said, I am the true Vine,
and my Father is the Husbandman;* or that the Elect
shall be rewarded in Heaven with corporal Pleasures,
because Christ said, I dispose unto you a Kingdom, as
my Father has disposed unto me; that ye may eat and
drink at my Table in my Kingdom.-^

Luther takes a deal of Pains to confute the Arguments
of the Neoteries, by which they endeavoured to main
tain and prove Transubstantiation, by philosophical
Keasons, out of Aristotle's School ; in which he troubles
himself more than is requisite : For the Church does not
believe it, because they dispute it so to be ; but because
She believed so from the Beginning, and that none
should stagger about it, decreed that all should so be
lieve. They therefore exercise their Wit with philo
sophical Reasons, that they may be able to teach that no
absurd Consequence can follow that Belief ; or that the
Change of Bread into a new Substance, does not neces
sarily leave, but take away the former.

Luther says, 'This Doctrine of Transubstantiation, is
risen in the Church within these three Hundred Years ;
whereas before, for above twelve Hundred Years, from
Christ's Birth, the Church had true Faith : Yet all this
while was there not any Mention made of this pro
digious (as he calls it) Word Transubstantiation/ If
he strives thus only about the Word, I suppose none will
trouble him to believe Transubstantiation; if he will
but believe, that the Bread is changed into the Flesh,
and the Wine into the Blood ; and that Nothing remains
of the Bread and Wine but the Species ; which, in one
Word, is the Meaning of those who put in the Word
Transubstantiation. But after the Church decreed that
to be true, (though this were the first Time it should
be ordained) yet if the Antients did not believe the Con-
*John xv. 1. fLu. xxii. 29, 30.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 243

aut electos denique remunerandos in coelo voluptate cor-
porea, propterea quod Christus ait : "Ego dispono vobis,
sicut mihi disposuit Pater meus, regnum, ut edatis et
bibatis super mensam meam in regno meo."

Lutherus multus est in destruendis Neotericorum ar-
gumentis, quibus defendere nituntur, et probare Trans
substantiationem rationibus petitis ex Aristotelica
scholar qua in re videtur plus laboris insumere quam
res exigat. Neque enim ideo credit Ecclesia, quia sic
illi disputant, sed quia sic Ecclesia jam inde ab initio
credidit, et, ne quis vacillet, ita credendum esse decre-
vit: ideo illi rationibus etiam philosophicis exercent in-
genium, quibus utcumque docere possint, quod ex tali
fide nihil sequatur absurdum, aut conversio panis in
substantiam novam necessario tollat, ac non relinquat
priorem.

Nam quod Lutherus ait hanc fidem TranssubstanticT,-
tionis jam intra trecentos annos proximos esse natam,
quum prius a Christo plus annis mille ducentis Ecclesia
recte crediderit, nee interim de Transsubstantiatione
tarn portentoso, ut ait ille, vocabulo mentio unquam ulla
sit facta, si de vocabulo tantum litiget, nemo erit,
opinor, illi molestus, ut credat Transsubstantiationem,
modo credat panem sic esse conversum in carnem, et
vinum in sanguinem, ut nihil neque panis remaneat,
neque vini, prseter speciem, quod ipsum uno verbo
volunt quicumque ponunt Transsubstantiationem. At
istud postquam Ecclesia verum esse decrevit, etiamsi
nunc primum decerneret, tamen, si veteres non credidere
contrarium, quanquam de ea re nunquam ante quisquam
cogitasset, cur non obtemperaret Lutherus Ecclesise
totius prsesenti decreto : persuasus id nunc tandem reve-

244 The Sacrament of the Altar

trary, although none should ever think of that Thing be
fore ; why should not Luther be obedient to the present
Decree of the whole Church, as persuaded that this is
revealed now at length to the Church, which was hidden
before ? For as the Spirit inspires where he is will
ing ;* so likewise he inspires when he pleases.

But this is no such Thing, as Luther feigns, when he
says, 'this Doctrine of Transubstantiation is risen up
within three hundred Years.' Yet let it not vex him to
allow us four hundred Years ; for I think it is so many
since Hugo de Sancta Victore writ a Book of the Sacra
ments, in which, though not the Word Transubstantia
tion itself, yet the Sense of his Words you may find to
be of the same Effect. 'Though this Sacrament (says
he) is but one, yet three different Things are proposed
in it ; to wit, the visible Form, the real Presence of the
Body, and Virtue of spiritual Grace/ You see how he
puts down the Accidents of Bread, not the Substance;
and the true Substance of the Body, not the Form ; and
more plainly a little further: 'For what we see is the
Species of the Bread and Wine ; but what we believe to
be under that Form, is the very Body of Christ which
hung on the Cross, and the very Blood which flowed
from his Side.' He is yet clearer in another Place,
where he says, 'by the Word of Sanctification, the true
Substance of Bread and Wine is turned, or changed into
the true Body and Blood of Christ, only the Form of
Bread and Wine remaining, and the Substance passing
into another Substance.' By this, then, it appears, that
this Doctrine of Transubstantiation is somewhat more
antient than Luther pretends it to be. But, for the bet
ter Confirmation of this, we will shew, that what he
thinks to be risen within three hundred Years, was the
Faith of the holy Fathers above a thousand Years ago :
*Joim iii. 8.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 245

latum Ecclesise, quod ante latuisset ? Spiritus enim,
sicut ubi vult spirat, ita spirat et quando vult.

Nunc vero non est istud tarn novum, quam fingit Lu-
therus : qui quum hanc Transsubstantiationis fidem
natam esse dicat ab annis hinc trecentis, ne gravetur,
qua3so, concedere saltern quadringentos ; totidem enim
opinor effluxisse post editum ab Hugone de Sancto- Vic-
tore librum de sacramentis, in quo Transsubstantia
tionis, etsi non verbum, rem certe, et sententiam re-
perias. Ait enim hoc pacto : "Jam quum unum sit
sacramentum, tria ibi discreta proponuntur, species
videlicet visibilis, et veritas corporis, et virtus gratis
spiritualist7 Vides ut speciem ponat panis, non veri-
tatem, veritatem corporis, non speciem. Et paulo post
apertius: aQuod enim videmus, species est panis et
vini ; quod autem sub specie ilia credimus, verum corpus
Christi est, et verus sanguis Jesu Christi, quod pependit
in cruce, et qui fluxit de later e." Item alio loco multo
adhuc manifestius, quum ait: "Verbo sanctificationis
vera panis, et vera vini substantia in verum corpus
et sanguinem Christi convertitur, sola specie panis
et vini remanente, et substantia in substantiam transe-
unte."

Clarum est igitur hanc Transsubstantiationis fidem
antiquiorem esse aliquanto, quam fingit Lutherus. At
ut eum astringamus f ortius, ostendemus quod ille natum
videri vult intra annos trecentos, fidem fuisse sanctissi-
morum Patrum ab annis hinc plus mille. Constat enim
ante annos plus mille sic credidisse fideles, ut f aterentur
totam panis vinique substantiam in Christi corpus et

246 The Sacrament of the Altar

For it is certain, that the Faithful, for above a thou
sand Years past, did believe the Substance of Bread and
Wine to be truly changed into the Body and Blood of
Jesus Christ: Which makes me wonder that Luther is
not ashamed of himself, to say, that this Belief of
Transubstantiation has not been in the Church above
three hundred Years. Who knows not that Eusebius Emis-
senus dyed above six hundred Years since ? who, as if
dreading the Broaching of such false Opinions said, 'Let
all Doubt or Ambiguity of Unfaithfulness be put away :
For he that is the Author of the Gift, is also the Witness
of the Truth ; now the invisible Priest converteth, by his
secret Power, the visible Creatures into his own Body and
Blood; saying, take and eat, this is my Body.7 Does
not this holy Man say, most plainly, that the Substance
of the Bread and Wine is changed into the Substance of
the Body and Blood ? What could be said more to the Pur
pose, than this of St. Augustine? 'We honour, (says he)
invisible Things, viz. the Flesh and Blood in the visible
Form of the Bread and Wine :' He does not say, in the
Bread and Wine, but in the Form of the Bread and Wine.
Luther denies that the Form of Bread is to be called
Bread ; and does he think that St. Austin should call that
the Form of Bread, which is the true Substance of Bread?
Likewise St. Gregory Nissenus says, 'That before the
Consecration, it is but Bread ; but when it is consecrated
by Mystery, it is made, and called the Body of Christ:'
His saying that it is so, before the Consecration, gives us
to understand, that it is not so after the Consecration.
Theophilus also, expounding the Words, Hoc est, &c.
This is my Body, &c. says, 'This, which now I give, and
you receive. For the Bread is not a Figure only of the
Body of Christ,, but is changed into the proper Body of
the Flesh and Blood of Christ;7 and a while after, 'If
we did see, says he, the Flesh and Blood of Christ, we

De Sacramento Eucharistice 247

sanguinem veraciter esse conversam. Quo magis miror
non pudere Lutherum, quum dicat hanc fidem Trans-
substantiationis intra annos natam esse trecentos. Euse-
bium Emissenum quis nescit ante annos plus sexcentos
esse def unctum ? Qui quasi veritus olim fore, qui talia
molirentur, tot annis jam prseteritis clamavit: "Rece-
dat," inquit, "omne infidelitatis ambiguum, quoniam
quidem qui auctor est muneris, ipse est etiam testis
veritatis. Jam invisibilis sacerdos visibiles creaturas in
substantiam corporis et sanguinis sui secreta potestate
convertit, ita dicens: Accipite ,, et comedite, hoc est
corpus meum; et repetita benedictione : Accipite et
bibite, hie est sanguis meus." Nonne hie vir sanctis-
simus aperte dicit panis ac vini substantias in substan-
tias corporis et sanguinis esse conversas ? Quid beatus
Augustinus, quum ait: "Nos autem in specie panis et
vini, quam videmus, res invisibiles, id est carnem et
sanguinem, honoramus ?" Quid potest apertius dici ?
Non enim dicit in pane et vino, sed in specie panis et
vini. Lutherus negat panem appellandum esse quod
tantum sit species panis, et putat Augustinum fuisse
vocaturum speciem panis id quod esset panis vera sub-
stantia !

Gregorius item Nyssenus : "Panis," inquit, uest ante
consecrationem, sed, ubi consecratur mysterio, fit et
dicitur corpus Christi." Quod ait esse ante consecra
tionem, hoc designat post consecrationem non esse.
Quin Theophilus quoque declarans ha3C verba: hoc est
corpus meum, ahoc," inquit, "quod nunc do, et quod
nunc sumitis. Non autem panis figura tantum est cor
poris Christi, sed in proprium Christi corpus trans-
mutatur." Et paulo post ait : "Si carnem et sanguinem
cerneremus, sumere non sustineremus : propter hoc
Dominus, nostrse infirmitati condescendens, species

248 The Sacrament of the Altar

could not endure to eat them : Therefore our Lord con
descending to our Weakness, preserves the Forms of the
Bread and Wine ; but changeth the Bread and Wine into
his own true Flesh and Blood.' Luther is here, by this
good and learned Man, twice beaten down : For first he
teaches, that that Article, Hoc, is not to be understood
as Luther interprets it; Hoc, that is, Hie Panis; but
Hoc, that is, This which now I give, and ye take : Sec
ondly, he plainly says, that the Form of the Bread and
Wine remains, and that the Substance is changed into
the Body and Blood. But what else do they mean, who
use the Word Transubstantiation, than what Theophilus
said, not within three hundred Years, for he was dead
some hundred Years before the Word Transubstantiation
was used? What need I mention St. Cyril, who not
only affirms the same Thing, but almost in the same
Words ? Tor God, (says he) condescending to our Frail
ties, lest we should abhor Flesh and Blood on the holy
Altars, infuseth the Force of Life into what is offered, by
changing them into the Truth of his own proper Flesh.'
Moreover, that none should say that the antient Fathers
believed the Body of Christ in such Manner, to be in the
Eucharist, as that the Bread should still remain; not
only those Things which I have related, do fully evince,
(as plainly they do) but likewise what we have above
related out of St. Ambrose, when he said, 'that although
the Form of Bread and Wine is seen, nevertheless we
are to believe that there is nothing else after the Con
secration, but the Body and Blood of Christ/

You see how the Holy Father says, 'That it is not
only the Body and Blood ; but that there is nothing be
sides them, although the Bread and Wine seem to be
there.' And he that speaks this, has not said it within
three hundred Years past, in which Luther feigns that
this Belief of Transubstantiation is risen ; but he spoke
it above a thousand Years ago:

De Sacramento Eucharistice 249

panis et vini conservat ; sed panem et vinum in verita-
tem convertit carnis et sanguinis." Hie vir piissimus,
idemque doctissimus bis premit Lutherum; nam pri-
mum ilium articulum hoc docet, non quomodo Lutherus
docet exponendum, hoc., id est hie panis, sed hoc, id est
id quod nunc ego do, et quod vos sumitis; deinde dicit
aperte panis et vini non nisi species esse conservatas,
substantias ipsas in corpus et sanguinem esse conversas.
At quid aliud volunt, qui ponunt Transsubstantia-
tionem, quam quod hie ait Theophilus, non intra tre-
centos hos annos proximos, quippe qui defunctus est
aliquod annorum centenariis prius quam Transsubstan-
tiationis vocabulum nasceretur? Quid beatum Cyril-
lum commemorem? Qui non tantum dicit idem, sed
f erme etiam eodem modo ? Ait enim : "Ne horreremus
carnem et sanguinem apposita sacris altaribus, con-
descendens, Deus, fragilitatibus nostris, infundis
oblatis vim vitee, convertens ea in veritatem proprise

Prseterea, ne quis dicat antiques Patres credidisse
sic in Eucharistia corpus esse Christi, ut tamen rema-
neat panis, non ista tantum obstant, quae diximus (quse
tamen obstant apertissime), sed illud prseterea, quod
supra diximus ex Ambrosio, quum ait: "Licet figura
panis et vini videatur, nihil tamen aliud, quam caro
Christi, et sanguis post consecrationem credendum est."

Videtis ut beatissiinus Pater dicat non tantum corpus
esse et sanguinem, sed etiam nihil esse prseterea, licet
panis et vinum esse videatur. Et istud qui dicit, non
intra trecentos annos proximos hoc dixit, intra quos
hanc Transmutationis fidem exortam esse fingit Lu
therus, sed dixit ante annos plus mille.

250 The Sacrament of the Altar

Neither can I believe that any of the antient
Fathers would have approved that fine Comparison
of Luther's, viz. of Iron joined with the Fire. For
none ever said that Iron is so converted into Fire,
that the Form only remains, the Substance of the
Iron being changed into that of the Fire; which
was the Opinion of all the Ancients concerning Bread
and the Flesh of Christ; or if, perhaps, any one
Person was of a contrary Sentiment, yet one Swallow
makes no Summer: And that Man, who ever he was, is
rather to be excused for not perfectly seeing through a
Matter, at that Time not in Dispute, than to be imi
tated, contrary to the Belief of all the rest of the whole
Church, and of so many Ages, in a Thing which he, if
a good Man, and now alive, without Doubt, would not
argue against : For that Man that has so much Esteem
for the Body of Christ, as he ought to have, will more
easily consent that any other two Substances should re
main together, than that any other Body remain, mixed
with the adorable Body of Christ; seeing there is no
Substance worthy to be mixed with that Substance which
created all Substances. Moreover, I suppose that the
primitive Fathers would as little approve that Compari
son of Luther, by which he intends to prove, that the
Bread remains with the Flesh, as God did remain with
Man in the Person of Christ: For as the most learned
and the most holy of the ancient Fathers confess, in
divers Places, that the Bread is changed into Flesh ; so
none of them were so wicked or ignorant, as to think
that the Humanity was changed into the Divinity ; un
less perhaps Luther will devise a new Person, that as
God took on him the Nature of Man, so God and Man
take the Nature of Bread, and Wine; which if he
believes, he shall be accounted an Heretic, by all those
who are not Heretics.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 251

Nee ego certe veterum fere sanctorum Patrum quem-
quam puto fuisse probaturum concinnam istam Lutheri
similitudinem ferri cum igne conjunct! ; nam nemo un-
quam dixit ferrum sic in ignem converti, ut tantum
ferri species relinquatur, substantia ferri in ignis
mutata substantiam, quod de pane et Christi carne
veteres senserunt omnes. Aut si quis unus forte sensit
aliter, tamen neque una hirundo f acit ver ; et ille, quis-
quis fuerit, potius excusandus est, quod in re turn non
satis excussa parum perviderit, quam contra cseterorum
omnium, contra totius Ecclesise, contra tot setatum
fidem sequendus, in quam ipse quoque, quisquis fuerit,
modo bonus fuerit, si nunc viveret, dubio procul f uerat
concessurus. Nam quisquis beatissimum Christi corpus
sic, ut debet, existimat, facilius assentietur quascumque
duas substantias simul manere conjunctas, quam ullum
corpus aliud manere commixtum cum venerando corpore
Christi. Neque enim ulla substantia digna est, quse
cum ea misceatur substantia, quse substantias omnes
condidit.

Prseterea olim Patribus opinor multo adhuc minus
fuisse placituram illam Lutheri collationem, qua sic
vult panem simul restare cum carne, sicut restabat in
una Christi persona Deus cum homine. Nam ut passim
veterum quisque Patrum doctissimus atque sanctis-
simus fatetur panem mutari in carnem, ita nemo tarn
impius erat, aut inscius, ut humanitatem converti
senserit in divinitatem: nisi forte novam nobis per-
sonam fingat Lutherus, ut, quomodo Deus assumpsit
hominem, ita Deus et homo assumant panem et vinum ;
quod si credat, habebitur, opinor, hsereticus apud omnes
qui non sunt haeretici.

252 The Sacrament of the Altar

Wherefore, (to conclude this Discourse of Transub-
stantiation) it evidently appears by Christ's Words, and
by the Judgment of the holy Fathers, that the Faith of
the Church, at this present, is true, by which it is be
lieved, that the Substance of Bread or Wine doth not
remain in the Eucharist; whence it follows, that Lu
ther's Opinion, in teaching the Contrary, is false and
heretical : From which Persuasion, I admire what Profit
he promises the People : Is it, as Luther says, That no
Body should esteem himself an Heretic, if perhaps he
should be of his Opinion V But he himself confesses,
that there is no Harm in believing this, as the Catholic
Church now believes; but on the Contrary, the whole
Church takes him to be an Heretic, who is of Luther's
Opinion: He, therefore, ought not to move any one
whom he wishes well, to be of his Judgment, which is
condemned by the whole Church ; but rather advise those
he loves, to join themselves to those whom he himself
witnesses to be in no Danger. That Opinion of Luther
is therefore false, as it is against the public Faith, not
only of this Time, but also of all Ages : Nor does he free
from Captivity those who believe him; but, drawing
them from the Liberty of Faith, that is, from a safe
Hold, (as he himself confesses) he captivates them,
leading them into a Precipice, into inaccessible, uncer
tain, doubtful and dangerous Ways : And he that loves
Danger, shall perish therein*

/ifoaae is a <5oo& "UHorfc
AFTER this Man, who is free from any Evil, has es
caped these two Captivities, which he imagines to him
self ; that he may not captivate his Mind to the Obedi
ence of God, he overcomes (as he pretends) a third Cap
tivity; and proposes a Liberty by which he may capti-
*Ecclus. iii. 27.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 253

Quamobrem, ut aliquando finem de Transsubstantia-
tione faciam, ex ipsis Christi verbis et sanctorum viro-
rum sententiis evidenter liquet hanc, quam nunc tenet
Ecclesia, veram esse fidem, qua creditur panis aut vini
substantiam in Eucharistia non manere ; ex qua et illud
sequitur, hoc Lutheri dogma, quod contra docet, f alsum
esse prorsus et hsereticum: quo ex dogmate miror quid
fructus populo spondeat. An, quod ait ipse, ne quis
propterea semet credat hsereticum, quod fors ita cum
Luthero sentiat? At Lutherus ipse fatetur nihil esse
periculi, si quis hac in re sentiat quod tota jam sentit
Ecclesia. At contra tota Ecclesia censet hsereticum esse
eum, qui sentiat cum Luthero. E"on debet ergo Lutherus
animare quemquam, cui bene cupit, ut secum sentiat,
cujus sententiam tota condemnat Ecclesia, sed debet his
suadere, quos amat, ut accedant illis, quos ipse quoque
indicat in nullo versari periculo.

Falsa est ergo ista Lutheri via contra publicam fidem,
non hujus modo temporis, sed etiam setatum omnium,
nee liberat captivitate credentes ei, sed educens e liber-
tate fidei, hoc est e loco tuto, quod Lutherus ipse fatetur,
captivat in errorem, ducens in prsecipitium, et vias in-
vias, incertas, dubias, eoque plenas periculi; et "qui
amat periculum, perit in illo."

/llMssa sit ©pus JBonum
POSTQUAM duas illas, quas ipse sibi fingit, Captivi-
tates homo in malum liber evasit; ne mentem in Dei
captivet obsequium, expugiiat, ut simulat, Captivitatem
tertiam, et libertatem proponit, qua totam captivet Ec-
clesiam, utpote cujus lucidissimam nubem dispergere,
columnam ignis exstinguere, arcam violare foederis,

254 The Sacrament of the Altar

vate the whole Church. This, worse than sacrilegious
Caitif, endeavours to scatter abroad the Church's most
splendid Congregation : to extinguish its Pillar of Fire ;
to violate the Ark of the Covenant ; and to destroy the
Chief and only Sacrifice which reconciles us to God,
and which is always offered for the Sins of the People :
For, as much as in him lies, he robs the Mass of all the
Benefits that flow from it to the People; denying it to
be a good Work, or to bring to them any Kind of Profit.
In which Thing I know not whether more to admire his
Wickedness, or his foolish Hope; or rather his mad
Pride ; who, seeing so many Obstructions before him, as
he himself mentions, brings Nothing with him, whereby
to remove the least ; but seems as if he would go about
to pierce a Rock with a Reed. For he sees, and con
fesses himself, that the Opinions of the holy Fathers
are against him, as also the Canon of the Mass, with the
Custom of the universal Church, confirmed by the Usage
of so many Ages, and the Consent of so many People.
What Defence then does he oppose against so innumer
able, so powerful, and so invincible Armies ? His ac
customed Force rages ; he strives to breed Discord, and
move Seditions, to excite the Commonalty against the
Nobility : And that he may the more easily stir them up
to a Revolt ; he, by his foolish and weak Policy, falsely
pretends that he has Christ for Captain of the whole
Army in the Camp ; and that the Trumpet of the Gospel
sounds only for him; which is the most ridiculous
Stratagem that ever was invented. For what Man liv
ing is so wicked or blockish, as to think that the Church,
which is the mystical Body of Christ should be in such
Manner delacerated, as that the Head should be severed
from the rest of the Members, joined together amongst
themselves; or that Christ, who never abandoned the
Flesh which once he took, should have cast off the

De Sacramento Eucharistice 255

summum, atque unicum sacrificium Dei propitiatorium,
quod assidue pro populi peccatis offertur, homo plus-
quam sacrilegus conatur auferre. JSTam Missam omni
fructu qui ex ea promanat in populum, pro sua virili
despoliat, quum Missam negat bonum opus esse, aut
populo quicquam prodesse. Qua in re nescio magisne
impietatem hominis admirer, an stultissimam spem, vel
potius insanam superbiam: qui quum tarn multas ipse
commemoret sibi objectas obices, nihil affert secum, quo
revellat ullam, sed perinde agit, ac si rupes foret arun-
dine perfossurus.

Videt enim et fatetur obstare sibi sanctorum Patrum
sententias, Missse canonem, totam denique totius Ec-
clesiae consuetudinem, tot sseculorum usu, tot popu-
lorum consensu corroboratam. Quid ergo prsesidii ad-
versus tot acies, tain validas, tarn invictas opponit?
Usitata via grassatur, laborat seminare discordiam, et
serere seditiones, plebem in patres excitare, et quo
vulgus ad defectionem provocet stultissima solertia, et
facillime coarguenda, mentitur totius exercitus ducem
Christum in suis sese castris habere, et evangelii tubam
pro se simulata canere. Quo stratagemate nullum un-
quam fuit excogitatum stultius. IsTam quis usquam
vivit, aut tam impius, aut tarn omnino stupidus, qui
Ecclesiam, corpus Christi mysticum, sic laceratam cen-
seat, ut ubi membrorum omnium compago sit, illinc
caput putet esse divulsum? ut is qui carnem, quam
sumpsit, nunquam deseruit, Ecclesiam, propter quam
sumpsit carnem, deseruerit, et cum qua se promisit ad
finem usque sseculi permansurum, ab ea prorsus tot jam
sseculis abfuerit, atque ad Lutherum tandem, conjura-
tissimum ejus hostem, transfugerit.

256 The Sacrament of the Altar

Church, for whose Sake he took that Flesh ; and that he
should, for so many Ages, absent himself from her, with
whom he promised to remain to the End of the World,
and should now pass to Luther's Side, who is her pro
fessed Enemy ? But pray let us see by what Enchant
ment he makes it appear for Truth, that Christ is on his
Side, as he brags. After many idle Circumstances, he
goes about to define what the Mass is; afterward he
separates the Ceremonies of the Mass, from the Mass
itself; he examines the Lord's Supper, and ponders the
Words which Christ used in the Institution of the Sacra
ment of the Mass : And, having found in them the Word
Testament, (as if a Thing very obscure,) he begins to
triumph, as though he had conquered his Enemies : He
beautifies with Words this his new found Mystery; (as
he calls it) and with great Gravity, as if it was never
heard of before, teaches us what a Testament is. He
bawls aloud, 'that it is to be marked and taken notice
of, that a Testament is the Promise of a dying Person,
by which he bequeaths the Inheritance, and institutes
Heirs: Therefore (says he) this Sacrament of the Mass,
is no other Thing than the Testament of Christ; and the
Testament is Nothing but the Promise of the eternal
Heritage giving his Body and Blood to us Christians,
whom he appointed for his Heirs, as a Sign for the
ratifying his Promise:' This he repeats over and over
again ; he inculcates, and fixes it ; intending to make it
his immoveable Foundation whereon to build Wood,
Hay and Stubble;* For, in laying this Ground-work,
That Mass is the Testament of Christ, he boasts, 'that he
will destroy all the Wickedness that impious Men (as
he says) have conveyed into the Sacrament ; and that he
will clearly prove we ought to receive the Communion
with Faith alone, without much regard to any Manner
*J. Cor. iii. 12.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 257

Verum videamus, obsecro, quid afferat prsestigii. quo
f aciat verum videri, quod dicit, Christum pro se stare.
Post longas ambages diffinit Missam; deinde separat a
Missa Missse cserimonias, excutit Coenam dominicam, et
verba Christi trutinat, quibus usus est, quum institueret
Missse sacramentum. Ibi quum testamenti verbum, rem
videlicet tarn abstrusam, reperisset, jam tanquam profli-
gatis hostibus coepit ingeminare victoriam; verbis
adornat inventum, ut jactat, suum, et tanquam mys-
terium hactenus inauditum magno supercilio docet quid
sit testamentum. Notandum esse clamat, ac memoria
tenendum, testamentum esse morituri promissionem,
qua nuncupat hsereditatem, et instituit hseredes. aHoc
igitur sacramentum," inquit, "Missse, nihil est aliud,
quam testamentum Christi, testamentum vero, nihil
aliud est, quam promissio hsereditatis seternse nobis
Christianis, quos suos hseredes instituit, corpus et san-
guinem suum, velut signum ratae promissionis, ad-
jiciens. "

Hoc igitur decies repetit, inculcat, infigit, utpote
quod haberi vult immobile fundamentum, super
quod sedificet ligna, f cerium, stipulam. Nam hoc f unda-
mento jacto, quod Missa Christi sit testamentum,
omnem sese jactat impietatem eversurum, quam impii,
ut ait, homines invexerunt in hoc sacramentum, et se
dilucide probaturum ad communionem recipiendam
sola fide veniendum esse; de operibus cujusmodi sint,
non admodum esse curandum; conscientia quanto
magis erronea sit, ac peccatorum vel morsu, vel titil-

258 The Sacrament of the Altar

of Good-works whatsoever ; and by how much the more
erroneous our Consciences are, and the more moved with
the Sting or Titillation of our Sins, the more holy is our
State for approaching the Communion: But the more
clear, pure and free from the Stain of Sin our Con
sciences are, in the worse Capacity are we to receive.
Further (he says) that Mass is no Sacrifice; that it is
only profitable to the Priest, not to the People ; that it
is nothing available, either to the Dead, or to the Living ;
that to sing Mass for Sins, for any Necessity, or for
the Dead, is an impious Error ; that Fraternities, as also
the annual Commemorations for the Dead, are vain and
wicked Things; that our voluntary maintaining of
Priests, Monks, Canons, Brothers, and whatsoever we
call religious, is to be abolished.7 These, therefore, with
many other great good Things, he glories to have found
out by this Discovery, of the blessed Sacrament being
the Testament of Christ. And now he inveighs against
the sententious Doctors, as he calls them: He exclaims
against all such as preach to the People; ' Those for
writing, These for preaching so much in the Defence of
the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist ; and neither of
them saying any Thing of the Testament, but most im
piously concealing that most incomparable Good from
the People, which so long since might have been profit
ably known. The Laity, (he says) neither alive, nor
after Death, will ever receive any Benefit by the Mass :'
For the Ignorance of which Matter, he denounces all
Priests and Monks at this Day in the World, with their
Bishops and Superiors, to be Idolaters, and in a very
dangerous Condition.

I do not therefore discuss how true that Mystery of
Luther is, from which he attributes so much Glory to
himself, in applying so accurately his Definition of the
Testament to the Sacrament; yet at the same Time, I

De Sacramento Eucharist ice 259

latione moveatur, tanto sancthis accedi; quanto
serenior, purior, et errore purgatior, tanto sumi dete-
rius.

Ad hsec Missam bonum opus non esse. Missam non
esse sacrificium. Missa sacerdoti tantum, non autem
populo prodesse. JSTihil prodesse defunctis, nihil cui-
quam viventium. Impium esse errorem, si Missa cana-
tur pro peccatis, si pro cujusquam necessitate, si pro
mortuis. Inanem esse rein et impiam fraternitates, et
annuas defunctorum memorias, abolendam esse talem
omnem sacerdotum, monachorum, canonicorum, fra-
trum, religiosorum denique, qnos vocamus, omnium ali-
moniam. Hsec igitur tot et tarn immensa bona se
reperisse gloriatur, in eo solo, quod hoc sacrosanctum
sacramentum comperit esse Christi testamentum.
Jamque in sententiarios protinus, quos vocat, doctores
invehitur ; exclamat in omnes qui declamant apud popu-
lum, quod quum illi tam multa scribant, hi tarn multa
loquantur et prsedicent de Eucharistise sacramento,
neutri tamen attingant quidquam de testamento, sed
impie celent populum bonum illud incomparabile, quod
tamen jam olim scisse profuisset, ex Missa nihil un-
quam boni laicos, neque vivos, neque defunctos, esse
consequuturos. Ob cujus rei ignorantiam, denunciat
universes hodie sacerdotes et monachos cum episcopis, et
omnibus suis majoribus idolatras esse, atque in statu
periculosissimo versari.

Igitur illud Lutheri mysterium, e quo tantas efflat
glorias, quod definitionem testamenti tam accurate ad
sacramentum applicat, quam verum sit, non excutio;
sed interim certe video, cur hoc inventum, tanquam

260 The Sacrament of the Altar

do not see why he should brag so much of this new
Invention of his. I do not know indeed who he hears
preach, where he is ; but here, I am sure, we have heard
Preachers, over and over again, not only treat of those
Things, which Luther brings out for so new and exqui
site, viz. 'That Christ is a Testator; that he made his
Testament in the last Supper ; that he promised an In
heritance, which he declared to be the Kingdom of
Heaven; that he instituted the Faithful for his Heirs;
that the Sacrament is a holy Sign, exhibited for a Seal ;'
not only these, and such like, but also 'the dumber of
Witnesses, the Bill, and other Rites of Testaments, they
unfolded to us out of the deepest Secrets of both Laws,
and applied all of them exactly to the Sacrament.' And
this they did more consciously, and truly, than Luther:
For they referred to the same Testament, not only what
Christ did at his last Supper, but also what he suffered
on the Cross; only in this differing from Luther, that
they did not find out the admirable and hitherto un
heard-of Benefits of the Mass, by which the Clergy
should lose all the Fruits of it in this Life, and the
Laity in the Life to come: For the People would not
maintain the Clergy to say Mass, if they should be per
suaded they could reap no spiritual Good thereby.

But it is worth our While to see from what Tree
Luther gathers this Fruit. After he has very often re
peated, that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is the Sign
of the Testament, and the Testament is nothing else but
the Promise of Inheritance; he thinks that it conse
quently follows, that the Mass cannot be a good Work,
or a Sacrifice. To which, if any one consents, he must
immediately admit that Catalogue of Plagues, by which
he endeavours to confound the whole Face of the
Church : But if you deny it, then can he do nothing with
so monstrous a Design: For I am almost ashamed of

De Sacramento Eucharistice 261

novum, tarn magnifice jactet prosuo. Nescio quos illic
concionantes audiat, hie certe, non seinel audivimus,
earn similitudinem ad taedium usque tractantes frater-
culos, ut qui non ea duntaxat afferrent, quse nunc pro
novis et exquisitis affert Lutherus, Christum esse testa-
torem, testamentum in Coena condidisse, hsereditatem
promisisse, eamdem nuncupasse regnum crelorum, hse-
redes instituisse fidelium ccetum, sacramentum hoc
sacrum esse signum, quod sit adhibitum pro sigillo : non
hsec, inquam? tantum, sed et testium numerum, et syn-
grapham, et alios testamentorum ritus, ex intimis utri-
usque juris erutos penetralibus explicarent, atque ada-
mussim omnia applicarent ad sacramentum. Hoc
aliquando concinnius, ac verius quoque, quam Lutherus,
quod ad idem testamentum referebant, non tantum, quse
Christus fecit in Cosna, sed etiam quse passus est in
cruce; hoc uno tantum impares Luthero, quod mira-
biles, et hactenus inauditos Missse fructus non invene-
runt, quibus et clerus prsesentis vitae f ructum omnem, et
populus futura? perderet. ISTeque enim sacerdotibus
quidquam laici ternporalis boni conferrent ob Missam,
e qua persuaderentur nihil se spiritualis boni referre.
Sed operse pretium est videre qua ex arbore tarn salubres
fructus colligat Lutherus.

Postquam ergo ssepius inculcavit Eucharistise sacra
mentum signum esse testamenti, testamentum vero
nihil esse aliud, quam promissionem haereditatis, inde
continue censet consequi, ut Missa neque bonum opus
esse possit, neque sacrificium: quod quisquis ei conces-
serit, jam illi statim admittendus erit totus ille pestium
catalogus, quo totam Ecclesise faciem confundit. At
quisquis negaverit illi, jam tarn magno molimine nihil
egerit. E"am argumenta, quibus docere prse se fert,
pudet propemodum recensere, ita sunt in re tantse ma-
jestatis nugacia prorsus ac frivola. Sic enim colligit

262 The Sacrament of the Altar

the Arguments, by which he pretends to teach these
Things ; they are so trifling and frivolous, in a Matter
of so great Majesty. Thus he concludes; (for I will
give you his own Words) 'You have heard that Mass is
nothing else but the divine Promise, or Testament of
Christ,, commended by the Sacrament of his Body and
Blood ; which, if it be true, you understand, that by any
Means it cannot be a Work; nor is it to be used after
any other Manner, than by Faith alone ; and Faith is not
a Work, but the Mistress and Life of Works.7 It is a
strange Thing, that, after so much Pains-taking, he
vents nothing but mere Wind : Which, though he would
have us believe it to be of Strength to overturn Moun
tains ; yet truly to me, it seems not of Force enough to
shake a Reed. For if you withdraw the Coverings of
his Words, with which (like an Ape in Purple) he
decks this ridiculous Matter ; if you take away the Ex
clamations, whereby he so often rails, and insults, as a
Conqueror; (though not as yet entered the Battle
against the Church;) or if he had clearly proved the
Thing, you will find that nothing remains, but a naked,
and miserable Piece of Sophistry. For what else has
he said by all that Heap of Words, but that Mass is a
Promise, and therefore no Work ? Wlio would but pity
this Man, that is so blockish, as not to perceive his own
Impertinency ; or, if he understands himself, who would
but take it heinously from him, that thinks all Chris
tians so dull, as not to discover or comprehend so mani
fest Follies ? I shall not dispute with him about the
Testament or Promise, or the whole Definition, or Ap
plication thereof to the Sacrament. I will not trouble
him so much; he may perhaps find others who will
ruin the best Part of his Foundation, by saying, 'That
the Testament is the Promise of the Evangelical Law,
as the Old Testament was of the Law of Moses; and by

De Sacramento Eucharistice 263

(nam ipsius verba recitabo) : "Audisti Missam nihil
aliud esse, quam promissionem divinam, seu testa-
mentum Christi, sacramento corporis et sanguinis sui
commendatum." Quod si verum est, intelligis earn non
posse opus esse ullo modo, nee alio studio a quoquam
tractari, quam sola fide: fides autem non est opus, sed
magistra, et vita operum. Minim est, quanto nixu par-
turiens, quam nihil peperit, nisi merum ventum, quern
quum ipse tarn validum velit videri, ut montes posset
evertere, mihi profecto videtur tarn languidus, ut agi-
tare non possit arundinem. Nam si verborum tollas
involucra, quibus rem absurdam, velut simiam purpura,
vestit, si tollas exclamationes illas, quibus jam velut re
delucide probata, toties in totam bacchatur Ecclesiam,
et nondum collata manu, tanquam ferox victor insultat,
nihil aliud restare videbis, quam nudum et miserum
sophisma. Quid enim aliud dicit tanto verborum am-
bitu, quam Missa est promissio ; ergo non potest esse
opus ? Quern non misereat hominis, si tarn stupidus sit,
ut ineptiam suam non sentiat ? Aut quis non indigne-
tur, si sibi conscius, tarn stupidos tamen omnes sestimet
Christianos, ut tarn manifestas insanias nequeant depre-
hendere ?

contendam cum eo de testamento et promissione,
et tota ilia diffinitione, et applicatione testamenti ad
sacramentum. Non ero tarn molestus ei, quam alios
fortassis inveniet, si qui bonam ei partem istius funda-
menti subruerint, qui et testamentum novum dicant
promissionem esse legis evangelicse, quemadmodum
vetus fuit mosaicse, et testamentum istud negent a Lu-

264 The Sacrament of the Altar

denying it to be rightly handled by Luther/ For neither
was the Testator particularly to name what he should
leave to the Heir, whom he had appointed over all in
general; nor is the Remission of Sins, which Luther
says, is bequeathed for an Inheritance, the same with
the Kingdom of Heaven, but rather the Way to Heaven.
If any one should urge and press Luther in these, and
such-like Sayings, he might, perhaps, by fastening these
Engines in any Part of his Structure, shake the whole
Frame thereof ; but I shall leave that to such as shall be
willing to do it : And because he desires his Foundation
should remain unshaken, I shall not go about to move
it; I will only shew, that the House he has built upon
it, falls of itself. And to shew this more plainly, let us
consider a little the Original of the Matter, and examine
the Mass by its first Pattern.

Christ, in his most holy Supper, in which he insti
tuted this Sacrament, made of Bread and Wine, his
own Body and Blood, and gave to his Disciples to be
eaten and drunk: A few Hours afterwards, he offered
the same Body and Blood on the Altar of the Cross, a
Sacrifice to his Father for the Sins of the People ; which
Sacrifice being finished, the Testament was consum
mated. Being now near his Death, he did (as some
dying Persons are wont to do) declare his Will concern
ing what he desired should be done afterwards in Com
memoration of him. Wherefore, instituting the Sacra
ment, when he gave his Body and Blood to his Disci
ples, he said, Do this in Commemoration of me. He who
diligently examines this, will find Christ to be the eter
nal Priest, who, in Place of all the Sacrifices which were
offered by the temporary Priesthood of Moses's Law,
(whereof many were but the Types and Figures of this
holy Sacrifice) has instituted one Sacrifice, the greatest
of all, the Plenitude of all, as the Sum of all others,

De Sacramento Eucharistice 265

thero satis scite tractari; neque enim testator! nuncu-
pandum esse nominatim, quid relinquat hseredi, quern
ex asse instituat, neque remissionem peccatorum, quam
pro hsereditate nuncupatam Lutherus ait, idem esse
quod regnum ccelorum, sed viam potius ad coelum.
Quas res, atque alias item aliquot quisquis urgere volet,
ac premere, posset fortassis fundamenti Lutheriani
structuram machinis alicunde concutere. Verum istud
eis permittam, qui volent. Ego istud ei fundamentum,
quod immobile postulat esse, non movebo ; tantum osten-
dam sedificium, quod superstruxit, facile per se corruere.
Quod quo liquidius appareat, consideremus paulisper
originem rei, Missamque ad primum ejus exemplar ex-
aminemus.

Christus igitur in ilia Ccena sanctissima, qua sacra-
mentum illud instituit, corpus suum et sanguinein ex
pane et vino confecit, ac tradidit manducandum biben-
dumque discipulis,tunc intra paucas horas idem corpus,
eumdem sanguinem in ara crucis obtulit in sacrificium
Patri pro peccatis populi : quo sacrificio peracto, testa-
mentum consummatum est. In Coena jam morti prox-
imus, quemadmodum solent morientes, testamento
quodam testatus est mentem suam, quid se defuncto
fieret in memoriam sui.

Instituens igitur sacramentum, quum suum corpus
ac sanguinem exhibuisset discipulis, ait illis: "Hoc
facite in meam commemorationem." Hoc si quis ex-
pendat diligenter, videbit Christum sacerdotem seter-
num, loco sacrificiorum omnium, quse temporarium
mosaicse legis sacerdotium offerebat (quorum etiam
pleraque sacrosancti hujus sacrificii tjpum gerebant)
unum sacrificium, omnium summum, omnium plenitu-
dinem, et quamdam veluti summam instituisse, quod et

266 The Sacrament of the Altar

that it might be offered to God, and given for Food to
the People : In which Thing, as Christ was the Priest,
so his Disciples did for that Time represent the People,
who themselves did not consecrate, but received, from
the Hands of their Priest, the consecrated Sacrament.
But God did shortly after elect and institute them
Priests, that they might consecrate the same Sacrament,
in Commemoration of him.

And what else then is this, but that they should con
secrate, and not only receive it themselves, but likewise
give it to the People, and offer it to God? For, if
Luther should argue that the Priest cannot offer, because
Christ did not offer in his Supper, let him remember
his own Words, That a Testament involves in it the
Death of the Testator; therefore has no Force or Power,
nor is in its full Perfection ; till the Testator be dead.
Wherefore, not only those Things which Christ did first
at his Supper, do belong to the Testament, but also his
Oblation on the Cross: For on the Cross he consum
mated the Sacrifice which he began in the Supper : And
therefore the Commemoration of the whole Thing, to
wit, of the Consecration in the Supper, and the Oblation
on the Cross, is celebrated, and represented together in
the Sacrament of the Mass ; so that it is, the Death that
is more truly represented than the Supper. And there
fore, the Apostle, when writing to the Corinthians, in
these Words, As often as ye shall eat this Bread, and
drink this Cup, adds, not the Supper of our Lord, but
ye shall declare our Lord's Death*

Let us now come to Luther's chief Reasons, by which
he proves Mass to be neither good Work, nor Sacrifice.
And though it were better first to treat of Sacrifice ; yet
because he has first moved concerning Work, we will
follow him. When therefore he thus argues, Mass is a
*I. Cor. xi. 26.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 267

offerretur Deo, et in cibum iaretur populo. Qua in re,
ut Christus sacerdos erat, ita discipuli eatenus reprse-
sentabant populum, qui non consecrabant ipsi, sed con-
seeratum de manu sacerdotis sui sumebant ; sed eos sta-
tim Deus in sacerdotes elegit, atque instituit, ut ipsi
idem sacramentum facerent in commemorationem ejus.

Quod quid aliud est, quam ut consecrarent, nee sibi
tantum sumerent, sed et exhiberent populo, et offerrent
Deo ? Nam si ibi nobis instet Lutherus, sacerdotem
offerre non posse, quia Christus in Coena non obtulit,
recordetur eorum qua? dixit ipse, testamentum involvere
mortem testatoris, nee ante vires et robur sumere, et
tota perfectione compleri, quam eo moriente, qui testa-
tus est. Quamobrem non ea solum pertinent ad testa
mentum, quse prius fecit in Cosna, sed etiam oblatio ejus
in cruce; nam in cruce consummavit sacrificium, quod
inchoavit in Ccena, eoque totius rei commemoratio,
nempe consecrationis in Coena, et oblationis in cruce,
uno celebratur ac repraesentatur sacramento missse;
atque adeo verius mors repraesentatur, quam Coena.
Apostolus enim quum Corinthiis scriberet: "Quoties-
cumque panem hunc comederitis, et calicem biberitis"
adjecit, non Coenam Domini, sed ft mortem Domini an-
nuntiabitis"

Veniamus ergo nunc ad prasclaras istas Lutheri
rationes, quibus probat Missam neque bonum opus esse,
neque sacrincium; et quanquam praestaret prius trac-
tare de sacrificio, tamen quoniam ille primam quaes-
tionem fecit de opere, sequemur ilium. Quum igitur
ita colligit: "Missa est promissio, ergo non est bonum

268 The Sacrament of the Altar

Promise, therefore no good Work, because no Promise
is a Work; we answer, that the Mass, which the Priest
celebrates, cannot more properly be called a Promise,
than the Consecration of Christ was : And all under one
we will demand of him, if Christ did not do a Work,
when he consecrated ? which if he deny, we shall cer
tainly begin to admire that there should be some Work
done by him who cuts an Image out of Wood, and not
by Christ, when he made his own Flesh of Bread ! And
if Christ did any Work, I am certain none will doubt
of its being a good Work: For if the Woman, who
poured the Ointment upon his Head,* wrought a good
Work in that, who doubts of his performing a good
Work, when he gave his Body for our Nourishment,
and offered it in Sacrifice to God? If this cannot be
denyed, unless by him who intends to trifle in so serious
a Matter, neither can it also be denyed that the Priest
worketh a good Work in the Mass; seeing that in the
Mass he does nothing else but what Christ did in his last
Supper, and on the Cross; for this is declared in
Christ's own Words, Do this in Commemoration of me.
By which Words, what was he willing they should rep
resent, and do in the Mass, but what he had done him
self in his last Supper, and on the Cross ? For he in
stituted, and began the Sacrament at his last Supper,
which he perfected on the Cross. And from this Reason
especially it seems, was taken the Occasion of mingling
W'ater with the Wine, according to the Custom of the
Church; because Water and Blood did flow from the
Side of Christ, dying on the Cross.

Since it cannot be denyed that Christ wrought a
good Work in his last Supper, and on the Cross ; neither
can it be denyed, that the Priest represents, and per
forms the same Things in the Mass: How can it then
*Matt. xxvi. 7-10.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 269

opus, quia nulla promissio est opus," dicemus Missam,
quam sacerdos celebrat, non verius esse promissionem,
quam fuit consecratio Christ! ; et simul quseremus ab eo,
an non aliquod opus turn f ecerit Christus : quod si neget,
mirabimur profecto, si quum is opus faciat, qui imagi-
nem facit ex ligno, Christus nullum prorsus opus
feeerit, quum carnem suam fecerit ex pane. Quod si
ullum opus fecerit, quin id bonum fuerit, nemo, opinor,
dubitabit: nam si bonum opus fecit mulier, quse caput
ejus perfudit unguento, quis potest ambigere an bonum
opus fecerit Christus, quum corpus proprium et in
cibum exhiberet hominibus, et in sacrificium offerret
Deo? Quod si negari non potest nisi ab eo, qui in re
inaxime seria valde velit nugari, bonum opus fecisse
Christum, nee istud etiam negari potest, in Missa
bonum opus facere sacerdotem, quippe qui non aliud
facit in Missa quam Christus in Coena fecit, et cruce.
Hoc enim declarant verba Christi : "H oc facite in meam
commemorationem" quibus verbis quid aliud volebat,
ut in Missa reprsesentarent ac facerent, quam quod ipse
f aciebat in Coena et cruce ? Instituebat enim, et incho-
abat in Coena sacramentum, quod in cruce perfecit:
nam hac ratione potissimum nata esse videtur occasio,
ut aqua ex Ecclesise ritu uno miscerietur in calice,
quia aqua cum sanguine de latere morientis effluxit in
cruce.

Quum ergo negari non possit, quin bonum opus
et in Ccena, et in cruce fecerit Christus, neque etiam
quod sacerdos eadem reprsesentat ac facit in Missa,
quomodo turn fingi potest Missam bonum opus non
esse.

270 The Sacrament of the Altar

be feigned that the Mass is not a good Work ? Where
fore, since Luther so handles the Matter, as to say,
'That, because the Communion of one Layman does not
profit another of the Laity, so neither does the Mass of
the Priest profit the People;' how dim of Sight is he
himself, and how much does he endeavour to spread his
Darkness over the Eyes of others, when he sees not that
there is this Difference in the Case, That now the Laity
receives out of the Priest's Hand, as the Apostles did
first from Christ's ; and the priest performs what Christ
did then perform; for he offers to God the same Body
that was offered by Christ ?

From whence also it appears how cold an Argument
is Luther's Comparison of the Mass, with the Sacra
ment of Baptism or Marriage; endeavouring to prove,
that, because one Layman cannot be baptized for an
other, nor marry a Wife for another Man; so a Priest
cannot celebrate Mass for any other Person! For he
openly puts Marriage out of the Number of the Sacra
ments, and Baptism too, under a Colour ; when he says,
That really there is but one Sacrament: Why then does
he now compare Baptism and Marriage with the Sacra
ment of the Mass, if he does not hold them to be Sacra
ments ?

And although he should confess them both to be
Sacraments, (as indeed they are) yet is neither of them
to be compared to this of the Mass ; but in such Manner
as this Sacrament, which is the proper Body of him
who is Lord of all Sacraments, may have a Prerogative
above all other, which he himself made ; since it is mani
fest, that the Priest, in administering all other Sacra
ments, does Good to all those who receive them; so in
this, while he offers it in the Mass, he is profitable, and
communicates Good to all.

Otherwise, if Luther exact with such Severity, that

De Sacramento Eucliaristioe 271

Quamobrem etiam quum Lutherus ita rem tractet, ut
quia laici communio alter! non prodest laico, ideo nee
sacerdotis Missa prosit populo, vehementer ipse coecutit,
dum tenebras aliis conatur effundere, quum non videat
hoc interesse, quod laicus nunc recipit tantum e manu
sacerdotis, sicut primo receperunt apostoli e manu
Christi, sacerdos vero facit quod turn fecit Christus,
nam idem corpus offert Deo, quod obtulit Christus. Qua
ex re et illud patet, quam frigidum argumentum sit, quo
Missam comparat cum sacramento Baptismi, aut Con-
jugii, contendens efficere ut, quoniam laicus baptizari
non potest pro alio, aut pro alio uxorem ducere, ideo nee
sacerdos Missam pro alio possit celebrare: nam Con-
jugium plane sustulit e sacramentis, et recte etiam Bap-
tismum, quum dicit non esse vere, nisi unum sacra-
mentum. Cur ergo nunc Baptismum comparat, et
Conjugium cum sacramento Missae, si ilia non habet
pro sacramentis ? Quanquam etiam si utrumque f atere-
tur esse sacramentum (quod revera sunt), tamen
neutrum erat sic comparandum huic sacramento Missse,
quin hoc sacramentum, quod est proprium corpus
ipsius, qui Dominus est sacramentorum omnium, sacra-
menta reliqua possit, quse fecit ipse, singular! aliqua
prserogativa praecellere, quum clare constet quod,
quemadmodum in omnibus aliis sacramentis sacerdos
prodest ministrando singulis, sic in hoc sacramento,
dum offert in Missa, prodest, et bonum communicat uni-
versis.

Alioqui si tarn severe Lutherus exigat ut omnia sacra-

272 The Sacrament of the Altar

all Sacraments should be alike, and no Difference
amongst them; and that, in the Sacrament of the
Eucharist, the Priest's Condition is no better than that
of the Laity ; why compels he not the Priest to receive
the Communion from the Hands of another, and not
suffer him to take it himself, though he can consecrate
it ; even as he cannot absolve himself, though he has the
Keys of Penance ?

And what he says of Faith, which he believes all Men
are to have in their own Persons, and that not the
Priest's, but every Man's own Faith, is that which
profits him, even (says he) as Abraham has not believed
for all the Jews. I allow it to be very true; yet it
proves no more than what it proposes : For neither has
Christ himself, offered by himself on the Cross, saved
the People, without every Man's particular Faith ; that
none may think the Mass of any Priest should do it;
yet the Mass of every Priest helps those to Salvation,
who, by their Faith, have deserved to be Partakers of
the greatest Good communicated in the Mass to many.

It may likewise be sometimes advantageous to the
procuring the Infusion of Faith into the Unfaithful, as
it is procured by the Death and Passion of Christ, that
Grace should be given to the Gentiles; by which,
through the Hearing of the Word, they might come to
the Understanding of the Faith of Christ.

Sacrifice of tbe
BUT Luther easily perceives, that it is no hard Matter
to destroy what he himself has built, if Mass can be a
Sacrifice or Offering, which may be offered to God ; he
therefore promises to remove this Obstacle, which, that he
may the more easily seem to do, he objects against himself
such Things, as he perceives to stand in his Way. 'And
now, (says he) another, the greatest and most spacious

De Sacramento Eucharistice 273

menta sint inter se similia, et in Eucharistiae sacra-
mento nihilo potior sit sacerdotis conditio, quam laico-
rum, quare non cogit ut sacerdos alterius manu semper
communicet, nee sinatur sibi sacramentum sumere,
quanquam potest conficere, quemadmodum, licet claves
habeat Poenitentia?, semet non potest absolvere? Nam
quod affert de fide, quam a singulis censet oportere
prsestari, et suam cuique fidem prodesse, non sacerdotis,
quemadmodum nee Abraham, ut ait, pro omnibus
Juda3is credidit, istud quidem verum dicit, at nihil
tamen magis id probat, quod proponit: nam neque
Christus ipse a semet oblatus in cruce sine sua cujusque
fide servavit populum, ne quis id Missam putet cujusque
sacerdotis efficere, quse tamen Missa cujuslibet sacer
dotis illis prodest ad salutem, quorum propria fides
meruit ut boni, quod tarn immensum Missa communicat
multis, possint esse participes. Quanquam potest et ad
hoc valere nonnunquam, ut incredulo quoque fidem pro-
curet infundi, quemadmodum Christi mors et Passio
procuravit ut gratia daretur Gentibus, qua per auditum
verbi venirent in fidem Christi.

2>e Saccificto

SED Lutherus satis sentit ipse facile destrui quicquid
astruxerat, si Missa possit esse sacrificium, aut oblatio,
quse offeratur Deo. Hanc igitur obicem se pollicetur
amoturum, quod quo fidelius facere videatur, et effica-
cius, objicit sibi ipse prius quasdam, quse sibi sentit ob~
stare. "Jam et alterum," inquit, "scandalum amoven-
dum est, quod multo grandius est, et speciosissimum, id

274 The Sacrament of the Altar

of all Scandals, is to be taken away, that is, Mass be
lieved every where to be a Sacrifice offered to God;'
which Opinion the Words of the Canon seem to favour,
where it is said these G-ifts, these Presents, and these
holy Sacrifices; and below that, this Offering. He like
wise complains, that it is taken for a Sacrifice, &c.
From thence Christ is called the Host of the Altar. To
this may be added the Words of the holy Fathers, so
many Examples, and the constant Custom observed
over the whole World.

You see, gentle Reader, what Blocks he himself finds
standing in his Way: Take Notice now with what
Herculean Strength he undertakes to remove them : But
to all these, (says he) are constantly to be opposed the
Words and Example of Christ. But pray what Words
of Christ are these, which have been unknown to so
many holy Fathers in Times past, and to the whole
Church of Christ, during so many Ages, and now, by
Luther, like a new Esdras, found out ? This he declares
himself, when he says, 'For unless we bring it to pass,
that Mass be accounted a Promise or Testament, as the
Words, clearly make out ; we lose the whole Gospel, and
all Comfort:' These are his Words: It now remains
that we see his Example. f Christ, says he, at his last
Supper, when he instituted this Sacrament, and be
queathed the Testament, offered it not to God the
Father, and has not performed it as a good Work for
others; but sitting at the Table, he proposed the same
Testament, and exhibited a Sign to every one of them.'
Those are therefore the Words of Christ ! This is the
Example, by which, now at last, only Luther himself
clearly sees Mass neither to be a Sacrifice, nor Offer
ing ! It is a Wonder that, of so many holy Fathers, of
so many Eyes which have read the Gospel in the Church
for so many Ages, none was ever so quick-sighted, as

De Sacramento Eucharistice 275

est, quod Missa creditur passim esse sacrificium, quod
offertur Deo. In quam opinionem et verba Canonis
sonare videntur, ubi dicitur : Jicec dona, hcec munera,
licec sancta sacrificia, et infra: hanc oblationem; item
clarissime postulatur ut acceptum sit sacrificium, sicut
sacrificium Abel, etc. Inde Christus hostia altaris
dicitur. Accedunt his dicta sanctorum Patrum, tot ex-
empla, tantusque usus per orbem constanter obser-
vatus."

Audisti, lector, quas obices ipse sibi sentit objectas;
audi nunc vicissim quam Herculeis viribus aggreditur
amovere. "His omnibus," inquit, "oportet constantis-
sime opponere verbum et exemplum Christi." At quse
sunt igitur ilia verba Christi, quse tot olim sanctis
Patribus, ac toti Christi Ecclesise tot ignorata sseculis,
velut novus Esdras iiobis Lutherus invenit ? Hoc de-
clarat ipse, quum dicit: "Nisi enim Missam obtinueri-
mus esse promissionem, seu testamentum, ut verba clare
sonant, totum evangelium, et universum solatium amit-
timus." Verba nunc audivimus ; restat ut videamus
exemplum: exemplum ergo subjungit. "Christus," in-
quit, "in Co3na novissima, quum institueret hoc sacra-
mentum, et condidit testamentum, non obtulit ipsum
Deo Patri, aut ut opus bonum pro aliis perfecit, sed in
mensa sedens singulis idem testamentum proposuit, et
signum exhibuit." Ista sunt ergo verba Christi, istud
est exemplum, e quibus nunc demum Lutherus unus
perspicue videt Missam non esse sacrificium, nee obla-
tionem. Mirum est igitur ex tot sanctis Patribus, ex
tot oculis, quot in Ecclesia tarn multis sseculis idem
legerunt evangelium, nullum fuisse unquam tarn per-
spicacem, ut rem tarn apertam deprehenderet, imo
omnes etiamnum tarn csecos esse, ut ne adhuc quidem
queant id quod cernere se Lutherus jactat, quanquam

276 The Sacrament of the Altar

to perceive a Thing so apparent ; and that at this pres
ent Time they are all so blind, as not to discern what
Luther (though he points it out with his Finger,) brags
so clearly to see himself! Is not Luther rather mis
taken, and thinks himself to see something, which in
Reality he sees not, or endeavours to shew us with his
Finger, that which is no-where to be found ? For pray
what Sort of Proof is that where he undertakes to
teach fthat Mass is no Sacrifice, because it is a Prom
ise/ as if Promise and Sacrifice were as repugnant to
gether as Heat and Cold ? Which Reason of his is alto
gether so weak, that it seems not worthy an Answer.
For the so many Sacrifices of Moses's Laws, though all
Figures of Things to come, yet were they Promises in
themselves, promising the Things for which they were
done; not only the Future, of which they were Fig
ures, but also Deliverances, Expiations, Purgations and
Purifications, of the People then present, for whom
they were solemnly offered every Year. Which Thing
being so apparent, that it leaves no Plea for Ignorance,
makes Luther's Dissimulation appear altogether ridicu
lous ; when arguing that this Thing cannot be done ;
which not only he himself, but all the People know to
have been so often performed.

]STow come we to the Example of Christ, by which
Luther thinks he so vehemently oppresses us ; because
Christ, in his last Supper, did not use the Sacrament for
a Sacrifice, nor has he offered it to his Father: Out of
which he goes about to prove, 'That the Mass, which
ought to agree with the Example of Christ, by whom it
was instituted, cannot be a Sacrifice or Offering.7

If Luther so rigidly summons us to the Example of
our Lord's Supper, as not to permit the Priest to do
any Thing that we do not read Christ to have done in
it ; then must they never receive themselves in the Sac-

De Sacramento Eucliaristice 277

ipso monstrante, perspicere. Annon Lutherus halluci-
natur potius, et aliquid se videre putat, quod non videt,
et digito conatur ostendere, quod nusquam est ?

E"am, obsecro, qualis est ista probatio, quum docere
nititur Missam non esse sacrificium ex eo quod sit
promissio ? quasi promissio et sacrificium ita sibi mutuo
pugnarent, quemadmodum frigus et calor ? Quse Lu-
theri ratio adeo prorsus friget, ut nee response digna
videatur. Nam legis Mosaics tarn multa sacrificia,
quanquam essent figurse omnia futurarum rerum, tamen
promissiones erant et ipsa : promittebant enim ea,
propter quse fiebant, non modo futura quondam ilia,
quorum erant figurse, sed etiam liberationes, expia-
tiones, purgationes, purificationes populi tune pra3-
sentis, pro quo more solemni quotannis oiferebantur.
Quae res quum tarn aperta sit, ut nemo prorsus earn
possit ignorare, ridicula plane dissimulatio est ista Lu-
theri, quum nunc argumentetur fieri id non posse, quod
non ipse tantum, sed populus quoque novit tarn ssepe
factum.

ATunc veniamus ad exemplum Christi, quo nos arbi-
tratur Lutherus vehementer opprimi, propterea quod
Christus in Coena sacramento non usus est pro sacrificio,
nee obtulit Patri : ex quo probare conatur quod Missa,
quse respondere debet exemplo Christi quo fuit insti-
tuta, non potest esse sacrificium, nee oblatio.

Si Lutherus tarn rigide nos revocet ad exemplum
Co3nse dominicae, ut nihil sacerdotes permittat facere,
quod ibi Christus fecisse non legitur, sacramentum,
quod consecrant, nunquam ipsi recipient. Suum enim

278 The Sacrament of the Altar

rament which they consecrate: For we do not read in
the Gospel, where it mentions the last Supper of our
Lord, that our Lord himself received his own Body:
and though some Doctors, and the whole Church, do
hold that he did receive it: yet that makes nothing for
Luther, who discredits not only all the Doctors, but the
Faith of the whole Church ; and thinks not any Thing
to be believed, but what is confirmed by Scriptures, and
that clearly to; (for so he writes in the Sacrament of
Orders.) In which Sort of Scripture, I am of Opinion,
he will not find that Christ received his own Body at
his last Supper. Whence it will follow, as I have said,
that the Priests ought not to take what they consecrate
themselves, if he binds us so strictly to the Example of
the last Supper. But if then he allows that the Priests
are to receive, because the Apostles did so ; and that he
holds they are commanded to do what the Apostles did
then, not what Christ has done; then must they never
consecrate; for Christ , and not the Apostles, did then
consecrate. The Matter itself shews, that, in this, the
Priests do not only perform what Christ did in his last
Supper, but also what he has afterwards done on the
Cross; the Apostles leaving us some Things by Tradi
tion, which Christ either never did, or which we do not
read that he had done; as the Ceremonies and Signs
used in the Consecration, of which I believe most are
delivered down to us from the Apostles themselves.
Furthermore, they repeat some Words in the Canon of
the Mass, as if spoken by Christ himself, which are not
read in Scripture; and yet there is no Doubt but he
spoke them; for many Things were said and done by
Christ, which are not recorded by any of the Evan
gelists, but by the fresh Memory of those who were
present: delivered afterwards, as it were, from Hand
to Hand, from the very Times of the Apostles, down to

De Sacramento Eucharistice 279

corpus Christus in evangelic non legitur, ubi Coena
scribitur, ipse recepisse. Nam quod Doctores aliquot
eum recepisse tradunt, et quod idem canit Ecclesia,
nihil potest pro Luthero facere, quum illi neque Doc-
tores omnes, neque totius Ecclesiae fides ullam faciat
fidem, neque credendum censeat quicquam (nam ita
scribit in sacramento Ordinis) nisi firmatum Scrip-
turis, et iisdem etiam claris, cujusmodi certe Scripturis,
non opinor, inveniet quod suum corpus in Crena re-
ceperit Christus; ex quo sequetur, ut dixi, nee sacer-
dotes debere, quod consecrant ipsi, recipere, si tarn
rigide nos obstringat Lutherus ad exemplum Coense
dominicse. Quod si ideo concedat recipiendum sacer-
dotibus, quia receperunt apostoli, et eos contendat id
jussos facere, quod tune apostoli fecerunt, non quod
Christus, hac ratione nunquam consecrabunt sacerdotes :
consecrabat enim Christus, non apostoli. Res ergo
docet non id solum sacerdotes in hoc sacramento facere,
quod Christus fecit in Co3na, sed etiam quod postea
fecit in cruce, qusedam etiam tradentibus apostolis, quse
Christus aut nusquam fecit, aut certe non legitur
usquam fecisse, cujusmodi sunt gestus et signa quibus
utuntur dum consecrant : quorum ego nonnulla credo ab
ipsis promanasse apostolis.

Prseterea quod in Canone Missse qusedam verba velut
a Christo prolata recensent, quse nusquam in Scriptura
sacra leguntur, et tamen non dubitatur, quin dixerit:
Multa enim dicta sunt et facta per Christum, quse
nullus evangelistarum complectitur, sed qusedam re-
cente memoria eorum, qui interfuerunt, velut per manus
deinceps tradita, ab ipso apostolorum tempore ad nos
usque pervenerunt. Lutherus non dubitat Christum in

280 The Sacrament of the Altar

us. Luther doubts not, that Christ said in his last
Supper, As often as ye shall do this, ye shall do it in
Commemoration of me: And he is so sure that they
were Christ's Words, that, from thence he takes his
Argument ; 'That Nobody is obliged to receive the Sac
rament; but that it is left to every Man's Discretion,
and that we are only bound, as often as we do it, to do
it in Remembrance of Christ/ These very Words he
does not read in the Evangelists concerning the Supper
of our Lord : For no other Thing is read there, but, do
this in Commemoration of me.

Where then read he these, 'as often as ye shall do
these Things ?' Whether, not in the Mass ? Indeed I
believe no where else. For the Apostles Words are not
so : Wherefore, seeing he trusts so much in these Words,
and uses them, because he finds them in the Canon;
why does he not give so much Credit to that Part of
the same Canon, in which Mass is called an Offering,
and Sacrifice?

Wherefore, if he confess that the Priests do rightly
receive what they consecrate in the Mass, though no
clear Scripture (which only he admits of,) testifies
Christ to have done it at his last Supper, nor in any
other Place ; he ought not to wonder if the Priest offers
Christ to his Father ; which Christ himself has done on
the Cross, as it is witnessed by clear Scripture in sev
eral Places : For Luther's, own Arguments demonstrate,
that the Cross belongs to the Testament made at the
Supper, when he says, 'That the Testament involves
the Death of the Testator, by which alone it can be
made perfect.' Moreover, it seems, as is said, that the
mingling of Water with the Wine, had its Beginning
from no other Place ; which Thing is not said by Scrip
ture to be done at the last Supper, but on the Cross.
Let Luther, therefore, forbear to oppose his trifling

De Sacramento Eucharistice 281

Coena dixisse: ffHcec quotiescunque feceritis, in mei
memoriam facietis," atque hsec usque adeo pro comperto
habet Christi verba fuisse, ut inde sumat argumentum,
neminem cogi ad recipiendum sacramentum, sed rem
cujusque relictam arbitrio, tantum ad hoc adstringi, ut,
quoties facimus, faciamus in memoriam Christi. Hsec
ergo verba non legit apud evangelistas in Coena
Domini: nam illic nihil aliud legitur, quam: "Hoc
facite in mei commemorationem" Ubi ergo legit ilia
verba : "Hoec quotiescunque feceritis/' annon in Missa ?
Opinor certe non alibi : nam apud Apostolum alia sunt.
Igitur qui tantum fidit, et utitur illis verbis, quia
reperit in Canone, cur non pari fide suscipit ejusdem
verba Canonis, quibus Missa oblatio dicitur, et sacri-
ficium ?

Quamobrem si sacerdotes in Missa fatetur recte
recipere quod consecrant, quanquam nulla Scriptura
clara (cujusmodi solam recipit Lutherus) Christum
testetur illud nee in Coena fecisse, non usquam, non
debet mirum videri Luthero, si sacerdos offerat Chris
tum Patri, quod non uno loco, clara testante Scriptura,
Christus ipse fecit in cruce ; nam crucem etiam ad testa-
mentum in Coena f actum pertinere Lutheri quoque ratio
demonstrat, quum testamentum dicit mortem testatoris
involvere, utpote qua sola perficitur. Prseterea non
aliunde, quod dixi, videtur et id institutum, ut aqua
vino misceretur in sacramento: quse res non in Coena
legitur esse facta, sed cruce. Desinat ergo Lutherus
argumentum nugax opponere, ut, quia Christus in
Coena sese non obtulit, ideo sacerdos non offerre creda-
tur in Missa, in qua non solum reprsesentat quod in

282 The Sacrament of the Altar

Argument, ''That, because Christ at his last Supper did
not offer himself, therefore the Priest must not be be
lieved to offer him in the Mass :' In which he not only
represents what Christ performed in his last Supper,
but also what he did on the Cross, on which he con
summated what he began in the Supper.

But now come we to the last of Luther's Arguments ;
by which, as by a sacred Anchor, his Ship is sustained :
Arid this is the most frivolous of all the rest. 'How
can it be, (says he) that the Priest should offer to God
what he takes himself ? It is not likely (says he) Mass
should be a Sacrifice, when we receive it ourselves. The
same Thing cannot be received and offered at one and
the same Time, nor given and received by one and the
same Person.7 Luther deters us every-where from
philosophical Reasonings, when he, in so sacred a
Thing, endeavours to sustain himself by the merest
Sophistry in the World. For pray was there ever a
Sacrifice in Moses's Law, which was not taken by those
who offered it? Or did God himself eat what they
offered him ? Shall I eat the Flesh of Bulls., or drink
the Blood of Goats, saith the Lord?* Besides, if
Christ was both Priest and Sacrifice ; why could he not
institute that the Priest, who should supply the same
Sacrifice, might both offer and receive the Victim him
self ? But lest I may seem, in this Case, to imitate
Luther, who has nothing to say for himself, but what
issues out of his own idle Brain ; I will lay before you
what St. Ambrose says to the Mass, 'O Lord God, (says
he) with how great Contrition of Heart, with what
Fountains of Tears, with how great Reverence and
Fear, with what Chastity and Purity of Mind that
divine and cselestial Mystery is to be celebrated : Where
thy Flesh is truly received; where thy Blood is truly
*Ps. xlix. 13.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 283

Ccena fecit Christus, sed etiam quod in cruce, in qua
consummavit Christus quod inchoavit in Cosna.

At postremum argumentum Lutheri, quo velut an-
chora sacra sustinetur navis, omnium est nugacissimum.
"Quomodo," inquit, "fieri potest ut sacerdos offerat Deo
quod ipse sumit? Kepugnat," inquit, "Missam esse
sacrificium, quum illam recipiamus : idem simul recipi
et offerri non potest, nee ab eodem simul dari et accipi."
Deterret nos ubique Lutherus a rationibus philosophi-
cis, quum ipse in re tarn sacra se firmet in meracissimo
sophismate : nam quod unquam f uit sacrificium in lege
Mosaica, quod non sumebant qui offerebant ? An quod
Deo offerebatur, ipse comedebat ? "Numquid ego man-
ducabo carnes taurorum, aut sanguinem" inquit Deus,
"hircorum potabof

Prseterea si Christus et sacerdos fuit, et sacrificium,
cur non potuit Christus instituere ut sacerdos, qui idem
sacrificium reprsesentaret, victimam et oiferret, et
sumeret ? Sed hac in re, ne Lutherum videar imitari,
qui nihil habet pro se, nisi quod e suo fingit capite, af-
feremus quod dicit beatus Ambrosius de Missa: aQuan-
ta,?? inquit, "cordis contritione, et lacrymarum fonte,
quanta reverentia et tremore, quanta corporis castitate
atque animi puritate istud divinum et creleste mys-
terium est celebrandum, Domine Deus : ubi caro tua in
veritate surnitur, ubi sanguis tuus in veritate bibitur,
ubi summis ima, humanis divina junguntur: ubi adest
sanctorum prsesentia, et angelorum: ubi tu es sacerdos
et sacrificium mirabiliter et ineffabiliter ! Quis digne

284 The Sacrament of the Altar

drank; where the lowest is joined to the highest; and
divine Things with human: Where the Saints and
Angels are present; where, after an admirable and un
speakable Manner, thyself are both Priest and Sacri
fice! Who shall be able to celebrate this Mystery
worthily, if then Almighty God do not render him
worthy that offers ?' You see how the holy Father, in
this Place, calls Mass an Oblation, and says that Christ
himself is both Priest and Sacrifice in it, even as he was
on the Cross. Let Luther see how much he attributes
to this Man's Authority ; but St. Gregory makes appear
how much he had him in Esteem, when, in this Manner,
he imitated him in his Writings : — 'Which of the Faith
ful (says he) can doubt, but that in the very Time of
the Immolation, the Heavens are opened to the Words
of the Priest, in that Mystery of Christ: That Choirs
of Angels are present ; that the lowest Things are asso
ciated to the highest: That Earth is joined with
Heaven ; and that of Visible and Invisible is made one
Thing?' And in another Place, 'For this singular
Victim, which renews to us the Death of the only Be
gotten, does loose our Souls from eternal Death.' 'Nor
speaks he less to the Purpose, when he says, 'Hence
therefore let us ponder with ourselves, how much that
Sacrifice stands us in stead, which always imitates the
Passion of the only begotten Son/ We see, that not
only St. Ambrose, but also St. Gregory, calls Mass an
Immolation and Sacrifice ; and confesses, that, not only
the last Supper of Christ, (as Luther holds) but also his
Passion is represented in it.

But these Fathers alone were not of that Judgment,
for St. Augustine confesses the same Thing, in divers
Places, who says thus of the Mass, 'The Oblation is
every Day renewed, though Christ has but once suf
fered : Because we daily fall, therefore is Christ daily

De Sacramento Eucharist ice 285

hoc potest celebrare mysterium, nisi tu, Dens omni-
potens, offerentem feceris dignum ?"

Videtis ut hie beatissimus Pater et oblationem appel-
lat Missam, et in eadem Christnm ipsum dicat et sacer-
dotem esse, et sacrificium, quemadmodum fuit in cruce.
Cujus anctoritati quantum Lutherus tribuat, viderit
ipse: quantum vero tribuerit beatus Gregorius, facile
declaravit, quum ilium imitatus ita scriberet: aQuis
fidelium dubitare possit in ipsa immolationis hora ad
sacerdotis vocem coelos aperiri, in illo Christi mysterio
angelorum chores adesse, summis ima sociari, terram
coalestibus jungi, unum quid ex visibilibus et invisibili-
bus fieri ?" Et alibi : "Hsec namque singularis victima
ab a3terno interitu animas solvit, quse illam nobis mor
tem Unigeniti reparat." J^ec minus aperte quum dicit:
uHinc ergo pensemus quale sit pro nobis istud sacri-
ficium, quod unigeniti Filii Passionem semper imita-
tur." Videmus ut non solum divus Ambrosius? sed et
beatus Gregorius immolationem appellat Missam, et
sacrificium, ac fatetur in ea non ultimam tantum
Christi Comam, quod Lutherus ait, sed et Passionem
ejus represent ari. Nee tamen istud soli censuerunt
illi: nam et Augustinus non semel idem fatetur. Ait
enim de Missa: "Iteratur quotidie haec oblatio, licet
Christus semel passus sit ; quia quotidie labimur, Chris-
tus pro nobis quotidie immolatur." Item : "Eucharistia
est oblatio benedicta, per quam benedicimur, adscripta,
per quam omnes in ccelum adscribimur, rata, per quam
in visceribus Christi censemur."

286 The Sacrament of the Altar

offered for us. Also the Eucharist is a blessed Offering
by which we are blessed ; an Enrollment, by which we
all are enrolled in Heaven ; a Ratification, whereby we
are mustered in the Bowels of Christ.7

Seeing, therefore, that Mass is by so holy and learned
Men called an Offering, and a Sacrifice ; and that they
are of Opinion, that not only the last Supper of Christ,
but also his Passion is by it commemorated ; that they
confess so immense and great Advantages to proceed
from it ; and that the Church, agreeing with them, sings
the same in the whole Mass : I much admire with what
Face Luther dares to cry out, on the Contrary, that
Mass is no Sacrifice or Offering ; and that it brings no
Profit to the People ; deriding the Authority of so many
holy Fathers, or rather of the whole Church, by his
most vain Device; as if they were all Things, which
were understood of the Reliques of the Jewish Cere
monies, (in which he says, 'the Priest did heave up
what was offered by the People.') Which Comment of
Luther's did seem so foolish and absurd, even to him
self, that he doubted whether he should withstand the
Sentiments of the holy Fathers, and the Customs of the
whole Church, by such a babbling Argument, or rather
openly despise them : 'For, says he, what shall we say to
the Canons and Authorities of the Fathers ?' 'I answer,
says he, that if we have nothing at all to say against
them; it is more safe to deny all Things, than to con
fess that Mass is a Work or Sacrifice, lest we deny the
Words of Christ, corrupting them together with the
Mass. Nevertheless, that we may agree with them also,
we will say that all these Things were the Reliques of
Jewish Ceremonies.' Lest, therefore, there should be
nothing said, this civil Man, tendering the Repute of
the holy Fathers, and the Honour of the whole Church,
(lest they might be thought to speak foolishly) will seem

De Sacramento Eucharistiw 287

Quum igitur viri tarn eruditi, tarn sancti, Missam
dicant oblationem, et sacrificium, quum per earn non
Coenam tantum sentiant, sed etiam Passionem Christ!
commemorari, quum inde tarn immensa bona provenire
fateantur, quum iisdem consentiens, eadem in Missa
tota decantet Ecclesia, vehementer admiror qua fronte
Lutherus audeat clamare contrarium, Missam non esse
sacrificium, non esse oblationem, non prodesse populo,
eludens auctoritatem tot sanctorum Patrum, imo totius
Ecclesise vanissimo figmento suo, quasi omnia quse de
oblatione et sacrificio fiunt, et dicuntur in Missa, intelli-
gerentur de reliquiis judaici ritus, quo levasse dicit
sacerdotem ea quae offerebantur a populo. Quod Lu-
theri commentum tarn ineptum visum est et tarn ab-
surdum etiam ipsi Luthero, ut dubitaverit an sanctorum
Patrum sententias, et Ecclesise totius consuetudinem
tarn futili ratione defenderet, an potius ex professo con-
temneret. E"am : "Quid dicemus," inquit, "ad Canones,
et auctoritates Patrum? Respondeo," inquit, "si nihil
habetur, quod dicatur, tutius est omnia negare, quam
Missam concedere opus, aut sacrificium esse, ne verbum
Christi negemus, simul cum Missa pessumdantes :
tamen quo servemus et eos, dicemus ilia omnia reliquias
esse ritus judaici."

Ergo ne nihil dicatur, homo civilis, et honori sanc
torum Patrum parcens, et honori totius Ecclesise, tan-
quam officii gratia, ne stulte loqui viderentur, prse
clarum illud figmentum suum de reliquiis judaici ritus

288 The Sacrament of the Altar

to oblige them, by covering their Shame with the Veil
of his most excellent Devices, concerning the Reliques
of the Jewish Rites ; which, if any Body remove, it will
be to their Danger. For Luther does not ingeniously
apprehend, that if any one urge him more narrowly,
he would rather blow away all the Testimonies of the
holy Fathers, and the Customs of the Church, than that
he should allow Mass to be a good Work, or a Sacrifice ;
that is, rather than allow that to be true which is true :
Tor in that (he says) they deny Christ's Words, and
corrupt Faith with Mass, who affirm Mass to be a Sacri
fice:' I suppose that none will believe him, unless he
first shews that he has read another Gospel different
from that the holy Fathers ever read, or that in reading
the same, he has been more diligent than they, or has
better understood it ; or finally, that he is more careful
about Faith, than ever any Man before him was.

But I believe he will not prefer any other Gospel
unto us; nor, if he do, will it be admitted, though
an Angel from Heaven should descend with it. And
that which he proffers, has not been more diligently ex
amined, nor more narrowly pryed into by him, than it
has been tryed and searched into by others heretofore ;
of whom none ever said, that they found in it what he
boasts himself to have found, viz. 'That Mass is not a
good Work; that it is not an Oblation, nor a Sacrifice.'
Lastly, if any one diligently considers what has been
written by the one and the other, he cannot be ignorant
what Difference has been in their Care about Faith:
Those holy antient Fathers have observed, that, as this
is the chiefest of all Sacraments, as containing in it the
Lord of Sacraments; so is it the only Sacrifice, which
alone remains, instead of so many Sacrifices of the Old
Law ; and lastly, of all the Works that can be done for
the Salvation of the People, this, without Comparison,

DQ Sacramento Eucharist'iw 289

pro velamento dignatus est eorum pudendis prsetexere;
quod si quis admoveat, illorum periculo fecerit: nam
Lutherus ingenue non veretur, si quis eum stringat
arctius, quicquid unquam fuit sanctorum Patrum, quic-
quid unquam in Ecclesia moris fuit, exsufflare potius
videlicet, quam concedat Missam bonum opus esse, vel
sacrificium, hoc est, potius quam concedat verum esse,
quod verum est. Nam quod ait eos negare verbum
Christi, ac fidem simul cum Missa pessumdare, qui-
cumque dicunt Missam esse sacrificium, nemo est,
opinor, qui credat hac in parte Luthero, nisi primum
doceat aut aliud evangelium legisse se, quam sancti illi
Patres legerunt, aut illud idem vel legisse diligentius,
vel intellexisse melius, aut sibi denique majorem esse
curam fidei, quam ulli unquam hactenus mortalium
fuerit. At evangelium, credo, non proferet nobis aliud ;
neque, si proferet, audietur, etiamsi angelus cum eo de
coelo descenderit. Illud vero, quod profert, neque dili
gentius excussit, neque perspicit acutius, quam olim et
excussum est, et perspectum ab illis, quorum nemo se
reperisse dixit illic, quod nunc iste jactat reperisse sese,
Missam bonum opus non esse, non esse oblationem,
non esse sacrificium; denique fidei cura cujusmodi
fuit utrique, non potest cuiquam esse obscurum,
qui quid utrinque scriptum sit, non oscitanter expen-
derit.

Veteres illi viri sanctissimi viderunt sicut sacra-
mentorum omnium hoc esse summum, quod ipsuni
sacramentorum Dominum complectatur, ita sacrificio-
rum omnium hoc esse unicum, quod solum in loco tot
olim sacrificiorum restiterit, postremo operum omnium,
quse pro salute populi fieri possunt, longe lateque salu-

290 The Sacrament of the Altar

is the best and most wholesome. For when other Sacra
ments are only profitable to particular Persons receiv
ing them : This, in the Mass, is beneficial to all, in gen
eral. And when Prayers made to God by one Man for
another, may not only be hindered, but also rendered
ineffectual, through the Fault of Men; the merciful
Bounty of God has instituted Mass for the Salvation of
the Faithful ; in which his own Body should be offered
a Sacrifice so wholesome, that the Wickedness of the
Minister, be it never so great, is not able to lessen, or
avert the Benefit of it from the People.

The most holy Fathers seeing these Things, took all
possible Care, and used their utmost Endeavours, that
the greatest Faith imaginable should be had towards
this most propitiatory Sacrament ; and that it should be
worshipped with the greatest Honour possible : And for
that Cause, amongst many other Things, they, with
great Care, delivered us this also; That the Bread and
Wine do not remain in the Eucharist, but is truly
changed into the Body and Blood of Christ. They
taught Mass to be a Sacrifice, in which Christ himself
is truly offered for the Sins of Christian People: And
so far as it was lawful for Mortals, they adorned this
immortal Mystery with venerable Worship, and mys
tical Rites : They commanded the People to be present
in Adoration of it, whilst it is celebrated, for the pro
curing of their Salvation. Finally, lest the Laity, by
forbearing to receive the Sacrament, should, by little
and little, omit it f or-good-and-all ; they have estab
lished an Obligation that every Man shall receive at
least once in a Year. By those Things, and many of the
like Nature, the holy Fathers of the Church, in several
Ages, have demonstrated their Care for the Faith arid
Veneration of this adorable Sacrament. Luther ought

De Sacramento Eucliaristiae 291

berrimum. Nam. quum csetera sacramenta prosint
singulis, solum hoc in Missa prodest universis ; et quum
omnes orationes, quibus alius pro alio intercedit apud
Deuin, nori impediri tantum, sed et frustra fieri possint
hominum vitio, misericors Dei dementia Missam insti-
tuit pro salute fidelium, in qua suum ipsius corpus
offer retur tarn salubre sacrificium, ut ejus fructum
nullius ministri quantavis iniquitas a populo suo vel
avertere possit, vel imminuere.

Hsec Patres illi sanctissimi quum vidissent, summam
habuerunt curam, summam adhibuere diligentiam,
ut propitiatorium hoc sacramentum et fide quam
maxima posset, haberetur, et honore quam posset
maximo, coleretur; eoque quum alia inulta, turn hoc
quoque sedulo tradiderunt, panem et vinum in
Eucharistia non manere, sed in carnem et sanguinem
Christi veraciter esse conversa. Missam sacrificium
esse docuerunt, in quo Christus ipse pro populi
Christiani peccatis immolatur. Turn, quoad mortali-
bus licet, immortale mysterium venerando cultu, et
mysticis ornarunt ritibus; populum, dum celebratur,
in suse salutis procuratione venerabundum adesse
jusserunt. Denique, ne laici desuetudine recipiendi
sacramenti paulatim ex toto desinerent, sanxerunt ut
semel saltern quotannis Eucharistiam quisque sus-
ciperet. His igitur, atque aliis ejusmodi multis sancti
Patres Ecclesise aliis alii temporibus sollicitudinem
suam circa sacramenti hujus reverendi fidem veneratio-
nemque declararunt. Ideo jactare non debet Lutherus
(id quod jactat tamen) eos, qui Missam dicunt
esse sacrificium, aut alii quam sumenti prodesse,
verbum Christi, fidemque, ac Missam ipsam pessum-

292 The Sacrament of the Altar

not therefore to boast (what nevertheless he does) that
they who call Mass a Sacrifice, or say that it is profit
able to any, but to him who receives the Sacrament in
it, does corrupt the Word of Christ, Faith, and Mass
itself.

But it will not be amiss, to consider after what Man
ner Luther sustains upon his Shoulders the Word of
Christ, Faith, and Mass itself, that they may not be
come corrupted, or fall. First of all, he changes the
Name itself of the Sacrament, into a worse; and that
which was, for so many Ages, called the Eucharist, or
the Sacrament of Christ's Body, lest the Name of it
should put the Auditors in Mind of the Majesty of it,
he commands to be called Bread : Afterwards the Bread
and Wine, which the Antients held to be turned into the
Body and Blood of our Lord, are by Luther taught to
remain entire; that so, by little and little, he may
traduce the Honour from Christ to the Bread. After
this, though he does not condemn the Church for having
adorned and amplified Mass, with Rites and Cere
monies ; yet he thinks it should be more Christian-like,
if the Pomp of Vestments, Singing, Gestures and other
Ceremonies were laid aside; that so it might be more
like and near to the first Mass of all, which Christ cele
brated in his last Supper with his Apostles ; or rather,
that nothing may be left that might move the simple
Minds of the vulgar Sort, and bring them to the Wor
ship of this invisible Deity, through the Majesty of
visible Honour. Moreover, he teacheth, and as much
as in him lies, inculcates, that Mass is not a good Work,
not a Sacrifice, not an Oblation, nor profitable to any
of the People. To what Purpose pray is this so evan
gelical a Lecture? It is, that all the People, leaving
Mass to the Priest, (to whom alone they must be per
suaded that it is profitable) may themselves neglect it,

De Sacramento Eucharisfice 293

dare. At Lutherus Christ! verbum, fidemque, ac
Missam ipsam, ne pessumdentur et corruant, quo pacto
suis humeris sustinet, id vero vicissim considerare
profuerit.

Initio nomen ipsum sacramenti demutat in deterius,
et quum tot sgeculis appellatum sit Eucharistia, vel
sacramentum corporis Christi, ille, ne nomen audientes
admoneat majestatis rei, jubet vocari panem. Deinde
panem et vinum, quse veteres conversa fatentur in
corpus et sanguinem Domini, Lutherus adhuc manere
docet integra, ut ordine paulatim honorem a Christo
traducat in panem. Turn licet non damnet Ecclesiam,
quae ritibus et cserimoniis ornavit, et ampliavit Missam,
tamen censet quod Missa foret multo christianior, si
vestium, cantuum, gestuum et cseterarum cserimoniarum
omnium pompa tolleretur, ut esset vicinior et similior
primse omnium Missse, quam Christus in Coena cele-
bravit cum apostolis, imo vero, ut quam minimum
supersit eorum qua? simplices animos plebeculse com-
moveant, et in venerationem numinis invisibilis visibilis
honoris ma j estate convertant. Ad hsec docet, et om
nibus modis inculcat Missam bonum opus non esse, sac-
rificium non esse, oblationem non esse, nemini prorsus e
populo prodesse. Quorsum hsec tarn sancta et evan-
gelica lectio? Nempe ut populus totus, Missa relicta
sacerdoti, cui soli prodesse persuasum habeant, negli-
gant ipsi, et suum officium rei sibi inutili subducant:
denique ut ipsi, quando communicantur, tantum fidem
afferant testamenti se fore compotes, qualescumque con-
scientias attulerint, imo quo magis erroneas attulerint,
et peccatorum vel morsu, vel titillatione turbatas, tanto

294 The Sacrament of the Altar

and pay no Duty to a Thing unprofitable to them.
Lastly, that when they communicate, if they only have
but Faith, that they are about to receive the Testament ;
whatsoever Consciences they bring; nay, the more er
roneous they are, and the more troubled with the Sting
and Concupiscence of Sin, the more are they to assure
themselves that they are Partakers of the divine Prom
ises ; especially, because this Sacrament is the Medicine
of Sins past, present, and to come ; which would find no
Room for itself in those who should purge themselves
with greatest Anxiety from the Diseases of Sin; and,
according to the Precept of the Apostle, proving them
selves,* they may approach our Lord's Table with as
pure and sincere a Conscience as may be possible ; that
seeing they cannot say we are justified, at least they may
say we are guilty of nothing to ourselves. After Luther,
therefore, has taught this short and compendious Prep
aration for receiving the Eucharist, to wit, in the Faith
alone of the Promise; without any good Works, and a
light Examination of Conscience; he, that nothing be
wanting to the absolute Sanctity of receiving the Sacra
ment; shews his Desire concerning what Time, and
how often he is willing the People should be obliged to
receive ; and that is, in no Time at all. And why so ?
What? Is there any one so blind, as not to see what
this so palpable a Matter drives at ? Certainly nothing
else, but that the People may, by Degrees, quite give
over communicating at all; who at first changed the
daily receiving, into a Seventh-day communicating ; and
after, to a longer Time; and at last would forsake it
altogether ; if the Fathers, fearing that should happen,
had not decreed, that every Man should receive thrice
in a Year; threatening, that he who would not obey,
should not be accounted a Christian: Yet nevertheless
*I. Cor. xi. 28.

De Sacramento Eucharistiw 295

magis se noverint divinse promissionis esse participes;
prsesertim quum sacramentum hoc sit medicina pecca-
torum prseteritorum, prsesentium et futurorum, qua?
nullum sibi locum reperiret, scilicet in eo, qui nimis
anxie semet prius ideo a peccati morbo purgaverit, ut
secundum Apostoli pneceptum probans semetipsum,
conscientia quam maxime potest pura et sincera discum-
bat in mensa Domini, ut quum dicere non possit:
Justificatus sum, illud saltern possit : Nullius mini con-
scius sum.

Lutherus ergo, posteaquam praiparationem istam
docuit brevem et compendiariam ad suscipiendam
Eucharistiam, nempe in sola fide promissionis, nullis
operibus bonis, levissima disquisitione conscientiaB, pos-
tremo, ne quicquam desit absolutse sanctimonise ad sus-
cipiendum sacramentum, suum votum aperit quoties, et
quibus anni temporibus potissimum velit cogi populum
communionem sumere, nempe prorsus nullo. Quid ita ?
quid ? An quisquam tarn caacus est, ut non videat quor-
sum haBC tarn putida tendant? Certe non aliorsum,
quam ut populus sensim a communione sacramenti
desciscat in totum, qui primum a quotidiana com
munione deflexit in septimum quemque diem, post in
longius distulit : tandem destituturus videbatur omnino,
nisi Patres illud veriti sanxissent, ut ter in anno
quisque communicaret, interminati non habendum pro
Cbristiano, qui non obtemperas set : at nee id tamen diu
potuit obtineri. Quamobrem adultimum eo descensum
est, ut inferius descendi non possit, nisi ferme prorsus
ad inferos, nempe ut semel saltern in anno communi-

296 The Sacrament of the Altar

that Custom could they not continue long; so that, at
last, the Matter fell so low, that it could descend no
lower; for now we are obliged to receive but once in a
Year: Which Custom, if Luther could demolish, as he
endeavours, the World would e'er long (through the
Decay of the Fervour of Faith) be reduced to what it
should have come to long ago, if it had not been pre
vented by this solemn Custom of receiving every Year ;
that at last there would scarce remain the least Foot
step of the Communion amongst the People, nor per
haps, among the Clergy neither, if Luther could bring
it about that Mass should be so spoiled, not only of its
Preparation and Ceremonies, but also of the People's
Resort, Hope and Veneration to it. These are the ex
cellent Promises of Luther; this is that spacious Liberty
he promises to all those who forsake the Catholic
Church to follow him, viz. That they may be freed at
last from the Use and Faith of the Sacrament ! Where
fore, I forbear to speak any more of this Thing, as being
so clear in itself, that it needs no further Dispute. And
seeing we have discovered the crafty Winding of the
subtil Serpent; which being now seen, (as without
Doubt they are by all who are not quite blind) it is not
necessary to exhort any Body to shun such apparent
Evils. I believe none are so mad, as to forsake the
Church of God, for the Synagogue of Satan. That,
shunning the Service of Christ, (to serve whom is to
reign) he may list himself into the Liberty proposed
by Luther; where, under the Name of Liberty, he
should wilfully, and to his own Knowledge put his Foot
into the Snare of the Devil. But rather let all the
Faithful of Christ say with the Psalmist, W e will not
decline from thy Judgments, because thou hast ap
pointed us a Law.*

*Ps. cxviii. 102.

De Sacramento Eucharistice 297

ceimis: quam consuetudinem si Lutherus, ut optat,
posset amoliri, mundus, refrigescente in dies fervore
fidei, propediem profecto redigeretur eo, quo jam
pridem pervenisset, nisi hoc solemni quotannis com-
municandi ritu fuisset retentus, ut aliquando nullum
ferme remaneat in populo communicandi vestigium,
fortasse nee in clero quidem, si Lutherus obtinere
possit, ut Missa non apparatu tantum, et cserimoniis,
sed populi quoque frequentia, spe ac veneratione spoli-
etur.

Hsec sunt ergo prseclara ilia promissa Lutheri. Hsec
est speciosa ilia libertas, quam pollicetur ex Ecclesia
catholica venientibus ad se, nempe ut liberentur ali
quando ab usu et fide sacramenti. Quamobrem ego hac
de re amplius disputare super sedeo, utpote re magis ex
se perspicua, quam ut cuiquam disputari debuerit. Tan-
turn indicasse non oberit astutissimas versuti serpentis
insidias, quibus jam perspectis (perspicit enim, non
dubito, quisquis non plane csecus est), non erit opus
hortari quemquam ut prsevisa mala devitet. Nemo erit,
opinor, tarn vecors, ut ex Ecclesia Dei desciscat in syna-
gogam Satanae, e Christi servitute fugiens, cui servire
regnare est, asserat se in libertatem propositam a Lu-
thero, ubi solo libertatis nomine, sciens prudensque in
prgemonstratas diaboli pedicas injiciat pedes. Sed una
cum psalmista omnes Christi fideles hunc versum
clament: ffA judiciis tuis non declinavimus, quid tu
legem posuisti nobis."

CHAP. V

©f Baptism

As for the rest of the Sacraments, it is not necessary
to stand long upon them; most of them he takes quite
away from us: And the Sacrament of the Eucharist,
(being almost the only one he vouchsafed to leave us)
has by him been handled in such a Manner, as we have
already shewn you; so that none can doubt but he de
vised by little and little, to demolish this also : ISTor does
he praise any one of the Sacraments, unless to the Preju
dice of another ; for he so much extols Baptism, that he
depresses Penance: Though he has treated of Baptism
itself after such a Manner, that it had been better he
had not touched it at all. For first of all, that he might
seem to treat with a great deal of Sanctity in a Matter
so holy, he, by a long Discourse, teaches that the divine
Promise is to be believed, by which he promises Salva-
rion to them who believe, and are baptized. He is
angry, and reproaches the Church for not teaching this
Faith to the Christians; as if in any Place they were
so ignorant of Christian Faith, as not to understand
this : And yet Luther proposes it for a new Thing, al
most never before heard of, to the Reproach of all the
Doctors.

But this is no new Method of his Proceedings, to
trifle in Things known, as though they had before never
been heard of. And having in many Words shewn what
this Faith is, he afterwards extols the Riches of Faith,
to the End he may render us poor of good Works, with
out which (as St. James saith*) Faith is altogether dead.
*James ii. 17-26.

CAP. V

Be Sacramento Baptismi

KELIQUIS ergo sacramentis nihil opus est immorari,
quorum pleraque omnia tollit, quum Eucharistise sacra-
mentum, quod unicum ferme relinquere videbatur,
tamen, ut ostendimus, ita tractarit, ut nemini relinquat
dubium quin et illud quoque paulatim machinetur
amoliri; nee ullum sane sacramentum laudat, nisi in
alter ius injuriam. Nam sic et Baptismum effert, ut
deprimat Poenitentiam. Quamquam Baptismum etiam
ipsum tractavit sic, ut satius multo fuerit non attigisse.
Nam. primum, quo videretur sancte rem sanctam tracta-
turus, multis verbis docet fidem habendam promissioni
divinse, qua salutem promittit credentibus et baptizatis.
Irascitur, et insectatur Ecclesiam, quod Christian! non
docentur hanc fidem, quasi quisquam sit usquam tarn
rudis Christianas fidei, ut hoc sit docendus; et tamen
tanquam rem novam et inauditam ferme Lutherus hoc
proponit, cum insigni contumelia doctorum omnium.
Sed hoc non est ei novum in rebus notis, tanquam novis,
nugari.

Qui postquam hanc fidem verbis multis ostendit,
deinde fidei divitias in hoc extollit, ut nos reddat
pauperes bonorum operum, sine quibus, ut beatus
Jacobus ait, "fides omnino mortua est." At Lutherus
sic fidem nobis commendat, ut non solum permittat

300 Of Baptism

But Luther so much commends Faith to us, as not only
to permit us to abstain from good Works ; but also en
courages us to commit any Kind of Action, how bad
soever: Tor (says he) you see now how rich the bap
tized Man is, who cannot lose his Salvation, though will
ing to do it, by any Sin whatsoever, except Infidelity:
For no Sins can damn him, but only Incredulity. ' O
most impious Doctrine, and Mistress of all Impiety ! so
hateful in itself to pious Ears, that there is no need to
confute it : Adultery will not damn then ! Murder will
not damn ! Perjury will not damn ! Is not Parricide
damnable neither, if every one believe that he shall be
saved, through the Virtue of the Promise alone in Bap
tism? For this he openly asserts; nor do the Words,
which he presently adds, correct this Sentence in any
wise; but rather add to the Force of it: For he saith,
'That all other Things, if Faith return, or stand in the
divine Promise made by the Baptized, are swallowed in
a Moment in the same Faith; rather by the Truth of
God, for he cannot deny himself, if you confess him,
and stick faithfully to his Promise :' By which Words,
what else does he say, but what he has said before, that,
'Infidelity excepted, all other Crimes are in a Moment
swallowed up by Faith alone; if you confess Christ,
and stick faithfully to his Promise;' that is, if you
firmly believe that you are to be saved by Faith, what
soever you do notwithstanding. And that you may the
less doubt what he aims at, 'Contrition (says he) and
Confession of Sins, as also Satisfaction, and all these
human Inventions, will forsake you, and leave you the
more unhappy, if you busy yourselves with them, for
getting this divine Truth.' What Truth Pray ? 'This
that no Sins can damn thee, but Infidelity only/ What
Christian Ears can with Patience hear the pestilen-
tious Hissing of this Serpent, by which he extols Bap-

De Sacramento Baptismi 301

nobis vacationem ab operibus bonis, sed etiam suggerat
audaciam qualiumcumque facinorum. Ait enim: "Jam
vides quam dives sit homo Christianus, sive baptizatus,
qui etiam volens non potest perdere salutem suam quan-
tiscumque peccatis, nisi nolit credere. Null a enim
peccata eum possunt damnare, nisi sola incredulitas."
O vocem impiam, et omnis impietatis magistram, ita per
se exosam piis auribus, ut non sit opus earn redarguere !
Ergo non damnabit adulterium? non damnabit homi-
cidium? non perjurium? non parricidium? si tantum
credat se quisquam salvandum fore per virtutem
promissionis in Baptismate? Nam hoc dicit apertis-
sime, neque quicquam corrigunt hanc sententiam verba
quge statim subjungit; imo verius augent. Ait enim:
"Csetera omnia, si redeat vel stet fides in promissionem
divinam baptizato factam, in momento absorbentur per
eamdem fidem, imo veritatem Dei, quia seipsum negare
non potest, si tu eum confessus fueris, et promittenti
fideliter adhseseris.7' Quibus verbis, quid aliud dicit,
quam quod dixit prius ? si absit incredulitas, csetera
flagitia omnia in momento absorberi in sola fide si con
fessus fueris Christum, et ejus promissioni fideliter
adhseseris, hoc est firmiter credideris te salvandum per
fidem, quicquid feceris. Et quo minus dubites quo
tendat: "Contritio," inquit, aet peccatorum Confessio,
deinde et Satisfactio, et omnia ilia hominum excogitata
studia subito te deserent, et infeliciorem reddent, si in
ipsis tete distenderis, oblitus veritatis hujus divinse."
Cujus veritatis 2 nempe hujus, quod nulla peccata pos
sunt te damnare, nisi sola incredulitas.

Quse Christianas ferent aures pestilens hoc serpentis
sibilum, quo Baptismum non in aliud levat, quam ut
premat Poenitentiam, et Baptismatis gratiam statuat

302 Of Baptism

tism, for no other End, but to depress Penance, and
establish the Grace of Baptism for a free Liberty of
Sinning? Contrary to which, is that Sentence of St.
Hierom, which says, that Penance is the Table after
Ship-wreck: But this agrees not with Luther; for he
denies Sin to be the Ship-wreck of Faith, and disputes
it, as if that only Word should totally destroy all the
Strength of Faith. But beside Luther, who is ignorant
that a Sinner not only Is not saved by the only Faith
of Baptism, but also that the Baptism will add to his
Damnation ? And indeed deservedly ; because he has
offended God, from whom he had the whole Grace of
Baptism, and God exacts the more from him to whom
he has given the more: Therefore since Faith becomes
dead by wicked Works, why can it not be said, that he
suffers Ship-wreck who falls from the Grace of God,
into the Hands of the Devil ? From which, without
Penance, he cannot escape, or be renewed to such a
Condition that Baptism may be profitable to him. Has
St. Hierom written wickedly in this ? Does the whole
Church follow an impious Opinion, for not believing
Luther, that Christians are safe enough by Faith alone,
in the midst of their Sins, without Penance? More
over, he is so taken up with the Faith of the Sacrament,
that he cares not much for the Form of Words ; though,
nevertheless, the Word, by which the Water is signified,
ought to be of no less Moment, than the Water itself;
in which, if he thinks that any Care is to be taken, that
it may be pure and elementary; ought not some true
Form also be carefully instituted, and used, as is ap
proved, and now observed in the Church, and was for
merly in Use amongst the Antients ?

After this, he so magnifies Faith, that he seems al
most to intimate, that Faith alone is sufficient without
the Sacrament. For in the mean While, he deprives

De Sacramento Baptismi 303

impune peccandi licentiam? In quam sententiam et
istud facit, quod ei non placet illud beati Hieronymi
Poenitentiam esse secundam tabulam post naufragium;
negat peccatum fidei esse naufragium, et sic disputat,
tanquam illud verbum prorsus interimat omne robur
fidei. At quis neseit, nisi Lutherus, peccatorem non
solum non salvari per solam fidem Baptismi, sed etiam
ilium ipsum Baptismum ei cessurum in cumulum
damnationis ? Et merito quia Isesit Deum, a quo totani
acceperat Baptismi gratiam, et cui plus a Deo datur, ab
illo vicissim plus exigitur. Igitur, quum fidem per
opera mala peremerit, cur dici non potest fecisse
naufragium, qui e Dei gratia decidit in manus dse-
monum, e quibus absque Poenitentia non reponitur in
eum statum, ut Baptismum ei rursus prodesse possit?
E~um hie impie scripsit Hieronymus ? E"um impie tota
sensit Ecclesia, quse non credit Luthero, sine Posni-
tentia, per solam fidem Christianos esse tutos in mediis
sceleribus ?

Prseterea sic totus est in fide sacramenti, ut non ad-
modum curet de forma verborum, quum verbum tamen
per quod significatur aqua, non minoris esse momenti
debeat quam aqua ipsa, in qua, si putat ullam adhiben-
dam esse curam, ut pura sit et elementaris, nullam-ne
decet adhiberi ad inquirendam et exercendam veram ali-
quam verboruin formam, quam certum sit et nunc
observari per Ecclesiam, et olhn in usu fuisse
veteribus.

Post haec ita magnificat fidem, ut propemodum videa-
tur innuere solam fidem sine sacramento sufficere. Nam
interim sacramentum privat gratia ; dicit sacramentuni

304 Of Baptism

the Sacrament of Grace; he says, 'that the Sacrament
it self profits nothing ;7 denies that the Sacraments con
fer any Grace ; or that they are effectual Signs of Grace ;
or that the Sacraments of the Evangelical Law differ in
any Kind from those of the Mosaical Law, as touching
the Efficacy of Grace : Which Matter I shall not much
dispute : But yet, it seems to me, that as all Things were
but Figures with the Jews, (the Truth of which we have
in the Christian Law) it may not be absurd to believe,
that the Sacraments which the Church uses, do so far
excel those of the Synagogues, as the new Law surpasses
the old ; that is, as much as the Body is more excellent
than the Shadow: Nor am I the first, or only Man of
this Opinion. For Hugo de Sancto Victore, whom
none esteems other than a good and learned Man, has
spoken thus; 'We say, that all Sacraments are certain
Signs, and spiritual Graces which by them are con
ferred. Moreover, that the Signs of spiritual Graces,
according to the Process of Time, ought to be framed
more evident and plain, that the Knowledge of Truth
might increase with the Effect of Salvation.7 And a
little further, 'Because Circumcision could only lop off
exterior Enormities, but not cleanse the inward Eilth
of Pollutions, a washing Font of Water succeeded Cir
cumcision, which purgeth the whole, that perfect Jus
tice may be signified.' I hope no body will deny, that
this Doctor is of Opinion, That the Sacrament of Bap
tism cleanses internally, and more efficaciously signifies
perfect Justice, than ever Circumcision did. In which
Matter Luther takes Notice of two Opinions, and re
futes both: The first is, 'Of many who have supposed
some secret and hidden Virtue to be in the Word and
Water, which should work the Grace of God in the Soul
of the Baptized :' The other is, 'Of those who attribute
no Virtue to the Sacraments, but were of Opinion, That

De Sacramento Baptismi 305

ipsum nihil prodesse; negat sacramenta gratiam con-
ferre, aut gratiae efficacia signa esse, aut omnino quoad
efficaciam significations, sacramenta legis evangelicse
differre quicquam a sacramentis legis mosaicse. Qua
in re non multum disputabo, sed tamen videtur mihi,
quum omnia in figuris contigerint Judseis, quarum
veritas est in lege Christiana, nihil absurd! consecu-
turum, si quis credat sacramenta, quibus utitur Ec-
clesia, tantum prsecellere synagogse sacramentis, quan
tum lex nova veterem legem autecellit, hoc est, quantum
corpus umbram superat. Quod ego tamen neque primus
cogito, neque solus. Hugo de Sancto-Victore, quern
nemo non habet et pro viro docto et bono: "Dicimus,"
inquit, "sacramenta omnia signa esse qusedam ejus, quse
per ilia datur, gratise spiritualis. Oportere autem, ut
secundum processum temporum, spiritualium gratia-
rum signa magis ac magis semper evidentia ac declara-
tiva formarentur, ut cum effectu salutis cresceret cogni-
tio veritatis." Et Paulo post: "Quia Circumcisio eas
tantum, quaa foris sunt, enormitates amputare potest,
eas vero, quse intrinsecus sunt, pollutionum sordes mun-
dare non potest, venit post Circumcisionem lavacrum
aquae, totum purgans, ut penecta justitia significare-
tur." Nemo negabit, opinor, hunc saltern Doctorem
sentire sacramentum Baptismi et interius purgare, et
efficacius perfectam significasse justitiam, quam fecerit
Circumcisio.

Qua in re Lutherus duas vias commemorat, et utram-
que refutat, alteram, qua arbitrati sunt plurimi esse
aliquam virtutem occultam, spiritalem in verbo et aqua,
quse operetur in animo recipientis gratiam Dei ; alteram
eorum qui nihil virtutis tribuerunt sacramentis, sed
gratiam censuerunt a solo Deo dari, qui assistit ex pacto
sacramentis a se institutis : sed quoniam utrique in hoc

306 Of Baptism

Grace was conferred by God alone, who, according to his
Covenant, is present to the Sacraments instituted by
himself.7 But because all agree in this, That Sacra
ments are efficacious Signs of Grace, Luther rejects the
one as well as the other : For my Part, as I do not know
which of the Opinions is the truest, so neither dare I
be so bold as to contemn either of them. For that very
Opinion which now is the less assented to, to wit, 'That
the Water, by Virtue of the Word, has an occult Power
of purging the Soul ;' seems not to be altogether absurd.
For if we believe, that Fire has any Influence over the
Soul, either to punish or purge Sins ; what hinders, that
Water should, by the Power of God, (by whom also the
other Thing is done) penetrate to wash away the Un-
cleanness of the Soul ? Which Opinion seems to be
much confirmed by the Words of St. Augustine, when
he says, 'The Water of Baptism toucheth the Body, and
washes the Heart ;? and also that of St. Beda, who says,
'That Christ, by the Touch of his most pure Flesh, has
given the Water a regenerate Power.' Likewise that of
the Prophet EzeJciel seems to incline towards this, 'I
washed thee with Water, and cleansed thy Blood from
thee :'* Which Words, though they were spoken in Times
past, before Baptism was instituted, are, notwithstand
ing, (according to the Custom of the Prophets) under
stood of the future. Neither speaks he only of the wash
ing of the Body, in which nothing is worthy the Prse-
dication of a Prophet ; nor was ever any other Washing
which washed the Crimes of the Soul, but the Sacra
ment of Baptism, of which Ezekiel seems to have spoken
in the Person of God ; prophesying, that there should be
a future Cleansing in the Sacrament of Baptism, by the
washing Font of Water: Which, by the same Prophet
is more plain a little after, when he speaks of the future ;
*Ezech. xvi. 9.

De Sacramento Baptismi 307

consentiunt sacramenta esse efficacia signa gratis,
utramque viam rejicit Lutherus. Ego ut nescio utra via
sit verier, ita neutram audeo plane contemnere.

Nam et ilia ipsa via, cui nunc pauciores assentiunt,
non omnino videtur absurda, quod aqua ipsa per verbum
occultam habeat animae purgandse potentiam. jN"am si
creditur ignis in animam agere, vel ad punienda, vel ad
expurganda peccata, quid vetat potestate Dei, per quam
et illud fit, aquam quoque ad eluendas animse sordes
posse penetrare. In quam sententiam videntur et
Augustini verba f acere, quum ait : "Aqua Baptismi cor
pus tangit, et cor abluit." Et illud Bedse quoque
dicentis, quod Christus tactu mundissimse carnis suse
vim regenerativam contulit aquis. Prseterea videtur
illud in idem vergere quod propheta canit Ezechiel:
"Lavi te aqua, et emundavi sanguinem tuum ex te."
Quae verba, quanquam de prseterito loquitur ante Bap-
tismum institutum, tamen, ut nios est prophetarum, de
future intelliguntur ; nee de corpore duntaxat abluendo
loquitur, in quo nihil est dignum quod propheta prge-
diceret, nee alia ablutio unquam abluit animae crimina,
praeter sacramentum Baptismi: de illo igitur locutus
videtur Ezechiel in persona Dei prsedicentis in sacra-
mento Baptismi mundationem futuram esse per aquae
lavacrum. Quod ipsum paulo post idem propheta
prosequitur apertius per verbum de futuro: "Effun-
dam" inquit, "super vos aquam mundam, et munddbir
mini ab omnibus inquinamentis vestris." Annon per
aquam promittit emundatioiiem ? Quanquam multo
adhuc apertius rem videtur ostendere Zacharias : ffExi-
bunt" inquit, f'aquce vivce de Jerusalem, medium earum
ad mare orientate, et medium earum ad mare novissi-

308 Of Baptism

<I will pour out, saith he, clear Water upon you, and I
will cleanse you from all your Iniquities.'* Whether
does he not here promise a Cleansing by Water ? Yet
Zecharias seems to unfold the Matter more apparently,
when he says, 'Living Water shall flow out from Jeru
salem, the one Half to the Eastern Sea, and the other
Half to the great Sea.'f Does not this Discourse mani
fest unto us the Figure of Baptism, viz. Water flowing
from the Church, which should purge both original and
actual Sin ? which he does not call dead, but living ; that
he might demonstrate, as I suppose, That, by the secret
Sanctification of God, the Force of spiritual Life is
infused into a corporeal Element. Although I do not
presume to judge, (as I have said already,) nor am I
curious, after what Manner God infuses Grace by the
Sacraments, because his Ways are inscrutable 4 Yet I
believe, that by one Way or other, this Water should not
be idle, where he fore-tells so many, and so great
Things, were to be done by Water; especially, since
Water, Salt, and other corporeal Things, do receive
spiritual Force, by the Word of God, without the Sacra
ment of Faith ; unless all those Things should be spoken
in vain ; in which Lights, Fire, Water, Salt, Bread, the
Altar, Vestments, and Kings, are either adjured by Ex
orcisms, or blessed by the Invocation of Grace.

If those Things, I say, receive any Virtue or Pres
ence of the Divinity, without the Sacrament ; how much
more credible is it, that the Water flowing from Christ's
Side, does infuse a spiritual Power of Life into the
Fountain of Regeneration ? Of which Christ himself
says, That lie, who is not born again of Water, and of
the Holy Ghost, shall not enter into the Kingdom of
Heaven ;§ to which (as the Apostle saith) we are called

*Ezech. xxxvi. 25. JRom. xi. 33.

•j-Zach. xiv. 8. §John iii. 5.

De Sacramento Baptismi 309

mum." Hie sermo annon nobis evidenter Baptisma
depingit? aquam videlicet de Ecclesia manantem, quse
et originale peccatum purget, et actuale, quam non mor-
tuam appellat, sed vivam, ut ostendat, opinor, per oc-
cultam sanctificationem Dei, elemento corporeo vim
vitse spiritualis infusam.

Quanquam, ut dixi, qua via Deus per sacrament a in-
fundat gratiam, neque mihi judicium arrogo, neque
valde vestigo, quum sint investigabiles vise ejus; sed
certe aliqua via credo fecisse Deum, ut illic aqua non sit
otiosa, ubi tam multa et tarn magna prssdicat facienda
per aquam, prsesertim quum et aqua, et sal, et alia
quoque corporea, sine sacramento fidei, per verbum Dei
recipiant spiritalem vim : nisi prorsus vana sint omnia
quibus cerei, ignis, aqua, sal, panis, altare, vestes, an-
nuli, vel adjurantur exorcismis, vel invocatione gratise
benedicuntur. QUJB si vim ullam recipiunt, aut ullam
numinis prsesentiam extra sacramentum, quanto magis
credibile est aquam e Christi latere manantem, spirita
lem vitse vim fonti regenerationis infundere ? De quo
Christus ipse pronunciat, quod nisi quis renatus fuerit
ex aqua et Spiritu sancto, non poterit videre regnum
Dei, ad quod, ut ait Apostolus, ffvocamur in Bap-
tismo"

310 Of Baptism

in Baptism* In which Baptism, I am not against
Luther, for having attributed so much to Faith: But,
on the other Side, I would not have him attribute so
much thereto, as by it to defend an evil Life, or exter
minate the Sacraments, which it ought to form. But
when he requires that certain and indubitable Faith in
the Receiver of the Sacraments; for my Part, I think
it is rather to be wished for, than exacted. For I do
not doubt, but when St. Peter did exhort the People
after this Manner, 'Do Penance, and be baptized every
one of you, in the Name of Jesus Christ ; and receive
you the Gift of the Holy Ghost unto the Remission of
Sins/f I doubt not but he was ready to receive all the
People to Baptism ; yet not so suddenly to have exacted
that high, certain and indubitable Faith of Luther from
them, which none would have been able to have known
himself to have attained to : But he promised Remission
of Sins, and Grace from the Sacrament itself, to all
those who should but only present themselves, and desire
it : For an undoubted and certain Faith, is a very great
Thing, which happens not always, nor to every Body;
no, not perhaps to them who do not doubt but they have
it. I indeed shall not doubt to hope, but the Benignity
of God assists in his Sacraments, and by Means of visi
ble Signs, infuses invisible Grace ; and helps the Tepid
ity of Believers, by the Fervour of his Sacraments:
That many obtain Salvation by the Sacraments, who
can promise no more to themselves of their Faith, than
he could, who said, 'Lord I believe, help my Unbelief.':}:
In which Thing if any, beside my Adversary, think I
attribute too much to the Sacrament; let him know, I
define Nothing, I appoint Nothing, in any Case, which
may be prejudicial to Faith, from which I derogate
Nothing : But as I do not think, that Faith alone, with-
*1. Cor. i. f Acts ii. 38. JMk. ix. 23.

De Sacramento Baptismi 311

Quo in Baptismo, quod Lutherus multuin tribuit
fidei, non adversor, modo ne tantum tribuat fidei, ut
fides malam vitam defendat, aut, quse formare debet,
exterminet sacramenta. At quum certain illam et in-
dubitatam fidem exigit in suscipiente sacramentum, ego
potius optandam quam exigendam puto. Nam et beatus
Petrus, quum ita populum hortaretur: "Pcenitentiam
agite, et baptizetur unusquisque vestrum in nomine Jesu
Christi in remissionem peccatorum vestrorum, et ac-
cipietis donum Spiritus sancti" non dubito quin paratus
fuerit ad Baptismum recipere totum populum; nee
tamen a toto populo repente exegisset illam summam
certam et indubitatam fidem Lutheri, quam nemo se
satis sciret attigisse ; sed promittebat ex ipso sacramento
omnibus qui se duntaxat offerrent, et cuperent, remis
sionem peccatorum, et gratiam. Nam magna qusedam
res est, certa et indubitata fides, neque semper, neque
cuique contingit, etiam ex his fortasse, qui sibi con-
tigisse non dubitant. Ego profecto sperare non dubitem,
quin Dei benignitas suis sacramentis assistat, et visi-
bilibus signis invisibilem infundat gratiam, et sacra-
menti sui fervore teporem credentium adjuvet, multos
per sacramenta consequi salutem, qui de sua fide non
amplius polliceri possunt, quam potuit ille, qui dixit:
"Credo, Domine, adjuva incredulitatem meam."

Qua in re, si cui alii prseterquam adversario, videar
nimium sacramento tribuere, sciat me nihil definire,
nihil omnino statuere, quod prsejudicet fidei, cui ego
nihil derogo; sed ut solam fidem sine sacramento non
puto sufncere in eo qui sacramenti compos esse potest, ita
neque sacramentum sufficere sine fide, sed utrumque

312 Of Baptism

out the Sacrament, is sufficient for him who may receive
it; so neither can the Sacrament suffice him without
Faith; but that both ought to concur and co-operate
with their Power: And I think it more safe to allow
Something to the Sacrament, than, like Luther, to at
tribute so much to Faith, as to leave neither Grace, nor
the Efficacy of a Sign to the Sacrament.

Besides, he makes Faith nothing else but a Cloak for
a wicked Life, as we have before more fully declared:
And that this may the more appear, after he has de
prived the Sacraments of Grace, he robs the Church of
all Vows and Laws ; nor does it at all move him, that
God said, Vow, and render to God your Vows.* But
as for Vows, I make no Doubt but some of those, whom
he calls Vovists and Votaries, will undertake to make
Answer for their own Profession : For at once, he turns
them almost all together, out of the Church.

Xawe of IRulcrs Bre tCo JBe
BUT, as for the Laws, I admire, that he could, for
Shame, invent such ridiculous Things ; as if Christians
could not sin ; but that so great a Multitude of Believers
should be so perfect, that nothing needed to be ordered,
either for the Honour of God, or the avoiding of Wicked
ness. But by the same Work and Policy he robs Priiices
and Prelates, of all Power and Authority; for what
shall a King or a Prelate do, if he cannot appoint any
Law-, or execute the Law which was before appointed ;
but, even like a Ship without a Rudder, suffer his Peo
ple to float without Land ? Where then is that Saying
of the Apostle, 'Let every Creature be subject to the
higher Powers ?'f Where is that other of his, 'If thou
dost Evil, fear the King, it is not without Reason that
he carries the Sword ??f Where is also that, 'be obedi-
*Ps. Ixxv. 12 ; Eccles. v. 3. ^Hom. xiii. 1. {Rom. xiii. 4.

De Sacramento Baptismi 313

oportere concurrere, et utriusque robur cooperari, et
tutius opinor aliquid sacramento concedere, quam tan-
turn dare fidei, quantum donat Lutherus, qui sacramento
neque gratiam relinquit, neque efficaciam signi.

Prseterea fidem ipsam nihil facit aliud, quam flagiti-
osse vita? patrocinium, quemadmodum ante uberius de-
claravimus. Quam rem quo magis adstrueret, postquam
sacramenta privavit gratia, Ecclesiam privat et votis
omnibus, et legibus. Nee quicquam movet ilium, quod
Deus ait, "Vovete, et reddite" Sed de votis non dubito
quin exsurgant ex his quos ille vovistas vocat, et votarios,
qui pro sua professione respondeant. Nam rllos ex
Ecclesia semel ferme prorsus eliminat universes.

3Le0fbus dfcagfstratuum ©be&ten&um Base

DE legibus vero, demiror hominem prse pudore
potuisse tarn absurda cogitare, quasi Christiani peccare
non possent, sed tarn perfecta foret tanta multitudo cre-
dentium, ut nihil decerni debeat, vel ad cultum Dei, vel
ad vitanda flagitia. Sed eadem opera, et eadem pru-
dentia, tollit omnem potestatem et auctoritatem prin-
cipum, et prselatorum. Nam quid faciet rex, aut prse-
latus, si neque legem potest ponere, neque positam
exsequi, sed populus absque lege, velut navis absque
gubernaculo fluctuet ? Ubi est ergo illud Apostoli :
"Omnis creatura potestatibus sublimioribus subjecta
sit?" Ubi illud: efSi male agis, regem time, non sine
causa gladium portat?" Ubi illud: "Obedite prcepositis
vestris, sive regi quasi prcecellenti" et quse sequuntur?
Cur igitur ait Paulus : "Bona est lex ?" Et alibi : "Lex
est vinculum perfectionist" Prseterea, cur ait Augus-

314 Of Baptism

ent to your Governours, whether to the King as excel
ling?'* And what follows? Why then does St. Paul
say, The Law is good?'f and in another Place, 'The
Law is the Bond of Perfection ?':f

Furthermore, why does St. Augustin say, The Power
of the King, the Right of the Owner, the Instruments
of the Executioner, the Arms of the Soldier, the Disci
pline of the Governor, and the Severity of a good
Father, were not instituted in vain ?' The first have all
their Customs, Causes, Reasons, Profits; and when the
others are feared, evil Men are restrained from doing
Evil, and the Good live quietly amongst the Wicked:

But I forbear to speak of Kings, lest I should seem to
plead my own Case. I only ask this, That if none,
either Man or Angel, can appoint any Law among
Christians, why does the Apostle institute for us so
many Laws; as for electing Bishops ;§ for Widows;)
covering the Heads of Women, Tf &c. ? Why has he or
dained that a Christian Woman should not forsake her
Husband, though an Infidel, if she be not by him first
abandoned ?'JH Why dares he say, I myself speak to the
rest, not the Lord?'-\-\- Why has he exercised so great
Power, as to command the Incestuous to be delivered
over to Satan, to the Destruction of the Flesh ?JJ Why
has St. Peter strucken Ananias and Saphira§§ his Wife
with the like Punishment, for reserving to themselves
a little of their own Moneys ? If the Apostles did, of
themselves, beside the especial Command of our Lord,
appoint so many Things to be observed by Christians,
why may not those who succeed them, do the same for
the Good of the People ? St. Ambrose, Bishop of

*Hebr. xiii. 17. \I. Cor. xi. 5 fol.

fl. Tim. i. 8; Prov. xiii. 14. **I. Cor. vii. 12, 13.

IColos. iii. 14. ffl. Cor. vii. 12.

§1. Tim. iii. ; Tit. i. 7. til. Cor. v. 4, 5.

fl. Tim. v. 3 fol. £§Acts v.

De Sacramento Baptismi 315

tinus: "Non frustra sunt instituta potestas regis, et
cognitoris jus, ungula carnificis, arma militis, disciplina
dominantis, severitas etiam boni patris ? Habent omnia
ista modos suos, causas suas, rationes, utilitates, et hsec,
quum timentur, et mail coercentur, et boni quieti inter
malos vivunt."

Sed de regibus dicere supersedeo, ne videar meam
causam agere. Istud quaere, si nemo, nee homo, nee an-
gelus potest super hominem Christianum legem ponere,
cur tot leges ponit Apostolus, et de legendis episcopis,
et de viduis, et velandis foeminarum capitibus? cur
statuit ne fidelis conjux ab infideli discedat, nisi desera-
tur ? Cur audet dicere : "Cceteris dico ego, non Domi-
nus ?" Cur exercuit tantam potestatem, ut f ornicarium
Satanse juberet tradi in interitum carnis ? Cur Petrus
Ananiam et Saphiram simili poena percussit, quod e sua
ipsorum pecunia paulum reservassent sibi ? Si multa
statuebant apostoli, prseter speciale prseceptum Domini,
super Christianum populum, cur non idem propter po-
puli commodum faciant hi, qui successerunt in aposto-
lorum locum ? Ambrosius Mediolanensis episcopus, vir
sanctus, et nihil arrogans, jubere non dubitavit ut per
suam diocesim conjuges in quadragesima conjugalibus
abstinerent amplexibus, et indignatur Lutherus, si Ro-
manus Pontifex, successor Petri, vicarius Christi, cui
Christus velut apostolorum principi tradidisse creditur
claves Ecclesiae, ut cseteri per ilium et intrarent, et
pellerentur, jejunium indicat aut preculas ? Nam quod
suadet, corpore parendum esse, animo retinendam liber-

316 Of Baptism

Millan, a holy Man, (not arrogant) has scrupled, in
commanding that married Persons, through his whole
Diocese, should abstain from their lawful Pleasures,
during the whole Time of Lent. And does Luther take
it so heinously that the Pope of Rome, Successor of St.
Peter, Christ's Vicar, (to whom, as to the Prince of the
Apostles, it is believed that Christ gave the Keys of the
Church, that by him the rest should enter, or be kept
out) should institute a Fast or Prayers? As for his
persuading Men to obey outwardly in Body, but yet to
retain to themselves their Liberty in Mind, who is so
blind as not to see his Shifts and Quirks ? Why carries
this simple Man, this Hypocrite, both Water and Fire ?
Why does he (as it were in the Words of the Apostle)
command not to serve Men, not to be subject to the
Statutes of Men;*1 and yet, notwithstanding, command
to shew Obedience to the unjust Tyranny of the Pope ?
Does the Apostle preach after this Manner? Kings
have no Right over you, yet suffer you an unjust Em
pire. Masters have no Right of Power over you, yet
suffer an unjust Servitude. If Luther is of Opinion,
that People ought not to obey; why does he say they
must obey ? If he thinks they ought to obey, why is not
he himself obedient ? Why does this Quack juggle
thus ? Why does he thus reproachfully raise himself
against the Bishop of Rome, whom he says we ought to
obey? Why raises he this Tumult? Why excites he
the People against him, whose Tyranny, (as he calls it)
he says is to be endured ? Indeed I believe, it is for no
other End, than to procure to himself the good Esteem
of such Malefactors as desire to escape the Punishment
due to their Crimes ; that so they might choose him for
their Head, who now fights for their Liberty; and de
molish Christ's Church, so long founded upon a firm
*I. Cor. vii. 23.

De Sacramento Baptismi 317

tatem, quis tarn csecus est, ut strophas istas non videat ?
Cur ignem gerit et aquam homo simplex et sanctulus ?
Cur jubet velut Apostoli verbis hominum servos non
fieri, hominum statutis non subjici, et tamen parere
jubet Pontificis injustse tyrannidi ! An Apostolus hoc
pacto prsedicat : Reges nihll juris habent in vos ; injus-
tum f eratis imperium ? Domini jus non habent in vos ;
feratis injustam servitutem? Si Lutherus parendum
esse non putet, cur parendum dicit? Si parendum
censet, cur ipse non paret ? Cur homo versipellis talibus
ludit technis ? Cur in PontifLcem, cui dicit obediendum
esse, convitiis insurgit ? Cur tumultum suscitat ? Cur
in ilium concitat populos, cujus vel tyrannidem, ut
vocat, fatetur esse ferendam? Profecto non ob aliud,
opinor, quam ut f avorem sibi conciliet improborum, qui
suorum scelerum impunitatem cuperent, et eum, qui pro
libertate eorum jam decertat, caput ipsis instituerent, et
Ecclesiam Christi tamdiu super firmani petram funda-
tam demolirentur, et Ecclesiam novam ex improbis et
flagitiosis connatam erigerent contra quam clamat
propheta : "Odivi Ecclesiam malignantium, et cum im-
piis non sedebo" et una cum illo nostra clamet Ecclesia :
"Dirige me in veritate tua, quia tu es Deus salvator
meus, et te sustinui tota die."

318 Of the Sacrament of Penance

Rock ; erecting to themselves a new Church, compacted
of flagitious and impious Persons, contrary to that Ex
clamation of the Prophet, I will have abhorred the
Church of Evil-doers, and I not sit with the Impious:*
Direct me in thy Truth; for thou art God my Saviour,
and thee have I sustained all the Day long.^

CHAP. VI

©f tbe Sacrament of penance

IT troubles me exceedingly to hear how absurd, how
impious, and how contradictory to themselves the Trifles
and Babbles are, wherewith Luther bespatters the Sac
rament of Penance. First, after his old Custom, he
proposes for a new Thing, what is by every Body com
monly known, viz. That we ought to believe the Promise
of God, whereby he promiseth to those who repent, Re
mission of Sins: And then he cries out reproachfully
against the Church, for not teaching this Faith. Who
I pray you, exhorts any one to the Penance of Judas;
that is, to be sorry for what he has committed, and not
expect Pardon ? Who should tell us, that we ought to
pray for Remission of Sins, if he did not teach Pardon
to be promised to the Penitent? What is more fre
quently preached than the Clemency of Almighty God,
which is so great, that he mercifully extends it to all
Persons who are willing to reform their wicked Lives ?
Did no Body, beside Luther, ever read, That at what
Time soever a Sinner repents of his Sins, he shall be
saved?$ Has none ever read, that the Adulteress was
dismissed ?§ That the Prophet was pardoned, who was

*Ps. xxv. 5. JEzech. xviii. 27.

tPs. xxiv. 5. SJohn viii. 3.

De Sacramento Poenitentice 319

CAP. VI

De Sacramento penitential

DE Poenitentia poenitet audire quas nugas, quse
somnia, quam absurda, quam impia, quam sibi repug-
nantia deblateret. Primum suo more, velut novum
proponit, quod omnibus est notissimum, fidem haben-
dam promissioni Dei, qua promisit pcenitenti remis-
sionem peccatorum; et jam insectatur Ecclesiam, quod
hanc fidem non doceat. Quis est, obsecro, qui hortatur
quemquam ad Judse prenitentiam, ut doleat quod com-
misit, nee tamen speret remissionem? Quis doceret
orandum pro venia, nisi qui doceret promissam poeni-
tenti veniam ? Quid prsedicatur saepius, quam Dei tarn
immensa dementia, ut nulli quantumvis scelerato se
emendanti claudat misericordiam ? Nemo-ne, prseter
Lutherum, legit unquam : "Quacumque hora ingemuerit
peccator, salvus erit?" Nemo legit dimissam adulteram,
veniam prophetse datam, non adulterii tantum, sed
homicidii quoque, Paradisum latroni datum, et eo datum
tempore, quo commissa prius flagitia nulla potuit satis-
f actione redimere ? Tantum abest ut haec non doceatur
fiducia consequendse venise, quam prseteritam eese
clamat Lutherus, ut potius in earn partem nimii sint
qui populos docent : ita per se libenter in hanc fiduciam
prsecipites, ut magis in alteram partem sint avocandi,

320 Of Contrition

not only guilty of Adultery, but of Murther also?*
That Paradise was given to the Thief on the Cross ;f
and at that Time too, when he could not cancel his
Crimes committed, by any Satisfaction ? They who in
struct the People, are so far from not teaching them this
Hope of obtaining Pardon, which Luther cries is past,
that they rather seem to do it too much; the People
being so easily inclined to rely upon this Confidence,
that there is a greater Need of recalling them to the
other Side; whereby they may contemplate the severe
and inflexible Justice of God: For there are ten to be
found, who sin in the too much Confidence of that
Promise; rather than one who despairs of obtaining
Pardon. Let Luther then propose that no more for a
Thing so new, and strange to us, which every Body al
ready knows. Let him not any longer complain, that
this is out of Use, than which nothing is more usual.

CHAP. VII

©f Contrition

'HAVING thus blotted out, (says Luther) the Promise
and Faith ; let us see what they have substituted in their
Place.' 'They allotted (says he) three Parts to Penance,
Contrition, Confession, and Satisfaction/ All which
three he so handles, that it appears well enough that
none of them pleaseth him. First of all, he is very
angry with Contrition, and calls the Anger of God in
supportable; because Place is given to Attrition, and
God is believed to supply, by the Sacrament, what is
wanting to Man in the Sorrow for his Sins, when it is
less vehement.

*II. Ks. xii. fLu. xxiii. 43,

De Contritione 321

qua contemplentur severam atque inflexibilem Dei
justitiam. Decuplo enim plures invenies, qui nimia
peccent istius promissionis fiducia, quam desperatione
remissionis obtinendae. Desinat ergo Lutberus earn rem
pro nova nobis et admiranda proponere, quam nemo non
novit. Desinat quiritari desuetam esse, qua nihil est
usitatius.

CAP. VII

2>e Contritione

"OBLITEKATIS," inquit, "promissione et fide, vide-
amus quid substituerunt in locum earum. Tree,"
inquit, "partes dederunt Pcenitentise : Contritionem,
Confessionem, Satisfactionem." Quas omnes tres ita
tractat Lutherus, ut satis perspicuum faciat nullam
earum satis ei placere. ISTam primum in Contritione in-
dignatur, et iram Dei vocat insustentabilem, quod At-
tritioni fiat locus, et credatur Deus in dolore non satis
de se vehementi per sacramentum supplere quod deest
homini. Videamus ergo quam prseclare tuetur quod
dicit, quid ipse contra statuat,

322 Of Contrition

Let us see how well he maintains what he says ; what
he brings against himself. He teaches Contrition to be
a great Thing, not easily had: He commands all Men
to be certain that they have it ; and to believe undoubted
ly, that, through the Words of the Promise, all their
Sins are forgiven them; and that after they are loosed
by the Word of Man here on Earth, they are absolved
by God in Heaven. In which Thing, his own Assertion
will either fall back upon what he has already repre
hended, or else will appear much more absurd.

For God has either promised to forgive Sins through
Penance, to those only, who grieve as much for them as
the Nature and Greatness of their Sins require, or to
those who grieve not so much; or, finally, to such as
are in no wise sorry for their Sins. If he has promised
Forgiveness only to those, who are as contrite as the
Greatness of their Crimes requires ; then cannot Luther
himself, (as he commands all others to be) be assured,
and out of Doubt, that his Sins are forgiven him. For
how will he be certain of his obtaining the Promise,
when he can in no-wise know that he is sufficiently con
trite for his Sins ? For no mortal Man has ever yet
known, how great Contrition is required for mortal
Sin. If God has promised Pardon to such as are less
contrite, than the Greatness of their Sins requires, then
has he promised it to such as are called Attrites; and
by that Luther agrees with those he but now repre
hended. But if God has promised it to such as have
no Manner of Sorrow for their Sins, he has surely much
more promised it to such as are attrite, that is, to such
as are in some Manner sorry. Wherefore if he admits
but only Contrition, that is, a sufficient Grief, then can
no Body be assured, that he is absolved; and Luther's
certain and undoubted Confidence of Absolution, will
perish, or be false, and erroneous.

De Contritione 323

Magnam rem docet esse Contritionem, nee facile para-
bilem. Jubet omnes habere pro certo, et indubitate
credere, propter verbum promissionis, omnia sibi peccata
esse dimissa, et a Deo se solutos in coelo, postquam per
os hominis soluti sunt in terra. Qua in re ipsius assertio
vel in idem recidet, quod reprehendit, vel multo magis
erit absurda. Nam Deus aut his duntaxat per Pceni-
tentiam promisit peccata remittere, qui quantum peccati
moles exigit, ante conteruntur, aut his etiam qui minus,
aut denique remittit et illis, qui nihil conteruntur om-
nino. Si non promisit, nisi, quantum poscat peccati
magnitudo, contritis, non potest Lutherus, quod omnes
jubet, certus esse, et indubius se esse solutum. Nam
quomodo scire se potest obtinere promissum, qui se scire
non potest satis esse contritum ? Nemo enim novit mor-
talium omnium quantum Contritionis exigat mortale
peccatum. Quod si veniam promisit Deus parum (pro
sceleris mole) contritis, tune promisit his, quos isti
vocant attritos, et jam cum his consentit Lutherus, quos
reprehendit. At si promisit Deus nihil omnino dolen-
tibus, magis promisit attritis, hoc est utcumque dolen-
tibus. Quamobrem, si tantum Contritionem admittit,
hoc est sufficientem dolorem, nemo certus esse potest se
esse absolutum, et sic Luthero perierit, aut falsa fuerit
et erronea absolutionis certa ilia et indubitata fiducia.

324 Of Contrition

But if he says, that the Sins of such as do only per
form a slack, or luke-warm Penance, are not otherwise
forgiven, than by the Sacrament of Penance; by con
fessing themselves Sinners, and asking and obtaining
Pardon by the Mouth of their Brother: What is this
different from the Opinion of those whom he reproves,
who say, that Attrition, by Means of the Sacrament of
Penance, is made Contrition ? For what is wanting to
Men, is supplyed by the Sacrament; or else Luther's
Position, that Man must be certain of Absolution, is
false : Whether he will or no, he must admit, if not the
Word Attrition, at least the Thing signified by it ; which,
if he grants, (as he will do, if he fly not from his own
Opinion;) it is a very unseasonable Trifle of him to
contend concerning the Word, and to allow the Effect.
Again ; he sets upon the whole Church with magnificent
Words; as though it perversely taught Contrition, in
exhorting us to acquire it by the Collection and Aspect
of our Sins; when we ought to be first taught, as he
says, the Beginnings and Causes of Contrition, to wit,
the immoveable Truth of divine Threatnings and Prom
ises ; as though such Things were not every where taught
among the People ; many Passages of Scripture for that
Opinion being alleged, not less threatning, nor less
comfortable ; the Causes likewise added to procure Con
trition ; nor less efficacious, than those which Luther ex
acts and much more holy. For these Causes do almost
propose Nothing, but the Fear of Punishment, or the
Hopes of Reward ; which is a Conversion not so accept
able to God, as a Conversion caused by Love. That
may be done, not only by proposing what Luther ad
vises, viz. God's Threatnings, and Promise of Remis
sion; but also what they teach, whom Luther derides;
as if they taught Nothing at all, to wit, the Bounty of
God towards us, and his exceeding great Benefits con-

De Contritione 325

Sin ei dicat, cujus alioqui tepido ac remisso dolori
peccata non remitterentur, per Pcenitentise sacramen-
tum remitti omnia, fatenti se peccatorem, et petenti
veniam, et per os fratris obtinenti, quid dicit aliud quam
sentiunt illi quos insectatur ? Qui dicunt ex Attritione
per sacramentum superveniens fieri Contritionem : sac-
ramentum enim supplere quod deest homini. Aut ergo
falsa est positio Lutheri, certum esse hominem de ab-
solutione, aut, velit nolit, admittendum est ei, si non
verbum Attritionis, certe res quam isti verbo designant ;
quam si concesserit (concedet autem, nisi velit de sua
sententia discedere) hominis est intempestive nugantis
re concessa contendere de vocabulo.

Rursus magnificis verbis totam invadit Ecclesiam,
tanquam perverse doceat Contritionem, dum ex pecca-
torum collectu et conspectu docemur parare Contri
tionem, quum prius doceri deberemus, ut ait ille, prin-
cipia et causas Contritionis, nempe divinse commina-
tionis, et promissionis immobilem veritatem : quasi non
talia passim dicantur apud populum, prolatis etiam in
eamdem sententiam locis multis e Scriptura sacra, neque
minus minacibus, neque minus consolantibus, additis
pra3terea causis in procurandam Contritionem, neque
minus emcacibus quam sunt istse, quas Lutherus exigit,
et longe sanctioribus. Nam hse causse nihil fere pro-
ponunt, prseter metum poense, et spem prsemii, quse con-
versio ad Deum non tarn grata est, ac si quis convertatur
amore, hoc fiet, si non ista quisque tantum proponet
sibi, quse Lutherus affert, comminationem Dei, et remis-
sionis promissionem, sed ilia etiam, quae docent hi, quos
Lutherus tanquam nihil docentes irridet, nempe Dei in
se benignitatem, et toties in nihil bene merentem, in
toties merentem male, ampliter collata beneficia. His

326 Of Confession

ferred upon us; when, not only undeserving Good, but
even demeriting Evil. For the Sinner, having consid
ered these Things, will rather be touched with Sorrow,
for having offended so pious a Father, than so potent a
Lord; and will less dread his own Punishment, than
God's Anger : Neither will he be so desirous of Heaven,
as of God's Favour: This Consideration of divine
Bounty formeth Contrition; (Knowest thou, 0 Man,,
says the Apostle, that the Bounty of God invites thee to
Penance?)* and, as I have said, forms a more holy Con
trition, than that which, from the Fear of Punishment,
and Hopes of Pardon, is formed by Luther; who boasts,
that no Body teaches Threatnings but himself; when
all Men do teach them, and better too.

CHAP. VIII

©f Confession

HE so treats of Confession, as to hold, 'That in pub
lic Crimes, where the Sin is known to all People, with
out Confession, there (where it is less Matter,) Con
fession is to be made.' But, in the Confession of secret
Sins, he has so uncertain Turnings, that, though he seem
not altogether to reject it, yet can it not be known by
him whether he admits it as a Thing commanded, or no :
For he denies it to be proved by Scripture ; and yet says,
'That it pleases him well, and that it is profitable and
necessary ;' yet he does not say it to be necessary to all ;
but, as I suppose, only to pacify troubled Consciences ;
giving it to be understood, that if any Body have a
Conscience like his own, which should be either safe
*Rom. ii. 4.

De Confessione 32 7

enim rebus sibi a se propositis adducetur peccator, nt
plus doleat off ensum tarn pium Patrem, quam tarn poten-
tem Dominum, et minus pcenam suam timeat, quam iram
Dei, nee tarn coelum cupiat, quam favorem Dei. Hsec
consideratio bonitatis divinse format Contritionem.
("An nescis, homo/' inquit Apostolus, "quod Dei be-
nignitas ad Poenitentiam te invitat?") Et format, ut
dixi, sanctiorem quam sit hsec quam ex metu poense et
spe remissionis format Lutherus, qui neminem jactat
ilia docere, prseter se, quum omnes et eadem doceant, et
meliora.

CAP. VIII

De Confeseione

CONFESSIONEM ita tractat, ut in publicis criminibus,
quae sine Confessione nota sunt toti populo, Confes-
sionem exigat ubi minus est opus. Occultorum vero
Confessionem ita versat lubricus, ut quum non rejiciat
prorsus, tamen relinquat incertum, an pro re jussa et
demandata recipiat. Nam e Scripturis earn negat pro-
bari ; tamen placere sibi dicit, et utilem esse, ac necessa-
riam, nee tamen dicit omnibus, sed ad pacandas dun-
taxat afflictas conscientias : opinor, significans, quod si
quis habeat conscientiam SUOB similem, quse vel de sua
sanctitate secura sit, vel de verbo promissionis divinse
certa sit, ei non sit opus occultorum Confessione.
Alioqui si quis meticulosus sit, ad pacandam conscien
tiam confitendum esse.

328 Of Confession

for his own Sanctity, or assured of the Word of the
divine Promise; he need not confess his secret Sins at
all, otherwise, if any Man be scrupulous, he may con
fess himself, to quiet his Conscience. Wherefore, see
ing he has so dubiously suspended his Words, I have
thought fit to speak something more plainly of the
Necessity of Confession: And because he denies Con
fession of secret Sins to be proved by Scripture, I will,
in the first Place, propose that Passage in Ecclesiasti-
cus, which seems to many besides me, to comprehend all
the three Parts of Penance. 'My Son, (saith he) neg
lect not thyself in thine Infirmity, but adore our Lord,
and he will cure thee ; Turn thyself from thy Sins, and
lift up thine Hand, and cleanse thy Heart from all
Sin.'* For God cures, whilst he looses in Heaven what
the Priest has loosed on Earth : We lift up our Hands in
a Satisfaction; we turn from our Sins by Contrition;
and in Confession, we cleanse our Hearts from Sin;
according to that Saying of the Prophet, 'Pour out your
Hearts before him.'f St. Chrysostom also comprehends
the three Parts of Penance, when he says, 'Perfect Pen
ance compels the Sinner to endure all Things willingly ;'
and further he says, 'Contrition in his Heart, Con
fession in his Mouth,' a perfect Humility in his Works ;
this is fruitful Penance.' This also makes for Con
fession ; 'Know the Face of your own Cattle :':(: But how
can he know it, if it be not shewn him ? What is more
clear than that in Numbers the fifth, The Lord spoke to
Moses, saying, speak to the Children of Israel, when a
Man or Woman has committed a Sin, of all the Sins
which are wont to happen unto Men; and have through
Negligence, transgressed the Commandments of our
Lord, and have sinned; they shall confess their Sins.§

*Ecclus. xxxviii. 9, 10. JProv. xxvii. 23.

fPs. Ixi. 9. §Num. v. 5-7.

De Confessions 329

Quamobrem, quoniam tarn dubie verba sua suspendit,
mihi visum est afferre qusedam, quse de necessitate Con-
fessionis loquimtur apertius. Et quia ex Scripturis
haberi negat occultorum Confessionem, primo loco pro-
ponam eum locum ex Ecclesiastico, qui non soli mihi
videtur omnes tres Poanitentise partes complecti : "Fill"
inquit, "in tua infirmitate ne despicias teipsum, sed
adora Dominum^ et ipse curabit te; averte te a delicto,
et dirige manus, et ab omni delicto munda cor tuum."

Curat enim Dens, dum solvit in coelo, quod sacerdos
solvit in terra ; dirigimus manus in Satisf actione, aver-
timus a delicto per Contritionem, cor vero a delicto in
Confessione mundamus, juxta illud prophetse: "Effun-
dite coram illo corda vestra" Tres Poenitentise partes
complectitur et Chrysostomus, quum ait: "Perfecta
Poenitentia cogit peccatorem omnia libenter sufferre."
Et infra: "In corde ejus Contritio, in ore ejus Con-
f essio, in opere tota humilitas : hsec est f ructif era Poeni
tentia." Pro Confessione facit et illud: "Cognosce
vulium pecoris tui" Quomodo enim potest cognoscere,
si non indicetur ? Quid eo manifestius, quod legitur
Numeri capite quinto ? "Locutus est Dominus ad
Mosen dicens : Loquere ad filios Israel : Vir, sive mulier,
quum fecerit ex omnibus peccatis., quce solent hominibus
accidere, et per negligentiam transgressi fuerint man-
datum Domini, atque deliquerint, confitebuntur pecca-
tum suum" Hue et illud pertinet, quod in lege veteri
Judseorum, quibus omnia contingebant in figura, popu-
lus infectus lepra jussus est se sacerdotibus ostendere.
Nam si Deus ideo scripsit in lege : "Non alligabis os bovi

330 Of Confession

To this also belongs that of the Jewish old Law, which
had all Things in Figure, the People infected with the
Leprosy were commanded to shew themselves to the
Priest. For if God has therefore written in the Law,
You shall not bind the Mouth of the Oxen that treads
out the Corn;* that he might admonish us, that it is but
just, that he that serves at the Altar, should live by the
Altar, (as the Appostle declares, who says, 'That this is
written in the Law, not for the Oxen, but for Men : For
what Care, saith he, takes God for Oxen?)'f There
is no Reason of Doubt, but that, by this Leprosy of the
Body in the carnal Law, was signified that of Sin in the
spiritual Law. And that Christ might bring us to the
Understanding of this, by Degrees, he said to the Lepers
which he cleansed, not only from the Leprosy of the
Body, but also of the Soul; Go shew yourselves to the
Priest. $ That of St. James also, 'confess your Sins to
one another :'§ Though I am not ignorant of the various
Interpretations given by many to this Place ; yet I am
of Opinion, and many more besides me, that it is com
manded of sacramental Confession. Or doth not that
manifestly confirm Confession which our Lord saith by
Esais, Declare thou thy Wickedness that thou mayest be
justified ?\\ If the Authority of the Fathers ought to
have any Credit, sure it deserves it in this. St. Ambrose
saith, 'No Man can be justified from Sin, if he do not
confess his Sin.7 What can be more plainly spoken?
Moreover, St. John Chrysostom says, 'He cannot receive
the Grace of God, unless he be cleansed from all his
Sins, by Confession.7 Lastly, St. Augustine, 'Do Pen
ance, such as is done in the Church ; Let no Man say to
himself, I do it secretly, because I do it with God :

*Deut, xxv. 4. §Jas. v. 16.

fl. Cor. ix. 9. flsai. xliii. 26.

iLu. xvii. 14.

De Confessione 331

trtiuranti" ut nos admoneret sequum esse, ut qui altari
servit, de altari viveret, quemadmodum declarat Apos-
tolus, qui illud ait in lege scriptum, non propter boves,
sed propter homines: "Numquid de bobus" inquit,
ffcura est Deo?" non est cur quisquam dubitet per
lepram illam corpoream in lege carnali significatam esse
peccatum in lege spirituali : in quam intelligentiam ut
nos paulatim duceret Christns, ait leprosis, quos dum
irent non a corporis tantum, sed ab animse quoque lepra
mundavit: "He" inquit, "ostendite vos sacerdotibus"
Jam illud divi Jacobi : "Confttemini alterutrum peccata
vestra" etiam si non nesciam alios alio trahere, mihi
certe, nee soli, videtur de sacramentali Confessione man-
datum. Annon illud quoque facit aperte pro Confes
sione, quod per Esaiam ait Dominus: "Tu die iniqui-
tates tuas, ut justificeris?"

Quod si quid valere debet auctoritas sanctorum
Patrum, valere debet imprimis quod ait beatus Am-
brosius : a]^on potest quisquam justificari a peccato, nisi
peccatum ipsum fuerit confessus." Quid dici potest
apertius ? Prseterea Joannes Chrysostomus : aE"on
potest," inquit, agratiam Dei accipere, nisi purgatus
fuerit ab omni peccato per Confessionem." Denique
beatus Augustinus: aAgite Poenitentiam, qualis agitur
in Ecclesia. Nemo dicat sibi : Occulte ago, quia apud
Deum ago. Ergo sine causa dictum est : Quce solveritis
super terrain? Ergo sine causa claves datse sunt?"

332 Of Confession

Therefore, without Reason was it said, What you shall
loose on Earth:* Therefore without Reason is it that
the Keys were given.' Put the Case, that not one Word
was particularly, or figuratively read of Confession, nor
any Thing spoken of it by the holy Fathers ; yet, when
I consider that all People have discovered their Sins to
the Priests, for so many Ages ; when I consider the Good
that continually follows the Practice of it, and no Evil
at all ; I cannot think, or believe it to be established, or
upholded by any human Invention, but by the divine
Order of God. For the People could never, by any
human Authority, be induced to discover their secret
Sins, which they abhor in their Consciences, and which
they are so much concerned to conceal, with such Shame,
and Confusion, and so undoubtedly to a Man that
might, when he pleased, betray them. Neither could it
happen, that among such great Numbers of Priests,
some good, and some bad, indifferently hearing Confes
sions, they should all retain them ; and that also, when
some of them can keep nothing else secret ; if God him
self, the Author of the Sacrament, did not, by his espe
cial Grace, defend this so wholesome a Thing. For my
Part, let Luther say what he will, I will believe that
Confession was instituted, and is preserved by God him
self ; not by any Custom of the People, or Institution of
the Fathers.

Now Luther's condemning the Reservation of some
Sins, by which a particular Priest is restrained from
remitting all ; but that some are not forgiven, but by
the Hand of a Bishop, some by the Hand of the Pope
himself; This shews how this popular Man so levels
all Things, as that, through the Hatred he bears to
the chief Bishop, he casts all other Bishops into the
Rank of the lowest Priest; being so blinded with
*Matt. xviii. 18.

De Confessions 333

Verum de Confessione si verbum nullum neque nomi-
natim, neque in figura legeretur, neque quicquam a
sanctis Patribus diceretur, tamen quum videam totum
populum tot sseculis peccata sua patefacere sacerdotibus,
quum ex ea re tarn assidue videam tantum boni proven-
tuna, tarn nihil enatum mali, aliud neque credere, neque
cogitare possem, quam earn rem non humano consilio,
sed divino plane mandato et constitutam esse, et con-
servatam. Neque enim ulla humana auctoritate popu-
lus unquam potuisset adduci, ut occultissima scelera,
quorum tacitam conscientiam horrebant, quse, ne pro-
dirent in lueem, tanti referebat ipsorum, in alienas aures
(qui posset quum vellet prodere) tanto cum pudore,
tanto cum periculo, tarn incunctanter effunderent.
Neque fieri potuisse, quum tarn numerosi presbyteri
boni malique promiscue Confessiones audiant, ut audita
continerent, etiam hi, qui alias nihil continent, nisi
Deus ipse, qui sacramentum instituit, rem tarn salubrem
speciali gratia defenderet. Mihi ergo, quicquid ait Lu-
therus, non ex aliqua populi consuetudine, nee ex insti-
tutione Patrum, sed ab ipso Deo videtur instituta et
praeservata Confessio.

Jam quod Lutherus reservationes peccatorum damnat,
per quas interdicitur ne quilibet sacerdos remittat
omnia, sed qusedam episcopi requirant manum, qusedam
etiam Papse, istud spectat, quod homo popularis sic ex-
sequat omnia, ut, summi Pontificis odio, Pontifices
omnes in classem cogat innmorum sacerdotum: tarn
caecus odio, ut jurisdictionem non discernat ab Ordine,
imo vero multo adhuc ca?cior, ut qui nee Ordinem videat
ullum, sed omnia plane permisceat, et confundat hor-

334 Of Confession

Malice, as not to discern Jurisdiction, from Order ; nay,
so blind, as not to see any Order at all; but mingles
and confounds all Things with Horror, and reduces
Priests themselves into the Rank of Lay-men. Seeing
that God has formed this his Church-militant to the
Example of the triumphant; why, reading there so
many Degrees, so many Orders, admits he in this
neither Degree, nor Order, nor any Difference at all?
Why then has the Apostle writ so much of Bishops, if a
Bishop has no more Power over his Flock, than any
other Priest, nor than a Lay-man ? But we will speak
of the Laity hereafter; let us now speak of Priests.
Every Priest indeed has Orders, but not Authority of
judging, any Thing belonging to him that absolves, be
fore the Care of some Flock be committed unto him:
Yet he is thought a fit Person for it before. If the
Bishop then, who has Care of the whole Diocese, com
mits any Part of his Care to a Priest ; does not Reason
teach us, that this Man can bind or loose no more than
what the other has permitted him, without whose Com
mand, he could not have bound or loosed any Thing at
all amongst the People ? for the same Thing is not law
ful for the Bishop to do in another Diocese. What
Wonder then, if the Bishop reserves some Things to
himself, whose Care is greater than what might be com
mitted to every Person, though not the least learned,
when it has been for so many Ages observed; fearing
lest the People should fall more pronely into Sin, when
the Power of Remission should be proposed to them in so
easy a Manner? Luther now at last, that no Body,
through the Difficulty of Penance, should be deterred
from Sin, commands every Thing to be permitted to
every Person ; not to Priests only, but also to the Laity :
Nay, he comes to that Height of Madness, that, though
Women have commonly that bad Esteem of not being

De Confessione 335

rore, sacerdotesque ipsos prorsus in laicorum classem
redigat. Quum Deus ecclesiam hane militantem ad ex
emplar triumphantis effinxerit, cur tot gradus, tot
ordines legens illic, nullum gradum, nullum ordinem,
nullum prorsus discrimen admittit hie ? Quorsum igitur
tarn multa scripsit Apostolus de episcopis, si nihil
juris in gregem suum plus quam sacerdotes reliqui,
nihil plus quam laicus quivis haberet episcopus 3
Sed de laicis dicemus postea; interim de sacerdote
dicemus.

Sacerdos quilibet Ordinem quidem habet, sed auctori-
tatem judicandi non habet (quse res ad absolventem per-
tinet) priusquam ei gregis alicujus cura committitur ;
idoneus tamen ante reputatur, cui cura tuto possit com-
mitti. Episcopus ergo qui curam habet totius dioecesis, si
cui sacerdoti partem quampiam suse curse commiserit, an-
non ipsa ratio docet hunc non ainplius aut ligare posse, aut
solvere, nisi quatenus ille permiserit, sine cujus mandato
nihil omnino in illius populo vel ligare quemquam, vel
solvere potuisset ? Quippe quod nee ipsi liceat episcopo
in aliena dicecesi. Quid ergo niiri est, si qusedam sibi
reservat episcopus, quorum curam putat esse majorem,
quam ut cuilibet possit, etiam non imperito, committi ?
Quod quum tot sa^culis observation sit, ne populus,
nimis facili proposita remissionis facultate, proclivius
in scelera prolaberetur, Lutherus nunc demum, ne quis-
quam difficultate Poenitentise deterreretur a peccando,
quidlibet jubet permitti cuilibet non sacerdoti modo,
sed etiam laico ; in tantum progressus ineptise, ut quum
vulgo mulieres male audiant, quasi parum probe taceant,
si quid audierint secretius, ille mulieres etiam velit viris
esse a confessionibus. At mulierem quum docere non
permittat Apostolus, non eliget, opinor, in sacerdotem

336 Of Confession

able to conceal any Thing of a Secret ; yet is he willing
Men should have them to hear their Confessions ! — But
I suppose, since the Apostle permits not a Woman to
teach, Luther will not make her a Priest; because he
denies almost any to be a Priest, who is not a Preacher.
But the Sentiments of the holy Fathers declare, That
we ought to confess our Sins only to Priests, unless
otherwise forced by Necessity: 'Let him come, (saith St.
Augustin) to the Priests, who can administer to him the
Keys of the Church.7 He does not say, Let him come to
Lay-men, or let him come to Women. The same Thing
he further tells us more plainly, in another Place : 'He
that repents, let him truly repent; let him signify his
Grief by Tears ; let him present his Life to God by the
Priest; let him prevent the Judgment of God by Con
fession. For the Lord commanded them that should be
cleansed, that they should shew themselves to the
Priest:' By this, teaching us, that Sins are to be con
fessed by a corporal Presence. Likewise Pope Leo;
'Christ gave this Power to the Governors of the Church,
that they should give the Satisfaction of Penance to
them that confess.7 Further, venerable Bede; 'Let us
discover our light and daily Crimes to our Co-equals,
and our grievous Sins to the Priest ; and as long as they
have Dominion in us, let us take Care to purge them;
for Sins cannot be forgiven, without Confession.7 More
over, what should Confession avail us, if Absolution did
not follow by the Keys of the Church : 'But this Power
(saith St. Ambrose) is given only to Priests.7 In an
other Place, he declares what the Sense of these Words
is, when he says, 'The Words of God remit Sin, the
Priest is Judge.' Likewise St. Augustine, in another
Place, writes most plainly, saying, 'He that doth Pen
ance, without the Appointment of the Priest, frustrates
the Keys of the Church.7 Now let any one judge of the

De Confessione 337

Lutherus, qui, nisi prsedicantem, negat ferme quem-
quam esse sacerdotem. At sacerdoti tantum confiten-
dum esse, nisi necessitas ingruat, sanctorum Patrum
declarat sententia. "Veniat, inquit Augustinus, ad
antistites, per quos illi claves ministrantur Ecclesiae."
!N"on dicit: Veniat ad laicos, veniat ad mulieres. Item
alibi dicit apertius: "Quern poenitet, omnino poeniteat,
et dolorem lacrymis ostendat, reprsesentet vitam suam
Deo per sacerdotem, praeveniat judicium Dei per Con-
fessionem: prsecepit enim Dominus mundandis, ut
ostenderent ora sacerdotibus, docens corporali prsesentia
confitenda peccata." Item Leo papa: "Christus hanc
prsepositis Ecclesise tradidit potestatem, ut confitentibus
Posnitentise Satisfactionem darent." Denique venera-
bilis Beda: "Cosequalibus quotidiana et levia, graviora
vero sacerdotibus pandamus, et quanto jusserit tempore,
purgare curemus, quia sine Confessione peccata neque-
unt dimitti."

Prseterea quid prodesset Confessio, nisi per claves Ec-
clesise sequeretur absolutio ? "At hoc jus," inquit Am-
brosius, "solis permissum est sacerdotibus:" quod quo-
modo velit intelligi, declarat alibi, quum dicit: "Ver-
bum Dei dimittit peccata, sacerdos est judex." Alio
item loco scribit Augustinus apertissime: "Erustrat
claves Ecclesiae, qui sine sacerdotis arbitrio Posnitentiam
agit." Nunc igitur judicet quisque quam vere sentit
Lutherus, qui contra sanctorum omnium sententiam
claves Ecclesiae trahit ad laicos, trahit ad mulieres, et ait

338 Of Confession

Truth of Luther's Opinion, who, contrary to the Senti
ments of all the holy Fathers, draws the Keys of the
Church to the Laity, and to Women; and says, that
these Words of Christ, Whatsoever you shall bind, &c.
are spoken not only to Priests, but also to all the Faith
ful. Marcus Aemilius Scaurus, a Man most excellent,
and of known Honesty, being accused at Rome to the
People, by Varius Sucronensis, a Man of little Sincer
ity; his Accuser having made a long and tedious Dis
course ; Scaurus confidently relying on the Judgment of
the People, not thinking him worthy of an Answer, said,
Romans, Varius Sucronensis says it, Aemilius Scaurus
denies it; which of them do you believe? By which
Words, the People, applauding this honourable Man,
scorned the idle Accusations of his babbling Adversary.
Which Discourse seems not more applicable to them,
than to what we hear state : For Luther says, That the
Words of Christ concerning the Keys are spoken to the
Laity; St. Augustine denies it: Which of them is the
rather to be believed? Luther affirms, Bede denies;
which of them will you believe? Luther affirms, St.
Ambrose denies ; which of them has the greatest Credit ?
Finally, Luther affirms it, and the whole Church deny
it : Which do you think is to be believed ? But if any
Body be so mad, as to believe with Luther, that he ought
to confess himself to a Woman ; perhaps it may not be
amiss for him also to follow the other Opinion of
Luther; in which he persuades us, not to be too careful
in calling to Mind our Sins. For certainly, it is not
altogether convenient to be too solicitous in examining
your Memory for what you are to put into such a Per
son's Ear, who has so large and passable a Road from
her Ear to her Tongue. Otherwise seeing it may be
done without any such Danger; I shall not scruple to
prefer, before the Council of Luther, the Example of the

De Confessions 339

verba Christi : "Qucecumque ligaveritis" et csetera, non
sacerdotibus tantum, sed omnibus dicta fidelibus M.
^milius Scaurus vir clarissimus, et exploratse probi-
tatis, Eomse quum a Vario Sucronensi homine parum
sincere accusaretur apud populum, et accusator oratione
longa perorasset, ille breviter et sua, et populi fretus
conscientia, non dignatus oratione contendere: "Quiri-
tes," inquit, "Varius Sucronensis ait, ^Emilius Scaurus
negat ; utri potius credendum censetis ??> Quibus verbis
applaudente populo, vir honoratus hominis nihili fu-
tilem accusationem elusit. Quse percontatio non illic
magis mihi visa est, quam in prsesente qusestione con-
gruere : nam verba Christi de clavibus laicis dicta, Lu-
therus ait, Augustinus negat ; utri magis credendum esse
censetis ? Lutherus ait, negat Beda ; utri magis creden
dum censetis ? Lutherus ait, negat Ambrosius ; utri
magis credendum censetis ? Denique Lutherus ait,
tota negat Ecclesia; utri magis censetis esse creden
dum ?

At si quis adeo desipiat, ut, auctore Luthero, mulieri
quoque putet esse confitendum, huic non inutile fortasse
fuerit illud alterum Lutheri dogma suscipere, quo
suadet non adhibendum multum studii ad recogitanda
peccata. Non expedit profecto nimis anxie multa revo-
care in memoriam, ut omnia in ejus infundas aurem,
quse perviam et patulam viam ab auribus habet ad
linguam. Alioqui quum res fieri potest absque tali peri-
culo, non dubitem Lutheri consilio exemplum prophetae
pra3ponere, qui dicit : "Recogitabo tibi omnes annos meos
in amaritudine." Omnes, inquit, annos meos, sed in
amaritudine. Talis enim Confessio non solum prseterita

340 Of Confession

Prophet; who saith, 'In Bitterness will I reckon over
all my Years unto thee;* all my Years, (says he) and
that in Bitterness:' For such a Confession, not only
cleanses from Sins past, but also begets abundantly new
Grace ; according to that of St. Ambrose, 'St. Peter
became more faithful after he bewailed the Loss of his
Faith ; and so he obtained a greater Grace than he had
lost/ St. Gregory, following him, says, 'That Life,
which is fervent in Love after Sin, is much more accept
able to God, than Innocency that is sluggish in Secur
ity.' When Luther calls them idle People, who are of
Opinion that the Circumstances of Sin are to be con
fessed ; see how much in this St. Augustine differs from
him, when he says, 'Let him consider the Quality of the
Crime ; as to the Place, Time, Perseverance, Distinction
of Persons, and with what Temptation it was done, how
often the Sin was committed ? For a Fornicator ought
to repent according to the Excellency of his State, or
Affairs, and according to the Quality of the Person with
whom he has sinned; according to the Crime itself; if
in a sacred Place, in Time of Prayer, as holy Days, and
Times of fasting ; he is to consider how long he persisted
in Sin, and let his Sorrow be according to his Persever
ance in Sin, and by what Assault he was overcome ; for
some there are, who, far from being overcome, do volun
tarily offer themselves to Sin; nor do they stay for
Temptation, but prevent the Pleasure : Let him consider
with what Pleasure, and how often, he has committed
the Sin: All these Circumstances are to be confessed,
and bewailed ; that when he has known his Sin, he may
soon find God propitious to him. In pondering the
Weight of his Offences, let him consider of what Age
he is, of what Understanding, and Order : Let him pon
der each of these singly, and examine the Manner of
*Isai. xxxviii. 15.

De Confessione 341

peccata diluit, sed novam etiam parit ubertim gratiam,
juxta illud Ambrosii : "Fidelior f actus est Petrus, post-
quam fide se perdidisse deflevit, atque ideo majorem
gratiam reperit, quaxn amisit." Quern secutus Gre-
gorius: "Fit, inquit, plerumque gratior Deo amore
ardens vita post culpam, quam in securitate torpens
innocentia."

Nam quum Lutherus otiosos homines appellet, qui
censuerunt confitendas peccatorum circumstantias,
Augustinus longe censet aliter. "Consideret," inquit
Augustinus, uqualitatem criminis in loco, in tempore, in
perseverentia, in varietate personse, et quali hoc fecerit
tentatione, an ipsius vitii multiplici exsecutione.
Oportet enim poenitere fornicantem secundum excellen-
tiam sui status, vel officii, et secundum modum mere-
tricis, et modum operis sui, et qualiter turpitudinem
peregit, si in loco sacrato, si in tempore orationi con-
stituto, ut sunt festivitates et tempora jejunii. Con-
sideret quantum perseveraverit, et doleat, quam per
se veranter peccaverit, et quanta victus fuerit oppugna-
tione. Sunt enim qui non solum non vincuntur, sed
etiam ultro se peccato otferunt, nee exspectant tenta-
tionem, sed prseveniunt voluptatem. Et pertractet
secum quam multiplici actione vitii, quam delectabiliter
peccavit. Omnis ista varietas confitenda est, et deflenda,
ut quum cognoverit quod peccatum est, cito inveniat
Deum sibi propitium. In cognoscendo augmentum pec-
cati, inveniat se cujus setatis fuerit, cujus sapientia3, et
ordinis. Immoretur in singulis istis, et sentiat modum
criminis, purgans lacrimis omnem qualitatem vitii."
Hactenus Augustinus, quo uno haud scio an reperiat
quemquam Lutherus ex his, quos otiosos vocat, qui dili-

342 Of Confession

the Crime, purging with Tears every Quality of the
Vice.' Hitherto the Words of St. Augustine: That
Luther may not think that Circumstances do not apper
tain to Confession; who has more diligently reckoned
up the Circumstances of Sins, than this Holy Man ? I
scarce know whether Luther will find any one of these he
calls idle. But, if the various Circumstances of Sin are
so diligently to be called to Mind, how much more are
heinous and different Crimes to be collected, and our
Conscience diligently to be examined, that, if possible,
we may not let one Sin escape our Knowledge? For
what Luther darts as a keen Shaft, 'That no Body can
possibly confess all his Sins, because none can remember
them all,' is indeed but a very obtuse one: For who
knows not, that none of those who said, all Sins are to be
confessed, was so stupid as to think that a Man must
tell the Priest in his Ear, what came not into his own
Memory to confess ?

De Confessione 343

gentius enumerarit peccatorum circumstantias, ne putet
Lutherus circumstantiarum nihil quicquam ad Con-
fessionem pertinere.

Quod si ejusdem peccati varise circumstantise sint,
quoad possumus in memoriam revocandse, quanto magis
gravia et diversa crimina colligenda sunt, et diligenter
excutienda conscientia, ut, si fieri possit, nullum nobis
patiamur excidere ? Nam quod Lutherus velut acutis-
simum telum conjicit, neminem posse omnia peccata
confiteri, propterea quod nemo potest omnium recordari,
telum est obtusissimum : quis enim nescit neminem, qui
dixit omnia peccata confitenda fuisse, tarn stolidum ut
senserit etiam ilia sacerdoti narranda in aurem, quse
confitenti non venissent in mentem ?

CHAP. IX

©f Satisfaction

I KNOW not how Luther will satisfy others concern
ing Satisfaction: For my Part, I think that, rather than
he would remain silent, he would chuse to speak many
Things of no Signification at all. For first, when he
says, 'That the Church so teaches Satisfaction, as that
the People can never understand true Satisfaction,
which is a Renovation of Life;' who does not see it to
be a Calumny? Who taught Luther, that the Church
does not teach, That we ought to renew our Lives ? He
has not travelled over the whole Church; he has not
been present at all Confessions, to hear this Ignorance
of the Priests : He must then have the holy Ghost in his
Bosom, or some Devil in his Breast, who has inspired
this into him. But what Spirit soever this was, it could
not be a good one, that taught him a Lye, but that
Spirit, of whom it is said, The Devil is a Lyar, and the
Father of Lyes;* for there is none that knows not that
to be false, which Luther affirms to be true: For who
was ever so doltish, as to enjoin such satisfactory Works
for past Sins, as should indulge the future ? Who does
not continually, when he absolves, pronounce these
Words of Christ, Go, and sin no more?\ And that of
St. Paul, As you have exhibited your Members to serve
Uncleanness, and Iniquity, unto Iniquity, so now ex
hibit your Members to serve Justice unto Sanctifica-
tion.$ Who has not read that of St. Gregory, We are
not able to perform our Penance, as we ought, unless we

•John viii. 44. fjohn viii. 11. fRom. vi. 19.

CAP. IX

2>e Satiafactione

DE Satisf actione nescio an satisfaciat aliis ; mihi pro-
fecto videtur potius, quam taceret, maluisse multis
verbis nihil dicere. Nam primum quod ait Ecclesiam
sic docere Satisf actionem, ut populus veram Satisfactio-
nem non intelligat unquam, quse est innovatio vitse, quis
non videt meram esse calumniam? Quis Lutherum
docuit Ecclesiam non docere innovandam esse vitam?
Totam non peragravit Ecclesiam, non omnibus interfuit
confessionibus, ut hanc audiret inscitiam sacerdotum.
Necesse est ergo aut Spiritum sanctum habeat in sinu,
aut dsemonem aliquem in pectore, qui istud ei inspira-
verit. Sed quisquis hie spiritus fuit, bonus esse non
potuit, qui falsitatem docuit: sed spiritus ille de quo
dictum est : "Diabolus mendax est,, ei Pater ejus." E"am
nemo nescit f alsum esse, quod Lutherus affert pro vero.
Quis enim unquam adeo stipes fuit, ut sic indiceret
opera satisf actoria pro prseteritis, ut indulgeret futura ?
Quis non assidue, quum absolvit, ilia Christi verba sue-
cinit : <e~Vade, et noli amplius peccare T' Et illud Pauli :
"Sicut exliibuistis membra vestra servire immunditice,
et iniquitati ad iniquitatem, ita nunc exhibete membra
vestra servire justitice in sanctificationem?" Quis non
legit illud Gregorii : "Pcenitentiam quippe agere digne
non possumus, nisi modum quoque ejusdem Poenitentiae
cognoscamus. Posnitentiain quippe agere, est et perpe-
trata mala plangere, et plangenda non perpetrare : nam
qui sic alia deplorat, ut iterum alia committat, adhuc
Poanitentiam agere ignorat, aut dissimulat. Quid enim

346 Of Satisfaction

know the Manner of the same Penance ? For to do Pen
ance, is to bewail our Sins formerly committed, and re
solve not to do any Thing hereafter that we should have
cause to sorrow for. For he that laments the past, so
as to commit the future, knows not how to perform
Penance, but dissembleth. What avails it to any Body,
to grieve for his Sins of Luxury, and yet to burn with
Covetousness ? If there were Nothing of this said ; yet
seeing the Priest imposes Penance for Sins committed,
he shews that the Thing itself is not to be again com
mitted, which must again be punished. It is therefore
very evident, that Luther has no Regard to what he
says, so he may but say Somewhat that may slander the
Church: Which Thing always appears wheresoever, (as
in some Matter of great Moment) he cries aloud, even
as he does in these Words : 'For what monstrous Things
are we indebted to thee, thou See of Rome! and to thy
murthering Laws and Rites, whereby thou hast so de
stroyed the whole World, that People think they can
satisfy God for their Sins, by Works; when Nothing,
but the Faith only of a contrite Heart, can satisfy;
which, by these Tumults, thou not only puttest to
Silence, but even oppressest, only that thy insatiable
Blood-suckers may have People to say to them, bring,
bring, that you may sell Sins P Who would not think,
by reading these so furious and tragical Words, but
Luther had discovered some great, and abominable
Prodigies in the Roman See ? But he that diligently
examines all these Things, will see that the Mountains
bring forth a ridiculous Mouse: For first, how ridicu
lous is that Exclamation of his against the See of Rome ?
as if Works of Satisfaction were only exacted, and
Penance imposed only at Rome, and not through the
whole Church, in all Parts of the World ; or, as if many
of the Laws, which he calls murthering Laws, were not

De Satisfactions 347

prodest, si peccata luxurise quis defleat, et tamen adhuc
avaritiae sestibus anhelat?" Quod si nihil horum
diceretur, tamen quum sacerdos indicit Poenitentiam
pro commissis, ipsa redocet non esse rursus committenda
quse rursus sint punienda.

Lutherum ergo manifeste liquet nihil habere pensi
quid dicat, modo verborum effutiat aliquid, quo calum-
nietur Ecclesiam: quse res maxime semper patet, ubi-
cumque, velut in re inaximi momenti, maxima voce
declamat, quemadmodum in his verbis facit: "Quse
monstra tibi debemus, Romana Sedes, et tuis homicidis
legibus, et ritibus, quibus mundum totum eo perdidisti,
ut arbitrentur sese posse Deo per opera pro peccatis
satisfacere, cui sola fide cordis contriti satisfit, quam tu
his tumultibus non solum taceri f acis, sed opprimis etiam
tantum, ut habeat sanguissuga tua insatiabilis, quibus
dicat : Affer, affer, et peccata vendat ?" Quis non arbi-
tretur, quum hac verba legat tarn atrocia, tam tragica,
Lutherum in Sede Romana deprehendisse ingentia et
abominanda portenta ? At si quis omnia pensiculet dili-
gentius, videbit parturiente monte, natum ridiculum
murem: nam primum quam ridiculum est illud, quod
exclamat in Romanam Sedem ? quasi Romse tantum, et
non per omnem totius orbis Ecclesiam exigerentur opera
Satisfactions, et injungatur Prenitentia: aut quasi
leges, quas ille vocat homicidas, non sint editse plerseque
a sanctissimis olim Patribus, et publico Christianorum
consensu in synodis, ac generalibus conciliis. Denique
quum dicit quod per opera non satisfit Deo, sed sola fide,
si sentit quod non per sola opera sine fide, stulte baccha-

348 Of Satisfaction

ordained in former Times by the holy Fathers, and
public Consent of all Christians, in Synods, and gen
eral Councils. Finally, when he says, 'That we cannot
satisfy God by Works, but by Faith alone ;' if he means,
that by Works alone, without Faith, we cannot do it;
he shews but his Folly, by railing against the See of
Rome; in which none was ever yet so foolish, as to say,
that Works, without Faith, can satisfy ; being not igno
rant of that of St. Paul, What is not of Faith is Sin.*
But if he thinks that Works are superfluous, and that
Faith alone is sufficient, whatever the Works be; then
he says Something, and dissents truly from the Roman
Church; which, with St. James, believes, That Faith,
without Works, is dead.-\ You see how impertinently
Luther troubles himself, who so furiously inveighs
against the Roman See, as in the mean While thus to in
volve himself in the Snares of Folly and Impiety. Al
though indeed, I think it is more probable, that Luther
is of Opinion, that Faith without good Works, is always
sufficient to Salvation : For, that he is of that Opinion,
evidently appears ; as well by other Passages of his, as
by his saying, 'That God does Nothing regard our
Works, nor has any Need of them : But he has Need that
we should esteem him true in his Promises.' What
Luther meant by these Words, he knows best himself.
For my Part, I believe, that God cares for our Faith
and our Works, and that he stands in Need of neither
our Faith, nor our Works. For though God has no
Want of our Goods, yet has he so much Care of what
we do, that he commands some Things to be done, and
forbids other Things : Without whose Care, not so much
as one Sparrow falls to the Earth, five of which are sold
for two Farthings.% But because Luther urges that a
Penitent ought only to renew his Life, and neglect to
*Rom. xiv. 23. fJas. ii. 17, 20. JLu. xii. 6.

De Satis factione 349

tur in Sedem Romanam in qua nemo fuit unquam tarn
stultus, qui diceret opera sine fide satisfacere, quum
nemo nesciat illud Pauli: "Quod non est ex fide, pec-
catum est." Sin opera sentit superflua, et fidem solam
sufficere, qualiacumque sint opera, turn dicit aliquid, et
vere dissentit a Sede Romana, quse credit divino Jacobo,
quod fides sine operibus mortua est. Yidetis igitur quam
inepte se commovet Lutherus, qui sic invehitur in
Romanam Sedem, ut semet interea vel stultitise retibus,
vel impietatis involvat.

Quanquam profecto propinquius opinor vero Luthe-
rum sentire fidem semper absque operibus bonis satis
esse ad salutem : nam id ilium sentire, turn exaliis locis
multis evidenter liquet, turn exeo, quod dicit: "Opera
Deus nihil curat, nee eis indiget ; indiget autem ut verax
in suis promissis a nobis habeatur." Quibus verbis quid
senserit Lutherus, viderit ipse : ego certe Deum credo et
fidem nostram, et opera nostra curare, et neque operibus
nostris egere, neque fide: nam ut bonorum nostrorum
non eget, qui Deus est, ita curam habet omnium, quse
faciunt homines, qui aliud ab his fieri vetat, aliud jubet,
sine cujus cura, ne unus quidem passer cadit super
terram, quorum duo veneunt dipondio. Sed quia videtur
Lutherus eo vergere, ut poenitens tantum ingrediatur
novam vitam, ac negligat a sacerdote pro commissorum
Satisfactione suscipere Poenitentiam, audiamus quid in
hac quoque parte scribat sanctissimus Augustinus:
"Non sufficit," inquit, "mores in melius commutare, et
a preeteritis malis recedere, nisi etiam de his, quse facta

350 Of Satisfaction

undergo any Penance from the Piiest, for his past Sins ;
let us hear what St. Augustine has writ on this Subject :
'It is not sufficient (says he) to change our Manners to
better, and forsake our former Wickedness; unless we
do also satisfy our Lord, for the Sins committed, by the
Sorrow of Penance, by the Sobs of Humility; by the
Sacrifice of a contrite Heart, with the Co-operation of
Alms-deeds, and Fasts.' And in another Place, he saith,
'Let the Penitent deliver himself altogether unto the
Judgment and Power of the Priest ;' reserving Nothing
of himself to himself, that he may be ready to do all
Things, as he is commanded, towards recovering the
Life of the Soul ; which he should do, to avoid the Death
of the Body. Likewise, in another Place, 'The Priests
do also bind, (says he) while they enjoin the Satisfac
tion of Penance to those who come to Confession ; they
loose when they remit any Thing thereof : For they exer
cise a Work of Justice towards Sinners, when they bind
them with just Punishment; a Work of Mercy, when
they remit Somewhat of the same Punishment :' I hope
I have plainly made appear how rashly he calumniates
the Church ; and through the whole Sacrament of Pen
ance, how impertinent, how impious, and how absurd he
is against the holy Fathers ; against Scriptures ; against
the public Faith of the Church ; against the Consent of
so many Ages and People ; even against Common-sense
itself ; with all which, he is not yet content ; but, after
having held a long Time that Penance is a Sacrament,
he began, in the End of his Book, to repent himself, that
it should contain any Thing of Truth at all ; and there
fore, as his Custom is, changes his Opinion into a worse,
and wholly denies Penance to be a Sacrament. Yet he
confesses before, 'That he does not doubt, but that who
ever, of his own Accord, or moved by Reproofs, has pri
vately confessed himself before any Brother, and de-

De Satisfaction 351

sunt, satisfaciat Domino per Poenitentise dolorem, per
humilitatis gemitum, per contriti cordis sacrificium,
cooperantibus eleemosynis, et jejuniis." Et alibi:
"Ponat se poenitens," inquit, "omnino in judicio et
potestate sacerdotis, nihil sui reservans sibi, ut omnia,
eo jubente, paratus sit f acere pro recipienda vita animse,
quse faceret pro vitanda corporis morte." Item alibi:
"Ligant quoque," inquit, "sacerdotes, dum Satisfactio-
nem Poenitentise confitentibus imponunt ; solvunt quum
de ea aliquid dimittunt : opus enim justitise exercent in
peccatores, quum eos justa poena ligant; opus miseri-
cordise, quum de ea aliquid relaxant."

Satis igitur aperte me docuisse confido, quam temere
calumniatur Ecclesiam, et per omnem Poenitentise par-
tern quam inepta, quam impia, et quam absurda contra
sanctos Patres, contra Scripturam sacram, contra pub-
licam Ecclesise fidem, contra tot setatum, tot populorum
consensum, contra sensum ferme communem constituat :
quibus tamen ille non est contentus, sed quum diu fassus
esset Poenitentiam esse sacramentum, tandem in fine
totius libri poenitere cospit eum, quod quicquam omnino
liber haberet veri, eoque mutata, quod solet, in deterius
sententia, Poenitentiam prorsus negat esse sacramentum.
At idem ante fatetur se non dubitare quin quicumque
coram quovis privatim fratre, vel sponte confessus, vel
correptus veniam petierit, et emendaverit, ab omnibus
occultis absolutus sit. Si ita sentit (quanquam falsum
in hoc sentit, quod ait coram quovis privatim fratre, et

352 Of Satisfaction

manded Pardon, and amends himself, is absolved from
all his secret Sins.7 If that be his Sentiment, though
false indeed ; (because he says, 'before any Brother pri
vately, and that indifferently ; whether he ask Pardon of
his own Accord, or as forced thereto by Rebukes :' ) If,
I say, he think such a Penance to be profitable, why
excludes he it from the Number of the Sacraments ? not
indeed for any other Intent, but that it may be the less
valued; and, being deprived of the Name of a Sacra
ment, (which amongst Christians is in great Venera
tion) it might become despicable : For which Thing he
finds no other Pretext, but that Penance has no visible
Sign; as though the exterior Penance, or the very Act
and Gestures of the Body, when the Priest absolves the
Penitent, could not be a Sign of spiritual Grace, by
which the Penitent obtains Remission. But, in fine, to
conclude the Discourse of Penance, I wish he may at
last repent himself, for having treated of Penance after
so evil a Manner ; that he may wholesomely perform all
its Parts, as he endeavours to destroy them all ; that he
may be contrite for his Malice, confess publicly his
Errors; and that, submitting himself to the Judgment
of the Church, (which with so many Blasphemies he
has offended) he may recompence for what he has before
committed, with the greatest Satisfaction possible; for
indeed he cannot do it worthily.

De Satisfactione 353

in hoc item, quod nihil interesse censet, an confiteatur
ultro, an correptus petat veniam), tamen si Poeniten-
tiam etiam talem censet esse tarn utilem, cur Poeniten-
tiam eximit e niimero sacramentorum ? Non ob aliud
omnino, quam ut haberetur in minore pretio, et viduata
nomine sacramenti, quod apud Christianos est in venera-
tione, vilesceret. Quam in rem non alium reperit pra>
textum, quam quod Posnitentia non habeat signum
visibile, quasi vel exterior Po3nitentia, vel ille ipse cor-
poreus actus, et gestus, quo sacerdos absolvit poeniten-
tem, signum esse non possit spiritalis gratise, qua
poenitens consequitur remissionem.

Sed ut aliquando finem loquendi faciam de Pceni-
tentia, utinam aliquando pceniteat ipsum tarn male
tractatse Poanitentise ; et cujus omnes partes conatur
evertere, salubriter olim partes omnes adimpleat: con-
teratur de malitia, publice confiteatur errores, et Eo
clesiae, quam tot blasphemiis oft'endit, judicio se sub-
jiciens, quicquid ante commisit, quanta maxima potest
(nam digna profecto non potest) Satisfactione recom-
penset !

CHAP. X

©f Confirmation

LUTHER is so far from admitting Confirmation to be
a Sacrament, that, on the Contrary, he says, he admires
what the Church's Intention was in making it one. And
this most impertinent Babler trifles thus in so sacred a
Thing; asking why the Church does not make three
Sacraments of Bread, as having in Scripture some Occa
sions to do it? The Church has not done any such
Thing, because she takes no Occasions, from any Words
whatsoever in Scripture, for having any other Sacra
ments, than those which were instituted by Christ, and
sanctified by his most holy Blood : Even so it omits none
of them which have been given by Christ and his Apos
tles, and transmitted to us, as it were, from Hand to
iland, though Nothing should be writ of them in any
Place.

But when he says, that Confirmation works no Salva
tion, and that it is supported by no Promise of Christ;
he only says this, proving Nothing, but only denying
all. But when Luther makes Mention of some Passages,
from which (though he laugh at it) the Sacrament of
Confirmation may probably have its Beginning; why
judges he so perversely of the whole Church, as if it
should rashly admit a Sacrament; because he reads no
Word of Promise in these Places; as if Christ had
promised, said, or done Nothing, but what the Evan
gelists mention in the Scriptures! By this Rule, if
there was no Gospel but that of St. John, he should
deny the Institution of the Sacrament of our Lord's

CAP. X

De Sacramento Conffrmationis

CONFIKMATIONEM adeo non recipit pro sacramento, ut
etiam mirari se dicat quid Ecclesiae in mentem venerit,
ut Confirmationem faceret sacramentum, et in re tarn
sacra ludit et nugatur homo nugacissimus, quaerens cur
non ex pane quoque faciant sacramenta tria, quum ansas
quasdam habeant ex Scripturis. Ideo non f acit Ecclesia,
quia non apprehendit ansam ex qualibuscumque Scrip-
turse verbis alia condendi sacramenta, quam quse
Christus instituit, et suo sanctincavit sanguine, quemad-
modum e diverse nullum eorum omittit, quse a Christo
et apostolis per manus deinceps tradita sunt, etiamsi
nusquam quicquam de eis scriberetur: nam quod ait
Confirmationem nullam operari salutem, nulla fulciri
promissione Christi, hoc dicit tantum, neque probat
quicquam, duntaxat negat omnia.

At quum loca qusedam Lutherus ipse commemorat, e
quibus, quanquam id Lutherus irridet, habere non ab-
surde potuerit sacramentum Confirmationis initium, cur
tarn maligne de tota judicat Ecclesia, quasi temere
sacramentum suscipiat, propterea quod in illis locis
nullum legit verbum promissionis ? quasi nihil omnino
promiserit, dixerit, fecerit Christus, quod non com-
plectantur evangelistse. Hac rations si tantum Joannis
exstaret evangelium, negaret institutionem sacrament!
in Coena Domini, de qua institutione nihil omnino per-

356 Of Confirmation

Supper ; of which Institution St. John writes Nothing
at all: Many other Things done by Jesus have been
omitted by all; which (as the Evangelist himself saith)
are not written in this Book, and which the whole World
could not contain ;* of which, some have, by the Mouth
of the Apostles, been delivered to the Faithful, and have
been ever after conserved by the perpetual Faith of the
holy Catholic Church ; whom, I think, you ought to be
lieve concerning some Things which are not in the Gos
pels; when, (as St. Augustine says) You could never
know which is the Scripture itself,, but by the Tradition
of the Church. And though none should have been ever
written, yet the Gospel would have always remained
written in the Hearts of the Faithful, which was more
antient than all the Books of the Evangelists. Let not
Luther think it is a prevailing Argument to prove the
Nullity of the Sacraments, not to find them instituted
in the Scriptures. Otherwise, if he admits Nothing at
all, but what he reads clearly in the Gospel, (that he
may have no Place for Wrangling) how comes he to be
lieve, (if he believes it, for he scarce believes any Thing
at all) the perpetual Virginity of the blessed Virgin
Mary? Of which he is so far from finding any Thing
in Scripture, that Helvidius took Occasion by Scripture
itself to prove the Contrary. Neither is any Thing op
posed against him, but the Faith of the whole Church,
which is no where greater and stronger than in the Sac
raments. For my Part, I do not think that any Person,
who has the least Spark of Faith in him, can be per
suaded, that Christ, who prayed for St. Peter, that his
Faith should not fail;\ who placed his Church on a firm
Rock; should suffer her, for so many Ages, to be bound
by vain Signs of corporal Things, under an erroneous
Confidence of their being divine Sacraments. If Noth-
*John xxi. 25. fLu. xxii. 32.

De Sacramento Confirmationis 35 7

scribit Joannes, qui eodem Dei consilio non tetigit istud,
quo multa alia prseterierunt omnes, quse fecit Jesus:
ffQuce" ut inquit evangelista, "non sunt scripta in libro
hoc, et quce totus mundus non posset capere" Ex quibus
rionnulla per apostolorum ora fidelibus patef acta sunt, et
perpetua deinceps Ecclesise catholicse fide conservata :
cui quare non debeas de quibusdam credere, quanquam
non legantur in evangeliis, quum, ut Augustinus ait
"nisi tradente Ecclesia scire non posses quse sint evan-
gelia ?" Quorum si nullum unquam scriptum esset,
maneret tamen evangelium scriptum in cordibus fideli-
um, quod antiquius fuit omnium evangelistarum
codicibus ; manerent sacramenta, quse et ipsa non dubito
evangelistarum libris esse omnibus antiquiora, ne putet
Lutherus efficax argumentum esse frustra suscepti sacra-
menti, si non reperiat institutum in evangeliis. Alioqui
si nihil omnino recipiat, quod non tarn aperte legat in
evangelio, ut tergiversandi non sit locus, quomodo credit
(si modo credit, qui fere nihil credit) perpetuam Marise
virginitatem ? De qua adeo nihil invenit in Scripturis,
ut Helvidius non aliunde quam ex Scripturarum verbis
arripuerit ansam decernendi contrarium. Nee aliud
opponitur illi, quam totius Ecclesise fides, quse nusquam
major est, aut fortior, quam in sacramentis.

Ego certe neminem esse puto, qui scintillam ullam
habeat fidei, cui persuaderi possit quod Christus qui pro
Petro oravit, ne fides ejus deficeret, qui Ecclesiam suam
supra firmam petram collocavit, pateretur earn tot
sseculis universam corporalium rerum signis inanibus,
erronea fiducia velut divinis sacramentis obstringi. Si
nusquam inde quicquam legeretur, illi tamen verbo
men tern Domini poterant enarrasse, qui praesentes versati

358 Of Confirmation

ing should be read of it any where, yet those who were
present, and conversed with our Lord, could, by Word of
Mouth, tell what his Mind was, of whom himself says,
Ye are Witnesses who have been with me from the Be
ginning* What was to be done, might be taught by the
Holy Ghost, of whom Christ said, But when the Para-
elite comes, whom I will send you from the Father,, the
Spirit of Truth which proceedeth from the Father, he
*hall give Testimony of me.-\ And in another Place,
When lie shall come, that is, the Spirit of Truth, he shall
teach you all Truth, for he shall not speak of himself;
but what Things soever he shall hear, he shall speak;
and the Things that are to come he shall shew you.\ Shall
we believe then, that the Church, having so many, and
so great Ministers, so many living Evangelists, and that
Spirit which inspires Truth, has rashly instituted a Sac
rament, and puts her Hope in an empty Sign ? Or shall
we not rather believe, that it has learned from the Apos
tles, and from the Spirit of Truth ? Certainly, if the
Name of this Sacrament, the Minister, and the Virtue
promised in it, be considered, it will appear not to be a
Thing which we may believe to be unadvisedly used by
the Church. For, as Hugo de St. Victore saith, From
Chrism is Christ named; from Christ, Christian; every
one ought to have taken Chrism, or Unction, since from
it they take their common Name. For we are all an
elected Nation, and a royal Priesthood§ in Christ: We
are not anointed, unless in Case of Necessity, but by the
Bishops, that they may seal the Christian, and give him
the Holy Ghost: 'Even (says he) as we read that the
Apostles only, in the primitive Church, had Power to
give the Holy Ghost by Imposition of Hands/ The
same Doctor declares also the Fruit of the Sacrament ;

"John xv. 27. JJohn xvi. 13.

fJohn xv. 26. §1. Pet. ii. 9.

De Sacramento Confirmationis 359

sunt cum eo, de quibus ait ipse: "Vos testes estis, qui
mecum ab initio fuistis" Docere poterat quid debebat
fieri, Paracletus ipse, de quo dixit Christus: "Quum
autem venerit Paracletus, quern ego miitam vobis a
Patre meo, Spiritus veritatis, qui a Patre procedit, ille
testimonium perhibebit de me." Et rursus: "Quum
venerit ille, qui est Spiritus veritatis, ducet vos in
omnem veritatem: non enim loquetur a semetipso, sed
qucecumque audierit, loquetur; et quce futura sunt, an-
nuntiabit vobis/' Ecclesia ergo quum tot et tales
habuerit prseceptores, tot vivos evangelistas, et Spiritum
ilium, qui veritatem inspirat, credetur temere instituisse
sacr amentum, et spem in signo collocare nihili ? Non
credetur potius ab apostolis, non credetur potius a
Spiritu sancto didicisse?

Certe si quis nomen hujus sacramenti, si quis ininis-
trum, si quis virtutem, quam spondet, sestimet, videbit
rem non esse talem, quam temere credatur Ecclesia sus-
cepisse. "A chrismate enim," ut inquit Hugo de Sancto-
Victore, "Christus dicitur: a Christo, Christianus;
cujus ex quo nomen omnes communicare coeperunt,
omnes unctionem accipere debuerunt, quia in Christo
omnes electum genus sumus, et regale sacerdotium."
Nee ungimur, excepta necessitate, nisi per episcopos, ut
Christianum consignent, et Spiritum Paracletum tra-
dant, quemadmodum idem ait Hugo, sicut, in primitiva
Ecclesia, Spiritum sanctum per impositionem manuum
dandi soli apostoli potestatem habuisse leguntur.
Fructum quoque sacramenti idem Doctor declarat:
"Sicut," inquit, ain Baptismo remissio peccatorum
accipitur, ita per manus impositionem Spiritus Para-
cletus datur. Illic gratia tribuitur ad remissionem

360 Of Confirmation

'As the Remission of Sins, (saith he) is received in Bap
tism; so, by the Imposition of Hands, the Holy Ghost
is given: There, Grace is given to the Remission of
Sins: Here, Grace is given to Confirmation; for what
avails it you to be lifted up from your Fall, if you are
not confirmed to stand?' These are Hugo's Words,
which are also consonant to Reason. For as in the cor
poral Life, besides Generation, by which we get Life,
another Action is required, by which we may increase,
and grow to the Perfection of Strength : So, in the
spiritual Life, which is required by Regeneration in
Baptism, the Sacrament of Confirmation is necessary,
by which the spiritual Life is led to perfect Virtue, and
the Holy Ghost is given for perfect Strength. And be
sides, the Sacrament of Baptism, which helps us to be
lieve, Confirmation is profitable to give us Courage to
confess our Faith boldly. For to this it is ordained,
that Man may, before the Persecutor, boldly confess his
Faith: And this is what Melchiades saith; In Baptism
we are regenerated to Life, after Baptism we are con
firmed for the Combat; for Confirmation arms and in
structs us against the Agonies of this World.

Finally, that Luther may understand that this Sacra
ment is no new Thing, or vain Fiction ; but that it is so
far from being void of Grace, that it confers the Spirit
of Grace and Truth: We will here relate what St.
Hierom has written of this Sacrament of Confirmation.
'If the Bishop impose his Hand, it is on them who have
been baptized in the true Faith, who have believed in
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three Persons and one
Substance. But the Arian, who believes in no other
(stop your Ears, that you may not be polluted with the
Words of such monstrous Impiety,) but in the Father
alone, in Jesus Christ as a Creature, in the Holy Ghost
as Servant to both ; how shall he receive the Holy Ghost

De Sacramento Confirmationis 361

peccatorum, hie gratia datur ad confirmationem. Quid
autem prodest si a lapsu erigeris, nisi ad standum con-
firmeris ?" Hactenus Hugo, cui recta quoque consentit
ratio. Quemadmodum enim in vita corporali prseter
generationem, per quam vitam consequimur, alia requi-
ritur actio, per quam et crescimus, et ad perfectionem
virtutis perducimur, ita in spiritali vita, quse per
generationem Baptismatis acquiritur, opus est sacra-
mento Confirmationis, per quam vita spiritualis ad per-
fectam virtutem perducitur; et Spiritus sanctus datur
ad perfectum robur. Et prseter sacramentum Baptismi,
quod adjuvat ad credendum, Confirmatio prodest in
adjutorium fortitudinis ad audacter confitendum. Ad
hoc enim ordinatur, ut homo coram persecutore fidem
confiteatur audacter; et hoc est, quod ait Melchiades:
"In Baptismo regeneramur ad vitam, post Baptisma
confirmamur ad pugnam:" nam Confirmatio ad hujus
mundi agones armat, et instruit.

Denique ut Lutherus intelligat hoc sacramentum
neque novum esse, neque inane figmentum, sed adeo non
vacare gratia, ut Spiritum etiam gratise conferat, ac
veritatis, afferemus in medium quid beatus Hieronymus
de Confirmationis sacramento scripserit. Ait enim:
"Episcopus si imponit manum, his imponit, qui recta
fide baptizati sunt, qui in Patre, et Filio, et Spiritu
sancto, tres personas, et unam substantiam crediderunt.
Arrianus vero, quum nihil aliud crediderit (claudite,
quseso, aures, qui audituri estis, ne tantse impietatis
vocibus polluamini) nisi in Patre solo vero Deo, et in
Jesu Christo salvatore creatura, et in Spiritu sancto
utriusque servo, quomodo Spiritum sanctum ah Ecclesia

362 Of Confirmation

from the Church, who has not as yet obtained Remission
of his Sins ? For the Holy Ghost inhabits not, but
where Faith is pure, nor remains but in that Church
which has true Faith for her Guide.'

'If in this Place, you ask why he that is baptized in
the Church, receives not the Holy Ghost but by the
Hands of the Bishop ? Learn, that this Observation is
descended from this Authority; because, after our
Lord's Ascension, the Holy Ghost descended on the
Apostles, and we find the same to have been done in
many Places.7 Hitherto St. Hierom. Which Sentence
is also confirmed by divers Passages in the Scripture,
and particularly by that in the Acts, which shews that
the People baptized before in Samaria, received the
Holy Ghost, when Peter and John came among them,
and laid their Hands upon them.* I therefore admire
how it should come into Luther's Mind to dispute, that
Confirmation is only to be accounted a Rite and a Cere
mony, and deny it to be a Sacrament ; when it is demon
strated, not only by the Testimony of holy Fathers, and
by the Faith of the whole Church, but also by clear Pas
sages of Scripture; that not only Grace, but also, the
very Spirit of Grace, is conferred by the visible Sign of
the Bishop's Imposition of Hands.

Let Luther therefore forbear to contemn any more the
Sacrament of Confirmation, which the Dignity of the
Minister, the Authority of the Church, and the Profit of
the Sacrament itself, commend.

*Acts viii. 14-17

De Sacramento Confirmationis 363

recipiet, qui necdum remissionem peccatorum con-
secutus est? Spiritus quippe sanctus nisi mundam
fidem non incolit, nee habitator ejus templi efficitur,
quod antistitem non habet veram fidem. Quod si hoc
loco quseras quare in Ecclesia baptizatus nisi per manus
episcopi non accipiat Spiritum sanctum, disce hanc ob-
servationem ex ea auctoritate descendere, quod post
ascensum Domini Spiritus sanctus ad apostolos de-
scendit, et multis in locis idem factitatum reperimus."
Hactenus Hieronymus: cujus sententise, quum alia
multa Scripturse loca subscribunt, turn ille multo claris-
sime, qui in Actis apostolorum declarat quod populus,
qui ante baptizatus est in Samaria, descendentibus ad
eos Petro ac Joanne, ac manus eis imponentibus, accepit
Spiritum sanctum. Demiror igitur quid in mentem
Luthero venerit, ut Confirmationem pro ritu tantum ac
cserimonia contendat habendam, pro sacramento vero
neget : quse non solum sanctorum testimonio Doctorum,
et totius Ecclesia fide, sed etiam sacrse Scripturse claris-
simis locis ostenditur visibili signo manus pontificise
non gratiam tantum, sed et ipsum gratise Spiritum con-
ferre. Desinat ergo Lutherus Confirmationis sacramen-
tum contemnere, quod ministri dignitas, Ecclesia3
auctoritas, et ipsius sacramenti commendat utilitas.

CHAP. XI

©f tbe Sacrament of flDarrtage

MARRIAGE, the first of all Sacraments, celebrated by
the first of Mankind, and honoured with our Saviour's
first Miracle, being for so long Time had in a religious
Veneration for its very Name of a Sacrament ; is now,
at last, (that People should not so much regard or value
conjugal Faith,) denyed by Luther to be any Sacrament
at all; and as in other Sacraments, (some of which he
takes away, by denying the Sign instituted; others, by
denying promised Grace) he denies both of them to be in
Marriage; (holding, that Grace has been no where
promised thereby) he teaches also, That it has been no
where instituted for a Sign : And how knows he this ?
Because (says he) we read it not. O strong Reason, and
Mother of many Heresies! This was the Fountain,
from which Helvidius drew his Venom. You admit no
Sacrament, unless you read its Institution in a Book!
What Book has he ever writ who instituted all ? Con
cerning some Things, (says he) I believe Christ's Evan
gelists: Why then does he not, in some Things, believe
also the Church of Christ; which is by Christ himself
preferred to all the Evangelists, who have been only
Members of the Church ? Wherefore, if he confides so
much in one, why does he distrust all together ? If he
attribute so much to a Member, why nothing at all to
the whole Body ?

The Church believes it to be a Sacrament ; that it has
been instituted by God ; given by Christ ; and left to us
by his Apostles; delivered afterwards by the Holy

CAP. XI

I>e Sacramento flDatrimonU

MATRIMONIUM sacramentorum omnium primum inter
primes homines celebratum, primo Christi miraculo
cohonestatum, quod, propter sacramenti nomen, ipsum
tandiu tarn religiose cultum est, Lutherus nunc demum,
ne conjugalem fidem tanti quisquam putet in posterum,
negat esse sacramentum ullum. Et quum alia sacra-
menta sic sustulerit, ut in uno negaret institutum
signum, in alio negaret promissam gratiam, in Matri-
monio negat utrumque: nam negat usquam promissam
esse gratiam; negat usquam institutum esse pro signo.
Unde hsec novit ? "Quia non legitur," inquit. O ratio-
nem fortem, et multarum hseresum parentem! Ex hoc
fonte venenum hausit Helvidius. Nullum sacramentum
admittis, cujus institutionem non legis in libro ? Quern
librum unquam scripsit ille, qui instituit omnia ? "De
quibusdam," inquit, "credo evangelistis Christi. Cur
ergo de quibusdam Christi non credis Ecclesise, quam
Christus omnibus prseponit evangelistis, qui non nisi
membra qusedam fuerunt Ecclesise? Quamobrem, si
fidis uni, cur diffidis omnibus ? Si membro tribuis tan-
turn, cur toti nihil tribuis corpori ? Ecclesia credit esse
sacramentum; Ecclesia credit a Deo institutum, a
Christo traditum, traditum ab apostolis, traditum a
sanctis Patribus, per manus deinceps pro sacramento
traditum ad nos pervenisse, pro sacramento per nos
tradendum posteris ad finem usque sseculi, .pro sacra
mento venerandum. Hoc Ecclesia credit, et quod credit,
dicit. Hoc, inquam, tibi dicit eadem Ecclesia, quse tibi

366 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

Fathers for a Sacrament, and given as it were, from
Hand to Hand down to us; from us also, as a Sacra
ment, down to Posterity, and to be honoured to the End
of the World. The Church believes this ; and tells you
what it believes too. The same Church that says, The
Evangelists writ the Gospel, tells you this also. For if
the Church had not said, That the Gospel of John, is the
Gospel of John, you should not have known it ; for you
were not present when he writ it. Why then do you not
believe the Church, when she tells you that Christ has
done these Things; has instituted these Sacraments;
that the Apostles have delivered them ; as well as when
she says, That the Evangelists writ such, and such
Gospels?

But Luther says, 'Marriage was amongst the antient
Patriarchs, and amongst the Gentiles ; and that as truly
as amongst us, yet was it not a Sacrament with either
of them.7 As for the Fathers that were under the Law,
and before the Law, I do not agree with Luther; but am
certain, that Marriage was a Sacrament with them as
well as Circumcision. But amongst the Gentiles, the
Case is otherwise; for their Marriage depended on the
Custom and Laws of each People: So that some Mar
riages were lawful with some of them, which by others
were accounted ridiculous : And yet, contrary to Luther,
we find some of Opinion, that even the Marriages of the
Gentiles were a Sacrament amongst them. For St.
Augustine says, 'That the Sacrament of Marriage is
common to all Nations: But the Sanctity of it is only
in the City of our God, and in his holy Mountain/ (the
Church.) On which Sentiment, let him that pleases
read Hugo de Sancto Victore. But though the Marriage
of the Unfaithful be no Sacrament, yet does it not fol
low what Luther infers, That the Marriage of the Faith
ful is none either. For the People of God have some-

De Sacramento Matrimonii 367

dicit evangelistas scripsisse Evangelium: nam nisi Ec-
clesia diceret evangelium Joannis Joannis esse, nescires
esse Joannis: non enim assedisti scribenti. Cur ergo
non credis Ecclesiae, quum dicit hsec Christum fecisse,
hsec sacramenta instituisse, hsec apostolos tradidisse,
quemadmodum credis ei, quum dicit haec evangelistam
scripsisse ?

"Matrimonium," inquit Lutherus, "erat apud an
tiques Patres, erat apud Gentiles, et tamen apud neutros
Matrimonium erat sacr amentum, quum tamen apud
utrosque Matrimonium fuerit seque verum, atque apud
nos. De Patribus, qui sub lege erant, et ante legem, non
accedo Luthero ; imo plane censeo Matrimonium fuisse
illis sacramentum, sicut fuit et Circumcisio. De
Gentibus alia qua3stio est, quarum Conjugium totum
pendebat a moribus ac legibus cuj usque populi ; eoque
talia erant apud alias legitima conjugia, qualia haberen-
tur alibi perabsurda. Quanquam non desunt, qui contra
Lutherum sentiant etiam Gentium Conjugium sacra
mentum esse : nam et beatus Augustinus ait quod sacra
mentum Conjugii omnibus Gentibus commune est,
sanctitas autem sacramenti non est, nisi in civitate Dei
nostri, et monte sancto ejus. In quam sententiam, qui
volet, Hugonem de Sancto- Victor e perlegat.

Quanquam si Conjugium infidelium sacramentum
non esset, non sequeretur tamen, quod Lutherus infert,
ut ideo ne fidelium quidem Conjugium sacramentum
sit. Populus enim Dei in Matrimonio quiddam habet

368 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

thing more holy in Marriage, and have always had, as
well as its first Institution, as when it was honoured
with Laws given by God. Moreover, the Gentiles, he-
cause it was acted as a human Thing amongst them,
were wont, by Compacts and human Laws, to take
Wives, and after to reject them again. Divorcement
was not lawful in former Times amongst the People of
God : For though God, by Moses, permitted the Bill of
Divorcement among the Hebrews; yet Christ confesses
that it was indulged them for the Hardness of the Peo
ple's Hearts: For, from the Beginning (saith our Sa
viour,) it was not so. But Christ hath restored Chris
tians to pristine Sanctity, consecrating Marriage with
an indesolvable Bond of Society; unless in Case of
Fornication between those, whom no human Error, but
God himself, has joined together. It follows not, there
fore, that if Marriage has not been a Sacrament amongst
the Gentiles, it must be none amongst us Christians, or
has not been a Sacrament amongst the antient Patri
archs ; amongst Christians, if it was no where read, yet
the Faith of the Church ought to suffice us. And yet
that one Passage of the Apostle, which Luther endeav
ours to put by with a Scoff, does plainly demonstrate,
that Marriage, not only now, but also at the very first
Beginning of Mankind, was instituted a Sacrament:
Which I suppose will not be doubted by any Body who
reads that Part of the Epistle to the Ephesians, and at
tentively considers it. Which whole Passage we have
here inserted; because, by any Man's Words, it cannot
be more clearly explicated, than it is already by the
Apostle himself, who has so plainly shewn us his Mind
therein, that no Place of Refuge is left to Luther's im
pertinent Calumnies. For he saith, 'Let Women be sub
ject to their Husbands, as to our Lord: Because the
Man is Head of the Woman, as Christ is Head of the

De Sacramento Matrimonii 369

sanctius, habuitque semper, et quum prirnum instituere-
tur, et quum datis a Deo legibus honestaretur. Porro
apud Gentes, quoniam humana tantum res agebatur,
adsciscere sibi conjuges ac rejicere pactis ac legibus
humanis solebant. In Dei populo junctos Conjugio non
licuit olim divelli. Nam quod per Moysem Deus per-
misit Hebrais libellum repudii, Christus fatetur in-
dultum propter duritiam populi : alioquin uxores animo
suo non satis commodas interf ecturi : ffnam ab iniiio''
inquit Christus, "non erat sic!' Christianos vero
Christus ad pristinam revocavit sanctitatem, consecrans
Matrimonium indissolubili vinculo societatis, excepta
fornicationis causa, inter eos quos non humanus error,
sed Deus rite conjunxit. !N"on sequitur igitur ut si Con-
jugium non fuerit sacr amentum Gentibus, idcirco sacra-
mentum aut nunc non sit Christianis, aut non fuerit
priscis olim Patribus.

Nam quod ad Christianos pertinet, etiam si nusquam
legeretur, Ecclesise fides suflficeret. Et tamen unus ille
locus ex Apostolo, quern Lutherus cavillo conatur
eludere, manifesto docet Matrimonium non nunc tan
tum, sed et olim quoque in generis humani primordiis
institutum pro sacramento. Quod nemini, opinor,
dubium relinquetur, qui locum ilium ex epistola ad
Ephesios perleget et considerabit attentius, quern totum
placuit inserere, propterea quod nullius interpretatione
poterit res elucere clarius, quam ipsis verbis Apostoli,
qui tarn aperte quod sensit, explicuit, ut ineptis Lutheri
calumniis nullum reliquerit locum. Ait enim: "Mu-
lieres viris suis subditce sint, sicut Domino: quoniam
vir caput est mulieris, sicut Christus caput est Eccleswe,
ipse Salvator corporis ejus. Sed sicut Ecclesia subjecta
est Christo, ita et mulieres viris suis in omnibus. Viri,

370 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

Church : Himself the Saviour of his Body. But as the
Church is subject to Christ, so the Women to their Hus
bands, in all Things. Husbands love your Wives, even
as Christ loved the Church, and delivered himself for it.
That he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the Laver of
Water in the Word ; That he might present to himself a
glorious Church, not having Spot or Wrinkle, or any
such Thing ; but that it may be holy and unspotted. So
also Men ought to love their Wives as their own Bodies ;
he that loveth his Wife, loveth himself. For no Man
ever hated his own Flesh, but he nourishes it and cher
ishes it, as also Christ the Church ; because we are Mem
bers of his Body, of his Flesh, and of his Bones: For
this Cause shall a Man leave Father and Mother, and
cleave to his Wife, and they shall be two in one Flesh ;
This is a great Sacrament : But I speak in Christ, and
in the Church.'* You see how the blessed Apostle
teacheth every-where, that the Marriage of Man and
Wife is a Sacrament, which represents the Conjunction
of Christ with his Church: For he teacheth, that God
consecrated Matrimony, that it might be the Mystery of
Christ joined with his Church. He tells you, 'That the
Man and Wife make one Body, of which the Man is the
Head ; and that Christ and the Church make one Body,
of which Christ is the Head.' He makes the chief Cause
why the Husband ought to love his Wife, no other, than
that he may not be an unlike Sign to Christ, whom he
represents: And this he makes rather the Cause, than
that common Nature of the Male and Female, which of
itself should also excite Love. He, by the same Exam
ple, 'exhorts the WTife to fear and respect her Husband ;'
that is, because she represents the Church of Christ.
And after he has by many Words inculcated these
Things over and over again; (fearing lest any Body
*Ephes. v. 22 fol.

De Sacramento Matrimonii 371

diligite uxores vestras, sicut et Christus dilexit Eccle
siam , et semetipsum tradidit pro ea, ut illam sanc-
tificaret, mundans earn lavacro aquce in verbo vitce, ut
exhiberet ipse sibi gloriosam Ecclesiam non habentem
maculam, aut rugam, aut aliquid hujusmodi, sed ut sit
sancta, et immaculata. Ita et viri debent diligere
uxores suas, ut corpora sua. Qui suam uxorem diligit,
seipsum diligit. Nemo enim unquam carnem suam odio
habuit, sed nutrit et fovet earn, sicut et Christus Eccle
siam; quia membra sumus corporis ejus, et de carne
ejus, et de ossibus ejus. Propter hoc relinquet homo
patrem suum, et matrem suam, et adhcerebit uxori suce:
et erunt duo in carne una. Sacramentum hoc magnum
est, ego autem dico in Christo et Ecclesia/'

Videtis ut beatus Apostolus Matrimonium viri et
uxoris docet undique sacramentum esse, quod reprse-
sentat conjunctionem Christi cum Ecclesia. Docet enim
consecratum a Deo Matrimonium, ut esset Christi cum
Ecclesia conjuncti sacramentum, atque ideo virum com-
parat Christo, uxorem Ecclesire. Virum caput esse dicit
ejus corporis, quod unum f acit cum foemina ; Christum
caput esse dicit ejus corporis, quod unum facit cum
Ecclesia. Prsecipuam causam facit cur vir uxorem
diligat non aliam, quam ne dissimile signum sit Christi,
quern reprsesentat ; et hanc potiorem causam facit, quam
communem masculi et foemellse naturam, quse et ipsa
potuisset incitare ad diligendum. Mulierem vero, ut
virum timeat ac revereatur, eodem exemplo provocat,
nempe quod ilia referat Ecclesiam obedientem Christo.
Quse quum iterum atque iterum multis verbis inculcas-
set, ne quis hanc viri cum Christo et uxoris cum Ecclesia
collationem putaret similitudinem esse quampiam
drmtaxat exhortandi gratia desumptam, ostendit rem

372 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

should think this Comparison of the Husband with
Christ, and the Wife with the Church, to be some
Similitude, used only for the Conveniency of the Ex
hortation,) he shews it to be a true Matter, a true Sacra
ment, foretold by the Prophesy of the chiefest and first
of all Prophets, when the World was but newly created :
For when the Apostle saith, 'He that loves his Wife,
loves himself ; for no Man ever hated his own Flesh, but
loves and cherishes it, even as Christ loveth his Church ;
because, (says he) we are Members of his Body, of his
Flesh, and of his Bones/ This he spoke to remind us of
the WTords, much like to these, which Adam spoke, when
Eve was first brought into his Sight, 'This is Bone of my
Bone, and Flesh of my Flesh.'

And that the Apostle might more clearly shew that
the Sacrament of the Conjunction of Adam and Eve
pertains to that Union of Christ with his Church, he
added Adam's very Words, 'Wherefore a Man shall
leave Father and Mother, and cleave to his Wife; and
they shall be two in one Flesh.7* This Sacrament, saith
the Apostle, is great in Christ and the Church. How
could he have more evidently refuted Luther, than by
these Words, which he so impertinently scoffs at, in con
tending that the Apostle had taken away the Sacrament
from the Marriage of Man and Wife, by saying, 'This
Sacrament is great in Christ and his Church' ? As if he
should, by saying, the Sacrament of Baptism is great in
the washing of the Soul, deny the Baptism of the Body
to be a Sacrament; or, as if he should, by saying, the
Sacrament of the Eucharist is great in the Body of
Christ, deny the Species of Bread and Wine to be a Sac
rament ; or, as if by saying, That the same Sacrament is
great in the mystical Body of Christ, he should detract
the Sacrament from the Body which he took of the
*Gen. ii. 23.

De Sacramento Matrimonii 373

esse veram, verum esse sacramentum a prophetarum
omnium primo, primoque ejus ipsius vaticinio, orbe jam
turn recens condito, prgenunciatum. Nam quum dixis-
set : "Qui suam uxorem diligit, seipsum diligit. Nemo
enim carnem suam odio liabuit, sed nutrit, et fovet earn,
sicut et Christus Ecclesiam: quia membra sumus" in-
quit, "corporis ejus, et de came ejus, et de ossibus ejus."
Quse verba dixit Apostolus, ut nos in memoriam duceret
eorum verborum quse verbis istis similia dixit Adam,
quum in conspectu ejus primum adducta est Eva : "Hoc
nunc os ex ossibus meis, et caro de carne mea." Et ut
evidentius ostenderet Apostolus ad Christi copulam cum
Ecclesia pertinere sacramentum conjunctionis Adse cum
Eva, Adse verba ipsa subjunxit: (fPropterea relinquet
homo patrem et matrem, et adhcerebit uxori suce: et
erunt duo in carne una. Hoc sacramentum'' inquit
Apostolus, tf magnum est in Christo et Ecclesia/' Quo-
modo potuisset Apostolus evidentius refellisse Luthe-
rum, quam his ipsis verbis, quse Lutherus inepte conatur
eludere ? Qui ex eo quod Apostolus dixit sacramentum
hoc magnum esse in Christo et Ecclesia, contendit Apos-
tolum abstulisse sacramentum a Matrimonio viri et
uxoris, tanquam si quis ita loqueretur: Sacramentum
Baptismi magnum est in ablutione animse, negaret Bap-
tismum corporis esse sacramentum; aut si quis diceret
sacramentum Eucharistise magnum esse in ipso Christi
corpore, negaret panis et vini species esse sacramentum ;
aut si dicat idem sacramentum esse magnum in Christi
corpore mystico, sacramentum detraheret corpori,
quod sumpsit de Virgine ? Quis unquam vidit quem-
quam tain nugace glossemate, tanta se cum gloria
jactantem ?

374 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

blessed Virgin. Who has ever seen any Man swell with
greater Pride for so frivolous a Gloss ? For if the
Apostle had been of his Opinion, and willing his Words
should be so interpreted, as to shew this Sacrament to be
great only in Christ and his Church, without any Refer
ence at all to the Marriage of Man and Wife ; it would
lessen the Force and Weight of all those Things, where
by, in that Comparison of the two Conjunctions, he had
before commended Marriage.

It would also, in another Manner prejudice the Mat
ter he undertook, if he should refer these Words of
Adam only to Christ and his Church, which, of them
selves, seem to unite Man and Wife together in mutual
Love, so as to teach, that there is in them no Reference
to Man and Wife. The Apostle teaches, that those
Words of Adam, were a Prophecy of Christ and his
Church ; which is confirmed by all the holy Doctors, and
very clearly demonstrated by Adam's speaking these
Words at the very first Sight of Eve, by which he pre
ferred a Wife to Father and Mother; nor as yet any
Command of begetting Children, to instruct him, by
the Comparison of Parents and Children, what Father
and Mother were. Because, if those Words of Adam
were a Prophecy of Christ and his Church, then it seems
they either did not belong to that Marriage which was
there performed; or that some Marriage, as a proper
Sign of this Conjunction, was then made a Sacrament
by God himself, whose Spirit then formed the Words of
Adam, that the same Words might signify what was
then done, and what was prophesied ; that is, the Mar
riage of Men, and the Conjunction of Christ with the
Church; and as one Sacrament comprehends a sacred
Thing, and the proper and sacred Sign of the same
Thing.

Moreover, that you may the more plainly discern, that

De Sacramento Matrimonii 375

Nam si Apostolus hoc sensisset, et sic voluisset accipi,
ut hoc sacramentum magnum esset duntaxat in Christo
et Ecclesia, neque pertineret quicquam ad viri et uxoris
Matrimonium, imminuisset robur et pondus illorum
omnium, quibus ilia comparatione duarum conjunctio-
num commendaverat ante Conjugmm. Quin alia
quoque ratione nocuisset causae quam susceperat, si ilia
Protoplasti verba, qua3 per se posita videbantur conjuges
in mutuum amorem trahere, sic traxisset ad Christum et
Ecclesiam, ut nihil pertinere doceret ad virum et
uxorem. Verba ilia Adse fuisse vaticinium de Christo
et Ecclesia docet Apostolus, et omnes Doctores sancti
confirmant, et ipsa res ostendit. Nam ad primum Evse
conspectum protulit ea verba, quibus patri et matri prse-
ferebat uxorem, quum ipse neque patrem habuisset
neque matrem, neque adhuc prseceptum procreandi libe-
ros, ut parentum et liberorum collatione cognosceret,
quid pater esset, aut mater. Quod si ilia Protoplasti
verba fuerunt vaticinium de Christo et Ecclesia, tune
aut nihil pertinuisse videntur ad Matrimonium quod
agebatur, et de quo dici videbantur, aut illud ipsum
Matrimonium velut illius conjunctions idoneum sig-
num, ab ipso Deo, cujus Spiritu formabatur Ada?
loquentis os, sacramentum instituebatur : ut eadem verba
possent, et in id quod agebatur, et in id etiam quod
pra3nuntiabatur, hoc est in hominum Conjugium, et
Christi cum Ecclesia copulam competere, et tanquam
unum sacramentum ex re sacratissima, et ejusdem rei
sacro et congruente signo, comprehendere.

Prseterea, ut liquido patere possit Lutherum nihil

376 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

what Luther speaks, is to no Purpose ; observe, that the
Apostle's Business, in that Place, to the Ephesians, is
not about teaching them how great a Sacrament Christ
joined with the Church, is; but about exhorting mar
ried People how to behave themselves one towards an
other, so as they might render their Marriage a Sacra
ment, like, and agreeable to, that so sacred a Thing, of
which it is the Sacrament. Luther., therefore, in this
Place, is either negligent himself, and unadvisedly reads
this Passage, or else he most impiously dissembles what
Truth he discovers therein; when he says, 'That which
we give, (which is the Sense of the whole Church) pro
ceeds from great Idleness, Negligence and inconsiderate
Reading thereof.7 Does St. Augustine therefore care
lessly read the Apostle? Has St. Hierom negligently
understood him ? and all Men except Luther, by whose
Vigilance St. Paul himself is discovered to have writ,
not a Sacrament, but a Mystery ? O this quick-sighted
Man! who is able to see that the whole Latin Church
does wrongfully name that a Sacrament, which the
Apostle, writing in Greek, calls Mystery, and not Sac
rament ! as though the Latins had erred by speaking the
Word in Latin, because St. Paul does not use a Latin
Word in the Greek Tongue. If the Interpreter had
translated it not a Sacrament, but a Mystery, and had
left the Greek Word entire ; yet had not this taken away
the Argument, whereby Marriage is, from this Place of
the Apostle, concluded to be a Sacrament ; seeing it is
taught so to be, by the Circumstance of the whole Mat
ter. For let him wrest the Word Mystery, as much as
he will ; yet can he never by it take away, or deny, the
Sacrament, though thereby it may not be proved.
Neither shall it be said, that he speaks or thinks ill,
who says, that the Eucharist is a great Mystery; for
there is no Sacrament but what is a Mystery, that is,

De Sacramento Matrimonii 377

dicere, non hoc agit Apostolus in illo loco ad Ephesios,
ut doceret ex illis verbis quam magnum esset sacra
mentum Christus conjunctus cum Ecclesia, sed ut
moneret conjunctos Matrimonio, ut se sic mutuo gere-
rent, ut ipsorum conjugium rei tarn sacrse, cujus sacra-
mentum erat, idoneum et quam simillimum sacramen-
tum redderent. Lutherus igitur hoc in loco, vel oscitat
ipse, atque indiligenter et inconsulte legit ilium locum,
aut, quod lectione comperit, impietate dissimulat, quum
hunc intellectum, quern attulimus, et quomodo intelligit
Ecclesia, respondet esse magnse oscitantise, et intelli-
gentis inconsultatseque lectionis. Ergo Augustinus
oscitanter legit Apostolum? Oscitanter legit Hierony-
mus ? Oscitanter omnes, prseter unum Lutherum ? Qui
vigilantia sua deprehendit Paulum ipsum non scripsisse
sacramentum, sed mysterium? O hominem oculatum,
qui viderit totam Ecclesiam latinam perperam vocare
sacramentum id quod Apostolus, dum grsece scriberet,
appellet mysterium, non sacramentum : quasi ideo latini
errarent, qui rem efferant latine, qui a Paulus in lingua
grseca non utatur latino vocabulo. Quod si non sacra
mentum, sed mysterium vertisset interpres, et grsecam
vocem reliquisset integram, non abstulisset tamen argu-
mentum quo ex eo loco Apostoli concluditur Matri-
monium esse sacramentum, quum id ita esse rei totius
doceat circumstantia. Nam ut maxime torqueat mys-
terii verbum, nunquam tamen efficiet ut, etiamsi non
statuat sacramentum, ideo tollat ac neget sacramentum ;
neque male aut sentire dicetur, aut loqui, qui sic
loquatur: Eucharistia magnum est mysterium. Qua-
mobrem, quum nullum sit e sacramentis, quod non idem
sit mysterium, utpote quod sub visibili signo complecti-
tur arcanam et invisibilem gratiam, interpres animad-
vertens in illis Pauli verbis ad Ephesios totius loci
seriem declarare planissime id mysterii genus Apos-

378 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

what contains, under a visible Sign, a secret and invisi
ble Grace; the Interpreter noting in the Words of St.
Paul to the Ephesians, that the whole Passage does most
evidently declare the Apostle to write of such a Mystery
as is a Sacrament. And if he had not truly translated
it, St. Augustine and St. Hierom, his Readers, were
not so careless, but they would have discovered the
Errors in the Translation: JSTor were they so much in
clined to favour Marriage, as to follow an Error, rather
than correct it, when once discovered ; especially, seeing
St. Augustine was nothing inferior to Luther, in the
Knowledge of the Greek Tongue : And St. Hierom, who,
without Doubt, was the most skilled of his Time in that
Language, did so favour Virginity, that, by some Per
sons, he was thought to be almost unjust towards Mar
riage.

Wherefore, that all Men may the more easily under
stand, not only these, whom Luther in Contempt calls
sententious, and now idle Readers ; but also the best and
most learned of the antient Fathers of the Church ; let
us here what St. Augustine says, 'Not only Fsecundity,
(says he) whose Fruit is in the Off-spring; not only in
Chastity, whose Bond is Faith/ but also the Sacrament
of Marriage, is commended to the Faithful, married
People : For which Reason, the Apostle says, 'Husbands
love your Wives, even as Christ loved his Church :'* St.
Augustine, then, calls it a Sacrament ; and that Luther
may not say he has read this Passage carelessly, he
treats of the same Text, again and again, in divers
Works. For in another Place, he says, 'It has been said
in Paradise, Man shall leave Father and Mother, and
cleave to his Wife;'f which by the Apostle is called a
great Sacrament in Christ and his Church.

Why does not St. Augustine explicate that Mystery of
•Ephes. v. 25. fGen. ii. 24.

De Sacramento Matrlmonii 379

tolum describere, quod vere sit sacramentum, ac prae-
terea videns Ecclesiam totam Matrimonium observare
pro sacramento, mysterium illic, ut debuit, vertit sacra
mentum. Qui si verbum non recte vertisset, neque tarn
oscitantes erant lectores aut Hieronymus, aut Augus
tinus, ut vertentis errorem non deprehenderent, neque
tarn proni fautores Conjugii, ut deprehensum sequeren-
tur potius, quam castigarent, prsesertim quum Augus-
tinus graecarum litterarum peritia non cederet Luthero,
et Hieronymus ejus linguae sine controversia doctis-
simus, adeo virginitati faverit, ut apud multos Matri-
monio parum aequus fuisse videretur.

Quamobrem, ut omnes facilius intelligant non eos
tantum, quos per contemptum vocat sententiarios, a Lu
thero nunc appellari lectores oscitantes, sed veteres
etiam Ecclesise Patres optimos et doctissimos, audiamus
quid ait beatissimus Augustinus : "Non tantum," inquit,
"foecunditas, cujus fructus in prole est, nee tantum
pudicitia, cujus vinculum est fides, verum etiam sacra
mentum nuptiarum commendatur fidelibus conjugatis.
Unde dicit Apostolus : Virif diligite uxores vestras, sicut
et Christus dilexit Ecclesiam." Augustinus igitur sac
ramentum vocat, quern ne dicat Lutherus oscitanter et
indiligenter legisse locum; iterum atque iterum, aliis
atque aliis operibus in eamdem sententiam eumdem
locum tractat. Ait enim alibi: "Dictum est in Para-
diso: Relinquet homo patrem et matremf et adhcerebit
uxori sues. Quod magnum sacramentum dicit Apos
tolus in Christo et Ecclesia." Cur hie non explicat
Augustinus illud Lutheri mysterium, errorem esse, quod
latini vocant sacramentum? quoniam graece Paulus ap-

380 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

Luther to be an Error, which the Latins call a Sacra
ment; seeing that in the Greek Text St. Paul calls it
Mystery, not Sacrament ? St. Augustine,, above a thou
sand Times, calls it the Sacrament of Marriage; as in
that Place where he says, That Off -spring, Faith, and
Sacrament, which are all the Goodness of Marriage, is
fulfilled in the Parents, of Christ himself. Why has
he not here admonished us, that it is not a Sacrament,
but a Mystery? For if what Luther says, be true, to
wit, That it is not a Sacrament, but concern Christ and
his Church; then is it not true which St. Augustine
says: For that which Luther takes for only a Mystery,
is not thf good Sacrament of Marriage, nor has it been
fulfilled in the Marriage of the Virgin Mary.

And in another Place, St. Augustine, treating of the
same Words of the Apostle, says, What is great in Christ
and the Church, is very little in Man and Wife; and
yet it is an inseparable Sacrament of Conjunction.

If Luther holds that it is not called a Sacrament, un
less in Christ and his Church ; the Apostle's very Words,
if diligently examined only by a Grammarian, shall con
vince him ; as when the Apostle says, This Sacrament is
great; but I say in Christ and the Church. What Sacra
ment is that, that is great in Christ and the Church?
Christ and the Church cannot be a Sacrament in Christ
and the Church : For none speaks after this Manner. It
is therefore a necessary Consequence, that this Sacra
ment, which he says is great in Christ and the Church,
is that Conjunction of Man and Wife which he has
spoken of. There is ^Nothing else but this spoken here
by the Apostle, viz. This Conjunction of Man and
Woman, is a great Sacrament in Christ and the Church,
as a sacred Sign in a most sacred Thing. Lastly, if
Luther still obstinately deny, that (by these Words of
the Apostle) Marriage should be called a Sacrament;

De Sacramento Matrimonii 381

pellat mysterium, non sacramentum. Augustinus plus
millies appellat sacramentum connubii, et sacramentum
nuptiarum : quemadmodum et illie, ubi dicit, quod omne
nuptiarum bonum impletum est in ipsis Christ! parenti-
bus, proles, fides, sacramentum. Cur hie non admonuit
nos non esse sacramentum, sed mysterium ? Praeterea,
si verum dicit Lutherus sacramentum non esse, nisi in
Christo et Ecclesia, verum non dicit Augustinus. Nam
neque illud sacramentum bonum est nuptiarum, prse-
sertim ut accepit Lutherus, qui dicit duntaxat esse mys
terium, neque in Marise nuptiis impletum est.

Et iterum super eadem Apostoli verba dicit Augus
tinus : Quod in Christo et Ecclesia est magnum, hoc in
singulis quibusque viris et uxoribus est minimum, sed
tamen conjunctions inseparabile sacramentum. Quod
si Lutherus dicat non vocari sacramentum, nisi in
Christo et Ecclesia, revincetur etiam ipsis Apostoli
verbis, si diligenter expendantur vel a grammatico.
Nam quum Apostolus dicat : "Sacramentum hoc mag
num est,, ego autem dico in Christo et Ecclesia" quod
est illud sacramentum, quod magnum est in Christo et
Ecclesia ? Christus et Ecclesia non potest esse sacra
mentum in Christo et Ecclesia : nemo enim sic loquitur.
Necesse est igitur ut id sacramentum, quod dicit esse
magnum in Christo et Ecclesia, sit ilia conjunctio viri
cum conjuge, de qua dixerat. Non aliud igitur dicit
Apostolus, quam hoc, id est ilia conjunctio viri et mulie-
ris, magnum est sacramentum in Christo et Ecclesia,
tanquam sacrum signum in re sacerrima.

Denique si pertinaciter neget Lutherus in illis Apos
toli verbis Conjugium vocari sacramentum, sed tantum
Christi copulam cum Ecclesia, saltern non negabit istud.

382 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

but merely the Conjunction of Christ with the Church :
Yet surely he will not deny Conjunction of Man and
Wife to be at least a Sign of that sacred Conjunction of
Christ and his Church, and that too by God's own Insti
tution ; not by human Invention, seeing our first Parents
were joined by God himself. But if he denies all this
that has been said; the Apostle's Words will, however,
manifest his Impudence: For it is so often, and so
plainly repeated, that he who should not see it, must un
doubtedly confess himself to be blind.

If therefore it shall evidently appear, that Grace is
conferred by Marriage, which is a Sign of so sacred a
Thing ; Luther will be compelled, whether he will or no,
to admit Marriage as a Sacrament, or else to reject all
Sacraments ; seeing that, by his own Confession, a Sac
rament consists in the Sign of a sacred Thing, and the
Promise of Grace. Let us see then, if it can be evi
dently made out, that Grace is infused after any Man
ner by Marriage ; for Luther flatly denies it.

'We read in no Place, (says he) that he who marries
a Wife shall receive any Grace from God.' Marriage
(says the Apostle) is honourable in all, and a Bed un-
defiled:* The Bed could not be undefiled, if the Mar
riage wanted Grace; neither has Marriage any Thing
else to confer, but a Bed unspotted. But because God,
whose Bounty has provided, that no necessary Thing
should be wanting, even to irrational Creatures, accord
ing to their several Natures and Capacities ; nay, even
to Things wanting Sense; has, by the like bountiful
Providence, joined Grace to Marriage, by which, he that
does not slight it, but keeps his Faith inviolate to his
Wife, shall not only not contract any Blemish by the
carnal Act, (whose filthy Concupiscence would other
wise stain him) but shall, on the Contrary, be advanced
*Hebr. xiii. 4.

De Sacramento Matrimonii 383

quin ilia conjunctio viri et mulieris signum saltern sit
sacrse illius conjunctionis, qua Christus conjungitur cum
Ecclesia, idque ex institutione Dei, quum primi
parentes, Deo ipso copulante, conjunct! sunt, non autem
humano ingenio inventum postea. Istud saltern, quod
dixi, Lutherus si neget ex Apostoli verbis patere, negabit
impudentissime : nam hoc in eo loco tarn ssepe, tarn
aperte dicitur, ut qui non id videat, caecum se fateatur
oportet. Igitur si Conjugio, quod rem tarn sacram
significat, constabit etiam conferri gratiam, tune, velit,
nolit, cogetur Lutherus aut Conjugium pro sacramento
suscipere, aut omnia prorsus sacr amenta rejicere, quum,
ipso fatente, signum rei sacrse cum promissione gratia?
faciant sacramentum.

Videamus igitur an aliquo modo liquere possit in-
fundi Conjugio gratiam ; nam id aperte negat Lutherus :
"Nusquam," inquit, "legitur aliquid gratise Dei acceptu-
rum, quisquis uxorem duxerit." "Honorabile Con
jugium," inquit Apostolus, "in omnibus, et thorns im-
maculatus;" thorus macula carere non posset, si Con
jugium careret gratia. Nee aliunde habet Conjugium,
ut thorum servet immaculatum, quam quod Deus, cujus
providit bonitas, ut nee rebus his, quse naturali feruntur
ordine, etiamsi non ratione tantum, sed etiam sensu
careant, quicquam deesset eorum, quse pro cuj usque
captu sint necessaria, simili benignitate curavit ut Con
jugio gratiam jungeret, qua quisquis earn nollet ab-
jicere, et fidem debitam servaret Conjugii, et ex com-
mixtione carnali, cujus alioqui fceda concupiscentia
macularetur, non solum non contraheret labem, sed
etiam proveheretur ad gloriam. Conjugium enim non
haberet thorum immaculatum, nisi quia gratia, quae
infunditur Conjugio, verteret illud in bonum, quod alias

384 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

to Grace. For Marriage should not have an immaculate
Bed, if the Grace, which is infused by it, did not turn
that unto Good, which should be otherwise a Sin.
Which, in another Passage of St. Paul, where he treats
of the Woman's Duty, is more plainly demonstrated;
She (saith he) shall be saved, through the Generation
of Children:* But if you take away Marriage, what else
shall Generation be, (by which, as the Apostle saith,
there is no Salvation in Marriage) but Death and eter
nal Damnation? For, Take away Marriage, (says St.
Bernard) and an undefiled Bed from the Church, and
do you not then fill it with Adulteries, Incests, Sodomy,
and all Sorts of Uncleanness? If all Generation, out
of Wedlock, is damnable, the Grace of Marriage must
needs be great, by which that Act, (which of its own
Nature defiles to Punishment) is not only purged, to
take away the Blemish ; but is so much sanctified, that,
as the Apostle testifies, it becomes meritorious. Neither
has it that Privilege of Grace, but by Virtue of the Sac
rament, consecrated for that Purpose by God himself;
that Man, at his first Creation, might, by the Use there
of, both perform his Duty of Propagation, and have also
a Remedy of Concupiscence, when restored: Yet what
should the conjugal Act itself be, but Concupiscence, if
God had not made it the Remedy thereof ? Which now
the holy Grace of the Sacrament has so made a Remedy
of Concupiscence, as that the paternal Substance may
not be negligently consumed, (as the prodigal Son had
done) forbidding not only, not to thirst after stolen
Waters of other Men's Cisterns, but also not to inebriate
ourselves with our own; but make our sober Draughts
so wholesome, that they may profit to Life everlasting.
The Apostle, in the same Place, though he exhorted as
much as possible to Continency and Virginity, (Virtues
*I. Tim. ii. 15.

De Sacramento Matrimonii 385

esset peccatum. Quod ipsum et alibi quoque, quum de
mulieris agit officio, Paulus designat apertius: ffSalva-
bitur" inquit, "per filiorum generationem" At si
tollas Conjugium, quid aliud fuerit generatio, per quam,
ut Apostolus ait, salvabitur in Conjugio, quam mors et
sterna damnatio ? "JSTam tolle, inquit beatus Bernar-
dus, de Ecclesia honorabile connubium, et thorum im-
maculatum, nonne reples earn concubinariis, incestuosis,
semininuis, mollibus masculorum concubitoribus, et
omni denique genere immundorum." Si igitur extra
Conjugium omnis generatio damnabilis est, magna
videtur gratia Matrimonii, qui eumdem actum (si natu-
ram respicis) ex quo maculareris in poenam, non solum
ita purgat, ut eluat labem, sed etiam sic sanctificat, ut
Apostolo teste, reportet prsemium. Nee istud habet
privilegium gratiaB, nisi virtute sacramenti ab ipso Deo
in id consecrati, ut homini ipsius cultori foret et in
propagationis officium, quum creatus est, et in remedi-
um concupiscentise, quum restitutus est. Quanquam ille
ipse conjugalis actus quid esset aliud, quam concupis-
centia, nisi Deus ilium faceret remedium concupis-
centise ? Quern nunc sancta sacramenti gratia sic fecit
concupiscentise remedium, ut eos, qui gratise paternas
substantiam, quam Deus infundit Conjugio, negligenter
nolit, ut filius prodigus fecit, effundere, non solum de-
fendat, ne quid aquae furtivse sitiant e cisternis alienis,
sed etiam ne se inebrient suis, et sobrios haustus efficiant
tarn salubres, ut in vitam proficiant a3ternam.

et Apostolus in illo etiam loco, ubi, quantum
potuit, hortabatur ad continentiam et virginitatem, con-
trariam conjugali generation: virtutem, tamen Matrj-

386 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

contrary to conjugal Generation) yet confesses, that
Marriage is the Gift of God ; and one of those Gifts, of
which it is said, Every good and perfect Gift is from
above, descending from the Father of Lights.* And cer
tainly the Gift of God, (which is so given, that he who
receives it, may continue in that State of Life, in which
he ought to remain, and not fall into the State of De
struction) doth it not shew that it hath in itself pre
servative Grace ?

Moreover, when the Apostle saith, If any Brother
have a Wife, an Infidel, and she consent to live with
him, let him not put her away : And if any Woman have
an Husband, an Infidel, and he consent to dwell with
her, let her not put away her Husband: For the Man,
an Infidel, is sanctified by the faithful Woman; and the
Woman, an Infidel, is sanctified by the faithful Hus
band; otherwise, your Children should be unclean; but
now they are holy.^ Do not these Words of the Apostle
shew, that, in Marriage (which is an entire Thing of
itself, after one of the Parties is converted to the Faith)
the Sanctity of the Sacrament sanctifies the whole Mar
riage, which before was altogether unclean? But why
should that Marriage be now more holy than before, (as
being a Marriage) if, for one of the Parties converted,
sacramental Grace were not added to it, which, before
Baptism, (the Door of all the Sacraments) could not
enter to the Marriage of the Unfaithful ?

But, to pass by the Apostle ; let us consider God, the
Consecrator of this Sacrament. Has he not consecrated
Marriage with his Blessing, when he joined together our
first Parents? For the Scripture saith, God blessed
them; saying, increase, and multiply :% Whose Bless
ing, having operated in all other living Creatures, ac
cording to their several Capacities ; who should doubt
*Jas. i. 17. fl. Cor. vii. 12. JGen. i. 28.

De Sacramento Matrimonii 387

monium etiam Dei donum fatetur, nimirum ex illis, de
quibus dicitur: ffOmne datum optimum,, omne donum
perfectum desursum est, descendens a Patre luminum."
Et certe donum Dei, quod ideo datur, ut qui accipit, in
eo vitse statu sit, in quo servari debeat, ne in eum decidat
statum, in quern si cadit, pereat, annon habere se docet
adjunctam prseservatricem gratiam ? Ad hsec quum ita
dicat Apostolus : "Si quis / 'rater uxorem habet infidelem,
et hcec consentit habitare cum illo, non dimittat illam.
Et si qua mulier fidelis habet virum infidelem, et hie
consentit habitare cum ilia, non dimittat virum. Sanc-
tificatus est enim vir infidelis per mulierem fidelem, et
sanctificata est mulier infidelis per virum fidelem.
Alioqui enim filii vestri immundi essent, nunc autem
sancti sunt" annon his verbis ostendit Apostolus, quod
quum integra qusedam res sit Conjugium, postquam alte-
rutra pars ad fidem conversa est, sanctitas sacramenti
totum sanctificat Conjugium, quod prius totum fuit im-
mundum ? At cur istud Conjugium plus haberet sancti,
quam prius, quatenus Conjugium est, nisi, propter
alterius accedentem fidem, accederet Conjugio sacra-
mentalis gratia quae, ante Baptismum, qui sacramen-
torum omnium janua est, ad infidelium Conjugium non
potuit ingredi ?

Sed prsetereamus Apostolum. Consideremus hujus
sacramenti consecratorem Deum. Annon ille, quum
primes parentes conjungeret, Conjugium benedictione
sacravit ? Ait enim Scriptura : "Benedixit illis Deus,
ac dixit: Crescite et mulliplicamini." Cujus benedictio,
quum in reliquis animantibus ad corporis robur pro
cuj usque captu sit operata, quis dubitet in homine ra-
tionis capace vim gratige spiritalis infudisse spiritui:

388 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

but that he has infused the Force of spiritual Grace
into the Spirit of Man, who alone is capable of Reason,
unless he did believe, that God, (being so bountiful to
the meanest of Beasts, as to give them largely, according
to their Natures, what was necessary) should be so spar
ing of his Blessings to Man, whom he created after his
own Image; that having only Regard to his Body, he
should omit the Soul, that Breath of Life, which he him
self has breathed, and by which he was most repre
sented, without imparting any Part of that great Bless
ing to it?

Further; when Christ, God and Man, conversing
amongst Men, not only honoured Marriage with his own
Presence, but also adorned it with his first Miracle ; has
he not taught, That Marriage is to be honoured? And
without Grace, I do not find any Thing in it deserving
Honour. Nor do I think he would have been present
at it, if Marriage had not already some Grace, which
might render it acceptable to Christ; or else he con
ferred Grace to it himself: But I see, the Miracle that
he wrought,* admonishes us that the insipid Water of
carnal Concupiscence, by the secret Grace of God, is
changed to Wine of the best Taste. But why search we
so many Proofs in so clear a Thing? especially, when
that only Text is sufficient for all, where Christ says,
Whom God has joined together., let no Man put asun
der, f 0 the admirable Word! which none could have
spoken, but the Word that was made Flesh ! who thinks
it not to have been abundantly sufficient, that God has
joined the first of Mankind ; and that the Bounty of so
great a God is to be admired by all Men ? But now we
are taught from Truth itself, that those who are law
fully married, are not rashly joined together ; not by the
Ceremonies of Men only, but by the invisible Presence
*John ii. tMatt, xix. 6.

De Sacramento Matrimonii 389

nisi quis Deum credat, quum infimis quibusque bestiolis
fuisset tarn benignus, ut pro sua cuique natura largitus
sit affluenter, homini, quern ad ipsius condidisset imagi-
nem, tarn parce manum in benedictione restringeret, ut,
corporis duntaxat habita ratione, animain, illud vitse
spiraculum, quod ipse inspiraverat, et qua maxime
reprsesentabatur, tanta benedictione prseteriret intac-
tam.

Iterum, quum Christus homo et idem Deus versatus
inter homines, nuptias non solum sua honoravit prae-
sentia, sed etiam nobilitavit miraculo, annon docuit
honorandum esse Connubium? Quod ego certe non
video quid honore dignum habere possit absque gratia.
N"eque ilium puto ad nuptias fuisse venturum, nisi vel
jam turn haberet aliquid gratiae Conjugium, quod ipsum
Christo faceret gratum, vel ut Conjugio gratiam ipse
conferret. Quin et miraculum, quod operabatur, nos ad-
monere video insipidam concupiscentise carnalis aquam,
per occultam Dei gratiam, in optimi saporis vinum esse
conversam.

Sed quid opus est in re tarn clara tot probamenta con-
quirere ? Prsesertim quum vel unus ille locus abunde
sufficiat, quo Christus ait: f'Quos Deus conjunxit, homo '
non separet" O verbum admirabile, et quod nemo
potuisset effari, prseter Yerbum quod caro factum est!
Quis non putasset abunde satis esse, quod primos
homines, initium generis, conjunxisset Deus ? Atque id
ipsum fuerat, in tanta Deitatis ma j estate, nulli non
admiranda benignitas. At nunc, Veritate referente
didicimus quicunque legitimo Conjugio copulantur, eos
non temere neque mortalium duntaxat cserimoniis, sed
ipso Deo invisibiliter assistente, et insensibiliter co-

390 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

and insensible Co-operation of God himself : And there
fore is it forbidden, that any should separate those whom
God has joined together. O Word as full of Joy and
Fears as it is of Admiration ! Who should not rejoice,
that God has so much Care over his Marriage, as to
vouchsafe, not only to be present at it, but also to pre
side in it ? Who should not tremble, whilst he is in
Doubt how to use his Wife, whom he is not only bound
to love, but also to live with, in such a Manner, as that
he may be able to render her pure and immaculate to
God, from whom he has received her ?

Wherefore, seeing that God himself, as he says, joins
all married People together; who believes not that he
infuses Grace by Marriage ? Does he join always, and
give his Blessing but once? Why reassumes he the
Office of joining, if we believe him not also to reassume
that of Blessing? Or can we imagine, that the most
holy Spirit, which is to be adored in Spirit and in
Truth, should always exercise the Office of joining mar
ried People, for Care of carnal Copulation only? In
deed, as for that Matter, it should be sufficient that God
leaves Man, like other Animals, to his own natural and
corrupt Inclinations. There must be understood Some
thing sure more holy than the Care of propagating the
Flesh, which God performs in Marriage ; and that, with
out all Doubt, is Grace; which is by the Prelate of all
Sacraments infused into married People in consecrating
Marriage.

Seeing therefore, we have, by so many Reasons,
proved Grace to be conferred in Marriage; and that
Marriage, which (as appears by the Words of the Apos
tle) is a Sign of a sacred Thing, (which Sign, is joined
with Grace, as is already said) cannot be a bare Figure
only; it follows then, that, in Despite of Luther, Mar-

De Sacramento Matrimonii 391

operante conjungi. Atque ideo vetitum ne, quos Deus
junxit, ullo separentur ab homine. O verbum non ad-
miratione magis, quam gaudio pariter et timore ple
num ! Quis non laetetur Deo tantse curaa esse suum Con
jugium, ut non solum interesse, sed etiam prseesse
dignetur ? Quis non inhorrescat, dum dubitet quomodo
debeat tractare conjugem, quam non solum tene-
atur amare, sed etiam sic convivere, ut puram et sine
macula possit Deo, quo tradente recepit, repoacenti
reddere ?

Igitur quum Deus, ut dicit ipse, conjungat omnes,
quis ab illo credet Conjugio non infundi gratiam ? An
qui semper copulat, semel duntaxat benedixit? Cur
jungendi resumit officium, nisi credatur et benedicendi
repetere ? An sanctissimum ilium Spiritum, quern in
spiritu et veritate oportet adorare, putandum est assidue
subire ministerium copulandorum conjugum, copulse
tantum cura carnalis ? Certe, quod ad earn rem attinet,
sufficeret Deo si genus humanum, quemadmodum csetera
animalia, naturae ab ipso inditse, et hominis vitio cor-
ruptse relinqueret. Sanctius igitur aliquid subesse opor
tet, ultra carnis propaganda curam, quod augustum
illud Dei numen in Conjugio peragat, id est baud dubie,
quod Antistes sacramentorum omnium conjugibus in-
fundit in Conjugio consecrando gratiam.

Ergo, quum tot modis probavimus conferri in Con
jugio gratiam, Conjugium vero sacrse rei signum esse
patet et ex Apostolo, quod signum, quum gratiam, sicut
ostendimus, adjunctam habeat, figura duntaxat esse non
possit, consequens est ut, invito Luthero, Conjugium
sacramentum sit, etiamsi sacramenti nomine, quod

392 Of the Sacrament of Marriage

riage is a Sacrament; though it had not, (as it is) been
so called by the Apostle.

But has any one, either Antient or Modern, doubted
to call Marriage a Sacrament, without being hissed at
by the Church ? In which alone, as Hugo de Sancto Vic-
tore mentions, is found a two-fold Sign : Tor Marriage
itself is the Sacrament of the Society, which is in the
Spirit between God and Man ; but the Duty of Marriage
is the Sacrament of that Society, which in the Flesh is
between Christ and the Church. For if that (says he)
which is in the Flesh, is great, much more that which is
in the Spirit : And if God is rightly called in Scripture,
a Bridegroom, and the Soul of Man the Bride, there is
certainly Something betwixt God and the Soul; of
which, what consists in Marriage betwixt Man and
Woman, is the Sacrament, and Image. But perhaps,
(to speak more expressly) that Society, which is ex
teriorly observed, according to the Contract in Mar
riage, is the Sacrament; and the mutual Love of the
Souls, which is kept by an interchangeable Bond of con
jugal Society and Alliance, is the Matter of the Sacra
ment.' And again ; 'this same Love, by which Male and
Female are spiritually united in the Sanctity of Wed
lock, is the Sacrament and Sign of that Love, by which
God is interiorly joined to the rational Soul, by Infusion
of his Grace, and Participation of his Spirit.' Thus far
the Words of Hugo.

Wherefore, seeing that not only the public Faith of
the Church, for so many Ages before us, and the antient
Fathers, remarkable for their virtuous Lives and
Knowledge in Scripture; but also the blessed Apostle,
St. Paul., Doctor of the Gentiles, have esteemed Mar
riage as a Sacrament, (which makes Wedlock honour
able, and does by Grace, not only conserve the Bed un
spotted from Adultery ; but also washes away the Stains

De Sacramento Matrimonii 393

tamen facit, non appellaret Apostolus. Sed quis un-
quam aut veterum, ant novorum, nisi quos explosit Ec-
clesia, Matrimonium dubitavit appellare sacramentum ?
"In quo uno," quod Hugo de Sancto-Victore com-
memorat, "duplex invenere signum : nam et Conjugium
ipsum sacramentum est illius societatis quse in Spiritu
est inter Deum et animam, officium vero Conjugii sacra
mentum est illius societatis, quse in carne est inter
Christum et Ecclesiam. Nam si magnum est/' inquit,
"quod in carne est, multo magis utique est, quod in
spiritu est. Et si recte per Scripturam sanctam Deus
Sponsus dicitur, et anima rationalis Sponsa vocatur,
aliquid profecto inter Deum et animam est, cujus id
quod in Conjugio inter masculum et foeminam const at,
sacramentum et imago est. Sed forte, ut expressius
dicam, ipsa societas, quse exterius in Conjugio pacto
foederis servatur, sacramentum est, et ipsius sacramenti
res est dilectio mutua animorum, quse ad invicem socie
tatis et fcederis conjugalis vinculo custoditur. Et hsec
rursus ipsa dilectio, qua masculus et foemina in sancti-
tate Conjugii animis uniuntur, sacramentum est, et
signum illius dilectionis, qua Deus animse rationali intus
per infusionem gratise suse, et Spiritus sui participa-
tionem, conjungitur." Hactenus Hugo. Quamobrem,
quum non solum publica fides Ecclesiae tot ante nos
sa3culis, ac vetusti Patres Scripturarum scientia et vitse
meritis insignes, sed ipse etiam beatus Apostolus et
Doctor Gentium Paulus Matrimonium habuerint pro
sacramento, quod honorabile faciat connubium, et
thorum per gratiam non solum servet immaculatum ab
adulterio, sed et abluat immunditiam libidinis, et aquam
convertat in vinum, sanctamque procuret voluntatem a
licitis nonnunquam abstinendi complexibus, non video
quid contra Lutherus possit afferre nisi quod "hseretici,"
ut beatus ait Bernardus, "pro libitu quisque suo sacra-

394 Of the Sacrament of Orders

of Lust, turns Water into Wine, and procures a holy
Pleasure of abstaining, even from lawful Pleasures.)
I do not perceive what Luther can say to the Contrary ;
unless it is because Hereticks (as St. Bernard saith) do
still, according to their own Fancies, strive who shall
exceed others, in endeavouring, with their viperous
Teeth, to tear in Pieces the Sacrament of the Church,
as the Bowels of their Mother.

CHAP. XII

©f tbe Sacrament of ©rbers

IN the Sacrament of Orders, Luther keeps no Manner
of Order; but gathering together from here and there
all the Treasuries of his Malice, he pours them out
against it.

He shews how well his Miind is composed for Evil,
if his Power were answerable thereto: He proposes
many Things, and asserts and affirms the worst: But,
satisfying himself by only saying, thus, and thus, he
confirms Nothing at all, by any Manner of Reason. In
which Proceeding his great Impudence appears, who,
not vouchsafing to believe the whole Church, (without
having Reasons for its Faith) does unreasonably require
that he himself should be credited, without shewing any
Reason at all ; and that in Matters of such Nature, as
he cannot tell what is to be believed, unless the Church
teach him: And yet he desires to be believed, and that
in such Sort, as to do it, is to confound and trample
under Foot the whole Church : For what else aims he at,
by endeavouring to take away the Holy Sacrament of

De Sacramento Ordinis 395

menta Ecclesise, tanquam matris viscera, dente vipereo
certatim inter se dilacerare contendunt."

CAP. XII

Be Sacramento ©r&tnis

IN sacramento Ordinis nullo procedit ordine ; sed
hinc atque inde colligens omnes malitiae suse thesauros
effundit, animum ostendit egregie versum ad nocendum,
si respondeant vires, proponit multa, asserit atque af-
firmat pessima, sed omnia sat habens dicere, nihil
prorsus ulla ratione confirmat. Qua ex re videre licet
insignem hominis impudentiam, qui quum toti credere
non dignetur Ecclesise, nisi rationem reddenti suse fidei,
sibi ut credatur uni sine ratione postulet, idque de rebus
ejusmodi, de quibus quid credat cognoscere, nisi Ec-
clesia docente, non potest. Et tamen sic postulat sibi
credi, quomodo, si quis credat, non aliud agat, quam ut
totam confundat atque pessumdet Ecclesiam. Nam quid
aliud molitur, qui conatur tollere sacrosanctum sacra-
mentum Ordinis, quam ut, postquam mysteriorum minis-
tri viluerint, incipiant utpote etiam, quse per viles minis-
trentur, vilescere sacramenta ? quem unum scopum toto
petit opusculo. De Ordine igitur, quia nullo procedit
ordine, colligemus hinc inde Lutheri dogmata, ut acer-

396 Of the Sacrament of Orders

V_>^v

Orders, than, by rendering the Ministers of the Church
contemptible, he may procure, that the Sacraments of
the Church may be also despised, and undervalued, as
being ministered by the Hands of vile and unworthy
Ministers : Which is the only Drift of his whole Work.
And because Luther proceeds with no Order, in treat
ing of Order; we will gather his Opinions here and
there, that the Reader may have under one View that
Heap of Evils; which being looked over, we need not
take any great Pains, I suppose, to convince him, whose
wicked Doctrine all Men may see tends directly to the
Destruction of the Faith of Christ, by Infidelity. For
what designs he else, who disputes that there is no Dif
ference of Priesthood between the Laity, and Priest?
that all Men are Priests alike: That all Men have the
same Power, in what Sacrament soever : That the Min
istry of the Sacraments is not given to the Priests, but
by Consent of the Laity : That the Sacrament of Orders
is Nothing else but the Custom of electing a Preacher in
the Church: That he is not a Priest, who is not a
Preacher, unless it be equivocally, as a painted Man,
may be called a Man: That a Priest may be made a
Layman again, when he pleases; because his priestly
Character is Nothing: Moreover, that Order itself,
which as a Sacrament, ordains some to be Clergymen,
is merely and altogether a Fiction invented by Men,
who understand Nothing of ecclesiastical Matters, of
Priesthood, of the Ministry, of the Word, or of a Sacra
ment? Finally, this holy Priest, (whereby you may
conjecture how chaste he himself is) makes it the great
est Error, and greatest Blindness imaginable, that
Priests should undertake to lead a single Life. And
when Christ praises those who have made themselves
Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven ; this most filthy
Antichrist compares them to the old idolatrous gelded

De Sacramento Ordinis 397

vum ilium malorum lector semel habeat sub oculis, quo
conspecto non erit, opinor, multum insumendum operse
ut ilium coarguamus, cujus impiam doctrinam videbunt
omnes eo recta contendere, ut omnem Christi fidem
possit infidelitate pervertere.

Quid enim destinat aliud, qui decernit inter laicos
et sacerdotes nullum esse discrimen sacerdotii, omnes
ex sequo presbyteros esse, omnes eamdem habere potes-
tatem in quocumque sacramento ? Sacerdotibus sacra-
mentorum ministerium non nisi laicorum consensu
committi ? Sacramentum Ordinis nihil aliud esse posse,
quam ritum quemdam eligendi concionatoris in Ec-
clesia ? Quicumque non praedicat, eum non esse sacer-
dotem, nisi sequivoce, quemadmodum homo pictus est
homo, qui sacerdos est, rursus fieri posse laicum:
characterem enim nihil esse. Ordinem denique ipsum
(qui velut sacramentum homines in clericos ordinat, qui
prsedicare nesciunt) esse vere mere omninoque figmen-
tum ex hominibus natum nihil de re ecclesiastica, de
sacerdotio, de ministerio verbi, de sacramento intelli-
gentibus. Postremo sanctus iste sacerdos, ut quam
castus ipse sit, conjecturam prsebeat, tanquam errorem
summum, et summam crecitatem ponit, et Captivitatem
maximam, quod sibi sacerdotes indixerint coelibem casti-
tatem. Et quum Christus eos laudet eximie, qui se
castraverunt ob regnum ccelorum, Antichristus iste
spurcissimus eosdem comparat eviratis olim Cybelis dese
sacerdotibus idolatris. Jamdudum scio, aures pii lec-
toris exhorrerit impium hunc dogmatum perniciosorum

398 Of the Sacrament of Orders

Priests of the Heathen Sybils. I know that this Cata
logue of pernicious Opinions has long since wearied the
Ears of the pious Reader ; every one of which Opinions
is more stuffed with Heresies, than the Trojan's Horse
is reported to have been with armed Men.

But his denying Orders to be a Sacrament, is as it
were the Fountain to all the rest; which, being once
stopped up, the other small Springs must of Necessity
become dry of themselves. 'This Sacrament (says he)
is not known to the Church of Christ, but has been in
vented by the Church of the Pope/ In these few
Words, are contained a great Heap of Absurdities and
Lyes: For he makes Distinction between Christ's
Church, and the Pope's] whereas the Pope is Christ's
Vicar, in that, over which Christ is the Head. He says
the Church has invented; when it has received it as
already instituted, and therefore has not invented it.
'This Sacrament (he says) is unknown to the Church
of Christ:' Whereas it is most certain, that all Parts of
the World, which have the true Faith of Christ, have
Orders for a Sacrament: For if he could find some ob
scure Corner, (which I doubt he cannot) in which this
Sacrament of Orders should not be known ; yet ought not
that Corner to be compared to the rest of the whole
Church; which not only is subject to Christ, but also,
for Christ's Sake, to Christ's only Vicar the Pope of
Rome, and believes Orders to be a Sacrament.

Otherwise, if Luther persists in his Distinction of the
Pope's Church, from Christ's-, and in saying that the
one has Orders for a Sacrament, the other not ; let him
shew us the Church of Christ, which, contrary to the
Faith of the Papal Church, (as he calls it) knows not
the Sacrament of Order. In the mean while, it appears
evidently, that, by asserting this Sacrament to be un
known to the Church of Christ, and that they are not

De Sacramento Ordinis 399

catalogum, quorum fere quodvis magis foetum est hsere-
sibus, quam fuisse fertur equus ille Trojanus armatis.
Sed omnium veluti quidam fons est, quod Ordinem
negat esse sacramentum, quo obstructo cseteros necesse
est rivulos exarescere.

"Hoc sacramentum," inquit, "Ecclesia Christ! igno-
rat, inventumque est ab Ecclesia Papae." Hsec pauca
verba non parvum habent et falsitatis et absurditatis
acervum : nam et Ecclesiam Papa3 discernit ab Ecclesia
Christi, quum Papa sit ejusdem Ecclesise Pontifex,
cujus et Christus. Ait Ecclesiam invenisse quod non
invenit, sed accepit institutum. Ait Ecclesiam Christi
hoc ignorare sacramentum, quum satis constet nullam
fere mundi plagam esse, quse rite prontetur fidem
Christi, quin Ordinem habeat pro sacramento. Nam si
posset obscurum aliquem angulum reperire (quod,
opinor, non potest) in quo nesciatur sacramentum
Ordinis, tamen angulus ille non esset cum reliqua com-
parandus Ecclesia, quse non Christo solum subest, sed et
propter Christum unico Christi vicario Papse Romano,
et Ordinem credit esse sacramentum. Alioqui si perstet
in eo Lutherus, ut Ecclesiam Papse discernat ab Ec
clesia Christi, et apud alteram dicat Ordinem haberi
pro sacramento, non haberi apud alteram, proferat illam
Ecclesiam Christi, quse contra fidem papalis, ut vocat,
Ecclesise, ignorat sacramentum Ordinis. Interim certe
perspicuum est, quum dicat hoc sacramentum ignorari
ab Ecclesia Christi, et de Christi Ecclesia dicat eos,
quibus prassidet Papa, non esse, utraque ratione ab
Ecclesia Christi eum segregare non Romam tantum, sed
Italiam totam, Germaniam, Hispanias, Gallias, Britan-
nias, reliquasque gentes omnes qusecumque Romano

400 Of the Sacrament of Orders

of Christ's Church who are governed by the Pope; he
separates, by both these Reasons, from Christ's Church,
not only Rome, but also all Italy, Germany, Spain,
France, Britain, and all other Nations, which obey the
See of Rome; or have Orders for a Sacrament. Which
People, being by him taken from the Church of Christ;
it consequently follows, that he must either confess
Christ's Church to be in no Place at all, or else, like
the Donatists, he must reduce the Catholic Church to
two or three Heretics whispering in a Corner.

But he draws out of his Shaft, as an inevitable Dart,
'That Grace is in no Place promised to this Sacrament;
and that the New Testament makes not the least Men
tion of it:' He says, 'That it is a ridiculous Thing to
assert that for the Sacrament of God, which cannot any
where be demonstrated to have been instituted by God.'
'Nor is it lawful (says he) to assert any Thing to be of
Divine Institution, which is not of Divine Ordinance;
but we ought (says he) to endeavour to have all Things
confirmed to us from clear Scripture.'

We will see, by and by, whether no Mention is made
at all of this Sacrament in the New Testament : For by
the same Dart he expects to wound all the rest of the
Sacraments ; against which Dart, I will take the same
Buckler or Shield which Luther himself confesses to be
impenetrable.

His own Words are these : 'Truly the Church has this
Faculty, That it can discern the Word of God, from
the Word of Men ;' even as St. Augustine confesses,
'That he has believed the Gospel by the Motion of the
Church's Authority; which told him that it was the
Gospel.' Wherefore, seeing that the Church, as Luther
confesses, can discern the Word of God, from the Word
of Men; it is certain it has not that Power, but from
God ; nor for any other Cause, than that it may not err

De Sacramento Ordinis 401

Pontifici parent, aut Ordinem pro sacramento recipiunt.
Quos populos onrnes quum de Christ! tollat Ecclesia,
necesse est ut aut Ecclesiam Christ! fateatur esse nus-
quam, aut, more Donatistarum, Ecclesiam Christi ca-
tholicam ad duos aut tres hsereticos redigat de Christo
susurrantes in angulo.

Sed velut inevitabile telum promit, quod hoc sacra-
mentum nullam habeat promissionem gratise ullibi, ut
inquit, positam: cujus sacramenti vel verbo meminisse
negat totum Novum Testamentum, et ridiculum ait
asserere pro sacramento Dei quod a Deo institutum nus-
quam potest monstrari ; "nee licet," inquit, "adstruere
aliquod divinitus ordinatum, quod divinitus ordinatum
non est, sed conandum est ut omnia nobis claris," inquit,
"Scripturis sint firmata." Utrum in Novo Testamento
nulla prorsus fiat hujus sacramenti mentio, post ex-
cutiemus. Interim sic agam cum illo, tanquam nulla
prorsus mentio fieret: nam eodem telo se sperat omnia
ferme sacramenta perfodere; adversus quod telum ego
in scutum mihi idipsum ferrum conjiciam, quod
Lutherus ipse fatetur impenetrabile. Sic enim se
habent ipsius verba: aHoc sane habet Ecclesia, quod
potest discernere verbum Dei a verbis hominum, sicut
Augustinus confitetur se evangelio credidisse, motum
auctoritate Ecclesise, quse hoc esse evangelium prsedica-
bat." Igitur quum istud habeat, ut Lutherus fatetur,
Ecclesia, quod verbum Dei discernere potest a verbis
hominurn, certum est istud non aliunde haberi, quam a
Deo, nee ob aliam causam, quam ne in his erraret Ec
clesia, in quibus non erratum esse oporteat. Sequitur
igitur ex hoc fundamento, quod nobis substravit Luthe-

402 Of the Sacrament of Orders

in those Things, in which there ought to be no Error.
It follows then, out of this Foundation he has laid for
us, that the Church has from God, not only the Power
of discerning God's Word from that of Mens, (which
he allows) but also the Faculty of discerning betwixt
divine and human Sense of Scripture. Otherwise, what
should it avail the Church to know, by God's Teaching,
the true Scripture from that which is false, if it could
not distinguish between the false and true Sense of true
Scripture ? Finally, it follows, by the same Reason,
that God instructs his Church, even in Things which are
not written ; lest it might, through Errors, embrace false
Things for true ones: For that is no less dangerous
than that it might admit the Writings of Men, for the
Words of God, or draw a false Sense out of the Word of
God; especially if it should take false Sacraments for
true ones, and human Traditions for divine; nay, not
only the Traditions of Men, but the Inventions of the
Devil; if the Church of Christ, should, as Inchanters
do, place its Hope in feigned and vain Signs of corporal
Things. It appears, therefore, by Luther's confessing
the Church to have a Faculty of discerning the Words
of God from the Words of Men, that it has no less
Power to discern betwixt divine Institutions, and the
Traditions of Men. For, otherwise, the Error which
we are to avoid, might as well arise from the one Side,
as from the other. And Christ's Care, is not, that his
Church may not err, after this or that Manner ; but that
it may not err in any Manner whatsoever. But it could
by no Error commit a greater Injury to Christ, than in
putting its Trust, which it ought to have in him alone,
in Signs not supported by any Grace, but empty and
void of all the Advantages of Faith. Therefore, the
Church cannot err about the Sacraments of Faith; no
more, I say, than in admitting Scripture, (in which

De Sacramento Ordinis 403

ms, ut Ecclesia habeat a Deo non id solum quod con-
cedit Lutherus, discretionem verborum Dei a verbis
hominum, sed etiam discernendi facultatem, qua in
Scripturis divinis divinum sensum ab humano dis-
criminet. Alioqui enim quid profuerit si Ecclesia, Deo
docente, Scripturam veram discernat a falsa, et in
Scriptura vera f alsum sensum non discernat a vero ?
Denique eadem ratione et istud sequitur, ut et in his
quse non scribuntur, Ecclesiam suam doceat Deus, ne
per errorem possit falsa pro veris amplecti, quum ex ea
re non minus impendeat periculi, quam si vel Scripturas
hominum teneat pro verbis Dei, vel e veris Dei verbis
f alsum eliciat sensum: prsesertim si falsa suscipiat
sacramenta pro veris, et traditiones hominum pro tradi-
tionibus Dei, imo non traditiones hominum, sed fig-
menta diaboli, si suam spem in fictis ac vanis corpora-
Hum rerum signis, quemadmodum magi faciunt, Ec
clesia Christi velut in Christi sacramentis collocet.

Liquet ergo manifeste ex eo quod fatetur Lutherus
Ecclesiam hoc habere, ut verba Dei discernat a verbis
hominum, hoc quoque non minus habere, ut traditiones
Dei discernat a traditionibus hominum, quum alioqui
utrobique possit ex sequo vitandus error exoriri, nee id
agat Christus, ne Ecclesia sua hoc aut illo erret modo,
sed ne erret ullo. Errare vero majore cum injuria
Christi non possit, quam si fiduciam in illo ponendam
solo ponat in signis nulla prorsus fultis gratia, sed omni
bono fidei vacuis atque inanibus. ISTon igitur errare
potest Ecclesia in suscipiendis sacramentis fidei, non
magis, inquam, quam errare potest in suscipiendis (qua
in re Ecclesiam errare non posse fatetur Lutherus ipse)
Scripturis. Quse res si se haberet aliter, multa seque-
rentur absurda, sed hoc imprimis, quo nihil esse potest

404 Of the Sacrament of Orders

LutJier confesses her infallible) which, if it were other
wise, many Absurdities should follow; and especially
this, that almost all Opinions of the Church, in Matters
of Faith, established these many past Ages, may be dis
puted after the Fancy of every new-fangled Heretic;
which were the most ridiculous Thing imaginable. For,
if Nothing must be certainly believed, but what is con
firmed by Scripture; and that (as he says) by clear
Testimonies of Scripture too ; we must not only, not
assert the perpetual Virginity of the blessed Virgin
Mary, but also an inexhausted Materia will be fur
nished for battering the Church, at the Pleasure of every
one wrho is minded to stir up new Sects, or renew the
old one : For, there have been at any Time few or no
Heretics, who would not pretend to Scripture, every one
disputing their new-broached Opinions to be confirmed
by Scripture; or, (however agreeable to Scripture, be
cause the contrary was not therein defined) disputing,
that what was alledged against their Sects, was other
wise to be understood, than as the orthodox Church un
derstood it : And lest it might be clearly brought against
them, they either forged another Sense, or preferred
some other Passages of Scripture, which seemed con
trary to the former ; troubling all Things in such Man
ner, as to make them seem ambiguous. If the public
Faith of the Church had not withstood Arrius, the
Heretic, I know not if he should ever have wanted a
Subject of Dispute out of Scripture.

Now, seeing we have proved, by Luther's own Funda
mentals, that the Sacraments believed by the Church
could not be instituted but by God himself, though Noth
ing were read thereof in Scripture : Let us see whether
Scripture makes not some Mention of this Sacrament.
x\ll Men do unanimously confess, (Luther only ex-
cepted) that the Apostles were by our Saviour ordained

De Sacramento Ordinis 405

absurdius, quod pleraque omnia fidei Christianas dog
mata, tot stabilita sseculis, ad succrescentium hsereti-
corum libidinem denuo revocarentur in dubium. Nam
si nihil haberi pro certo debet, nisi quod Scripturis et
iisdem, ut Lutherus ait, claris firmatum est, non solum
non asseremus divse Marise virginitatem perpetuam, sed
et inexhausta suggeretur fidei oppugnandse materia, si
cui unquam libeat aut novas excitare sectas, aut ressus-
citare sepultas. Nam paucissimi fuerunt hseretici, qui
non receperint Scripturas; sed omnes fere ex eo sua
statuebant dogmata, quod aut ea contenderent esse fir-
mata Scripturis, aut, quum illis viderentur rationi con-
sentanea, contrarium non definiri Scripturis: quoniam
ea, quse proponebantur adversus suam sectam, aliter con-
tendebant intelligi, quam orthodoxa intelligebat Ec-
clesia, et, ne clara dici possent, aut alio excogitato sensu,
aut prolatis aliunde ex eadem Scriptura locis, in
speciem valde contrariis, omnia sic turbarunt, ut
viderentur ambigua. Itaque adversus Arium, nisi pub-
lica stetisset fides Ecclesise, baud scio an defuisset un-
quani de Scripturis disputandi materia.

Nunc, quoniam ex ipsius Lutheri fundamento pro-
bavimus sacramenta, quse credit Ecclesia, non aliunde
quam a Deo potuisse constitui, etiamsi nihil inde prorsus
in Scriptura legeretur, videamus an Scriptura tarn nul-
lam omnino mentionem faciat hujus sacramenti.
Omnes una voce fatentur Apostolos in Ccena Domini
ordinatos in sacerdotes. Solus istud Lutherus negat,

406 Of the Sacrament of Orders

Priests, at his last Supper; where it plainly appears,
that Power was given them to consecrate the Body of
Christ, which Power the Priest alone hath. 'But, says
Luther, it is not a Sacrament, because there is no Grace
promised therein.' But pray, how, or whence has he
this Knowledge ? 'Because (says he) it is not read in
Scripture !' This is his usual Consequence : 'It is not
written in the Gospels, therefore has it not been done
by Christ:' Which Form of reasoning the Evangelist
overthrows, when he says, Many Things were done,
which are not written in this Book.* But let us touch
Luther yet a little closer. He confesses that the Euchar
ist is a Sacrament ; and he were mad, if he did not ; but
where, pray, does he find in Scripture, that Grace is
promised in that Sacrament ? For he admits Nothing
but Scripture, and that clear Scripture too. Let him
read the Passages that treat of our Lord's Supper, and
see if he can find in any of the Evangelists, that Grace
is promised in the receiving of the Blessed Sacrament.
We read that Christ said, This is my Blood, which shall
be shed for many, to the Remission of Sins;-\ whereby
he signified, that he should redeem Mankind by his
Passion upon the Cross. But when he said, This do in
Remembrance of me:\ He promises no Grace, or Re
mission of Sins, to him that does this; that is, to the
consecrated Priests, or to him that receives the
Eucharist. NOT doth the Apostle, in his Epistle to the
Corinthians, when he threatens Judgment to them that
unworthily receive, make Mention of any Grace to him
that receives it worthily. If any Thing in the 6th of
St. John promise Grace to him that receives the Sacra
ment of our Lord's Body and Blood; yet can that make
Nothing for Luther, because he denies the whole Chap
ter to have any Reference at all to the Eucharist : You
*Jolm xxii. 25. fMatt. xxvi. 28. JI. Cor. xi. 24.

De Sacramento Ordinis 407

quum plane constet illic datam potestatem conficiendi
corporis Christi, quod solus conficere sacerdos potest.
"At non est," inquit ille, "sacramentum, quia non fuit
illis ulla promissa gratia." Unde id novit Lutherus?
"Quia non legitur," inquit. Familiaris est ista Luthero
consequent! a : Non est in Evangelio scriptum ; ergo non
est a Christo f actum : quam colligendi f ormam infirmat
Evangelista, quum dicit: "Multa sunt facta, quce non
sunt scripta in libro hoc/' Sed tangemus tamen Luthe-
rum aliquando propius. Eucharistiam concedit esse
sacramentum : quod nisi fateretur, insaniret. At ubi
reperit in Scriptura promissam in illo sacramento gra-
tiam ? Nam ille nihil recipit, nisi Scripturas, et easdem
claras. Legatur locus de Coena dominica: non reperiet
apud ullum evangelistarum in susceptione sacramenti
promissam gratiam. Legitur a Christo dictum: "Hie
est sanguis meus novi testamenti, qui pro multis effun-
detur in remissionem peccatorum :" quibus verbis
significavit semet in cruce per Passionem redempturum
genus humanum. Sed quum dixit ante : "Hoc facite in
meam commemorationem" nullam hoc facienti, id est
sacerdoti consecranti, aut Eucharistiam recipienti gra
tiam ibi promittit, nullam peccatorum remissionem. At
nee Apostolus in epistola ad Corinthios, quum inter-
minetur male manducantibus judicium, ullam mentio-
nem f acit de gratia bene manducantium. Quod si quid,
ex capite sexto Joannis, gratiam promittat suscipienti
sacramentum carnis et sanguinis Domini, ne id quidem
quicquam juvare Lutherum potest, quippe qui totum
illud caput negat ad Eucharistiam quicquam perti-
nere.

Videtis ergo ut istam promissionem gratise, quam pro
totius sacramenti fundamento magnifice nobis in toto

408 Of the Sacrament of Orders

see here, very plainly, that he cannot maintain that
Promise of Grace, which he so fairly promised us, in his
whole Work, as the sole Basis of the Sacrament, and in
that only Sacrament which he admits; unless, besides
the Words of Scripture, he has recourse (as it is neces
sary for him) to the Faith of the Church.

Wherefore; as it is sufficient for us to read in the
Gospel, that the Power of consecrating the Sacrament,
was given them to whom the Priests succeed; so is it
likewise enough, that we read the Council of the Apostle
to Timothy, 'That he impose not Hands rashly upon
any one.? Which Passage plainly demonstrates, that the
Ordination of Priests is not performed by the Consent
of the Laity, (by which alone Luther affirms, that a
Priest may be ordained,) but by the Ordination of a
Bishop only: and that by a certain Imposition of
Hands ; in which God, through the exterior Sign, should
infuse an interior Grace. Concerning which Grace,
why should we not believe the Church of the Living
God ? which is, as the Apostle saith, The Ground and
Pillar of Truth;* for Luther himself must certainly be
lieve her concerning the Grace promised in the Euchar
ist; as the Promise of that Grace, or the giving of it
without any Promise, is known in this Faith of the
Church.

Indeed I admire that any one should be so distracted
as to doubt, whether Grace is given by the Sacrament
of Orders to the Priest of the Gospel ; whereas we may
read many Places, that seem to signify that Grace was
conferred on the Priests of the old Law; and that God
saith, You shall anoint and sanctify Aaron and his Sons,
that they may exercise to me the Office of Priesthood. •[
Otherwise, what should this exterior Sanctification have
signified for the Honour of God, if God had not likewise
*I. Tim. iii. 15. fExod. xxviii. 1.

De Sacramento Ordinis 409

promisit opere, non potest in eo tueri sacramento, quod
fere solum relinquit, nisi, quod necesse habet, praeter
Scripturse verba recurrat ad Ecclesise fidem. Igitur
quemadmodum satis est nobis quod in Evangelio legi-
mus conficiendi sacramenti potestatem commissam his
in quorum locum succedunt sacerdotes, ita satis est quod
ab Apostolo legimus consilium datum Timotheo, ut
nemini cito manum imponeret: quse loca plane signifi
cant ordinationem sacerdotum, non consensu communi-
tatis, quo solo interveniente fieri sacerdotum posse
Lutherus ait, sed sola ordinatione episcopi, idque certa
impositione manuum, in qua per exterius signum Deus
inf underet interiorem gratiam : de qua gratia quid obstat
quominus credamus Ecclesise Dei vivi, quse "est" ut
ait Apostolus, "columna et firmamentum veritatis"
quando eidem Ecclesise necesse est ipse credat Lutherus
de gratia promissa in sacramento Eucharistise. Nam in
hac fide cognoscitur, aut illius gratise promissio, aut
certe sine prornissione donatio.

Demiror profecto tarn vecordem esse quemquam ut
dubitet an sacerdotibus evangelicis in Ordine conferatur
gratia, quum passim legantur plurima quse significare
videntur etiain veteris legis sacerdotibus gratiam esse
collatam. Nam: "Aaron" inquit Deus, "ei filios ejus
unges; sanctificabis eos, ut sacerdotio fungantur mihi."
Alioqui enim, quid profuisset exterior sanctificatio in
cultum Dei, nisi Deus pariter infudisset gratiam, qua
sanctificarentur interius ? atque id quoque per Chris
tum, cujus venturi fides robur et vim potuit indidisse

410 Of the Sacrament of Orders

infused Grace, by which they should be likewise in
teriorly sanctified; and that also through Christ; the
Faith of whose coming, gave Force and Strength to
precedent Sacraments, even as it made the Jews capable
of obtaining eternal Salvation ?

But if any one will not admit, that Grace was con
ferred to the Priesthood of the Old Law ; yet has he no
Reason to deny the Infusion of Grace into the Priests
of the Evangelical Law : Because now, through the Pas
sion of Christ the Fullness of Grace is come. In the
Acts of the Apostles, when St. Paul and Barnabas were
set apart for that Work, to which the Holy Ghost has
called them,* they were not sent away, before they were
first ordained by Imposition of Hands. But pray, why
did the Apostles lay Hands on them ? Was it to touch
their Bodies in a vain Manner, without profiting their
Souls by spiritual Grace ? How then dares Luther af
firm, that this Sacrament was unknown to the Church of
Christ, which was used by the Apostles? 'But (says
he) it was never called a Sacrament by any of the
antient Doctors, except Dyonisius; for we read nothing
at all in the other Fathers, of these Sacraments, neither
did they think on the Name of Sacrament, whenever
they spoke of these Things ; for the Invention of Sacra
ments is new/ (says he.) An excellent Reason of Lu
ther's I must confess, yet altogether false ; and if it was
true, yet could it avail nothing for his Purpose. For if
the Antients had not writ at all, of a Thing perhaps
never disputed amongst them; or if, when they did
write of it, they should signify it by its proper Name, and
not by that common Name of Sacrament ; should it then
follow, as a necessary Consequence, that there has been
no Order at all, or that it was not a Sacrament ? For
if any Body should call Baptism by the proper Name
*Acts xiii.

De Sacramento Ordinis 411

sacramentis prsecedentibus, sicut capacem fecit populum
judaicum consequendse aliquando salutis seternse?
Verum si quis id non admittat, veteris legis sacerdotio
collatam gratiam, certe non est cur gravetur tamen ad-
mittere gratiam sacerdotibus evangelicse legis in-
fundi, quia jam per Christi Passionem venit plenitude
gratise.

In Actis apostolorum, quum Barnabas ac Paulus
segregarentur in opus in quod eos Spiritus sanctus
accersivit, non ante dimissi sunt, quam impositis mani-
bus ordinati sunt. At cur, obsecro, manus eis imposue-
runt apostoli ? An ut corpus inani tactu pulsarent, nulla
spiritali gratia prodessent animse ? Quomodo potest
ergo Lutherus hoc sacramentum dicere Ecclesise Christi
esse incognitum, quo nulla natio Christiana non utitur ?
Quomodo potest appellare novum quod instituit Chris-
tus, quod in usu habebant apostoli ? aAt nunquam/7
inquit, ''appellatum est sacramentum apud veteres Doc-
tores usquam, excepto Dionysio. Nihil enim prorsus in
reliquis Patribus de istis sacramentis legimus," inquit,
anec sacramenti nomine censuerunt, quoties de his rebus
locuti sunt. Recens enim est inventio sacramentorum."
Egregia sane ratio est ista Lutheri, quse et manifesto
falsa est, et, si foret vera, nihil tamen efficeret: nam si
veteres de re fortassis olim non controversa nihil scrip-
sissent omnino, aut si, quum scriberent aliquid, rem
proprio tamen, non communi sacramentorum nomine
designassent, non necessario colligeretur ex eo aut Ordi-
nem non fuisse prorsus, aut non fuisse sacramentum.
Kam si quis Baptismum vocet Baptismum, nee addat
sacramentum, dicetur ideo non habuisse Baptismum pro
Sacramento ?

412 Of the Sacrament of Orders

of Baptism, and should not add the Word Sacrament;
shall it be therefore said, that he does not think Bap
tism to be a Sacrament ? Moreover, if Dyonisius only,
amongst all the holy Fathers, should write Orders to be
a Sacrament, that alone should be sufficient to destroy
Luther's Objection ; by which he intends to make People
believe, that the Invention of Sacraments is new; for
this Novelty is contradicted by his confessing it to be
written by him, whom he acknowledges to be antient:
And this would be true, though St. Dyonisius were such
a Man, as sacrilegious Luther feigns him to be, saying,
'That he had almost no solid Learning in him: That
none of the Things he writ in his ecclesiastical Hier
archy, are proved by Authority, or Reason; but that
they are all his own Inventions, and much like Dreams :
That in his mystical Divinity, which some ignorant
Divines (says Luther) so much extoll; he is pernicious;
more like a Platonist than a Christian : In which (says
he) you will not only, not learn who is Christ; but if
you had known it before, you should lose your Belief
of him: I speak (says he) by Experience; (By the Ex
periment, I suppose, of losing Christ there himself. )'
And further; 'Pray what performs he in his ecclesi
astical Hierarchy, but only describes allegorically some
ecclesiastical Rites f Finally, that he might shew in
how light a Matter St. Dyonisius lost his Labour, 'Do
you think (says he) it should be difficult for me to sport
with Allegories in whatsoever is credited ? It should
not be any hard Work for me to write a better Hierarchy
than that of Dyonisius is.' Who can patiently endure
to see the pious Labours of the holy Man so much abused
by this J angler, as if he were raging against some
Heretic like himself? For he calls him illiterate and
foolish, and one that writes not only Dreams, but also
pernicious Doctrines, destroying Christ! All which Re-

De Sacramento Ordinis 413

Prseterea si solus ex antiquis Patribus Dionysius
Ordinem scriberet esse sacramentum, vel satis esset ad
evertendam Luther i objectionem, qua videri vult in-
ventionem sacramentorum novam esse: repugnat enim
esse novum quod ab illo fatetur scriptis comprehensum,
quern fatetur antiquum. Atque istud quidem verum
esset etiam, si talis esset sacer Dionysius, qualem eum
depingit sacrilegus Lutherus, qui ferme nihil in eo dicit
esse solidse eruditionis, nihil eorum quse scribit, aut
auctoritate quicquarn, aut ratione probari, sed omnia
esse illius meditata ac prope somniis simillima quse-
cumque in coelesti scribit Hierarchia. aln Theologia
mystica, quam sic inflant," inquit, aignorantissimi
quidam theologistse, est," inquit, "etiam perniciosissi-
mus, plus platonizans, quam christianizans. In qua,"
inquit, "Christum adeo non disces, ut, etiamsi scias,
amittas.

"Expertus," inquit, "loquor:" hoc est, ut opinor,
expertus est ibi se Christum perdidisse. "De-
mum in ecclesiastica Hierarchia quid facit," inquit,
anisi quod ritus quosdam ecclesiasticos describit, ludens
allegoriis ?" Denique ut ostenderet in re quam levi
divus Dionysius luderet operam: "An mihi putas," in-
quit, "difficile esse in qualibet re creata allegoriis
ludere? Mihi non fuerit operosum meliorem Hierar-
chiam scribere quam Dionysii sit." Quis patienter ferat
in viri sancti pios labores sic debacchantem rabulam,
quse vere meritoque in sui similem baccharetur hsereti-
cum ?

Nam et indoctum vocat, et ludicrum, et scriben-
tem non tantum somnia, sed etiam perniciosa, et Chris
tum destruentia dogmata. Quse tamen omnia convitia
sancto viro cedunt in gloriam, cujus opera ornnia vel
hoc abunde demonstrat esse bona, quod viro malo dis-
pliceant. Nam quae consortia luci cum tenebris, Christo

414 Of the Sacrament of Orders

preaches, are, notwithstanding, to the Glory of the holy
Man, whose Works are all sufficiently demon stiated to
be good, by their displeasing only a Man so wicked as
this. For what Agreement can there be betwixt Light
and Darkness, between Christ and Belial? His own
wicked Brain was the Cause that he gained no Good by
the pious Books of this holy Man: For Horatius writ
truly ; — 'Unless the Vessel be sweet, whatsoever you put
therein will become sour.7 In as much as he says, 'He
could write a better Hierarchy, than that of St. Dyoni
sius/ pray let him brag of it when he has done it. In
the mean while, he undertakes a Thing much more diffi
cult, when he goes about to demolish that Hierarchy
which is founded upon a solid Rock.

The Indignation we have conceived at that impious
Fellow's casting such injurious Reproaches against the
holy Man, has caused us somewhat to digress. But, as
I begun to say, though St. Dyonisius had been the Man
that had taught holy Orders to have been a Sacrament ;
yet that is, however, sufficient to convince Luther, when
he asserts the Invention of the Sacraments to be but a
new Thing ; since he not only confesses Dyonisius to be
antient, but also that all the Christian World honours
him for a Saint. So that Luther's Anger against him, is
caused merely through Malice, which suffers him to
brook nothing contrary to his wicked Heresies.

But now, that his Vanity in every Place may the more
plainly appear ; I will shew, that not only St. Dyonisius,
but also St. Gregory, and St. Augustine, (whom he
falsely calls his Patron,) take Orders for a Sacrament.
Moreover, this indefaceable Character (by him derided)
though not called by that very Name; yet St. Hierom,
in the Sacrament of Baptism, writes plainly enough of
the Thing itself, to which also St. Augustine has had
Regard, both in the Sacraments of Baptism and Orders.

De Sacramento Ordinis 415

cum Beliali ? At quod e piis viri sancti libellis nihil
pietatis hausit, impium ipsius caput erat in causa,
quando quidem vere scribit Horatius :

"Sincerum est nisi vas, quodcumque infundis, acescit."

quod ait sibi non operosum esse meliorem Hier-
archiam scribere, quam fuerit ilia Dionysii, postquain
scripserit, turn, istud jactitet. Interea vero rem ag-
greditur multo magis operosam, Hierarchiam alteram,
quae supra firmam fundata est petram, demoliri.

Longius aliquanto nos avexit indignatio, qua moleste
ferimus in virum sanctum ab impio evomita tarn con-
tumeliosa convitia. Verum, ut coepi dicere, etiamsi
solus Dionysius docuisset Ordinem esse sacramentum,
suffecisset illud ad revincendum Lutherum asserentem
novam esse inventionem sacramentorum, quum Diony-
sium non solum Lutherus fateatur antiquum, sed et
totus orbis Christianus veneretur ut sanctum. Cui quod
Lutherus irascitur, non aliud facit, quam sola malitia,
qua nihil ferre potest quod impiis ipsius hseresibus ad-
versatur. At nunc, ut plane liqueat quam vanus un-
dique sit Lutherus, ostendam non solum Dionysium, sed
etiam Gregorium, et, quern sibi patronum Lutherus
mentitur, Augustinum Ordinem habuisse pro sacra-
mento; prseterea characterem, quern Lutherus irridet,
indelebilem, etiamsi non vocetur nomine, re tamen
aperte describi et ab Hieronymo in sacramento Baptis-
matis, et rationem ejus haberi ab Augustino in utroque
sacramento tarn Baptismi, quam Ordinis.

416 Of the Sacrament of Orders

I will therefore begin with St. Hierom, of the Char
acter of Baptism, that the Character of Orders may
more evidently appear; which for its Indebility, both
St. Augustine and St. Gregory compare with the Sacra
ment of Orders. St. Hierom, therefore, on these Words
of St. Paul to the Epliesians, (Do not contristate the
holy Spirit of God, in which you were signed in the Day
of Redemption.,)* writes thus, 'But we have been signed
with the Holy Ghost, that our Spirit and Soul may be
sealed with the Signet of God, and that we may receive
that Image and Similitude, after which we were first
created. This Seal of the Holy Ghost, according to the
Words of our Saviour, is stamped by God himself : For,
says he, This has God the Father signed :'f And a little
after, 'He is therefore signed, that he may keep the
Seal ; and that he may, in the Day of Redemption, shew
it pure, sincere, and unchanged : that therefore he may
receive his Reward with those who are redeemed.7
Amongst all those, who have ever writ of the Character
of Sacraments, none could have more plainly expressed
the Character, whereby God Almighty signs the Soul
through the Sacraments, than St. Hierom has done in
these Words; not by human Fiction (as Luther, that
execrable Scoffer of Sacraments, feigns,) but by solid
Testimonies of holy Scriptures.

For a Character is that Quality of the Soul, which
God Almighty, (best known to himself, and to us in
scrutable,) doth impress as a Seal, whereby to know his
own Flock from Strangers: Which Character, though
they stain it with Vices, and turn it from White to
Black, from Perfect to Imperfect, from most Pure to
Impure ; yet can they never so raze it out, but that in the
Day of Judgment, those therewith signed, will be known
to all the World, to be of his Flock, who has marked
*Ephes. iv. 30. fJohn vi. 27.

De Sacramento Ordinis 41Y

Incipiain igitur a Hieronymo de charactere Baptis-
matis, ut appareat manifestius character Ordinis, quern
et Augustinus, et Gregorius ob indelebilem characterem
cum Baptismo comparant. Igitur super ilia Pauli verba
ad Ephesios : "Nolite contristari Spiritum sanctum Dei,
in quo signati estis in diem redemptionis," Hieronymus
in hunc scribit modum: "Signati autem sumus Spiritu
Dei sancto, ut et spiritus noster, et anima imprimatur
signaculo Dei, et illam recipiamus imaginem et simili-
tudinem, ad quam in exordio conditi sumus. Hoc
signaculum sancti Spiritus juxta eloquium Salvatoris
Deo imprimente signatur: Hunc enim" ait, "signavit
Pater Deus" Et paulo post: aldcirco signatur," in-
quit, aut servet signaculum, et ostendat illud in die re
demptionis purum, atque sincerum, et nulla ex parte
mutilatum, et ob id remunerari valeat cum his qui re-
dempti sunt." Quicumque scripsere de sacramentorum
charactere nullis unquam verbis apertius expressere
characterem, quern anima? per sacr amenta imprimit
Deus, quam verbis his beatus expressit Hieronymus, non
liumano figmento, ut Lutherus fingit sacramentorum ex-
secrandus irrisor, sed solidis Scripturse sacrse testi-
moniis. Character enim est ilia qualitas animse, quam
Deus sibi notam, nobis incogitabilem imprimit in signa
culum, quo suum gregein discernit ab alienis, quod
signaculum, etiamsi vitiis maculent, et e candido red-
el ant atrum, ex integro mutilum, e purissimo reddant
irnpurum, nunquam tamen ita poterunt eradere, quin
illo characteris impressi signaculo, in cujus gregeni
signati sint, orbi toti maneant in judicii die cognosci-
biles. ISTec alia ratione tarn constantor observat Ecclesia,
ut quum alia sacramenta toties iteret (quod in Eucha-
ristise sumptione facit ac Pcenitentia, Gonjugio, et Unc-
tione languentium), Baptisma, Confirmationem atque
Ordinem nunquam iterari permittat. In iis enim sacra-

418 Of the Sacrament of Orders

them with that Signet : Which is the only Reason, why
the Church so constantly observes; that, whereas she
renews so often other Sacraments, as the Eucharist,
Penance, Marriage, Extreme Unction; yet never suffers
Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders to be renewed ;
having learned from the Holy Ghost, that the Seal of the
Character is imprinted in these Sacraments, so that it
cannot be defaced, therefore ought not to be iterated.

But that it may more evidently appear, that Orders
are, in this Case, like to Baptism ; let us hear St. Greg
ory, 'It is (says he) a ridiculous Thing to say, that he
who has received Holy Orders, ought to receive them
again ; for, as he who has once been baptized, ought not
to be baptized again; so he, who has been once conse
crated, ought not again to be consecrated in the same
Degree of Orders.' You see that the Church suffers not
the Sacrament of Orders to be iterated, any more than
that of Baptism, by Reason of its indelible Character.
But to shut Luther's Mouth, who calls that Character a
feigned Thing, and that St. Dyonisius was the only
Man, of all the antient Fathers, that catted Holy Orders
a Sacrament: We will, as we have promised, give you St.
Augustine's Words; who, in treating of Baptism and
Holy Orders, speaks thus; 'They are both Sacraments,
and given to Man after certain Consecration ; the one at
his Baptism, the other when he receives Holy Orders:
Therefore it is not lawful in the Holy Catholic Church
to iterate either of them. For when any heretical Min
ister is received into the Church, for the Good of Peace ;
if, after the Error of Schism is corrected, it should
seem necessary, he should exercise the same Office, which
he had before : Yet is he not to be ordained again ; for,
as Baptism remains intire in them, so Orders also; be
cause the Vice consisted in the Separation, not in the
Sacraments, which are the same, where-ever they are:'

De Sacramento Ordinis 419

mentis, sancto docente Spiritu, didicit Ecclesia charac-
teris conferri signaculum, quod quum deleri non possit,
iterari non debeat.

Sed ut manifeste pateat Ordini hac in parte parem
esse cum Baptismo conditioner)!, audiamus quid ait Gre-
gorius: "Quod dicitis," inquit, "ut qui ordinatus est
iterum ordinetur, valde ridiculum est." Ut enim bap-
tizatus semel, iterum baptizari non debet, ita qui con-
secratus est semel, in eodem Ordine non valet iterum
consecrari. Videtis ut Ordinis sacramentum non magis
iterari patiatur Ecclesia quam sacramentum Baptis-
matis; quse res, ut dixi, pendet ab indeleto charactere.
Qua de re, ut os obstruamus Luthero, ne rursus obgan-
niat figmentum esse characterem, et solum ex antiquis
Dionysium Ordinem vocasse sacramentum, subjun-
gemus, ut polliciti sumus hac de re, etiam divi Augus-
tini sententiam. Is igitur, quum de Baptismo et Ordine
disserit, in hunc modum scribit : "Utrumque enim sacra
mentum est, et quadam consecratione utrumque homini
datur illud, quum baptizatur, et illud, quum ordinatur.
Ideo non licet in Ecclesia catholica utrumque iterari.
ISfam si quando ex hsereticorum parte venientes etiam
prsepositi, pro bono pacis, correcto schismatis errore,
suscepti sunt, et si visum est opus esse ut eadem officia
gererent, quse gerebant, non sunt rursus ordinandi, sed
sicut Baptismus in eis, ita mansit ordinatio integra,
quia in prsecisione fuerat vitium, non in sacramentis,
quse ubicumque sunt, ipsa sunt." Et paulo post : "Neutri
sacramento facienda est injuria." Et addit de sacra-
mento Ordinis: "Sicut non recte habet qui ab imitate

420 Of the Sacrament of Orders

And a little after, 'Injury must be done to neither of
the two Sacraments.7

And of the Sacrament of Orders, he adds, 'That, as
he that breaks off from Unity, has it not rightly, yet
has it ; so likewise he does not rightly give it, yet gives
it :' And returning again to both, 'It hinders them not
(says he) from being the Sacraments of Christ and his
Church ; because Hereticks and wicked Persons use
them unlawfully ; but these Men are to be corrected, and
punished, and the Sacraments to be acknowledged and
venerated/ You see how void of Truth it is, what
Luther so boldly boasts, viz. That the Sacrament of Holy
Orders was unknown to the Church of Christ: That
Character is an idle Fiction; That the Invention of
Sacraments is a new Thing: That Holy Orders were no
Sacrament among the Antients. You see Nothing of
what he has said, but has been rejected by the Testi
mony of such Persons, as he cannot separate from the
Church of Christ; for they were illustrious therein by
Doctrine of Faith and exemplary Lives ; nor can he
reckon them among the Moderns, if a thousand Years
be not with him as one Day.* Notwithstanding this,
he opposes himself against all the Eeasons, Authority,
and Faith of all, by this one Argument: We are all
Priests (says he) according to that of St. Peter. Ye are
all a royal Priesthood, and priestly Kingdom;^ but as
one cannot be more a Man than another; so one can be
no more a Priest than another: Those,, therefore, who
are called Priests, are no other but Lay-men, chosen by
the only Consent of the People, or elected by the Bishop,
not without the People: For to preach and ordain, are
Nothing but mere Ministry, without any Thing of Sac
rament. We have not only faithfully repeated his Argu
ment, but also freely set down whatever may support
him: And yet who would not laugh at this doltish
*Ps. Ixxxix. 4. fl. Pet. ii. 9.

De Sacramento Ordinis 421

recedit, sed tamen habet, sic etiam non recte dat qui ab
imitate recedit, et tamen dat." Et mrsus ad utrumque
reversus adjecit: "Non ergo ideo non sunt sacramenta
Christi et Ecclesise, quia eis illicite utuntur non modo
hseretici, sed etiam omnes impii ; sed illi corrigendi sunt
et puniendi, ilia autem sunt agnoscenda et vene-
randa."

Videtis mine quam verum sit illud, quod Lutherus
taiita jactavit audacia, sacramentum Ordinis Ecclesiam
Christi nescire, characterem inane figmentum esse, sac-
ramentorum inventionem novam esse, Ordinem veteri-
bus non habitum pro sacramento. Quorum omnium
nihil dixit, quod non videtis eorum testimonio reproba-
tum, quos neque de Christi Ecclesia potest eximere
(utpote quam illi et doctrina fidei, et exemplo virtutis
illustrarunt), neque inter novos numerare, nisi talis sit,
ut ei mille sint anni, tanquam dies unus.

Sed ille tamen adversus omnes omnium rationes,
auctoritatem, fidem, uno se tuetur argumento. "Ornnes,"
inquit, "sumus sacerdotes secundum illud Petri: Vos
estis regale sacerdotium et sacerdotale regnum. Sed
alius alio non potest magis esse sacerdos, quemadmodum
alius alio non potest magis esse homo. Igitur sacerdotes
qui vocantur, nihil sunt aliud, quam laici quidam, solo
vel consensu populi, vel episcopi vocatione, non absque
populo delecti ad concionandum, et Ordo nihil est aliud,
quam merum sine sacramento ministerium." Recensui-
mus ejus argumentum non solum fideliter, sed etiam
liberaliter adjicientes quod fulciat: et tamen cui non
excutiat risum tarn hebes theologantis argutia ? Nam si

422 Of the Sacrament of Orders

Divine? For, if the Order of Priesthood is therefore
Nothing, because every Christian is a Priest; by the
same Keason it will follow, that Christ had Nothing
above Saul: For David said of Saul, Peccavi tangens
Christum Domini; I have sinned in touching (Chris
tum) the Anointed of our Lord: Or that Christ had
Nothing above them, of whom it is said, Nolite tangere
Christos meos; Touch not mine anointed: Finally,
that God had Nothing above all those of whom he said
by the Prophet, I have said ye are Gods, and are all the
Sons of the most High. In a Word, all Christians are
Kings in the same Manner that they are Priests : For it
is not only said, Ye are a royal Priesthood; but also, a
priestly Kingdom. Let us diligently observe what the
Serpent designs, who, I suppose, is more crafty than to
think this Argument of any Consequence, but only licks,
that he may afterwards bite : He extols the Laity to the
Priesthood, for this only Reason, that he may reduce
Priests to the Rank of the Laity ; denying Priesthood to
be a Sacrament, but only a Custom of electing a
Preacher; and saying, 'That he who preaches, is no
more a Priest, than the other; nay, no more a Priest,
than a painted Man, is a Man :7 Contrary to St. Paul,
who, writing to Timothy, says, The Priests that rule
well, are worthy of double Honour, especially such as
labour in the Word and Doctrine* The Apostle, by
this, evidently teaches, That though those are most
worthy of double Honour, who, being Priests, do labour
in the Word and Doctrine : Yet those who perform not
This, but can only govern well, are also Priests; and
merit double Honour. Otherwise, he would not have
said, Especially those who labour in the Word and Doc
trine; but only such as labour therein.

Furthermore, that Luther may not be able to hold
what he says, viz. That the Priest's Office is nothing
*I. Tim. v. 17.

De Sacramento Ordinis 423

ideo nihil est Ordo sacerdotii, quia quilibet Christ! anus
est sacerdos, eadem ratione sequetur ut nihil supra Saul
habuerit Christus. Nam et de Saul dixit David : "Pec-
cavi tangens CJiristum Domini/' Nihil habuerit Chris
tus supra quemquam eorum, de quibus dictum est : "No-
lite tangere Christos meos" Nihil denique supra quem
quam Deus eorum omnium, de quibus per prophetam
dixit ipse : "Ego dixi, Dii estis, et filii excelsi omnes."
Postremo, qua ratione Christiani omnes sacerdotes sunt,
eadem etiam ratione reges sunt. Non enim solum dici-
tur: "Vos estis regale sacerdotium," sed etiam "sacer-
dotale regnum."

Sedulo considerandum est serpens iste quid destlnet,
quern ego certe callidiorem puto, quam ut ullius esse
momenti putet tarn frivol urn argumentum : sed qui tan-
turn ideo lambit, ut mordeat, laicos ideo tollit in sacer-
dotium, ut sacerdotes redigat in classem laicorum. Nam
sacramentum esse negat, et ritum tantum esse dicit
eligendi concionatoris. Nam qui non concionantur,
nihil minus ait esse quam sacerdotes, nee aliter sacer
dotes esse, quam homo pictus est homo; contra Paulum
apostolum, qui ad Timotheum scribens ait: "Qui bene
prcesunt presbyteri. duplici honore digni sunt, maxime
qui laborant in verbo et doctrinal Apostolus hie mani-
feste docet, quanquam ii prsecipue duplici honore digni
sunt, qui quum presbyteri sint, laborant in verbo et doc-
trina, tamen et qui hoc non faciunt, non solum esse
presbyteros, sed et bene prseesse posse, et duplicem
quoque honorem promereri. Alioqui non dixisset:
maxime qui laborant in verbo et doctrina, sed solum ii
qui laborant in verbo et doctrina.

Prseterea ne possit dicere Lutherus id quod dicit, of-
ficium sacerdotis erga populum nihil esse, nisi prsedi-

424 Of the Sacrament of Orders

but to preach to the People: For to say Mass (says he)
is nothing but to receive the Communion for himself:'
I say, that it may appear how false this is ; let us again
hear the Apostle's Words, 'Every Priest (says he) that
is taken out from amongst Men, is constituted for Men,
in the Things which belong to God, that he may offer
Gifts and Sacrifices for their Sins.'* Does not this
plainly shew us that a Priest's Duty requires from him,
to offer Sacrifices to God for Men ? Though writing to
the Hebrews, (yet not willing, that Christians should
be any Thing Jewish,) it is evident that it is spoken of
the Priesthood of both Laws ; so that Luther is twice
pressed by this Testimony : For he also teaches Mass to
be a Sacrifice, and to be offered for the People : Seeing
the Church offers no other ; and he teacheth, that the
Duty of offering it, is the chief Part of the Priest's
Charge. And truly if Luther's Words were not false,
how easily may you see it to follow ; that since none but
a Priest can consecrate our Lord's Body: of so many
Thousand Priests, that have not the Gift of Preaching,
if they were not truly Priests, but only equivocally so
called, as a painted Man is called a Man ; then would
almost all the Christian World have no other God, or
People but Idolaters, adoring Bread for Christ, and
bending their Knees to Baal.

In the Right of electing, as he calls it, he attributes
the chief Power to the People ; for though in one Place ;
he seems to give this Rite promiscuously to the Bishop
and People, (when he says, 'That although it is certain
all Christians are equally Priests, and that they have a
like Power in all the Sacraments: Yet that none can
lawfully exercise this Power, without the Consent of the
Congregation, or the Vocation of a Superior.' Yet, in
another Place, he gives the greatest Right to the People
*Heb. v. 1.

De Sacramento Ordinis 4-25

care: nam "Missas," inquit, "canere nihil est aliud,
quam communicare seipsum," hoc, inquam, ut appareat
quam falsum sit, rursus audiamus Apostolum: ffOm-
nis" inquit, "pontifex ex hominibus assumptus pro
hominibus constituitur in his quce sunt ad Deum, ut
offerat dona et sacrificia pro peccatis." Annon Apos-
tolus aperte declarat etiam pontificis officmm istud pos-
cere, ut pro hominibus offerat sacrificium Deo ? Quod
quum scribat, quanquam Hebrseis, tamen Christianis,
quos nolit judaizare, clarum est loqui de pontifice legis
utri usque, atque ideo bis Lutherum suo premere testi-
monio. Nsun et Missam docet esse sacrificium, et offerri
pro populo, quum Ecclesia nullum offerat aliud, et docet
offerendi officium prsecipuam partem esse muneris pon-
tificii. Et certe, nisi falsum esset quod dicit Lutherus,
facile videtis consequi ut quum nemo nisi sacerdos possit
consecrare corpus Domini, si e tot sacerdotum millibus,
qui concionari nesciunt, nullus vere sacerdos est, sed
tantum vocatur sequivoce, quemadmodum homo pictus
vocatur homo, totus Christianus orbis clerum popu-
lumque ferme non habet alium quam idololatras, panem
pro Christo colentes, et genua sua curvantes ante
Baal.

In eligendi, ut vocat, ritu, praecipuum jus tribuit
populo. ]STam licet uno loco tribuere videatur episcopo
aut populo jus promiscuum, quum dicit quod quanquam
certum sit omnes Christianos sequaliter esse sacerdotes,
et eamdem in verbo et sacramento quocumque habere
potestatem, non licere tamen quemquam hac ipsa uti,
nisi consensu communitatis aut vocatione majoris, alio
tamen loco, superiores partes tribuit populo, quum de
sacerdotibus dicit: "Qui si cogerentur admittere nos
omnes sequaliter esse sacerdotes, quotquot baptizati

426 Of the Sacrament of Orders

when, speaking of Priests, he says, 'who, if they were
compelled to admit all of us, who have been baptized
equally to be Priests, as indeed we are; and that the
Ministry is only given to them by our Consent; they
should know also, that they have no Right of ruling over
us, but what we admit them of our own free Will.'
Which two Places being compared together, shews his
Opinion to be, 'That the People, without the Bishop,
but not the Bishop without the People, can ordain
Priests;' as appears by his saying, 'That the Ministry
only is permitted to the Priests, and that not without
the Consent of the People :' Which if true, a Priest
cannot be ordained, without the People's Consent; by
which alone, he says, 'That Bishops were formerly made
Rulers of the Church.'

'It cannot be denyed, (says he) that the true Churches
were formerly governed by Elders, without the Ordi
nations and Consecrations; being chosen to this, by
Reason of their Age and long Experience in Things of
that Kind.' Pray let him shew us where he finds these
Things ? For my Part, I do not think them to be true.
For, if every Layman hath equal Power over any of the
Sacraments, with a Priest ; and if the Order of Priest
hood stands for Nothing, why writes the Apostle thus to
Timothy, 'Neglect not the Grace which is in thee, and
which has been given thee by Prophesy, by the Imposi
tion of the Hands of the Presbytery ?'* and in another
Place, to the same, 'I admonish thee, that thou stir up
the Grace of God that is in thee, by the Imposition of
my Hands :'f Again, 'Impose Hands suddenly on no
Man, neither be thou Partakers of other Men's Sins.':}:
Finally, these are the Words of the Apostle to Titus;
'For this Cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest
correct the Things that are wanting; and constitute
*I. Tim. iv. 14. fll. Tim. i. 6. {I. Tim. v. 22.

De Sacramento Ordinis 427

sumus, sicut re vera sumus, illisque solum ministerium,
nostro tamen consensu, permissum, scirent simul nullum
eis esse super nos jus imperil, nisi quantum nos sponte
nostra admitterenms."

Quse duo loca si confer antur, ostendunt hoc sentire
Lutherum, ut populus absque episcopo possit ordinare
sacerdotem, episcopus sine populi consensu non possit,
quum dicit sacerdotibus solum ministerium, nee id
tamen, nisi populi consensu, permissum. E"am si hoc
verum est, sacerdos fieri nisi populi consensu non potest,
cujus consensu solo dicit olim prsefectos Ecclesiis epis-
copos. "Negari non potest/' inquit, "Ecclesias olim a
senioribus fuisse rectas absque istis ordinationibus et
consecrationibus, propter setatem et longum rerum usum
in hoc electis." Lutherus ubi ista reperit, ostendat ipse ;
mihi interim vera non videntur. Nam si laicus quisque
sequalem habet potestatem cum sacerdote in quocumque
sacramento, et Ordo sacerdotii nihil est; cur ita scribit
Apostolus Timotheo : "Noli negligere gratiam quce est
in te, quce data est tibi per prophetiam, cum impositione
manuum presbyterii?" Et alibi ad eumdem: ffAd-
moneo te ut ressuscites gratiam Dei, quce in te est per
impositionem manuum mearum ?" Iterum : "Nemini"
inquit, "cito manus imposueris, neque communices pec-
catis alienis?" Denique hunc in modum Apostolus
scribit ad Titum : "Hujus rei gratia retiqui te Cretce, ut
ea quce desunt corrigas, et constituas per civitates pres-
byteros, sicut et ego disposui tibi."

428 Of the Sacrament of Orders

Priests in the Cities, even as I have appointed
tfaee.'*

Now Reader, you have, in a few Words, seen some
Passages of the Apostle, by comparing of which, you
may easily discover, that whatsoever Luther has thus
disorderly vented against Order, are mere Fictions and
Lyes: For what he says, 'is done by the People's Con
sent,7 St. Paul shews to be done by the Bishop, while he
says, 'He has left him (Titus) at Crete, to that End that
he should ordain Priests in the Cities, and that not
rashly, but as he himself, when present, had appointed.7
You see, by this, that Priests are made by Imposition of
Hands. And that it may not be doubted that Grace is
also given at the same Time; you see, that it is con
ferred by Imposition of Hands: 'Stir up (says he,) the
Grace of God ; which has been given thee by the Imposi
tion of my Hands :'f And this also, 'Neglect not the
Grace which is in thee, and which has been given thee
through Prophesy, by Imposition of the Hands of the
Presbytery' $ — —Take Notice of these Things 1 ad
mire that Luther is not ashamed to deny the Sacrament
of Holy Orders, as he is not ignorant that the Words of
St. Paul are in every Man's Hands ; which teach, that a
Priest cannot be ordained but by a Bishop, and not
without Consecration : In which both the corporeal Sign
is adhibited, and so much spiritual Grace infused, that
he who is consecrated, not only receives the Holy Ghost
for himself, but also the Power of imparting it to others.
Can that which the Apostle has writ be new, though it is
so affirmed by Luther? How can it be unknown to the
Church, which is, and has at all Times been, read
through the universal Church of Christ? By these
Things, it is manifest, that of all that Luther has railed
out so confidently against Holy Orders, not one Syllable
is true, but all the mere lying Inventions of his Malice.
*Tit. i. 5. fll. Tim. i. 6. JI. Tim. iv. 14, 15.

De Sacramento Ordinis

Habes mine, lector, semel sub oculis Apostoli pauca
loca, et non multa verba, quibus inter se collatis facile
potes deprehendere falsa fictaque esse omnia quibus tarn
inordinate Lutherus debacchatur in Ordinem. Xam
quos dicit populi consensu fieri, Paulus ostendit fieri ab
episcopo, quern in hoc ait se reliquisse Greta?, ut oppi-
datim presbyteros constitueret, nee tamen temere, sed
sicut ipse prcesens disposuerat. Vides impositis mani-
bus fieri sacerdotem. Et ne dubitari possit simul con-
ferri gratiam, vides illam manuum impositione colla-
tam. "Ressuscita" inquit, "gratiam quo? data est tibi
per impositionem manuum mearum." Et illud quoque :
"Noli negligere gratiam quce in te est, quce data est tibi
per prophetiam, cum impositione manuum presbyterii;
in Us te exerce" Miror igitur non pudere Lutherum,
qimm negat sacramentum Ordinis: baud ignarus in
manibus omnium versari verba Pauli, quse doceant non
nisi a sacerdote fieri sacerdotem, nee sine consecratione
fieri, in qua et signum adhibeatur corporeum, et tantum
spiritalis infuiidatur gratise, ut is, qui consecratur, non
solum accipiat ipse Spiritum sanctum, sed etiam potes-
tatem conferendi aliis. Novum vero qui potest esse,
quanquam id Lutherus ait, de quo scribit Apostolus ?
Quomodo ignoratum Ecclesise, quod in omnibus Christi
legitur, et nunquam non legebatur Ecclesiis? Quibus
ex rebus manifestum est e tarn multis quse tanta cum
confidentia pro compertissimis Lutherus deblateravit in
Ordinem ne imam quidem syllabam fuisse veram, sed
per malitiam ficta falsaque omnia.

CHAP. XIII

©f tbe Sacrament of Eytreme function

Tiff this Sacrament of Extreme Unction ; that Luther
might be twice derided himself, he twice scoffs the
Church: First, because Divines,, (says he) do call this
Unction a Sacrament; (as if those he calls Divines,
were the only Men who call it a Sacrament.) Again,
because they call it Extreme ; to which, as to the second,
he himself objects, after a joking Manner, what he can
never answer in earnest : For it may be rightly called
Extreme, as being the last of four. Afterwards, to shew
that it is no Sacrament, himself first objects, what he
foresees every Body will object against him, viz. the
Words of St. James the Apostle, 'If any be sick amongst
you, let him send for the Priests of the Church, and let
them pray over him, anointing him with Oil, in the
Name of our Lord: And the Prayers of the Faithful
will save the Sick, and our Lord will raise him up ; and
if he be in Sins, they shall be forgiven him.'* These
Words, (which, according to his own Definition, most
apparently testify Extreme Unction to be a Sacrament,
as wanting neither a visible Sign, nor Promise of
Grace) he immediately begins, with most impudent Con
fidence, to deride; as if they were of no Manner of
Force. 'For my Part, (says he) I say, that if ever
there was Folly acted, it is especially in this Place.'
And I, again on the Contrary do affirm, that if ever
Luther was mad at any Time, (as indeed his Madness
appears almost in every Place,) he is certainly dis-
*Jas. v. 14, 15.

CAP. XIII

2>e Sacr; Cytrema^Iinctionte

IN sacramento Extremse-Unctionis, Lutherus bis ipse
ridendus, bis irridet Ecclesiam. Primum, quod Theo-
logi, ut ait, hanc unctionem appellant sacramentum
(quasi soli hoc dicant hi, quos ille vocat theologos),
deinde, quod appellent extremam. Et quod ad secun-
dum pertinet, objicit sibi tanquam joco quod nunquam
solvet serio.

E"am et ideo quoque vere dici potest extrema, quod
extrema sit e quatuor. Postea, ut doceat non esse sacra
mentum, objicit sibi primum id quod neminem videt
non objecturum, apostoli Jacobi verba: ffSi infirmatur
quis in vobis, inducat presbyteros Ecclesice, et orent
super eum, ungentes oleo in nomine Domini: et oratio
fidei salvabit infirmum, et alleviabit eum Dominus, et
si in peccatis sit remittentur ei." Hsec verba, quse ex
ipsius etiam finitione apertissime declarant hanc unc
tionem sacramentum esse, quse neque signo careat visi-
bili, nee promissione gratise, protinus incipit Phormiana,
conndentia, tanquam nihil haberent vigoris, eludere.
aEgo autem dico," inquit, asi uspiam deliratum est,
hoc loco prsecipue deliratum est." At ego contra non
verebor dicere quod si uspiam delirat Lutherus (qui
fere delirat ubique) hie in sacramento Unctionis-
Extremse ad extremam usque delirat amentiam.
"Omitto," inquit, aquod hanc epistolam non esse apos
toli Jacobi, nee apostolico spiritu dignam, multi valde
probabiliter asserant, licet consuetudine auctoritatem,
cujuscumque sit, obtinuerit. Tamen," inquit, "si esset

432 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

tracted here, in the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, to
an extreme Height of Madness. 'I omit (says he) say
ing that many do probably assert this not to be the
Epistle of the Apostle St. James, nor worthy an apos
tolic Spirit, though by Custom, whosoever it be, it has
obtained Authority: Yet if it were certainly written
by the Apostle St. James, I should say that it is not
lawful for an Apostle to institute a Sacrament by his
own Authority; that is, to give a divine Promise, with
a Sign joined thereunto: This belongs to Christ alone.
So that St. Paul says that he received from our Lord the
Sacrament of the Eucharist ; and that he was sent, not
to baptize, but to preach the Gospel : But of the Sacra
ment of Extreme Unction we read no where in the
Gospel.7 You see how he endeavours here, two Ways,
to weaken the Words of the Apostle. First, he will not
have the Epistle to have been writ by the Apostle. Sec
ondly, though it was by him written; yet will he not
have the Apostle to have Authority of instituting Sacra
ments. Although he has proposed these two Things in a
few Words, and passes hastily on to some other ; yet are
they the chief Weapons, by which he intends to destroy
this Sacrament; for what else he says, are but Trifles,
whereby he takes Occasion to laugh, as if the Church
did not well in observing this Sacrament. But these
two do come both to the same Thing : For if the Epistle
had not been writ by the Apostle, or is not worthy an
apostolical Spirit; or if, for the Apostle's giving this
Unction for a Sacrament, it be not the more approved
to be one: Yet it should follow plainly, that nothing
could be effected by these Words. If he had said, that
it was formerly doubted whose Epistle this was, he had
said truly; for the Church admits Nothing rashly, it
discusses every Thing diligently : And this it doth, that
every Thing it receives, may be had for greater Cer-

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 433

apostoli Jacobi, dicerem non licere apostolum sua auc-
toritate sacramentum instituere, id est divinam promis-
sionem cum adjuncto signo dare; hoc ad Christum
solum pertinebat. Sic Paulus sese accepisse a Domino
dicit sacramentum Eucharistise, et missum, non ut bap-
tizet, sed ut evangelizet. Nusquam autem legitur in
evangelio Unctionis istius extremse sacramentum."

His verbis videtis ut apostoli verba duobus modis
enervare conatur, primum, quod epistola non sit apos
toli, deinde quod, etiamsi sit apostoli, tamen apostolus
auctoritatem non habeat instituendi sacramenta. Hsec
duo quanquam proponat paucis, ac statim ad alia transi-
liat, tarnen prsecipua tela sunt, quibus instituit hoc
sacramentum perimere. Nam csetera quse dicit omnia,
nugamenta sunt, ridendi occasionem captantia, tanquam
Ecclesia non recte sacramentum observet. Sed hsec duo
vivum tangunt. Nam si epistola non apostoli sit, nee
apostolico spiritu digna, aut si apostolo tradente Unc-
tionem hanc pro sacramento, tamen nihilomagis probe-
tur sacramentum, consequeretur omnino ut hsec verba
nihil efficerent.

Si dixisset olim fuisse dubitatum cujus ilia fuerit
epistola, dixisset vere: neque enim temere quicquam
recepit Ecclesia ; omnia diligenter excussit, idque ipsum
facit, ut certiora deberent haberi omnia, quse receperit,
etiamsi duntaxat humana prudentia regeretur Ecclesia,

434 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

tainty ; though it were only directed by human Policy.
But when he says, 'That many do assert this Epistle, not
only, not to be of the Apostle's Writing; but also, un
worthy of an apostolical Spirit ; and that they not only
assert, but probably assert this;' it is more than prob
able, he cannot prove what he says; otherwise let him
name some of these many Persons; who if they be of
the Church, I suppose they are not so many, nor of so
great Authority, as to be able to stand out against the
whole Church. But as yet he has produced none: I
will therefore bring one who may suffice against his
many, to wit, St. Hierom; who, in holy Scriptures, was
the most learned of his Time, and has as exactly distin
guished between dubious and real Things, as could be
possible. This great Man, after he had for some Time
remained doubtful, of the Epistle of St. Paul, (and that
only at such Time as it was not confirmed by a full Con
sent of the whole Church.) Yet he pronounces the
Epistle of St. James to be undoubtedly of his own
Writing: His Words are these, 'St. James, St. Peter,
St. Jude, and St. John, have published seven Epistles,
as mystical, as they are succinct and short ; yea, likewise
long; short in Words, and long in Sentences, so that
there are not many, who would not be blinded in the
reading them.' The same St. Hierom, speaks thus of
the seven canonical Epistles, 'The first of them is one
>f St. James's, the second, of St. Peter's, three of St.
John's, one of St. Jude's :' You see how this Father
has the same Opinion of St. James's Epistle that he has
of St. Peter's ; nor does he think it unworthy an apos
tolical Spirit: Truly if Luther had brought us any
Reasons why this Epistle must not be accounted St.
James's, (though of some other Person, who should
speak in the same Spirit,) yet should he be in some Sort
tolerable. But now he says, 'It is not probable it should

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 435

Verum quum dicat multos asserere hanc epistolam non
solum non esse apostoli, sed esse prseterea indignam
apostolico spiritu, atque istud non asserere solum, sed
asserere etiam probabiliter, probabile est ilium istud
probare non posse. Alioqui proferat e multis aliquos
qui, si ex Ecclesia sunt, neque tarn multi sunt, opinor,
neque tarn magni, ut pondus obtinere mereantur ad-
versus reliquos omnes. Adhuc produxit nullum. Ego
producam unum, qui sufficere debet adversus multos,
beatum Hieronymum, quo neque doctior quisquam fuit
in Scripturis sacris, neque qui veras ac germanas ex-
actiore censura distinxit a dubiis.

Is igitur quum aliquandiu de epistola Pauli dubi-
tasset, sed tune dubitasset, quum res adhuc non esset tain
pleno Ecclesise consensu firmata, Jacobi tamen, quse
vocatur epistola, ipsius esse sine ulla dubitatione pro-
nuntiat. Nam hunc in modum scribit: " Jacobus,
Petrus, Judas et Joannes, septem epistolas ediderunt,
tarn mysticas quam succinctas, et breves pariter et
longas, breves in verbis, longas in sententiis, ut rarus sit
qui non in earum c^ecutiat lectione." Idem in prologo
in septem epistolas canonicas sic ait: "Est enim prima
earum una Jacobi, duse Petri, tres Joannis, una

Videtis ut beatus Hieronymus idem judicium de
Jacobi profert epistola, quod de Petri, nee putat in
dignam apostolico spiritu. Certe si rationes attulisset
Lutherus, quare epistola non esset Jacobi, sed tamen
alterius cujuspiam, qui eodeni loqueretur spiritu, potuis-
set utcumque ferri. Nunc vero dicit esse probabile ideo
non esse, quod sit indigna spiritu apostolico. Qua in re
non alium objiciam Luthero, quam Lutherum ipsum,

436 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

be St. James's, because it is unworthy an apostolical
Spirit:' In which Thing, I will bring no Objections,
but Luther's own against Luther; for none did ever
more frequently and strongly contradict himself, than
Luther. In the Sacrament of holy Order, he says, 'The
Church has Power given her to discern the Word of
God, from the Words of Men.' — How then does he say,
that this Epistle is unworthy an apostolical Spirit,
which the Church whose Judgment (as himself con
fesses) cannot err in this, has judged it to be full of
apostolical Spirit ? Wherefore, he has now, by his own
Wisdom, so hemmed himself in on all Sides, that he
must necessarily consent that this Epistle belongs to the
Apostle, contrary to what he has affirmed to be probable ;
or, that the Church can err in distinguishing Scripture,
which before he denyed. If he says that the Church has
approved, as worthy of an apostolical Spirit, what is
unworthy, then is he a Blasphemer against the Church :
If he hold that the Apostle has writ what is unworthy
an Apostle, then is he a Blasphemer against the Apostle.
We have therefore sufficiently confuted this: Indeed
he has sufficiently confuted himself, in denying the
Epistle to belong to the Apostle, or to be worthy an
apostolical Spirit. Now come we to that, in which, like
a valiant Man, he openly sets upon the Apostle himself,
saying, 'That though it was of the Apostle's Writing,
yet it is not lawful for an Apostle to institute a Sacra
ment by his own Authority ; that is, To give a divine
Promise, with a Sign thereunto adjoined : Eor this (says
he) belongs to Christ alone.' O this happy Age! in
which Luther, this new Doctor of the Gentiles, is risen,
who will seem himself to follow the Example of St.
Paul, by resisting an Apostle to his Face,* as not going
the right Way to the Gospel of Christ, but (which is
*Gal. ii. 11-14.

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 437

neque enim Luthero quisquam aut ssepius ferme contra-
dicit, aut validius, quam Lutherus. Is igitur in sacra-
mento Ordinis ait Ecclesiam hoc habere datum, ut possit
discernere verba Dei a verbis hominum. Quomodo ergo
nunc dicit epistola apostolico spiritu indignam esse,
quam Ecclesia, cujus judicium, ut ait, hac in re falli
non potest, apostolico spiritu judicavit plenam? Qua-
mobrem nunc ita se sua sapientia constrinxit undique,
ut aut necessario comprobet epistolam esse apostoli
(cujus contrarium dixit esse probabile) aut dicat Eccle
siam in Scriptura sacra posse dijudicanda falli, quod
earn posse negaverat. Quod si dicat velut apostolico
dignum spiritu comprobasse, quod apostolico spiritu sit
indignum, blasphemus est in Ecclesiam. Si fatetur
apostolum scripsisse quod apostolo sit indignum, blas
phemus est in apostolum.

Satis igitur illud confutavimus, imo semet satis con-
futavit ipse, quod epistolam negavit aut esse apostoli,
aut dignam apostolico spiritu. Veniamus nunc ad id in
quo, ut fortem virum decet, aperte oppugnat apostolum,
dicens, etiamsi sit apostoli Jacobi, tamen non licere
apostolo sua auctoritate sacramentum instituere, id est,
divinam promissionem cum adjuncto signo dare. "Hoc
enim pertinet," inquit, aad solum Christum." O nostri
sseculi magnam felicitatem, quo novus iste Gentium
doctor exortus est Lutherus, qui hoc sibi arrogans, tan-
quam Pauli sequeretur exemplum, in faciem resistat
apostolo, quod non recta via ingrediatur ad evangelium
Christi, sed, quod plus est, quam si gentes doceat
judaizare, arroget sibi facultatem promittendi gratiam,
et sacramenta condendi, hoc est, quod usurpet sibi potes-

438 Of the Sacrament of Extreme V notion

more than if he should teach the Gentiles to Judaize)
arrogating to himself the Power of promising Grace,
and instituting Sacraments ; usurping in that the Power
of Christ ; like the proud and traitorous Angel, who said,
<I will establish my Throne in the North, and be like
to the most High/* The Pope has no great Cause of
being vexed at his Reproaches, who charges such enor
mous Crimes upon the Apostle himself : For, since it is
certain this Epistle belongs to the Apostle; what else
does he then, but manifestly accuse the Apostle of hav
ing (without Authority, and against all Right) insti
tuted this Sacrament ? Nay, when he denies the Epistle
to belong to the Apostle (lest he should leave off his
Calumny,) he professes, that he would say as much, if
It were of the Apostle's own Writing! Indeed, though
some think, that the Apostle received Power of insti
tuting Sacraments, (not without the Power of the Holy
Ghost, which God sent them at Pentecost, and of which
Christ had foretold, The Holy Ghost which I will send
unto you, He shall teach you all Things.' )f Yet shall
not I dispute it at this Time, whether an Apostle has
such Power or no, because it is now not necessary to
dispute it. But seeing it is evident, that the Apostle
gives us this Unction as a Sacrament, I do not doubt,
but it is really a Sacrament; and that the Apostle was
not so impiously arrogant, as to give the People, for a
Sacrament, what was in Reality no such Thing. But if
the Apostle had not the Power of instituting this Sacra
ment himself, then has he delivered it to the People in
these Words, as he received it from Christ, who, as he
would notify to the World some Things by St. Matthew,
some by St. Luke, some by St. John, and some by the
Apostle St. Paul; why is it not possible he should be
*Isai. xiv. 13, 14. fjohn xiv. 26.

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 439

tatem Christi, ad modum superbientis et prsevaricantis
angeli, qui dixit: "Ponam solium meum ad aquilonem,
et ero similis Altissimo!" Non est nunc quod segre
ferat Pontifex ab illo reprehend!, qui de tarn atroce
crimine reprehendit apostolum. Nam quum certum sit
epistolam esse apostoli, quid aliud quam manifeste dicit
apostolum sine auctoritate et contra fas instituere sacra-
mentum ? Inio quum neget epistolam illius esse, tamen
ne abstineret contumelia, dicit id se dicturum etiamsi
esset apostoli. Ego certe etsi nonnullis visum sit apos-
tolis non sine Spiritu sancto, quern Deus in Pentecoste
misit, rationem traditam esse condendi sacramenti, de
quo spiritu Christus praedixerat: "Spimtus sanctus
quern ego mittam, ille vos docebit omnia" tamen in prse-
sente non disputabo, utrum apostolus auctoritatem
habeat instituendi sacramenti, quippe quod nunc dis-
putari non opus est : sed quum plane constet apostolum
TJnctionem istam pro sacramento tradere, non dubito
vere sacramentum esse, et apostolum non fuisse tarn
impie arrogantem, ut pro sacramento traderet populo
quod sacramentum non esset ; sed, si condendi sacra
menti potestatem non habuit, verbis illis id tradidisset
populo, quod ipse acceperat a Christo, qui, ut alia
mundo volebat innotescere per Matthseum, alia per Lu-
cam, per Joannem alia, alia prseterea per apostolum
Paulum, cur fieri non possit, ut qusedam etiam doceri
voluerit per apostolum Jacobum ?

440 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

'pleased to make known some Things unto us, by the
Apostle St. James.

Luther having thus strenuously behaved himself
against the Apostle, begins now altogether to turn him
self against the Church: 'Which (as he says) abuseth
the Words of the Apostle, in not administring this Unc
tion to the Sick, but when at the Point of Death:7
Whereas St. James says, 'If any be sick, not if any be
dying.' As if the Church sinned in not exhibiting in
considerately, in every light Fever, (contracted, per
haps, by too much Drinking) so great a Thing as a
Sacrament; or, in not attributing to herself a Miracle
in healing such Disease, as either Sleep, or Abstinence
can cure ; that it may not be doubted, though the Apostle
writes sick, that yet he did not mean a Man in every
light Sickness, but troubled with such Sickness, as, if
cured, may shew to be taken away by Virtue of the
Sacrament; and that this Sacrament is not to be ad
hibited, but in great Sickness; appears by all the
Prayers which are said over the sick Person, which, no
Doubt, are very antient, and not of the new Invention
of those he calls Divines. And though they do not
promise an assured Health of the Body, yet do they not
despair of Health; nor do they (as Luther says,) come
to such only, as are sure undoubtedly to die; for it
should be in vain to pray for his Health, if they were
sure of his Death.

Therefore the Church's Intention, is, not (as he im
pertinently cavils) that this should be the last Sacra
ment, although it is so called, but on the Contrary, and
that the sick Person may recover his Health ; which, if
God is not pleased he should ; yet that is no Prejudice to
the Force and Virtue of the Sacrament, which tends
more to the curing of the Soul, than to the Health of
the Body.

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctwnis 441

Lutherus postquam se tarn strenue quam videtis gessit
ad versus apostolum, jam totum se convertit ad ridendum
Ecclesiam, quse verbis apostoli, ut dicit Lutherus, abuti-
tur, quod non ministret, nisi ad mortem usque segrotanti,
quum Jacobus dicat: feSi quis infirmatur.," non si quis
moriatur : quasi ideo peccet Ecclesia, quod rem tantam,
quanta est sacr amentum, non adhibeat temere in quali-
bet levi febricula, quam aliquis nimium fortasse potando
contraxerit, neque in eo morbo, qui vel dormiendo
paululum, vel abstinendo curari possit, Ecclesia per sac-
ramentum velit efflagitare miraculum! E"e dubitari
possit, etiamsi duntaxat infirmum scripserit Jacobus,
sensisse tamen baud aegrotantem leviter, sed eo morbo
vexatum, cujus depulsio posset ostendere, si sanaretur,
sanatum sacramento, orationes omnes quse dicuntur
super infirmum (quas nemo dubitat esse vetustissimas,
non novum inventum eorum, quos iste vocat theologos),
ostendunt non adhibendum hoc sacramentum, nisi in
laborante graviter: et tamen ut non promittunt certam
salutem corporis, ita non desperant salutem, nee
veniunt, quod Lutherus ait, tanquam ad eos, qui jam
turn sint omnino morituri. Frustra enim tot orationi-
bus orarent salutem, si certo sibi sponderent mortem.
!N~on igitur id agit Ecclesia, quod inepte cavillatur iste,
ut sit Extrema-Unctio, licet vocetur extrema, sed agit ut
non sit extrema, sed convalescat segrotus. Quod si nolit
eum Deus convalescere, id tamen non evacuat vim ac
virtutem sacramenti, cujus praecipua cura non in corpus
fertur, sed animam.

442 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

As for Luther's Reason, concerning the Efficacy of
the Sign, it is altogether without Reason or Efficacy:
'If that Unction be (says he) a Sacrament, it ought,
without Doubt, to be an effectual Sign of what it prom
ises; but it promises the Health and Recovery of the
Sick, as appears by the Words, The Prayers of the
Faithful shall save the Sick, and our Lord will raise
him up : Yet who sees not but this Promise is fulfilled
in very few? What shall we say then? (says he), For
either the Apostle speaks false in this Promise, or else
this Unction is no Sacrament ; for a sacramental Prom
ise is certain, but this, for the most Part, fails.5 It ap
pears by this only Argument, that Luther cares not
much how open his Calumnies are, so that he can but,
under some Pretext of Truth, impose upon the Unwary :
For he shames not to object against the Divines, (as
said by them,) what they never spoke: A 'Sacrament
(says he) is, according to their Sayings, an effectual
Sign of what it promiseth ; but this Sacrament gives not
the Health of the Body, which it promiseth/ But
Divines say no such Thing; they say it is an effectual
Sign of Grace, defining it thus, 'A Sacrament is a visible
Sign of invisible Grace:7 They do not speak of the
Health of the Body, which may be given without Grace.
So that when he says, 'That if Unction be a Sacrament,
Lhe Apostle should lye ;' it is Luther himself that lyeth :
For the Sacrament, in as much as it is a Sacrament
promiseth not the Health of the Body, but of the Soul,
by a corporeal Sign. Nevertheless, Luther comprehends,
under the same Lye, not only the Apostle, but Christ
himself, though Unction were no Sacrament: For the
Words and Promise ought to be true also, without the
Sacrament. Therefore, when the Apostle says, 'The
Sick shall be healed by Unction and Prayers;7 And
when Christ says, 'These Signs shall follow those that

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 443

Nam ratio ilia Lutheri de efficacia signi nihil omnino
rationis habet, aut efficacise. "Si unctio ista sacranien-
tum est," inquit, adebet sine dubio esse, ut dicunt,
efficax signum ejus quod signat et promittit. At sani-
tatem et restitutionem infirmi promittit, ut stant aperta
verba : Oratio fidei salvabit infirmum, et alleviabii eum
Dominus. Quis autem non videt hanc promissionem
in paucis impleri ? Quid ergo dicemus, inquit ? Aut
apostolus hac prornissione mentitur, aut unctio ista sac-
ramentum non erit ; promissio enim sacramentalis certa
est, at hsec majore parte fallit."

Vel ex hoc argumento patere potest nihil curare Lu-
therum quam apertas afferat calumnias, modo specie
aliqua veritatis imponere possit incautis, quern non
pudet ea contra theologos afferre, quasi ab ipsis dicta,
quae nusquam dicunt. "Sacramentum," inquit, "ut
dicunt, est efficax signum ejus quod promittit: at hoc
sacramentum sanitatem corporis non efficit, quam
promittit." Theologi non istud dicunt, sed quod est
efficax signum gratia?. Sic enim definiunt: sacramen
tum est visibile signum invisibilis gratis; non dicunt
salutis corporese, quse dari possit et sine gratia. Qua-
mobrem, quod ait consequi, ut, si haec unctio sacramen
tum esset, apostolus mentiretur, Lutherus ipse menti
tur. Nam sacramentum, quatenus sacramentum est,
non salutem promittit corporis, sed animse, per signa
corporea. Alioqui Lutherus nihilominus eodem con-
cludit mendacio, non apostolum solum, sed etiam Chris
tum ipsum, quanquam unctio non esset sacramentum.
Debent enim verba et promissiones etiam extra sacra-
menta veraces esse. Igitur quum apostolus dicat sanan-
dum per unctionem et orationem, eum qui infirmus est,
et Christus, signa ilia secutura credentes, ut super segros
manus imponerent, et bene haberent, quis non videt hsec
sic interdum fieri, ut tamen non fiant semper ? Neque

444 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

believe in him, to wit, that thej should lay Hands on
the Sick, and they should be healed ;'* who sees not that
sometimes these Things are performed, but not always ?
Neither yet are they false who promised them: For, in
whatsoever Words they promised corporeal Things ; yet
every Body knows, they never promised them to be per
petual, when the Body, in which they are to be done,
cannot last always. But spiritual Things are here to be
understood, because the Spirit is to live for ever. For
Luther's Sentence (which exacts from the Divines, that,
if Unction is a Sacrament, it may always cure, that may
not be an ineffectual Sign) undertakes to prove that it
cannot be a Sacrament, if it renders not the Body im
mortal : Which, nevertheless, he himself promises to be
done by the Prayers of good Men, without the least stag
gering in Faith: For, (says he) 'There is no Doubt, but
at this Day, as many as we please may be cured:7
Which, if true, such a Faith as this may preserve Man
jramortal: For, seeing this may be done by Faith, not
only Sometimes, but, as he affirms, always, if Faith be
stable and undoubtful ; it is probable indeed, if any one
ever meet with such a Faith : And doubtless Luther was
a Man of such Faith, (having so much thereof, that in
Favour of it, in many Places, he almost bids Defiance to
good Works; being likewise one to whom God has re
vealed so many, and so great Mysteries, and who erects
a new Church, for which Miracles are absolutely neces
sary) it is therefore likely that Luther can perform
abundantly whatever can be done by Faith. If this be
true, I wonder he cures not every dying Person! We
look for News daily from Germany of his raising the
Dead : Yet, for all this, we hear that not only none are
cured by him, but that many good and innocent Priests
are killed, (by his Adherents) and cruelly murthered
*Mk. xvi. 17, 18.

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 445

tamen falsos esse qui promiserint, quum eos nemo dubi-
tet corporalia, quibuscumque verbis promiserint, nun-
quam promisisse perpetua, quum corpus in quo fieri
deberent perpetuum esse non possit. Spiritalia vero,
quia sua natura spiritus seternum victurus est, perpetua
consecutura pollicentur.

Nam Lutheri sententia, quse a theologis exigit ut, si
sacramentum sit Unctio, semper sanet, ne sit signum
inefficax, eo tendit ut sacramentum esse non possit, nisi
reddat corpus immortale, quod ipse tamen fieri posse
promittit per orationem f actam a bonis viris nihil hsesi-
tante fide. E"am prorsus dubium non esse dicit, hodie
quoque, sic sanari posse quotquot vellemus. Hoc si
dicit verum, talis fides qualis est illius, hominem servare
potest immortalem. ISTam quum ista fieri possint per
fidem, non solum interdum, sed, quod Lutnerus ait,
perpetuo, modo sit fides indubia, quse nihil hsesitet,
credibile est fidem istam, si cuiquam alteri, potissimum
contigisse Luthero, homini sic in fidem propenso, ut,
fidei favore, bonis operibus multis in locis propemodum
indicat bellum. Homini praeterea, cui nunc tot et tanta
mysteria revelavit Deus, ct qui novam condit Ecclesiam,
quam in rem opus est et miraculis. Igitur verisimile
est, quicquid fieri per fidem potest, abunde Lutherum
facere. Demiror igitur, si vera dicit, ipsum non curare
quoscumque morientes. Et quotidie auscultamus
rumores e Germania, qui referant ressuscitatos etiam
sepultos, quum interim semper audimus non modo sana-
tum nullum, sed etiam per illius quosdam satellites,
occisos et crudeliter trucidatos, ejus causa, bonos et
innocentes sacerdotes, ut exemplo doceret Ordinem
nihil esse, figmentum esse characterem, meticulosum

446 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

for his Sake ; that, by his Example, he may teach, 'That
Holy Order is nothing: That Character is a Fiction:
That David was timorous for repenting himself to have
touched the Lord's Anointed.'*

These are Luther's Cures, wrought by his great Faith,
without good Works. For, seeing he kills, and cures
not; it appears plainly, (as he says, 'That Prayers are
to be made not only by Faith, but also by good Men/)
that Luther, not being a good Man, can therefore cure
no Body himself. 'This Unction, he says, is no Sacra
ment, because it does not always heal the Body :' But
himself is a holy Man, by whom, as it is reported, the
Body is killed, and certainly Souls are killed. St. James
writes nothing worthy an apostolick Spirit ; but Luther
writes every Thing worthy such Spirit, and discerns
Things unworthy thereof, and that against the whole
Church : which, as he acknowledges, cannot be deceived
in discerning such Scripture. In which Thing, when I
had read St. James's Epistle, and saw so many Things
worthy an apostolic Spirit therein, (as the Joy in over
coming Temptations, Patience in Adversity, Wisdom to
be begged from God, Hopes to be placed in God without
staggering, with many such like ; all which are read in
the Apostle) I much wonder what Reason Luther had
to think them unworthy to have been writ by an Apostle.
But perhaps Luther would that the Apostle had writ
such Things as these, to wit, 'That Mass is not profitable
to the People, that Order is a vain Fiction;' and such
like, as himself writes ; which are all Things worthy an
apostolic Spirit.

But though, as I said, I admired why Luther should
be so much displeased at St. James's Epistle; yet, hav-
*I. Ks. xxvi. 11, 23.

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 447

fuisse Davidem, quern poenituerit tetigisse Christum
Domini.

Hsec sunt Lutheri sanationes, quas nihil vacillans
ejus fides operatur, absque bonis operibus. Nam quod
occidit, non sanat, inde plane accedit, quod, ut Lutherus
ait, oratio non tantum cum fide facienda est, sed etiam
a bono viro, quse res Lutherum, qui vir bonus non est,
ne quemquam sanet, impedit. Unctio hsec sacramen-
tum non est, quia non semper sanat corpus. Lutherus
vir sacer est, per quern et corpus, ut ferunt, occiditur,
et certe occiduntur animse. Jacobus apostolus nihil
dignum scribit apostolico spiritu; Lutherus apostolico
spiritu digna scribit omnia, et quse sint indigna dis-
cernit, idque contra totam Ecclesiam, quam in talium
discretione Scripturarum falli, fassus est ipse non
posse.

Qua in re, quum epistolam Jacobi legerem, atque ibi
tarn multa conspicerem apostolico digna spiritu, vehe-
menter admiratus sum quid in mentem venerit Luthero,
ut gaudium in tentationibus, patientiam in adversis, a
Deo petendam sapientiam, in Deo fiducia nihil haesi-
tante, sperandum, et hujusmodi multa (nam talia sunt,
quse tota leguntur epistola) miratus, inquam, sum, cur
Lutherus putarit indigna quse scriberentur ab apostolo:
an ilia potius scribere debebat apostolus, populo nihil
esse fructus in Missa, et Ordinem inane figmentum
esse, et alia quse Lutherus scribit hujusmodi ? quse quan-
quam sint omnia dignissima spiritu apostatico, tamen
contemnere non debet, si minor a scribant minores
apostoli.

Atqui licet aliquandiu, quod dixi, iniratus sum cur
Luthero displiceat epistola Jacobi, tamen ubi legi
ssepius, et oculos intendi pressius, desii profecto mirari.

448 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

ing read it more attentively, I wonder not at all: For,
by the Apostle's Writings, I find that he so narrowly
touches Luther every-where, as if, by his prophetic
Spirit, he had plainly foreseen him. For, when Luther
under the Pretext of Faith, despises good Works; St.
James, on the other Side, disputes, by Keason, Scrip
ture, and Example, 'that Faith without Works, is
dead :' Nor is it in one Place alone, that by bitter
Words, he resists that prattling Petulancy of Luther: 'If
any one (says he) esteem himself religious, not bridling
his Tongue, but seducing his own Heart, his Religion
is vain.'* Besides Luther frets at this, which 'he sees
very fitly may be applied to his own Tongue.' The
Tongue is a restless Evil, full of deadly Poison, f Finally,
he perceives that what the Apostle has writ against con
tentious Persons, is truly spoken against his own Opin
ions: 'For (says the Apostle) who is wise and well-
disciplined among you ? Let him shew forth his Works
by a good Conversation, in the Meekness of Wisdom;
because, if you have the Zeal of Souls, and Contentions
be in your Hearts, do not glory, being Lyars against the
Truth. For this is not Wisdom descending from above,
from the Father of Lights, but an earthly, beastly, and
diabolical Wisdom : For where Zeal is joined with Con
tention, there also is Inconstancy, and every naughty
Work. But the Wisdom which is from above, is first of
all shamefaced, then peaceable, modest, complyable,
agreeing with good Things, full of Mercy and good
Works, judging with Dissimulation : And the Fruit of
Justice is sown in Peace to the Workers of Peace. '$

These, gentle Eeader, are the Words which move

Luther to Wrath against the Apostle : These, I say, are

the Words whereby the Apostle as openly touches Lu-

ther's Petulancy, Railings, wicked and contentious

*Jas i. 26. fJas. Hi. 8. tJas. iii. 13 fol,

De Sacr. Extremoe-Unctionis 449

Nam ea scribit apostolus, ut plane videri possit pro-
phetico spiritu prsenovisse Lutherum: ita virum un-
dique pungit ad vivum. Nam quum Lutherus fidei pra>
textu contemnat opera, Jacobus e diverso disputat, ra-
tione, Scripturis, exemplis fidem sine operibus mortuam
esse. Prseterea garrulam istam Lutheri petulantiam
non uno loco verbis invadit acerrimis. "Si quis" in-
quit, tfputat se religiosum esse, non refrenans linguam
suam, sed seducens cor suum, hujus vana est religio"
Accedit ad hsec quod in suam linguam Lutherus aptis-
sime videt competere, quod illi f rendit legens : ft Lingua
inquietum malum, plena veneno mortifero." Denique
sentit in sua dogmata verissime dici quse de contentiosis
hunc in modum scribit pluribus ibi verbis apostolus:
"Quis sapiens et disciplinatus inter vos? Ostendat ex
bona conversatione operaiionem suam in mansuetudine
sapientice. Quod si zelum amarum habetis, et conten-
tiones sint in cordibus vestris, nolite gloriari, et men-
daces esse adversus veritatem. Non est enim ista sa-
pientia desursum descendens a Patre luminum, sed
terrena, animalis, diabolica. Ubi enim zelus et con-
tentio, ibi inconstantia, et omne opus pravum. Quce
autem desursum est sapientia, primum quidem pudica
est, deinde pacifica, modesta, suadibilis, bonis consen-
tiens, plena misericordia, et fructibus bonis, non judi-
cans, sine simulatione. Fructus autem justitiw in pace
seminatur facientibus pacem."

Haec sunt, lector, quse Lutherum commovent ut ei non
placeat apostolus. Hsec, inquam, sunt, quibus apostolus
aperte Lutherum ac Lutheri petulantiam, maledicen-
tiam, impia et contentiosa dogmata, non secus ac si
vidisset virum. et verba legisset, attingit. Cujus epis-

450 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

Opinions; even as if he had seen him, and read his
Words. I question not but his Epistle, though never so
much despised by Luther, will sufficiently prove to all
Christians the Sacrament of Extreme-Unction ; nor shall
Luther be ever so powerful, as to be able to abolish any
Sacrament, which, for the Salvation of the Faithful,
has been received by the Church, against which the
Gates of Hell shall never prevail ; much less this single
Brother, who is but a sooty Wicket of Hell.

WE have in this little Book, courteous Reader, clearly
demonstrated, I hope, how absurdly and impiously
Luther has handled the Holy Sacraments : For, though
we have not touched all Things contained in his Book ;
yet so far as was necessary to defend the Sacraments,
(which only was our design) I suppose I have treated,
though not so sufficiently as might have been done, yet
more than is even necessary ; insomuch that it behoves
me not to insist any longer thereupon; else were it no
hard Matter to enrich this Discourse with more plentiful
Arguments, Laws, and Sentences of the Holy Fathers,
and Scripture itself, if it were not in vain, upon
Luther's Account, and for others more than necessary;
for it is as easy for the Ethiopian to change his colour,
or the Leopard his spots, as for Luther to be converted
by teaching. But that others may understand how false
and wicked his Doctrine is, lest they might be so far
deceived as to have a good Opinion of him ; I doubt not
but in all Parts there are very learned Men, though I
had said Nothing at all of this Matter, who have much
more clearly discovered the same, than can be shewn by
me. And if there be any who desire to know this strange
Work of his, I think I have sufficiently made it apparent
to them. For, seeing by what has been said, it is evident
to all Men what sacrilegious Opinions he has of the
Sacrament of our Lord's Body, (from which the Sane-

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 451

tolam quantumvis earn contemnat Lutherus, non dubito
satis approbare Christianis omnibus Unctionis-Extremse
sacramentum, nee tarn potentem fore Lutherum, ut
ullum sacramentum possit evertere, quod in salutem
fidelium fides recepit Ecclesise, adversus quam nee portse
prsevalebunt inferorum, nedum fraterculus unus, in-
ferni fuliginosum posticum.

FECIMUS hoc libello tibi, lector, ut spero, perspicuum
quam absurde Lutherus et impie tractarit sacrament a.
Nam etsi non attigimus omnia, quse liber ipsius conti-
net, tamen quod attinet ad tuenda sacramenta ipsa
(neque enim aliud erat institutum meum) tractasse rem
videor, si non quam multis fieri potuit, certe pluribus
ferme quam necesse fuit, tantum abest ut oporteat im-
morari diutius. Alioqui et rationibus, et legibus, et
Doctorum sententiis, et Scripturis ipsis non fuisset
difficile rem locupletare cumulatius, nisi erga et Luthe-
rum frustra fecissemus, et erga cseteros supervacue.

Nam si Lutherum docendo conemur immutare, citius
et nigrorem ^Ethiops, et varietatem pardus immutabit.
Sin aliis ostendere quam falso et quam maligne sentiat,
ne quis ita fallatur, ut de illo sentiat bene, passim doc-
tissimos viros esse non dubito, qui, vel tacentibus nobis,
id multo clarius perpendant, quam ipse queam osten
dere, et si qui sint, qui alienam in id operam desiderant,
his abunde jam nunc opinor ostendisse me. Quum
enim ex his quse disseruimus inclarescat omnibus, quam
sacrilega statuat dogmata de sacramento illo quod ipsius
Christi corpus est (e quo sacramenta reliqua quicquid
habent sacri promanat), quis dubitare potuisset, etiamsi
nihil adjecissem amplius, quam indignis ille modis

452 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

tity of all the other Sacraments flows) who would have
doubted, if I had said Nothing else, how unworthily,
without Scruple, he treats all the rest of the Sacra
ments ? Which, as you have seen, he has handled in
such Sort, that he abolishes and destroys them all, except
Baptism alone ; and that too, he has abused and deprived
of all Grace; leaving it for no other End, than in a
Contumely of Penance; in some, denying the Sign, in
others, the Matter itself: Neither proves he any Thing
in this so great a Matter; nor brings he any Thing in
Confirmation of his Doctrine; contenting himself in
only denying whatever the Church admits. What every
Body believes, he alone, by his vain Reason, laughs at ;
denouncing himself to admit Nothing, but clear and
evident Scriptures: And these too, if alledged by any
against him, he either evades by some private Exposi
tion of his own, or else denies them to belong to their
own Authors. None of the Doctors are so antient, none
so holy, none of so great Authority in treating of Holy
Writ : But this new Doctor, this little Saint, this Man
of Learning; rejects with great Authority. Seeing
therefore he despiseth all Men, and believes none, he
ought not to take it ill, if every Body discredit him
again. I am so far from intending to hold any further
Dispute with him, that I almost repent myself of what
I have already argued against him. For what avails it
to dispute against a Man, who disagrees with every one,
even with himself? who affirms in one Place, what he
denies in another; denying what he presently affirms;
who, if you object Faith, combats by Eeason; if you
touch him with Reason, pretends Faith ; if you alledge
Philosophers, he flies to Scripture; if you propound
Scripture, he trifles with Sophistry ; who is ashamed of
Nothing, fears none, and thinks himself under no Law ;
who contemns the antient Doctors of the Church, and

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 453

tractare csetera sacramenta non dubitet? Quse sicut
videtis tractavit sic, ut prseter Baptismum unum, et
ilium quoque male vexatum, et omni privatum gratia,
nee in aliud relictum, quam in contumeliam Poeniten-
tise, tollat prorsus, atque evertat omnia, in aliis signum
negans, in aliis rem inficians, nee in tanta re probat
quicquam, nee affert aliquid, quo confirmet sua, sat
habens negare tantum quicquid recepit Ecclesia. Quic-
quid creditur ab omnibus, ratione futili solus eludit, ac
se denuntiat nihil admissurum prseter claras et evi-
dentes Scripturas. Quas ipsas tamen, si quis afferat,
vel aliquo repellit commento, vel auctoris esse, cujus
feruntur, negat. Doctorum vero nemo tarn vetus est,
nemo tarn sanctus, nemo tantae auctoritatis in tractatu
sacrarum litterarum, quern non iste novus doctorculus,
sanctulus et eruditulus magna cum auctoritate rejiciat.

Quamobrem, quum Lutherus omnes contemnat, et
credat nemini, debet non indignari si nemo vicissim
credat illi. Cum quo tantum abest ut disputem pluri-
bus, ut propemodum pigeat disputasse tarn multis.
Quid enim prodest amplius cum illo disserere, qui
cseteris dissentit omnibus, et non consentit sibi ? qui
quod alibi negat, alibi dicit; quod dicit, id rursum
negat ? Qui si fidem objicias, ratione dimicat ; si
ratione ferias, prsetendit fidem. Si philosophos alleges,
appellat Scripturam; si Scripturam proponas, nugatur
sophismate. Quern neque pudet quicquam, neque timet
quemquam, neque legein putat tenere se ullam. Qui
veteres Ecclesia? Doctores contemnit, novos e sublirni
deridet. Summum Ecclesiae Pontificem insectatur con-
vitiis. Ecclesise consuetudines, dogmata, mores, leges,

454 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

derides the new ones in the highest Degree ; loads with
Keproaches the chief Bishop of the Church: Finally,
he so undervalues the Customs, Doctrine, Manners,
Laws, Decrees, and Faith of the Church ; yea, the whole
Church itself; that he almost denies there is any such
Thing as a Church; except perhaps such a one as him
self makes up of two or three Heretics, of whom him
self is Chief. Wherefore, since he is such a one, as will
have no solid or certain Principle betwixt himself and
his Adversary; but requires to be free in whatever
pleases him, and as often as it pleases him lawfully to
assert or deny; when, neither Reason, Scripture, Cus
tom, Laws, human or divine Authority, binds him: I
thought it not fit to dispute any longer with him, nor to
contend, by painful Reason, against his Heresies, which
he confirms by no Reason. But I rather advise all
Christians, that, as the most exterminating of Plagues,
they shun him, who endeavours to bring into the
Church of Christ such foul Prodigies, being the very
Doctrine of Antichrist. For, if he, who studies to move
a Schism in any one Thing, is to be extirpated with all
Care; with what great Endeavours is he to be rooted
out, who, not only goes about to sew Dissention, to stir
up the People against the chief Bishop, Children against
their Parents, Christians against the Vicar of Christ;
finally, who endeavours to dissolve by his Tumults,
Brawls and Contentions, the whole Church of Christ,
which he, in the Time of his precious Death, has bound
together by the Bond of Charity and Love ; and also to
destroy, prophane and pollute, with a most execrable
Mind, filthy Tongue, and detestable Touch, what is most
sacred therein ; who, if he did but give any Hopes of
Cure in himself, or any Sign of Amendment, he would
thereby move all People to regard Disposition, and to
endeavour, by all good Means possible, to heal him, and

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 455

decreta, fidem, Ecclesiam denique ipsam adeo floccif acit
universam, ut nee esse fere fateatur ullam, nisi fors
Ecclesiam illam, quam facit ipse duorum vel trium
hsereticorum, quorum sit ipse caput.

Quamobrem, quum sit ejusmodi, ut nihil statuat
principii, quod certum sit ac solidum, quod ei cum dis-
putante coiiveniat, sed sibi liberum relinqui postulet, ut
quicquid libet, quando libet, quoties libet, id illi liceat
et asserere vicissim, et negare : quum neque ratione sese,
neque Scriptura, neque moribus, neque legibus, neque
auctoritate demum vel humana, vel divina patiatur as-
tringi, non constitui cum eo disserendum amplius, nee
adversus eas hsereses, quse nulla ratione firmantur,
operosa ratione pugnandum, sed admonendos potius
Christianos omnes, ut tanquam teterrimam pestem devi-
tent ilium, qui tarn freda portenta, ipsissima Antichristi
dogmata, in Ecclesiam Christi conatur invehere. ISTam
si omnimodo curandum est ut extirpetur qui de quavis
una re schisma suscitare studuerit, quanto studio con-
niti decet ut evellatur is qui non dissidium modo pergit
serere, et populum in Pontificem, filios in parentem.
Christianos in Christi vicarium provocare, totam
denique Ecclesiam Christi, quam ille moriens amore et
charitate colligavit, tumultu, rixis et contentione dis-
solvere, verum etiam quicquid est in ea sacrosanctum
exsecrabili mente, spurcissima lingua, scelerato contactu
rescindere, temerare, polluere ? Qui si quam tamen de
se salutis spem, si quod emendandi sui signum daret,
hortarer omnes ut hominis sic affecti curam susciperent,
et in hoc incumberent, ut modis quam possent optimis,
medicarentur, et sanitati mentis restitution facerent ut
hsereses a se propositas revocaret. Verum adhuc pro-

456 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

to restore him to Soundness of Mind, that he might
again revoke the Heresies he has broached. But in
deed, as yet, I see in him all the Signs that precede
Death: I am not so much moved to think thus, by
Reason of his Disease, though never so mortal; as by
his admitting no Medicine, nor of any manual Opera
tion of the Chyrurgion : For how can he be cured, who
will not suffer himself to be handled ? Or in what Man
ner is he to be dealt withal; who, if you teach him,

trifles with you ? If you advise him, is angry ? If

you exhort him, resists ? If in any Thing you would

appease him, is incensed ? — If you resist him, is mad ?
Otherwise, if he could be cured, what has the pious
Vicar of Christ omitted, who, following the Example of
a good Shepherd, would seek, find, take on his Shoul
ders, and bring home to the Fold this lost Sheep ? But,
alas ! the most greedy Wolf of Hell has surprized him,
devoured and swallowed him down into the lowest Part
of his Belly, where he lies half alive, and half dead in
Death: And wThilst the pious Pastor calls him, and
bewails his Loss, he belches out of the filthy Mouth of
the hellish Wolf these foul Inveighings, which the Ears
of the whole Flock do detest, disdain, and abhor.

For, first of all, being unprovoked in any Kind, he
proposed some Articles of Indulgences; in which, (un
der Pretence of Godliness,) he most impiously defamed
the Chief Bishop: Afterwards, that he might under
Pretence of Honour and Duty, cast on the Pope the
greater Aspersion, he transmitted them to Rome, as if
submitting himself to the Pope's Judgment ; but he aug
mented them with Declarations, much worse than they
were themselves ; that it might appear to all Men, that
the Pope would not be counselled by a good and pious
Man, but derided by a knavish little Brother, as if so
stupid as to hold for an Honour such a Contumely, as

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 457

fecto, qusecumque solent ad mortem esse signa, omnia
huic esse video. Quod ut censeam non tarn morbus ejus,
quantumvis lethalis, me movet, quam ipse: quippe qui
medicinam nullam, nullam prorsus manum medicantis
admittit. Quomodo enim curari potest qui se tractari
non patitur? Aut quomodo tractari potest, quern si
quid doces, nugatur; si quid mones, irascitur; si quid
hortaris, obnititur; si quid placas, incenditur; si quid
adversaris, insanit ?

Alioquin si curari potuisset, quid omisit pientissimus
Christi vicarius, quo pastoris sui secutus exemplum,
ovem hanc errantem qusereret, inveniret, in humeros
tolleret, ac reportaret in stabulum? Sed heu Lupus
averni pessimus, anteceperat, devoraverat, atque in
imum ventrem dimiserat, ubi semivivus adhuc in morte
jacens, adversus inclamantem se pastorem pium, et
perditionem ejus deplorantem, e spurco tartarei Lupi
rictu, fcedos illos latratus eructat, quos totius gregis
aures aversantur, abominantur, exhorrent.

primum, nihil omnino lacessitus, articulos pro-
posuit de Indulgentiis, quibus prsetextu pietatis impie
traduceret summum Pontificem. Deinde, ut per honoris
eum et officii speciem majore contumelia perfunderet,
eos transmittit Romain, tanquam Pontificis judicio sub-
mittens, sed auctos ante declarationibus multo quam
essent ipsi deterioribus ; ut plane liqueret omnibus,
Pontificem non a viro bono pioque consuli, sed a frater-
culo nebulone rideri, tanquam ita stupidum, ut pro
honore duceret insignem et nullius unquam exempli
contumeliam, barbamque, quod aiunt, vellendam pra>
beret irrisori. Si nihil mali commerebatur Pontifex,

458 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

the like thereof had never before been heard. If the
Pope deserved no 111, why has this degenerate Son, cast
a false and undeserving Scandal on his Father ? But if
any Thing had been done at Rome, which needed re
forming; yet if Luther had been (as he would be ac
counted) an honest Man, and zealous Christian, he
should not have preferred his own private Glory before
the public Good of all others, nor have desired to have
had the Credit of a Scorner amongst the Wicked, laugh
ing at the Nakedness of his sleeping Father,* uncover
ing, and pointing thereto with his Finger ; but, contrary-
wise, would have covered the same, and would have more
secretly advised him in his own Person by Letters, fol
lowing the Example of the Apostle, who commands us
not to deride or reproach our Superiors, but to seek of
them :f Which if Luther had done, I doubt not but the
more holy Pope, (so well is his great Benignity known
to all Men) being awakened, should have blessed his Son
Japhet; would have rendered him Thanks for his Piety ;
and would not have cursed him in his Anger ; who has
f orborn to curse him when he was mocked by him ; but,
pitying the miserable, and (more tender of a Son, than
mindful of a Scoffer) has dealt with him by most
honourable Men, in whose Presence he was not worthy
to appear, that he might desist from his Iniquity: To
which pious and wholesome Counsel, he was so far from
obeying, that he not only derided the Legate, careful for
his Salvation, but also immediately published another
Book, in which he endeavoured to overthrow the Pope's
Power : After which, he was summoned to Rome, that
he might either render Reasons of his Writings, or re
cant what he had inconsiderately written; having any
Security imaginable offered him, that he should not
undergo the Punishment which he deserved, with suffi-
*Gen. ix. 22 fol. fl. Tim. v. 1.

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 459

cur films degener immerentem patrem falsa conspersit
infamia ? At si quid Romae fiebat, quod oporteret im-
mutari, tamen si fuisset Lutherus, quod haberi volebat,
probus, et Christiana? rei studiosus, non prseposuisset
privatam gloriam suam publico omnium commodo, nee
scurrandi f amam sibi venatus esset apud improbos, dor-
mienti pudenda parentis irridens, et revelata common-
strans digito. sed adversiis contexisset potius, et vel
coram, vel per epistolam secretius reverenter admonuis-
set, Apostoli praBceptum secutus, qui jubet ut ma j ores
non rideamus, non objurgemus, sed obsecremus. Quod
si fecisset Lutherus, baud dubito quin beatissimus Pon-
tifex (tanta est ejus nulli non explorata benignitas) ex-
pergefactus benedixisset filio suo Japhet, et pietatis
retulisset gratiam, non maledixisset iratus, qui ne sic
quidem adhuc maledixit illudenti, sed misertus miseri,
magisque filii memor? quam irrisoris, egit cum eo per
viros honoratissimos, in quorum ille conspectum prodire
non erat dignus, ut ab iniquitate desisteret. Cui tarn
pio ac salubri consilio tantum abfuit ut paruerit, ut non
solum deriserit legatum, de ipsius salute sollicitum, sed
etiam novum librum ederet e vestigio, in quo Pontificis
potestatem machinabatur evertere. Vocatus deinde
Romam, ut vel scriptorum causam redderet, vel temere
scripta recantaret, quavis oblata securitate non sube-
undi supplicii quod meruerat, oblato quod in rem satis
esset viatico, tamen, ut insignem declararet obedientis
viri modestiam, venire contempsit fraterculus ad Ponti-
ficem, nisi regio instructus apparatu, et bellico stipatus
exercitu. Sed homo cautus appellavit ad generale con-
silium, nee tamen quodlibet, sed quod proxime congre-
garetur in Spiritu sancto, ut in quoeumque damnaretur,
ibi negaret esse Spiritum sanctum, quern bomo sanctus
et spiritalis misquam fatetur esse, nisi in sinu suo.

460 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

cient Expenses offered him for his Journey: Yet, for
all this, this silly Brother, to shew his great Modesty
and Obedience to the Pope, refused to go, unless in the
Equipage of a King, and guarded by a warlike Army:
But this wary Man made his Appeal to a general
Council ; yet not to every Council, but to such as should
next meet in the Holy Ghost ; that in whatsoever Coun
cil, he was condemned, he might deny the Holy Ghost
to be present therein; for this holy and spiritual Man
denies Him to be any where, but in his own Bosom:
Wherefore, being oftentimes advised to repent of his
Wickedness, the most conscientious Shepherd has at
length been forced to cast out from the Eold the Sheep
suffering with an incurable Disease, lest the sound Sheep
be corrupted by Contact, and to deplore the Death of his
son Absolom, whose Life he was unable to save, while
he sees him hanging from a Tree by his beautiful Hair,
of which he had stupidly grown proud.* So Luther,
realizing himself to be cast out from the Society of the
Faithful, began to do what the lamented Wicked Ones
do, who, when they have fallen into Contempt, con
temn, f He has not uttered a Groan; he has not be
wailed his Case, in which, exalted like Lucifer, like
Lightning he has fallen^ and wrought Damage; but
having imitated the Despair of the Devil, himself a
Devil too, that is having become a Calumniator, he has
begun to rush into Blasphemies and Calumnies against
the Pope, and, jealous of others faithful, like the old
Serpent, § to set up Nets of Infidelity, that he might get
them to taste of the forbidden Tree of harmful Knowl
edge and to be driven out of the Paradise of the Church
(whence he had fallen) onto an Earth bringing forth
Thorns and Briars. I indeed bear very ill this Man's

*II. Ks. xviii. 9. JLu. x. 18.

fProv. xviii. 8. §Gen, iii.

De Sacr. Extremce-Unciionis 461

Quamobrem, iterum atque iterum admonitus ut ab
impietate resipisceret, quum iterum atque iterum im-
pietatem ad impietatem adjiceret, adactus est tandem
pientissimus Pastor ovem immedicabili scabie laboran-
tem, ne sanas attactu corrumperet, ex ovili procul
ejicere, et filii sui Absolonis, cujus vitam servare non
poterat, mortem deplorare, dum ab arbore pendentem
conspicit decora caesarie, qua stulte superbierat. Luthe-
rus ergo sentiens ejectum se e societate fidelium, facere
coepit quod deplorati solent impii, qui quum in profun-
dum venerint, contemnunt. Non ingemuit ; non planxit
casum suum, quo, sicut Lucifer exalt atus, sicut fulgur
corruerat et allisus est, sed imitatus diaboli desperatio-
nem, diabolus etiam ipse, hoc est calumniator effectus,
adversus Pontificem in blasphemias et calumnias cospit
erumpere, et reliquis invidens fidelibus, velut serpens
antiquus infidelitatis laqueos tendere, ut eos e vetito
scientise noxise ligno gustantes, ex Ecclesise paradiso,
unde ipse deciderat, procuraret expelli in terram germi-
nantem spinas et tribulos.

Ego profecto tantam hominis dementiam et miserri-
mnm casum perquam moleste fero, cupioque ut vel
adhuc, inspirante gratiam Deo, resipiscat tandem, con-

462 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

great Madness, and most lamentable State, and I wish
that even now (God inspiring him by Grace) he may
at length come to his Senses and be converted and live.
And I do not wish this so much for his own Sake,
(though for his too, as I wish all to be saved, if it be
possible) as that at length being converted, and like the
prodigal Son* returned to the Mercy of so benign a
Father, and having confessed his Error, he may recall
any whom he has made err.

But if he has sunken so deep in the Mire that now
the Sink of Impiety and Despair shuts its Mouth upon
him,f let him blate, blaspheme, calumniate, act as a
Madman, so that "he that is filthy, let him be filthy
still."}

But I beseech and entreat all other Christians, and
through the Bowels of Christ, (Whose Faith we pro
fess,) to turn away their Ears from the impious Words
and not to foster Schisms and Discords, especially at
this Time when most particularly it behooves Christians
to be concordant against the Enemies of Christ. Do not
listen to the Insults and Detractions against the Vicar
of Christ which the Fury of the little Monk spews up
against the Pope; nor contaminate Breasts sacred to
Christ with impious Heresies, for if one sews these he
has no Charity, swells with vain Glory, loses his Reason,
and burns with Envy. Finally with what Feelings they
would stand together against the Turks, against the
Saracens, against anything Infidel anywhere, with the
same Feelings they should stand together against this
one little Monk weak in Strength, but in Temper more
harmful than all Turks, all Saracens, all Infidels any
where.

*Lu. xv. fPs. Ixviii. JApoc. xx|i

The End.

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 463

vertaiurque, et vivat: nee id tarn ipsius causa cupio
(quanquam ipsius etiam, ut qui omnes cupiam salvos,
si possit fieri) quam ut aliquando conversus, ac, velut
filius prodigus, reversus ad misericordiam tarn benigrd
Patris, et errorem suum confessus, in viam revocet, si
quos eifecit errare. Cseterum si is tarn profunde se
demersit, ut jam super eum puteus impietatis ac
desperationis urgeat os suum, blateret, blasphemet,
calumnietur, insaniat, ut qui sordet, sordescat
adhuc !

Cseteros vero Christianos omnes obsecro, et per Christ!
viscera, cujus fidem profitemur, obtestor, ut ab impiis
verbis avertant aures, neque schismata foveant et dis-
cordias, hoc prsesertim tempore, in quo maxime opor-
tebat adversus hostes Christi Christianos esse Concordes.
ISTeque adversus Christi vicarium probris et detractioni-
bus auscultent, quas in Pontincem fraterculi furor
eructat, neque sacrata Christo pectora haeresibus impiis
contaminent: quas si seminat, charitate vacat, gloria
turget, ratione friget, fervet invidia. Denique, quibus
animis adversus Turcas, adversus Saracenos, adversus
quicquid est uspiam infidelium consisterent, iisdem
animis consistant adversus unum istum viribus im-
becillum; sed animo Turcis omnibus, omnibus Sara-
cenis, omnibus usquam infidelibus nocentiorem frater-
culum.

Finis.

^Translation of flnbey

NOTE. The references are to the pages of the Paris edition of
1562, by Desboys ; every second or right-hand page is numbered,
and that is " a" ; the left-hand page is not numbered, but is " b"; the
numbers only, not the letters, are printed in the body of the work.

Blpbabetical fnoea; to tbe " Defence of tbe
Seven Sacraments"

Ambrose ordered married people to live continently

during Lent, 48 b.

When the Apostles were ordained priests, 80 a.
Worthless Calling of Luther to the council, 100 a.
Occasion of mixing Water in the chalice, 32 a.
Shrewd interpretation of Luther, 18 b.
Arrogance of Luther, 51 b.
Argument from Christ's promise valid against Luther,

27 a.

Attrition greatly displeases Luther, 50 a.
Author's object, 96 b.

C

Open Calumny of Luther, 58 a.

Triple Captivity of Luther exploded, 26 b.

Reason of reserved Cases, 54 b.

In which sacraments a Character is imprinted, 68 b.

Circumstances of sins to be confessed, 56 b.

Luther condemns Celibacy of priests, 77 a.

Lord's Supper told of, 30 b.

Elegant and convincing Comparison of the sacrament,

19 a.
Beautiful Figure, 45 a.

B00ectfoni0 Septcm Sacramentorum fn&ej Blpbabeticua

Ambrosius conjuges ab amplexibus in quadragesima

jussit abstinere, 48 b.

Apostoli quando ordinati sint sacerdotes, 80 a.
Appellatio Lutheri ad concilium friuola, 100 a.
Aquse miscendse in calice, occasio, 32 a.
Argutula Lutheri interpretatio, 18 b.
Arrogantia Lutheri, 51 b.
Argumentum validum ex Christi promissione contra

Lutherum, 27 a.

Attritio nimium displicet Luthero, 50 a.
Authoris institutura, 96 b.

C

Calumnia aperta Lutheri, 58 a.

Captivitas Lutheri trina excutitur, 26 b.

Casuum reservandorum ratio, 54 b.

Character in quibus sacramentis imprimatur, 68 b.

Circumstantise peccatorum confitendse, 56 b.

Coelibatum Sacerdotum damnat Lutherus, 77 a.

Coena Dominica expensa, 30 b.

Comparatio elegans et efficax de Sacramento,

19 a.
Comparatio pulchra, 45 a.

466 Translation of Index

Luther's false Figure of fire and iron, 25 a.
Strong confirmation of auricular Confession, 53 b.
Consideration of the sacrament of Confirmation, 61 a

and fol.

Confusion of Luther, 54 a.
That the sacrament of Marriage existed among all races,

65 b.
Better causes of Contrition than those which Luther

offers, 51 b.
The Church is to be Believed about the institution of

the sacraments, 61 b.

D

Explanation of the substantial words of the sacrament

of the altar against Luther, 19 b.
That God takes an interest in our works, 59 b.
If one may believe Luther, Dionysius is nothing to

Luther, 63 a.

E

The Church takes precedence of all the evangelists,

65 a.
The Church has to discern the word of God from the

words of men, 78 b.
The faith of the Church is preserved in traditions,

62 a.
Why Bishops alone impose their hands on the baptized

that they may receive the Holy Ghost, 64 a.
The Exitus of the faithful from Luther, 26 a.
Exorcisms in the Church, 46 a.
Consideration of Extreme Unction, 89 a.

Why the marriage of the Faithful is a sacrament rather

than that of infidels, 66 a.
Faith is supported by reason and scripture, 47 a.

Index Alphabeticus 467

Comparatio Luther i de ferro et igne elusa, 25 a.
Confessionis clancularise solida confirmatio, 53 b.
Confirmationis sacrament! consideratio, 61 a et

dein.

Confusio Lutherana, 54 a.
Conjugii sacramentum fuisse apud omnes gentes,

65 b.
Contritionis justiores causa?, quam quas Lutherus affert,

51 b.
Credendum est ecclesia? in Sacramentorum institutione,

61 b.

D

Declaratis verborum substantialium sacramenti altaris

contra Lutherum, 19 b.
Deum curare opera nostra, 59 b.
Dionysius nihil ad Lutherum, si Luthero credas, 63 a.

E

Ecclesia omnibus evangelistis praposita, 65 a.

Ecclesia habet discernere verum Dei verbis hominum,

78 b.
Ecclesiae fides intraditionibus valet, 62 a.

cur Episcopi soli baptizatis manus imponunt ut accipi-

ant spiritum sanctum, 64 a.
Exitus Luthero credentium, 26 a.
Exorcism! in ecclesia, 46 a.
Extreme Unctionis consideratio, 89 a.

Fidelium conjugium cur potius fit sacramentum, quam

infidelium, 66 a.
Fides et ratione et scripturis suffulta, 47 a.

468 Translation of Index

G

Greece obeys the Roman Pontiff, 9 b.
That Grace is infused in the sacrament of Matrimony,
71 b; so too in the sacrament of Orders, 81 b, 88 b.

H

Most all Heretics rest on scripture, 79 b.

Helvidius, 62 a, 64 b.

Jerome for the character, 68 a.

How much Jerome defers to the Roman See, 9 b.

Hugh of St. Victor, 44 b, 62 b.

The Epistle of James is defended by the authority of
Jerome, 90 b.

The Epistle of James, how weighty and sacred, and
worthy of the apostolic spirit, 95 b.

The same can be taken and offered, 37 a.

Impudence is Luther's one reason for proving every
thing, 106 a.

Little Children were formerly admitted to Communion,
14 b.

L

Laymen are the Lutheran priests, 86 a.

Leo the Tenth, 6 a.

The Liberty of Luther worse than the Egyptian bond
age, 16 b.

The Liberty of those going over from the Church of
Christ to Luther, 42 a.

Luther fights against his mother, 3 b.

Luther is to be cautiously read, 4 b.

Luther contradicts himself, 6 a, 8 a, 13 a, b.

Index Alphabeticus 469

G

Grsecia Romano paret pontifici, 9 b.
Gratiam in sacramento matrimonii infundi, 71 b; item
in sacramento ordinis, 81 b, 88 b.

H

Hsereticos plerosque omnes scripturis niti, 7" 9 b.
Helvidius, 62 a, 64 b.
Hieronymus pro charactere, 68 a.
Hieronymus quantum Romanse sedi deferat, 9 b.
Hugo de Sancto Victore, 44 b, 62 b.

I

Jacobi epistola asseritur authore Hieronymo, 90 b.

Jacobi epistola quam gravis ac sancta, apostolicoque

spiritu digna, 95 b.
Idem potest sumi et offerri, 3Y a.
Impudentia unica ratio est Luthero probandi omnia,

106 a.
Infantes olim ad communionem admittebantur, 14 b.

Laici sacerdotes Lutheriani, 86 a.

Leo decimus, 6 a.

Libertas Lutheri, ^Egyptiaca servitute delerior, 16 b.

Libertas transfugientium ab ecclesia Christi ad Lu-

tberum, 42 a.

Lutherus matrem oppugnat, 3 b.
Lutherus caute legendus, 4 b.
Lutherus sibi ipsi contrarius, 6 a, 8 a, 13 a, b.

470 Translation of Index

Luther consigns his books to the fire, 8 a.

Luther lately detested the Bohemians, 8 b.

Luther works and teaches against, ibid.

Luther admits only one sacrament, 11 a.

Luther is to be avoided as an adder, 11 b.

Whither Luther is going, 11 b, 12 b.

Luther thinks of a flight to the Bohemians, 16 a.

Luther corrupts the testament of Christ, 30 a.

Luther the new Esdras, 34 a.

Luther singular in either doctrine or stupidity, 39 a.

Luther Atlas, 40 a.

Luther drives the people away from Mass, 40 b.

Luther allows Christians the worst license, 47 b.

Luther is caught everywhere, 50 b.

Luther in a labyrinth, 51 a.

Luther mixes up everything, 54 a.

Luther prodigal of words, 57 b.

Luther ridiculously ridicules the Church, 69 a.

Luther convicted by his own words, 79 a.

Why Luther is mad with Dionysius, 83 b.

Luther pierced by his own shaft about the Epistle of
James, 91 a.

Luther the destroyer of both bodies and souls, 95 a.

Luther writes things worthy of the apostolic spirit, 95 b.

Why Luther is so enraged at the Epistle of James, 95 b.

Luther relinquishes Baptism to the damage of Penance,
97 a.

Luther in dispute — how he is, 97 a.

Luther the new little doctor, little saint, and little know-
it-all, 97 b.

Luther or a pest to be avoided, 98 b.

Luther Proteus, 97 b.

Luther incurable, 98 b.

Where Luther is going, 99 a.

Luther the wicked, 111 a.

Index Alphabeticus 471

Lutherus libros suos devovet igni, 8 a.

Lutherus nuper Bohemos detestabatur, 8 b.

Lutherus contra facit ac docet, ibidem.

Lutherus unum tantum sacramentum admittit, 11 a.

Lutherus ut coluber vitandus, 11 b.

Lutherus quo tendat, 11 b, 12 b.

Lutherus fugam meditatur ad Bohemos, 16 a.

Lutherus adulterat Christ! testamentum, 30 a.

Lutherus novus Esdras, 34 a.

Lutherus vel doctrina vel stultitia singularis, 39 a.

Lutherus Atlas, 40 a.

Lutherus populum a missa abigit, 40 b.

Lutherus Christianis summani decernit licentiam, 47 b.

Lutherus undequaque constrictus, 50 b.

Lutherus in labyrintho, 51 a.

Lutherus omnia confundit, 54 a.

Lutherus verborum prodigus, 57 b.

Lutherus ridicule ridet ecclesiarn, 69 a.

Lutherus suis ipsius verbis victus, 79 a.

Lutherus cur irascatur Dionysio, 83 b.

Lutherus suo telo confossus de epistola Jacobi,

91 a.

Lutherus et corporum et animorum occisor, 95 a.
Lutherus apostatico spiritu digna scribit, 95 b.
Lutherus cur tarn infensus epistolse Jacobi, 95 b.
Lutherus reliquit baptismum in contumeliam pceniten-

tise, 97 a.

Lutherus qualis in disputando, 97 a.
Lutherus novus doctorculus, sanctulus et eruditulus,

97 b.

Lutherus ceu pestis vetandus, 98 b.
Lutherus Proteus, 97 b.
Lutherus immedicabilis, 98 b.
Lutherus qua via grassatur, 99 a.
Lutherus malitiosus; 111 a.

472 Translation of Index

Luther's pride, 4 b.

Luther's untruthfulness, 5 b.

Luther's view-points, 8 b.

Luther's contumelious words against all the clergy, 15 a.

Luther's deceit discovered, 16 a.

Luther's great pity, IT a.

Luther's argument from the article turned against him,

19 b.

Luther's frivolous cunning parried, 19 b.
Luther's facetious deception, 22 a.
Luther's position overthrown, 35 a.
Luther's crass ignorance, 37 a.
Luther's regular way, 42 b, 61 a.
Luther's strategy, how it differs from Paul's simplicity,

48 b.

Luther's way to propose familiar things as if new,

49 a.

Luther's spirit which warns him of hidden things, 57 b.

Luther's inconstancy, 60 a ; quibbling, 61 a.

Luther a reed-cane, 65 a.

Luther's new dogmas, 76 b.

Luther's great impudence, 76 a.

Luther's church the church of malefactors, 78 a.

Luther's contumely against St. Dionysius, 82 b.

Lutheran priests laymen, 86 a.

Luther's madness, 88 b.

Luther's faith, 94 b; earnestness, 98 b.

With Luther the papal Church is one, Christ's another,

77 a.
Lutheran unction makes men immortal, 94 b.

M

The Method of Luther exposed, 76 a.

The example of M. ^Emilius Scaurus, 55 b.

Consideration of Matrimony, 64 b.

Index Alphabeticus 473

Lutheri superbia, 4b.

Lutheri fictio, 5 b.

Lutheri conspicilia, 8 b.

Lutheri verba contumeliosa in totum clerum, 15 a.

Lutheri dolus deprehensus, 16 a.

Lutheri insignis misericordia, 17 a.

Lutheri argumentum de articulo retortum, 19 b.

Lutheri nugax argutia eluditur, 19 b.

Lutheri faceta illusio, 22 a.

Lutheri prsecipuum fundamentum subversum, 35 a.

Lutheri insignis inscitia, 37 a.

Lutheri mos perpetuus, 42 b, 61 a.

Lutheri techna quam discidet a simplicitate Pauli,

48 b.
Lutheri mos notissima ceu ignota proponere, 49 a.

Lutheri spiritus, qui ilium secretorum admoneat, 57 b.

Lutheri inconstantia, 60 a ; nugacitas, 61 a.

Lutherus baculus arundineus, 65 a.

Lutheri nova dogmata, 76 b.

Lutheri insignis impudentia, 76 a.

Lutheri ecclesia, ecclesia malignantium, 78 a.

Lutheri contumelia in b. Dionysium, 82 b.

Lutherani sacerdotes laici, 86 a.

Lutheri delirium, 88 b.

Lutheri fides, 94 b; studium, 98 b.

Luthero alia est papalis ecclesia, alia Christi,

77 a.
Lutheriana unctio homines reddit immortales, 94 b.

M

Machina Lutheri deprehensa, 76 a.
M. zEmilii Scauri exemplum, 55 b.
Matrimonii consideratio, 64 b.

474 Translation of Index

The sacrament of Matrimony proven from the words of

Paul, 67 a.
Those whom Luther condemns are illustrious for

Miracles, 13 b.

The Mass is a sacrifice, 33 b.
The Mass represents the passion, not to say the supper,

35 b.

Excellence of the Mass, 39 b.
Luther calumniates the Mass, 29 a.
The Modesty of the little monk Luther, 10 b.
Women are full of defects, 56 a.
Luther lets Women hear confessions, 55 a.

A Mystery is easily turned into a sacrament, 69 b.

1ST
Nobody knows that he is sufficiently contrite, 50 b.

O

Every sacrament is a mystery, 69 b.
God has a care for our works, 59 b.
Consideration of the sacrament of Orders, 76 a.
The sacrament of Orders not to be repeated, 85 a.
Luther profanes the sacrament of Orders, 88 a.

Luther calls the Eucharist a sacrament of Bread,

lib.

The vastness of the Papacy, 9 a ; its antiquity, ibid.
The express words of Paul about Matrimony, 67 a.
Reservations of Sins to bishops and popes, 54 b.
Petitions of Luther in disputing, 98 a.
Luther's Bad reason, 86 a.

Index Alphdbeticus 475

Matrimonii sacr amentum ex Pauli verbis assertum,

67 a.
Miraculis elarent, quos Lutherus damnat, 13 b.

Missa sacrificium est, 33 b.

Missa passionem representat, nedum coenam, 35 b.

Missas excellentia, 39 b.

Missam calumniatur Lutherus, 29 a.

Modestia fraterculi Lutheri, 10 b.

Mulieres rimarum plense sunt, 56 a.

Mulieribus Lutherus permittit confessiones audire,

55 a.
Mysterium bene vertitur in sacr amentum, 69 b.

1ST
Nemo scit se satis esse contritum, 50 b.

O

Omne sacramentum est mysterium, 69 b.
Opera nostra deo curas sunt, 59 b.
Ordinis sacramenti consideratio, 76 a.
Ordinis sacramentum non esse iterandum, 85 a.
Ordinis sacramentum profanat Lutherus, 88 a.

P

Panis sacramentum, Eucharistiam vocat Lutherus,

lib.

Papatus amplitude, 9 a ; antiquitas, ibidem.
Pauli verba de matrimonio expensa, 67 a.
Peccatorum reservationes episcopis et papis, 54 b.
Petitiones Lutheri in disputando, 98 a.
Plumbea Lutheri ratio, 86 a.

476 Translation of Index

Penance a second plank, 43 b.

Lutheran Preparation for the Eucharist, 41 a.

The confidence of the Probity of ^Emilius Scaurus,

55 b.
The Promises of the sacrifices of the Old Testament,

34 b.
Luther on Purgatory, 7 a.

K

Some things are to be Received which are not written,

61 b.
The right of Divorce denied married people by Christ

Himself, 74 a.
A King is nobody to Luther, because all are kings with

him, 86 b.
Authority of the See of Eome, 9 b.

S

Luther condemns the celibacy of priests, 77 a.

Priests are made only by bishops, 88 b.

The definition of a Sacrament according to Luther,

27 b.
The Sacrament of Marriage has existed among all races,

65 b.

Two opinions on the power of the Sacraments, 45 a.
How Luther treats the Sacraments, 44 b.
The Sacrifices of the Old Law were taken by the priests,

37 a.

Satisfaction is necessary to Penitents, 60 a.
Consideration of Satisfaction, 5 b.
The Holy Spirit withdraws from the deceitful, 5 b.

Index Alpliabeticus 477

Poenitentia, secunda tabula, 43 b.

Pneparatio Lutheriana ad Eucharistiam, 41 a.

Probitatis confidentia ^Einilii Scauri, 55 b.

Promissiones sacrificiorum veteris testament!,

34 b.
de Purgatorio Lutherus, 7 a.

R

Kecipienda esse qusedam quse non sunt scripta,

61 b.
Repudii jus ademptum conjugibus ab ipso Christo,

74 a.
Rex nemo est Luthero, quia illi omnes reges,

86 b.
Romanes sedis auctoritas, 9 b.

S

Sacerdotum coelibatum damnat Lutherus, 77 a.
Sacerdotes non nisi ab episcopis fieri, 88 b.
Sacramenti definitio secundum Lutherum, 27 b.

Sacramenturn conjugii fuisse apud omnes gentes,

65 b.

de Sacramentorum potestate duse opiniones, 45 a.
Sacramentis quam tribuat Lutherus, 44 b.
Sacrificia veteris legis a sacerdotibus sumebantur,

37 a.

Satisfactio necessaria est poenitentibus, 60 a.
Satisfactionis consideratio, 57 b.
Spiritus Sanctus effugit fictum, 5 b.

4Y8 Translation of Index

T

The Times prescribed by Luther for the people to com
municate, 41 b.

Traditions also to be received, 61 b and fol.
How old the name of Transsubstantiation, 22 b.

Too great trust in the people of obtaining Pardon, 49 b.
Extreme Unction not to be given in every sickness, 93 a.
"You are a royal priesthood" : how it should be under
stood, 86 a.
Votaries, 47 b.

The End.

Index Alphabeticus 479

T

Tempora plebi ad communicandum a Luthero statuta,

41 b.

Traditiones etiam esse recipiendas, 61 b et dein.
Transsubstantiationis nomen quam vetus, 22 b.

Venise consequenda? fiducia nimia in populo, 49 b.
Unctio extrema non in quo vis morbo danda, 93 a.
Vos estis regale sacerdotium, ut intelligatur,

86 a.
Vovista3, Votarii, 47 b.

Finis.

PRINTED BY BENZIGER BROTHERS, NEW YORK.

80

o

BQX 2059 ,A2 04 SMC

Asssrtio septern
sacramentorum

Henry VIII