{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_13133/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_13133","id":"gutenberg_13133","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/13133","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: History - British","Category: History - Early Modern (c. 1450-1750)","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Catholic Church -- Apologetic works"],"text":"TEN REASONS PROPOSED TO HIS ADVERSARIES FOR DISPUTATION IN THE\nNAME OF THE FAITH AND PRESENTED TO THE ILLUSTRIOUS MEMBERS OF OUR\nUNIVERSITIES BY EDMUND CAMPION PRIEST OF THE SOCIETY OF THE NAME\nOF JESUS Nihil Obstat S. GEORGIUS KIERAN HYLAND, S.T.D, CENSOR\nDEPUTATUS Imprimatur + PETRUS EPUS SOUTHWARC CONTENTS\nINTRODUCTION RATIONES DECEM TRANSLATION INTRODUCTION\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThough Blessed Edmund Campion's _Decem Rationes_ has passed\nthrough forty-seven editions,[1] printed in all parts of Europe;\nthough it has awakened the enthusiasm of thousands; though Mark\nAnthony Muret, one of the chief Catholic humanists of Campion's\nage, pronounced it to be \"written by the finger of God,\" yet it\nis not an easy book for men of our generation to appreciate, and\nthis precisely because it suited a bygone generation so exactly.\nBefore it can be esteemed at its true value, some knowledge of\nthe circumstances under which it was written, is indispensable.\n\n1. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE _Decem Rationes_.\n\nThe chief point to remember is that the _Decem Rationes_ was the\nlast and most deliberate free utterance of Campion's\never-memorable mission. During the few months that mission\nlasted he succeeded in staying the full tide of victorious\nProtestantism, which had hitherto been irresistible. The ancient\nChurch had gone down before the new religion, at Elizabeth's\naccession twenty years before, with an apparently final fall,\nand since then the Elizabethan Settlement had triumphed in every\nchurch, in every school and court. The new generation had been\nmoulded by it; the old order seemed to be utterly prostrate,\ndefeated and moribund. Nor was it only at home that\nProtestantism talked of victory. In every neighbouring land she\nhad gained or was gaining the upper hand. She had crossed the\nBorder and subdued Scotland, she held Ireland in an iron grip,\nshe had set up a new throne in Holland, she had deeply divided\nFrance, and had learned how to paralyze the power of Spain. What\ncould stay her progress?\n\nThen a new figure appeared, a fugitive flying before the law. He\nwas hunted backwards and forwards across the country, every man's\nhand seemed against him. It was impossible to hold out for long\nagainst such immense odds, and he was in fact soon captured,\nmocked, maligned, sentenced and executed with contumely. Yet\nCampion and his handful of followers had meanwhile succeeded in\ndoing what the whole nation, when united, had failed to do. He\nhad evoked a spirit of faith and fervour, against which the\nviolence of Protestantism raged in vain. He had saved the beaten,\nshattered fragments of the ancient host, and animated them with\ninvincible courage; and his work endured in spite of endless\nassaults and centuries of persecution. The _Decem Rationes_ is\nCampion's harangue to those whom he called upon to follow him in\nthe heroic struggle.\n\n2. THE MAN AND THE MISSION.\n\nThus much for the inspiration and general significance of\nCampion's work considered as a whole. It will also repay a much\nmore minute study, and to appreciate it we must enter into\nfurther details.\n\nAs to the man himself, suffice it to say that he was a Londoner;\nhis father a publisher; his first school Christ's Hospital; that\nhe was afterwards a Fellow of St. John's, Oxford, and held at the\nsame time an exhibition from the Grocer's Company. At Oxford he\naccepted to some extent the Elizabethan Settlement of religion,\nbut not sufficiently to satisfy the Company of Grocers, who\neventually withdrew their exhibition. This was a sign for further\ninquisitorial proceedings, which made him leave the University,\nand retire to Dublin; but he was driven also thence by the\nzealots for Protestantism. Eventually he went over to the English\nCollege at Douay, whence he migrated to Rome, entered the Society\nof Jesus, and after eight years' training had returned, a priest,\nto his native country, forty years old. His strong point was\nundoubtedly a singularly lovable character, and he possessed the\ngift of eloquence in no ordinary degree. For the rest, his\nnatural qualities and acquired accomplishments were above the\nordinary level, without reaching an extraordinary height. He was\na man who never ceased working, and whose temper was always\nangelic, though he sometimes suffered from severe depression. He\nwas adored by his pupils both at Oxford and in Bohemia. His\nmemory was always bright, and his conversation always sparkled\nwith fresh thoughts and poetical ideas. He composed with\nextraordinary facility in Latin prose and verse; but the extant\nfragments of these literary exercises do not strike us as being\nof unusual excellence, though genuinely admired in their day. He\nwas certainly an ideal missioner: saintly, inspired, eloquent,\nuntireable, patient, consumed with the desire for the success of\nhis undertaking, and unfaltering in his faith that success would\nfollow by the providential action of God, despite the obvious\nfact that all appearances were against him.\n\nCampion landed at Dover late in June, 1580, and reached London\nat the end of the month. There was an immediate rush to hear\nhim, and Lord Paget was persuaded to lend his great hall at\nPaget House in Smithfield to accommodate a congregation for the\nfeast of Saints Peter and Paul. The sermon was delivered on the\ntext from the Gospel of the day, _Tu es Christus, Filius Dei\nvivi_. The hall was filled, and the impression caused by the\nsermon was profound; but the number of hearers had been\nimprudently large. Though no arrests followed, the persecutors\ntook the alarm, and increased their activity to such an extent\nthat large gatherings had for ever to be abandoned; and after a\ncouple of weeks both Campion and Persons left London to escape\nthe notice of the pursuivants, whose raids and inquisitorial\nsearches were making the lot of Catholics in town unbearable,\nwhereas in the country the pursuit was far less active, and\ncould be much more easily avoided. The two Fathers met for the\nlast time at Hoxton, then a village outside London, to concert\ntheir plans for the next couple of months, and were on the point\nof starting, each for his own destination, when a Catholic of\nsome note rode up from London. This was Thomas Pounde, of\nBelmont or Beaumont, near Bedhampton, a landed gentleman of\nmeans, an enthusiastic Catholic, and for the last five years or\nso a prisoner for religion. Mr. Pounde's message in effect was\nthis. \"You are going into the proximate danger of capture, and\nif captured you must expect not justice, but every refinement of\nmisrepresentation. You will be asked crooked questions, and your\nanswers to them will be published in some debased form. Be sure\nthat whatever then comes through to the outer world will come\nout poisoned and perverted. Let me therefore urge you to write\nnow, and to leave in safe custody, what you would wish to have\npublished then, in case infamous rumours should be put about\nduring your incarceration, rumours which you will then not be\nable to answer or to repudiate.\" Father Persons seems to have\nagreed at once. Campion at first raised objections, but soon,\nwith his ever obliging temper, sat down at the end of the table\nand wrote off in half an hour an open letter _To the Lords of\nHer Majesty's Privy Council_, afterwards so well known as\n_Campion's Challenge._\n\n3. THE CHALLENGE.\n\nCampion, after finishing his letter and taking copy for himself,\nhad consigned the other copy to Pounde. Persons had done the\nsame; but whereas the latter took the precaution to seal his\nletter, Campion had handed over his unfastened. Then the company\nbroke up. Persons made a wide circle from Northampton round to\nGloucester, while Campion made a smaller circle from Oxfordshire\nup to Northampton. When they got back to town in September, they\nfound all the world discussing \"the Challenge.\" What had happened\nwas that proceedings had been taken by the Ecclesiastical\nCommission against Pounde, and he had been committed to solitary\nconfinement in the ruinous castle of Bishop's Stortford. Before\nhe left London he began to communicate the letter to others, lest\nit should be altogether lost, and as soon as it was thus\npublished it attracted everyone's attention, and his adversaries\nhad ironically christened it _the challenge_. The word was indeed\none which Campion had used, but he had employed it precisely in\norder to avoid any charge that might have arisen, of being\ncombative and presumptuous.\n\nThus in the course of three months Campion, as it were in spite\nof himself, had filled England with his name and with the message\nhe had come to announce, and he had reduced his adversaries to a\nvery ridiculous position. They had been dared to meet him in\ndisputation, and this they feared to do. In effect, they in their\nthousands were hiding their heads in the sand, while their\nconstables and pursuivants were raiding the houses of Catholics\non every side in hopes of catching the homeless wanderer, and of\nstopping his mouth by violence. The pulpits, of course, rang with\noutcries against the newcomer, and in his absence his doctrines\nwere rent and scoffed at; but, as Campion said in a contemporary\nletter, \"The people hereupon is ours, and the error of spreading\nthat letter abroad hath done us much good.\" This was the first\npopular success which the Catholics had scored for years; and\nafter so many years of oppression some popular success was of\nimmense importance to the cause. Father Persons, in a\ncontemporary letter, says that the Government found that there\nwere 50,000 more recusants that autumn than they had known of\nbefore. The number is, of course, a round one, and is possibly\nmuch exaggerated, but it gives the Catholic leader's view of the\nadvantage won at this time.\n\nWe may now turn to _The Challenge_ itself, the only piece of\nCampion's English during this his golden period, which has survived.\n\n[TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE, THE LORDS OF HER MAJESTIE'S PRIVY COUNCIL]\n\nRIGHT HONOURABLE:\n\nWhereas I have come out of Germanie and Boemeland, being sent by\nmy Superiors, and adventured myself into this noble Realm, my\ndeare Countrie, for the glorie of God and benefit of souls, I\nthought it like enough that, in this busie watchful and\nsuspicious worlde, I should either sooner or later be intercepted\nand stopped of my course. Wherefore, providing for all events,\nand uncertaine what may become of me, when God shall haply\ndeliver my body into durance, I supposed it needful to put this\nwriting in a readiness, desiringe your good Lordships to give it\nye reading, for to know my cause. This doing I trust I shall ease\nyou of some labour. For that which otherwise you must have sought\nfor by practice of wit, I do now lay into your hands by plaine\nconfession. And to ye intent that the whole matter may be\nconceived in order, and so the better both understood and\nremembered, I make thereof these ix points or articles, directly,\ntruly and resolutely opening my full enterprise and purpose.\n\ni. I confesse that I am (albeit unworthie) a priest of ye Catholike\nChurch, and through ye great mercie of God vowed now these viii\nyears into the Religion of the Societie of Jhesus. Hereby I have\ntaken upon me a special kind of warfare under the banner of\nobedience, and eke resigned all my interest or possibilitie of\nwealth, honour, pleasure, and other worldlie felicitie.\n\nii. At the voice of our General Provost, which is to me a\nwarrant from heaven, and Oracle of Christ, I tooke my voyage\nfrom Prage to Rome (where our said General Father is always\nresident) and from Rome to England, as I might and would have\ndone joyously into any part of Christendome or Heathenesse, had\nI been thereto assigned.\n\niii. My charge is, of free cost to preach the Gospel, to\nminister the Sacraments, to instruct the simple, to reforme\nsinners, to confute errors--in brief, to crie alarme spiritual\nagainst foul vice and proud ignorance, wherewith many my dear\nCountrymen are abused.\n\niv. I never had mind, and am strictly forbidden by our Father that\nsent me, to deal in any respect with matter of State or Policy of\nthis realm, as things which appertain not to my vocation, and from\nwhich I do gladly restrain and sequester my thoughts.\n\nv. I do ask, to the glory of God, with all humility, and under\nyour correction, iii sortes of indifferent and quiet audiences:\n_the first_ before your Honours, wherein I will discourse of\nreligion, so far as it toucheth the common weale and your\nnobilities: _the second_, whereof I make more account, before the\nDoctors and Masters and chosen men of both Universities, wherein\nI undertake to avow the faith of our Catholike Church by proofs\ninnumerable, Scriptures, Councils, Fathers, History, natural and\nmoral reasons: _the third_ before the lawyers, spiritual and\ntemporal, wherein I will justify the said faith by the common\nwisdom of the laws standing yet in force and practice.\n\nvi. I would be loth to speak anything that might sound of any\ninsolent brag or challenge, especially being now as a dead man\nto this world and willing to put my head under every man's foot,\nand to kiss the ground they tread upon. Yet have I such a\ncourage in avouching the Majesty of Jhesus my King, and such\naffiance in his gracious favour, and such assurance in my\nquarrel, and my evidence so impregnable, and because I know\nperfectly that no one Protestant, nor all the Protestants\nliving, nor any sect of our adversaries (howsoever they face men\ndown in pulpits, and overrule us in their kingdom of grammarians\nand unlearned ears)[2] can maintain their doctrine in\ndisputation. I am to sue most humbly and instantly for the\ncombat with all and every of them, and the most principal that\nmay be found: protesting that in this trial the better furnished\nthey come, the better welcome they shall be.\n\nvii. And because it hath pleased God to enrich the Queen my\nSovereign Ladye with notable gifts of nature, learning, and\nprincely education, I do verily trust that--if her Highness would\nvouchsafe her royal person and good attention to such a\nconference as, in the ii part of my fifth article I have\nmotioned, or to a few sermons, which in her or your hearing I am\nto utter,--such manifest and fair light by good method and plain\ndealing may be cast upon these controversies, that possibly her\nzeal of truth and love of her people shall incline her noble\nGrace to disfavour some proceedings hurtful to the Realm, and\nprocure towards us oppressed more equitie.\n\nviii. Moreover I doubt not but you her Highness' Council being, of\nsuch wisdom and discreet in cases most important, when you shall\nhave heard these questions of religion opened faithfully, which\nmany times by our adversaries are huddled up and confounded, will\nsee upon what substantial grounds our Catholike Faith is builded,\nhow feeble that side is which by sway of the time prevaileth\nagainst us, and so at last for your own souls, and for many\nthousand souls that depend upon your government, will\ndiscountenance error when it is bewrayed, and hearken to those\nwho would spend the best blood in their bodies for your\nsalvation. Many innocent hands are lifted up to heaven for you\ndaily by those English students, whose posteritie shall never\ndie, which beyond seas gathering virtue and sufficient knowledge\nfor the purpose, are determined never to give you over, but\neither to win you heaven, or to die upon your pikes. And touching\nour Societie be it known to you that we have made a league--all\nthe Jesuits in the world, whose succession and multitude must\noverreach all the practices of England--cheerfully to carry the\ncross you shall lay upon us, and never to despair your recovery,\nwhile we have a man left to enjoy your Tyburn, or to be racked\nwith your torments, or consumed with your prisons. The expense is\nreckoned, the enterprise is begun; it is of God, it cannot be\nwithstood. So the faith was planted: so it must be restored.\n\nix. If these my offers be refused, and my endeavours can take no\nplace, and I, having run thousands of miles to do you good, shall\nbe rewarded with rigour, I have no more to say but to recommend\nyour case and mine to Almightie God, the Searcher of Hearts, who\nsend us His grace, and set us at accord before the day of\npayment, to the end we may at last be friends in heaven, when all\ninjuries shall be forgotten.\n\n   *   *   *   *   *\n\n\"Direct, true, and resolute,\" Campion's words certainly are, and\nthey are calculated in a remarkable degree to reassure and\nanimate his fellow Catholics and their friends, and it is for\nthem in reality, rather than for the Lords of the Council, that\nthe message is composed. If the composition has a fault it is its\ncombativeness; and in effect, though this drawback was not felt\nat the time, it was later. Subsequent missionaries found it best\nto adopt a policy of far greater secrecy and silence. If,\nhowever, we remember that Campion intended his paper to be\npublished under quite different circumstances, we can see that he\nat least hardly deserves the reproach of being contentious, or if\nhe does, his failing was venial when we consider the tastes of\nthe age. The immediate result of the publication was without\nquestion a great success.\n\nTHE \"DECEM RATIONES.\"\n\nLike a wise general, Father Persons at once bethought himself how\nbest to follow up the good beginning already made. Accordingly,\nwhen he and Campion met at Uxbridge (for it was not safe for\nCampion to come to London), he suggested that the latter, seeing\nthat his memory was still green at Oxford, should compose a short\naddress on the crisis to the students of the two Universities.\nCampion met the suggestion as he had met the suggestion of\nPounde, with a gentle disclaimer, \"alleging divers difficulties,\"\nbut soon good-humouredly assented on the condition (not a usual\none with literary men) that someone else should propose the\nsubject. The company therefore made various suggestions, none of\nwhich met with general acceptance, until Campion proposed \"Heresy\nin Despair.\" \"Whereat,\" adds Persons, \"all that were present\ncould not choose but laugh, and wonder to see him fall upon that\nargument at such a time when heresy seemed most of all to\ntriumph.\" In truth, with England invincible at sea and on land,\nand the absolute sway of Elizabeth, Cecil, and Walsingham over\nboth Church and State, what more hopeful position for\nProtestantism could have been imagined? Campion's meaning, of\ncourse, was that Protestantism was in despair of holding the\nposition of the ancient Church; of ruling in the hearts of a free\npeople; of co-existing with Christian liberty. It was unworthy,\ntherefore, of the acceptance of minds that aspired to mental\nfreedom, as did the youth of the Universities. This subject for\nan address was welcomed with acclamation, and Campion promised to\nundertake it, suggesting on his side that Persons should arrange\nways and means for printing the tract when finished, and any\nother which might seem needed.\n\nThis agreed to, all separated once more, and Campion rode\nnorthwards on a tour which he took in Derbyshire, Yorkshire, and\nLancashire, and which was not over for six months. Meantime\nFather Persons had set up his \"magic press\" near London, and\nissued from it five volumes of small size indeed, but of\nremarkable vigour and merit. As soon as any notable attack was\nmade on the Catholics, an answer was brought out in a wonderfully\nshort time, and these answers were pithy, vigorous, and pointed,\nin no ordinary degree. When one remembers how much co-operation\nis needed to bring out even the slightest volume, one is truly\nastonished at the feat of bringing out so many and such good\nones, while the hourly fear of capture, torture, and death hung\nover the heads of all. When threatened with danger in one place\nthe press was bodily transported to another.\n\nHowever, our business at present is not with Persons, but with\nCampion. His book was finished and sent up to Persons in March,\n1581, with a title altered to suit the controversy which had\nalready begun. It was now _Decem Rationes: quibus fretus,\ncertamen adversariis obtulit in causa Fidei, Edmundus Campianus\n&c._ \"Ten Reasons, for the confidence with which Edmund Campion\noffered his adversaries to dispute on behalf of the Faith, set\nbefore the famous men of our Universities.\" Persons was charmed,\nas he had expected to be, with its literary grace. It was in\nLatin, as had been agreed, and Campion's Latin prose, (though\ncritics of our time find it somewhat silvery and Livian), suited\nthe tastes of that day to perfection. The only thing which made\nPersons at all thoughtful was the number of references. Campion\ndeclared that he was sure he had verified them, as he entered\nthem in his notebook, but Persons, with greater caution, declared\nthat they must be verified anew.\n\nThe difficulty of this for men living under the ban, and cut off\nfrom access to large libraries, was of course great, but through\nthe help of others, especially through Mr. Thomas Fitzherbert of\nSwynnerton, the task was happily accomplished. Campion came up\nfrom the north to Stonor, on the Oxfordshire border where the\nsecret press then was; and there, amid a thousand fears, alarms\nand dangers, the book was printed.\n\n5. THE PRINTING.\n\nOf the actual preparations for printing the _Ten Reasons_,\nPersons gives this account in his memoirs[3]: Persons was of\nopinion that Campion should come up to London immediately after\nEaster [March 26th] to examine the passages quoted, and to assist\nthe print. Meanwhile Persons began to prepare new means of\nprinting, making use of friends and in particular of a certain\npriest called William Morris, a learned and resourceful man, who\nafterwards died in Rome.[4] This was necessary, as the first\npress near London, where the first two books had been printed,\nhad been taken down. Eventually and with very great difficulty he\nfound, after much trying, a house belonging to a widow, by name\nLady Stonor, in which she was not living at that time. It was\nsituated in the middle of a wood, twenty miles from London.\n\nTo this house were taken all things necessary, that is, type,\npress, paper, &c., though not without many risks. Mr. Stephen\nBrinkley, a gentleman of high attainments both in literature and\nin virtue, superintended the printing. Father Campion then coming\nto London, with his book already revised, went at once to the\nhouse in the wood, where the book was printed and eventually\npublished. Persons too went down to stay with him for some days\nto take counsel on their affairs.\n\n* * * * *\n\nStonor Park, to which Campion and Persons had betaken\nthemselves,[5] is still in the possession of the old Catholic\nfamily of that name, of which Lord Camoys is the representative.\nFather Morris says that \"the printing, according to the\ntraditions of the place, was carried on in the attics of the old\nhouse.\"[6] Being near Henley it was possible to go there by road\nor by water, and one might come and go on the Oxford high-road\nwithout attracting attention.\n\nStill there was grave risk of discovery from the noise made by\nthe press, and from the number of extra men about the house, as\nto the fidelity of each of whom it was impossible to be\nabsolutely sure. Day by day the dangers thickened round them.\nOne evening, soon after their arrival, William Hartley, a priest\nand afterwards a martyr, who was helping in the work, and had\nthen just come back from a visit to Oxford, mentioned casually\nthat Roland Jenks, the Catholic stationer and book-binder there,\nwas again in trouble, having been accused by his own servant.\nJenks was doubtless known to all Oxford men, indeed but three\nyears before his name had been noised all over Europe. He had\nbeen sentenced to have his ears cut off for some religious\noffence, when the Judge was taken ill in the court itself, and,\nthe infection travelling with marvellous rapidity, the greater\npart both of the bench and of the jury were stricken down with\ngaol fever, and two judges, twelve justices, and other high\nofficials, almost the whole jury, and many others, died within\nthe space of two days.[7]\n\nIn mentioning Jenks's new troubles Hartley probably did not\nrealize the extent of the danger to the whole party which they\nportended. Persons had in fact employed the very servant who had\nnow turned traitor, to bind a number of books for him at his\nhouse near Bridewell Church, London, which with all its contents\nwas thus in a perilous condition. Early next morning an express\nmessenger was sent in to town with orders to hide or destroy\nPersons' papers and other effects. It was already too late: that\nvery night the house had been searched, and Persons' letters,\nbooks, vestments, rosaries, pictures, and other pious objects,\nhad all fallen into the hands of the pursuivants. Worse still,\nFather Alexander Briant, afterwards a martyr, and one of the\nbrightest and most lovable of the missionaries, was seized next\ndoor, and hurried off first to the Counter, then to the Tower,\nwhere he was repeatedly and most cruelly racked to make him say\nwhere Persons might be found.\n\nInformation about his torture was brought to the Jesuits at\nStonor, and one can easily see how grave and disturbing such\nbad news must have been. \"For almost the whole of one night,\"\nsays Persons, \"Campion and I sat up talking of what we had\nbetter do, if we should fall into their hands. A fate which\nbefell him soon after.\"\n\nThe Registers of the Privy Council inform us that their Lordships\ngave orders to have Jenks sent up to London on the 28th of April.\nThis settles approximately the date of the beginning of the\nprinting at Stonor, and the book was not finished till nearly the\nend of June. So the work lasted about nine weeks, a fairly long\nperiod when we consider the smallness of the Latin book, here\nreproduced. It will, however, be shown from intrinsic evidence,\nthat the stock of type was very small. The printers had to set up\na few pages at a time, to correct them at once, and to print off,\nbefore they could go any further. Then they distributed the type\nand began again. When all was finished they rapidly stabbed and\nbound their sheets. Considering the fewness of the workmen[8] and\nthe unforeseen delays which so often occur during printing, the\ntime taken over the production does not seem extraordinary.\n\nFor many years no example of the original edition of the _Decem\nRationes_ was known to exist: none of our great public libraries\nin London or at the Universities possesses a copy. But it was the\nsingular good fortune of the late Marquess of Bute to pick up two\ncopies of this extremely rare volume, and he munificently\npresented one of them to Stonyhurst College. Canon Gunning of\nWinchester is the happy owner of a third copy. By the courtesy of\nthe Rector of Stonyhurst, I am able to offer a minute description\nof the precious little book.\n\nThe volume is, considering the printing of that time, distinctly\nwell got up. There is nothing at first sight to suggest that its\npublication had been a matter of so much difficulty and danger;\nbut when one scrutinizes every page with care, one finds that it\nbears about it some traces of the unusual circumstances under\nwhich it was produced.\n\nIf we look first for the water-mark in the paper we shall find\nthat it is the pot--the ordinary English sign; a proof, if one\nwere needed, that the book was really printed in this country.\nThe sheets run from A to K (with prefixed [double-dagger]), in\nfours, 16mo; the folios are 44, of which 39 are numbered (but by\naccident the pagination is omitted from 1 to 4 and 40 is blank as\nwell as the fly-leaves).\n\nLet us think of what this means. Eleven signatures for 44 folios,\n16mo, means that only eight pages 16mo went into each printing\nframe, or, in other words, that the frame was so small that it\nwould have been covered by half a folio sheet, 9 by 13 inches.\nThey probably printed off each little sheet by itself, for if\nthey had had a larger frame so as to print an entire folio\nsheet--then we should have found in the finished book that the\nwater-mark would recur once in each sixteen pages. In point of\nfact, however, it only recurs irregularly in the first, fifth,\nand tenth gathering. This could not have occurred unless the\nsheets used were of half folio size.\n\nA Greek fount was evidently wanting. Campion was fond, after the\nfashion of scholars of that day, of throwing into his Latin\nletters a word or two of Greek, which in his autograph are\nwritten, as Mr. Simpson has remarked, with the facility of one\nfamiliar with the language. Here on fol. 24 a we find _adynata_,\nwhere [Greek: adunata] would have been in Campion's epistolary\nmanner. Again, on fol. 4 b he quotes, \"Hic calix novum\ntestamentum in sanguine meo, qui (calix) pro vobis fundetur,\" and\nin the margin _Poterion Ekchynomenon_, in Italics, where Greek\nscript, if obtainable, would obviously have been preferred. A\nfurther indication of the difficulties under which type had been\nprocured is seen in the use of a query sign of a black-letter\nfount (_i.e. [different question mark]_) instead of the Roman\nfount (_i.e.,?_). This will be the more readily comprehended when\nwe remember that Father Persons' books, which Brinkley had\nprinted before, were in English, and that English prose was then\nstill generally printed in Gothic character[9].\n\nSo Persons also made use of it in order that there might be\nnothing in his books to strike the eye as unusual in books of\nthat class. Campion's volume on the other hand being in Latin, it\nwas necessary to procure a new set of \"Roman\" type. The use of\nthe black-letter query-signs would not at once attract attention,\nso they were kept, though all else was changed.\n\nA further trace of the difficulty in finding type is found in\nthe signs for a, e, diphthong. This combination recurred very\nfrequently in Latin, and the printers had very few of them. Very\nsoon after starting we find them substituting for Roman an\nItalic diphthong, [ae ligature] also o, e ([oe ligature]), and\neven e, an ordinary mediaeval form of the sign. It will be\nnoticed that these substitutions become increasingly frequent,\nas we approach fol. 12 (end of signature C), fol. 32 (end of\nsignature H), and 36 (end of signature I), whereas as soon as\nthe next signature begins the fount of [ae ligature] is ready to\nhand again. The conclusion to be deduced is that leaves C, H,\nand I were each printed off, and the type distributed, before\nthe setting up of D, I, and K could be proceeded with. This\nillustrates what has been said before of the very small stock of\ntype in the printing establishment.\n\nAnother slight peculiarity ought perhaps to be noticed: it is\nthe accentuation of the Latin. Adverbs, for instance, are\ngenerally accented on the last syllable, e.g., doctiu's,\nfacile', qua'm, eo', quo': the rule, however, is by no means\nregularly kept. But this has evidently nothing to do with the\npeculiar conditions under which Campion's book was produced, and\nis to be accounted for by the use of accents in other\npublications of the same class. Nothing was then definitely\nsettled about the accentuation of either French, Italian, or\nLatin, and Campion's volume does but reproduce the uncertainty\non the matter which was everywhere prevalent.\n\nWhilst the printers were contending with the difficulties arising\nfrom the smallness of their stock of type, difficulties which no\ndoubt caused vexatious and dangerous delays, Campion and Persons\nresumed their missionary labours with vigour. In his Memoirs\nPersons writes:\n\n* * * * *\n\nWhilst the preparations were being made Campion preached\nunweariedly, sometimes in London, sometimes making excursions.\nThere was one place [that of the Bellamy's] whither we often\nwent, about five miles from London, called Harohill. In going\nthither we had to pass through Tyburn. But Campion would always\npass bareheaded, and making a deep bow both because of the sign\nof the Cross, and in honour of some martyrs who had suffered\nthere, and also because he used to say that he would have his\ncombat there.[10]\n\n* * * * *\n\nFather Bombino[11] managed to find out some further details. Mrs.\nBellamy's house, he tells us, had a good library, and as to\nCampion's conduct at Tyburn, he explains that the shape of the\ngallows was a triangle, supported at its three angles by three\nbaulks of timber; the tie-beams, however, suggested to Campion\nthe Cross of Christ.\n\nFrom the State Papers we hear of other families and places said\nto have been visited by Campion at this period: the Prices, of\nHuntingdon; Mr. William Griffith, of Uxbridge; Mr. Edwin East, of\nBledlow, Bucks; Lady Babington, at Twyford, Bucks; Mr. Dormer, at\nWynge, and Mrs. Pollard.[12]\n\nIn spite of alarms, dangers, and interruptions, the work of\nprinting was concluded without mishap. The method of publication\nwas singular. Hartley took the bulk of the copies to Oxford,\nwhere the chief academical display of the year, the Act, as it\nwas called, was taking place in St. Mary's, on several successive\ndays. Hartley, coming in at the end of the first day, waited for\nevery one to go out, then slipped his little books under the\npapers left on the seats, and was gone. Next morning he entered\nwith the rest, and soon saw that his plan had been perfectly\nsuccessful. The public disputation began, but the attention of\nthe audience was elsewhere. There was whispering and comparing\nnotes, and passing about of little books, and as soon as the\nseance was over, open discussion of Campion's \"Reasons.\" Hartley\ndid not wait for more, but rode back to Stonor with the news that\nthe book had surely hit its mark.\n\nAt Oxford, as Father Persons says, many remembered and loved the\nman, or at least knew of his gentle character, and of the career\nhe had abandoned to become a Catholic missionary. The book\nrecalled all this; and to those who were able to enter into its\nspirit it preached with a strange penetrating force. By all the\nlovers of classical Latin, and there were many such at that day,\nit was read greedily. The Catholics and lovers of the old Faith\nreceived it with enthusiasm, but a still more valid testimony to\nits power was given by the Protestant Government, which gave\norders to its placemen that they should elaborate replies. These\nreplies drew forth answers from the Catholics, and the controversy\nlasted for several years. Mr. Simpson has included an outline of\nthis controversy in his _Life of Campion_, and to it I may refer\nmy readers, having nothing substantial to add to his account.\n\n6. CRITICISM.\n\nIt would not be necessary for me to say more about its success,\nexcept that to us nowadays, the _Rationes_ will not seem at all\nso remarkable as it did to our ancestors. Religious controversy,\nin itself, does not much interest us moderns; and those who will\nread Latin merely to enjoy the style are very few. But in the\nsixteenth century, as Sir Arthur Helps truly says, men found in\nthe thrill of controversy the interest they now take in novels.\nAt that time, too, of all literary charms, that of good Latin\nprose was by far the most popular, and the language was still the\n\"lingua franca\" of the learned all the world over. Once we get so\nfar as to appreciate that both subject and style were in its\nfavour, the popularity of the volume will seem natural enough,\nfor it is bright, pointed, strong, full of matter, bold,\neloquent, convincing.\n\nWithout attempting anything like a complete account of the\nreception of the book by the public, I may mention as the most\nobvious proof of its popularity, that more strenuous endeavours\nwere made (so far as I can discover) to answer it than were made\nin the case of any other assault upon the Elizabethan religious\nsettlement. Lord Burghley himself, the chief minister of the\nCrown, called upon the Bishop of London, perhaps the most forward\nman then on the episcopal bench, to use all endeavours to ensure\nthe publication of a sufficient answer. Finally they appointed\nthe Regius Professors of Divinity both at Oxford and at Cambridge\nto provide for the occasion, and it took both of these a long\nseries of months to propound their answers to Campion's tract,\nwhich is only as long as a magazine article. Speaking broadly, we\nmay say that this was the most that Elizabeth's Establishment\ncould do officially; and besides this, there were sermons\ninnumerable, and pamphlets not a few by lesser men, as well as\ndisputations in the Tower, of which more must be said later.\n\nThis hostile evidence is so striking and so ample that it might\nseem unnecessary to allege more, but I attach a great deal more\nimportance to the praise of theologians of Campion's own faith:\nfor, in the first place this is much harder to obtain than the\nattention of the persons attacked. Secondly, those who are\nacquainted with Catholic theological criticism are at first\nsurprised to find what very severe critics Catholic theologians\nare one of another. In this case, where the writer had from the\nnature of his task to make so much use of rhetorical arguments,\nallusions, irony, and unusual forms of expression, there was\nmore than usual chance of fault being found, especially as every\npossible thorny subject is introduced somehow, and that in terms\nmeant to please not Roman theologians, but Oxford students.\nEvidently there was danger here that critics should or might be\nsevere, or at least insist on certain changes and emendations.\nIn fact the work was received with joy, and reprinted frequently\nand with honour. I have lately found a letter in its\ncommendation from the Cardinal Secretary of State of that day,\nand Muret, as we have heard, perhaps the greatest humanist then\nliving in the Catholic ranks, described it as \"Libellum aureum,\nvere digito Dei scriptum.\"\n\n7. THE DISPUTATIONS.\n\nThe publication of the _Decem Rationes_ was the last act of\nCampion's life of freedom. He was seized the very next week, and\nafter five months of suffering was martyred on 1 December, 1581.\nDuring that prolonged and unequal struggle against every variety\nof craft and violence the _Ten Reasons_ continued to have their\ninfluence, and on the whole they were extremely helpful, for\nthey enabled the martyr to recover some ground which he had lost\nwhile under torture. During those awful agonies he confessed to\nhaving found shelter in the houses of certain gentlemen. It is\ncertain that these names were all known to the Government\nbefore, and that he was not betraying any secret. Nevertheless\nthe gentlemen in question were at once seized, imprisoned and\nfined, on the alleged evidence of Campion's confessions only.\nThis of course caused much scandal among Catholics, and so long\nas he lay lost in the Tower dungeons, unpleasant rumours about\nhis constancy could not be effectively contradicted. Thus far\nElizabeth's ministers had gained an advantage, which Pounde had\nforetold they were likely to win. But the remedy he had\nsuggested also proved effective.\n\nThough under ordinary circumstances Elizabeth's ministers \"meant\nnothing less\" than having the disputation requested, nevertheless\nnow that Campion was so terribly shaken and reduced, they hoped\nthat they might arrange some sort of a meeting, which might in\nshow correspond with what had been demanded in the _Decem\nRationes_, and yet leave them with a certain victory. They were\nemboldened too, by finding that their prisoner was not after all,\nsuch a particularly learned man. He had never been a professor of\ntheology, or written or made special studies, beyond the ordinary\ncourse which in those days was not a long one. It was, therefore,\nsettled that four disputations should be held in the Tower of\nLondon. Theology was still taught at Oxford and Cambridge in\nsomething of the old mediaeval method and in syllogistic form.\nThe men who were pitted against Campion had lately been, or were\nstill, examiners at the Universities. Nor is it to be denied for\na moment that they did their work well. The attack never\nfaltered. Their own side quite believed they had won. The method\nthey adopted was this. They assumed the role of examiners, and\nstarting with the _Decem Rationes_ before them, they plied\nCampion with crabbed texts, and obscure quotations from the\nFathers. Then they cut short his answers, and as soon as one had\nexamined for one quarter of an hour, another took his place, for\nthey were anxious above all things to avoid defeat. The number of\ntopics broached and left unsettled surpasses belief, indeed the\nscene was one of utter confusion, taunts, scoldings, sneers--a\nvery, very different test from the academic argumentation, which\nCampion had requested.\n\nThe martyr did not show any remarkable erudition, indeed all\nopportunity to do so was carefully shut off. No University, I\nfancy, would have given him a chair of theology on the strength\nof his replies on that occasion. There was more than one\npremature assertion of victory on the Protestant side. But when\nthe Catholic and Protestant accounts are compared, one sees that\nthe advantages won against Campion were slight. They evidently\nhoped that by vigorous and repeated attacks they would at last\npuzzle or bear him down. But they were never near this. He was\nalways fresh and gay, never in difficulties, or at the end of his\ntether. He stands out quite the noblest, the most sympathetic and\nimportant figure in those motley assemblies. The Catholics were\ndelighted. They succeeded in getting their own report of the\ndisputations, which is still extant, and they would have printed\nit, if they had been able. Philip, Earl of Arundel, by far the\nmost important convert of that generation, was won over by what\nhe heard in those debates.\n\nOn the whole then we must say that, if Campion did not come off\ngloriously, he at least acquitted himself well and honourably,\nand distinctly gained by the conflict. Offers of disputation were\nnot the ideal way of forwarding a mission such as his.\nNevertheless, in his case, despite circumstances the most\nadverse, the result had proved advantageous. It had greatly\nstrengthened and encouraged his own followers, and that was in\nreality the best that could then be expected. Incidentally too\nthe adverse rumours, which had gained ground during his\nseclusion, were dissipated. It was clear that, though he might\nhave been deceived, his constancy was unconquerable.\n\nThus Campion's _Challenge_ and his _Ten Reasons_ not only contain\nthe message of his mission enunciated with characteristic\neloquence, but the delivery of each message is an history-making\nevent, big with dramatic consequences. The controversy about his\nbook did not die with him, but continued for some years, until it\nwas merged into the standing controversy between the two\nreligions. We cannot describe it here.\n\nSuffice it to say that Mr. Simpson, in the _Appendix_ to his\n_Edmund Campion_ enumerates not less than twenty works, which\nappeared in those controversies between 1581 and 1585. The chief\ndefender of Father Campion's writings was Father Robert Drury,\nS.J., but all his biographers also have something to say on the\nsubject. The chief opponents are William Charke, Meredith Hanmer,\nWilliam Fulke, Laurence Humphrey, William Whitaker, R. Stoke,\nJohn Field, Alexander Nowell, and William Day. Some further\ninformation on the whole subject may be found in articles by the\nlate Father Morris and myself in _The Month_ for July 1889,\nJanuary 1905, and January 1910. [J.H.P.]\n\n[Footnote 1: Of these four are in English translations, dated\n1606 (by Richard Stock), 1632, 1687, and 1827. The present\ntranslation is thus the fifth into Campion's mother tongue.\nThough each of the quaint old versions has its merits, and some\ndo not lack charm, not one would adequately represent Campion to\nthe modern reader. A new translation was a necessity--may I not\nsay, a most happy one--seeing that Father Joseph Rickaby was at\nhand to satisfy it. [J.H.P.]]\n\n[Footnote 2: The meaning is--\"The ministers tyrannize over us, as\nif we were a kingdom of unlearned schoolboys, listening to a\nteacher of grammar.\"]\n\n[Footnote 3: _Catholic Record Society_ IV., 14-17.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Father Bombino calls him Richard Morris, and says he\nwent into exile and lived with Allen first at Rheims, and\nafterwards at Rome, where he died in the English College. (_Vita\nCampiani_, p. 139)]\n\n[Footnote 5: Father Morris identified the lady who let or lent\nStonor Park, with Dame Cecilia Stonor, daughter of Leonard\nChamberlain. Father Persons describes her as a widow, and if so,\nthe Sir Francis, then alive, was not her husband, but her son.\nBoth father and son had the same Christian name.]\n\n[Footnote 6: On the other hand, Mr. Thomas Edward Stonor, in a\ncorrespondence to be mentioned immediately, says that there were\nno definite traditions as to the actual locality of the press.]\n\n[Footnote 7: Challoner, _Missionary Priests_, Introd. p. 12.]\n\n[Footnote 8: As five printers were subsequently arrested, we know\ntheir names, and they deserve to be recorded here, viz., Stephen\nBrinkley, John Harris, John Hervey, John Tuker, John Compton. Allen\nspeaks of seven workmen. _Diary of the Tower and Douay Diary._]\n\n[Footnote 9: The custom however was already changing, and \"Roman\"\ntype soon afterwards came into general use.]\n\n[Footnote 1: _Memoirs_, i. cap. 24; _Collectanea P._ fol. 155.]\n\n[Footnote 11: Bombino, _Vita Campiani_ 1620, p.136. Some of\nBombino's additions are not, perhaps, arranged in their true\nchronological order. He tells us, for instance, a propos of\nBrinkley's difficulties in getting printers, that he had to dress\nthem, and give them horses to ride, like gentlemen. But he does\nnot make it clear whether these were the men who printed the _Ten\nReasons_, or Persons' previous works. Bombino says that Brinkley\npaid for the type, &c., but Allen, in a contemporary letter, says\nthat George Gilbert had left a fund for these purposes. Bombino\nsays the printing of the _Decem Rationes_ was commenced at\nBrinkley's own house at Green Street, and had to be removed\nbecause one of the servants was arrested in London, and tortured\nto make him confess, which he heroically refused. Campion and\nPersons knowing of the torture, not of the man's constancy, at\nonce removed the press. But Persons' _Memoirs_ ascribes this\nincident to an earlier period. (_Domestical Difficulties_, p.\n119; _Autobiography_ for 1581).]\n\n[Footnote 12: Simpson, p. 217, following Lansdowne MSS. xxx. 78]\n\nRATIONES DECEM\n\nQVIBVS FRETVS B. EDMVNDVS CAMPIANVS CERTAMEN ADVERSARIIS OBTVLIT\nIN CAVSA FIDEI, REDDITAE ACADEMICIS ANGLIAE.\n\nEPISTOLA [1]\n\nAD REGINAE ANGLIAE CONSILIARIOS, QUA PROFECTIONIS SUAE IN ANGLIAM\nINSTITUTUM DECLARAT, ET ADVERSARIOS AD CERTAMEN PROVOCAT\n\nQuandoquidem, viri ornatissimi, a Germania et Bohemia revocatus,\nnon sine ingenti vitae meae periculo, in hoc florentissimum\nAngliae regnum, dulcissimam patriam meam, tandem aliquando\nperveni, pro Superiorum meorum voluntate, Dei gloriam et animarum\nsalutem promoturus; verisimile esse putavi, me turbulento hoc,\nsuspicioso ac difficillimo tempore, sive citius, sive aliquanto\ntardius, in medio cursu abreptum iri. Quapropter ignarus quid de\nme futurum sit, quum Dei permissu in carceres et vincula forte\ndetrudendus sim, ad omnem eventum scriptum hoc condidi: quod ut\nlegere, et ex eo causam meam cognoscere velitis, etiam atque\netiam rogo. Fiet enim, ut hac re non parvo labore liberemini, dum\nquod multis ambagibus inquirere vos audio, id totem aperta\nconfessione libere expromo. Atque ut rem omnem, quo melius et\nintelligi, et memoria comprehendi queat, compendio tradam, in\nnovem omnino capita eam dispertiar.\n\n1. Profiteor me, quamvis indignum, Ecclesiae Catholicae\nsacerdotem, et iam octo abhinc annis magna Dei misericordia in\nSocietatem nominis Iesu cooptatum, peculiare quoddam belli\ngenus sub obedientiae vexillo suscepisse; ac simul me omni\ndivitiarum, honorum et aliorum huiusmodi bonorum spe, et\nhabendi potestate, abdicasse.\n\n2. Generalis Praepositi nostri decreto (quod ego tamquam mandatum\ncoelitus missum, et a Christo ipso sancitum veneror), Praga Romam,\nubi Generalis nostri perpetua sedes est; Roma deinde in Angliam\ncontendi: qua animi alacritate etiam in quamcumque aliam orbis\nterrarum partem, sive ad christianos, sive ad infideles, profectus\nfuissem, si me ad eam profectionem superiores mei designassent.\n\n3. Negotium mihi commisum tale est, ut gratis Evangelium\nadministrem, rudes in fide instituam, flagitiosos a scelere ad\nmeliorem vitae rationem traducam, errores convellam; et, ut\nsummatim omnia complectar, pugnae spiritualis signum tuba canam,\natque alacriter adversus foeda flagitia et superbam ignorationem,\nqua innumeri cives mei, quos intimis animi visceribus complector,\noppressi iacent, depugnem.\n\n4. Numquam mihi animus fuit, imo et a Patribus, qui me miserunt,\nsevere prohibitum mihi est, ut ne reipublicae ac politicae huius\nregni administrationis negotiis me immisceam: nam et aliena haec\nsunt a vocationis meae instituto, et iis animum cogitationesque\nmeas libenter avoco.\n\n5. Quamobrem vestra clementia fretus, ad gloriam Dei tria non\nminus aequa, quam ab omni pacis et tranquillitatis reipublicae\nperturbatione aliena, concedi mihi et permitti humillime postulo.\nPrimum est, ut Dominationes vestrae, pro sua et reipublicae\ndignitate, me pro religione disserentem audire non graventur.\nAlterum, quod et cumprimis desidero, et maximi momenti esse\narbitror, ut mihi liceat in consessu doctorum, magistorum et\nutriusque Academiae virorum insignium, sacrosanctae theologiae\nprofessorum, verba facere. Promitto me catholicae Ecclesiae fidem\ninvictis rationibus et sacrarum Scripturarum, Conciliorum, Patrum\natque historiarum auctoritate, ac denique ex ipsa tum naturali,\ntum morali philosophia efficaciter demonstraturum et defensurum.\nTertium, ut audiar ab utriusque iuris, sive canonici, sive\ncivilis, peritis, quibus eamdem fidei veritatem, legum, quae\netiamnum vigent, testimonio atque auctoritate comprobabo.\n\n6. Nollem equidem quidquam proferre, quod insolentem\nprovocationem aut arrogantiam aliquam prae se ferret; quum et\nmundo mortuus iam sim, et ex animo paratus promtusque, ut me ad\ncuiusvis pedes abiiciam ac vestigia etiam exosculer. Tantus tamen\nanimus mihi est pro gloria et maiestate Regis mei Iesu\namplificanda, tanta in eius favore fiducia, tanta denique in\ncausae aequitate et firmissimorum argumentorum ac probationum\nrobore confidentia, (quum certo sciam nullum protestantium, nec\nomnes simul iunctos, nec ullam adversariorum factionem,\nquantumvis imperitam multitudinem et grammaticos quosdam\nadolescentulos, apud quos insigniter debacchantur, in errorem\ninducant, posse dogmata sua disputatione aut tueri aut probare);\nut cum illis omnibus, vel cum eorum quolibet, vel cum\nantesignanis ex omni illorum numero delectis, ultro me offeram\ncongressurum; bona fide protestans eo mihi gratius fore certamen,\nquo melius instructi accesserint.\n\n7. Et quoniam Dominus Deus Dominam meam reginam, eximiis naturae,\neruditionis ac regiae educationis dotibus exornare voluit, si sua\nMaiestas huiusmodi auditionem, qualem in quinto articulo secundo\nloco efflagitavi, sua regali praesentia et benigna attentione\ncohonestare dignaretur, sperarem sane, me articulos controversos\noptima methodo et perspicuis argumentis ita illustrare, atque ab\nomnibus fallaciarum involucris quibus constricti sunt, explicare\nposse, ut zelo veritatis et amore, quo sua Maiestas populum\ncomplectitur, mediocriter eius animum inclinarem, quum ad\nplurimas res, quae regno suo non parum detrimenti afferunt,\ndamnandas et reiiciendas, tum ad nos catholicos, misere iamdui\noppressos, maiore aequitate prosequendos.\n\n8. Neque vero dubium mihi est quin vos, ornatissimi consiliari\nS. M., quum in maximi momenti negotiis praeclare ac sapienter\nagere soleatis, ubi has de fide controversias, quas adversarii\nnostri non sine fuco et confuse plerumque pertractant, bona fide\ndelectas et fuco nudatas perspexeritis, luce meridiana clarius\ncognituri sitis, quam solidis et firmis fundamentis fides\ncatholica nitatur. Et quia e contrario protestantium argumenta\nsunt omnino frivola et infirma, quae temporis iniquitate vim\naliquam contra nos habere putantur; futurum spero, ut vestrarum\nanimarum et innumerabilium aliarum, quae a vestro nutu et\nexemplo pendent, miserti, ab huiusmodi falsorum dogmatum\narchitectis et doctoribus facies vestras animumque ipsum\navertatis, ac nobis, qui vitam nostram pro vesta salute\nalacriter profundere parati sumus, aequiori et magis propitia\nmente auscultetis. Multae innocentes manus quotidie et sine\nintermissione pro vobis in coelum attolluntur. Haec in vos\nstudia sunt eorum Anglorum, qui in provinciis transmarinis\nnumquam interiturae posteritatis patres, virtuti et eruditioni\nadquirendae dant operam; omninoque secum statuerunt, a salute\nvestra promovenda non prius absistere, quam vel animas vestras\nChristo lucrifecerint, vel lanceis vestras confixi generose\noccubuerint. Et quidem quod ad Societatem nostram attinet, velim\nsciatis, omnes nos, qui sumus de Societate Iesu, per totum\nterrarum orbem longa lateque diffusi, (quorum continua successio\net multitudo omnes machinationes vestras anglicas facile\nsuperabit), sanctum foedus iniisse ut cruces, quas nobis\niniicietis, magno animo feramus, neque umquam de vestra salute\ndesperemus, quamdiu vel unus quispiam e nobis supererit, qui\nTiburno[2] vestro fruatur, atque suppliciis vestris\nexcarnificari, carceribusque squalere et consumi possit.\nIampridem inita ratio est, divinique numinis auspicio inchoatum\ncertamen; nulla vis, nullus impetus adversariorum superabit. Hac\nratione consita et tradita olim fides est, eadem in pristinam\ndignitatem revocari et restitui debet.\n\nQuod si hoc scriptum meum, quod offero, reiicitur, nec benevoli\nconatus mei quidquam possint efficere, et pro itinere multorum\nmillium milliarium vestri causa suscepto, ingratum animum\nexperiar; id unum agendum mihi supererit, ut vos causamque meam\nDeo scrutatori cordium commendem: quem quidem ex animo precor, ut\nnobis tantisper gratiam suam impertiri velit, qua ante extremum\nremunerationis diem in unam sententiam conspiremus; et ut tandem\naliquando in coelo, ubi nulla erit iniuriarum memoria, amicitia\nsempiterna perfruamur.\n\nPREFATIO\n\nEDMUNDUS CAMPIANVS DOCTISSIMIS ACADEMICIS OXONII FLORENTIBVS ET\nCANTABRIGIAE, S. P. D.\n\nAnno praeterito, quum ex instituto vitae meae iussus in hanc\ninsulam remeassem, clarissimi viri, offendi sane fluctus haud\npaulo saeviores in anglicano littore, quam quos in oceano\nbrittannico recens a tergo reliqueram. Mox interiorem in Angliam\nubi penetrassem, nihil familiarius, quam inusitata supplicia;\nnihil certius, quam incerta pericula. Collegi me, ut potui, memor\ncausae, memor temporum. Ac ne prius forte corriperer, quam\nauditus a quopiam fuissem, scripto protinus mandavi consileum\nmeum, qui venissem, quid quaererem, quod bellum, et quibus,\nindicere cogitarem Autographum apud me habui, ut mecum, si\ncaperer, caperetur; exemplum eius apud amicum deposui, quod, me\nquidem nesciente, pluribus communicatum est. Adversarii\npublicatam schedulam atrociter acceperunt quum caetera, tum illud\ninvidiosissime criminantes, quod unus omnibus in hoc religionis\nnegotio certamen obtulissem; quamquam solus non eram futurus, si\nfide publica disputassem. Responderunt postulatis meis Hammerus\net Charcus. Quid tandem? Otiose omnia. Nullum enim responsum,\npraeter unum, honeste dabunt, quod numquam dabunt: \"Conditiones\namplectimur, Regina spondet, advola.\" Interea clamant isti:\n\"Sodalitium tuum, seditiones tuas, arrogantiam tuam, proditorem,\nsine dubio proditorem.\" Ridicule. Operam et oleum et famam\nhomines non insipientissimi cur profundunt?\n\nVerum his duobus, (quorum prior animi causa meam chartam delegit,\nin quam incurrerat; alter malitiosius totam rem convolvit),\npraebitus nuper est libellus admodum luculentus, qui quantum\noportuit, tantum et de Societate nostra, et de horum iniuriis, et\nde provincia, quam sustinemus, edisserit. Mihi supererat,\n(quoniam, ut video, tormenta, non scholas, parant antistites),\nrationem facti mei vobis ut probarem; capita rerum, quae mihi\ntantum fidentiae pepererunt, quasi digito fontes ostenderem. Vos\netiam hortarer, quorum interest praeter caeteros, incumbatis in\nhanc curam, quam a vobis Christus, Ecclesia, respublica et vestra\nsalus exigunt. Ego si fretus ingenio, litteris, arte, lectione,\nmemoria, peritissimum quemque adversarium provocavi fui\nvanissimus et superbissimus, qui neque me, necque illos\ninspexerim; sin causam intuitus, existimavi satis me valentem\nesse, qui docerem hunc solem meridie lucere, debetis mihi\nfervorem istum concedere, quem honor Iesu Christi, Regis mei, et\ninvicta veritas imperarunt. Scitis M. Tullium in Quintiana, quum\nRoscius victoriam adpromitteret, si efficeret argumentis,\nseptingenta millia passuum non esse decursa biduo, non modo nihil\nveritum articulos et nervos Hortensii, sed ne grandiores quidem\nHortensio, Phillipos, et Cottas, et Antonios, et Crassos, quibus\nmaximam dicendi gloriam tribuebat, metuere potuisse. Est enim\nquaedam veritas tam illustris et perspicua, ut eam nullae\nverborum rerumque praestigiae possint obruere. Porro liquidius\nest quod nos agimus, quam illa fuit hypothesis Rosciana. Nam si\nhoe praestitero: coelos esse, divos esse, fidem esse, Christum\nesse, causam obtinui. Hic ego non sim animosus? Equidem occidi\npossum, superari non possum, iis enim Doctoribus insisto, quos\nille Spiritus erudiit, qui nec fallitur, nec vincitur.\n\nQuaeso a vobis ut salvi esse velitis. A quibus hoc impetraro,\nreliqua minime dubitanter expecto. Date modo vos huic\nsollicitudini, Christum obtestamini, industriam adiungite;\nprofecto sentietis id, quod res est, et adversarios desperare, et\nnos, tam solide fundatos, quieto magnoque animo hanc arenam\nexpetere oportere. Brevior hic sum, quod reliquo sermone vos\nalloquor. Valete.\n\nRATIONES OBLATI CERTAMINIS\n\n_Ego dabo vobis os et sapientiam, cui non poterunt resistere et\ncontradicere omnes adversarii vestri._ Luc. xxi. 15.\n\nRationum capita.\n\n1. Sacrae Litterae.\n\n2. Sacrarum Litterarum sententia.\n\n3. Natura Ecclesiae.\n\n4. Concilia.\n\n5. Patres.\n\n6. Fermamenta Patrum.\n\n7. Historia.\n\n8. Paradoxa.\n\n9. Sophismata.\n\n10. Omne genus testium.\n\nPRIMA RATIO\n\nSACRAE LITTERAE.\n\nQuum multa sunt, quae adversariorum diffidentiam in causa\nloquuntur, tum nihil aeque atque sanctorum maiestas Bibliorum\nfoedissime violata. Etenim qui, posteaquam reliquorum testium\nvoces et suffragia contempserunt, eo sunt redacti nihilo secius,\nut stare nequeant, nisi divinis ipsis codicibus vim et manus\nintulerint; ii se profecto declarant extrema fortuna confligere,\net rebus iam desperatis ac perditis, experiri durissima velle\natque ultima. Manicheis[3] quid causae fuit, ut \"Evangelium\nMatthei et Acta refigerent Apostolica?\" Desperatio. His enim\nvoluminibus cruciabantur, et qui Christum negaverant prognatum de\nVirgine, et qui Spiritum christianis tum primo coelitus illapsum\nfinxerant quum ipsorum Paracletus, Persa nequissimus, erupisset.\nQuid Ebioniis,[4] ut omnes Pauli repudarient epistolas?\nDesperatio. His enim suam dignitatiem retinentibus, antiquata\ncircumcisio est, quam isti revocaverant. Quid Luthero[5] ut\nEpistolam Iacobi \"contentiosam, tumidam, aridum, stramineam,\"\nflagitiosus apostata nominaret, et \"indignam spiritu censeret\napostolico?\" Desperatio. Hoc enim scripto confessus miser atque\ndisruptus est, quum \"in sola fide iustitiam, constitueret.\" Quid\nLutheri catulis, ut Tobiam, Ecclesiasticum, Machabaeos, et horum\nodio complures alios eadem calumnia comprehensos, e sincero\ncanone repente dispungerent? Desperatio. His enim oraculis\ndisertissime coarguuntur, quoties de angelorum patrocinio,\nquoties de arbitrii libertate, quoties de fidelibus vita\ndefunctis, quoties de Divorum hominum intercessione disputant.\n\nItane vero? Tantum perversitatis, tantum audaciae? Quum Ecclesiam,\nconcilia, cathedras, Patres, martyres, imperia, populos, leges,\nacademias, historias, omnia vetustatis et sanctitatis vestigia\nconculcassent, scripto Dei verbo tantum controversias velle\ndirimere proclamassent, illud ipsum verbum, quod solum restiterat,\nexsectis e toto corpore tam multis, tam bonis, tam speciosis,\npartibus, delumbasse? Septem enim ipsos de veteri Testamento[6]\ncodices, ut minuta dissimulem, calviniani praeciderunt; lutherani\nvero etiam epistolam Iacobi, et huius invidia quinque alias;[7] de\nquibus aliquando fuerat et alicubi controversum. His quoque\nlibellum Estheris et tria capita Danielis adnumerant novissimi\nGenuenses; quae quidem Anabaptistae, istorum condiscipuli, iam\npridem damnaverant atque deriserant.\n\nQuanto modestius Augustinus,[8] qui sacrosanctum catalogum\npertexens, non sibi neque alphabetum hebraicum, ut Iudaei; neque\nprivatum spiritum, ut Sectarii, pro regula posuit; sed illum\nSpiritum, quo totum corpus Ecclesiae Christus animat. Quae quidem\nEcclesia custos huius depositi, non magistra, quod haeretici\ncavillantur, thesaurum hunc universum quem Tridentina[9] Synodus\nest amplexa, vetustissimis olim conciliis publicitus vindicavit.\nIdem Augustinus,[10] de una Scripturarum particula speciatim\ndisserens, inducere in animum non potest, librum Sapientiae, qui\niam tum Ecclesiae calculo, temporum serie, priscorum testimonio\ninstinctione fidelium, ut firmus et canonicus robur obtinuerat,\ncuiusquam temeritate vel susurro extrudi extra canonem oportere.\nQuid ille nunc diceret, si viveret in terris, et Lutheros\nCalvinosque concerneret opifices bibliorum, qui sua lima politula\net elegantula vetus novumque Testamentum raserint; neque\nSapientiam tantum, sed et alia permulta de canonicorum librorum\nordine segregaverint: ut quidquid ex horum officina non\nprodierit, illud ad omnibus phrenetico decreto tamquam incultum\net horridum conspuatur?\n\nAd hoc tam dirum et exsecrabile perfugium qui descenderunt, ii\ncerte licet in ore suorum asseclarum volitent, sacerdotia\nnundinentur declamitent in concione, ferrum in catholicos,\nequuleum crucemque consciscant; tamen victi, abiecti, squalidi,\nprostrati sunt: quandoquidem arrepta virgula censoria, veluti\narbitri sedentes honorarii, divinas ipsas tabulas, si quae ad\nstomachum non fecissent, obliterant. Ecquis est vel mediocriter\ninstitutus, qui talium cuniculos hostium reformidet? Qui homines\nquamprimum in corona vestra, eruditorum hominum, ad eiusmodi\nveteratorias artes, tamquam ad familiarem daemonem currerent, non\naurium convicio sed strepitu pedum exciperentur. Quaererem ab\neis, verbi gratia, quo iure corpus biblicum detruncent atque\ndiripiant? Respondent: non se veras Scripturas exscindere, sed\nexcernere supposititias. Quo iudice? Spiritu sancto. Hoc enim\nresponsum a Calvino[11] praescribitur, ut Ecclesiae iudicium, quo\nspiritus examinantur, subterfugiat. Cur igitur alios alii\nlancinatis, quum omnes eodem Spiritu gloriemini?\n\nCalvinianorum spiritus recipit sex epistolas, quae spiritui non\nplacent lutherano; freti tamen uterque sancto Spiritu.\nAnabaptistae historiam Iobi fabulam[12] appellant, tragicis et\ncomicis legibus intermixtam. Qui sciunt? Spiritu docente.\nCastalio[13] mysticum illud Salomonis Canticum, quod ut\nparadisum animae, ut manna reconditum, ut opiparas in Christo\ndelicias catholici admirantur, nihilo pluris quam cantilenam de\nanicula, et cum pedissequis aulae colloquium amatorium venereus\nfurcifer aestimavit. Vnde hausit? A spiritu. In Apocalypsi\nIoannis, cuius omnes apices excelsum aliquid et magnificum\nsonare confirmat Hieronymus,[14] tamen Lutherus[15] et Brentius\net Kemnitius quiddam, nescio quid, difficiles aristarchi\ndesiderant; eo scilicet propendentes, ut exautoretur. Quem\npercontati? Spiritum. Quatuor Evangelia fervore praepostero\nLutherus[16] inter se committit, et prioribus tribus Epistolas\nPauli longe praeferens, \"unicum\" deinceps \"Evangelium Ioannis,\npulchrum, verum, praecipuum\" decernit esse nominandum; quippe\nqui, quod in ipso fuit, libenter etiam Apostolos suarum rixarum\nsocios adscripsisset. Quo doctore? Spiritu. Quin etiam iste\nfraterculus[17] non dubitavit Evangelium Lucae petulanti stylo\nperstringere, quod in eo crebrius bona nobis virtutum opera\ncommendentur. Quem interrogavit? Spiritum. Theodorus Beza ex\nLucae vigesimo secundo capite : \"Hic calix, novum testamentum,\nin meo sanguine, qui (calix) pro vobis fundetur, <Greek:\npotaerion enchunomenon>,\" ausus est ut corruptum vitiatumque\ntraducere, quod haec oratio nullam expositionem, nisi de vino\ncalicis converso in verum Christi sanguinem, patiatur. Quis\nindicavit? Spiritus. Denique quum omnia credant suo quisque\nspiritui, nomen sancti Spiritus horribili blasphemia mentiuntur.\nQui sic agunt, nonne se produnt? Nonne facile refutantur? Nonne\nin concessu talium virorum, quales estis Academici, tenentur ac\nminimo negotio constringuntur? Cum his ego timeam pro fide\ncatholica disputare, qui pessima fide voces non humanas, sed\naethereas tractavere?\n\nNihil hic dico, quae vertendo perverterint quamvis intolerabilia\nsint, quae accusem. Gregorio Martino, scientissimo linguarum,\ncollegae meo, qui doctius et plenius hoc praestabit, nihil\npraeripio, nec aliis, quibus id laboris esse iam prae manibus\nintellexi. Facinorosius crimen est ac tetrius, quod nunc\npersequor. Inventos esse doctorculos, qui temulento quodam\nimpetu in coeleste chirographum involarint; idipsum pluribus\nlocis, ut maculatum, ut mancum, ut falsum, ut subreptitium\ncondemnarint; eius partes aliquas correxerint, aliquas\ncorroserint, aliquas evulserint. Hinc omne propugnaculum, quo\nmuniebatur, in lutheranos spiritus, tamquam in valla\nphantasmatum pictosque parietes commutarint; ne prorsus\nobmutescerent, quum in Scripturas, erroribus suis infestas,\nimpingerent, quas nihilo commodius expedire, quam sorbere\nfavillas, aut saxa mandere, potuissent.\n\nHaec ergo mihi prima ratio vehemens et iusta fuit quae ubi partes\nadversarias umbraticas et fractas ostendisset, animum sane\naddidit viro et christiano et in his studiis exercitato, pro\nsempiterni Regis diplomate adversus reliquias profligatorum\nhostium decertandi.\n\nSECVNDA RATIO\n\nSACRARVM LITTERARVM SENTENTIA\n\nAlterum est, quod me quidem ad congressum incitarit, et horum\napud me copiolas elevarit, adversarii perpetuum in Scripturis\nexponendis ingenium, plenum fraudis, inane prudentiae. Statim\nhaec, philosophi, tangeretis. Itaque vos auditores expetii.\n\nSciscitemur ab adversaras, exempli gratia, quidnam sequuti novam\nsectam intriverint, qua Christus excluditur e coena mystica? Si\nnominant Evangelium, accurrimus. A nobis verba sunt:[18] \"Hoc\nest corpus meum. Hic est calix meus.\" Qui sermo visus est ipsi\nLuthero[19] tam potens, ut quum etiam discuperet fieri\nZuinglianus, quod ea re plurimum incommodare Pontifici\npotuisset, captus tamen et victus apertissimo contextu, cederet;\nneque minus invitus Christum vere praesentem in Sacramento\nsanctissimo fateretur, quam olim daemones, victi miraculis,\nChristum Dei Filium vociferati sunt.[20] Agedum, pagella scripta\nsuperiores sumus; de sententia scripti contenditur. Hanc\npervestigemus ex verbis adiacentibus:[21] \"Corpus meum, quod pro\nvobis tradetur. Sanguis meus, qui pro multis effundetur.\" Adhuc\ndurissimae partes Calvini sunt, nostrae faciles et explicatae.\nQuid amplius? Conferte Scripturas, inquiunt. Conspirant\nEvangelia,[22] Paulus adstipulatur; voces, clausulae, tota\nconnexio panem, vinum, insigne miraculum, coeleste pabulum,\ncarnem, corpus, sanguinem, reverenter ingeminant. Nihil\naenigmaticum, nihil offusum caligine loquendi.\n\nTamen perstant adversarii, neque finem faciunt altercandi. Quid\nagimus? Opinor, audiatur antiquitas; et quod nos alteris alteri\nsuspecti non possumus, illud omnium saeculorum veneranda\ncanities, Christo propior, ab hac lite remotior, decidat\narbitrio. Non ferunt: prodi se aiunt. Dei verbum purum, purum,\ninclamant; hominum commentarios aversantur. Insidiose inepte. Dei\nverbum perurgemus, obscurant; Divos testamur interpretes,\nobsistunt. In summa, sic instituunt, nisi reorum iudicio\nsteteris, nullum iudicium fore.\n\nAtque ita se gerunt in omni, quam exercemus, controversia, de\ninfusa gratia, de inhaerente iustitia, de Ecclesia conspicua, de\nnecessitate Baptismatis, de Sacramentis et Sacrificio, de piorum\nmeritis, de spe et timore, de peccatis imparibus, de auctoritate\nPetri, de clavibus, de votis, de conciliis evangelicis, de\ncaeteris. Scripturas neque paucas et ponderosa catholici passim\nin libris, in colloquiis, in templis, in schola citavimus atque\ndiscussimus; eluserunt. Veterum scholia graecorum et latinorum\nadmovimus; abnuerunt. Quid tum denique? Doctor Martinus Lutherus,\naut vero Phillippus, aut certe Zuinglius, aut sine dubio Calvinus\net Bezza, fideliter enarrarunt. Egone quemquam vestrum existimen\ntam esse mucosis naribus, qui hoc artificium, monitus, non\npersentiscat? Quare fateor me scholas Academicas cupide\nrequirere, ut inspectantibus vobis, calamistratos istos milites,\nin solem et pulverem e suis umbraculis evocatos, non meis\nviribus, qui cum vestris centesima parte non sum conferendus, sed\nvalentissima causa et certissima veritate debilitem.\n\nTERTIA RATIO\n\nNATVRA ECCLESIAE\n\nAudito iam Ecclesiae nomine, hostis expalluit. Sed tamen\nexcogitavit quiddam, quod a vobis animadverti volo, ut falsi\nruinam et inopiam cognoscatis. Senserat in Scripturis tum\npropheticis, tum apostolicis, ubique honorificam Ecclesiae fieri\nmentionem: vocari civitatem sanctam (Apoc. xxi. 10), fructiferam\nvineam (Ps. lxxix.9), montem excelsum (Isai. ii. 2), directam\nviam (Ibid. xxxv. 8), columbam unicam (Cant. vi. 8), regnum coeli\n(Matth. xiii. 24), sponsam (Cant. iv. 8), et corpus Christi (Eph.\nv. 23 et 1 Cor. xii. 12), firmamentum veri (1 Tim. iii. 15),\nmultitudinem illam, cui Spiritus promissas instillet omnia\nsalutaria (Ioan. xiv. 26): illam, in quam universam nullae sint\numquam fauces diaboli morsum letiferum impacturae (Matth. xvi.\n18); illam, cui quicumque repugnet, quantumvis ore Christum\npraedicet, non magis Christi, quam publicanus aut ethnicus\n(Matth. xviii. 17), potiatur.\n\nNon est ausus contravenire sonitu, videri noluit Ecclesiae, quam\ntoties Scripturae commemorant, refragari; nomen callide retinuit,\nrem ipsam funditus, definiendo, sustulit. His enim proprietatibus\ndelineavit Ecclesiam, quae penitus ipsam occulant, et dimotam a\nsensibus tamquam ideam platonicam, secretis obtutibus hominum\nperpaucorum subiiciant[23]; eorum tantummodo, qui singulariter\nafflati, corpus hoc aerium intelligentia comprehenderent, et\nhuiusce sodalitatis participes subtili quodam oculo lustrarent.\nVbi candor? Vbi simplicitas. Quae Scripturae, quae sensa, qui\nPatres, hoc penicillo depingunt Ecclesiam? Sunt Christi ad\nAsiaticas ecclesias (Apoc. i. 2, 3), sunt Petri, Pauli, Ioannis,\naliorum ad diversos epistolae; frequentes in Actis Apostolicis\ninchoantur et propagantur ecclesiae (Act. viii. 10, 11 et seq.).\nQuid istae? Num soli Deo et sanctis hominibus, an christianis\netiam cuiuscumque generis, manifestae?\n\nSed profecto durum telum necessitas est. Ignoscite. Nam qui\nsaeculis omnino quindecim, non oppidam, non villam, non domum\nreperiunt imbutam doctrina sua, donec infelix monachus (Lutherus)\nincesto connubio votam Deo virginem funestasset; aut Helvetius\ngladiator (Zuinglius) in patriam coniurasset; aut stigmaticus\nperfuga (Calvinus) Genevam occupasset; ii coguntur Ecclesiam, si\nquam volent, in latebris venditare, et eos parentes asserere,\nquos nec ipsi noverint, neque mortalium quisquam aspexerit. Nisi\nforte gaudent maioribus illis, quos haereticos fuisse liquet, ut\nAerio, Ioviniano, Vigilantio, Helvidio, Iconomachis, Berengario,\nValdensibus, Lolhardo, Wiclefo, Hussio; a quibus pestifera\nquaedam fragmenta dogmatum emendicarint.\n\nNolite mirari, si fumulos istos non pertimui, quos, modo ad\nmeridianam lucem venero, minime fuerit laboriosum dispellere.\nHaec est enim nostra sermocianatio. Dic mihi: subscribis\nEcclesiae, quae saeculis anteactis viguit?--Omnino.--Obeamus ergo\nterras et tempora. Cui?--Coetui fidelium.--Quorum?--Nomina\nnesciuntur, sed constat plurimos exstitisse.--Constat? Quibus\nconstat?--Deo.--Quis dicit?--Nos, qui divinitus edocti\nsumus.--Fabulae qui credam?--Si arderes fide, tam scires hoc,\nquam te vivere.\n\n/* Spectatum admissi, risum teneatis?\n\nIuberi christianos omnes adiungere se Ecclesiae, cavere ne\nspiritali gladio trucidentur, in domo Dei pacem colore, huic\nanimas credere columini veritatis, istic querelas omnes deponere,\nhinc eiectos habere pro ethnicis; nescire tamen tot centinis, tot\nhomines, ubinam illa sit, quive huc pertineant? Vnum illud\ncrepare in tenebris, ubi ubi sit Ecclesia, tantummodo sanctos et\nin aethera destinatos ea contineri? Ex quo fit ut, si quis\nimperium sui Praesulis detrectare velit, scelere solvatur,\ndummodo sibi persuadeat presbyterum in crimen incidisse, et ab\nEcclesia protinus excidisse.\n\nQuum scirem adversarios talia comminisci, quod nullius aetatis\nEcclesiae consuessent, et orbatos tota re, velle tamen inter\nangustias vocabulum possidere, solabar me vestro acumine, atque\nadeo mihi pollicebar, fore ut quamprimum huiusmodi technas ex\nipsorum confessione cerneretis, statim homines ingenui et cordati\nstultas argutias in vestram intextas perniciem exscinderetis.\n\nQVARTA RATIO\n\nCONCILIA\n\nGravis, Ecclesia nascente, quaestio de legitimis caeremoniis,\nquae credentium animos disturbavit, coacto Apostolorum et\nseniorum concilio, soluta est. Credidere parentibus filii,\npastoribus oves, in haec verba mandantibus[24]: \"Visum est\nSpiritui sancto et nobis.\" Sequuta sunt ad extirpandam haeresim,\nquae varia quibusque saeculis pullulavit, oecumenica veterum\nConcilia quatuor, tantae firmitudinis, ut iis ante annos mille\nsingularis honos tamquam divinis vocibus, haberetur[25]. Non\nabibo longius. Etiam domi nostrae, comitiis regni eadem Concilia\npristinum ius inviolatamque dignitatem obtinent. Haec citabo,\nteque ipsam[26], Anglia, dulcissima patria, contestabor. Si,\nquemadmodum prae te fers, quatuor ista Concilia reverebere,\nsummum honorem primae sedis Episcopo, id est, Petro, deferes:[27]\nincruentum corporis et sanguinis Christi sacrificium in altari\nrecognosces:[28] beatos Martyres, divosque omnes coelites, ut pro\nte Christo supplicent, obsecrabis:[29] mulierosos apostatas ab\ninfando concubitu et incestu publico coercebis:[30] multa facies,\nquae demoliris; multa, quae facis, infecta voles.[31] Porro\nSynodos aliorum temporum, nominatim vero Tridentinam, eiusdem\nauctoritatis ac fidei cum primis illis fuisse, quando usus\nvenerit, demonstraturum me spondeo atque recipio.\n\nAuctus igitur Conciliorum omnium valido et exquisito praesidio,\ncur non ingrediar in hanc palaestram animo tranquillo et\npraesenti, observaturus adversarium, quo se proripiat? Nam et\nevidentissima producam, quae distorquere non poterit, et\nprobatissima, quae respuere non audebit.\n\nFortasse verbosius loquendo diem extrahere conabitur; sed ab\nintentis hominibus, si vos rego bene novi, nec aures nec oculos\ncompilabit. Quod si quis erit omnino tam demens, qui se unum\nopponat Senatoribus orbis terrae, et iis quidem omni exceptione\nmaioribus, sanctioribus, doctioribus, vetustioribus; libenter\naspiciam illud os, quod ubi vobis ostendero, reliqua\ncogitationibus vestris relinquam. Interim hoc monebo; qui pleno\nConcilio, rite atque ordine consummato, momentum et pondus\nabrogat, videri mihi nullo consilio, nullo cerebro; neque solum\nin theologicis tardum, sed etiam in politicis inconsultum. Si\numquam Dei Spiritus illuxit Ecclesiae, certe illud est tempus\nimmitendi Numinis, quum omnium ecclesiarum, quae sunt in terris\npatentissimae, religio, maturitas, scientia, sapientia, dignitas,\nunam in urbem confluxerint, adhibitisque modis omnibus divinis et\nhumanis, quibus indagari veritas possit, promissum implorent\nSpiritum,[32] quo salutariter et prudenter sanciat.\n\nProsiliat nunc aliquis factionis haereticae magistellus, attollat\nsupercilia, suspendat nasum, frontem perfricet, iudicesque suos\nscurriliter ipse iudicet. Quos ille ludos, quos iocos dabit?\nRepertus est Lutherus,[33] qui diceret, anteferre se Consiliis\nduorum suffragia bonorum et eruditorum hominum (putatote suum et\nPhillippi), si quando in Christi nomine consensissent. O\ncirculos! Repertus est Kemnitius[34], qui concilium Tridentinum\nad suos vertiginis importunae calculos exegerit; quid lucratus?\nInfamiam. Dum iste nictaverit, sepelietur cum Ario; Tridentina\nSynodus quo magis inveterascet, eo magis in dies eoque perennius\nefflorescet. Bone Deus! quae gentium varietas, qui delectus\nepiscoporum totius orbis, qui regum et rerumpublicarum splendor,\nquae medulla theologorum, quae sanctitas, quae lacrymae, quae\nieiunia, qui flores academici, quae linguae, quanta subtilitas,\nquantus labor, quam infinita lectio, quantae virtutum et\nstudiorum divitiae augustum illud sacrarium impleverunt? Audivi\nego Pontifices exsultantes, et in his Antonium, archiepiscopum\nPragensem, a quo sum creatus presbyter, amplissimos et\nprudentissimos viros, quod in ea schola haesissent aliquot annis,\nut nullum Ferdinandi Caesaris, cui multum debuerant, regalius et\nuberius in se beneficium colerent, quam hoc fuit quod in\nTridentino gymnasio legati ex Pannonia consedissent. Intellexit\nhoc Caesar, qui reversis ita gratulatus est: \"Aluimus vos in\nschola optima.\"\n\nHuc invitati fide publica, cur non properarunt adversarii, ut eos\npalam refellerent, in quos ranunculi coaxant e cavernulis?--Hussio\net Hieronymo fregere fidem, inquiunt--Qui?--Constantiensis Concilii\nproceres--Falsum est: nullam dedere. Sed nec in Hussium tamen\nanimadversum fuisset, nisi homo perfidiosus et pestilens, retractus\nex fuga, quam ei Sigismundus Imperator periculo capitis\ninterdixerat, violatis etiam conditionibus, quas scripto pepigerat\ncum Caesare, vim omnem illius diplomatis enervasset. Fefellit\nHussium praecipitata malitia. Iussus enim, quum barbaras in sua\nBohemia tragoedias excitasset, semetipsum sistere Constantiae,\ndespexit praerogativam Concilii; securitatem periit a Caesare,\nCaesar obsignavit, christianus orbis resignavit maior Caesare.\nRedire ad mentem haeresiarcha noluit: periit. Hieronymus vero\nPragensis furtim venit Constantiam, protectus a nemine; deprehensus\ncomparuit, peroravit, habitus est perbenigne, liber abiit quo\nvoluit, sanatus est, haeresim eiuravit, relapsus est, exustus est.\n\nQuid toties unum exemplum de sexcentis exagitant? Repetant\nannales suos. Martinus ipse Lutherus (a. 1518) odium Dei et\nhominum, Augustae positus coram Cardinale Caietano, nonne quod\npotuit, eructavit, et Maximiliani litteris communitus excessit?\nIdem accitus Wormatiam (a. 1521), quum et Caesarem et plerosque\nImperii principes haberet infensos, nonne Caesaris verbo tutus\nfuit? Postremo lutheranorum et zuinglianorum capita, praesente\nCarolo quinto, haereticorum hoste victore, domino, nonne datis\ninduciis confessiones suas innovatas exhibuere comitiis\nAugustanis, et sospites abiere? Haud secus litterae Tridientinae\nlocupletissimas adversario cautiones providerant:[35] uti noluit.\nNimirum se iactat in angulis in quibus ubi tria verba graeca\nsonuerit, sapere videatur; abhorret a luce, quae litteratorem in\nnumero poneret, et ad honesta subsellia devocaret. Catholicis\nAnglis tale chirographum impunitatis impetrent, si diligunt\nsalutem animarum. Nos Hussium non causabimur; verbo Principis\ninnixi, convolabimus.\n\nSed ut, unde sum egressus, eo regrediar, Concilia generalia mea\nsunt, primum, ultimum, media; his pugnabo. Hastam exspectet\nadversarius amentatam, quam avellere numquam poterit.\nProsternatur in eo satanas, Christus vivat.\n\nQVINTA RATIO\n\nPATRES\n\nAntiochiae, qua primum in urbe Christianorum nobile cognomentum\nincrebuit, Doctores,[36] id est, eminentes theologi; et\nProphetae, id est, concionatores perquam celebres, floruerunt.\nHuiusce generis \"scribas et sapientes, doctos in regno Dei, nova\npromentes et vetera,\"[37] Christum callentes et Moysem, Dominus\nipse futuros gregi prospexerat. Hos, ingentis beneficii loco\ndonatos, explodere, quanti maleficii est? Explosit adversarius.\nQuid ita? Quia stantibus illis, concidisset. Id ego quum pro\ncertissimo comperissem, pugnam simpliciter exoptavi, non illam\niocularem, qua turbae velitantur in compitis, sed istam severam\net acrem, qua congredimur in vestris Philosophorum spatiis:\n\n/*-pede pes, densusque viro vir.\n\nAd Patres si quando licebit accedere, confectum est praelium; tam\nsunt nostri, quam Gregorius ipse decimus tertius, filiorum\nEcclesiae Pater amantissimus. Nam ut omittam loca sparsa, quae ex\nmonumentis veterum conquisita, nostram fidem apposite affirmateque\npropugnant; tenemus horum integra volumina, quae de industria\nreligionem, quam tuemur, evangelicam distincte copioseque\ndilucidant. Duplex Hierarchia Martyris Dionysii[38] quas classes,\nquae sacra, quos ritus edocet? Pupugit ea res Lutherum[39] tam\nvalde, ut huius opera \"simillima somniis, nec non\nperniciosissima\" iudicaret. Imitatus parentem Caussaeus,[40]\nnescio quis terrae filius, ex Gallia, non est veritus hunc\nDionysium, inclytae gentis Apostolum, vocitare \"delirum senem.\"\nCenturiatores[41] vehementer offendit Ignatius et Calvinum,[42]\nut in eius epistolis \"deformes naevos, et putidas naenias\"\nhominum quisquiliae notarint. Censoribus[43] illis \"fanaticum\nquiddam\" Irenaeus edixit; Clemens auctor Stromatum \"zizania\nfaecesque protulit;\"[44] reliqui Patres huius aevi, sane\napostolici viri, \"blasphemias et monstra posteris reliquerunt.\"\nIn Tertulliano rapiunt avide, quod a nobis edocti, nobiscum\ncommuniter detestentur; sed meminerint libellum de\nPraescriptionibus,[45] qui nostri temporis sectarios tam\ninsigniter perculit, numquam fuisse reprehensum. Hippolytus,\nPortuensis[46] episcopus, quam belle, quam clare Antichristi\nnervum, lutherana tempora, praemonstravit? Eum propterea\n\"scriptorem infantissimum et larvam\" nominant. Cyprianum,\ndelicias et decus Africae, Gallicanus ille criticus[47] et\nMagdeburgici[48] \"stupidum, et destitutum Deo, et depravatorem\npoenitentiae\" nuncuparunt. Quid admisit? Scripsit enim de\nvirginibus, de lapsis, de unitate Ecclesiae tractationes\neuismodi, eas etiam epistolas Cornelio, Romano Pontifici, ut nisi\nfides huic martyr detrahatur, Petrus Martyr Vermilius, omnesque\ncum eo foederati, peiores adulteris et sacrilegis habeantur. Ac\nne singulis insistam diutius, Patres huius saeculi damnantur\nomnes, \"quippe qui doctrinam de poenitentia mire\ndepravarint.\"[49] Quo pacto? Nam austeritas canonum, quae viguit\nea tempestate, maiorem in modum displicet huic sectae plausibili,\nquae tricliniis aptior, quam templis, voluptarias aures titillare\net pulvillos omni cubito[50] solet assuere.\n\nQuid aetas proxima, quid peccavit? Chrysostomus et ii Patres\n\"iustitiam fidei foede\" videlicet \"obscurarunt.\"[51] Nazianzenus,\nquem honoris causa, Theologum veteres appellarunt, Caussaeo[52]\niudice, \"Fabulator, quid affirmaret, nesciit.\" Ambrosius \"a\ncacodaemone fascinatus est.\" Hieronymus \"aeque damnatus, atque\ndiabolus: iniuriosus Apostolo,[53] blasphemus, sceleratus,\nimpius.\" \"Vnus\" Gregorio Massovio[54] \"pluris est Calvinus, quam\ncentum Augustini.\" Parum est, centum; Lutherus[55] \"nihili facit\nadversum se mille Augustinos, mille Cyprianos, mille Ecclesias.\"\nLongius rem deducere, supervacaneum puto. Nam in hos, qui\nbachantur, quis miretur in Optatum, Athanasium, Hilarium,\nCyrillos, Epiphanium, Basilium, Vincentium, Fulgentium, Leonem,\nGregoriumque Romanum fuisse procacissimos?\n\nQuamquam si datur ulla rebus iniustis iusta defensio non inficior\nhabere Patres, ubicumque incideris, quod isti, dum sibi\nconsentiunt, necessario stomachentur. Etinem qui odere stata\nieiunia, quo animo oportet esse in Basilium, Nazianzenum,\nChrysostomum, qui de quadragesima et indictis ieiuniorum feriis,\ntamquam de rebus iam usitatis, conciones egregias publicarunt?\nQui suas animas auro, libidine, crapula et ambitiosis\nconspectibus vendiderunt, possuntne non esse inimicissimi\nBasilio, Chrysostomo, Hierionymo, Augustino, quorum excellentes\nlibri de monachorum instituto, regula, virtutibus, teruntur?\n\nQui captivam hominis voluntatem invexere, qui christiana funebria\nsustulere, qui Divorum reliquias incendere, sintne placabiles\nAugustino, qui de libero arbitrio libros tres, de cura pro\nmortuis unum, de miraculis ad Basilicas et memorias Martyrum\nprolixum caput nobilissimi operis[56] et conciones aliquot\nexaravit? Qui fidem suis captiunculis metiuntur, nonne\nsuccenseant Augustino, cuius est insignis epistola,[57] qua se\nprofitetur antiquitati, consensioni, successioni perpetuae et\nEcclesiae, quae sola inter tot haereses Catholicae nomen\nusucapione vindicat assentire?\n\nOptatus, Milevitanus episcopus, Donatianam partem revincit[58] ex\ncommunione Catholica; nequitiam accusat ex decreto Melchiadis\n(lib. 1); haeresim refutat ex ordine Romanorum Pontificum (lib.\n2); insaniam patefacit ex Eucharistia et chrismate contaminatis\n(lib. 3); sacrilegium horret ex diffractis altaribus \"in quibus\nChristi membra portata sunt,\" pollutisque calicibus \"qui Christi\nsanguinem tenuerunt,\" (lib. 6). De Optato quid sentiant, aveo\nscire, quem Augustinus[59] ut venerabilem et catholicum\nepiscopum, Ambrosio parem et Cypriano; quem Fulgentius[60] ut\nsanctum et fidelem Pauli interpretem, Augustini similem et\nAmbrosii, meminerunt.\n\nAthanasii Symbolum in templis concinunt. Num favent ei, qui\nAntonium Eremitam Aegyptium,[61] gravis auctor, accurato libello\ndilaudaverit, quique cum Alexandrina Synodo[62] iudicium Sedis\nApostolicae, Divi Petri, suppliciter appellarit? Prudentius in\nhymnis quoties precatur Martyres, quos decantat? Quoties ad eorum\ncineres et ossa Regem Martyrum veneratur? Num hunc probabunt?\nHieronymus pro Divorum reliquiis et honoribas scribit in\nVigilantium, in Iovinianam pro virginitatis gradu. Huccine\npatientur? Ambrosius[63] tutores suos Gervasium et Protasium,\ncelebritate notissima, in Arianam ignominiam honestavit; cui\nfacto divinissimi Patres[64] encomium tribuere: quod factum Deus\nnon uno prodigio decoravit. Num benevoli sunt Ambrosio futuri?\nGregorius Magnus, noster Apostolus, planissime noster est, eoque\nnomine nostris adversariis odiosus; quem Calvini[65] rabies negat\nin schola sancti Spiritus educatum, propterea quod sacras\nimagines illitteratorum libros appellasset.\n\nDies me deficeret numerantem epistolas, conciones, homilias,\norationes, opuscula, disceptationes Patrum, in quibus ex apparato\ngraviter et ornate nostra catholicorum dogmata roborarunt.\nQuamdiu apud bibliopolas ista venierint, tamdiu frustra nostrorum\ncodices prohibentur; frustra servantur aditus oraeque maritimae;\nfrustra domus, arcae, scrinia, capsulae disquiruntur; frustra tot\nportis minaces tabulae suffiguntur. Nullus enim Hardingus, nec\nSanderus, nec Stapletonus, nec Bristolius haec nova somnia\nvehementius, quam hi, quos recensui, Patres, insectantur. Talia\ncogitanti accrevit animus et desiderium pugnae, in qua, quoquo se\nmoverit adversarius, nisi gloriam Deo cesserit, feret incommodum.\nPatres admiserit, captus est; excluserit, nullus est.\n\nAdolescentibus nobis ita contigit. Ioannes Ivellus antesignanus\ncalvinianorum Angliae, catholicos ad Divi Pauli Londinensium\nincredibili iactantia lacessivit, invocatis per hypocrisim et\nimploratis Patribus, quicumque intra salutis annum sexcentesimum\nclaruisset. Accipiunt conditionem memorabiles viri, qui tum\nexsulabant Lovanii, summis licet difficultatibus propter\niniquitatem suorum temporum circumsepti. Ausim dicere, tanto\npopularibus nostris bono fuisse illam Ivellii astutiam,\ninscitiam, improbitatem, impudentiam, quas ii scriptores\nfeliciter expanderunt, ut vix aliud quidquam, memoria mea,\nprovenerit Anglorum Ecclesiae laboranti fructuosius. Edictum\ncontinuo valvis appenditur, ne qui codices illiusmodi\nlegerentur, neve haberentur. Quum tantis clamoribus propemodum\nextorti prodiissent, didicere quicumque negotium attigissent,\nPatres fuisse catholicos, id est, nostros. Neque hoc sibi\nsuisque vulnus inflictum Laurentius Humfredus[66] tacuit; qui\nquum alte Ivellum quoad caetera sustulisset, unam ei notam\naspersit inconsiderantiae, quod Patrum calculos recepisset,\nquibuscum sibi nihil esse commercii, nec fore, sine ulla\ncircuitione proloquitur.\n\nPertentavimus etiam familiariter aliquando Tobiam Matthaeum, qui\nnunc in concionibus dominatur, quem propter bonas artes et virtutum\nsemina dileximus, ut responderet ingenue, possetne qui Patres\nassiduus lectitaret, istarum esse partium, quas ille suaserat.\nRetulit, non posse, si pariter eos legeret iisque crederet.\nVerissimum hoc verbum est, neque aliter eum nunc, aut Mattheum\nHuttonum, qui vir nominatus in paucis, versare Patres dicitur, aut\nreliquos adversarios, qui hoc faciunt, sentire arbitror.\n\nHactenus ergo securus in hanc aciem potui descendere, bellaturus\ncum, iis, qui quasi auribus lupum teneant, aeternam causae\nmaculam cogantur inutere, sive recusent Patres, sive deposcant.\nNam in altero fugam adornant, in altero suffocantur.\n\nSEXTA RATIO\n\nFIRMAMENTVM PATRVM\n\nSi quibus umquam cordi curaeque fuit id, quod maximopere nostris\nfuit et esse debet: \"Scrutamini Scripturas,\"[67] facile princeps\net palmares in hoc genere sanctissimi Patres exstitere. Horum\nopera sumptuque tot gentibus et linguis transcripta Biblia et\nimportata sunt; horum periculis et cruciatibus erepta de flammis\nhostilibus et vastitate; horum laboribus et vigiliis omnem in\npartem enucleata studiosissime; die noctuque sacras Litteras\nimbibere, de suggestibus omnibus sacras Litteras edidere, immensa\nvolumina sacris Litteris ditavere, fidelissimis commentariis\nsacras Litteras explicuere cibos et inediam sacris Litteris\ncondivere, occupati denique sacris in Litteris, ad senectutem\ndecrepitam pervenere.\n\nQuod si frequenter ipsi quoque ab auctoritate maiorum, ab\nEcclesiae praxi, a successione Pontificum, a Conciliis\noecumenicis, a traditionibus apostolicis, a cruore Martyrum, a\nscitis Praesulum, a visis eventisque mirabilibus argumentati\nsunt; tamen omnium maxime et libentissime sanctarum Litterarum\ntestimonia densa conglobant, haec premunt, in his habitant, huic\n\"armaturae fortium\" duces robustissimi, sarta tecta civitatis Dei\ncontra nefarios impetus quotidie munientes, optimo iure primas\npartes honoratissimasque porrigunt.\n\nQuo magis demiror illam exceptionem adversarii superbam et\nfatuam, qui velut aquam in profluente quaeritans, sic in\nScripturis confertissimis Scripturarum penuriam obiectat.\nTantisper se Patribus assensurum dicit, dum sacris Litteris\nadhaerescunt. Num loquitur ex animo? Curabo igitur procedant\narmati atque stipati Christo, Prophetis, Apostolis atque omni\napparatu biblico, celeberrimi auctores, antiquissimi Patres,\nsanctissimi viri, Dionysius, Cyprianus, Athanasius, Basilius,\nNazianzenus, Ambrosius, Hieronymus, Chrysostomus, Augustinus,\nlatinusque Gregorius. Regnet in Anglia fides illa, quam hi\nPatres, amicissimi Scripturarum, ex Scripturis exstruunt. Quas\nafferunt, afferemus; quas conferunt, conferemus; quod inferunt,\ninferemus. Placet? Excrea, dic sodes--Minime vero, inquis, nisi\nrecte exponant--Quid est hoc ipsum, recte? Arbitratu tuo. Nihilne\npudet labyrinthi?\n\nErgo quum sperem in Academiis florentissimis consociatum iri bene\nmultos, qui, non pingui Minerva, sed acuto iudicio in has\ncontroversias inspecturi sunt, et horum responsa nugatoria\nlibraturi, laetus hunc diem campi praestolabor, ut qui contra\nsylvestres tumulos mendiculorum inermium nobilitatem et robur\nEcclesiae Christi cogitem educere.\n\nSEPTIMA RATIO\n\nHISTORIA\n\nPristinam Ecclesiae faciem historia prisca retegit. Huc provoco.\nCerte antiquiores historici, quos etiam usurpant adversarii, fere\nnumerantur Eusebius, Damasus, Hieronymus, Ruffinus, Orosius,\nSocrates, Sozomenus, Theodoretus, Cassiodorus, Gregorius\nTuronensis, Vsuardus, Regino, Marianus Sigebertus, Zonaras,\nCedrenus, Nicephorus. Quid narrant? Nostrorum laudes, progressus,\nvicissitudinem, hostes. Imo vero, quod observes diligenter, illi\nqui dissident a nobis odio capitali, Philippus, Pantaleon,\nFunecius, Magdeburgici, quum se ad scribendam vel chronologiam\nEcclesiae vel historiam appulissent, nisi nostrorum gesta\ncolligerent, ac inimicorum Ecclesiae nostrae fraudes et scelera\ncoacervarent, mille quingentos annos argumento vacui\npraetermitterent.\n\nCum his considera peculiares certarum historiographos regionum,\nqui unius acta cuiusque populi curiosius operosiusque scrutati\nsunt. Ii quasi Spartam adepti, quam locupletare modis omnibus et\nperpolire cuperent, qui ne convivia quidem lautiora, aut\nmanicatas tunicas, aut pugionum capulos, aut inaurata calcaria,\ntalesque minutias, si novitatem saperent, tacuere; profecto, si\nquid in religione mutatum, aut a primis degeneratum saeculis\ninaudissent, frequentes memorassent; si non frequentes, saltem\naliqui: si non aliqui, unus aliquis absque dubio. Nullus omnino,\nneque benevolus nobis, neque malevolus, non modo quidquam tale\nprodidit, sed nec significavit.\n\nVerbi gratia. Dant nobis adversarii, nec aliter possunt, fuisse\nRomanam Ecclesiam aliquando Sanctam, Catholicam, Apostolicam: tum\nquum haec a Divo Paulo promeruisset elogia:[68] \"Vestra fides\nannuntiatur in universo mundo: sine intermissione memoriam vestri\nfacio: Scio quia venien ad vos, in abundantia benedictionis\nChristi veniam: Salutant vos omnes Ecclesiae Christi: Vestra enim\nobedientia in omnem locum divulgata est.\" Tum quum ibi Paulus in\nlibera custodia[69] disseminaret Evangelium; tum quum in ea\nquondam \"Babylone coelectam Ecclesiam\"[70] Petrus regeret; tum\nquum ille Clemens,[71] apprime laudatus ab Apostolo,[72] sederet\nad ipsa gubernacula; tum quum profani Caesares,[73] ut Nero,\nDomitianus, Traianus, Antoninus, Romanos Pontifices laniarent;\ntum etiam, vel Calvino[74] teste, quum Damasus, Siricius,\nAnastasius, Innocentius, clavum tenerent Apostolicum. Hoc enim\nsaeculo nihil adhuc, praesertim Romae, digressos ab Evangelica\ndoctrina, liberaliter ille concedit.\n\nQuando igitur hanc fidem tantopere celebratatam Roma perdidit?\nQuando esse desiit, quod ante fuit? Quo tempore, quo Pontifice,\nqua via, qua vi, quibus incrementis urbem et orbem religio\npervasit aliena? Quas voces, quas turbas, quae lamenta\nprogenuit? Omnes orbe reliquo sopiti sunt, dum Roma, Roma,\ninquam, nova sacramenta, novum sacrificium, novum religionis\ndogma procuderet? Nullus exstitit historicus neque latinus,\nneque graecus, neque remotus, neque citimus, qui rem tantam vel\nobscure iaceret in commentarios?\n\nErgo perspicuum hoc quidem est, si, quae nos credimus, historia\nmulta et varia, nuntia vetustatis, vita memoriae, loquitur ac\nrepetit affluenter; quae vero isti obtrudunt, nulla naratio post\nhomines natos in Ecclesia valuisse commeminit: et Historicos esse\nmeos, et incursiones adversarias esse frigidissimas, quae nihil\nmovere possint, nisi prius receptum sit, omnes omnium temporum\nchristianos in spissam perfidiam atque in gehennae voraginem\ncorruisse, donec Lutherus Boram constuprasset.\n\nOCTAVA RATIO\n\nPARADOXA\n\nEgo vero, praestantissimi viri, quum de multis haeresibus quaedam\napud me opiniosissimorum portenta reputo, quae mihi venient\nexpugnanda; meipsum inertiae nequitiaeque condemnem, si cuiusquam\nin experiundo facultatem aut vires extimescerem. Sit ingeniosus,\nsit eloquens, sit exercitatus, sit omnium librorum helluo; tamen\naridus et balbus appareat necesse est, quum haec tam \"adunata\"\nsustentabit. Disputabitur enim, si forte nobis annuent, de Deo,\nde homine, de peccato, de iustitia, de sacrimentis, de moribus.\nVidero an ausint asseverare, quae sentiunt, quaeque, rebus\naddicti necessariis, divulgant in scriptiunculis. Faxo norint\nista suorum axiomata.\n\nDE DEO.--\"Deus est auctor et causa[75] peccati, volens,\nsuggerens, efficiens, iubens, operans, et in hoc impiorum\nscelerata consilia gubernans. Proprium Dei opus fuit,[76] ut\nvocatio Pauli, sic adulterium Davidis, Iudaeque proditoris\nimpietas.\" Monstrum hoc, cuius Philippum aliquando puduit,\nLutherus[77] tamen, a quo Philippus hauserat, quasi oraculum\ncoeleste miris extollit laudibus, et alumnum suum eo nomine\ntantum non exaequat[78] Apostolo Paulo. Percontabor etiam, quid\nanimi Luthero fuerit, quem Angli[79] calviniani \"virum divinitus\ndatum ad orbem illuminandum\" pronuntiant, quum hunc versum\ndemeret supplicationibus Ecclesiae.[80] \"Sancta Trinitas, unus\nDeus, miserere nobis.\"\n\nDE CHRISTO.--Mox ad personam Christi progrediar. Quaeram ista\nsibi quid velint; Christus De Filius, Deus de Deo? Calvino:[81]\n\"Deus ex sese,\" Bezae:[82] \"Non est genitus de Patris essentia.\"\nItem: \"Duae constituantur in Christo uniones hypostaticae,[83]\naltera animae cum carne, Divinitatis cum humanitate altera.\"\n\"Locus apud Ioannem:\" 'Ego et Pater unum sumus,' non ostendit\nChristum Deum 'homoousion'[84] Deo Patri.\" Sed et 'anima mea,\ninquit Lutherus,[85] odit hoc verbum 'homoousion.'\" Pergite:\n\"Christus ab infantia non fuit gratia consummatus,[86] sed animi\ndotibus velut caeteri homines adolevit: usu factus quotidie\nsapientior, ita ut puerulus ignorantia laborarit.\" Quod perinde\nest, ac si dicerent originis labe et vitio sordidatum. Sed\ncognoscite diriora: \"Christus, quum orans in horto, sudoribus\naquae manaret et sanguinis, sensu damnationis aeternae\ncohorruit:[87] vocem edidit sine ratione, sine spiritu, vocem\ndoloris impetu repentinam; quam, ut non satis meditatam, cleriter\ncastigavit.\" Estne aliquid amplius? Attendite: \"Christus, quum\nactus in crucem exclamaret:\" 'Deus meus, Deus meus, ut quid\ndereliquisti me?' accensus est flammis inferni,[88] desperationis\nvoceni emisit, non aliter affectus, quam si pereundum ei foret\ninternecione sempiterna.\"\n\nHis etiam, si quid possunt, addant: \"Christus, inquiunt,[89]\ndescendit ad inferos, id est, mortuus gehennam gustavit, nihilo\nminus quam animae damnatorum, nisi quod sibi restituendus\nerat.--Quandoquidem enim morte corporea nobis nihil\nprofuisset;[90] anima quoque luctari cum morte debuit aeterna,\natque hoc modo nostrum scelus suppliciumque dependere.\" Ac ne\nquis forte suspicetur, istud Calvino per incuriam obrepsisse,\nidem Calvinus:[91] \"Omnes vos, si qui doctrinam istam solatii\nplenam exagitastis, perditos\" appellat \"nebulones.\" Tempora,\ntempora, cuiusmodi monstrum aluistis? Cruor ille delicatus et\nregius, qui de innocentis Agni corpore lacerato fissoque\nscaturiit, cuius cruoris una guttula propter dignitatem Hostiae\nmille mundos redimere potuisset, nihil humano genet profecit,\nnisi \"mediator Dei et hominum (1 Tim ii. 5), homo Christus Iesus\nmortem quoque secundam (Apoc. ii. 11),\" mortem animae, mortem\ngratiae, peccati solius et exsecrabilis blasphemiae sociam,\npertulisset? Prae hac insania modestus videbitur Bucerus,\nquamquam est impudens, qui[92] infernum in symbolo sepulcrum\naccipit, per epexegesim valde praeposteram, ac potius tautologiam\nineptam atque stolidam.\n\nAnglicani sectarii, pars Calvino, idolo suo, pars Bucero, magno\nmagistro, solent accedere; pars etiam submurmurant in hunc\narticulum, ne quid facessat ultra molestiae, quemadmodum sine\ntumultu penitus eximatur de Symbolo. Id veno etiant fuisse\ntentatum in conventiculo quodam Londinensi, memini narrasse mihi,\nqui interfuit, Richardum Chenaeum, miserrimum senem, male\nmulctatum a latronibus foris, neque tamen ingressum in paternam\ndomum. Hactenus de Christo.\n\nDE HOMINE.--De homine[93] quid? \"Imago Dei penitus in homine\ndeleta est, nulla boni scintilla superstite: tota natura quoad\nomnes animae partes ita funditus eversa, ut ne renatus quidem et\nsanctus quidquam sit aliud intrinsecus, nisi mera corruptio atque\ncontagio.\" Quorsum ista? Vt qui sola fide gloriam rapturi sunt,\nin omnium turpitudinum coeno volutati, naturam accusent, virtutem\ndesperent, praecepta deonerent.\n\nDE PECCATO.--Huc Illyricus, Magdeburgensium primipilus, illud\nsuum adiecit immane placitum[94] de originis peccato, quod esse\nvult: \"Intimam substantiam animarum, quippe quas, post Adami\nlapsum, diabolus ipse procreet, et in sese transformet.\" Hoc\nquoque tritum est in hac faece: \"Omnia peccata esse paria:\"[95]\nsed ita (ne Stoici reviviscant), \"si Deo iudice ponderentur.\" Ac\nsi Deus, aequissimus iudex, oneri nostro cumulum potius, quam\nlevamentum faceret, et id, quod non est in re, quum sit ipse\niustissimus, exaggeraret. Hac trutina non levius in Deum\nseverissime iudicantem deliquerit ille caupo, qui gallum\ngallinaceum, quando non est opus, occiderit, quam infamis ille\nsicarius, qui plenus Beza, Gallum heroa Guisium, admiribili\nvirtute principem, displosa fistula interemit; quo facinore nihil\nvidit orbis noster aetate nostra funestius, nihil luctuosius.\n\nDE GRATIA.--Sed fortasse, qui tam sunt in peccati conditione\ntetrici, magnifice philosophantur de divina gratia, quae huic\nmalo succurrere ac mederi possit. Praeclaras vero isti partes\nassignant gratiae, \"quam neque infusam cordibus nostris, neque ad\nresistendum sceleribus validam esse latrant, sedextra nos in solo\nDei favore[96] collocant: \"qui favor non emendet impios, nec\npurget, nec illuminet, nec ditet; sed veterem illam sentinam\nadhuc manantem atque foetentem, ne deformis et odiosa putetur,\nDeo connivente, dissimulet. Quo suo plasmate tantopere\ndelectantur, ut ne \"Christus quidem aliter apud illos[97] gratia\nplenus et veritate dicatur, quam quod ei Deus Pater mirandum in\nmodum faverit.\"\n\nDE IVISTITIA.--Quae res ergo iustitia est? Relatio.[98] Non enim\nex theologics concinnata virtutibus, fide, spe, charitate, quae\nanimam suo nitore convestiant; sed tantum \"occultatio delicti,\nquam qui sola fide prehenderit, ille tam de salute certus est, ac\nsi iampridem interminato coeli gaudio[99] frueretur.\" Age,\nsomniet hoc; sed unde constare poterit de futura perseverantia,\nqua qui caruit, exivit infelicissimus, licet ad tempus pure\npieque iustitiam coluisset? Imo vero, \"haec tua fides, Calvinus\nait[100], nisi tuam tibi perseverantiam firme pronuntiet, ut\nhallucinari nequeas, tamquam inanis et languida sperneretur.\"\nAgnosco discipulum Lutheri. \"Christianus, inquit ille[101] etiam\nvolens, non potest salutem perdere, nisi nolit credere.\"\n\nDE SACRAMENTIS.--Ad Sacramenta festino. Nullum, nullum, non duo,\nnon unum, O Sancte Christe, reliquerant. Ipsorum quippe panis\nvenenum est; Baptismus etsi adhuc verus, tamen ipsorum iudicio\n\"nihil est, non est unda salutis, non est canalis gratiae, non\nderivat in nos Christi merita; sed significatio dumtaxat salutis\nest. Itaque nihilo pluris Baptismum Christi, quoad naturam rei,\nquam Ioannis facere caeremoniam. Si habeas, recte; si careas,\nnihil damni: crede, salvus es, antequam abluere.\"[102] Quid ergo\nparvuli, qui nisi iuventur virtute Sacramenti, sua fide miselli\nnihil assequuntur? \"Potius quam Sacramento Baptismatis quidquam\ntribuamus, inquiunt Magdeburgici,[103] demus inesse fidem ipsis\ninfantulis, qua serventur, cuius fidei pulsus quosdam abditos\nintelligant\" ipsi, qui vivant necne, nondum intelligunt. Durum. Si\nhoc adeo durum est, Lutheri pharmacum auditote: \"Praestat,\ninquit,[104] omittere, quandoquidem nisi credat infans, nequidquam\nlavatur.\" Haec illi quidem ancipites animo, quidnam enuntient\ncategorice. Ergo Balthassar Pacimontanus diribitor interveniat;\nqui parens Anabaptistarum, quum parvulis motum fidei non posset\naffingere, Lutheri cantiunculam adprobavit, et paedobaptismum\neiiciens e templis, \"neminen nisi adultum fonte sacro decrevit\nabluere.\" Ad reliqua Sacramenta quod attinet, quamvis illa bestia\nmulticeps horrendas eiectet contumelias, tamen quia quotidianae\niam sunt et callum auribus obduxerunt, hic praetereo.\n\nDE MORIBVS.--Restant haereticorum de vita et moribus frusta\nnocentissima, quae Lutherus evomi in chartas, ut ex unius\npectoris impuro gurgustio pestem lectoribus inhalaret. Audite\npatienter, et erubescite, et mihi date veniam recitanti: \"Si\nnolit uxor[105], aut non possit, veniat ancilla. Siquidem res\nuxoria tam est cuique necessaria, quam esca, potus, somnus.\nMatrimonium est virginitate multo praestantius; eam Christus, eam\nPaulus dissuaserunt hominibus christianis.\" Sed haec fortasse\npropria Lutheri sunt? Non sunt. Etiam nuper a meo Charco,[106]\nsed misere timideque defenduntur. Vultis ne plura? Quidni?\n\"Quanto sceleratior es, inquit,[107] tanto vicinior gratiae.\nOmnes actiones bonae peccata sunt; Deo iudice, mortifera; Deo\npropitio, leviuscula[108]--Nemo malum suapte voluntate\ncogitat[109]--Decalogus nihil ad christianos[110]--Opera nostra\nDeus nequaquam curat--Soli recte participant coena Dominica, qui\ntristes, afflictas, perturbatas, confusas, erraticas apportant\nconscientias.--Confitenda crimina sunt, sed cuilibet, qui si te\nvel ioco absolverit, modo credideris, absolutus es.--Legere\npreces horarias non est sacerdotum, sed laicorum--Christiani\nliberi sunt a statutis hominum.\" Satis superque lacunam istam\ncommosse videor. lam finio. Nec vero putetis iniquiorem esse me,\nqui lutheranos et zuinglianos promiscue coarguerim; nam isti\nmemores a quo proseminati sint, inter se fratres et amici volunt\nesse,[111] adeoque gravem interpretantur iniuriam, quum in ulla\nre praeter unam, discriminantur.\n\nEquidem non sum tanti, ut vel mediocrem locum mihi sumam in\nselectis theologis, qui hodie bellum haeresibus indixere; sed hoc\nscio, quantuluscumque sum, periclitari me non posse, dum Christi\ngratia fultus adversum talia commenta, tam invisa, tam insulsa,\ntam bruta, coelo terraque iuvantibus, praeliabor.\n\nNONA RATIO\n\nSOPHISMATA\n\nScitum est, inter caecos luscum regnare posse. Apud rudes valet\nsaepe fucata disputatio, quam schola Philosophorum exsibilat. Multa\npeccat adversarius in hoc genere; sed quatuor fallacies plerumque\nconsuitur, quas in Academia malim, quam in trevio, retexere.\n\nPrimum vitium [Greek: skiamachia] est, quae auras et umbras magno\ncontau diverberat. Hoc pacto: contra coelibes iuratos et votos in\ncastimoniam, quod nuptiae bonae sint, virginitas melior,\nofferuntur Scripturae loquentes honorifice de coniugio. Quem\nferiunt? Contra meritum hominis christiani, tinctum Christi\nsanguine, alioquin nullum, promuntur testimonia, quibus iubemur,\nnec naturae, nec legi, sed sanguini Christi fidere. Quem\nrefellunt? In eos, qui colunt Coelites, ut famulos Christi maxime\ngratiosos, citantur integrae pagellae, quae vetant colere multos\nDeos. Vbinam sunt? Huiusmodi argumentis, quae apud haereticos\ninfinita reperio, nobis esse detrimento non poterunt; vobis esse\nfastidio poterunt.\n\nAliud vitium [Greek: logomachia] est, quae sensa deserens,\nloquaciter cum verbo litigat, \"Invenias mihi Missam, inquiunt,\naut Purgatorium in Scripturis.\" Quid ergo? Trinitas, Homoousion,\nPersona, nusquam sunt in Bibliis, quia voces istae non sunt?\nAffine est huic peccato litterarum aucupium; quum neglecta\nconsuetudine et mente loquentium, quae vita vocabuli est,\nadversus elementa contenditur. Nempe sic aiunt: \"Presbyter nihil\nest Graecis, nisi senior; Sacramentum, quodvis mysterium.\"\nCaeterum acute D. Thomas,[112] ut omnia: \"In vocibus, inquit,\nvidendum, non tam ex quo, quam ad quid sumantur.\"\n\nTertium, [Greek: homonumia] est, longe lateque patens. Vt:\n\"Quorsum ordo sacerdotum; quum Ioannes (Apoc. v. 10) omnes nos\nvocaverit sacerdotes?\" Etiam hoc addidit: \"Regnabimus super\nterram.\" Quorsum ergo reges? Item: \"Propheta (Isai. LVIII. 6)\ncelebrat ieiunium spiritale, hoc est, ab inveteratis criminibus\nabstinentiam. Valeat ergo ciborum delectus, et dierum\npraescriptio.\" Siccine? Igitur insanierunt Moyses, David, Elias,\nBaptistes, Apostoli, qui biduo, triduo, vel hebdomadis inediam\nterminarunt; quae quidem, ut a crimine, debebat esse perpetua.\nHoc quale sit, iam vidistis: propero.\n\nQuartum his adiicitur \"Circulatio,\" in hunc modum: Da mihi notas,\ninquam, Ecclesiae. \"Verbum Dei et purissima Sacramenta.\" Haeccine\nsunt apud vos? \"Quis dubitet?\"--Ego vero pernego. \"Consule verbum\nDei.\"--Iam consului, minusque vobis, quam antea, faveo. \"Attamen\nplanum est.\"--Proba mihi. \"Quia nos ne latum quidem unguem\ndiscedimus a verbo Dei.\"--Vbi est acumen tuum? Semperne capies\npro argumento illud ipsum, quod ponitur in quaestione? Quoties\nhoc iam inculco? Num tu evigilas? Num faces admovendae sunt? Dico\na te perperam exponi verbum Dei: testes habeo quindecim aetates,\nsta sententiae, non meae, non tuae, sed harum omnium.--\"Stabo\nsententiae verbi Dei: Spiritus ubi vult, spirat.\" Eccum, quos\ngyros, quas rotas fabricat. Hic nugator, tot verborum atque\nsophismatum architectus, nescio cui formidolosus esse queat,\nmolestus erit fortasse. Molestiam vestra prudentia sublevabit,\nformidinem res eripuit.\n\nDECIMA RATIO\n\nOMNE GENVS TESTIVM\n\n\"Haec erit vobis directa via, ita ut stulti non errent per\neam.\"[113] Quis enim, quamvis hebes in plebecula, dummodo salutis\ncupidus parumper attenderit, semitam Ecclesiae tam egregie\ncomplanatam, non videat, non teneat; vepres, et cautes, et avia\ndetestatus? Erunt haec etiam rudibus explorata, sicut Isaias\nvaticinatus est; vobis igitur, si voletis, exploratissima.\n\nCOELITES.--Theatrum universitatis rerum ponamus ob oculos;\nquidquid est uspiam peragremus; omnia nobis argumenta\nsuppeditant. Eamus in coelum: \"Rosas[114] et lilia\ncontemplemur,\" purpuratos nempe martyrio, candidatos innocentia.\nRomanos, inquam, Pontifices[115] tres et triginta continenter\noccisos; Pastores terris omnibus, qui suum pro Christi nomine\nsanguinem oppignerarunt; greges fidelium, qui Pastorum vestigiis\ninstitere; Divos omnes coelites, qui turbae hominum puritate et\nsanctimonia praeluxere. Nostros hic vixisse, nostros hinc\nemigrasse reperias. Noster fuit, ut paucula delibemus, ille\nmartyrii sitientissimus Ignatius[116] \"qui in rebus Ecclesiae\nneminem, ne regen[117] quidem, aequavit Episcopo: qui\ntraditiones[118] quasdam Apostolicas, quarum testis ipse fuerat,\nne dilaberentur, scripto mandavit.\" Noster anachoreta\nTelesphorus,[119] \"qui ieiunium quadragesimale, sancitum ab\nApostolis, observari severius iussit.\" Noster Irenaeus,[120]\n\"qui a successione Cathedraque Romana fidem Apostolicam\ndeclaravit.\" Noster etiam Victor Pontifex, \"qui[121] Asiam\nedicto coercuit universam:\" quod quum aliquibus, atque etiam\nhuic Irenaeo, viro sacratissimo, videretur asperius, nemo tamen\nattenuavit, ut exoticam potestatem. Noster Polycarpus,[122] qui\nsuper quaestione Paschatis Romam adiit, cuius ambustas reliquias\nSmyrna collegit, anniversario die rituque legitimo suum\nEpiscopum venerata. Nostri Cornelius et Cyprianus,[123] aureum\npar Martyrum, ambo magni praesules; sed maior ille, qui Romanus\nAfricanum errorem resciderat; hic nobilitatus observantia, qua\nmaiorem est prosequutus, amicissimum sui. Noster Sixtus,[124]\n\"cui ad aram solemnibus sacris operanti ministrarunt e clero\nseptemviri.\" Noster Laurentius, huius Archidiaconus,[125] quem\nadversarii de suis fastis eiiciunt, quem ante mille ducentos\nannos vir consularis Prudentius[126] sic ornavit:\n\n   Quae sit potestas credita\n   Et muneris quantum datum,\n   Probant Quiritum gaudia,\n   Quibus rogatus annuis.\n   Hos inter, o Christi decus,\n   Audi et poetam rusticum,\n   Cordis fatentem crimina,\n   Et facta prodentem sua.\n   Audi benignus supplicem\n   Christi reum, Prudentium.\n\nNostrae virgines illae[127] perbeatae, Caecilia, Agatha,\nAnastasia, Barbara, Agnes, Lucia, Dorothea, Catharina; quae\ndecretam pudicitiam adversus et hominum et daemonum tyrannidem\nfirmaverunt. Nostra Helena, quam dominicae Crucis inventio\ncelebravit. Nostra Monica, quae moriens[129] orari et\nsacrificari pro se mortua ad altare Christi, religiosissime\nflagitavit. Nostra Paula,[129] quae ex urbano palatio et opimis\npraediis in speluncam Bethleemiticam tantis itineribus peregrina\ncucurrit, ut ad Christi vagientis cunabula delitesceret. Nostri\nPaulus, Hilarion, Antonius, seniculi solitarii. Noster\nSatyrus,[130] Ambrosii germanus frater, qui tremendam illam\nhostiam circum se gestans in orario, naufragus insiliit in\nOceanum, et fide plenissimus enatavit. Nostri Nicolaus et\nMartinus, episcopi, exerciti vigiliis, paludati ciliciis,\nieiunio pasti, Noster Benedictus, tot monachorum pater.\nChiliadas istas decennio non exsequerer.\n\nSed nec illos repeto, quos in Ecclesiae Doctoribus ante posueram.\nMemor sum brevitatis meae, Petat ista, qui volet, non solum ex\nabundanti veterum historia, sed multo etiam magis ex gravissimis\nauctoribus, qui paene singuli Divos singulos memoriae[131]\nreliquerunt. Renuntiet mihi, de christianis illis antiquissimis\net beatissimis quid autumet? Vtrius doctrinae fuerint,\ncatholicae, an lutheranae? Testor Dei solium et illud tribunal,\nad quod stabo rationem rationum harum et dicti et facti\nredditurus, aut nullum coelum esse, aut nostrorum esse; illud\nexsecramur, hoc ergo defigimus.\n\nDAMNATI.-Nunc e contrario, si libet, inspiciamus in Tartara.\nCremantur incendio sempiterno. Qui? Iudaei. Quam Ecclesiam\nadversati? Nostram.--Qui? Ethnici. Quam Ecclesiam crudelissime\npersequuti? Nostram.--Qui? Turcae. Quae templa demoliti?\nNostra.--Qui? Haeretici. Cuius Ecclesiae perduelles?\nNostrae.--Quae enim Ecclesia praeter nostram omnibus inferorum\nportis[132] se opposuit?\n\nIVDAEI.--Quum, pulsis Hebraeis, Christiani[133] succrescerent\nHierosolymis, Deum immortalem! qui concursus hominum ad loca\nsacra fuit,[134] quae urbis religio, quae sepulcri, quae\npraesepii, quae crucis, quae monumentorum omnium, quibus velut\nexuviis mariti, Ecclesia sponsa delectatur? Hinc manavit in nos\nIudaeorum odium ferum et implacabile. Queruntur etiam nunc,\nmaiores nostros maioribus suis exitio fuisse. A Simone Mago et\nlutheranis nullum ictum acceperunt.\n\nETHNICI.--In Ethnicis violentissimi fuere, qui toto Imperio,\ntrecentis annis, per intervalla temporum, aerumnosissima\nChristianis supplicia machinati sunt. Quibus? Patribus et filiis\nnostrae fidei. Cognoscite vocem tyranni, qui Divum Laurentium\ntorruit in craticula:[135]\n\n   Hunc esse vestris Orgiis\n   Moremque et artem, proditum est;\n   Hanc disciplinam foederis,\n   Libent ut auro antistites.\n   Argenteis scyphis ferunt\n   Fumare sacrum sanguinem,\n   Auroque nocturnis sacris\n   Adstare fixos cereos.\n   Tunc cura summa est fratribus,\n   (Vt sermo testatur loquax),\n   Offerre, fundis venditis,\n   Sestertiorum millia.\n   Addicta avorum praedia\n   Foedis sub auctionibus\n   Successor exhaeres gemit,\n   Sanctis egens parentibus.\n   Haec occulantur abditis\n   Ecclesiarum in angulis;\n   Et summa pietas creditur\n   Nudare dulces liberos.\n   Deprome thesauros, malis\n   Suadendo quos praestigiis\n   Exaggeratos obtines,\n   Nigrantes quos claudis specu.\n   Hoc poscit usus publicus;\n   Hoc fiscus, hoc aerarium,\n   Vt dedita stipendiis\n   Ducem iuvet petunia.\n   Sic dogma vestrum est, audio;\n   \"Suum quibusque reddito.\"\n   En Caesar agnoscit suum\n   Numisma, nummis inditum.\n   Quod Caesaris scis, Caesari\n   Da: nempe iustum postulo,\n   Ni fallor; haud ullam tuus\n   Signat Deus pecuniam.\n   Nec quum veniret, aureos\n   Secum Philippos detulit;\n   Praecepta\n   sed verbis dedit\n   Inanis a marsupio.\n   Implete dictorum fidem,\n   Quae vos per orbem venditis,\n   Nummos libenter reddite;\n   Estote verbis divites.\n\nQuis videtur? In quos furit? Cuius Ecclesiae sacra, lychnos,\nritus, ornamenta convellit? Cui patellas aureas, et argenteos\ncalices, et sumptuosa donaria, et opulentam gazam invidet?\nProfecto lutherizat. Quod enim aliud velum suo latrocinio\nnostri Nemrodes[136] obtenderunt, quum depecularentur\necclesias, et Christi patrimonium dissiparent? Contra vero\nmagnus ille Constantinus Christomastigon terror, quam Eeclesiam\ntranquillavit? Illam, cui Pontifex Sylvester praefuit,[137]\nquem in Soracte latitantem accersiit, ut eius opera nostro\nbaptismate tingeretur.--Quibus auspiciis victor? Signo\ncrucis.[138]--Qua matre gloriosus? Helena.--Quibus se patribus\nadiunxit? Nicaenis.--Cuiusmodi? Vt Sylvestro, ut Marco, ut\nIulio, ut Athanasio, ut Nicolao.--Cuius se precibus[139]\ncommendavit? Antonii.--Quam sellam postulavit[140] in Synodo?\nVltimam.--O quanto regalior hac sede, quam qui regis titulum,\nnon debitum, ambierunt! Singula narrare longum est. Sed ex his\nduobus altero nobis infestissimo, altero nobis amicissimo,\nlicebit singula coniicere, quae sunt horum simillima. Etenim,\nut nostrorum illa fuit Epistasis turbulenta, sic nostrorum haec\nevasit divina Catastrophe.\n\nTVRCAE.-Turcica videamus. Mahometes et Sergius monachus apostata\nin profundo barathro iacent ululantes, et suis et posterorum\nsceleribus onusti. Haec portentosa et efferata bellua,\nSarraceni, Turcae, nisi a nostris ordinibus militiae\nsacrae,[141] nisi a nostris principibus et populis accisa\nfuisset ac repressa, per Lutherum quidem, (cui gratias hoc\nnomine Solymanus Turcus litteris egisse dicitur), et per\nlutheranos regulos (quibus Turcorum progressio laetabilis\nexistimatur); haec, inquam, Erinnys furiosa et exitiosa\nmortalibus, totam iam depopularetur et vastaret Europam; neque\nindiligentius altaria et signa crucis, quam ipse Calvinus\neverteret. Ergo nostri hostes illi sunt proprii, utpote\nnostrorum industria a christianorum iugulis repulsi.\n\nHAERETICI.--Despectemus in haereticos, faeces, et folles, et\nalimenta gehennae. Primus occurrit Simon Magus. Quid ille?\n\"Eripiebat homini liberam[142] voluntatem; solam fidem[143]\npercrepabat.\" Mox Novatianus: Quis? Antipapa Cornelio,[144]\nPontifici Romano, \"hostis sacramentorum poenitentiae et\nchrismatis.\"[145] Deinde Manes Persa: hic docebat \"baptismum\nsalutem[146] non conferre.\" Post Aerius Arianus \"preces damnabat\npro mortuis,[147] confundebat episcopis sacerdotes.\" Hinc Aerius\n\"solam[148] et ipse fidem personabat,\" cognominatus atheos[149]\nnon minus quam Lucianus. Sequitur Vigilantius,[150] qui \"Divos\norari non ferebat:\" ac Iovinianus, qui \"virginitatem et nuptias\naequiparabat.\" Denique colluvies universa Macedonius, Pelagius,\nNestorius, Entyches, Monothelitae, Iconomachi, caeteri, quibus\nLutherum et Calvinum posteritas aggregabit. Quid isti? Omnes mali\ncorvi, eodem ovo geniti, ab Ecclesiae nostrae Praesulibus\ndesciverunt, ab illis evicti et exinaniti sunt.\n\nDeseramus avernum, reddamur terris. Quocumque me oculis et\ncogitatione convertero, sive Patriarchas intueor et sedes\nApostolicas, sive Antistites caeterarum gentium, sive laudatos\nprincipes, reges, caesares, sive christianorum cuiusque nationis\ninitia, sive ullum iudicium vetustatis, aut lumen rationis, aut\nhonestatis decus; nostrae fidei serviunt et suffragantur omnia.\n\nSEDES APOSTOLICA.--Testis Romana successio, \"In qua semper\nEcclesia, (ut cum Augustino ep. 162 loquar), Apostolicae\nCathedrae viguit principatus.\" Testes illae reliquae sedes\napostolicae, in quas hoc nomen insignite convenit, quod ab ipsis\nApostolis horumve auditoribus exaedificatae[151] fuerint.\n\nDISIVNCTTISSIMAE TERRAE.--Testes ubivis gentium pastores, loco\ndissiti, religione nostra concordes, Ignatius et Chrysostomus,\nAntiochiae; Petrus, Alexander, Athanasius, Theophilus,\nAlexandriae; Macharius et Cyrillus, Hierosolymis; Proclus,\nConstantinopoli; Gregorius et Basilius, in Cappadocia;\nThaumaturgus, in Ponto; Smyrnae, Polycarpus; Iustinus, Athenis;\nDionysius, Corinthi; Gregorius, Nissae; Methodius, Tyri; Ephremus,\nin Cyria; Cyprianus, Optatus, Augustinus, in Africa; Epiphanius,\nin Cypro; Andreas, Cretae; Ambrosius, Paulinus, Gaudentius,\nProsper, Faustus, Vigilius in Italia; Irenaeus, Martinus,\nHilarilius, Eucherius, Gregorius, Salvianus, in Gallia;\nVincentius, Orosius, Ildefonsus, Leander, Isidorus, in Hispania;\nin Britannia, Fugatius, Damianus, Iustus, Mellitus, Beda. Denique,\nne ambitiosus videar in nominibus, quaecumque vel opera, vel\nfragmenta supersunt eorum, qui disiunctissimis terris Evangelium\nseverunt, omnia nobis unam fidem exhibent, quam hodie catholici\nprofitemur. Christe, quid causae tibi afferam, quo minus me de\ntuis extermines, si tot luminibus Ecclesiae tenebricosos homulos,\npaucos, indoctos, dissectos, improbos, antetulero?\n\nPRINCIPES.--Testes item principes, reges, caesares, horumque\nrespublicae, quorum et ipsorum pietas, et ditionum populi, et\npacis bellique disciplina, se penitus in hac nostra doctrina\ncatholica fundaverunt. Hic ergo quos ab oriente Theodosios, quos\nab occidente Carolos, quos Eduardos ex Anglia, Ludovicos e\nGallia, Hermenegildos ex Hispania, Henricos a Saxonia, Wenceslaos\ne Bohemia, Leopoldos ex Austria, Stephanos ex Hungaria,\nIosaphatos ex India, quos orbe toto dynastas atque toparchas\npossim arcessere; qui exemplo, qui armis qui legibus, qui\nsollicitudine, qui sumptu, nostram Ecclesiam nutrierunt? Sic enim\npraecinuit Isaias (xlix. 23): \"Erunt reges nutricii tui, et\nreginae iutrices tuae.\" Audi, Elisabetha, Regina potentissima,\ntibi canit, te tuas partes edocet. Narro tibi: Calvinum et hos\nprincipes unum coelum capere non potest. His ergo te principibus\nadiunge, dignam maioribus, dignam ingenio, dignam litteris,\ndignam laudibus, dignam fortuna tua. Solum hoc de te molior ego\net moliar, quidquid me fiet, cui, tamquam hosti capitis tui,\ntoties iam isti patibulum ominantur. Salve bona crux. Veniet,\nElisabetha, dies ille, ille dies, qui tibi liquido commonstrabit,\nutri te dilexerint, Societas Iesu, an Lutheri progeies Pergo.\n\nNATIONES AD CHRISTAM TRADVCTAE.--Testes iam omne sorae plagaeque\nmundi, quibus evangelica tuba post Christum natum insonuit.\nParumne hoc fuit, idolis ora claudere, Dei regnum gentibus\nimportare? Christum Lutherus, catholici Christum loquimur. \"Num\ndivisus est Christus?\"[152] Minime. Aut nos, aut ille, falsum\nChristum loquimur. Quid ergo? Dicam. Christus ille sit, et\nillorum sit, quo Dagon[153] invecto cervices fregerit. Noster\nChristus opera nostrorum uti voluit, quum Ioves, Mercurios,\nDianas, Phaebadas, et illam noctem saeculorum atram, Erebumque\ntristem, e tot populorum cordibus relegaret. Non est otium\nlonginqua perquirere; finitima tantum atque domestica speculemur.\nHiberni ex Patritio, Scoti ex Palladio, Angli ex Augustino, Romae\nsacratis, Roma missis, Romam venerantibus, fidem aut nullam aut\ncerte nostram, id est, catholicam insuxerunt. Res aperta. Curro.\n\nCVMVLVS TESTIVM.--Testes academiae, testes legum tabulae, testes\nvernaculi mores hominum, testes selectio caesarum et inauguratio,\ntestes regum ritus et inunctio, testes equitum ordines, ipsaeque\nchlamydes, testes fenestrae, testes nummi, testes urbanae portae\ndomusque civicae, testes avorum fructus et vita, testes res omnes\net reculae, nullam in orbe religionem, nisi nostram, imis umquam\nradicibus insedisse.\n\nQuae mihi quum suppeterent, et certe sic efficerent meditantem,\nut his omnibus nuntium remittere christianis, et consociari cum\nperditissimis quibusque, videretur insolentis insaniae; non\ndiffiteor, animatus sum et incensus ad conflictum, in quo nisi\nDivi de coelo deturbentur, et superbus Lucifer coelum recuperet,\ncadere numquam potero. Quo mihi sit aequior Charcus, qui me tam\nimmaniter concerpit, si hanc animulam peccatricem, quam tanti\nChristus emit, viae tutae, viae certae, viae regiae malui\ncredere, quam Calvinis scopulis dumetisve suspendere.\n\nCONCLVSIO\n\nHabetis a me, florentes Academici, hoc munusculum, contextum\noperis in itinere subcisivis. Animus fuit et purgare me vobis de\narrogantia, et satisfacere de fiducia, et interim dum ab\nadversariis una mecum in scholas invitemini, quaedam apponere\ndegustanda. Si aequam, si tutum, si honestum ducitis, haberi\nLutherum, aut Calvinum, canonem Scripturae, mentem sancti\nSpiritus, normam Ecclesiae, Conciliorum Patrumque paedagogum,\nomnium denique testium et saeculorum Deum, nihil est quod\nsperem, vobis lectoribus vel auditoribus. Sin estis ii, quos\napud animum formavi meum, philosophi occulati, amatores veri,\nsimplicitatis, modestiae; hostes temeritatis, nugarum,\nsophismatum; facile diem in aprico videbitis, qui dieculam\nangusta rima dispicitis. Dicam libere, quod meus in vos amor, et\nvestrum periculum et rei magnitudo postulat. Non hoc nescit\ndiabolus, vos istam lucem, si quando coeperitis oculos attolere,\nconspecturos. Cuius enim stuporis fuerit, antiquitati\nchristianae Hammeros et Charcos anteponere? Sed sunt quaedam\nillecebrae lutheranae, quibus suum ille regnum amplificat,\nquibus ille tendiculis hamatus multos iani vestri ordinis\ninescavit. Quaenam? Aurum, gloria, deliciae, veneres.\nContemnite. Quid enim aliud ista sunt, nisi terrarum ilia,\ncanorus aer, propina vermium, bella sterquilinia? Spernite.\nChristus dives est, qui vos alet; Rex est, qui ornabit; lautus\nest, qui satiabit, speciosus est, qui felicitatum omnium cumulos\nlargietur. Huic vos adscribite militanti, ut cum eo triumphos,\nvere doctissimi vereque clarissimi, reportetis. Valete.\nCosmopoli 1581.\n\n[Footnote 1: A Beato Edmundo anglice scripta, ab alio\nlatine reddita.]\n\n[Footnote 2: Est hic locus supplicii anglice _Tyburn_.]\n\n[Footnote 3: Aug. l. 28 contra Faust. c. 2 et de utilit. cred. c. 3.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Iren. l. 1, c. 26.]\n\n[Footnote 5: Lut. in novo test. german.; Praef. in ep. Iac.;\nvide etiam l. de capt. Babyl. cap. de extr. unct. et cent,\nMagd. 2 p. 58.]\n\n[Foonote 6: Ii sunt Baruch, Tobias, Iudith, Sapientia,\nEcclesiast., duo Machab.]\n\n[Footnote 7: Ep. ad Hebr., Ep. Iudae, Ep. 2 Petri, Epist. 2 et 3 Ioan.]\n\n[Footnote 8: De doctr. christ. l. 2 c. 3.]\n\n[Footnote 9: Conc. Trid. sess. 4; vid. Melch. Can. l. 2 de loc, theol.]\n\n[Footnote 10: De praedest, sanct. c. 14.]\n\n[Footnote 11: Instit. I. lib. I, c. 7, num. 4 et 5.]\n\n[Footnote 12: Xistus Sen. l. 8, haer. 10.]\n\n[Footnote 13: Praef. in Cant. Vide Bezam in sua praef. ante comm.\nCalv. in Iosue.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Epist. ad Paulinum.]\n\n[Footnote 15: Lut. praef. in Apoc.--Kemn. in exam. Conc.\nTrid. sess. 4.]\n\n[Footnote 16: Praef. in nov. Test.]\n\n[Footnote 17: Lut. serm. de Pharis. et Publ.]\n\n[Footnote 18: Matth. xxvi. 26; Marc. xiv. 22; Luc. xxii. 19.]\n\n[Footnote 19: In epist. ad Argent.]\n\n[Footnote 20: Matth. viii. 29; Marc. i. 24.]\n\n[Footnote 21: Luc. xxii. 19; Matth. xxvi. 28; Marc. xiv. 24.]\n\n[Footnote 22: Ioan. vi.; Matth. xvi.; Marc. xiv.; Luc. xxii.;. 1\nCor. x. et xi.]\n\n[Footnote 23: Calv. Instit. l. iv., c. 1 n. 2 et 3.]\n\n[Footnote 24: Act. xv. 28.]\n\n[Footnote 25: Greg. I. 1, ep. 24.]\n\n[Footnote 26: Ang. I Elizab.]\n\n[Footnote 27: Nic. can. vi.; Chalc. act. iv.; Const. c. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 28: Ephes. conc. in epist. ad Nestor; Nic. c. xiv.]\n\n[Footnote 29: Chalc. act. xi.]\n\n[Footnote 30: Nic. conc. apud Soc. I. i. c. 8.]\n\n[Footnote 31: Vide Chalc. can. iv., vii., xvi., xxiv.]\n\n[Footnote 32: Matth. xviii. 20; Ioan. xiv. 26.]\n\n[Footnote 33: Lib. de capt. Bab.]\n\n[Footnote 34: Exam. Conc. Trid]\n\n[Footnote 35: Vide Conc. Trid. sess. 11, 15 et 18.]\n\n[Footnote 36: Act. xiii. 1; 1 Cor. xii. 28; Ephes. iv. 11; 1 Cor.\nxiv., 1 et seq.]\n\n[Footnote 37: Matth. xiii. 52.]\n\n[Footnote 38: S. Dion. Areop. de quo vide. 6 Syn. act. 4, Adon.,\nTren. in martyr. Turon., Syng., Suid., Metap.]\n\n[Footnote 39: Comm. in 1, 13, 17 Deut. Item in capt. Babyl.]\n\n[Footnote 40: Dial. 5 et 11.]\n\n[Footnote 41: Cent. 2, c. 10.]\n\n[Footnote 42: Inst. l. I, c. 13, n. 29.]\n\n[Footnote 43: Cent. 2, c. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 44: Cent. 1, l. 2, c. 10 et seq.]\n\n[Footnote 45: Tert. l. de praescr. contr. haer.]\n\n[Footnote 46: Orat. de cos. secul.]\n\n[Footnote 47: Causs. dial. 8 et 11.]\n\n[Footnote 48: Cent. 3, c. 4.]\n\n[Footnote 49: Ibid.]\n\n[Footnote 50: Ezech. xiii. 18.]\n\n[Footnote 51: Praef. in Cent. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 52: Dial. 6, 7, 8.]\n\n[Footnote 53: Beza in act. c. 23, v. 3]\n\n[Footnote 54: Test. Stanch. l. de Trinit.]\n\n[Footnote 55: Contr. Henr. reg. Angl.]\n\n[Footnote 56: Lib. 22 de Civit. Dei c. 8 et serm. de\ndivers. 34 et seq.]\n\n[Footnote 57: Contr. ep. Man. quam vocant funda c. 4.]\n\n[Footnote 58: Lib. 1 contr. Parmen.]\n\n[Footnote 59: Aug. l. 1. contr. Parmen.; De unit. c 16; et De\ndoctr. christ. c. 40.]\n\n[Footnote 60: Lib. 2 ad Monim.]\n\n[Footnote 61: Vide S. Hieron. de Script. Eccles.]\n\n[Footnote 62: Vide Epist. Syn. Alexandr. ad Felic. 2.]\n\n[Footnote 63: Epist. ad Ital. Item serm. 91.]\n\n[Footnote 64: Aug. l. 22 de Civ. Dei; Greg. Tur. l. de glor,\nMart. e. 46 et Metaph.]\n\n[Footnote 65: Instit. l. 1, c. 11, n. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 66: Lib. de vita Ivelli.]\n\n[Footnote 67: Ioan. v. 39.]\n\n[Footnote 68: Rom. 1, 8, 9; xv. 29; xvi, 16, 19.]\n\n[Footnote 69: Act. xxviii. 30.]\n\n[Footnote 70: 1 Pet. v. 13.]\n\n[Footnote 71: Hieron. in cap. script. Eccles.; Euseb. 2 hist.c, 14.]\n\n[Footnote 72: Phillip. iv. 3.]\n\n[Footnote 73: Iren. l. 3, c. 3.]\n\n[Footnote 74: Inst. l. 4, c. 2, n. 3 et in epist. ad Sadol.]\n\n[Footnote 75: Calv. Inst. l. 1, c. 18; l. 2, c. 4; l. 3, cc. 23\net 24; Petr. Mart. in 1, Sam. 2.]\n\n[Footnote 76: Melanct. in cap. Rom. 8.]\n\n[Footnote 77: Sic docet Luth. in asser. 36 et in resol. asser. 36\net in libr. de servo arbitrio.]\n\n[Footnote 78: Praef. in Phillip. in ep. ad Rom.]\n\n[Footnote 79: In Apol. Eccl. Anglic.]\n\n[Footnote 80: Vide enchir. prec. an. 1541.]\n\n[Footnote 81: Calv. Inst. l. 1, c. 13, n. 23, 24.]\n\n[Footnote 82: Beza in Hes.]\n\n[Footnote 83: Beza cont. Schmidel. l. de unitat. hypost. duas\nin Christ. nat.]\n\n[Footnote 84: Calv. in Ioan. x, 30.]\n\n[Footnote 85: Luth. contr. Latom.]\n\n[Footnote 86: Bucer. in Luc. 2; Calv. in har. ev.; Luc. Los.;\nMelanct. in ev. Dom. 1 p. Epiph.]\n\n[Footnote 87: Marlorat. in Matth. 26; Calv. in harm. eveng.]\n\n[Footnote 88: Brent. in Luc. part. 2, hom. 65 et in Ioan. hom.\n54; Calv. in harm. evang.]\n\n[Footnote 89: Schmidel. Conc. de pass. et coena Dom.; Aepinus\ncomm. in Ps. 16.]\n\n[Footnote 90: Calv. Inst. l. 2, c. 16, n. 10, 11; Brent. in\ncatech, an. 1551.]\n\n[Footnote 91: Ibid. n. 12.]\n\n[Footnote 92: Buc. in Matt. cap. 26.]\n\n[Footnote 93: Illyr. in var. l. de orig. pecc.; Sarcer. de cons.\nvet Eccles.; Aepinus de imb. et pecc. Sanct.; Kemn. contra cens.\ncol.; Calv. Inst. l. 4, c. 15, n. 10, 11.]\n\n[Footnote 94: Illyr. in var. l. de pecc. orig.--Vide Hesbusium\nin ep. ad Illyr.]\n\n[Footnote 95: Calv. in antidot. Conc. Trid.--Idem docuerat\nWiclef. apud. Wald. l. 2, de Sacr. c. 154.]\n\n[Footnote 96: Luth. in resp. contra Lovan.]\n\n[Footnote 97: Bucer. in Ioan. 1; Wald. in nat. Christi; Brent.\nhom 16 in Ioan.; Cent. l. 1, c. 4.]\n\n[Footnote 98: Hesb. de iustif. in resp . asv. 115 obiect.\nIllyric. in Apol. confes. Antuerp. c. 6 de iustif.]\n\n[Footnote 99: Calv. Inst. l. 3, c. 2, n. 28 etc.]\n\n[Footnote 100: Calv. Inst. l. 3, c. 2, n. 40.]\n\n[Footnote 101: Lib. de capt. Babyl.]\n\n[Footnote 102: Calv. Inst. l. 4, c. 15, n. 2 et 10; Cent. l. 1,\nc. 19; Luth. l. de capt. Babyl.]\n\n[Footonote 103: Cent. 2 et 5, c. 4.]\n\n[Footnote 104: Luth. adv. Cochlae, Item epist. ad Melanct. t. 2;\net in ep. ad Wald.]\n\n[Footnote 105: Luth. serm. de matrim. et lib. de vit. coniug.; in\nasser. art. 16; lib. de vot. monast.]\n\n[Footnote 106: Charc. in Cens. suum.]\n\n[Footnote 107: Luth. serm. de Pet.; in asser. art. 32.]\n\n[Footnote 108: Id. l. de serv. arbit.]\n\n[Footnote 109: Id. serm. de Moyse.]\n\n[Footnote 110: Id. l. de capt. Bab. c. de Euch.]\n\n[Footnote 111: Apol. Eccles. Angl.]\n\n[Footnote 112: In 1, p. q. 13, a. 2 ad 2.]\n\n[Footnote 113: Isai. xxxv. 8.]\n\n[Footnote 114: Aug. serm. 37 de Sanct.]\n\n[Footnote 115: Dam. in vit. Pont. Rom.]\n\n[Footnote 116: Hier. cat. Script.]\n\n[Footnote 117: Ign. epist. ad Smyrn.]\n\n[Footnote 118: Euseb. l. 3, c. 30.]\n\n[Footnote 119: Dam. in vita Telesph. to. 1 con. c. stat. d. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 120: Lib. 3, c. 3.]\n\n[Footnote 121: Euseb. 5 hist. 24.]\n\n[Footnote 122: Euseb. 4 hist. 13 et 14.]\n\n[Footnote 123: Euseb. 7 hist. 2 interp. Ruff.]\n\n[Footnote 124: Prud. in hym. de S. Laur.]\n\n[Footnote 125: Vid. Aug. Ser. 1 de S. Laur.; Ambr. l. 1 offi, c.\n41; Leo serm. in die S. Laur.]\n\n[Footnote 126: Prud. in hym. de S. Laur.]\n\n[Footnote 127: Metaph.; Ambr. et alii.]\n\n[Footnote 128: Aug. l. 6 confess. c. 7 ad 13.]\n\n[Footnote 129: Hier. in epit. Paul.]\n\n[Footnote 130: Ambr. in orat. fun. de Satyro.]\n\n[Footnote 131: Vide sex tomos Surii de vitis Sanct.]\n\n[Footnote 132: Matth. xv. 18.]\n\n[Footnote 133: Euseb. 4 hist. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 134: Hieron, in epit. Paul. et passim in epist.]\n\n[Footnote 135: Prudent. in Pin. de S, Laur.]\n\n[Footnote 136: Gen. x. 9.]\n\n[Footnote 137: Dam. in Sylv.; Niceph. l. 7, c. 33; Zonaras, Cedremus.]\n\n[Footnote 138: Euseb. l. 2 de vit. Const. c. 7, 8, 9; Sozom.\nl. 1, c. 8, 9.]\n\n[Footnote 139: Athan. in vita S. Ant.]\n\n[Footnote 140: Theod. l. 1, hist. cap.]\n\n[Footnote 141: Vid. Volate, lovium Aemilium l. 8, Blond. l. 9 de 2.]\n\n[Footnote 142: Clem. l. 1, recog.]\n\n[Footnote 143: Iren. l. 1, c. 2.]\n\n[Footnote 144: Cypr. ep. ad Iubatam et l. 4 ep. 2.]\n\n[Footnote 145: Theod. de fab. haeret.]\n\n[Footnote 146: Aug. haer. 46, 53, 54.]\n\n[Footnote 147: Epiph. haer. 75.]\n\n[Footnote 148: Aug. haer. 54.]\n\n[Footnote 149: Socr. l. 2, C. 28.]\n\n[Footnote 150: Hier. in Iovin. et Vigilant.; Aug. haer. 82.]\n\n[Footnote 151: Vid. Tert. de praescr.; Aug. l. 2 de\ndoctr. christ. c. 8.]\n\n[Footnote 152: 1 Cor. i. 13.]\n\n[Footnote 153: 1 Reg. v. 4.]\n\nTRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.\n\nThis is no dry controversial divinity, but a sort of illuminated\ncopy of _theses_, the call of a knight's trumpet challenging his\nantagonist to come forth. The Ten Reasons represent the ten\n_theses_, which Edmund Campion would fain have maintained in the\nDivinity School at Oxford against all comers, sharing, as he did\nto the full, the passion which his age felt and seems entirely to\nhave lost, for such intellectual tournaments, as the natural\nmeans to bring out the truth and compose religious differences.\nThe reader, then, must not be surprised to find in this little\nwork quite as much of rhetoric as of logic; if he is unfriendly,\nhe may say considerably more. Nor, if he knows anything of the\ncontroversial methods of the sixteenth century, will he be\nsurprised at the vehemence of the language. Compared with his\nopponents, Luther for example, Edmund Campion is mere milk and\nhoney. His book made a great stir: it is what a successful book\nmust be, instinct with the spirit of the age in which and for\nwhich it was written.\n\nThe Protestant answer to the Ten Reasons was not given in the\nDivinity School at Oxford. It was the rack in the Tower, and the\ngibbet at Tyburn; and that answer was returned ere the year was out.\n\nJ.R.\n\nPope's Hall, Oxford\n\nMay 1910\n\nPREFACE.\n\n_Edmund Campion, to the Learned Members of the Universities of\nOxford and Cambridge, Greeting._\n\nLast year, Gentlemen, when in accordance with my calling in life\nI returned under orders to this Island, I found on the shore of\nEngland not a little wilder waves than those I had recently left\nbehind the in the British Seas. As thereupon I made my way into\nthe interior of England, I had no more familiar sight than that\nof unusual executions, no greater certainty than the uncertainty\nof threatening dangers. I gathered my wits together as best I\ncould, remembering the cause which I was serving and the times in\nwhich I lived. And lest I might perhaps be arrested before I had\ngot a hearing from any one, I at once put my purpose in writing,\nstating who I was, what was my errand, what war I thought of\ndeclaring and upon whom. I kept the original document on my\nperson, that it might be taken with me, if I were taken. I\ndeposited a copy with a friend, and this copy, without my\nknowledge, was shown to many. Adversaries took very ill the\npublication of the paper. What they particularly disliked and\nblamed was my having offered to hold the field alone against all\ncomers in this matter of religion, though to be sure I should not\nhave been alone had I disputed under a public safe conduct.\nHanmer and Chartres have replied to my demands. What is the\ntenour of their reply? All off the point. The only honest answer\nfor them to give is one they will never give: \"We embrace the\nconditions, the Queen pledges her word, come at once.\" Meanwhile\nthey fill the air with their cries: \"Your conspiracy! your\nseditious proceedings! your arrogance! traitor! aye marry,\ntraitor!\" The whole thing is absurd. These men are not fools: why\nare they wasting their pains and damaging their own reputation?\nNevertheless, in reply to these two gentlemen (one of whom has\nchosen my paper to run at for his amusement, the other more\nmaliciously has confused the whole issue) there has recently been\npresented a very clear memorial setting forth all that need be\nsaid about our Society and their calumnies and the part that we\nare taking. The only course left open to me (since as I see, it\nis tortures, not academic disputations, that the high-priests are\nmaking ready) was to make good to you the account of my conduct;\nto show you the chief heads and point my finger to the sources\nfrom whence I derive this confidence; to exhort you also, as it\nis your concern above others, to give to this business that\nattention which Christ, the Church, the Common Weal, and your own\nsalvation demand of you. If it were confidence in my own talents,\nerudition, art, reading, memory, that led me to challenge all the\nskill that could be brought against me, then were I the vainest\nand proudest of mortals, not having considered either myself or\nmy opponents. But if, with my cause before my eyes, I thought\nmyself competent to show that the sun here shines at noon-day,\nyou ought to allow in me that heat which the honour of Jesus\nChrist, my King, and the unconquered force of truth have put upon\nme. You know how in Marcus Tullius's speech for Publius Quintius,\nwhen Roscius promised that he should win the case if he could\nmake out by arguments that a journey of 700 miles had not been\naccomplished in two days, Cicero not only had no fear of all the\nforce of the pleading of the opposing counsel, Hortensius, but\ncould not have been afraid even of greater orators than\nHortensius, men of the stamp of Cotta and Antonius and Crassus,\nwhose reputation for speaking he set higher than that of all\nother men: for truth does sometimes stand out in so clear a light\nthat no artifice of word or deed can hide it. Now the case on our\nside is clearer even than that position of Roscius. I have only\nto evince this, that there is a Heaven, that there is a God, that\nthere is a Faith, that there is a Christ, and I have gained my\ncause. Standing on such ground should I not pluck up heart? I may\nbe killed, beaten I cannot be. I take my stand on those Doctors,\nwhom that Spirit has instructed who is neither deceived nor\novercome. I beg of you, consent to be saved. Of those from whom I\nobtain this consent I expect without the least doubt that all the\nrest will follow. Only give yourselves up to take interest in\nthis inquiry, entreat Christ, add efforts of your own, and\ncertainly you will perceive how the case lies, how our\nadversaries are in despair, and ourselves so solidly founded that\nwe cannot but desire this conflict with serene and high courage.\nI am brief here, because I address you in the rest of my\ndiscourse. Farewell.\n\nFIRST REASON\n\nHOLY WRIT\n\nOf the many signs that tell of the adversaries' mistrust of their\nown cause, none declares it so loudly as the shameful outrage\nthey put upon the majesty of the Holy Bible. After they have\ndismissed with scorn the utterances and suffrages of the rest of\nthe witnesses, they are nevertheless brought to such straits that\nthey cannot hold their own otherwise than by laying violent hands\non the divine volumes themselves, thereby showing beyond all\nquestion that they are brought to their last stand, and are\nhaving recourse to the hardest and most extreme of expedients to\nretrieve their desperate and ruined fortunes. What induced the\nManichees to tear out the Gospel of Matthew and the Acts of the\nApostles? Despair. For these volumes were a torment to men who\ndenied Christ's birth of a Virgin, and who pretended that the\nSpirit then first descended upon Christians when their peculiar\nParaclete, a good-for-nothing Persian, made his appearance. What\ninduced the Ebionites to reject all St. Paul's Epistles? Despair.\nFor while those Letters kept their credit, the custom of\ncircumcision, which these men had reintroduced, was set aside as\nan anachronism. What induced that crime-laden apostate Luther to\ncall the Epistle of James contentious, turgid, arid, a thing of\nstraw, and unworthy of the Apostolic spirit? Despair. For by this\nwriting the wretched man's argument of righteousness consisting\nin faith alone was stabbed through and rent assunder. What\ninduced Luther's whelps to expunge off-hand from the genuine\ncanon of Scripture, Tobias, Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, and, for\nhatred of these, several other books involved in the same false\ncharge? Despair. For by these Oracles they are most manifestly\nconfuted whenever they argue about the patronage of Angels, about\nfree will, about the faithful departed, about the intercession of\nSaints. Is it possible? So much perversity, so much audacity?\nAfter trampling underfoot Church, Councils, Episcopal Sees,\nFathers, Martyrs, Potentates, Peoples, Laws, Universities,\nHistories, all vestiges of Antiquity and Sanctity, and declaring\nthat they would settle their disputes by the written word of God\nalone, to think that they should have emasculated that same Word,\nwhich alone was left, by cutting out of the whole body so many\nexcellent and goodly parts! Seven whole books, to ignore lesser\ndiminutions, have the Calvinists cut out of the Old Testament.\nThe Lutherans take away the Epistle of James besides, and, in\ntheir dislike of that, five other Epistles, about which there had\nbeen controversy of old in certain places and times. To the\nnumber of these the latest authorities at Geneva add the book of\nEsther and about three chapters of Daniel, which their\nfellow-disciples, the Anabaptists, had some time before condemned\nand derided. How much greater was the modesty of Augustine (_De\ndoct. Christ. lib._ 2, _c._ 8.), who, in making his catalogue of\nthe Sacred Books, did not take for his rule the Hebrew Alphabet,\nlike the Jews, nor private judgment, like the Sectaries, but that\nSpirit wherewith Christ animates the whole Church. The Church,\nthe guardian of this treasure, not its mistress (as heretics\nfalsely make out), vindicated publicly in former times by very\nancient Councils this entire treasure, which the Council of Trent\nhas taken up and embraced. Augustine also in a special discussion\non one small portion of Scripture cannot bring himself to think\nthat any man's rash murmuring should be permitted to thrust out\nof the Canon the book of Wisdom, which even in his time had\nobtained a sure place as a well-authenticated and Canonical book\nin the reckoning of the Church, the judgment of ages, the\ntestimony of ancients, and the sense of the faithful. What would\nhe say now if he were alive on earth, and saw men like Luther and\nCalvin manufacturing Bibles, filing down Old and New Testament\nwith a neat pretty little file of their own, setting aside, not\nthe book of wisdom alone, but with it very many others from the\nlist of Canonical Books? Thus whatever does not come out from\ntheir shop, by a mad decree, is liable to be, spat upon by all as\na rude and barbarous composition. They who have stooped to this\ndire and execrable way of saving themselves surely are beaten,\noverthrown, and flung rolling in the dust, for all their fine\npraises that are in the mouths of their admirers, for all their\ntraffic in priesthoods, for all their bawling in pulpits, for all\ntheir sentencing of Catholics to chains, rack and gallows. Seated\nin their armchairs as censors, as though any one had elected them\nto that office, they seize their pens and mark passages as\nspurious even in God's own Holy Writ, putting their pens through\nwhatever they cannot stomach. Can any fairly educated man be\nafraid of battalions of such enemies? If in the midst of your\nlearned body they had recourse to such trickster's arts, calling\nlike wizards upon their familiar spirit, you would shout at\nthem,--you would stamp your feet at them. For instance I would\nask them what right they have to rend and mutilate the body of\nthe Bible. They would answer that they do not cut out true\nScriptures, but prune away supposititious accretions. By\nauthority of what judge? By the Holy Ghost. This is the answer\nprescribed by Calvin (_Instit. lib._ I, _c._ 7), for escaping\nthis judgment of the Church whereby spirits of prophesy are\nexamined. Why then do some of you tear out one piece of\nScripture, and others another, whereas you all boast of being led\nby the same Spirit? The Spirit of the Calvinists receives six\nEpistles which do not please the Lutheran Spirit, both all the\nwhile in full confidence reposing on the Holy Ghost. The\nAnabaptists call the book of Job a fable, intermixed with tragedy\nand comedy. How do they know? The Spirit has taught them. Whereas\nthe Song of Solomon is admired by Catholics as a paradise of the\nsoul, a hidden manna, and rich delight in Christ, Castalio, a\nlewd rogue, has reckoned it nothing better than a love-song about\na mistress, and an amorous conversation with Court flunkeys.\nWhence drew he that intimation? From the Spirit. In the\nApocalypse of John, every jot and tittle of which Jerane declares\nto bear some lofty and magnificent meaning, Luther and Brent and\nKemnitz, critics hard to please, find something wanting, and are\ninclined to throw over the whole book. Whom have they consulted?\nThe Spirit. Luther with preposterous heat pits the Four Gospels\none against another (_Praef. in Nov. Test._), and far prefers\nPaul's Epistles to the first three, while he declares the Gospel\nof St. John above the rest to be beautiful, true, and worthy of\nmention in the first place,--thereby enrolling even the Apostles,\nso far as in him lay, as having a hand in his quarrels. Who\ntaught him to do that? The Spirit. Nay this imp of a friar has\nnot hesitated in petulant style to assail Luke's Gospel because\ntherein good and virtuous works are frequently commended to us.\nWhom did he consult? The Spirit. Theodore Beza has dared to carp\nat, as a corruption and perversion of the original, that mystical\nword from the twenty-second chapter of Luke, _this is the\nchalice, the new testament in my blood, which_ (chalice) _shall\nbe shed for you_ [Greek: potaerion ekchunomenon], because this\nlanguage admits of no explanation other than that of the wine in\nthe chalice being converted into the true blood of Christ. Who\npointed that out? The Spirit. In short, in believing all things\nevery man in the faith of his own spirit, they horribly belie and\nblaspheme the name of the Holy Ghost. So acting, do they not give\nthemselves away? are they not easily refuted? In an assembly of\nlearned men, such as yours, Gentlemen of the University, are they\nnot caught and throttled without trouble? Should I be afraid on\nbehalf of the Catholic faith to dispute with these men, who have\nhandled with the utmost ill faith not human but heavenly\nutterances? I say nothing here of their perverse versions of\nScripture, though I could accuse them in this respect of\nintolerable doings. I will not take the bread out of the mouth of\nthat great linguist, my fellow-Collegian, Gregory Martin, who\nwill do this work with more learning and abundance of detail than\nI could; nor from others whom I understand already to have that\ntask in hand. More wicked and more abominable is the crime that I\nam now prosecuting, that there have been found upstart Doctors\nwho have made a drunken onslaught on the handwriting that is of\nheaven; who have given judgment against it as being in many\nplaces defiled, defective, false, surreptitious; who have\ncorrected some passages, tampered with others; torn out others;\nwho have converted every bulwark wherewith it was guarded into\nLutheran \"spirits,\" what I may call phantom ramparts and parted\nwalls. All this they have done that they might not be utterly\ndumbfounded by falling upon Scripture texts contrary to their\nerrors, texts which they would have found it as hard to get over\nas to swallow hot ashes or chew stones. This then has been my\nFirst Reason, a strong and a just one. By revealing the shadowy\nand broken powers of the adverse faction, it has certainly given\nnew courage to a Christian man, not unversed in these studies, to\nfight for the Letters Patent of the Eternal King against the\nremnant of a routed foe.\n\nSECOND REASON\n\nTHE SENSE OF HOLY WRIT\n\nAnother thing to incite me to the encounter, and to disparage in\nmy eyes the poor forces of the enemy, is the habit of mind which\nthey continually display in their exposition of the Scriptures,\nfull of deceit, void of wisdom. As philosophers, you would seize\nthese points at once. Therefore I have desired to have you for my\naudience. Suppose, for example, we ask our adversaries on what\nground they have concocted that novel and sectarian opinion which\nbanishes Christ from the Mystic Supper. If they name the Gospel,\nwe meet them promptly. On our side are the words, _this is my\nbody, this is my blood._ This language seemed to Luther himself\nso forcible, that for all his strong desire to turn Zwinglian,\nthinking by that means to make it most awkward for the Pope,\nnevertheless he was caught and fast bound by this most open\ncontext, and gave in to it (_Luther, epistol. ad Argent._), and\nconfessed Christ truly present in the Most Holy Sacrament no less\nunwillingly than the demons of old, overcome by His miracles,\ncried aloud that He was Christ, the Son of God. Well then, the\nwritten text gives us the advantage: the dispute now turns on the\nsense of what is written. Let us examine this from the words in\nthe context, _my body which is given for you, my blood which hall\nbe shed for many_. Still the explanation on Calvin's side is most\nhard, on ours easy and quite plain.\n\nWhat further? Compare the Scriptures, they say, one with another.\nBy all means. The Gospels agree, Paul concurs. The words, the\nclauses, the whole sentence reverently repeat living bread,\nsignal miracle, heavenly food, flesh, body, blood. There is\nnothing enigmatical, nothing befogged with a mist of words. Still\nour adversaries hold on and make no end of altercation. What are\nwe to do? I presume, Antiquity should be heard; and what we, two\nparties suspect of one another, cannot settle, let it be settled\nby the decision of venerable ancient men of all past ages, as\nbeing nearer Christ and further removed from this contention.\nThey cannot stand that, they protest that they are being\nbetrayed, they appeal to the word of God pure and simple, they\nturn away from the comments of men. Treacherous and fatuous\nexcuse. We urge the word of God, they darken the meaning of it.\nWe appeal to the witness of the Saints as interpreters, they\nwithstand them. In short their position is that there shall be no\ntrial, unless you stand by the judgment of the accused party. And\nso they behave in every controversy which we start. On infused\ngrace, on inherent justice, on the visible Church, on the\nnecessity of Baptism, on Sacraments and Sacrifice, on the merits\nof the good, on hope and fear, on the difference of guilt in\nsins, on the authority of Peter, on the keys, on vows, on the\nevangelical counsels, on other such points, we Catholics have\ncited and discussed Scripture texts not a few, and of much\nweight, everywhere in books, in meetings, in churches, in the\nDivinity School: they have eluded them. We have brought to bear\nupon them the _scholia_ of the ancients, Greek and Latin: they\nhave refused them. What then is their refuge? Doctor Martin\nLuther, or else Philip (Melancthon), or anyhow Zwingle, or beyond\ndoubt Calvin and Besa have faithfully laid down the facts. Can I\nsuppose any of you to be so dull of sense as not to perceive this\nartifice when he is told of it? Wherefore I must confess how\nearnestly I long for the University Schools as a place where,\nwith you looking on, I could call those carpet-knights out of\ntheir delicious retreats into the heat and dust of action, and\nbreak their power, not by any strength of my own,--for I am not\ncomparable, not one per cent., with the rest of our people;--but\nby force of strong case and most certain truth.\n\nTHIRD REASON\n\nTHE NATURE OF THE CHURCH\n\nAt hearing the name of the Church the enemy has turned pale.\nStill he has devised some explanation which I wish you to notice,\nthat you may observe the ruinous and poverty-stricken estate of\nfalsehood. He was well aware that in the Scriptures, as well of\nProphets as of Apostles, everywhere there is made honourable\nmention of the Church: that it is called the holy city, the\nfruitful vine, the high mountain, the straight way, the only\ndove, the kingdom of heaven, the spouse and body of Christ, the\nground of truth, the multitude to whom the Spirit has been\npromised and into whom He breathes all truths that make for\nsalvation; her on whom, taken as a whole, the devil's jaws are\nnever to inflict a deadly bite; her against whom whoever rebels,\nhowever much he preach Christ with his mouth, has no more hold on\nChrist than the publican or the heathen. Such a loud\npronouncement he dared not gainsay; he would not seem rebellious\nagainst a Church of which the Scriptures make such frequent\nmention: so he cunningly kept the name, while by his definition\nhe utterly abolished the thing, He has depicted the Church with\nsuch properties as altogether hide her away, and leave her open\nto the secret gaze of a very few men, as though she were removed\nfrom the senses, like a Platonic Idea. They only could discern\nher, who by a singular inspiration had got the faculty of\ngrasping with their intelligence this aerial body, and with keen\neye regarding the members of such a company.\n\nWhat has become of candour and straightforwardness? What\nScripture texts or Scripture meanings or authorities of Fathers\nthus portray the Church? There are letters of Christ to the\nAsiatic Churches (Apoc. i. 3), letters of Peter, Paul, John, and\nothers to various Churches; frequent mention in the Acts of the\nApostles of the origin and spread of Churches. What of these\nChurches? Were they visible to God alone and holy men, or to\nChristians of every rank and degree? But, doubtless, necessity\nis a hard weapon. Pardon these subterfuges. Throughout the whole\ncourse of fifteen centuries these men find neither town, village\nnor household professing their doctrine, until an unhappy monk\nby an incestuous marriage had deflowered a virgin vowed to God,\nor a Swiss gladiator had conspired against his country, or a\nbranded runaway had occupied Geneva. These people, if they want\nto have a Church at all, are compelled to crack up a Church all\nhidden away; and to claim parents whom they themselves have\nnever known, and no mortal has ever set eyes on, Perhaps they\nglory in the ancestry of men whom every one knows to have been\nheretics, such as Aerius, Jovinianus, Vigilantius, Helvidius,\nBerengarius, the Waldenses, the Lollards, Wycliffe, Huss, of\nwhom they have begged sundry poisonous fragments of dogmas.\nWonder not that I have no fear of their empty talk: once I can\nmeet them in the noon-day, I shall have no trouble in dispelling\nsuch vapourings. Our conversation with them would take this\nline. Tell me, do you subscribe to the Church which flourished\nin bygone ages? Certainly. Let us traverse, then, different\ncountries and periods. What Church? The assembly of the\nfaithful. What faithful? Their names are unknown, but it is\ncertain that there have been many of them. Certain? to whom is\nit certain? To God Who says so! We, who have been taught of\nGod--stuff and nonsense, how am I to believe it? If you had the\nfire of faith in you, you would know it as well as you know you\nare alive. Let in as spectators, could you withhold your\nlaughter? To think that all Christians should be bidden to join\nthe Church; to beware of being cut down by the spiritual sword;\nto keep peace in the house of God; to trust their soul to the\nChurch as to the pillar of truth; to lay all their complaints\nbefore the Church; to hold for heathen all who are cast out of\nthe Church; and that nevertheless so many men for so many\ncenturies should not know where the Church is or who belong to\nit! This much only they prate in the darkness, that wherever the\nChurch is, only Saints and persons destined for heaven are\ncontained in it. Hence it follows that whoever wishes to\nwithdraw himself from the authority of his ecclesiastical\nsuperior has only to persuade himself that the priest has fallen\ninto sin and is quite cut off from the Church. Knowing as I did\nthat the adversaries were inventing these fictions, contrary to\nthe customary sense of the Churches in all ages, and that,\nhaving lost the whole substance, they still wished in their\ndifficulties to retain the name, I took comfort in the thought\nof your sagacity, and so promised myself that, as soon as ever\nyou had cognisance of such artifices by their own confession,\nyou would at once like men of mark and intelligence rend asunder\nthe web of foolish sophistry woven for your undoing.\n\nFOURTH REASON\n\nCOUNCILS\n\nIn the infant Church a grave question about lawful ceremonies,\nwhich troubled the minds of believers, was solved by the\ngathering of a Council of Apostles and elders. The Children\nbelieved their parents, the sheep their shepherds, commanding in\ntheir words, _It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us_\n(Acts xv). There followed for the extirpation of various heresies\nin various several ages, four Oecumenical Councils of the\nancients, the doctrine whereof was so well established that a\nthousand years ago (see St. Gregory the Great's Epistles, lib. i.\ncap. 24) singular honour was paid to it as to an utterance of\nGod. I will travel no further abroad. Even in our home, in\nParliament (ann. 1 Elisabeth), the same Councils keep their\nformer right and their dignity inviolate. These I will cite, and\nI will call thee, England, my sweet country, to witness. If, as\nthou professest, thou wilt reverence these four Councils, thou\nshalt give chief honour to the Bishop of the first See, that is\nto Peter: thou shalt recognise on the altar the unbloody\nsacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ: thou shalt beseech the\nblessed martyrs and all the saints to intercede with Christ on\nthy behalf: thou shalt restrain womanish apostates from unnatural\nvice and public incest: thou shalt do many things that thou art\nundoing, and wish undone much that thou art doing. Furthermore, I\npromise and undertake to show, when opportunity offers, that the\nSynods of other ages, and notably the Synod of Trent, have been\nof the same authority and credence as the first. Armed therefore\nwith the strong and choice support of all the Councils, why\nshould I not enter into this arena with calmness and presence of\nmind, watchful to keep an eye on my adversary and see on what\npoint he will show himself? I will produce testimonies most\nevident that he cannot wrest aside. Possibly he will take to\nscolding, and endeavour to talk against time, but he will not\nelude the eyes and ears of men who will watch him hard, as you\nwill do, if you are the men I take you for. But if there shall be\nany one found so stark mad as to set his single self up as a\nmatch for the senators of the world, men whose greatness,\nholiness, learning and antiquity is beyond all exception, I shall\nbe glad to look upon that face of impudence; and when I have\nshown it to you, I will leave the rest to your own thoughts.\nMeanwhile I will say thus much: The man who refuses consideration\nand weight to a Plenary Council, brought to a conclusion in due\nand orderly fashion, seems to me witless, brainless, a dullard in\ntheology, and a fool in politics. If ever the Spirit of God has\nshone upon the Church, then surely is the time for the sending of\ndivine aid, when the most manifest religiousness, ripeness of\njudgment, science, wisdom, dignity of all the Churches on earth\nhave flocked together in one city, and with employment of all\nmeans, divine and human, for the investigation of truth, implore\nthe promised Spirit that they may make wholesome and prudent\ndecrees. Let there now leap to the front some mannikin master of\nan heretical faction, let him arch his eyebrows, turn up his\nnose, rub his forehead, and scurrilously take upon himself to\njudge his judges, what sport, what ridicule will he excite! There\nwas found a Luther to say that he preferred to Councils the\nopinions of two godly and learned men (say his own and Philip\nMelanchthon's) when they agreed in the name of Christ. Oh what\nquackery! There was found a Kemnitz to try the Council of Trent\nby the standard of his own rude and giddy humour. What gained he\nthereby? Infamy. While he, unless he takes care, shall be buried\nwith Arius, the Synod of Trent, the older it grows, shall\nflourish the more, day by day, and year by year. Good God! what\nvariety of nations, what a choice assembly of Bishops of the\nwhole world, what a splendid representation of Kings and\nCommonwealths, what a quintessence of theologians, what sanctity,\nwhat tears, what fears, what flowers of Universities, what\ntongues, what subtlety, what labour, what infinite reading, what\nwealth of virtues and of studies filled that august sanctuary! I\nhave myself heard Bishops, eminent and prudent men,--and among\nthem Antony, Archbishop of Prague, by whom I was made\nPriest,--exulting that they had attended such a school for some\nyears; so that, much as they owed to Kaiser Ferdinand, they\nconsidered that he had shown them no more royal and abundant\nbounty than this of sending them to sit in that Academy of Trent\nas Legates from Bohemia. The Kaiser understood this, and on their\nreturn he welcomed them with the words, \"We have kept you at a\ngood school.\" Invited as our adversaries have been under a safe\nconduct, why have they not hastened thither, publicly to refute\nthose against whom they go on quacking like frogs from their\nholes? \"They broke their promise to Huss and Jerome,\" is their\nreply. Who broke it? \"The Fathers of the Council of Constance.\"\nIt is false; they never gave any promise. But anyhow, not even\nHuss would have been punished had not the perfidious and\npestilent fellow been brought back from that flight which the\nEmperor Sigusmund had forbidden him under pain of death; had he\nnot violated the conditions which he had agreed to in writing\nwith the Kaiser and thereby nullified all the value of that\nsafe-conduct. Huss's hasty wickedness played him false. For,\nhaving instigated deeds of savage violence in his native Bohemia,\nand being bidden thereupon to present himself at Constance, he\ndespised the prerogative of the Council, and sought his\nsafe-conduct of the Kaiser. Caesar signed it; the Christian\nworld, greater than Caesar, cancelled the signature. The\nheresiarch refused to return to a sound mind, and so perished. As\nfor Jerome of Prague, he came to Constance protected by no one;\nhe was detected and arraigned; he spoke in his own behalf, was\ntreated very kindly, went free whither he would; he was healed,\nabjured his heresy, relapsed, and was burnt. Why do they so often\ndrag out one case in a thousand? Let them read their own annals.\nMartin Luther himself, that abomination of God and men, was put\nin court at Augsburg before Cardinal Cajetan: there did he not\nbelch out all he could, and then depart in safety, fortified with\na letter of Maximilian? Likewise, when he was summoned to Worms,\nand had against him the Kaiser and most of the Princes of the\nEmpire, was he not safe under the protection of the Kaiser's\nword? Lastly, at the Diet of Augsburg, in presence of Charles V.,\nan enemy of heretics, flushed with victory, master of the\nsituation, did not the heads of the Lutherans and Zwinglians,\nunder truce, present their Confessions, so frequently re-edited,\nand depart in peace? Not otherwise had the letter from Trent\nprovided most ample safe-guards for the adversary; he would not\ntake advantage of them. The fact is, he airs his condition in\ncorners, where he expects to figure as a sage by coming out with\nthree words of Greek: he shrinks from the light, which should\nplace him in the number of men of letters [_lilleratorum_\n{transcribers note: the Latin is interpolated into the\ntranslation here}] and call him to sit in honourable place. Let\nthem obtain for English Catholics such a written promise of\nimpunity, if they love the salvation of souls. We will not raise\nthe instance of Huss: relying on the Sovereign's word, we will\nfly to Court. But, to return to the point whence I digressed, the\nGeneral Councils are mine, the first, the last, and those\nbetween. With them I will fight. Let the adversary look for a\njavelin hurled with force, which he will never be able to pluck\nout. Let Satan be overthrown in him, and Christ live.\n\nFIFTH REASON\n\nFATHERS\n\nAt Antioch, in which city the noble surname of Christians first\nbecame common, there flourished _Doctors_, that is, eminent\ntheologians, and _Prophets_, that is, very celebrated preachers\n(Acts xiii. 1). Of this sort were the scribes and wise men,\nlearned in the kingdom of God, bringing forth new things and old\n(Matth. xiii. 52; xxiii. 34), knowing Christ and Moses, whom the\nLord promised to His future flock. What a wicked thing it is to\nscout these teachers, given as they are by way of a mighty boon!\nThe adversary has scouted them. Why? Because their standing means\nhis fall. Having found that out for certain beyond doubt, I have\nasked for a fight unqualified, not that sham-fight in which the\ncrowds in the street engage, and skirmish with one another, but\nthe earnest and keen struggle in which we join in the arena of\nyon philosophers,\n\n   Foot to foot, and man close gripping man.\n\nIf ever we shall be allowed to turn to the Fathers, the battle is\nlost and won: they are as thoroughly ours as is Gregory XIII.\nhimself, the loving Father of the children of the Church. To say\nnothing of isolated passages, which are gathered from the records\nof the ancients, apt and clear statements in defence of our\nfaith, we hold entire volumes of these Fathers, which professedly\nillustrate in clear and abundant light the Gospel religion which\nwe defend. Take the twofold _Hierarchy_ of the martyr Dionysius,\nwhat classes, what sacrifices, what rites does he teach? This\nfact struck Luther so forcibly that he pronounced the works of\nthis Father to be \"such stuff as dreams are made of, and that of\nthe most pernicious kind.\" In imitation of his parent, an obscure\nFrenchman, Caussee, has not hesitated to call this Dionysius, the\nApostle of an illustrious nation, \"an old dotard.\" Ignatius has\ngiven grievous offence to the Centuriators of Magdeburg, as also\nto Calvin, so that these men, the offscouring of mankind, have\nnoted in his works \"unsightly blemishes and tasteless prosings.\"\nIn their judgment, Irenaeus has brought out \"a fanatical\nproduction\": Clement, the author of the _Stromata_, has produced\n\"Tares and dregs\": the other Fathers of this age, Apostolic men\nto be sure, \"have left blasphemies and monstrosities to\nposterity.\" In Tertullian they eagerly seize upon what they have\nlearned from us, in common with us, to detest; but they should\nremember that his book _On Prescriptions_, which has so signally\nsmitten the heretics of our times, was never found fault with.\nHow finely, how, clearly, has Hippolytus, Bishop of Porto pointed\nout beforehand the power of Antichrist, the times of Luther! They\ncall him, therefore, \"a most babyish writer, an owl.\" Cyprian,\nthe delight and glory of Africa, that French critic Caussee, and\nthe Centuriators of Magdeburg, have termed \"stupid, God-forsaken\ncorrupter of repentance.\" What harm has he done? He has written\n_On Virgins, On the Lapsed, On the Unity of the Church_, such\ntreatises as also such letters to Cornelius, the Roman Pontiff,\nthat, unless credence be withdrawn from this Martyr, Peter Martyr\nVermilius and all his associates must count for worse than\nadulterers and men guilty of sacrilege. And, not to dwell longer\non individuals, the Fathers of this age are all condemned \"for\nwonderful corruption of the doctrine of repentance.\" How so?\nBecause the austerity of the Canons in vogue at that time is\nparticularly obnoxious to this plausible sect which, better\nfitted for dining-rooms than for churches, is wont to tickle\nvoluptuous ears and to sew _cushions on every arm_ (Ezech. xiii.\n18). Take the next age, what offence has that committed?\nChrysostom and those Fathers, forsooth, have \"foully obscured the\njustice of faith.\" Gregory Nazianzen whom the ancients called\neminently \"the Theologian,\" is in the judgment of Caussee \"a\nchatter-box, who did not know what he was saying.\" Ambrose was\n\"under the spell of an evil demon.\" Jerome is \"as damnable as the\ndevil, injurious to the Apostle, a blasphemer, a wicked wretch.\"\nTo Gregory Massow--\"Calvin alone is worth more than a hundred\nAugustines.\" A hundred is a small number: Luther \"reckons nothing\nof having against him a thousand Augustines, a thousand Cyprians,\na thousand Churches.\" I think I need not carry the matter\nfurther. For when men rage against the above-mentioned Fathers,\nwho can wonder at the impertinence of their language against\nOptatus, Hilary, the two Cyrils, Epiphanius, Basil, Vincent,\nFulgentius, Leo, and the Roman Gregory. However, if we grant any\njust defence of an unjust cause, I do not deny that the Fathers\nwherever you light upon them, afford the party of our opponents\nmatter they needs must disagree with, so long as they are\nconsistent with themselves. Men who have appointed fast-days, how\nmust they be minded in regard of Basil, Gregory, Nazianzen, Leo,\nChrysostom, who have published telling sermons on Lent and\nprescribed days of fasting as things already in customary use?\nMen who have sold their souls for gold, lust, drunkenness and\nambitious display, can they be other than most hostile to Basil,\nChrysostom, Jerome, Augustine, whose excellent books are in the\nhands of all, treating of the institute, rule, and virtues of\nmonks? Men who have carried the human will into captivity, who\nhave abolished Christian funerals, who have burnt the relics of\nSaints, can they possibly be reconciled to Augustine, who has\ncomposed three books on Free Will, one on Care for the Dead,\nbesides sundry sermons and a long chapter in a noble work on the\nMiracles wrought at the Basilicas and Monuments of the Martyrs?\nMen who measure faith by their own quips and quirks, must they\nnot be angry with Augustine, of whom there is extant a remarkable\nLetter against a Manichean, in which he professes himself to\nassent to Antiquity, to Consent, to Perpetuity of Succession, and\nto the Church which, alone among so many heresies, claims by\nprescriptive right the name of Catholic?\n\nOptatus, Bishop of Milevis, refutes the Donatist faction by\nappeal to Catholic communion: he accuses their wickedness by\nappeal to the decree of Melchiades: he convicts their heresy by\nreference to the order of succession of Roman Pontiffs: he lays\nopen their frenzy in their defilement of the Eucharist and of\nschism: he abhors their sacrilege in their breaking of altars \"on\nwhich the members of Christ are borne,\" and their pollution of\nchalices \"which have held the blood of Christ.\" I greatly desire\nto know what they think of Optatus, whom Augustine mentions as a\nvenerable Catholic Bishop, the equal of Ambrose and of Cyprian;\nand Fulgentius as a holy and faithful interpreter of Paul, like\nunto Augustine and Ambrose. They sing in their churches the Creed\nof Athanasius. Do they stand by him? That grave anchor who has\nwritten an elaborate book in praise of the Egyptian hermit\nAntony, and who with the Synod of Alexandria suppliantly appealed\nto the judgment of the Apostolic See, the See of St. Peter. How\noften does Prudentius in his Hymns pray to the martyrs whose\npraises he sings! how often at their ashes and bones does he\nvenerate the King of Martyrs! Will they approve his proceeding?\nJerome writes against Vigilantius in defence of the relics of the\nSaints and the honours paid to them; as also against Jovinian for\nthe rank to be allowed to virginity. Will they endure him?\nAmbrose honoured his patron saints Gervase and Protase with a\nmost glorious solemnity by way of putting the Arians to shame.\nThis action of his was praised by most godly Fathers, and God\nhonoured it with more than one miracle. Are they going to take a\nkindly view off Ambrose here? Gregory the Great, our Apostle, is\nmost manifestly with us, and therefore is a hateful personage to\nour adversaries. Calvin, in his rage, says that he was not\nbrought up in the school of the Holy Ghost, seeing that he had\ncalled holy images the books of the illiterate.\n\nTime would fail me were I to try to count up the Epistles,\nSermons, Homilies, Orations, Opuscula and dissertations of the\nFathers, in which they have laboriously, earnestly and with much\nlearning supported the doctrines of us Catholics. As long as\nthese works are for sale at the booksellers' shops, it will be\nvain to prohibit the writings of our controversialists; vain to\nkeep watch at the ports and on the sea-coast; vain to search\nhouses, boxes, desks, and book-chests; vain to set up so many\nthreatening notices at the gates. No Harding, nor Sanders, nor\nAllen, nor Stapleton, nor Bristow, attack these new-fangled\nfancies with more vigour than do the Fathers whom I have\nenumerated. As I think over these and the like facts, my courage\nhas grown and my ardour for battle, in which whatever way the\nadversary stirs, unless he will yield glory to God, he will be in\nstraits. Let him admit the Fathers, he is caught: let him shut\nthem out, he is undone.\n\nWhen we were young men, the following incident occurred. John\nJewell, a foremost champion of the Calvinists of England, with\nincredible arrogance challenged the Catholics at St. Paul's,\nLondon, invoking hypocritically and calling upon the Fathers, who\nhad flourished within the first six hundred years of\nChristianity. His wager was taken up by the illustrious men who\nwere then in exile at Louvain, hemmed in though they were with\nvery great difficulties by reason of the iniquity of their times.\nI venture to assert that that device of Jewell's, stupid,\nunconscionable, shameless as it was, qualities which those\nwriters happily brought out, did so much good to our countrymen\nthat scarcely anything in my recollection has turned out to the\nbetter advantage of the suffering English Church. At once an\nedict is hung up on the doors, forbidding the reading or\nretaining of any of those books, whereas they had come out, or\nwere wrung out, I may almost say, by the outcry that Jewell had\nraised. The result was that all the persons interested in the\nmatter came to understand that the Fathers were Catholics, that\nis to say, ours. Nor has Lawrence Humphrey passed over in silence\nthis wound inflicted on him and his party. After high praise of\nJewell in other respects, he fixes on him this role of\ninconsiderateness, that he admitted the reasonings of the\nFathers, with whom Humphrey declares, without any beating about\nthe bush, that he has nothing in common nor ever will have.\n\nWe also sounded once in familiar discourse Toby Matthews, now a\nleading preacher, whom we loved for his good accomplishments and\nthe seeds of virtue in him; we asked him to answer honestly\nwhether one who read the Fathers assiduously could belong to that\nparty which he supported. He answered that he could not, if,\nbesides reading, he also believed them.[1] This saying is most\ntrue; nor do I think that either he at the present time, or\nMatthew Hutten, a man of name, who is said to read the Fathers\nwith an assiduity that few equal, or other adversaries who do the\nlike, are otherwise minded.\n\nThus far I have been able to descend with security into this\nfield of conflict, to wage war with men, who, as though they held\na wolf by the ears, are compelled to brand their cause with an\neverlasting stigma of shame, whether they refuse the Fathers or\nwhether they call for them. In the one case they are preparing to\nrun away, in the other they are caught by the throat.\n\nSIXTH REASON\n\nTHE GROUNDS OF ARGUMENT ASSUMED BY THE FATHERS\n\nIf ever any men took to heart and made their special care,--as\nmen of our religion have made it and should make it their special\ncare,--to observe the rule, _Search the Scriptures_ (John v. 39),\nthe holy Fathers easily come out first and take the palm for the\nmatter of this observance. By their labour and at their expense\nBibles have been transcribed and carried among so many nations\nand tongues by the perils they have run and the tortures they\nhave endured the Sacred Volumes have been snatched from the\nflames and devastation spread by enemies: by their labours and\nvigils they have been explained in every detail. Night and day\nthey drank in Holy Writ, from all pulpits they gave forth Holy\nWrit, with Holy Writ they enriched immense volumes, with most\nfaithful commentaries they unfolded the sense of Holy Writ, with\nHoly Writ they seasoned alike their abstinence and their meals,\nfinally, occupied about Holy Writ they arrived at decrepit old\nage. And if they also frequently have argued from the Authority\nof Elders, from the Practice of the Church, from the Succession\nof Pontiffs, from ecumenical Councils, from Apostolic Traditions,\nfrom the Blood of Martyrs, from the decrees of Bishops, from\nMiracles, yet most persistently of all and most willingly do they\nset forth in close array the testimonies of Holy Writ: these they\npress home, on these they dwell, to this _armour of the strong_\n(Cant. iii. 7), for the best of reasons, is the first and the\nmost honourable part assigned by these valiant leaders in their\nwork of forgiving and keeping in repair the City of God against\nthe assaults of the wicked.\n\nWherefore I do all the more wonder at that haughty and famous\nobjection of the adversary, who, like one looking for water in a\nrunning stream, takes exception to the lack of Scripture texts\nin writings crowded with Scripture texts. He says he will agree\nwith the Fathers so long as they keep close to Holy Scripture.\nDoes he mean what he says? I will see then that there come\nforth, armed and begirt with Christ, with Prophets and Apostles,\nand with all array of Biblical erudition, those celebrated\nauthors, those ancient Fathers, those holy men, Dionyius,\nCyprian, Athanasius, Basil, Nazianzen, Ambrose, Jerome,\nChrysostom, Augustine, and the Latin Gregory. Let that faith\nreign in England, Oh that it may reign! which these Fathers,\ndear lovers of the Scriptures, build up out of the Scriptures.\nThe texts that they bring, we will bring: the texts they confer,\nwe will confer: what they infer, we will infer. Are you agreed?\nOut with it and say so, please. Not bit of it, he says, unless\nthey expound rightly. What is this \"rightly\"? At your\ndiscretion. Are you not ashamed of the vicious circle?\n\nHopeful as I am that in flourishing Universities there will be\ngathered together a good number, who will be no dull spectators,\nbut acute judges of these controversies and who will weigh for\nwhat they are worth the frivolous answers of our adversaries, I\nwill gladly await this meeting-day, as one minded to lead forth\nagainst wooded hillocks [cf. Cicero _in Catilinam_ ii. 11],\ncovered with unarmed tramps, the nobility and strength of the\nChurch of Christ.\n\nSEVENTH REASON\n\nHISTORY\n\nAncient History unveils the primitive face of the Church. To this\nI appeal. Certainly, the more ancient historians, whom our\nadversaries also habitually, consult, are enumerated pretty well\nas follows: Eusebius, Damasus, Jerome, Rufinus, Orosius,\nSocrates, Sozomen, Theodoret Cassiodorus, Gregory of Tours,\nUsuard, Regino, Marianus, Sigebert, Zonaras, Cedrinus,\nNicephorus. What have they to tell? The praises of our religion,\nits progress, vicissitudes, enemies. Nay, and this is a point I\nwould have you observe diligently, they who in deadly hatred\ndissent from us,--Melancthon, Pantaleon, Funck, the Centuriators\nof Magdeburg,--on applying themselves to write either the\nchronology or the history of the Church, if they did not get\ntogether the exploits of our heroes, and heap up the accounts of\nthe frauds and crimes of the enemies of our Church, would pass by\nfifteen hundred years with no story to tell.\n\nAlong with the above-mentioned consider the local historians, who\nhave searched with laborious curiosity into the transactions of\nsome one particular nation. These men, wishing by all means to\nenrich and adorn the Sparta which they had gotten for their own,\nand to that effect not passing over in silence even such things\nas banquets of unusual splendour, or sleeved tunics, or hilts of\ndaggers, or gilt spurs, and other such minutiae having any smack\nof revelry about them, surely, if they had heard of any change in\nreligion, or any falling off from the standard of early ages,\nwould have related it, many of them; or, if not many, at least\nseveral; if not several, some one anyhow. Not one, well-disposed\nor ill-disposed towards us, has related anything of the sort, or\neven dropped the slightest hint of the same.\n\nFor example. Our adversaries grant us,--they cannot do\notherwise,--that the Roman Church was at one time holy,\nCatholic, Apostolic, at the time when it deserved these\neulogiums from St. Paul: _Your faith is spoken of in the whole\nworld. Without ceasing I make a commemoration of you. I know\nthat when I come to you, I shall come in the abundance of the\nblessing of Christ. All the Churches of Christ salute you. Your\nobedience is published in every place_ (Rom. i. 8, 9; xv. 29;\nxvi. 17, 19): at the time when Paul, being kept there in free\ncustody, was spreading the gospel (Acts xxviii. 31) : at the\ntime when Peter once in that city was ruling _the Church\ngathered at Babylon_ (1 Peter v. 13): at the time when that\nClement, so singularly praised by the Apostle (Phil. iv. 3) was\ngoverning the Church: at the time when the pagan Caesars, Nero,\nDomitian, Trajan, Antoninus, were butchering the Roman Pontiffs:\nalso at the time when, as even Calvin bears witness, Damasus,\nSiricius, Anastasius and Innocent guided the Apostolic bark. For\nat this epoch he generously allows that men, at Rome\nparticularly, had so far not swerved from Gospel teaching. When\nthen did Rome lose this faith so highly celebrated? when did she\ncease to be what she was before? at what time, under what\nPontiff, by what way, by what compulsion, by what increments,\ndid a foreign religion come to pervade city and world? What\noutcries, what disturbances, what lamentations did it provoke?\nWere all mankind all over the rest of the world lulled to sleep,\nwhile Rome, Rome I say, was forging new Sacraments, a new\nSacrifice, new religious dogma? Has there been found no\nhistorian, neither Greek nor Latin, neither far nor near, to\nfling out in his chronicles even an obscure hint of so\nremarkable a proceeding?\n\nTherefore this much is clear, that the articles of our belief are\nwhat History, manifold and various, History the messenger of\nantiquity, and life of memory, utters and repeats in abundance;\nwhile no narrative penned in human times records that the\ndoctrines foisted in by our opponents ever had any footing in the\nChurch. It is clear, I say, that the historians are mine, and\nthat the adversary's raids upon history are utterly without\npoint. No impression can they make unless the assertion be first\nreceived, that all Christians of all ages had lapsed into gross\ninfidelity and gone down to the abyss of hell, until such time as\nLuther entered into an unblessed union with Catherine Bora.\n\nEIGHTH REASON\n\nPARADOXES\n\nFor myself, most excellent Sirs, when, choosing out of many\nheresies, I think over in my mind certain portentous errors of\nself-opinionated men, errors that it will be incumbent on me to\nrefute, I should condemn myself of want of spirit and discernment\nif in this trial of strength I were to be afraid of any man's\nability or powers. Let him be able, let him be eloquent, let him\nbe a practised disputant, let him be a devourer of all books,\nstill his thought must dry up and his utterance fail him when he\nshall have to maintain such impossible positions as these. For we\nshall dispute, if perchance they will allow us, on God, on\nChrist, on Man, on Sin, on Justice, on Sacraments, on Morals. I\nshall see whether they will dare to speak out what they think,\nand what under the constraint of their situation they publish in\ntheir miserable writings. I will take care that they know these\nmaxims of their teachers:--\"God is the author and cause of evil,\nwilling it, suggesting it, effecting it, commanding it, working\nit out, and guiding the guilty counsels of the wicked to this\nend. As the call of Paul, so the adultery of David, and the\nwickedness of the traitor Judas, was God's own work\" (Calvin,\n_Institut_. i. 18; ii. 4; iii. 23, 24). This monstrous doctrine,\nof which Philip Melanchthon was for once ashamed, Luther however,\nof whom Philip had learned it, extols as an oracle from heaven\nwith wonderful praises, and on that score puts his foster-child\nall but on an equality, with the Apostle Paul (Luther, _De servo\narbitrio_). I will also enquire what was in Luther's mind, whom\nthe English Calvinists pronounce to be \"a man given of God for\nthe enlightenment of the world,\" when he wished to take this\nversicle out of the Church's prayers, \"Holy Trinity, one God,\nhave mercy on us.\"\n\nI will proceed to the person of Christ. I will ask what these\nwords, \"Christ the Son of God, God of God,\" mean to Calvin, who\nsays, \"God of Himself\" (_Instit._ i. 13); or to Beza, who says,\n\"He is not begotten of the essence of the Father\" (Beza in Josue,\nnn. 23, 24). Again. Let there be set up two hypostate unions in\nChrist, one of His soul with His flesh, the other of His Divinity\nwith His Humanity (Beza, _Contra Schmidel_). The passage in John\nx. 30, _I and the Father are one_, does not show Christ to be\nGod, consubstantial with God the Father (Calvin on John x.), the\nfact is, says Luther, \"my soul hates this word, _homousion._\" Go\non. Christ was not perfect in grace from His infancy, but grew in\ngifts of the soul like other men, and by experience daily became\nwiser, so that as a little child He laboured under ignorance\n(Melanchthon on the gospel for first Sunday after Epiphany).\nWhich is as much as to say that He was defiled with the stain and\nvice of original sin. But observe still more direful utterances.\nWhen Christ, praying in the Garden, was streaming with a sweat of\nwater and blood, He shuddered under a sense of eternal damnation,\nHe uttered an irrational cry, an unspiritual cry, a sudden cry\nprompted by the force of His distress, which He quickly checked\nas not sufficiently premeditated (Marlorati in Matth. xxvi.;\nCalvin _in Harm. Evangel._). Is there anything further? Attend.\nWhen Christ Crucified exclaimed, _My God, my God, why hast Thou\nforsaken me,_ He was on fire with the flames of hell, He uttered\na cry of despair, He felt exactly as if nothing were before Him\nbut to perish in everlasting death (Calvin _in Harm. Evangel._).\nTo this also let them add something, if they can. Christ, they\nsay, descended into hell, that is, when dead, He tasted hell not\notherwise than do the damned souls, except that He was destined\nto be restored to Himself: for since by His mere bodily death He\nwould have profited us nothing, He needed in soul also to\nstruggle with everlasting death, and in this way to pay the debt\nof our crime and our punishment. And lest any one might haply\nsuspect that this theory had stolen upon Calvin unawares, the\nsame Calvin calls _all of you who have repelled this doctrine,\nfull as it is of comfort, God-forsaken boobies_ (Institut. ii.\n16). Times, times, what a monster you have reared! That delicate\nand royal Blood, which ran in a flood from the lacerated and torn\nBody of the innocent Lamb, one little drop of which Blood, for\nthe dignity of the Victim, might have redeemed a thousand worlds,\navailed the human race nothing, unless _the mediator of God and\nmen, the man Christ Jesus_ (I Tim. ii. 5) had borne also _the\nsecond death_ (Apoc. xx. 6), the death of the soul, the death to\ngrace, that accompaniment only of sin and damnable blasphemy! In\ncomparison with this insanity, Bucer, impudent fellow that he is,\nwill appear modest, for he (on Matth. xxvi.), by an explanation\nvery preposterous, or rather, an inept and stupid tautology,\ntakes _hell_ in the creed to mean the tomb. Of the Anglican\nsectaries, some are wont to adhere to their idol, Calvin, others\nto their great master, Bucer; some also murmur in an undertone\nagainst this article, wishing that it may be quietly removed\naltogether from the Creed, that it may give no more trouble. Nay,\nthis was actually tried in a meeting at London, as I remember\nbeing told by one who was present, Richard Cheyne, a miserable\nold man, who was badly mauled by robbers outside, and, for all\nthat, never entered his father's house.[2]\n\nAnd thus far of Christ. What of Man? The image of God is utterly\nblotted out in man, not the slightest spark of good is left: his\nwhole nature in all the parts of his soul is so thoroughly\noverturned that, even after he is born again and sanctified in\nbaptism, there is nothing whatever within him but mere corruption\nand contagion. What does this lead up to? That they who mean to\nseize glory by faith alone may wallow in the filth of every\nturpitude, may accuse nature, despair of virtue, and discharge\nthemselves of the commandments (Calvin, _Instit._ ii. 3). To\nthis, Illyricus, the standard-bearer of the Magdeburg company,\nhas added his own monstrous teaching about original sin, which he\nmakes out to be the innermost substance of souls, whom, since\nAdam's fall, the devil himself engenders and transforms into\nhimself. This also is a received maxim in this scum of evil\ndoctrine, that all sins are equal, yet with this qualification\n(not to revive the Stoics), \"if sins are weighed in the judgment\nof God.\" As if God, the most equitable judge, were to add to our\nburden rather than lighten it; and, for all His justice, were to\nexaggerate and make it what it is not in itself. By this\nestimation, as heavy an offence would be committed against God,\njudging in all severity, by the innkeeper who has killed a\nbarn-door cock, when he should not have done, as by that infamous\nassassin who, his head full of Beza, stealthily slew by the shot\nof a musket the French hero, the Duke of Guise, a Prince of\nadmirable virtue, than which crime our world has seen in our age\nnothing more deadly, nothing more lamentable.\n\nBut perchance they who are so severe in the matter of sin\nphilosophise magnificently on divine grace, as able to bring\nsuccour and remedy to this evil. Fine indeed is the function\nwhich they assign to grace, which their ranting preachers say is\nneither infused into our hearts, nor strong enough to resist sin,\nbut lies wholly outside of us, and consists in the mere favour of\nGod,--a favour which does not amend the wicked, nor cleanse, nor\nilluminate, nor enrich them, but, leaving still the old stinking\nordure of their sin, dissembles it by God's connivance, that it\nbe not counted unsightly and hateful. And with this their\ninvention they are so delighted that, with them, even Christ is\nnot otherwise called _full of grace and truth_ than inasmuch as\nGod the Father has borne wonderful favour to Him (Bucer on John\ni: Brent hom. 12 on John).\n\nWhat sort of thing then is righteousness? A relation. It is not\nmade up of faith, hope and charity, vesting the soul in their\nsplendour; it is only a hiding away of guilt, such that, whoever\nhas seized upon this righteousness by faith alone, he is as sure\nof salvation as though he were already enjoying the unending joy\nof heaven. Well, let this dream pass: but how can one be sure of\nfuture perseverance, in the absence of which a man's exit would\nbe most miserable, though for a time he had observed\nrighteousness purely and piously? Nay, says Calvin (_Instit._\niii. 2), unless this your faith foretells you your perseverance\nassuredly, without possibility of hallucination, it must be cast\naside as vain and feeble. I recognise the disciple of Luther. A\nChristian, said Luther (_De captivitate Babylonis_), cannot lose\nhis salvation, even if he wanted, except by refusing to believe.\n\nI hasten to pass on to the Sacraments. None, none, not two, not\none, O holy Christ, have they left. Their bread is poison; and\nas for their baptism, though it is still true baptism,\nnevertheless in their judgment it is nothing, it is not a wave\nof salvation, it is not a channel of grace, it does not apply to\nus the merits of Christ, it is a mere token of salvation\n(Calvin, _Instit._ iv. 15). Thus they have made no more of the\nbaptism of Christ, so far as the nature of the thing goes, than\nof the ceremony of John. If you have it, it is well; if you go\nwithout it, there is no loss suffered; believe, you are saved,\nbefore you are washed. What then of infants, who, unless they\nare aided by the virtue of the Sacrament, poor little things,\ngain nothing by any faith of their own? Rather than allow\nanything to the Sacrament of baptism, say the Magdeburg\nCenturiators (Cent. v. 4.), let us grant that there is faith in\nthe infants themselves, enough to save them; and that the said\nbabies are aware of certain secret stirrings of this faith,\nalbeit they are not yet aware whether they are alive or not. A\nhard nut to crack! If this is so very hard, listen to Luther's\nremedy. It is better, he says (_Advers. Cochl._), to omit the\nbaptism; since, unless the infant believes, to no purpose is it\nwashed. This is what they say, doubtful in mind what absolutely\nto affirm. Therefore let Balthasar Pacimontanus step in to sort\nthe votes. This father of the Anabaptists, unable to assign to\ninfants any stirring of faith, approved Luther's suggestion;\nand, casting infant baptism out of the churches, resolved to\nwash at the sacred font none who was not grown up. For the rest\nof the Sacraments, though that many headed beast utters many\ninsults, yet, seeing that they are now of daily occurrence, and\nour ears have grown callous to them, I here pass them over.\n\nThere remain the sayings of the heretics concerning life and\nmorals, the noxious goblets which Luther has vomited on his\npages, that out of the filthy hovel of his one breast he might\nbreathe pestilence upon his readers. Listen patiently, and blush,\nand pardon me the recital. If the wife will not, or cannot, let\nthe handmaid come (_Serm. de matrimon._); seeing that commerce\nwith a wife is as necessary to every man as food, drink, and\nsleep. Matrimony is much more excellent than virginity. Christ\nand Paul dissuaded men from virginity (_Liber de vot. evangel._).\nBut perhaps these doctrines are peculiar to Luther. They are not.\nThey have been lately defended by my friend Chark but miserably\nand timidly. Do you wish to hear any more? Certainly. The more\nwicked you, are, he says, the nearer you are to grace (_Serm. de.\npisc. Petri_). All good actions are sins, in God's judgment,\nmortal sins; in God's mercy, venial. No one thinks evil of his\nown will. The Ten Commandments are nothing to Christians. God\ncares nought at all about our works. They alone rightly partake\nof the Lord's Supper, who bury consciences sad, afflicted,\ntroubled, confused, erring. Sins are to be confessed, but to\nanyone you like; and if he absolves you even in joke, provided\nyou believe, you are absolved. To read the Hours of the Divine\nOffice is not the function of priests, but of laymen. Christians\nare free from the enactments of men (Luther, _De servo arbitrio,\nDe captivilate Babylon_).\n\nI think I have stirred up this puddle sufficiently. I now finish.\nNor must you think me unfair for having turned my argument against\nLutherans and Zwinglians indiscriminately. For, remembering their\ncommon parentage, they wish to be brothers and friends to one\nanother; and they take it as a grave affront, whenever any\ndistinction is drawn between them in any point but one. I am not\nof consequence enough to claim for myself so much as an\nundistinguished place among the select theologians who at this day\nhave declared war on heresies: but this I know, that, puny as I\nam, I run no risk while, supported by the grace of Christ, I shall\ndo battle, with the aid of heaven and earth, against such\nfabrications as these, so odious, so tasteless, so stupid.\n\nNINTH REASON\n\nSOPHISM\n\nIt is a shrewd saying that a one-eyed man may be king among the\nblind. With uneducated people a mock-proof has force which a\nschool of philosophers dismisses with scorn. Many are the\noffences of the adversary under this head; but his case is made\nout by four fallacies chiefly, fallacies which I would rather\nunravel in the University than in a popular audience. The first\nvice is [Greek: skiamachia], with mighty effort hammering at\nbreezes and shadows. In this way: against such as have sworn to\ncelibacy and vowed chastity, because, while marriage is good,\nvirginity is better (1 Cor. vii.), Scripture texts are brought\nup speaking honourably of marriage. Whom do they hit? Against\nthe merit of a Christian man, a merit dyed in the Blood of\nChrist, otherwise null, testimonies are alleged whereby we are\nbidden to put our trust neither in nature nor in the law, but in\nthe Blood of Christ. Whom do they refute? Against those who\nworship Saints, as Christ's servants, especially acceptable to\nHim, whole pages are quoted, forbidding the worship of many\ngods? Where are these many gods? By such arguments, which I find\nin endless quantity in the writings of heretics, they cannot\nhurt us, they may bore you.\n\nAnother vice is [Greek: logomachia], which leaves the sense, and\nwrangles loquaciously over the word. _Find me Mass or Purgatory\nin the Scriptures_, they say. What then? Trinity, Consubstantial,\nPerson, are they nowhere in the Bible, because these words are\nnot found? Allied to this fault is the catching at letters, when,\nto the neglect of usage and the mind of the speakers, war is\nwaged on the letters of the alphabet. For instance, thus they\nsay: _Presbyter to the Greeks means nothing else than elder;\nSacrament, any mystery_. On this, as on all other points, St.\nThomas shrewdly observes: \"In words, we must look not whence they\nare derived, but to what meaning they are put.\"\n\nThe third vice is [Greek: homonumia], which has a very wide\nrange. For example: _What is the meaning of an Order of Priests,\nwhen John has called us all priests?_ (Apoc. v. 10). He has also\nadded this: _we shall reign upon the earth_. What then is the use\nof Kings? Again: _the Prophet_ (Isaias lviii.) _cries up a\nspiritual fast, that is, abstinence from inveterate crimes.\nFarewell then to any discernment of meats and prescription of\ndays._ Indeed? Mad therefore were Moses, David, Elias, the\nBaptist, the Apostles, who terminated their fasts in two days,\nthree days, or in so many weeks, which fasting, being from sin,\nought to have been perpetual. You have already seen what manner\nof argument this is. I hasten on.\n\nAdded to the above is a fourth vice, Vicious Circle, in this way.\nGive me the notes, I say, of the Church. _The word of God and\nundefiled Sacraments_. Are these with you? _Who can doubt it?_ I\ndo, I deny it utterly. _Consult the word of God._ I have\nconsulted it, and I favour you less than before. _Ah, but it is\nplain._ Prove it to me. _Because we do not depart a nail's\nbreadth from the word of God._ Where is your persecution? Will\nyou always go on taking for an argument the very point that is\ncalled in question? How often have I insisted on this already? Do\nwake up: do you want torches applied to you? I say that your\nexposition of the word of God is perverse and mistaken: I have\nfifteen centuries to bear me witness stand by an opinion, not\nmine, nor yours, but that of all these ages. _I will stand by the\nsentence of the word of God: the Spirit breatheth where it will_\n(John iii. 8). There he is at it again; what circumvolutions,\nwhat wheels he is making! This trifler, this arch-contriver of\nwords and sophisms, I know not to whom he can be formidable:\ntiresome he possibly will be. His tiresomeness will find its\ncorrective in your sagacity: all that was formidable about him\nfacts have taken away.\n\nTENTH REASON\n\nALL MANNER OF WITNESS\n\n_This shall be to you a straight way, so that fools shall not go\nastray in it_ (Isaias xxxv. 8).\n\nWho is there, however small and lost in the crowd of\nilliterates, that, with a desire of salvation and some little\nattention, cannot see, cannot keep to the path of the Church, so\nadmirably smoothed out, eschewing brambles and rocks and\npathless wastes! For, as Isaias prophesies, this path shall be\nplain even to the uneducated; most plain therefore, if you\nchoose, to you. Let us put before our eyes the theatre of the\nuniverse: let us wander everywhere: all things supply us with an\nargument. Let us go to heaven: let us contemplate roses and\nlilies, Saints empurpled with martyrdom or white with innocence:\nRoman Pontiffs, I say, three and thirty in a continuous line put\nto death: Pastors all the world over, who have pledged their\nblood for the name of Christ: Flocks of faithful, who have\nfollowed in the footsteps of their Pastors: all the Saints of\nheaven, who as shining lights in purity and holiness have gone\nbefore the crowd of mankind. You will find that these were ours\nwhen they lived on earth, ours when they passed away from this\nworld. To cull a few instances, ours was that Ignatius, who in\nchurch matters put no one not even the Emperor, on a level with\nthe Bishop; who committed to writing, that they might not be\nlost, certain Apostolic traditions of which he himself had been\nwitness. Ours was that anchoret Telesphorus, who ordered the\nmore strict observance of the fast of Lent established by the\nApostles. Ours was Irenaeus, who declared the Apostolic faith by\nthe Roman succession and chair (lib. iii. cap. 3). Ours was Pope\nVictor, who by an edict brought to order the whole of Asia; and\nthough this proceeding seemed to some minds, and even to that\nholy man Irenaeus, somewhat harsh, yet no one made light of it\nas coming from a foreign power. Ours was Polycarp, who went to\nRome on the question of Easter, whose burnt relics Smyrna\ngathered, and honoured her Bishop with an anniversary feast and\nappointed ceremony. Ours were Cornelius and Cyprian, a golden\npair of Martyrs, both great Bishops, but greater he, the Roman,\nwho had rescinded the African error; while the latter was\nennobled by the obedience which he paid to the elder, his very\ndear friend. Ours was Sixtus, to whom, as he offered solemn\nsacrifice at the altar, seven men of the clergy ministered. Ours\nwas his Archdeacon Lawrence, whom the adversaries cast out of\ntheir calendar, to whom, twelve hundred years ago, the Consular\nman Prudentius thus prayed:\n\n   What is the power entrusted thee,\n   And how great function is given thee,\n   The joyful thanks of Roman citizens prove,\n   To whom thou grantest their petitions.\n   Among them, O glory of Christ,\n   Hear also a rustic poet,\n   Confessing the crimes of his heart\n   And publishing his doings.\n   Hear bountifully the supplication\n   Of Christ's culprit Prudentius.\n\nOurs are those highly-blest maids, Cecily, Agatha, Anastasia,\nBarbara, Agnes, Lucy, Dorothy, Catherine, who held fast against\nthe violent assault of men and devils the virginity they had\nresolved upon. Ours was Helen, celebrated for the finding of the\nLord's Cross. Ours was Monica, who in death most piously begged\nprayers and sacrifices to be offered for her at the altar of\nChrist. Ours was Paula, who, leaving her City palace and her rich\nestates, hastened on a long journey a pilgrim to the cave at\nBethlehem, to hide herself by the cradle of the Infant Christ.\nOurs were Paul, Hilarion, Antony, those dear ancient solitaries.\nOurs was Satyrus, own brother to Ambrose, who, when shipwrecked,\njumped into the ocean, carrying about his neck in a napkin the\nSacred Host, and full of faith swam to shore (_Ambrose, Orat.\nfun. de Satyro_).\n\nOurs are the Bishops Martin and Nicholas, exercised in watchings,\nclad in the military garb of hair cloths, fed with fasts. Ours is\nBenedict, father of so many monks. I should not run through their\nthousands in ten years. But neither do I set down those whom I\nmentioned before among the Doctors of the Church. I am mindful of\nthe brevity imposed upon me. Whoever wills, may seek these\nfurther details, not only from the copious histories of the\nancients, but even much more from the grave authors who have\nbequeathed to memory almost one man one Saint. Let the reader\nreport to me his judgment concerning those ancient blessed\nChristians, to what doctrine they adhered, the Catholic or the\nLutheran. I call to witness the throne of God, and that Tribunal\nat which I shall stand to render reason for these Reasons, of\neverything I have said and done, that either there is no heaven\nat all, or heaven belongs to our people. The former position we\nabhor, we fix therefore upon the latter.\n\nNow contrariwise, if you please, let us look into hell. There are\nburnt with everlasting fire, who? The Jews. On what Church have\nthey turned their backs? On ours. Who again? The heathen. What\nChurch have they most cruelly persecuted? Ours. Who again? The\nTurks. What temples have they destroyed? Ours. Who once more?\nHeretics. Against what Church are they in rebellion? Against\nours. What Church but ours has opposed itself against all the\ngates of hell? When, after the driving away of the Hebrews,\nChristian inhabitants began to multiply at Jerusalem, what a\nconcourse of men there was to the Holy Places, what veneration\nattached to the City, to the Sepulchre, to the Manger, to the\nCross, to all the memorials in which the Church delights as a\nwife in what has been worn by her husband. Hence arose against us\nthe hatred of the Jews, cruel and implacable. Even now they\ncomplain that our ancestors were the ruin of their ancestors.\nFrom Simon Magus and the Lutherans they have received no wound.\nAmong the heathen, they were the most violent who, throughout the\nRoman Empire, for three hundred years, at intervals of time,\ncontrived most painful punishments for Christians. What\nChristians? The fathers and children of our faith. Learn the\nlanguage of the tyrant who roasted St. Lawrence on the gridiron:\n\n   That this is of your rites\n   The custom and practice, it has been handed down to memory:\n   This the discipline of the institution,\n   That priests pour libations from golden cups.\n   In silver goblets they say\n   That the sacred blood smokes;\n   And that in golden candlestick, at the nightly sacrifices,\n   There stand fixed waxen candles.\n   Then is it the chief care of the brethren,\n   As many-tongued report does testify,\n   To offer from the sale of estates,\n   Thousands of pence.\n   Ancestral property made over\n   To dishonest auctions,\n   The disinherited successor groans,\n   Needy child of holy parents.\n   These treasures are concealed in secret,\n   In corners of the churches;\n   And it is believed the height of piety\n   To strip your sweet children.\n   Bring out your treasures,\n   Which by evil arts of persuasion\n   You have heaped up and hold,\n   Which you shut up in darkling cave.\n   Public utility demands this,\n   The privy purse demands it, the treasury demands it,\n   That the soldiers may be paid for their services,\n   And the commander may benefit thereby.\n   This is your dogma, then:\n   Give every man his own.\n   Now Caesar recognises his own\n   Image, stamped on the coin.\n   What you know to be Caesar's, to Caesar\n   Give; surely what I ask is just.\n   If I am not mistaken, your Deity\n   Coins no money,\n   Nor when he came did he bring\n   Golden Jacobuses[3] with him;\n   But he gave his precepts in words,\n   Empty in point of pocket.\n   Fulfil the promise of the words\n   Which you sell the round world over.\n   Give up your hard cash willingly,\n   Be rich in words.\n\n(_Prudentius, Hymn on St. Lawrence_).\n\nWhom does this speaker resemble. Against whom does he rage? What\nChurch is it whose sacred vessels, lamps, and ornaments he is\npillaging, whose ritual he overthrows? Whose golden patens and\nsilver chalices, sumptuous votive offerings and rich treasure,\ndoes he envy? Why, the man is a Lutheran all over. With what\nother cloak did our Nimrods[4] cover their brigandage, when they\nembezzled the money of their Churches and wasted the patrimony of\nChrist? Take on the contrary Constantine the Great, that scourge\nof the persecutors of Christ, to what Church did he restore\ntranquillity? To that Church over which Pope Silvester presided,\nwhom he summoned from his hiding-place on Mount Soracte that by\nhis ministry he might receive our baptism. Under what auspices\nwas he victorious? Under the sign of the cross. Of what mother\nwas he the glorious son? Of Helen. To what Fathers did he attach\nhimself? To the Fathers of Nice. What manner of men were they?\nSuch men as Silvester, Mark, Julius, Athanasius, Nicholas. What\nseat did he ask for in the Synod? The last. Oh how much more\nkingly was he on that seat than the Kings who have ambitioned a\ntitle not due to them! It would be tedious to go into further\ndetails. But from these two [Emperors, Decius and Constantine],\nthe one our deadly enemy, the other our warm friend, it may be\nleft to the reader's conjecture to fix on points of closest\nresemblance to the one and to the other in the history of our own\ntimes. For as it was our cause that went through its agony under\nDecius, so our cause it was that came out triumphant under\nConstantine.[5]\n\nLet us look at the doings of the Turks. Mahomet and the apostate\nmonk Sergius lie in the deep abyss, howling, laden with their own\ncrimes and with those of their posterity. This portentous and\nsavage monster, the power of the Saracens and the Turks, had it\nnot been clipped and checked by our Military Orders, our Princes\nand Peoples,--so far as Luther was concerned (to whom Solyman the\nTurk is said to have written a letter of thanks on this account),\nand so far as the Lutheran Princes were concerned (by whom the\nprogress of the Turks is reckoned matter of joy),--this frantic\nand man-destroying Fury, I say, by this time would be\ndepopulating and devastating all Europe, overturning altars and\nsigns of the cross as zealously as Calvin himself. Ours therefore\nthey are, our proper foes, seeing that by the industry of our\nchampions it was that their fangs were unfastened from the\nthroats of Christians.\n\nLet us look down on heretics, the filth and fans and fuel of\nhell[6] the first that meets our gaze is Simon Magus. What did he\ndo? He endeavoured to snatch away free will from man: he prated\nof faith alone (Clen. lib. i. recog.; Iren. l. 1, c. 2). After\nhim, Novatian. Who was he? An Anti-pope, rival to the Roman\nPontiff Cornelius, an enemy of the Sacraments, of Penance and\nChrism. Then Manes the Persian. He taught that baptism did not\nconfer salvation. After him the Arian Aerius. He condemned\nprayers for the dead: he confounded priests with bishops, and was\nsurnamed \"the atheist\" no less than Lucian. There follows\nVigilantius, who would not have the Saints prayed to; and\nJovinian, who put marriage on a level with virginity; finally, a\nwhole mess of nastiness, Macedonius, Pelagius, Nestorius,\nEutyches, the Monothelites, the Iconoclasts, to whom posterity\nwill aggregate Luther and Calvin. What of them? All black\ncrows,[7] born of the same egg, they revolted from the Prelates\nof our Church, and by, them were rejected and made void.\n\nLet us leave the lower regions and return to earth. Wherever I\ncast my eyes and turn my thoughts, whether I regard the\nPatriarchates and the Apostolic Sees, or the Bishops of other\nlands, or meritorious Princes, Kings, and Emperors, or the origin\nof Christianity in any nation, or any evidence of antiquity, or\nlight of reason, or beauty of virtue, all things serve and\nsupport our faith. I call to witness the Roman Succession, _in\nwhich Church_, to speak with Augustine (_Ep_. 162: _Doctr.\nChrist_. ii. 8), _the Primacy of the Apostolic Chair has ever\nflourished_. I call to witness those other Apostolic Sees, to\nwhich this name eminently belongs, because they were erected by\nthe Apostles themselves, or by their immediate disciples. I call\nto witness the Pastors of the nations, separate in place, but\nunited in our religion: Ignatius and Chrysostom at Antioch;\nPeter, Alexander, Athanasius, Theophilus, at Alexandria; Macarius\nand Cyril at Jerusalem; Proclus at Constantinople; Gregory and\nBasil in Cappadocia; Thaumaturgus in Pontus; at Smyrna Polycarp;\nJustin at Athens; Dionysius at Corinth; Gregory at Nyssa;\nMethodius at Tyre; Ephrem in Syria; Cyprian, Optatus, Augustine,\nin Africa; Epiphanius in Cyprus; Andrew in Crete; Ambrose,\nPaulinus, Gaudentius, Prosper, Faustus, Vigilius, in Italy;\nIrenaeus, Martin, Hilary, Eucherius, Gregory, Salvianus, in Gaul;\nVincentus, Orosius, Ildephonsus, Leander, Isidore, in Spain; in\nBritain, Fugatius, Damian, Justus, Mellitus, Bede. Finally, not\nto appear to be making a vain display of names, whatever works,\nor fragments of works, are still extant of those who sowed the\nGospel seed in distant lands, all exhibit to us one faith, that\nwhich we Catholics profess to-day. O Christ, what cause can I\nallege to Thee why Thou shouldst not banish me from Thine own, if\nto so many lights of the Church I should have preferred\nmannikins, dwellers in darkness, few, unlearned, split into\nsects, and of bad moral character!\n\nI call to witness likewise Princes, Kings, Emperors, and their\nCommonwealths, whose own piety, and the people of their realms,\nand their established discipline in war and peace, were\naltogether founded on this our Catholic doctrine. What\nTheodosiuses here might I summon from the East, what Charleses\nfrom the West, what Edwards from England, what Louises from\nFrance, what Hermenegilds from Spain, Henries from Saxony,\nWenceslauses from Bohemia, Leopolds from Austria, Stephens from\nHungary, Josaphats from India, Dukes and Counts from all the\nworld over, who by example, by arms, by laws, by loving care, by\noutlay of money, have nourished our Church! For so Isaias\nforetold: _Kings shall be thy foster-fathers, and queens thy\nnurses_ (Isaias xlix. 23).\n\nListen, Elizabeth, most powerful Queen, for thee this great\nprophet utters this prophecy, and therein teaches thee thy part. I\ntell thee: one and the same heaven cannot hold Calvin and the\nPrinces whom I have named. With these Princes then associate\nthyself, and so make thee worthy of thy ancestors, worthy of thy\ngenius, worthy of thy excellence in letters, worthy of thy\npraises, worthy of thy fortune. To this effect alone do I labour\nabout thy person, and will labour, whatever shall become of me,\nfor whom these adversaries so often augur the gallows, as though I\nwere an enemy of thy life. Hail, good Cross. There will come,\nElizabeth, the day, that day which will show thee clearly which\nhave loved thee, the Society of Jesus or the offspring of Luther.\n\nI proceed. I call to witness all the coasts and regions of the\nworld, to which the Gospel trumpet has sounded since the birth of\nChrist. Was this a little thing, to close the mouth of idols and\ncarry the kingdom of God to the nations? Of Christ Luther speaks:\nwe Catholics speak of Christ. _Is Christ divided?_ (1 Cor. i.\n13). By no means. Either we speak of a false Christ or he does.\nWhat then? I will say. Let Him be Christ, and belong to them, at\nwhose coming in Dagon broke his neck. Our Christ was pleased to\nuse the services of our men, when He banished from the hearts of\nso many peoples--Jupiters, Mercuries, Dianas, Phoebades, and that\nblack night and sad Erebus of ages. There is no leisure to search\nafar off, let us examine only neighbouring and domestic history.\nThe Irish imbibed from Patrick, the Scots from Palladius, the\nEnglish from Augustine, men consecrated at Rome, sent from Rome,\nvenerating Rome, either no faith at all or assuredly our faith,\nthe Catholic faith. The case is clear. I hurry on.\n\nWitness Universities, witness tables of laws, witness the\ndomestic habits of men, witness the election and inauguration of\nEmperors, witness the coronation rites and anointing of Kings,\nwitness the Orders of Knighthood and their very mantles, witness\nwindows, witness coins, witness city gates and city houses,\nwitness the labours and life of our ancestors, witness all things\ngreat and small, that no religion in the world but ours ever took\ndeep root there.\n\nThese considerations being at hand to me, and so affecting me as\nI thought them over that it seemed the part of insolence, nay of\ninsanity, to renounce all this Christian company and consort\nwith the most abandoned of men, I confess, I felt animated and\nfired to the conflict, a conflict wherein I can never be worsted\nuntil it comes to the Saints being hurled from heaven and the\nproud Lucifer recovering heaven. Therefore let Chark, who\nreviles me so outrageously, be in better conceit with me, if I\nhave preferred to trust this poor sinful soul of mine, which\nChrist has bought so dearly, rather to a safe way, a sure way, a\nroyal road, than to Calvin's rocks or woodland thickets, there\nto hang caught in uncertainty.\n\nCONCLUSION\n\nYou have from me, Gentlemen of the University, this little\npresent, put together by the labour of such leisure as I could\nsnatch on the road. My purpose was to clear myself in your\njudgment of the charge of arrogance, and to show just cause for\nmy confidence, and meanwhile, until such time as along with me\nyou are invited by the adversaries to the disputations in the\nSchools, to give you a sort of foretaste of what is to come\nthere. If you think it a just, safe, and virtuous choice for\nLuther or Calvin to be taken for the Canon of Scripture, the Mind\nof the Holy Ghost, the Standard of the Church, the Pedagogue of\nCouncils and Fathers, in short, the God of all witnesses and\nages, I have nothing to hope of your reading or hearing me. But\nif you are such as I have pictured you in my mind, philosophers,\nkeen-sighted, lovers of the truth, of simplicity, of modesty,\nenemies of temerity, of trifles and sophisms, you will easily see\ndaylight in the open air, seeing that you already see the peep of\nday through a narrow chink. I will say freely what my love of\nyou, and your danger, and the importance of the matter requires.\nThe devil is not unaware that you will see this light of day, if\never you raise your eyes to it. For what a piece of stupidity it\nwould be to prefer Hanmers and Charks to Christian antiquity! But\nthere are certain Lutheran enticements whereby the devil extends\nhis kingdom, delicate snares whereby that hooker of men has\ncaught with his baits already many of your rank and station. What\nare they! Gold, glory, pleasures, lusts. Despise them. What are\nthey but bowels of earth, high-sounding air, a banquet of worms,\nfair dunghills. Scorn them. Christ is rich, who will maintain\nyou: He is a King, who will provide you: He is a sumptuous\nentertainer, who will feast you; He is beautiful, who will give\nin abundance all that can make you happy. Enrol yourselves in His\nservice, that with Him you may gain triumphs, and show yourselves\nmen truly most learned, truly most illustrious. Farewell. At\nCosmopolis, City of all the world, 1581.\n\nTHE END.\n\n[Footnote 1: Cf. Newman, _Lectures on Anglican Difficulties_,\nLect. xii.: \"I say, then, the writings of the Fathers, so far\nfrom prejudicing at least one man (J.H.N.) against the modern\nChurch, have been singly and solely the one intellectual cause of\nhis having renounced the religion in which he was born and\nsubmitted himself to her.\"]\n\n[Footnote 2: Richard Cheyne, Anglican bishop of Gloucester, to whom\nthere is extant a letter from Campion, dated 1 November, 1571.]\n\n[Footnote 3: The Latin is Philippos.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Seems to refer to the first Protestant bishops,\n_mighty hunters_ (Genesis x. 9) after place, and, to secure it, all\ntoo ready to alienate the manors and possessions of their see.]\n\n[Footnote 5: I have here paraphrased, as any literal translation\nwould have been hopelessly obscure to most modern readers.\nCampion could but hint darkly his comparison of the Elizabethan\npersecution to the Decian. The Latin runs: _Etenim, ut nostrorum\nilla fuit Epistasis turbulenta, sic nostrorum haec evasit divina\nCatastrophe_. _Epistasis_ is \"the part of the play where the\nplot thickens\" (Liddell and Scott). _Catastrophe_ is \"the turn\nof the plot\" (Id.).]\n\n[Footnote 6: _Faeces et folles et alumenta gehennae_.]\n\n[Footnote 7: _Mali corvi_.]","title":"Ten Reasons Proposed to His Adversaries for Disputation in the Name: of the Faith and Presented to the Illustrious Members of Our Universities","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":34662}