Ten Reasons Proposed To His Adversaries For Disputation In The Name Of The Faith And Presented To The Illustrious Members Of Our Universities By Edmund Campion

E-text prepared by Geoff Horton TEN REASONS PROPOSED TO HIS ADVERSARIES FOR DISPUTATION IN THE NAME OF THE FAITH AND PRESENTED TO THE ILLUSTRIOUS MEMBERS OF OUR UNIVERSITIES BY EDMUND CAMPION PRIEST OF THE SOCIETY OF THE NAME OF JESUS Nihil Obstat S. GEORGIUS KIERAN HYLAND, S.T.D, CENSOR DEPUTATUS Imprimatur + PETRUS EPUS SOUTHWARC CONTENTS INTRODUCTION RATIONES DECEM TRANSLATION INTRODUCTION Though Blessed Edmund Campion’s Decem Rationes has passed through forty-seven editions,[1] printed in all parts of Europe; though it has awakened the enthusiasm of thousands; though Mark Anthony Muret, one of the chief Catholic humanists of Campion’s age, pronounced it to be “written by the finger of God,” yet it is not an easy book for men of our generation to appreciate, and this precisely because it suited a bygone generation so exactly. Before it can be esteemed at its true value, some knowledge of the circumstances under which it was written, is indispensable.

1. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE Decem Rationes. The chief point to remember is that the Decem Rationes was the last and most deliberate free utterance of Campion’s ever-memorable mission. During the few months that mission lasted he succeeded in staying the full tide of victorious Protestantism, which had hitherto been irresistible. The ancient Church had gone down before the new religion, at Elizabeth’s accession twenty years before, with an apparently final fall, and since then the Elizabethan Settlement had triumphed in every church, in every school and court. The new generation had been moulded by it; the old order seemed to be utterly prostrate, defeated and moribund. Nor was it only at home that Protestantism talked of victory. In every neighbouring land she had gained or was gaining the upper hand. She had crossed the Border and subdued Scotland, she held Ireland in an iron grip, she had set up a new throne in Holland, she had deeply divided France, and had learned how to paralyze the power of Spain. What could stay her progress? Then a new figure appeared, a fugitive flying before the law. He was hunted backwards and forwards across the country, every man’s hand seemed against him. It was impossible to hold out for long against such immense odds, and he was in fact soon captured, mocked, maligned, sentenced and executed with contumely. Yet Campion and his handful of followers had meanwhile succeeded in doing what the whole nation, when united, had failed to do. He had evoked a spirit of faith and fervour, against which the violence of Protestantism raged in vain. He had saved the beaten, shattered fragments of the ancient host, and animated them with invincible courage; and his work endured in spite of endless assaults and centuries of persecution. The Decem Rationes is Campion’s harangue to those whom he called upon to follow him in the heroic struggle.
2. THE MAN AND THE MISSION. Thus much for the inspiration and general significance of Campion’s work considered as a whole. It will also repay a much more minute study, and to appreciate it we must enter into further details. As to the man himself, suffice it to say that he was a Londoner; his father a publisher; his first school Christ’s Hospital; that he was afterwards a Fellow of St. John’s, Oxford, and held at the same time an exhibition from the Grocer’s Company. At Oxford he accepted to some extent the Elizabethan Settlement of religion, but not sufficiently to satisfy the Company of Grocers, who eventually withdrew their exhibition. This was a sign for further inquisitorial proceedings, which made him leave the University, and retire to Dublin; but he was driven also thence by the zealots for Protestantism. Eventually he went over to the English College at Douay, whence he migrated to Rome, entered the Society of Jesus, and after eight years’ training had returned, a priest, to his native country, forty years old. His strong point was undoubtedly a singularly lovable character, and he possessed the gift of eloquence in no ordinary degree. For the rest, his natural qualities and acquired accomplishments were above the ordinary level, without reaching an extraordinary height. He was a man who never ceased working, and whose temper was always angelic, though he sometimes suffered from severe depression. He was adored by his pupils both at Oxford and in Bohemia. His memory was always bright, and his conversation always sparkled with fresh thoughts and poetical ideas. He composed with extraordinary facility in Latin prose and verse; but the extant fragments of these literary exercises do not strike us as being of unusual excellence, though genuinely admired in their day. He was certainly an ideal missioner: saintly, inspired, eloquent, untireable, patient, consumed with the desire for the success of his undertaking, and unfaltering in his faith that success would follow by the providential action of God, despite the obvious fact that all appearances were against him. Campion landed at Dover late in June, 1580, and reached London at the end of the month. There was an immediate rush to hear him, and Lord Paget was persuaded to lend his great hall at Paget House in Smithfield to accommodate a congregation for the feast of Saints Peter and Paul. The sermon was delivered on the text from the Gospel of the day, Tu es Christus, Filius Dei vivi. The hall was filled, and the impression caused by the sermon was profound; but the number of hearers had been imprudently large. Though no arrests followed, the persecutors took the alarm, and increased their activity to such an extent that large gatherings had for ever to be abandoned; and after a couple of weeks both Campion and Persons left London to escape the notice of the pursuivants, whose raids and inquisitorial searches were making the lot of Catholics in town unbearable, whereas in the country the pursuit was far less active, and could be much more easily avoided. The two Fathers met for the last time at Hoxton, then a village outside London, to concert their plans for the next couple of months, and were on the point of starting, each for his own destination, when a Catholic of some note rode up from London. This was Thomas Pounde, of Belmont or Beaumont, near Bedhampton, a landed gentleman of means, an enthusiastic Catholic, and for the last five years or so a prisoner for religion. Mr. Pounde’s message in effect was this. “You are going into the proximate danger of capture, and if captured you must expect not justice, but every refinement of misrepresentation. You will be asked crooked questions, and your answers to them will be published in some debased form. Be sure that whatever then comes through to the outer world will come out poisoned and perverted. Let me therefore urge you to write now, and to leave in safe custody, what you would wish to have published then, in case infamous rumours should be put about during your incarceration, rumours which you will then not be able to answer or to repudiate.” Father Persons seems to have agreed at once. Campion at first raised objections, but soon, with his ever obliging temper, sat down at the end of the table and wrote off in half an hour an open letter To the Lords of Her Majesty’s Privy Council, afterwards so well known as Campion’s Challenge.
3. THE CHALLENGE. Campion, after finishing his letter and taking copy for himself, had consigned the other copy to Pounde. Persons had done the same; but whereas the latter took the precaution to seal his letter, Campion had handed over his unfastened. Then the company broke up. Persons made a wide circle from Northampton round to Gloucester, while Campion made a smaller circle from Oxfordshire up to Northampton. When they got back to town in September, they found all the world discussing “the Challenge.” What had happened was that proceedings had been taken by the Ecclesiastical Commission against Pounde, and he had been committed to solitary confinement in the ruinous castle of Bishop’s Stortford. Before he left London he began to communicate the letter to others, lest it should be altogether lost, and as soon as it was thus published it attracted everyone’s attention, and his adversaries had ironically christened it the challenge. The word was indeed one which Campion had used, but he had employed it precisely in order to avoid any charge that might have arisen, of being combative and presumptuous. Thus in the course of three months Campion, as it were in spite of himself, had filled England with his name and with the message he had come to announce, and he had reduced his adversaries to a very ridiculous position. They had been dared to meet him in disputation, and this they feared to do. In effect, they in their thousands were hiding their heads in the sand, while their constables and pursuivants were raiding the houses of Catholics on every side in hopes of catching the homeless wanderer, and of stopping his mouth by violence. The pulpits, of course, rang with outcries against the newcomer, and in his absence his doctrines were rent and scoffed at; but, as Campion said in a contemporary letter, “The people hereupon is ours, and the error of spreading that letter abroad hath done us much good.” This was the first popular success which the Catholics had scored for years; and after so many years of oppression some popular success was of immense importance to the cause. Father Persons, in a contemporary letter, says that the Government found that there were 50,000 more recusants that autumn than they had known of before. The number is, of course, a round one, and is possibly much exaggerated, but it gives the Catholic leader’s view of the advantage won at this time. We may now turn to The Challenge itself, the only piece of Campion’s English during this his golden period, which has survived. [TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE, THE LORDS OF HER MAJESTIE’S PRIVY COUNCIL] RIGHT HONOURABLE: Whereas I have come out of Germanie and Boemeland, being sent by my Superiors, and adventured myself into this noble Realm, my deare Countrie, for the glorie of God and benefit of souls, I thought it like enough that, in this busie watchful and suspicious worlde, I should either sooner or later be intercepted and stopped of my course. Wherefore, providing for all events, and uncertaine what may become of me, when God shall haply deliver my body into durance, I supposed it needful to put this writing in a readiness, desiringe your good Lordships to give it ye reading, for to know my cause. This doing I trust I shall ease you of some labour. For that which otherwise you must have sought for by practice of wit, I do now lay into your hands by plaine confession. And to ye intent that the whole matter may be conceived in order, and so the better both understood and remembered, I make thereof these ix points or articles, directly, truly and resolutely opening my full enterprise and purpose. i. I confesse that I am (albeit unworthie) a priest of ye Catholike Church, and through ye great mercie of God vowed now these viii years into the Religion of the Societie of Jhesus. Hereby I have taken upon me a special kind of warfare under the banner of obedience, and eke resigned all my interest or possibilitie of wealth, honour, pleasure, and other worldlie felicitie. ii. At the voice of our General Provost, which is to me a warrant from heaven, and Oracle of Christ, I tooke my voyage from Prage to Rome (where our said General Father is always resident) and from Rome to England, as I might and would have done joyously into any part of Christendome or Heathenesse, had I been thereto assigned. iii. My charge is, of free cost to preach the Gospel, to minister the Sacraments, to instruct the simple, to reforme sinners, to confute errors–in brief, to crie alarme spiritual against foul vice and proud ignorance, wherewith many my dear Countrymen are abused. iv. I never had mind, and am strictly forbidden by our Father that sent me, to deal in any respect with matter of State or Policy of this realm, as things which appertain not to my vocation, and from which I do gladly restrain and sequester my thoughts. v. I do ask, to the glory of God, with all humility, and under your correction, iii sortes of indifferent and quiet audiences: the first before your Honours, wherein I will discourse of religion, so far as it toucheth the common weale and your nobilities: the second, whereof I make more account, before the Doctors and Masters and chosen men of both Universities, wherein I undertake to avow the faith of our Catholike Church by proofs innumerable, Scriptures, Councils, Fathers, History, natural and moral reasons: the third before the lawyers, spiritual and temporal, wherein I will justify the said faith by the common wisdom of the laws standing yet in force and practice. vi. I would be loth to speak anything that might sound of any insolent brag or challenge, especially being now as a dead man to this world and willing to put my head under every man’s foot, and to kiss the ground they tread upon. Yet have I such a courage in avouching the Majesty of Jhesus my King, and such affiance in his gracious favour, and such assurance in my quarrel, and my evidence so impregnable, and because I know perfectly that no one Protestant, nor all the Protestants living, nor any sect of our adversaries (howsoever they face men down in pulpits, and overrule us in their kingdom of grammarians and unlearned ears)[2] can maintain their doctrine in disputation. I am to sue most humbly and instantly for the combat with all and every of them, and the most principal that may be found: protesting that in this trial the better furnished they come, the better welcome they shall be. vii. And because it hath pleased God to enrich the Queen my Sovereign Ladye with notable gifts of nature, learning, and princely education, I do verily trust that–if her Highness would vouchsafe her royal person and good attention to such a conference as, in the ii part of my fifth article I have motioned, or to a few sermons, which in her or your hearing I am to utter,–such manifest and fair light by good method and plain dealing may be cast upon these controversies, that possibly her zeal of truth and love of her people shall incline her noble Grace to disfavour some proceedings hurtful to the Realm, and procure towards us oppressed more equitie. viii. Moreover I doubt not but you her Highness’ Council being, of such wisdom and discreet in cases most important, when you shall have heard these questions of religion opened faithfully, which many times by our adversaries are huddled up and confounded, will see upon what substantial grounds our Catholike Faith is builded, how feeble that side is which by sway of the time prevaileth against us, and so at last for your own souls, and for many thousand souls that depend upon your government, will discountenance error when it is bewrayed, and hearken to those who would spend the best blood in their bodies for your salvation. Many innocent hands are lifted up to heaven for you daily by those English students, whose posteritie shall never die, which beyond seas gathering virtue and sufficient knowledge for the purpose, are determined never to give you over, but either to win you heaven, or to die upon your pikes. And touching our Societie be it known to you that we have made a league–all the Jesuits in the world, whose succession and multitude must overreach all the practices of England–cheerfully to carry the cross you shall lay upon us, and never to despair your recovery, while we have a man left to enjoy your Tyburn, or to be racked with your torments, or consumed with your prisons. The expense is reckoned, the enterprise is begun; it is of God, it cannot be withstood. So the faith was planted: so it must be restored. ix. If these my offers be refused, and my endeavours can take no place, and I, having run thousands of miles to do you good, shall be rewarded with rigour, I have no more to say but to recommend your case and mine to Almightie God, the Searcher of Hearts, who send us His grace, and set us at accord before the day of payment, to the end we may at last be friends in heaven, when all injuries shall be forgotten.

“Direct, true, and resolute,” Campion’s words certainly are, and they are calculated in a remarkable degree to reassure and animate his fellow Catholics and their friends, and it is for them in reality, rather than for the Lords of the Council, that the message is composed. If the composition has a fault it is its combativeness; and in effect, though this drawback was not felt at the time, it was later. Subsequent missionaries found it best to adopt a policy of far greater secrecy and silence. If, however, we remember that Campion intended his paper to be published under quite different circumstances, we can see that he at least hardly deserves the reproach of being contentious, or if he does, his failing was venial when we consider the tastes of the age. The immediate result of the publication was without question a great success. THE “DECEM RATIONES.” Like a wise general, Father Persons at once bethought himself how best to follow up the good beginning already made. Accordingly, when he and Campion met at Uxbridge (for it was not safe for Campion to come to London), he suggested that the latter, seeing that his memory was still green at Oxford, should compose a short address on the crisis to the students of the two Universities. Campion met the suggestion as he had met the suggestion of Pounde, with a gentle disclaimer, “alleging divers difficulties,” but soon good-humouredly assented on the condition (not a usual one with literary men) that someone else should propose the subject. The company therefore made various suggestions, none of which met with general acceptance, until Campion proposed “Heresy in Despair.” “Whereat,” adds Persons, “all that were present could not choose but laugh, and wonder to see him fall upon that argument at such a time when heresy seemed most of all to triumph.” In truth, with England invincible at sea and on land, and the absolute sway of Elizabeth, Cecil, and Walsingham over both Church and State, what more hopeful position for Protestantism could have been imagined? Campion’s meaning, of course, was that Protestantism was in despair of holding the position of the ancient Church; of ruling in the hearts of a free people; of co-existing with Christian liberty. It was unworthy, therefore, of the acceptance of minds that aspired to mental freedom, as did the youth of the Universities. This subject for an address was welcomed with acclamation, and Campion promised to undertake it, suggesting on his side that Persons should arrange ways and means for printing the tract when finished, and any other which might seem needed. This agreed to, all separated once more, and Campion rode northwards on a tour which he took in Derbyshire, Yorkshire, and Lancashire, and which was not over for six months. Meantime Father Persons had set up his “magic press” near London, and issued from it five volumes of small size indeed, but of remarkable vigour and merit. As soon as any notable attack was made on the Catholics, an answer was brought out in a wonderfully short time, and these answers were pithy, vigorous, and pointed, in no ordinary degree. When one remembers how much co-operation is needed to bring out even the slightest volume, one is truly astonished at the feat of bringing out so many and such good ones, while the hourly fear of capture, torture, and death hung over the heads of all. When threatened with danger in one place the press was bodily transported to another. However, our business at present is not with Persons, but with Campion. His book was finished and sent up to Persons in March, 1581, with a title altered to suit the controversy which had already begun. It was now Decem Rationes: quibus fretus, certamen adversariis obtulit in causa Fidei, Edmundus Campianus &c. “Ten Reasons, for the confidence with which Edmund Campion offered his adversaries to dispute on behalf of the Faith, set before the famous men of our Universities.” Persons was charmed, as he had expected to be, with its literary grace. It was in Latin, as had been agreed, and Campion’s Latin prose, (though critics of our time find it somewhat silvery and Livian), suited the tastes of that day to perfection. The only thing which made Persons at all thoughtful was the number of references. Campion declared that he was sure he had verified them, as he entered them in his notebook, but Persons, with greater caution, declared that they must be verified anew. The difficulty of this for men living under the ban, and cut off from access to large libraries, was of course great, but through the help of others, especially through Mr. Thomas Fitzherbert of Swynnerton, the task was happily accomplished. Campion came up from the north to Stonor, on the Oxfordshire border where the secret press then was; and there, amid a thousand fears, alarms and dangers, the book was printed. 5. THE PRINTING. Of the actual preparations for printing the Ten Reasons, Persons gives this account in his memoirs[3]: Persons was of opinion that Campion should come up to London immediately after Easter [March 26th] to examine the passages quoted, and to assist the print. Meanwhile Persons began to prepare new means of printing, making use of friends and in particular of a certain priest called William Morris, a learned and resourceful man, who afterwards died in Rome.[4] This was necessary, as the first press near London, where the first two books had been printed, had been taken down. Eventually and with very great difficulty he found, after much trying, a house belonging to a widow, by name Lady Stonor, in which she was not living at that time. It was situated in the middle of a wood, twenty miles from London. To this house were taken all things necessary, that is, type, press, paper, &c., though not without many risks. Mr. Stephen Brinkley, a gentleman of high attainments both in literature and in virtue, superintended the printing. Father Campion then coming to London, with his book already revised, went at once to the house in the wood, where the book was printed and eventually published. Persons too went down to stay with him for some days to take counsel on their affairs.

Stonor Park, to which Campion and Persons had betaken themselves,[5] is still in the possession of the old Catholic family of that name, of which Lord Camoys is the representative. Father Morris says that “the printing, according to the traditions of the place, was carried on in the attics of the old house.”[6] Being near Henley it was possible to go there by road or by water, and one might come and go on the Oxford high-road without attracting attention. Still there was grave risk of discovery from the noise made by the press, and from the number of extra men about the house, as to the fidelity of each of whom it was impossible to be absolutely sure. Day by day the dangers thickened round them. One evening, soon after their arrival, William Hartley, a priest and afterwards a martyr, who was helping in the work, and had then just come back from a visit to Oxford, mentioned casually that Roland Jenks, the Catholic stationer and book-binder there, was again in trouble, having been accused by his own servant. Jenks was doubtless known to all Oxford men, indeed but three years before his name had been noised all over Europe. He had been sentenced to have his ears cut off for some religious offence, when the Judge was taken ill in the court itself, and, the infection travelling with marvellous rapidity, the greater part both of the bench and of the jury were stricken down with gaol fever, and two judges, twelve justices, and other high officials, almost the whole jury, and many others, died within the space of two days.[7] In mentioning Jenks’s new troubles Hartley probably did not realize the extent of the danger to the whole party which they portended. Persons had in fact employed the very servant who had now turned traitor, to bind a number of books for him at his house near Bridewell Church, London, which with all its contents was thus in a perilous condition. Early next morning an express messenger was sent in to town with orders to hide or destroy Persons’ papers and other effects. It was already too late: that very night the house had been searched, and Persons’ letters, books, vestments, rosaries, pictures, and other pious objects, had all fallen into the hands of the pursuivants. Worse still, Father Alexander Briant, afterwards a martyr, and one of the brightest and most lovable of the missionaries, was seized next door, and hurried off first to the Counter, then to the Tower, where he was repeatedly and most cruelly racked to make him say where Persons might be found. Information about his torture was brought to the Jesuits at Stonor, and one can easily see how grave and disturbing such bad news must have been. “For almost the whole of one night,” says Persons, “Campion and I sat up talking of what we had better do, if we should fall into their hands. A fate which befell him soon after.” The Registers of the Privy Council inform us that their Lordships gave orders to have Jenks sent up to London on the 28th of April. This settles approximately the date of the beginning of the printing at Stonor, and the book was not finished till nearly the end of June. So the work lasted about nine weeks, a fairly long period when we consider the smallness of the Latin book, here reproduced. It will, however, be shown from intrinsic evidence, that the stock of type was very small. The printers had to set up a few pages at a time, to correct them at once, and to print off, before they could go any further. Then they distributed the type and began again. When all was finished they rapidly stabbed and bound their sheets. Considering the fewness of the workmen[8] and the unforeseen delays which so often occur during printing, the time taken over the production does not seem extraordinary. For many years no example of the original edition of the Decem Rationes was known to exist: none of our great public libraries in London or at the Universities possesses a copy. But it was the singular good fortune of the late Marquess of Bute to pick up two copies of this extremely rare volume, and he munificently presented one of them to Stonyhurst College. Canon Gunning of Winchester is the happy owner of a third copy. By the courtesy of the Rector of Stonyhurst, I am able to offer a minute description of the precious little book. The volume is, considering the printing of that time, distinctly well got up. There is nothing at first sight to suggest that its publication had been a matter of so much difficulty and danger; but when one scrutinizes every page with care, one finds that it bears about it some traces of the unusual circumstances under which it was produced. If we look first for the water-mark in the paper we shall find that it is the pot–the ordinary English sign; a proof, if one were needed, that the book was really printed in this country. The sheets run from A to K (with prefixed [double-dagger]), in fours, 16mo; the folios are 44, of which 39 are numbered (but by accident the pagination is omitted from 1 to 4 and 40 is blank as well as the fly-leaves). Let us think of what this means. Eleven signatures for 44 folios, 16mo, means that only eight pages 16mo went into each printing frame, or, in other words, that the frame was so small that it would have been covered by half a folio sheet, 9 by 13 inches. They probably printed off each little sheet by itself, for if they had had a larger frame so as to print an entire folio sheet–then we should have found in the finished book that the water-mark would recur once in each sixteen pages. In point of fact, however, it only recurs irregularly in the first, fifth, and tenth gathering. This could not have occurred unless the sheets used were of half folio size. A Greek fount was evidently wanting. Campion was fond, after the fashion of scholars of that day, of throwing into his Latin letters a word or two of Greek, which in his autograph are written, as Mr. Simpson has remarked, with the facility of one familiar with the language. Here on fol. 24 a we find adynata, where [Greek: adunata] would have been in Campion’s epistolary manner. Again, on fol. 4 b he quotes, “Hic calix novum testamentum in sanguine meo, qui (calix) pro vobis fundetur,” and in the margin Poterion Ekchynomenon, in Italics, where Greek script, if obtainable, would obviously have been preferred. A further indication of the difficulties under which type had been procured is seen in the use of a query sign of a black-letter fount (i.e. [different question mark]) instead of the Roman fount (i.e.,?). This will be the more readily comprehended when we remember that Father Persons’ books, which Brinkley had printed before, were in English, and that English prose was then still generally printed in Gothic character[9]. So Persons also made use of it in order that there might be nothing in his books to strike the eye as unusual in books of that class. Campion’s volume on the other hand being in Latin, it was necessary to procure a new set of “Roman” type. The use of the black-letter query-signs would not at once attract attention, so they were kept, though all else was changed. A further trace of the difficulty in finding type is found in the signs for a, e, diphthong. This combination recurred very frequently in Latin, and the printers had very few of them. Very soon after starting we find them substituting for Roman an Italic diphthong, [ae ligature] also o, e ([oe ligature]), and even e, an ordinary mediaeval form of the sign. It will be noticed that these substitutions become increasingly frequent, as we approach fol. 12 (end of signature C), fol. 32 (end of signature H), and 36 (end of signature I), whereas as soon as the next signature begins the fount of [ae ligature] is ready to hand again. The conclusion to be deduced is that leaves C, H, and I were each printed off, and the type distributed, before the setting up of D, I, and K could be proceeded with. This illustrates what has been said before of the very small stock of type in the printing establishment. Another slight peculiarity ought perhaps to be noticed: it is the accentuation of the Latin. Adverbs, for instance, are generally accented on the last syllable, e.g., doctiu’s, facile’, qua’m, eo’, quo’: the rule, however, is by no means regularly kept. But this has evidently nothing to do with the peculiar conditions under which Campion’s book was produced, and is to be accounted for by the use of accents in other publications of the same class. Nothing was then definitely settled about the accentuation of either French, Italian, or Latin, and Campion’s volume does but reproduce the uncertainty on the matter which was everywhere prevalent. Whilst the printers were contending with the difficulties arising from the smallness of their stock of type, difficulties which no doubt caused vexatious and dangerous delays, Campion and Persons resumed their missionary labours with vigour. In his Memoirs Persons writes:

Whilst the preparations were being made Campion preached unweariedly, sometimes in London, sometimes making excursions. There was one place [that of the Bellamy’s] whither we often went, about five miles from London, called Harohill. In going thither we had to pass through Tyburn. But Campion would always pass bareheaded, and making a deep bow both because of the sign of the Cross, and in honour of some martyrs who had suffered there, and also because he used to say that he would have his combat there.[10]

Father Bombino[11] managed to find out some further details. Mrs. Bellamy’s house, he tells us, had a good library, and as to Campion’s conduct at Tyburn, he explains that the shape of the gallows was a triangle, supported at its three angles by three baulks of timber; the tie-beams, however, suggested to Campion the Cross of Christ. From the State Papers we hear of other families and places said to have been visited by Campion at this period: the Prices, of Huntingdon; Mr. William Griffith, of Uxbridge; Mr. Edwin East, of Bledlow, Bucks; Lady Babington, at Twyford, Bucks; Mr. Dormer, at Wynge, and Mrs. Pollard.[12] In spite of alarms, dangers, and interruptions, the work of printing was concluded without mishap. The method of publication was singular. Hartley took the bulk of the copies to Oxford, where the chief academical display of the year, the Act, as it was called, was taking place in St. Mary’s, on several successive days. Hartley, coming in at the end of the first day, waited for every one to go out, then slipped his little books under the papers left on the seats, and was gone. Next morning he entered with the rest, and soon saw that his plan had been perfectly successful. The public disputation began, but the attention of the audience was elsewhere. There was whispering and comparing notes, and passing about of little books, and as soon as the seance was over, open discussion of Campion’s “Reasons.” Hartley did not wait for more, but rode back to Stonor with the news that the book had surely hit its mark. At Oxford, as Father Persons says, many remembered and loved the man, or at least knew of his gentle character, and of the career he had abandoned to become a Catholic missionary. The book recalled all this; and to those who were able to enter into its spirit it preached with a strange penetrating force. By all the lovers of classical Latin, and there were many such at that day, it was read greedily. The Catholics and lovers of the old Faith received it with enthusiasm, but a still more valid testimony to its power was given by the Protestant Government, which gave orders to its placemen that they should elaborate replies. These replies drew forth answers from the Catholics, and the controversy lasted for several years. Mr. Simpson has included an outline of this controversy in his Life of Campion, and to it I may refer my readers, having nothing substantial to add to his account. 6. CRITICISM. It would not be necessary for me to say more about its success, except that to us nowadays, the Rationes will not seem at all so remarkable as it did to our ancestors. Religious controversy, in itself, does not much interest us moderns; and those who will read Latin merely to enjoy the style are very few. But in the sixteenth century, as Sir Arthur Helps truly says, men found in the thrill of controversy the interest they now take in novels. At that time, too, of all literary charms, that of good Latin prose was by far the most popular, and the language was still the “lingua franca” of the learned all the world over. Once we get so far as to appreciate that both subject and style were in its favour, the popularity of the volume will seem natural enough, for it is bright, pointed, strong, full of matter, bold, eloquent, convincing. Without attempting anything like a complete account of the reception of the book by the public, I may mention as the most obvious proof of its popularity, that more strenuous endeavours were made (so far as I can discover) to answer it than were made in the case of any other assault upon the Elizabethan religious settlement. Lord Burghley himself, the chief minister of the Crown, called upon the Bishop of London, perhaps the most forward man then on the episcopal bench, to use all endeavours to ensure the publication of a sufficient answer. Finally they appointed the Regius Professors of Divinity both at Oxford and at Cambridge to provide for the occasion, and it took both of these a long series of months to propound their answers to Campion’s tract, which is only as long as a magazine article. Speaking broadly, we may say that this was the most that Elizabeth’s Establishment could do officially; and besides this, there were sermons innumerable, and pamphlets not a few by lesser men, as well as disputations in the Tower, of which more must be said later. This hostile evidence is so striking and so ample that it might seem unnecessary to allege more, but I attach a great deal more importance to the praise of theologians of Campion’s own faith: for, in the first place this is much harder to obtain than the attention of the persons attacked. Secondly, those who are acquainted with Catholic theological criticism are at first surprised to find what very severe critics Catholic theologians are one of another. In this case, where the writer had from the nature of his task to make so much use of rhetorical arguments, allusions, irony, and unusual forms of expression, there was more than usual chance of fault being found, especially as every possible thorny subject is introduced somehow, and that in terms meant to please not Roman theologians, but Oxford students. Evidently there was danger here that critics should or might be severe, or at least insist on certain changes and emendations. In fact the work was received with joy, and reprinted frequently and with honour. I have lately found a letter in its commendation from the Cardinal Secretary of State of that day, and Muret, as we have heard, perhaps the greatest humanist then living in the Catholic ranks, described it as “Libellum aureum, vere digito Dei scriptum.” 7. THE DISPUTATIONS. The publication of the Decem Rationes was the last act of Campion’s life of freedom. He was seized the very next week, and after five months of suffering was martyred on 1 December, 1581. During that prolonged and unequal struggle against every variety of craft and violence the Ten Reasons continued to have their influence, and on the whole they were extremely helpful, for they enabled the martyr to recover some ground which he had lost while under torture. During those awful agonies he confessed to having found shelter in the houses of certain gentlemen. It is certain that these names were all known to the Government before, and that he was not betraying any secret. Nevertheless the gentlemen in question were at once seized, imprisoned and fined, on the alleged evidence of Campion’s confessions only. This of course caused much scandal among Catholics, and so long as he lay lost in the Tower dungeons, unpleasant rumours about his constancy could not be effectively contradicted. Thus far Elizabeth’s ministers had gained an advantage, which Pounde had foretold they were likely to win. But the remedy he had suggested also proved effective. Though under ordinary circumstances Elizabeth’s ministers “meant nothing less” than having the disputation requested, nevertheless now that Campion was so terribly shaken and reduced, they hoped that they might arrange some sort of a meeting, which might in show correspond with what had been demanded in the Decem Rationes, and yet leave them with a certain victory. They were emboldened too, by finding that their prisoner was not after all, such a particularly learned man. He had never been a professor of theology, or written or made special studies, beyond the ordinary course which in those days was not a long one. It was, therefore, settled that four disputations should be held in the Tower of London. Theology was still taught at Oxford and Cambridge in something of the old mediaeval method and in syllogistic form. The men who were pitted against Campion had lately been, or were still, examiners at the Universities. Nor is it to be denied for a moment that they did their work well. The attack never faltered. Their own side quite believed they had won. The method they adopted was this. They assumed the role of examiners, and starting with the Decem Rationes before them, they plied Campion with crabbed texts, and obscure quotations from the Fathers. Then they cut short his answers, and as soon as one had examined for one quarter of an hour, another took his place, for they were anxious above all things to avoid defeat. The number of topics broached and left unsettled surpasses belief, indeed the scene was one of utter confusion, taunts, scoldings, sneers–a very, very different test from the academic argumentation, which Campion had requested. The martyr did not show any remarkable erudition, indeed all opportunity to do so was carefully shut off. No University, I fancy, would have given him a chair of theology on the strength of his replies on that occasion. There was more than one premature assertion of victory on the Protestant side. But when the Catholic and Protestant accounts are compared, one sees that the advantages won against Campion were slight. They evidently hoped that by vigorous and repeated attacks they would at last puzzle or bear him down. But they were never near this. He was always fresh and gay, never in difficulties, or at the end of his tether. He stands out quite the noblest, the most sympathetic and important figure in those motley assemblies. The Catholics were delighted. They succeeded in getting their own report of the disputations, which is still extant, and they would have printed it, if they had been able. Philip, Earl of Arundel, by far the most important convert of that generation, was won over by what he heard in those debates. On the whole then we must say that, if Campion did not come off gloriously, he at least acquitted himself well and honourably, and distinctly gained by the conflict. Offers of disputation were not the ideal way of forwarding a mission such as his. Nevertheless, in his case, despite circumstances the most adverse, the result had proved advantageous. It had greatly strengthened and encouraged his own followers, and that was in reality the best that could then be expected. Incidentally too the adverse rumours, which had gained ground during his seclusion, were dissipated. It was clear that, though he might have been deceived, his constancy was unconquerable. Thus Campion’s Challenge and his Ten Reasons not only contain the message of his mission enunciated with characteristic eloquence, but the delivery of each message is an history-making event, big with dramatic consequences. The controversy about his book did not die with him, but continued for some years, until it was merged into the standing controversy between the two religions. We cannot describe it here. Suffice it to say that Mr. Simpson, in the Appendix to his Edmund Campion enumerates not less than twenty works, which appeared in those controversies between 1581 and 1585. The chief defender of Father Campion’s writings was Father Robert Drury, S.J., but all his biographers also have something to say on the subject. The chief opponents are William Charke, Meredith Hanmer, William Fulke, Laurence Humphrey, William Whitaker, R. Stoke, John Field, Alexander Nowell, and William Day. Some further information on the whole subject may be found in articles by the late Father Morris and myself in The Month for July 1889, January 1905, and January 1910. [J.H.P.] [Footnote 1: Of these four are in English translations, dated 1606 (by Richard Stock), 1632, 1687, and 1827. The present translation is thus the fifth into Campion’s mother tongue. Though each of the quaint old versions has its merits, and some do not lack charm, not one would adequately represent Campion to the modern reader. A new translation was a necessity–may I not say, a most happy one–seeing that Father Joseph Rickaby was at hand to satisfy it. [J.H.P.]] [Footnote 2: The meaning is–“The ministers tyrannize over us, as if we were a kingdom of unlearned schoolboys, listening to a teacher of grammar.”] [Footnote 3: Catholic Record Society IV., 14-17.] [Footnote 4: Father Bombino calls him Richard Morris, and says he went into exile and lived with Allen first at Rheims, and afterwards at Rome, where he died in the English College. (Vita Campiani, p. 139)] [Footnote 5: Father Morris identified the lady who let or lent Stonor Park, with Dame Cecilia Stonor, daughter of Leonard Chamberlain. Father Persons describes her as a widow, and if so, the Sir Francis, then alive, was not her husband, but her son. Both father and son had the same Christian name.] [Footnote 6: On the other hand, Mr. Thomas Edward Stonor, in a correspondence to be mentioned immediately, says that there were no definite traditions as to the actual locality of the press.] [Footnote 7: Challoner, Missionary Priests, Introd. p. 12.] [Footnote 8: As five printers were subsequently arrested, we know their names, and they deserve to be recorded here, viz., Stephen Brinkley, John Harris, John Hervey, John Tuker, John Compton. Allen speaks of seven workmen. Diary of the Tower and Douay Diary.] [Footnote 9: The custom however was already changing, and “Roman” type soon afterwards came into general use.] [Footnote 1: Memoirs, i. cap. 24; Collectanea P. fol. 155.] [Footnote 11: Bombino, Vita Campiani 1620, p.136. Some of Bombino’s additions are not, perhaps, arranged in their true chronological order. He tells us, for instance, a propos of Brinkley’s difficulties in getting printers, that he had to dress them, and give them horses to ride, like gentlemen. But he does not make it clear whether these were the men who printed the Ten Reasons, or Persons’ previous works. Bombino says that Brinkley paid for the type, &c., but Allen, in a contemporary letter, says that George Gilbert had left a fund for these purposes. Bombino says the printing of the Decem Rationes was commenced at Brinkley’s own house at Green Street, and had to be removed because one of the servants was arrested in London, and tortured to make him confess, which he heroically refused. Campion and Persons knowing of the torture, not of the man’s constancy, at once removed the press. But Persons’ Memoirs ascribes this incident to an earlier period. (Domestical Difficulties, p. 119; Autobiography for 1581).] [Footnote 12: Simpson, p. 217, following Lansdowne MSS. xxx. 78] RATIONES DECEM QVIBVS FRETVS B. EDMVNDVS CAMPIANVS CERTAMEN ADVERSARIIS OBTVLIT IN CAVSA FIDEI, REDDITAE ACADEMICIS ANGLIAE. EPISTOLA [1] AD REGINAE ANGLIAE CONSILIARIOS, QUA PROFECTIONIS SUAE IN ANGLIAM INSTITUTUM DECLARAT, ET ADVERSARIOS AD CERTAMEN PROVOCAT Quandoquidem, viri ornatissimi, a Germania et Bohemia revocatus, non sine ingenti vitae meae periculo, in hoc florentissimum Angliae regnum, dulcissimam patriam meam, tandem aliquando perveni, pro Superiorum meorum voluntate, Dei gloriam et animarum salutem promoturus; verisimile esse putavi, me turbulento hoc, suspicioso ac difficillimo tempore, sive citius, sive aliquanto tardius, in medio cursu abreptum iri. Quapropter ignarus quid de me futurum sit, quum Dei permissu in carceres et vincula forte detrudendus sim, ad omnem eventum scriptum hoc condidi: quod ut legere, et ex eo causam meam cognoscere velitis, etiam atque etiam rogo. Fiet enim, ut hac re non parvo labore liberemini, dum quod multis ambagibus inquirere vos audio, id totem aperta confessione libere expromo. Atque ut rem omnem, quo melius et intelligi, et memoria comprehendi queat, compendio tradam, in novem omnino capita eam dispertiar.

1. Profiteor me, quamvis indignum, Ecclesiae Catholicae sacerdotem, et iam octo abhinc annis magna Dei misericordia in Societatem nominis Iesu cooptatum, peculiare quoddam belli genus sub obedientiae vexillo suscepisse; ac simul me omni divitiarum, honorum et aliorum huiusmodi bonorum spe, et habendi potestate, abdicasse.
2. Generalis Praepositi nostri decreto (quod ego tamquam mandatum coelitus missum, et a Christo ipso sancitum veneror), Praga Romam, ubi Generalis nostri perpetua sedes est; Roma deinde in Angliam contendi: qua animi alacritate etiam in quamcumque aliam orbis terrarum partem, sive ad christianos, sive ad infideles, profectus fuissem, si me ad eam profectionem superiores mei designassent.
3. Negotium mihi commisum tale est, ut gratis Evangelium administrem, rudes in fide instituam, flagitiosos a scelere ad meliorem vitae rationem traducam, errores convellam; et, ut summatim omnia complectar, pugnae spiritualis signum tuba canam, atque alacriter adversus foeda flagitia et superbam ignorationem, qua innumeri cives mei, quos intimis animi visceribus complector, oppressi iacent, depugnem.
4. Numquam mihi animus fuit, imo et a Patribus, qui me miserunt, severe prohibitum mihi est, ut ne reipublicae ac politicae huius regni administrationis negotiis me immisceam: nam et aliena haec sunt a vocationis meae instituto, et iis animum cogitationesque meas libenter avoco.
5. Quamobrem vestra clementia fretus, ad gloriam Dei tria non minus aequa, quam ab omni pacis et tranquillitatis reipublicae perturbatione aliena, concedi mihi et permitti humillime postulo. Primum est, ut Dominationes vestrae, pro sua et reipublicae dignitate, me pro religione disserentem audire non graventur. Alterum, quod et cumprimis desidero, et maximi momenti esse arbitror, ut mihi liceat in consessu doctorum, magistorum et utriusque Academiae virorum insignium, sacrosanctae theologiae professorum, verba facere. Promitto me catholicae Ecclesiae fidem invictis rationibus et sacrarum Scripturarum, Conciliorum, Patrum atque historiarum auctoritate, ac denique ex ipsa tum naturali, tum morali philosophia efficaciter demonstraturum et defensurum. Tertium, ut audiar ab utriusque iuris, sive canonici, sive civilis, peritis, quibus eamdem fidei veritatem, legum, quae etiamnum vigent, testimonio atque auctoritate comprobabo.
6. Nollem equidem quidquam proferre, quod insolentem provocationem aut arrogantiam aliquam prae se ferret; quum et mundo mortuus iam sim, et ex animo paratus promtusque, ut me ad cuiusvis pedes abiiciam ac vestigia etiam exosculer. Tantus tamen animus mihi est pro gloria et maiestate Regis mei Iesu amplificanda, tanta in eius favore fiducia, tanta denique in causae aequitate et firmissimorum argumentorum ac probationum robore confidentia, (quum certo sciam nullum protestantium, nec omnes simul iunctos, nec ullam adversariorum factionem, quantumvis imperitam multitudinem et grammaticos quosdam adolescentulos, apud quos insigniter debacchantur, in errorem inducant, posse dogmata sua disputatione aut tueri aut probare); ut cum illis omnibus, vel cum eorum quolibet, vel cum antesignanis ex omni illorum numero delectis, ultro me offeram congressurum; bona fide protestans eo mihi gratius fore certamen, quo melius instructi accesserint.
7. Et quoniam Dominus Deus Dominam meam reginam, eximiis naturae, eruditionis ac regiae educationis dotibus exornare voluit, si sua Maiestas huiusmodi auditionem, qualem in quinto articulo secundo loco efflagitavi, sua regali praesentia et benigna attentione cohonestare dignaretur, sperarem sane, me articulos controversos optima methodo et perspicuis argumentis ita illustrare, atque ab omnibus fallaciarum involucris quibus constricti sunt, explicare posse, ut zelo veritatis et amore, quo sua Maiestas populum complectitur, mediocriter eius animum inclinarem, quum ad plurimas res, quae regno suo non parum detrimenti afferunt, damnandas et reiiciendas, tum ad nos catholicos, misere iamdui oppressos, maiore aequitate prosequendos.
8. Neque vero dubium mihi est quin vos, ornatissimi consiliari S. M., quum in maximi momenti negotiis praeclare ac sapienter agere soleatis, ubi has de fide controversias, quas adversarii nostri non sine fuco et confuse plerumque pertractant, bona fide delectas et fuco nudatas perspexeritis, luce meridiana clarius cognituri sitis, quam solidis et firmis fundamentis fides catholica nitatur. Et quia e contrario protestantium argumenta sunt omnino frivola et infirma, quae temporis iniquitate vim aliquam contra nos habere putantur; futurum spero, ut vestrarum animarum et innumerabilium aliarum, quae a vestro nutu et exemplo pendent, miserti, ab huiusmodi falsorum dogmatum architectis et doctoribus facies vestras animumque ipsum avertatis, ac nobis, qui vitam nostram pro vesta salute alacriter profundere parati sumus, aequiori et magis propitia mente auscultetis. Multae innocentes manus quotidie et sine intermissione pro vobis in coelum attolluntur. Haec in vos studia sunt eorum Anglorum, qui in provinciis transmarinis numquam interiturae posteritatis patres, virtuti et eruditioni adquirendae dant operam; omninoque secum statuerunt, a salute vestra promovenda non prius absistere, quam vel animas vestras Christo lucrifecerint, vel lanceis vestras confixi generose occubuerint. Et quidem quod ad Societatem nostram attinet, velim sciatis, omnes nos, qui sumus de Societate Iesu, per totum terrarum orbem longa lateque diffusi, (quorum continua successio et multitudo omnes machinationes vestras anglicas facile superabit), sanctum foedus iniisse ut cruces, quas nobis iniicietis, magno animo feramus, neque umquam de vestra salute desperemus, quamdiu vel unus quispiam e nobis supererit, qui Tiburno[2] vestro fruatur, atque suppliciis vestris excarnificari, carceribusque squalere et consumi possit. Iampridem inita ratio est, divinique numinis auspicio inchoatum certamen; nulla vis, nullus impetus adversariorum superabit. Hac ratione consita et tradita olim fides est, eadem in pristinam dignitatem revocari et restitui debet. Quod si hoc scriptum meum, quod offero, reiicitur, nec benevoli conatus mei quidquam possint efficere, et pro itinere multorum millium milliarium vestri causa suscepto, ingratum animum experiar; id unum agendum mihi supererit, ut vos causamque meam Deo scrutatori cordium commendem: quem quidem ex animo precor, ut nobis tantisper gratiam suam impertiri velit, qua ante extremum remunerationis diem in unam sententiam conspiremus; et ut tandem aliquando in coelo, ubi nulla erit iniuriarum memoria, amicitia sempiterna perfruamur. PREFATIO EDMUNDUS CAMPIANVS DOCTISSIMIS ACADEMICIS OXONII FLORENTIBVS ET CANTABRIGIAE, S. P. D. Anno praeterito, quum ex instituto vitae meae iussus in hanc insulam remeassem, clarissimi viri, offendi sane fluctus haud paulo saeviores in anglicano littore, quam quos in oceano brittannico recens a tergo reliqueram. Mox interiorem in Angliam ubi penetrassem, nihil familiarius, quam inusitata supplicia; nihil certius, quam incerta pericula. Collegi me, ut potui, memor causae, memor temporum. Ac ne prius forte corriperer, quam auditus a quopiam fuissem, scripto protinus mandavi consileum meum, qui venissem, quid quaererem, quod bellum, et quibus, indicere cogitarem Autographum apud me habui, ut mecum, si caperer, caperetur; exemplum eius apud amicum deposui, quod, me quidem nesciente, pluribus communicatum est. Adversarii publicatam schedulam atrociter acceperunt quum caetera, tum illud invidiosissime criminantes, quod unus omnibus in hoc religionis negotio certamen obtulissem; quamquam solus non eram futurus, si fide publica disputassem. Responderunt postulatis meis Hammerus et Charcus. Quid tandem? Otiose omnia. Nullum enim responsum, praeter unum, honeste dabunt, quod numquam dabunt: “Conditiones amplectimur, Regina spondet, advola.” Interea clamant isti: “Sodalitium tuum, seditiones tuas, arrogantiam tuam, proditorem, sine dubio proditorem.” Ridicule. Operam et oleum et famam homines non insipientissimi cur profundunt? Verum his duobus, (quorum prior animi causa meam chartam delegit, in quam incurrerat; alter malitiosius totam rem convolvit), praebitus nuper est libellus admodum luculentus, qui quantum oportuit, tantum et de Societate nostra, et de horum iniuriis, et de provincia, quam sustinemus, edisserit. Mihi supererat, (quoniam, ut video, tormenta, non scholas, parant antistites), rationem facti mei vobis ut probarem; capita rerum, quae mihi tantum fidentiae pepererunt, quasi digito fontes ostenderem. Vos etiam hortarer, quorum interest praeter caeteros, incumbatis in hanc curam, quam a vobis Christus, Ecclesia, respublica et vestra salus exigunt. Ego si fretus ingenio, litteris, arte, lectione, memoria, peritissimum quemque adversarium provocavi fui vanissimus et superbissimus, qui neque me, necque illos inspexerim; sin causam intuitus, existimavi satis me valentem esse, qui docerem hunc solem meridie lucere, debetis mihi fervorem istum concedere, quem honor Iesu Christi, Regis mei, et invicta veritas imperarunt. Scitis M. Tullium in Quintiana, quum Roscius victoriam adpromitteret, si efficeret argumentis, septingenta millia passuum non esse decursa biduo, non modo nihil veritum articulos et nervos Hortensii, sed ne grandiores quidem Hortensio, Phillipos, et Cottas, et Antonios, et Crassos, quibus maximam dicendi gloriam tribuebat, metuere potuisse. Est enim quaedam veritas tam illustris et perspicua, ut eam nullae verborum rerumque praestigiae possint obruere. Porro liquidius est quod nos agimus, quam illa fuit hypothesis Rosciana. Nam si hoe praestitero: coelos esse, divos esse, fidem esse, Christum esse, causam obtinui. Hic ego non sim animosus? Equidem occidi possum, superari non possum, iis enim Doctoribus insisto, quos ille Spiritus erudiit, qui nec fallitur, nec vincitur. Quaeso a vobis ut salvi esse velitis. A quibus hoc impetraro, reliqua minime dubitanter expecto. Date modo vos huic sollicitudini, Christum obtestamini, industriam adiungite; profecto sentietis id, quod res est, et adversarios desperare, et nos, tam solide fundatos, quieto magnoque animo hanc arenam expetere oportere. Brevior hic sum, quod reliquo sermone vos alloquor. Valete. RATIONES OBLATI CERTAMINIS Ego dabo vobis os et sapientiam, cui non poterunt resistere et contradicere omnes adversarii vestri. Luc. xxi. 15. Rationum capita.
9. Sacrae Litterae.
10. Sacrarum Litterarum sententia.
11. Natura Ecclesiae.
12. Concilia.
13. Patres.
14. Fermamenta Patrum.
15. Historia.
16. Paradoxa.
17. Sophismata.
18. Omne genus testium. PRIMA RATIO SACRAE LITTERAE. Quum multa sunt, quae adversariorum diffidentiam in causa loquuntur, tum nihil aeque atque sanctorum maiestas Bibliorum foedissime violata. Etenim qui, posteaquam reliquorum testium voces et suffragia contempserunt, eo sunt redacti nihilo secius, ut stare nequeant, nisi divinis ipsis codicibus vim et manus intulerint; ii se profecto declarant extrema fortuna confligere, et rebus iam desperatis ac perditis, experiri durissima velle atque ultima. Manicheis[3] quid causae fuit, ut “Evangelium Matthei et Acta refigerent Apostolica?” Desperatio. His enim voluminibus cruciabantur, et qui Christum negaverant prognatum de Virgine, et qui Spiritum christianis tum primo coelitus illapsum finxerant quum ipsorum Paracletus, Persa nequissimus, erupisset. Quid Ebioniis,[4] ut omnes Pauli repudarient epistolas? Desperatio. His enim suam dignitatiem retinentibus, antiquata circumcisio est, quam isti revocaverant. Quid Luthero[5] ut Epistolam Iacobi “contentiosam, tumidam, aridum, stramineam,” flagitiosus apostata nominaret, et “indignam spiritu censeret apostolico?” Desperatio. Hoc enim scripto confessus miser atque disruptus est, quum “in sola fide iustitiam, constitueret.” Quid Lutheri catulis, ut Tobiam, Ecclesiasticum, Machabaeos, et horum odio complures alios eadem calumnia comprehensos, e sincero canone repente dispungerent? Desperatio. His enim oraculis disertissime coarguuntur, quoties de angelorum patrocinio, quoties de arbitrii libertate, quoties de fidelibus vita defunctis, quoties de Divorum hominum intercessione disputant. Itane vero? Tantum perversitatis, tantum audaciae? Quum Ecclesiam, concilia, cathedras, Patres, martyres, imperia, populos, leges, academias, historias, omnia vetustatis et sanctitatis vestigia conculcassent, scripto Dei verbo tantum controversias velle dirimere proclamassent, illud ipsum verbum, quod solum restiterat, exsectis e toto corpore tam multis, tam bonis, tam speciosis, partibus, delumbasse? Septem enim ipsos de veteri Testamento[6] codices, ut minuta dissimulem, calviniani praeciderunt; lutherani vero etiam epistolam Iacobi, et huius invidia quinque alias;[7] de quibus aliquando fuerat et alicubi controversum. His quoque libellum Estheris et tria capita Danielis adnumerant novissimi Genuenses; quae quidem Anabaptistae, istorum condiscipuli, iam pridem damnaverant atque deriserant. Quanto modestius Augustinus,[8] qui sacrosanctum catalogum pertexens, non sibi neque alphabetum hebraicum, ut Iudaei; neque privatum spiritum, ut Sectarii, pro regula posuit; sed illum Spiritum, quo totum corpus Ecclesiae Christus animat. Quae quidem Ecclesia custos huius depositi, non magistra, quod haeretici cavillantur, thesaurum hunc universum quem Tridentina[9] Synodus est amplexa, vetustissimis olim conciliis publicitus vindicavit. Idem Augustinus,[10] de una Scripturarum particula speciatim disserens, inducere in animum non potest, librum Sapientiae, qui iam tum Ecclesiae calculo, temporum serie, priscorum testimonio instinctione fidelium, ut firmus et canonicus robur obtinuerat, cuiusquam temeritate vel susurro extrudi extra canonem oportere. Quid ille nunc diceret, si viveret in terris, et Lutheros Calvinosque concerneret opifices bibliorum, qui sua lima politula et elegantula vetus novumque Testamentum raserint; neque Sapientiam tantum, sed et alia permulta de canonicorum librorum ordine segregaverint: ut quidquid ex horum officina non prodierit, illud ad omnibus phrenetico decreto tamquam incultum et horridum conspuatur? Ad hoc tam dirum et exsecrabile perfugium qui descenderunt, ii certe licet in ore suorum asseclarum volitent, sacerdotia nundinentur declamitent in concione, ferrum in catholicos, equuleum crucemque consciscant; tamen victi, abiecti, squalidi, prostrati sunt: quandoquidem arrepta virgula censoria, veluti arbitri sedentes honorarii, divinas ipsas tabulas, si quae ad stomachum non fecissent, obliterant. Ecquis est vel mediocriter institutus, qui talium cuniculos hostium reformidet? Qui homines quamprimum in corona vestra, eruditorum hominum, ad eiusmodi veteratorias artes, tamquam ad familiarem daemonem currerent, non aurium convicio sed strepitu pedum exciperentur. Quaererem ab eis, verbi gratia, quo iure corpus biblicum detruncent atque diripiant? Respondent: non se veras Scripturas exscindere, sed excernere supposititias. Quo iudice? Spiritu sancto. Hoc enim responsum a Calvino[11] praescribitur, ut Ecclesiae iudicium, quo spiritus examinantur, subterfugiat. Cur igitur alios alii lancinatis, quum omnes eodem Spiritu gloriemini? Calvinianorum spiritus recipit sex epistolas, quae spiritui non placent lutherano; freti tamen uterque sancto Spiritu. Anabaptistae historiam Iobi fabulam[12] appellant, tragicis et comicis legibus intermixtam. Qui sciunt? Spiritu docente. Castalio[13] mysticum illud Salomonis Canticum, quod ut paradisum animae, ut manna reconditum, ut opiparas in Christo delicias catholici admirantur, nihilo pluris quam cantilenam de anicula, et cum pedissequis aulae colloquium amatorium venereus furcifer aestimavit. Vnde hausit? A spiritu. In Apocalypsi Ioannis, cuius omnes apices excelsum aliquid et magnificum sonare confirmat Hieronymus,[14] tamen Lutherus[15] et Brentius et Kemnitius quiddam, nescio quid, difficiles aristarchi desiderant; eo scilicet propendentes, ut exautoretur. Quem percontati? Spiritum. Quatuor Evangelia fervore praepostero Lutherus[16] inter se committit, et prioribus tribus Epistolas Pauli longe praeferens, “unicum” deinceps “Evangelium Ioannis, pulchrum, verum, praecipuum” decernit esse nominandum; quippe qui, quod in ipso fuit, libenter etiam Apostolos suarum rixarum socios adscripsisset. Quo doctore? Spiritu. Quin etiam iste fraterculus[17] non dubitavit Evangelium Lucae petulanti stylo perstringere, quod in eo crebrius bona nobis virtutum opera commendentur. Quem interrogavit? Spiritum. Theodorus Beza ex Lucae vigesimo secundo capite : “Hic calix, novum testamentum, in meo sanguine, qui (calix) pro vobis fundetur, potaerion enchunomenon>,” ausus est ut corruptum vitiatumque traducere, quod haec oratio nullam expositionem, nisi de vino calicis converso in verum Christi sanguinem, patiatur. Quis indicavit? Spiritus. Denique quum omnia credant suo quisque spiritui, nomen sancti Spiritus horribili blasphemia mentiuntur. Qui sic agunt, nonne se produnt? Nonne facile refutantur? Nonne in concessu talium virorum, quales estis Academici, tenentur ac minimo negotio constringuntur? Cum his ego timeam pro fide catholica disputare, qui pessima fide voces non humanas, sed aethereas tractavere? Nihil hic dico, quae vertendo perverterint quamvis intolerabilia sint, quae accusem. Gregorio Martino, scientissimo linguarum, collegae meo, qui doctius et plenius hoc praestabit, nihil praeripio, nec aliis, quibus id laboris esse iam prae manibus intellexi. Facinorosius crimen est ac tetrius, quod nunc persequor. Inventos esse doctorculos, qui temulento quodam impetu in coeleste chirographum involarint; idipsum pluribus locis, ut maculatum, ut mancum, ut falsum, ut subreptitium condemnarint; eius partes aliquas correxerint, aliquas corroserint, aliquas evulserint. Hinc omne propugnaculum, quo muniebatur, in lutheranos spiritus, tamquam in valla phantasmatum pictosque parietes commutarint; ne prorsus obmutescerent, quum in Scripturas, erroribus suis infestas, impingerent, quas nihilo commodius expedire, quam sorbere favillas, aut saxa mandere, potuissent. Haec ergo mihi prima ratio vehemens et iusta fuit quae ubi partes adversarias umbraticas et fractas ostendisset, animum sane addidit viro et christiano et in his studiis exercitato, pro sempiterni Regis diplomate adversus reliquias profligatorum hostium decertandi. SECVNDA RATIO SACRARVM LITTERARVM SENTENTIA Alterum est, quod me quidem ad congressum incitarit, et horum apud me copiolas elevarit, adversarii perpetuum in Scripturis exponendis ingenium, plenum fraudis, inane prudentiae. Statim haec, philosophi, tangeretis. Itaque vos auditores expetii. Sciscitemur ab adversaras, exempli gratia, quidnam sequuti novam sectam intriverint, qua Christus excluditur e coena mystica? Si nominant Evangelium, accurrimus. A nobis verba sunt:[18] “Hoc est corpus meum. Hic est calix meus.” Qui sermo visus est ipsi Luthero[19] tam potens, ut quum etiam discuperet fieri Zuinglianus, quod ea re plurimum incommodare Pontifici potuisset, captus tamen et victus apertissimo contextu, cederet; neque minus invitus Christum vere praesentem in Sacramento sanctissimo fateretur, quam olim daemones, victi miraculis, Christum Dei Filium vociferati sunt.[20] Agedum, pagella scripta superiores sumus; de sententia scripti contenditur. Hanc pervestigemus ex verbis adiacentibus:[21] “Corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Sanguis meus, qui pro multis effundetur.” Adhuc durissimae partes Calvini sunt, nostrae faciles et explicatae. Quid amplius? Conferte Scripturas, inquiunt. Conspirant Evangelia,[22] Paulus adstipulatur; voces, clausulae, tota connexio panem, vinum, insigne miraculum, coeleste pabulum, carnem, corpus, sanguinem, reverenter ingeminant. Nihil aenigmaticum, nihil offusum caligine loquendi. Tamen perstant adversarii, neque finem faciunt altercandi. Quid agimus? Opinor, audiatur antiquitas; et quod nos alteris alteri suspecti non possumus, illud omnium saeculorum veneranda canities, Christo propior, ab hac lite remotior, decidat arbitrio. Non ferunt: prodi se aiunt. Dei verbum purum, purum, inclamant; hominum commentarios aversantur. Insidiose inepte. Dei verbum perurgemus, obscurant; Divos testamur interpretes, obsistunt. In summa, sic instituunt, nisi reorum iudicio steteris, nullum iudicium fore. Atque ita se gerunt in omni, quam exercemus, controversia, de infusa gratia, de inhaerente iustitia, de Ecclesia conspicua, de necessitate Baptismatis, de Sacramentis et Sacrificio, de piorum meritis, de spe et timore, de peccatis imparibus, de auctoritate Petri, de clavibus, de votis, de conciliis evangelicis, de caeteris. Scripturas neque paucas et ponderosa catholici passim in libris, in colloquiis, in templis, in schola citavimus atque discussimus; eluserunt. Veterum scholia graecorum et latinorum admovimus; abnuerunt. Quid tum denique? Doctor Martinus Lutherus, aut vero Phillippus, aut certe Zuinglius, aut sine dubio Calvinus et Bezza, fideliter enarrarunt. Egone quemquam vestrum existimen tam esse mucosis naribus, qui hoc artificium, monitus, non persentiscat? Quare fateor me scholas Academicas cupide requirere, ut inspectantibus vobis, calamistratos istos milites, in solem et pulverem e suis umbraculis evocatos, non meis viribus, qui cum vestris centesima parte non sum conferendus, sed valentissima causa et certissima veritate debilitem. TERTIA RATIO NATVRA ECCLESIAE Audito iam Ecclesiae nomine, hostis expalluit. Sed tamen excogitavit quiddam, quod a vobis animadverti volo, ut falsi ruinam et inopiam cognoscatis. Senserat in Scripturis tum propheticis, tum apostolicis, ubique honorificam Ecclesiae fieri mentionem: vocari civitatem sanctam (Apoc. xxi. 10), fructiferam vineam (Ps. lxxix.9), montem excelsum (Isai. ii. 2), directam viam (Ibid. xxxv. 8), columbam unicam (Cant. vi. 8), regnum coeli (Matth. xiii. 24), sponsam (Cant. iv. 8), et corpus Christi (Eph. v. 23 et 1 Cor. xii. 12), firmamentum veri (1 Tim. iii. 15), multitudinem illam, cui Spiritus promissas instillet omnia salutaria (Ioan. xiv. 26): illam, in quam universam nullae sint umquam fauces diaboli morsum letiferum impacturae (Matth. xvi. 18); illam, cui quicumque repugnet, quantumvis ore Christum praedicet, non magis Christi, quam publicanus aut ethnicus (Matth. xviii. 17), potiatur. Non est ausus contravenire sonitu, videri noluit Ecclesiae, quam toties Scripturae commemorant, refragari; nomen callide retinuit, rem ipsam funditus, definiendo, sustulit. His enim proprietatibus delineavit Ecclesiam, quae penitus ipsam occulant, et dimotam a sensibus tamquam ideam platonicam, secretis obtutibus hominum perpaucorum subiiciant[23]; eorum tantummodo, qui singulariter afflati, corpus hoc aerium intelligentia comprehenderent, et huiusce sodalitatis participes subtili quodam oculo lustrarent. Vbi candor? Vbi simplicitas. Quae Scripturae, quae sensa, qui Patres, hoc penicillo depingunt Ecclesiam? Sunt Christi ad Asiaticas ecclesias (Apoc. i. 2, 3), sunt Petri, Pauli, Ioannis, aliorum ad diversos epistolae; frequentes in Actis Apostolicis inchoantur et propagantur ecclesiae (Act. viii. 10, 11 et seq.). Quid istae? Num soli Deo et sanctis hominibus, an christianis etiam cuiuscumque generis, manifestae? Sed profecto durum telum necessitas est. Ignoscite. Nam qui saeculis omnino quindecim, non oppidam, non villam, non domum reperiunt imbutam doctrina sua, donec infelix monachus (Lutherus) incesto connubio votam Deo virginem funestasset; aut Helvetius gladiator (Zuinglius) in patriam coniurasset; aut stigmaticus perfuga (Calvinus) Genevam occupasset; ii coguntur Ecclesiam, si quam volent, in latebris venditare, et eos parentes asserere, quos nec ipsi noverint, neque mortalium quisquam aspexerit. Nisi forte gaudent maioribus illis, quos haereticos fuisse liquet, ut Aerio, Ioviniano, Vigilantio, Helvidio, Iconomachis, Berengario, Valdensibus, Lolhardo, Wiclefo, Hussio; a quibus pestifera quaedam fragmenta dogmatum emendicarint. Nolite mirari, si fumulos istos non pertimui, quos, modo ad meridianam lucem venero, minime fuerit laboriosum dispellere. Haec est enim nostra sermocianatio. Dic mihi: subscribis Ecclesiae, quae saeculis anteactis viguit?–Omnino.–Obeamus ergo terras et tempora. Cui?–Coetui fidelium.–Quorum?–Nomina nesciuntur, sed constat plurimos exstitisse.–Constat? Quibus constat?–Deo.–Quis dicit?–Nos, qui divinitus edocti sumus.–Fabulae qui credam?–Si arderes fide, tam scires hoc, quam te vivere. /* Spectatum admissi, risum teneatis? Iuberi christianos omnes adiungere se Ecclesiae, cavere ne spiritali gladio trucidentur, in domo Dei pacem colore, huic animas credere columini veritatis, istic querelas omnes deponere, hinc eiectos habere pro ethnicis; nescire tamen tot centinis, tot homines, ubinam illa sit, quive huc pertineant? Vnum illud crepare in tenebris, ubi ubi sit Ecclesia, tantummodo sanctos et in aethera destinatos ea contineri? Ex quo fit ut, si quis imperium sui Praesulis detrectare velit, scelere solvatur, dummodo sibi persuadeat presbyterum in crimen incidisse, et ab Ecclesia protinus excidisse. Quum scirem adversarios talia comminisci, quod nullius aetatis Ecclesiae consuessent, et orbatos tota re, velle tamen inter angustias vocabulum possidere, solabar me vestro acumine, atque adeo mihi pollicebar, fore ut quamprimum huiusmodi technas ex ipsorum confessione cerneretis, statim homines ingenui et cordati stultas argutias in vestram intextas perniciem exscinderetis. QVARTA RATIO CONCILIA Gravis, Ecclesia nascente, quaestio de legitimis caeremoniis, quae credentium animos disturbavit, coacto Apostolorum et seniorum concilio, soluta est. Credidere parentibus filii, pastoribus oves, in haec verba mandantibus[24]: “Visum est Spiritui sancto et nobis.” Sequuta sunt ad extirpandam haeresim, quae varia quibusque saeculis pullulavit, oecumenica veterum Concilia quatuor, tantae firmitudinis, ut iis ante annos mille singularis honos tamquam divinis vocibus, haberetur[25]. Non abibo longius. Etiam domi nostrae, comitiis regni eadem Concilia pristinum ius inviolatamque dignitatem obtinent. Haec citabo, teque ipsam[26], Anglia, dulcissima patria, contestabor. Si, quemadmodum prae te fers, quatuor ista Concilia reverebere, summum honorem primae sedis Episcopo, id est, Petro, deferes:[27] incruentum corporis et sanguinis Christi sacrificium in altari recognosces:[28] beatos Martyres, divosque omnes coelites, ut pro te Christo supplicent, obsecrabis:[29] mulierosos apostatas ab infando concubitu et incestu publico coercebis:[30] multa facies, quae demoliris; multa, quae facis, infecta voles.[31] Porro Synodos aliorum temporum, nominatim vero Tridentinam, eiusdem auctoritatis ac fidei cum primis illis fuisse, quando usus venerit, demonstraturum me spondeo atque recipio. Auctus igitur Conciliorum omnium valido et exquisito praesidio, cur non ingrediar in hanc palaestram animo tranquillo et praesenti, observaturus adversarium, quo se proripiat? Nam et evidentissima producam, quae distorquere non poterit, et probatissima, quae respuere non audebit. Fortasse verbosius loquendo diem extrahere conabitur; sed ab intentis hominibus, si vos rego bene novi, nec aures nec oculos compilabit. Quod si quis erit omnino tam demens, qui se unum opponat Senatoribus orbis terrae, et iis quidem omni exceptione maioribus, sanctioribus, doctioribus, vetustioribus; libenter aspiciam illud os, quod ubi vobis ostendero, reliqua cogitationibus vestris relinquam. Interim hoc monebo; qui pleno Concilio, rite atque ordine consummato, momentum et pondus abrogat, videri mihi nullo consilio, nullo cerebro; neque solum in theologicis tardum, sed etiam in politicis inconsultum. Si umquam Dei Spiritus illuxit Ecclesiae, certe illud est tempus immitendi Numinis, quum omnium ecclesiarum, quae sunt in terris patentissimae, religio, maturitas, scientia, sapientia, dignitas, unam in urbem confluxerint, adhibitisque modis omnibus divinis et humanis, quibus indagari veritas possit, promissum implorent Spiritum,[32] quo salutariter et prudenter sanciat. Prosiliat nunc aliquis factionis haereticae magistellus, attollat supercilia, suspendat nasum, frontem perfricet, iudicesque suos scurriliter ipse iudicet. Quos ille ludos, quos iocos dabit? Repertus est Lutherus,[33] qui diceret, anteferre se Consiliis duorum suffragia bonorum et eruditorum hominum (putatote suum et Phillippi), si quando in Christi nomine consensissent. O circulos! Repertus est Kemnitius[34], qui concilium Tridentinum ad suos vertiginis importunae calculos exegerit; quid lucratus? Infamiam. Dum iste nictaverit, sepelietur cum Ario; Tridentina Synodus quo magis inveterascet, eo magis in dies eoque perennius efflorescet. Bone Deus! quae gentium varietas, qui delectus episcoporum totius orbis, qui regum et rerumpublicarum splendor, quae medulla theologorum, quae sanctitas, quae lacrymae, quae ieiunia, qui flores academici, quae linguae, quanta subtilitas, quantus labor, quam infinita lectio, quantae virtutum et studiorum divitiae augustum illud sacrarium impleverunt? Audivi ego Pontifices exsultantes, et in his Antonium, archiepiscopum Pragensem, a quo sum creatus presbyter, amplissimos et prudentissimos viros, quod in ea schola haesissent aliquot annis, ut nullum Ferdinandi Caesaris, cui multum debuerant, regalius et uberius in se beneficium colerent, quam hoc fuit quod in Tridentino gymnasio legati ex Pannonia consedissent. Intellexit hoc Caesar, qui reversis ita gratulatus est: “Aluimus vos in schola optima.” Huc invitati fide publica, cur non properarunt adversarii, ut eos palam refellerent, in quos ranunculi coaxant e cavernulis?–Hussio et Hieronymo fregere fidem, inquiunt–Qui?–Constantiensis Concilii proceres–Falsum est: nullam dedere. Sed nec in Hussium tamen animadversum fuisset, nisi homo perfidiosus et pestilens, retractus ex fuga, quam ei Sigismundus Imperator periculo capitis interdixerat, violatis etiam conditionibus, quas scripto pepigerat cum Caesare, vim omnem illius diplomatis enervasset. Fefellit Hussium praecipitata malitia. Iussus enim, quum barbaras in sua Bohemia tragoedias excitasset, semetipsum sistere Constantiae, despexit praerogativam Concilii; securitatem periit a Caesare, Caesar obsignavit, christianus orbis resignavit maior Caesare. Redire ad mentem haeresiarcha noluit: periit. Hieronymus vero Pragensis furtim venit Constantiam, protectus a nemine; deprehensus comparuit, peroravit, habitus est perbenigne, liber abiit quo voluit, sanatus est, haeresim eiuravit, relapsus est, exustus est. Quid toties unum exemplum de sexcentis exagitant? Repetant annales suos. Martinus ipse Lutherus (a. 1518) odium Dei et hominum, Augustae positus coram Cardinale Caietano, nonne quod potuit, eructavit, et Maximiliani litteris communitus excessit? Idem accitus Wormatiam (a. 1521), quum et Caesarem et plerosque Imperii principes haberet infensos, nonne Caesaris verbo tutus fuit? Postremo lutheranorum et zuinglianorum capita, praesente Carolo quinto, haereticorum hoste victore, domino, nonne datis induciis confessiones suas innovatas exhibuere comitiis Augustanis, et sospites abiere? Haud secus litterae Tridientinae locupletissimas adversario cautiones providerant:[35] uti noluit. Nimirum se iactat in angulis in quibus ubi tria verba graeca sonuerit, sapere videatur; abhorret a luce, quae litteratorem in numero poneret, et ad honesta subsellia devocaret. Catholicis Anglis tale chirographum impunitatis impetrent, si diligunt salutem animarum. Nos Hussium non causabimur; verbo Principis innixi, convolabimus. Sed ut, unde sum egressus, eo regrediar, Concilia generalia mea sunt, primum, ultimum, media; his pugnabo. Hastam exspectet adversarius amentatam, quam avellere numquam poterit. Prosternatur in eo satanas, Christus vivat. QVINTA RATIO PATRES Antiochiae, qua primum in urbe Christianorum nobile cognomentum increbuit, Doctores,[36] id est, eminentes theologi; et Prophetae, id est, concionatores perquam celebres, floruerunt. Huiusce generis “scribas et sapientes, doctos in regno Dei, nova promentes et vetera,”[37] Christum callentes et Moysem, Dominus ipse futuros gregi prospexerat. Hos, ingentis beneficii loco donatos, explodere, quanti maleficii est? Explosit adversarius. Quid ita? Quia stantibus illis, concidisset. Id ego quum pro certissimo comperissem, pugnam simpliciter exoptavi, non illam iocularem, qua turbae velitantur in compitis, sed istam severam et acrem, qua congredimur in vestris Philosophorum spatiis: /*-pede pes, densusque viro vir. Ad Patres si quando licebit accedere, confectum est praelium; tam sunt nostri, quam Gregorius ipse decimus tertius, filiorum Ecclesiae Pater amantissimus. Nam ut omittam loca sparsa, quae ex monumentis veterum conquisita, nostram fidem apposite affirmateque propugnant; tenemus horum integra volumina, quae de industria religionem, quam tuemur, evangelicam distincte copioseque dilucidant. Duplex Hierarchia Martyris Dionysii[38] quas classes, quae sacra, quos ritus edocet? Pupugit ea res Lutherum[39] tam valde, ut huius opera “simillima somniis, nec non perniciosissima” iudicaret. Imitatus parentem Caussaeus,[40] nescio quis terrae filius, ex Gallia, non est veritus hunc Dionysium, inclytae gentis Apostolum, vocitare “delirum senem.” Centuriatores[41] vehementer offendit Ignatius et Calvinum,[42] ut in eius epistolis “deformes naevos, et putidas naenias” hominum quisquiliae notarint. Censoribus[43] illis “fanaticum quiddam” Irenaeus edixit; Clemens auctor Stromatum “zizania faecesque protulit;”[44] reliqui Patres huius aevi, sane apostolici viri, “blasphemias et monstra posteris reliquerunt.” In Tertulliano rapiunt avide, quod a nobis edocti, nobiscum communiter detestentur; sed meminerint libellum de Praescriptionibus,[45] qui nostri temporis sectarios tam insigniter perculit, numquam fuisse reprehensum. Hippolytus, Portuensis[46] episcopus, quam belle, quam clare Antichristi nervum, lutherana tempora, praemonstravit? Eum propterea “scriptorem infantissimum et larvam” nominant. Cyprianum, delicias et decus Africae, Gallicanus ille criticus[47] et Magdeburgici[48] “stupidum, et destitutum Deo, et depravatorem poenitentiae” nuncuparunt. Quid admisit? Scripsit enim de virginibus, de lapsis, de unitate Ecclesiae tractationes euismodi, eas etiam epistolas Cornelio, Romano Pontifici, ut nisi fides huic martyr detrahatur, Petrus Martyr Vermilius, omnesque cum eo foederati, peiores adulteris et sacrilegis habeantur. Ac ne singulis insistam diutius, Patres huius saeculi damnantur omnes, “quippe qui doctrinam de poenitentia mire depravarint.”[49] Quo pacto? Nam austeritas canonum, quae viguit ea tempestate, maiorem in modum displicet huic sectae plausibili, quae tricliniis aptior, quam templis, voluptarias aures titillare et pulvillos omni cubito[50] solet assuere. Quid aetas proxima, quid peccavit? Chrysostomus et ii Patres “iustitiam fidei foede” videlicet “obscurarunt.”[51] Nazianzenus, quem honoris causa, Theologum veteres appellarunt, Caussaeo[52] iudice, “Fabulator, quid affirmaret, nesciit.” Ambrosius “a cacodaemone fascinatus est.” Hieronymus “aeque damnatus, atque diabolus: iniuriosus Apostolo,[53] blasphemus, sceleratus, impius.” “Vnus” Gregorio Massovio[54] “pluris est Calvinus, quam centum Augustini.” Parum est, centum; Lutherus[55] “nihili facit adversum se mille Augustinos, mille Cyprianos, mille Ecclesias.” Longius rem deducere, supervacaneum puto. Nam in hos, qui bachantur, quis miretur in Optatum, Athanasium, Hilarium, Cyrillos, Epiphanium, Basilium, Vincentium, Fulgentium, Leonem, Gregoriumque Romanum fuisse procacissimos? Quamquam si datur ulla rebus iniustis iusta defensio non inficior habere Patres, ubicumque incideris, quod isti, dum sibi consentiunt, necessario stomachentur. Etinem qui odere stata ieiunia, quo animo oportet esse in Basilium, Nazianzenum, Chrysostomum, qui de quadragesima et indictis ieiuniorum feriis, tamquam de rebus iam usitatis, conciones egregias publicarunt? Qui suas animas auro, libidine, crapula et ambitiosis conspectibus vendiderunt, possuntne non esse inimicissimi Basilio, Chrysostomo, Hierionymo, Augustino, quorum excellentes libri de monachorum instituto, regula, virtutibus, teruntur? Qui captivam hominis voluntatem invexere, qui christiana funebria sustulere, qui Divorum reliquias incendere, sintne placabiles Augustino, qui de libero arbitrio libros tres, de cura pro mortuis unum, de miraculis ad Basilicas et memorias Martyrum prolixum caput nobilissimi operis[56] et conciones aliquot exaravit? Qui fidem suis captiunculis metiuntur, nonne succenseant Augustino, cuius est insignis epistola,[57] qua se profitetur antiquitati, consensioni, successioni perpetuae et Ecclesiae, quae sola inter tot haereses Catholicae nomen usucapione vindicat assentire? Optatus, Milevitanus episcopus, Donatianam partem revincit[58] ex communione Catholica; nequitiam accusat ex decreto Melchiadis (lib. 1); haeresim refutat ex ordine Romanorum Pontificum (lib. 2); insaniam patefacit ex Eucharistia et chrismate contaminatis (lib. 3); sacrilegium horret ex diffractis altaribus “in quibus Christi membra portata sunt,” pollutisque calicibus “qui Christi sanguinem tenuerunt,” (lib. 6). De Optato quid sentiant, aveo scire, quem Augustinus[59] ut venerabilem et catholicum episcopum, Ambrosio parem et Cypriano; quem Fulgentius[60] ut sanctum et fidelem Pauli interpretem, Augustini similem et Ambrosii, meminerunt. Athanasii Symbolum in templis concinunt. Num favent ei, qui Antonium Eremitam Aegyptium,[61] gravis auctor, accurato libello dilaudaverit, quique cum Alexandrina Synodo[62] iudicium Sedis Apostolicae, Divi Petri, suppliciter appellarit? Prudentius in hymnis quoties precatur Martyres, quos decantat? Quoties ad eorum cineres et ossa Regem Martyrum veneratur? Num hunc probabunt? Hieronymus pro Divorum reliquiis et honoribas scribit in Vigilantium, in Iovinianam pro virginitatis gradu. Huccine patientur? Ambrosius[63] tutores suos Gervasium et Protasium, celebritate notissima, in Arianam ignominiam honestavit; cui facto divinissimi Patres[64] encomium tribuere: quod factum Deus non uno prodigio decoravit. Num benevoli sunt Ambrosio futuri? Gregorius Magnus, noster Apostolus, planissime noster est, eoque nomine nostris adversariis odiosus; quem Calvini[65] rabies negat in schola sancti Spiritus educatum, propterea quod sacras imagines illitteratorum libros appellasset. Dies me deficeret numerantem epistolas, conciones, homilias, orationes, opuscula, disceptationes Patrum, in quibus ex apparato graviter et ornate nostra catholicorum dogmata roborarunt. Quamdiu apud bibliopolas ista venierint, tamdiu frustra nostrorum codices prohibentur; frustra servantur aditus oraeque maritimae; frustra domus, arcae, scrinia, capsulae disquiruntur; frustra tot portis minaces tabulae suffiguntur. Nullus enim Hardingus, nec Sanderus, nec Stapletonus, nec Bristolius haec nova somnia vehementius, quam hi, quos recensui, Patres, insectantur. Talia cogitanti accrevit animus et desiderium pugnae, in qua, quoquo se moverit adversarius, nisi gloriam Deo cesserit, feret incommodum. Patres admiserit, captus est; excluserit, nullus est. Adolescentibus nobis ita contigit. Ioannes Ivellus antesignanus calvinianorum Angliae, catholicos ad Divi Pauli Londinensium incredibili iactantia lacessivit, invocatis per hypocrisim et imploratis Patribus, quicumque intra salutis annum sexcentesimum claruisset. Accipiunt conditionem memorabiles viri, qui tum exsulabant Lovanii, summis licet difficultatibus propter iniquitatem suorum temporum circumsepti. Ausim dicere, tanto popularibus nostris bono fuisse illam Ivellii astutiam, inscitiam, improbitatem, impudentiam, quas ii scriptores feliciter expanderunt, ut vix aliud quidquam, memoria mea, provenerit Anglorum Ecclesiae laboranti fructuosius. Edictum continuo valvis appenditur, ne qui codices illiusmodi legerentur, neve haberentur. Quum tantis clamoribus propemodum extorti prodiissent, didicere quicumque negotium attigissent, Patres fuisse catholicos, id est, nostros. Neque hoc sibi suisque vulnus inflictum Laurentius Humfredus[66] tacuit; qui quum alte Ivellum quoad caetera sustulisset, unam ei notam aspersit inconsiderantiae, quod Patrum calculos recepisset, quibuscum sibi nihil esse commercii, nec fore, sine ulla circuitione proloquitur. Pertentavimus etiam familiariter aliquando Tobiam Matthaeum, qui nunc in concionibus dominatur, quem propter bonas artes et virtutum semina dileximus, ut responderet ingenue, possetne qui Patres assiduus lectitaret, istarum esse partium, quas ille suaserat. Retulit, non posse, si pariter eos legeret iisque crederet. Verissimum hoc verbum est, neque aliter eum nunc, aut Mattheum Huttonum, qui vir nominatus in paucis, versare Patres dicitur, aut reliquos adversarios, qui hoc faciunt, sentire arbitror. Hactenus ergo securus in hanc aciem potui descendere, bellaturus cum, iis, qui quasi auribus lupum teneant, aeternam causae maculam cogantur inutere, sive recusent Patres, sive deposcant. Nam in altero fugam adornant, in altero suffocantur. SEXTA RATIO FIRMAMENTVM PATRVM Si quibus umquam cordi curaeque fuit id, quod maximopere nostris fuit et esse debet: “Scrutamini Scripturas,”[67] facile princeps et palmares in hoc genere sanctissimi Patres exstitere. Horum opera sumptuque tot gentibus et linguis transcripta Biblia et importata sunt; horum periculis et cruciatibus erepta de flammis hostilibus et vastitate; horum laboribus et vigiliis omnem in partem enucleata studiosissime; die noctuque sacras Litteras imbibere, de suggestibus omnibus sacras Litteras edidere, immensa volumina sacris Litteris ditavere, fidelissimis commentariis sacras Litteras explicuere cibos et inediam sacris Litteris condivere, occupati denique sacris in Litteris, ad senectutem decrepitam pervenere. Quod si frequenter ipsi quoque ab auctoritate maiorum, ab Ecclesiae praxi, a successione Pontificum, a Conciliis oecumenicis, a traditionibus apostolicis, a cruore Martyrum, a scitis Praesulum, a visis eventisque mirabilibus argumentati sunt; tamen omnium maxime et libentissime sanctarum Litterarum testimonia densa conglobant, haec premunt, in his habitant, huic “armaturae fortium” duces robustissimi, sarta tecta civitatis Dei contra nefarios impetus quotidie munientes, optimo iure primas partes honoratissimasque porrigunt. Quo magis demiror illam exceptionem adversarii superbam et fatuam, qui velut aquam in profluente quaeritans, sic in Scripturis confertissimis Scripturarum penuriam obiectat. Tantisper se Patribus assensurum dicit, dum sacris Litteris adhaerescunt. Num loquitur ex animo? Curabo igitur procedant armati atque stipati Christo, Prophetis, Apostolis atque omni apparatu biblico, celeberrimi auctores, antiquissimi Patres, sanctissimi viri, Dionysius, Cyprianus, Athanasius, Basilius, Nazianzenus, Ambrosius, Hieronymus, Chrysostomus, Augustinus, latinusque Gregorius. Regnet in Anglia fides illa, quam hi Patres, amicissimi Scripturarum, ex Scripturis exstruunt. Quas afferunt, afferemus; quas conferunt, conferemus; quod inferunt, inferemus. Placet? Excrea, dic sodes–Minime vero, inquis, nisi recte exponant–Quid est hoc ipsum, recte? Arbitratu tuo. Nihilne pudet labyrinthi? Ergo quum sperem in Academiis florentissimis consociatum iri bene multos, qui, non pingui Minerva, sed acuto iudicio in has controversias inspecturi sunt, et horum responsa nugatoria libraturi, laetus hunc diem campi praestolabor, ut qui contra sylvestres tumulos mendiculorum inermium nobilitatem et robur Ecclesiae Christi cogitem educere. SEPTIMA RATIO HISTORIA Pristinam Ecclesiae faciem historia prisca retegit. Huc provoco. Certe antiquiores historici, quos etiam usurpant adversarii, fere numerantur Eusebius, Damasus, Hieronymus, Ruffinus, Orosius, Socrates, Sozomenus, Theodoretus, Cassiodorus, Gregorius Turonensis, Vsuardus, Regino, Marianus Sigebertus, Zonaras, Cedrenus, Nicephorus. Quid narrant? Nostrorum laudes, progressus, vicissitudinem, hostes. Imo vero, quod observes diligenter, illi qui dissident a nobis odio capitali, Philippus, Pantaleon, Funecius, Magdeburgici, quum se ad scribendam vel chronologiam Ecclesiae vel historiam appulissent, nisi nostrorum gesta colligerent, ac inimicorum Ecclesiae nostrae fraudes et scelera coacervarent, mille quingentos annos argumento vacui praetermitterent. Cum his considera peculiares certarum historiographos regionum, qui unius acta cuiusque populi curiosius operosiusque scrutati sunt. Ii quasi Spartam adepti, quam locupletare modis omnibus et perpolire cuperent, qui ne convivia quidem lautiora, aut manicatas tunicas, aut pugionum capulos, aut inaurata calcaria, talesque minutias, si novitatem saperent, tacuere; profecto, si quid in religione mutatum, aut a primis degeneratum saeculis inaudissent, frequentes memorassent; si non frequentes, saltem aliqui: si non aliqui, unus aliquis absque dubio. Nullus omnino, neque benevolus nobis, neque malevolus, non modo quidquam tale prodidit, sed nec significavit. Verbi gratia. Dant nobis adversarii, nec aliter possunt, fuisse Romanam Ecclesiam aliquando Sanctam, Catholicam, Apostolicam: tum quum haec a Divo Paulo promeruisset elogia:[68] “Vestra fides annuntiatur in universo mundo: sine intermissione memoriam vestri facio: Scio quia venien ad vos, in abundantia benedictionis Christi veniam: Salutant vos omnes Ecclesiae Christi: Vestra enim obedientia in omnem locum divulgata est.” Tum quum ibi Paulus in libera custodia[69] disseminaret Evangelium; tum quum in ea quondam “Babylone coelectam Ecclesiam”[70] Petrus regeret; tum quum ille Clemens,[71] apprime laudatus ab Apostolo,[72] sederet ad ipsa gubernacula; tum quum profani Caesares,[73] ut Nero, Domitianus, Traianus, Antoninus, Romanos Pontifices laniarent; tum etiam, vel Calvino[74] teste, quum Damasus, Siricius, Anastasius, Innocentius, clavum tenerent Apostolicum. Hoc enim saeculo nihil adhuc, praesertim Romae, digressos ab Evangelica doctrina, liberaliter ille concedit. Quando igitur hanc fidem tantopere celebratatam Roma perdidit? Quando esse desiit, quod ante fuit? Quo tempore, quo Pontifice, qua via, qua vi, quibus incrementis urbem et orbem religio pervasit aliena? Quas voces, quas turbas, quae lamenta progenuit? Omnes orbe reliquo sopiti sunt, dum Roma, Roma, inquam, nova sacramenta, novum sacrificium, novum religionis dogma procuderet? Nullus exstitit historicus neque latinus, neque graecus, neque remotus, neque citimus, qui rem tantam vel obscure iaceret in commentarios? Ergo perspicuum hoc quidem est, si, quae nos credimus, historia multa et varia, nuntia vetustatis, vita memoriae, loquitur ac repetit affluenter; quae vero isti obtrudunt, nulla naratio post homines natos in Ecclesia valuisse commeminit: et Historicos esse meos, et incursiones adversarias esse frigidissimas, quae nihil movere possint, nisi prius receptum sit, omnes omnium temporum christianos in spissam perfidiam atque in gehennae voraginem corruisse, donec Lutherus Boram constuprasset. OCTAVA RATIO PARADOXA Ego vero, praestantissimi viri, quum de multis haeresibus quaedam apud me opiniosissimorum portenta reputo, quae mihi venient expugnanda; meipsum inertiae nequitiaeque condemnem, si cuiusquam in experiundo facultatem aut vires extimescerem. Sit ingeniosus, sit eloquens, sit exercitatus, sit omnium librorum helluo; tamen aridus et balbus appareat necesse est, quum haec tam “adunata” sustentabit. Disputabitur enim, si forte nobis annuent, de Deo, de homine, de peccato, de iustitia, de sacrimentis, de moribus. Videro an ausint asseverare, quae sentiunt, quaeque, rebus addicti necessariis, divulgant in scriptiunculis. Faxo norint ista suorum axiomata. DE DEO.–“Deus est auctor et causa[75] peccati, volens, suggerens, efficiens, iubens, operans, et in hoc impiorum scelerata consilia gubernans. Proprium Dei opus fuit,[76] ut vocatio Pauli, sic adulterium Davidis, Iudaeque proditoris impietas.” Monstrum hoc, cuius Philippum aliquando puduit, Lutherus[77] tamen, a quo Philippus hauserat, quasi oraculum coeleste miris extollit laudibus, et alumnum suum eo nomine tantum non exaequat[78] Apostolo Paulo. Percontabor etiam, quid animi Luthero fuerit, quem Angli[79] calviniani “virum divinitus datum ad orbem illuminandum” pronuntiant, quum hunc versum demeret supplicationibus Ecclesiae.[80] “Sancta Trinitas, unus Deus, miserere nobis.” DE CHRISTO.–Mox ad personam Christi progrediar. Quaeram ista sibi quid velint; Christus De Filius, Deus de Deo? Calvino:[81] “Deus ex sese,” Bezae:[82] “Non est genitus de Patris essentia.” Item: “Duae constituantur in Christo uniones hypostaticae,[83] altera animae cum carne, Divinitatis cum humanitate altera.” “Locus apud Ioannem:” ‘Ego et Pater unum sumus,’ non ostendit Christum Deum ‘homoousion’[84] Deo Patri.” Sed et ‘anima mea, inquit Lutherus,[85] odit hoc verbum ‘homoousion.’” Pergite: “Christus ab infantia non fuit gratia consummatus,[86] sed animi dotibus velut caeteri homines adolevit: usu factus quotidie sapientior, ita ut puerulus ignorantia laborarit.” Quod perinde est, ac si dicerent originis labe et vitio sordidatum. Sed cognoscite diriora: “Christus, quum orans in horto, sudoribus aquae manaret et sanguinis, sensu damnationis aeternae cohorruit:[87] vocem edidit sine ratione, sine spiritu, vocem doloris impetu repentinam; quam, ut non satis meditatam, cleriter castigavit.” Estne aliquid amplius? Attendite: “Christus, quum actus in crucem exclamaret:” ‘Deus meus, Deus meus, ut quid dereliquisti me?’ accensus est flammis inferni,[88] desperationis voceni emisit, non aliter affectus, quam si pereundum ei foret internecione sempiterna.” His etiam, si quid possunt, addant: “Christus, inquiunt,[89] descendit ad inferos, id est, mortuus gehennam gustavit, nihilo minus quam animae damnatorum, nisi quod sibi restituendus erat.–Quandoquidem enim morte corporea nobis nihil profuisset;[90] anima quoque luctari cum morte debuit aeterna, atque hoc modo nostrum scelus suppliciumque dependere.” Ac ne quis forte suspicetur, istud Calvino per incuriam obrepsisse, idem Calvinus:[91] “Omnes vos, si qui doctrinam istam solatii plenam exagitastis, perditos” appellat “nebulones.” Tempora, tempora, cuiusmodi monstrum aluistis? Cruor ille delicatus et regius, qui de innocentis Agni corpore lacerato fissoque scaturiit, cuius cruoris una guttula propter dignitatem Hostiae mille mundos redimere potuisset, nihil humano genet profecit, nisi “mediator Dei et hominum (1 Tim ii. 5), homo Christus Iesus mortem quoque secundam (Apoc. ii. 11),” mortem animae, mortem gratiae, peccati solius et exsecrabilis blasphemiae sociam, pertulisset? Prae hac insania modestus videbitur Bucerus, quamquam est impudens, qui[92] infernum in symbolo sepulcrum accipit, per epexegesim valde praeposteram, ac potius tautologiam ineptam atque stolidam. Anglicani sectarii, pars Calvino, idolo suo, pars Bucero, magno magistro, solent accedere; pars etiam submurmurant in hunc articulum, ne quid facessat ultra molestiae, quemadmodum sine tumultu penitus eximatur de Symbolo. Id veno etiant fuisse tentatum in conventiculo quodam Londinensi, memini narrasse mihi, qui interfuit, Richardum Chenaeum, miserrimum senem, male mulctatum a latronibus foris, neque tamen ingressum in paternam domum. Hactenus de Christo. DE HOMINE.–De homine[93] quid? “Imago Dei penitus in homine deleta est, nulla boni scintilla superstite: tota natura quoad omnes animae partes ita funditus eversa, ut ne renatus quidem et sanctus quidquam sit aliud intrinsecus, nisi mera corruptio atque contagio.” Quorsum ista? Vt qui sola fide gloriam rapturi sunt, in omnium turpitudinum coeno volutati, naturam accusent, virtutem desperent, praecepta deonerent. DE PECCATO.–Huc Illyricus, Magdeburgensium primipilus, illud suum adiecit immane placitum[94] de originis peccato, quod esse vult: “Intimam substantiam animarum, quippe quas, post Adami lapsum, diabolus ipse procreet, et in sese transformet.” Hoc quoque tritum est in hac faece: “Omnia peccata esse paria:”[95] sed ita (ne Stoici reviviscant), “si Deo iudice ponderentur.” Ac si Deus, aequissimus iudex, oneri nostro cumulum potius, quam levamentum faceret, et id, quod non est in re, quum sit ipse iustissimus, exaggeraret. Hac trutina non levius in Deum severissime iudicantem deliquerit ille caupo, qui gallum gallinaceum, quando non est opus, occiderit, quam infamis ille sicarius, qui plenus Beza, Gallum heroa Guisium, admiribili virtute principem, displosa fistula interemit; quo facinore nihil vidit orbis noster aetate nostra funestius, nihil luctuosius. DE GRATIA.–Sed fortasse, qui tam sunt in peccati conditione tetrici, magnifice philosophantur de divina gratia, quae huic malo succurrere ac mederi possit. Praeclaras vero isti partes assignant gratiae, “quam neque infusam cordibus nostris, neque ad resistendum sceleribus validam esse latrant, sedextra nos in solo Dei favore[96] collocant: “qui favor non emendet impios, nec purget, nec illuminet, nec ditet; sed veterem illam sentinam adhuc manantem atque foetentem, ne deformis et odiosa putetur, Deo connivente, dissimulet. Quo suo plasmate tantopere delectantur, ut ne “Christus quidem aliter apud illos[97] gratia plenus et veritate dicatur, quam quod ei Deus Pater mirandum in modum faverit.” DE IVISTITIA.–Quae res ergo iustitia est? Relatio.[98] Non enim ex theologics concinnata virtutibus, fide, spe, charitate, quae animam suo nitore convestiant; sed tantum “occultatio delicti, quam qui sola fide prehenderit, ille tam de salute certus est, ac si iampridem interminato coeli gaudio[99] frueretur.” Age, somniet hoc; sed unde constare poterit de futura perseverantia, qua qui caruit, exivit infelicissimus, licet ad tempus pure pieque iustitiam coluisset? Imo vero, “haec tua fides, Calvinus ait[100], nisi tuam tibi perseverantiam firme pronuntiet, ut hallucinari nequeas, tamquam inanis et languida sperneretur.” Agnosco discipulum Lutheri. “Christianus, inquit ille[101] etiam volens, non potest salutem perdere, nisi nolit credere.” DE SACRAMENTIS.–Ad Sacramenta festino. Nullum, nullum, non duo, non unum, O Sancte Christe, reliquerant. Ipsorum quippe panis venenum est; Baptismus etsi adhuc verus, tamen ipsorum iudicio “nihil est, non est unda salutis, non est canalis gratiae, non derivat in nos Christi merita; sed significatio dumtaxat salutis est. Itaque nihilo pluris Baptismum Christi, quoad naturam rei, quam Ioannis facere caeremoniam. Si habeas, recte; si careas, nihil damni: crede, salvus es, antequam abluere.”[102] Quid ergo parvuli, qui nisi iuventur virtute Sacramenti, sua fide miselli nihil assequuntur? “Potius quam Sacramento Baptismatis quidquam tribuamus, inquiunt Magdeburgici,[103] demus inesse fidem ipsis infantulis, qua serventur, cuius fidei pulsus quosdam abditos intelligant” ipsi, qui vivant necne, nondum intelligunt. Durum. Si hoc adeo durum est, Lutheri pharmacum auditote: “Praestat, inquit,[104] omittere, quandoquidem nisi credat infans, nequidquam lavatur.” Haec illi quidem ancipites animo, quidnam enuntient categorice. Ergo Balthassar Pacimontanus diribitor interveniat; qui parens Anabaptistarum, quum parvulis motum fidei non posset affingere, Lutheri cantiunculam adprobavit, et paedobaptismum eiiciens e templis, “neminen nisi adultum fonte sacro decrevit abluere.” Ad reliqua Sacramenta quod attinet, quamvis illa bestia multiceps horrendas eiectet contumelias, tamen quia quotidianae iam sunt et callum auribus obduxerunt, hic praetereo. DE MORIBVS.–Restant haereticorum de vita et moribus frusta nocentissima, quae Lutherus evomi in chartas, ut ex unius pectoris impuro gurgustio pestem lectoribus inhalaret. Audite patienter, et erubescite, et mihi date veniam recitanti: “Si nolit uxor[105], aut non possit, veniat ancilla. Siquidem res uxoria tam est cuique necessaria, quam esca, potus, somnus. Matrimonium est virginitate multo praestantius; eam Christus, eam Paulus dissuaserunt hominibus christianis.” Sed haec fortasse propria Lutheri sunt? Non sunt. Etiam nuper a meo Charco,[106] sed misere timideque defenduntur. Vultis ne plura? Quidni? “Quanto sceleratior es, inquit,[107] tanto vicinior gratiae. Omnes actiones bonae peccata sunt; Deo iudice, mortifera; Deo propitio, leviuscula[108]–Nemo malum suapte voluntate cogitat[109]–Decalogus nihil ad christianos[110]–Opera nostra Deus nequaquam curat–Soli recte participant coena Dominica, qui tristes, afflictas, perturbatas, confusas, erraticas apportant conscientias.–Confitenda crimina sunt, sed cuilibet, qui si te vel ioco absolverit, modo credideris, absolutus es.–Legere preces horarias non est sacerdotum, sed laicorum–Christiani liberi sunt a statutis hominum.” Satis superque lacunam istam commosse videor. lam finio. Nec vero putetis iniquiorem esse me, qui lutheranos et zuinglianos promiscue coarguerim; nam isti memores a quo proseminati sint, inter se fratres et amici volunt esse,[111] adeoque gravem interpretantur iniuriam, quum in ulla re praeter unam, discriminantur. Equidem non sum tanti, ut vel mediocrem locum mihi sumam in selectis theologis, qui hodie bellum haeresibus indixere; sed hoc scio, quantuluscumque sum, periclitari me non posse, dum Christi gratia fultus adversum talia commenta, tam invisa, tam insulsa, tam bruta, coelo terraque iuvantibus, praeliabor. NONA RATIO SOPHISMATA Scitum est, inter caecos luscum regnare posse. Apud rudes valet saepe fucata disputatio, quam schola Philosophorum exsibilat. Multa peccat adversarius in hoc genere; sed quatuor fallacies plerumque consuitur, quas in Academia malim, quam in trevio, retexere. Primum vitium [Greek: skiamachia] est, quae auras et umbras magno contau diverberat. Hoc pacto: contra coelibes iuratos et votos in castimoniam, quod nuptiae bonae sint, virginitas melior, offeruntur Scripturae loquentes honorifice de coniugio. Quem feriunt? Contra meritum hominis christiani, tinctum Christi sanguine, alioquin nullum, promuntur testimonia, quibus iubemur, nec naturae, nec legi, sed sanguini Christi fidere. Quem refellunt? In eos, qui colunt Coelites, ut famulos Christi maxime gratiosos, citantur integrae pagellae, quae vetant colere multos Deos. Vbinam sunt? Huiusmodi argumentis, quae apud haereticos infinita reperio, nobis esse detrimento non poterunt; vobis esse fastidio poterunt. Aliud vitium [Greek: logomachia] est, quae sensa deserens, loquaciter cum verbo litigat, “Invenias mihi Missam, inquiunt, aut Purgatorium in Scripturis.” Quid ergo? Trinitas, Homoousion, Persona, nusquam sunt in Bibliis, quia voces istae non sunt? Affine est huic peccato litterarum aucupium; quum neglecta consuetudine et mente loquentium, quae vita vocabuli est, adversus elementa contenditur. Nempe sic aiunt: “Presbyter nihil est Graecis, nisi senior; Sacramentum, quodvis mysterium.” Caeterum acute D. Thomas,[112] ut omnia: “In vocibus, inquit, videndum, non tam ex quo, quam ad quid sumantur.” Tertium, [Greek: homonumia] est, longe lateque patens. Vt: “Quorsum ordo sacerdotum; quum Ioannes (Apoc. v. 10) omnes nos vocaverit sacerdotes?” Etiam hoc addidit: “Regnabimus super terram.” Quorsum ergo reges? Item: “Propheta (Isai. LVIII. 6) celebrat ieiunium spiritale, hoc est, ab inveteratis criminibus abstinentiam. Valeat ergo ciborum delectus, et dierum praescriptio.” Siccine? Igitur insanierunt Moyses, David, Elias,