SUMMARY OF THE CONTROVERSY OF THE "BUTS," BETWEEN MR. FREIND AND DON
INIGO-Y-MEDROSO, Y-COMODIOS, Y-PAPALAMIENDOS, BACHELOR OF SALAMANCA.
The following is a summary of the pleasant disputation, which our dear
friend Freind and the Bachelor Don Papalamiendos held, in the presence
of the Earl of Peterborough. This familiar conversation was called the
dialogue of the "Buts." As you read it you will discover why.
THE BACHELOR.--But, sir, notwithstanding all the fine things you have
said, you must admit that your respectable established church did not
exist before the time of Don Luther and Don Ecolampade; consequently, it
is quite new, and can hardly be said to belong to the family.
FREIND.--You might as well say I am not a descendant of my grandfather,
because another branch of the family, living in Italy, seized on his
will, and my claims. I have fortunately found them again; and it is now
quite clear that I am my grandfather's grandson. You and I are, as it
were, of the same family; but with this difference. We read our
grandfather's testament in our mother tongue, while you are forbidden to
read it in yours. You are the slaves of a foreigner; we listen to the
dictates of reason.
THE BACHELOR.--But suppose your reason should lead you astray? For, in a
word, you have no faith in our University of Salamanca, which has
declared the infallibility of the pope, and his indisputable control of
the past, the present, the future, and the paulo-post-future.
FREIND.--Neither did the apostles. It is written that Peter, who denied
his master Jesus, was severely rebuked by Paul. I have not examined the
case to see which was in the wrong; perhaps, as is the case in most
disputes, neither was right; but I do not find one passage in the Acts
of the Apostles to prove that Peter was considered the master of his
companions, and of the paulo-post-future.
THE BACHELOR.--But St. Peter was certainly archbishop of Rome; for
Sanchez tells us that this great man came there in the reign of Nero,
and filled the archbishop's throne twenty-five years under the same
Nero, who only reigned thirteen. Besides, it is a matter of faith, and
Don Gullandus, the prototype of the inquisition, affirms it (for we
never read the Holy Bible), that St. Peter was at Rome during a certain
year, for he dates one of his letters from Babylon. Now, since Babylon
is visibly the anagram of Rome, it is clear that the pope by divine
right is lord of the world; moreover, all the licentiates of Salamanca
have shown that Simon Grace-of-God, first sorcerer and counsellor of
state at the court of Nero, sent his compliments by his dog to Simon
Barjona, otherwise called St. Peter, as soon as he came to Rome; that
St. Peter, who was scarcely less polite, sent also his dog to compliment
Simon Grace-of-God; and then they diverted themselves by trying which
could soonest raise from the dead a cousin german of Nero's; that
Grace-of-God only succeeded in effecting a partial restoration, while
Barjona won the game by wholly restoring the dead man to life; that
Grace-of-God sought to have his revenge by flying through the air like
Saint Dædalus; and that Barjona broke his legs, by making him fall. On
this account St. Peter received the Martyr's crown, being crucified with
his heels upward. Therefore we have proved that his holiness the pope
ought to reign over all who wear crowns; that he is lord of the past,
the present, and of all the futures in the world.
FREIND.--It is clear these things happened in the days when Hercules
separated at a stroke the two mountains Calpe and Abyla, and crossed the
straits of Gibraltar in his goblet. But it is not on such histories,
however authentic they may be, that we base our religion. We found it on
the gospel.
THE BACHELOR.--But, sir, on what passages of the gospel? I have read a
portion of the gospel in our theological tracts. Do you base it on the
descent of the angel to announce to the Virgin Mary that she had
conceived by the Holy Ghost? On the journey of the three kings after the
star? On the massacre of all the children of the country? On the trouble
the devil took to carry God into the wilderness, to place him on a
pinnacle of the temple, and on the summit of a mountain from whence he
beheld all the kingdoms of the world? On the miracle of water changed
into wine at a village wedding? On the miracle of two thousand pigs
drowned by the devil in a lake at the command of Jesus? On--?
FREIND.--Sir, we respect these things because they are in the gospel;
but we never speak of them, because they are too far above our weak
human reason.
THE BACHELOR.--But they say you never call the Holy Virgin, Mother of
God?
FREIND.--We revere and cherish her. But we think she cares very little
for the titles given her in this world. She is never styled the Mother
of God in the gospel. In the year 431, there was a great dispute at the
council of Ephesus to ascertain if Mary was Theotocos; and if Jesus
Christ, being at the same time God and the son of Mary, Mary could be at
the same time mother of God the Father and God the Son. We do not enter
into these disputes of Ephesus. The Royal Society at London does not
concern itself with such controversies.
THE BACHELOR.--But, sir, you talk of Theotocos. What may Theotocos mean,
if you please?
FREIND.--It means Mother of God. What, are you a Bachelor of Salamanca,
and don't understand Greek?
THE BACHELOR.--But Greek! Of what use can Greek be to a Spaniard? But,
sir, do you believe that Jesus Christ has one nature, one person, and
one will; or two natures, two persons, and two wills; or, one will, one
nature, and two persons; or, two wills, two persons and one nature;
or,--?
FREIND.--This, also, belongs to the Ephesian controversy and does not
concern us.
THE BACHELOR.--But what does concern you, then? Do you suppose there are
only three persons in God, or that there are three Gods in one person?
Does the second person proceed from the first person, and the third from
the two others, or from the second _intrinsecus_, or only from the
first? Has the father all the attributes of the son except paternity?
And does the third person proceed by infusion, by identification, or by
spiration?
FREIND.--This question is not mooted in the gospel. St. Paul never wrote
the name of the Trinity.
THE BACHELOR.--But, you always refer to the gospel, and never make
mention of St. Bonaventura, of Albert the Great, of Tambourini, of
Gullandus, of Escobar.
FREIND.--Because I do not call myself a Dominican, a Franciscan, or a
Jesuit. I am satisfied with being a Christian.
THE BACHELOR.--But if you are a Christian, tell me if you
conscientiously think the rest of mankind will be damned?
FREIND.--It does not become me to limit the compassion or the justice of
God.
THE BACHELOR.--But to come to the point, if you are a Christian, what do
you believe?
FREIND.--I believe with Jesus Christ that we ought to love God and our
neighbor, forgive our enemies, and do good for evil. These are the
maxims of Jesus. So true are they, that no legislator, no philosopher,
ever had other principles before him, and it is impossible that there
can be any other. These truths never have and never can meet with
contradiction, save from our passions.
THE BACHELOR.--But, in regard to the passions, is it true that your
bishops, priests, and deacons are all married?
FREIND.--Quite true. St. Joseph, who passed for the father of Jesus, was
married. James the Less, surnamed Oblia, brother of our Lord, was his
son, who, after the death of Jesus, spent his life in the temple. St.
Paul--the great St. Paul--was a married man.
THE BACHELOR.--But Grillandus and Molina assert the contrary.
FREIND.--Let them say what they please, I prefer believing St. Paul
himself on the subject. In _I. Corinthians, ix: 4-7._ he says: "Have we
not power to eat and to drink? Have we not power to lead about a sister,
a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the lord, and
Cephas. Or I only and Barnabas, have we not power to forbear working?
Who goeth a warfare at any time at his own charges? Who planteth a
vineyard and eateth not of the fruit thereof?"
THE BACHELOR.--But, sir, did St. Paul really say that?
FREIND.--Yes, he said that and very much more.
THE BACHELOR.--But, really, that prodigy of the efficacy of grace?--
FREIND.--It is true, sir, that his conversion was a great miracle. I
admit, from the _Acts of the Apostles_, that he was the most cruel
satellite of the enemies of Jesus. The _Acts_ say that he assisted at
the stoning of Stephen. He admits himself, that when the Jews condemned
to death a follower of Christ, he would see to the execution of the
sentence, "detuli sententiam", I admit that Abdia, his disciple, and the
translator Julius, the African, accused him of putting to death James
Oblia, the brother of our Lord; but his persecutions increase the wonder
of his conversion, and by no means prevented his having a wife. I assure
you he was married. St. Clement of Alexandria expressly declares it.
THE BACHELOR.--But St. Paul, then, was a worthy man of God! Really, I am
grieved to think he assassinated St. Stephen, and St. James, and am
surprised to find he traveled to the third heaven. But pray continue.
FREIND.--We gather from St. Clement of Alexandria that St. Peter had
children; one St. Petronilla is mentioned among them. Eusebius, in his
_History of the Church_ says that St. Nicolas, one of the first
disciples, had a very handsome wife; and that the disciples blamed him
for being over-fond and jealous. "Sirs," said he, "let any one take her
who likes; I give her to you."
In the Jewish economy, which should have lasted for ever, but to which
nevertheless the Christian dispensation succeeded, marriage was not only
permitted, but expressly enjoined on priests, since they were always of
the same race. Celibacy was considered infamous.
It is certain that celibacy could not have been considered a very pure
and honorable state by the first Christians, since we find among the
bishops excommunicated by the first councils, chiefly those who oppose
the marriage of priests; such as Saturnians, Basilidians, Montanists,
Encrasists, and other ans and ists. This accounts for the wife of
Gregory of Nazianze bearing another Gregory of Nazianze, and enjoying
the inestimable felicity of being at one and the same time the wife and
mother of a canonized saint,--a privilege which even St. Monica, the
mother of St. Augustin, did not enjoy.
By the same reason I might name as many and even more of the ancient
bishops who were married, and account for your not having had in the
earlier ages of the church bishops and popes who indulged in
fornication, adultery, and even worse crimes. Things are not so now.
This is also the reason why the Greek church, the mother of the Latin
church, allows priests to marry. In a word, the reason why I myself am
married, and have a son, as fine a fellow as you can wish to see.
Besides, my dear bachelor, have you not in your church seven sacraments
which are outward signs of things invisible? Does not a bachelor of
Salamanca enjoy the advantage of baptism as soon as he comes into the
world; of confirmation as soon as he has committed a few follies or
understands those of others; of communion, though a little different
from ours, when he is fourteen years of age; of holy orders, when they
shave the crown of his head and give him a living of twenty, thirty, or
forty thousand piastres; and lastly of extreme unction, when he is ill?
Must he then be deprived of the sacrament of marriage, when he is in
health? Especially when God united Adam and Eve in marriage: Adam, the
first bachelor in the world, since, according to your schools, he had
knowledge by infusion; Eve, the first _female_ bachelor, since she
tasted the tree of knowledge before her husband.
THE BACHELOR.--But, if things are so, I may cease my "Buts." This is
certain, I adopt your religion; I will belong to the established church
of England; will marry an honest woman, who at least will pretend to
love me while I am young, take care of me when I grow old, and whom I
will bury decently, should I survive her. I think this is better than
roasting men and enticing girls after the fashion of my cousin Don
Caracucarador, the inquisitor of the faith.
* * * * *
This is a faithful summary of the conversation between Mr. Freind and
the Bachelor Don Papalamiendos, since called by us Papa Dexando. This
curious dialogue was drawn up by Jacob Hull, one of my lord's
secretaries.
After this conversation the Bachelor took me aside and said:
"This Englishman, whom I took at first for an anthropagus, must be a
very good man; for he is a theologian and can keep his temper."
I informed him that Mr. Freind was tolerant, or a quaker, and a
descendant of the daughter of William Penn, who founded Philadelphia.
"Quaker, Philadelphia," he cried, "I never heard of those sects."
I gave him some information on the subject. He could scarcely believe
me. It seemed to him like another universe. And, indeed, he was in the
right.