For myself, most excellent Sirs, when, choosing out of many
heresies, I think over in my mind certain portentous errors of
self-opinionated men, errors that it will be incumbent on me to
refute, I should condemn myself of want of spirit and discernment
if in this trial of strength I were to be afraid of any man's
ability or powers. Let him be able, let him be eloquent, let him
be a practised disputant, let him be a devourer of all books,
still his thought must dry up and his utterance fail him when he
shall have to maintain such impossible positions as these. For we
shall dispute, if perchance they will allow us, on God, on
Christ, on Man, on Sin, on Justice, on Sacraments, on Morals. I
shall see whether they will dare to speak out what they think,
and what under the constraint of their situation they publish in
their miserable writings. I will take care that they know these
maxims of their teachers:--"God is the author and cause of evil,
willing it, suggesting it, effecting it, commanding it, working
it out, and guiding the guilty counsels of the wicked to this
end. As the call of Paul, so the adultery of David, and the
wickedness of the traitor Judas, was God's own work" (Calvin,
_Institut_. i. 18; ii. 4; iii. 23, 24). This monstrous doctrine,
of which Philip Melanchthon was for once ashamed, Luther however,
of whom Philip had learned it, extols as an oracle from heaven
with wonderful praises, and on that score puts his foster-child
all but on an equality, with the Apostle Paul (Luther, _De servo
arbitrio_). I will also enquire what was in Luther's mind, whom
the English Calvinists pronounce to be "a man given of God for
the enlightenment of the world," when he wished to take this
versicle out of the Church's prayers, "Holy Trinity, one God,
have mercy on us."
I will proceed to the person of Christ. I will ask what these
words, "Christ the Son of God, God of God," mean to Calvin, who
says, "God of Himself" (_Instit._ i. 13); or to Beza, who says,
"He is not begotten of the essence of the Father" (Beza in Josue,
nn. 23, 24). Again. Let there be set up two hypostate unions in
Christ, one of His soul with His flesh, the other of His Divinity
with His Humanity (Beza, _Contra Schmidel_). The passage in John
x. 30, _I and the Father are one_, does not show Christ to be
God, consubstantial with God the Father (Calvin on John x.), the
fact is, says Luther, "my soul hates this word, _homousion._" Go
on. Christ was not perfect in grace from His infancy, but grew in
gifts of the soul like other men, and by experience daily became
wiser, so that as a little child He laboured under ignorance
(Melanchthon on the gospel for first Sunday after Epiphany).
Which is as much as to say that He was defiled with the stain and
vice of original sin. But observe still more direful utterances.
When Christ, praying in the Garden, was streaming with a sweat of
water and blood, He shuddered under a sense of eternal damnation,
He uttered an irrational cry, an unspiritual cry, a sudden cry
prompted by the force of His distress, which He quickly checked
as not sufficiently premeditated (Marlorati in Matth. xxvi.;
Calvin _in Harm. Evangel._). Is there anything further? Attend.
When Christ Crucified exclaimed, _My God, my God, why hast Thou
forsaken me,_ He was on fire with the flames of hell, He uttered
a cry of despair, He felt exactly as if nothing were before Him
but to perish in everlasting death (Calvin _in Harm. Evangel._).
To this also let them add something, if they can. Christ, they
say, descended into hell, that is, when dead, He tasted hell not
otherwise than do the damned souls, except that He was destined
to be restored to Himself: for since by His mere bodily death He
would have profited us nothing, He needed in soul also to
struggle with everlasting death, and in this way to pay the debt
of our crime and our punishment. And lest any one might haply
suspect that this theory had stolen upon Calvin unawares, the
same Calvin calls _all of you who have repelled this doctrine,
full as it is of comfort, God-forsaken boobies_ (Institut. ii.
16). Times, times, what a monster you have reared! That delicate
and royal Blood, which ran in a flood from the lacerated and torn
Body of the innocent Lamb, one little drop of which Blood, for
the dignity of the Victim, might have redeemed a thousand worlds,
availed the human race nothing, unless _the mediator of God and
men, the man Christ Jesus_ (I Tim. ii. 5) had borne also _the
second death_ (Apoc. xx. 6), the death of the soul, the death to
grace, that accompaniment only of sin and damnable blasphemy! In
comparison with this insanity, Bucer, impudent fellow that he is,
will appear modest, for he (on Matth. xxvi.), by an explanation
very preposterous, or rather, an inept and stupid tautology,
takes _hell_ in the creed to mean the tomb. Of the Anglican
sectaries, some are wont to adhere to their idol, Calvin, others
to their great master, Bucer; some also murmur in an undertone
against this article, wishing that it may be quietly removed
altogether from the Creed, that it may give no more trouble. Nay,
this was actually tried in a meeting at London, as I remember
being told by one who was present, Richard Cheyne, a miserable
old man, who was badly mauled by robbers outside, and, for all
that, never entered his father's house.[2]
And thus far of Christ. What of Man? The image of God is utterly
blotted out in man, not the slightest spark of good is left: his
whole nature in all the parts of his soul is so thoroughly
overturned that, even after he is born again and sanctified in
baptism, there is nothing whatever within him but mere corruption
and contagion. What does this lead up to? That they who mean to
seize glory by faith alone may wallow in the filth of every
turpitude, may accuse nature, despair of virtue, and discharge
themselves of the commandments (Calvin, _Instit._ ii. 3). To
this, Illyricus, the standard-bearer of the Magdeburg company,
has added his own monstrous teaching about original sin, which he
makes out to be the innermost substance of souls, whom, since
Adam's fall, the devil himself engenders and transforms into
himself. This also is a received maxim in this scum of evil
doctrine, that all sins are equal, yet with this qualification
(not to revive the Stoics), "if sins are weighed in the judgment
of God." As if God, the most equitable judge, were to add to our
burden rather than lighten it; and, for all His justice, were to
exaggerate and make it what it is not in itself. By this
estimation, as heavy an offence would be committed against God,
judging in all severity, by the innkeeper who has killed a
barn-door cock, when he should not have done, as by that infamous
assassin who, his head full of Beza, stealthily slew by the shot
of a musket the French hero, the Duke of Guise, a Prince of
admirable virtue, than which crime our world has seen in our age
nothing more deadly, nothing more lamentable.
But perchance they who are so severe in the matter of sin
philosophise magnificently on divine grace, as able to bring
succour and remedy to this evil. Fine indeed is the function
which they assign to grace, which their ranting preachers say is
neither infused into our hearts, nor strong enough to resist sin,
but lies wholly outside of us, and consists in the mere favour of
God,--a favour which does not amend the wicked, nor cleanse, nor
illuminate, nor enrich them, but, leaving still the old stinking
ordure of their sin, dissembles it by God's connivance, that it
be not counted unsightly and hateful. And with this their
invention they are so delighted that, with them, even Christ is
not otherwise called _full of grace and truth_ than inasmuch as
God the Father has borne wonderful favour to Him (Bucer on John
i: Brent hom. 12 on John).
What sort of thing then is righteousness? A relation. It is not
made up of faith, hope and charity, vesting the soul in their
splendour; it is only a hiding away of guilt, such that, whoever
has seized upon this righteousness by faith alone, he is as sure
of salvation as though he were already enjoying the unending joy
of heaven. Well, let this dream pass: but how can one be sure of
future perseverance, in the absence of which a man's exit would
be most miserable, though for a time he had observed
righteousness purely and piously? Nay, says Calvin (_Instit._
iii. 2), unless this your faith foretells you your perseverance
assuredly, without possibility of hallucination, it must be cast
aside as vain and feeble. I recognise the disciple of Luther. A
Christian, said Luther (_De captivitate Babylonis_), cannot lose
his salvation, even if he wanted, except by refusing to believe.
I hasten to pass on to the Sacraments. None, none, not two, not
one, O holy Christ, have they left. Their bread is poison; and
as for their baptism, though it is still true baptism,
nevertheless in their judgment it is nothing, it is not a wave
of salvation, it is not a channel of grace, it does not apply to
us the merits of Christ, it is a mere token of salvation
(Calvin, _Instit._ iv. 15). Thus they have made no more of the
baptism of Christ, so far as the nature of the thing goes, than
of the ceremony of John. If you have it, it is well; if you go
without it, there is no loss suffered; believe, you are saved,
before you are washed. What then of infants, who, unless they
are aided by the virtue of the Sacrament, poor little things,
gain nothing by any faith of their own? Rather than allow
anything to the Sacrament of baptism, say the Magdeburg
Centuriators (Cent. v. 4.), let us grant that there is faith in
the infants themselves, enough to save them; and that the said
babies are aware of certain secret stirrings of this faith,
albeit they are not yet aware whether they are alive or not. A
hard nut to crack! If this is so very hard, listen to Luther's
remedy. It is better, he says (_Advers. Cochl._), to omit the
baptism; since, unless the infant believes, to no purpose is it
washed. This is what they say, doubtful in mind what absolutely
to affirm. Therefore let Balthasar Pacimontanus step in to sort
the votes. This father of the Anabaptists, unable to assign to
infants any stirring of faith, approved Luther's suggestion;
and, casting infant baptism out of the churches, resolved to
wash at the sacred font none who was not grown up. For the rest
of the Sacraments, though that many headed beast utters many
insults, yet, seeing that they are now of daily occurrence, and
our ears have grown callous to them, I here pass them over.
There remain the sayings of the heretics concerning life and
morals, the noxious goblets which Luther has vomited on his
pages, that out of the filthy hovel of his one breast he might
breathe pestilence upon his readers. Listen patiently, and blush,
and pardon me the recital. If the wife will not, or cannot, let
the handmaid come (_Serm. de matrimon._); seeing that commerce
with a wife is as necessary to every man as food, drink, and
sleep. Matrimony is much more excellent than virginity. Christ
and Paul dissuaded men from virginity (_Liber de vot. evangel._).
But perhaps these doctrines are peculiar to Luther. They are not.
They have been lately defended by my friend Chark but miserably
and timidly. Do you wish to hear any more? Certainly. The more
wicked you, are, he says, the nearer you are to grace (_Serm. de.
pisc. Petri_). All good actions are sins, in God's judgment,
mortal sins; in God's mercy, venial. No one thinks evil of his
own will. The Ten Commandments are nothing to Christians. God
cares nought at all about our works. They alone rightly partake
of the Lord's Supper, who bury consciences sad, afflicted,
troubled, confused, erring. Sins are to be confessed, but to
anyone you like; and if he absolves you even in joke, provided
you believe, you are absolved. To read the Hours of the Divine
Office is not the function of priests, but of laymen. Christians
are free from the enactments of men (Luther, _De servo arbitrio,
De captivilate Babylon_).
I think I have stirred up this puddle sufficiently. I now finish.
Nor must you think me unfair for having turned my argument against
Lutherans and Zwinglians indiscriminately. For, remembering their
common parentage, they wish to be brothers and friends to one
another; and they take it as a grave affront, whenever any
distinction is drawn between them in any point but one. I am not
of consequence enough to claim for myself so much as an
undistinguished place among the select theologians who at this day
have declared war on heresies: but this I know, that, puny as I
am, I run no risk while, supported by the grace of Christ, I shall
do battle, with the aid of heaven and earth, against such
fabrications as these, so odious, so tasteless, so stupid.