Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Antichrist · On the Roman Pontiff, Book III
Chapter 23: The Lies of Chytraeus Are Refuted
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Antichristo, On Antichrist (On the Roman Pontiff, Book III). The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
David Chytraeus, in his Commentary on chapter 9 of the Apocalypse, explaining that vision of John, in which, at the sounding of the fifth Angel's trumpet, there was first seen a huge star fall from heaven to the earth, to which was given the key of the pit of the abyss; then there was seen a most dense smoke ascend from the abyss, which darkened the Sun and the air; last, from the smoke there were seen to come forth certain wonderful locusts, which a little after bore also the appearance of horses, and lions, and scorpions, and armed men — this vision, I say, Chytraeus, explaining, so thought it to suit the Roman Pontiff, and wished it to be thought so by others, that he said: “That Antichrist, or the order of the Roman Papacy, is described in this vision, is not doubtful.”
And indeed he teaches that the beginning of this vision is to be taken from the year of the Lord 600, and that that star falling from heaven is Gregory the Great, Roman Pontiff, and his successors, who, having cast away the keys of the kingdom of heaven, received the keys of the pit of the abyss. That the smoke coming forth from the pit is the corruptions of doctrine and the various traditions of the Roman Pontiffs. Finally, he will have the swarm of locusts to be the Bishops, Clerics, Monks, etc.; and, to dissipate that smoke in some way, he proposed an antithesis of the Papist and the Evangelical doctrine, or the Antichristian and the Christian, which comprises twelve articles, as it were another Apostles' Creed.
But this opinion of his can be refuted in many ways. First, because it rests on no witness. For the ancient Interpreters, as Arethas, Bede, Primasius, Anselm, Rupert, and others on this place, by that star which fell from heaven understand the Devil, not some Bishop. For of the Devil it is said, Isaiah 14: How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, who didst rise in the morning? And because the Devil fell long before John wrote the Apocalypse, therefore the Fathers note that it was not said by John, I saw a star falling from heaven, but I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to the earth. For he saw that star already creeping over the earth, which of old had shone most brightly in heaven. To the Devil too most aptly suits what follows: And there was given to him the key of the pit of the abyss. For as Christ has and communicates to His own the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and reigns in the minds of the Faithful and the pious, so the Devil has the keys of the pit of the abyss, and reigns in the sons of diffidence, and in the Scriptures is everywhere called Prince of darkness, Prince of this World, God of this age, John 12 and 14, 2 Corinthians 4, Ephesians 6, Colossians 1, and elsewhere. He too it is who, God permitting, sends forth from the pit the smoke of errors, and who launches into the borders of the Church new swarms of locusts, that is, new heresiarchs with their armies, in almost every age.
Secondly, because it is repugnant to the opinion of Chytraeus what John says in this same chapter of the sixth Angel and the sixth persecution. For Saint John, in chapters 8 and 9 of the Apocalypse, describes by the trumpets of six Angels six persecutions of heretics, which were to be from the time of the Apostles down to the consummation of the World. And Chytraeus himself, by the first trumpet, understands not ill the heresy of the Ebionites, which was stirred up in the time of the Apostles; by the second he understands the heresy which followed after, of the Gnostics; by the third, the still later heresy of Samosatenus and Arius; by the fourth, the heresy of Pelagius, which was later than all those.
Now if by the fifth is understood the persecution of the Roman Antichrist, which, as they themselves confess, is the last persecution, what shall we understand by the sixth trumpet? Chytraeus answers: by the sixth trumpet is signified the persecution of Mohammed and the Turks. But this is not rightly said, both because the Mohammedans are not heretics, but pagans, and also because the persecution of Mohammed will not follow the persecution of Antichrist, but precede it, as we think, or be waged at the same time, as Chytraeus says. And so Chytraeus is forced to confound the fifth trumpet with the sixth, though he referred the rest to diverse times plainly enough. Better, therefore, do the Catholics by the sixth trumpet understand the persecution of Antichrist, which will be truly the last and most grievous; but by the fifth, some very pernicious heresy which will most nearly precede the times of Antichrist — which indeed many very probably conjecture to be the Lutheran heresy.
Thirdly, because Chytraeus errs by the whole heaven, when he teaches that the falling star is Saint Gregory. For Saint Gregory, if any credit can be given to the historians, did not fall from heaven to earth, but ascended from earth to heaven. For from a Praetor he was made a Monk, from a Monk a Bishop, nor ever returned from the episcopate to the praetorship, nor from monasticism to the world. In the way that Basil, Nazianzen, Chrysostom among the Greeks, Martin, Paulinus, and Augustine among the Latins, from being secular became Monks, from Monks Bishops, nor did anyone ever say that they therefore fell from heaven to earth. Next, Gregory was second to none in continence, sobriety, love of heavenly things; but in humility he surpassed almost all; and yet Chytraeus dares to say that he fell from heaven, that is, from the heavenly life to earth, that is, to an earthly and delicious life. Finally, Luther himself says that Gregory was a holy Pontiff, in the Supputation of times; and, following Luther, Theodore Bibliander, table 10 of the Chronology, extols the same Gregory with wondrous praises, and says that how much he advanced in the study of piety and doctrine can be known from his books — which indeed is most true, for his writings breathe an admirable sanctity. Nor less vain is what the same Chytraeus adds of the smoke of the pit, which he interprets as the corruptions of doctrine introduced into the Church by Gregory and his successors. For Gregory innovated nothing as regards doctrine; but as regards rites and discipline he corrected many things which had crept in by abuse, restored many which had been obliterated by the negligence of the times, and instituted very few new ones, and those with mature counsel, as can be known both from the four books on his life written by John the Deacon, and from his letter 63, Book 7, where he gives the reason of the rites which he renewed or instituted. But this very thing will chiefly become plain, if we run through that very antithesis of the Evangelical and Papist doctrine which Chytraeus proposes, and to which he afterward often refers his readers. So then he says:
I. On the true knowledge and invocation of God.
“The Gospel teaches that the one only God is to be invoked and worshipped, as He has commanded Himself to be worshipped in His word, and that all confidence of our salvation is to be placed in the goodness and mercy of God alone. The Papists command that not the one true God only, but also dead men, or saints, be invoked, and that help and aid be sought and expected from them in dangers, etc. Then also, plainly after the Heathen manner, they bind the invocation and worship of God to certain statues, just as if to him who invokes at this or that statue God were more propitious than elsewhere.”
Since of these controversies which are touched in this antithesis we have elsewhere copiously discoursed, here we will only most briefly demonstrate that the doctrine which is called Papist by Chytraeus neither fights with the word of God, nor began in the time of Saint Gregory.
The word of God teaches indeed that the one only God is to be worshipped and invoked with that invocation and adoration which is due to God alone; for the true God, who is also a jealous God, does not suffer that we hold any creature for the creator. Yet meanwhile that same word of God commands that we honor the more excellent creatures, and even invoke some — not indeed as gods, but as dear and familiar to God. Just as Kings would indeed take it ill if they saw royal honors conferred on their servants, who yet gladly receive it when they behold those same servants of theirs honored and observed. Adore, says David, Psalm 98, his footstool. And Job chapter 5: Call, if there be any that will answer thee, and turn to some of the saints. Wherefore Obadiah, a great and holy man, adored Elijah, prostrate to the earth, 3 Kings 18. And the sons of the Prophets, when they had heard that the spirit of Elijah rested upon Eliseus, coming, adored him prostrate to the earth. And the Apostle Paul, in almost every epistle, implores the prayers of the Christians, that by them he may be freed from many dangers. Nor can any reason be given why the honor due to God should be diminished if we ask of the spirits of the Saints that they pray to God for us, and not diminished if we ask the same of the living.
Finally, blessed Ambrose was 200 years more ancient than Saint Gregory, and yet in his book on widows he speaks thus: “The Angels are to be entreated, who are given us for a guard; the Martyrs are to be entreated, whose patronage we seem to claim for ourselves by some pledge of their body.” And below: “Let us not blush to employ them as intercessors of our weakness, etc.”
Moreover, we bind worship and invocation to the statues of the Saints, to the memorials of the Martyrs, and the other religious monuments, no otherwise than God of old bound them to the sanctuary, or to the temple of Solomon. For although God hears us everywhere, and in every place we can raise our hands to God, yet not without cause did the Holy Spirit in Isaiah chapter 56, and Christ in Matthew chapter 21, call the Temple of God a house of prayer; nor without cause did the most pious Emperor Theodosius (to pass over meanwhile very many other examples of antiquity) go round with the Priests and the people all the places of prayer, lie prostrate in sackcloth before the shrines of the Martyrs and Apostles, and ask for himself faithful aids by the intercession of the Saints. And certainly Theodosius, who did this, and Rufinus, who writes this, Book 2 of the Ecclesiastical history, chapter 33, preceded Saint Gregory by nearly two hundred years.
II. On the office and benefits of Christ.
“The Gospel teaches that on account of the one and only Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, crucified, dead, and raised for us, freely, not on account of any works or merits of ours, remission of sins and eternal salvation are given us. And indeed that this is the honor proper to God alone, as is said Isaiah 43: I am, I am he that blot out iniquities. Likewise: There is salvation in no other. The Papists on the contrary teach that not on account of the merit of Christ alone, but partly on account of Christ, partly on account of our contrition and obedience, or good works, we are justified and made safe, etc.”
The Catholic doctrine does not hold this, that sinners are justified partly on account of Christ, partly on account of their works, as if even without Christ the works themselves merited anything; since we distinguish three kinds of works. One, of those which are done by the powers of nature alone, without Faith and the grace of God; and of these we plainly pronounce, with the Apostle, that a man is not justified by works, but by Faith, and that if anyone were justified by such works, he would have glory, but not before God, as blessed Paul says of Abraham, Romans 4. And so of these works there is no controversy between us, although you everywhere, by a most impudent lie, attribute to us that we teach works without the Faith of Christ to be meritorious.
The other kind of works is that which proceeds from Faith and the grace of God, and disposes to reconciliation with God and the remission of sins — such as are Prayer, Almsgiving, Fasting, Sorrow for sins, and others of the kind. Which works indeed we do not say to be meritorious out of the justice of the reconciliation itself; but on the contrary we rather hear the Council of Trent saying, session 6, chapter 8, that men are therefore justified freely, because neither Faith nor the works which precede justification merit justification itself — namely out of justice, as if justification were owed to such works. Yet we confess that these very works, in so far as they proceed from Faith and the divine aid, are divine works, and in their own way merit, that is, obtain the remission of sins. For this, though you do not grant it, yet the word of God grants. For what is it that Ezekiel says, chapter 18: When the wicked turneth himself away from his wickedness, he shall save his own soul? What is it that Daniel says, chapter 4: Redeem thou thy sins with alms? What is it that Jonah says, chapter 3: God saw their works (fastings and sackcloth) and had mercy on them? What is it that Christ says, Luke 7: Many sins are forgiven her, because she hath loved much?
This same thing too not only Gregory, but before him many Fathers taught. Ambrose, Book 10 on Luke: “Tears do not ask pardon, but merit it.” Jerome, Book 2 against the Pelagians: “Those who simply confess their sins merit by humility the clemency of the Savior.” Augustine, letter 105: “Nor is the remission of sins itself without some merit, if faith obtains it. For there is not no merit of the faith by which he said: God be merciful to me a sinner; and he went down justified by the merit of the faithful humbled one, etc.” And letter 106: “If anyone should say that faith merits the grace of working well, we cannot deny it, nay we most gladly confess it.”
The last kind of works, finally, is of those which are done by a man already justified, and proceed from the Holy Spirit dwelling in the heart of man, and diffusing charity in it. To which works, whether you will or no, we attribute merit; not that they merit the remission of sins, which has preceded, and which cannot properly fall under merit, but that they truly and properly merit eternal glory and beatitude; for otherwise how would Paul, 2 Timothy 4, say: I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith; as to the rest, there is laid up for me a crown of justice, which the Lord, the just Judge, will render to me in that day? For if eternal life is not truly the reward of good works, why does he call it a crown of justice, and not rather a gift of clemency? Why does he say it is to be rendered, not given? Why by a just Judge, not by a liberal King? Rightly therefore Augustine, letter 105: “Whence eternal life itself, which surely will be had in the end without end, and is therefore rendered to preceding merits — yet, because the same merits to which it is rendered are not prepared by us through our own sufficiency, but wrought in us by grace, is itself also called grace; not because it is not given to merits, but because the very merits too, to which it is given, have been given.”
Nor indeed do those two testimonies of Scripture frighten us: I am he that blot out iniquities; and, There is salvation in no other. For such testimonies exclude another God, another Christ, another Savior and Physician of souls, who, the true God and Christ Jesus the Savior being excluded, should promise salvation; but they do not exclude Faith, Hope, Charity, Penance, the Sacraments, by which, as by certain means and instruments, God Himself chiefly working, the merit of Christ is applied to us. Otherwise, how do those sentences, I am he that blot out iniquities, and There is salvation in no other, cohere with these: Thy faith hath made thee safe, Luke 7; He will save them, because they have hoped in him, Psalm 36; He shall save his own soul, Ezekiel 18; The fear of the Lord driveth out sin, Ecclesiasticus 1; He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, Mark last chapter; He that eateth this bread shall live for ever, John 6? But of these enough. Chytraeus proceeds.
III.
“The Gospel teaches that he who does penance, and hears the promise, ought to believe the promise, and to determine that sins are remitted not only to others, to Peter or Paul, but also to himself for Christ's sake; that he pleases God, is received by God, and heard; and with this faith he must approach God in daily invocation. The Papists contend that we must always doubt whether we have remission of sins — which doubt simply fights with Faith, and is plainly Heathen.”
That we ought to have faith in the promises of God, and in no way to doubt of them, our Gospel teaches plainly enough, and all Catholics teach. But that remission of sins is absolutely promised to men by God is nowhere read in our Gospel. Much less is it read that each one ought certainly to determine that his sins are remitted, that he pleases God, is received by God, and heard. And rightly is this not read, because it would destroy the other things which are most plainly and clearly read in it. For what is clearer than that which the Wise man writes, Ecclesiastes 9: There are just and wise men, and their works are in the hand of God; and yet man knoweth not whether he be worthy of hatred or love? Likewise how plain is that which Job says, chapter 9: Although I should be simple, even this my soul shall be ignorant of? And below: I feared all my works, knowing that thou didst not spare the offender? What of this, that the divine promises have almost all an annexed condition, which no one can certainly know whether he has fulfilled as he ought? Matthew 19: If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Luke 14: If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. Romans 8: The Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit, that we are the sons of God; and if sons, heirs also — heirs indeed of God, and joint heirs with Christ; yet so if we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him. Finally, Saint Ambrose (as we said above) much more ancient than Gregory, in sermon 5 on Psalm 118: “He wished to have taken away from himself the reproach which he suspected, either because he had thought it in his heart and not done it, and, though abolished by penance, he was yet suspicious lest perchance its reproach still remained; and therefore he prays God to take it away, who alone knows what even he who did it can be ignorant of.”
IV.
“The Gospel teaches that there is only one propitiatory sacrifice in the World, etc. Hebrews 7: Christ was offered once, to take away sin, etc. The Papists teach that daily in the sacrifice of the Mass Christ is offered by the Priests to God the Father, etc.”
The Gospel teaches indeed that there is only one propitiatory sacrifice in the World, that, namely, which was once offered on the cross; nor do the Catholics deny this. But that that one sacrifice cannot be daily repeated in mystery by that same supreme Pontiff Christ, through the hands of the Priests, the Gospel nowhere teaches — and this the Catholics affirm. Nor do they alone affirm it who were after the times of Gregory, but absolutely all the Fathers, even those who preceded Gregory by many centuries. Hear, in the name of the rest, Augustine alone, in letter 23 to Boniface, speaking thus: “Was not Christ once immolated in Himself? and yet in the Sacrament He is immolated to the peoples, not only through all the solemnities of Easter, but every day.”
V.
“The Gospel teaches that sin is not only the external actions fighting with the law of God, but also the doubts about God, carnal security, and contumacy, and the concupiscence born with us and remaining in the regenerate, Romans 7. The Papists deny that these evils remaining in the regenerate are sins fighting with the law of God.”
Nowhere do the Papists, that is, the Catholics, teach that only external actions are sins; but you are allowed to lie, for you learned this from your father, who stood not in the truth. Moreover, that doubts about God, carnal security, contumacy, and concupiscence, if they be voluntary, are sins, we do not at all doubt; but if they be involuntary — such as were those desires of the flesh against the spirit which Paul felt, though he did not consent to them — that these are sins, we constantly deny. Nor do we dispute with you about the words of Paul, as if the words of Paul seemed true to you, false to us, but about the interpretation of those words. Nor ought you to take it ill if we prefer Augustine, and the whole choir of the Saints, to you new men. For thus speaks Augustine, Book 1 against the two epistles of the Pelagians, chapter 13: “But concerning this concupiscence of the flesh I believe they are deceived, or deceive, with which it is necessary that even the baptized man — and this if he most diligently advances, and is led by the Spirit of God — contend with a pious mind. But this, although it is called sin, is so called not because it is sin, but because it was made by sin — as the handwriting of anyone is called his hand, because his hand made it.”
VI.
“The Gospel teaches that man in this weakness of nature can by no means satisfy the law of God, and by this perfect fulfilling of the law be just and free of all sin, Romans 8: The wisdom of the flesh is an enemy to God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither can it be. The Papists contend that man can satisfy the law of God, and by this fulfilling of the law be just, and merit eternal life.”
The Papists, that is, the sons of the Catholic Church, do not say that man in this weakness of nature is free of all sin. For we acknowledge and profess it most true, which John says at the beginning of his first epistle: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves. But since those daily sins neither take away justice, nor are so much against the law as beside the law of God — since for the remission of such offences every Saint prays in a seasonable time, Psalm 31, and all the sons of God, just and holy though they be, are taught to say daily, Forgive us our debts, Matthew 6 — therefore we do not fear to assert that a man justified by the grace of God can, by the aid of that same grace, both fulfill the law and by that fulfilling merit eternal life; for we know who said: And his commandments are not heavy, 1 John 5; and who likewise said: Call the laborers, and pay them their hire, Matthew 20; and again: Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess the kingdom prepared for you; for I was hungry, and you gave me to eat, Matthew 25.
Wherefore Augustine, in his book on grace and free choice, chapter 16: “It is certain that we keep the commandments if we will; but because the will is prepared by the Lord, it must be asked of Him that we will as much as suffices, that by willing we may do.” And on the spirit and the letter, chapter 10: “Therefore grace is given, not because we have fulfilled the law, but that we may be able to fulfill the law.” Nor does that word of the Apostle move us, The wisdom of the flesh is an enemy to God. For the same Apostle had before said, Romans 7: Therefore I myself with the mind serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. But what we do with the mind, that we truly do; but what we do with the flesh, if the mind resists, is not ours, as the same Apostle says: If I do that which I will not, it is no more I that do it.
VII.
“The Gospel teaches that good works are only those which are commanded by God, etc.: according to the rule which I command thee, these only do to the Lord; thou shalt not add, nor diminish. The Papists on the contrary have overwhelmed the whole Church with traditions, etc.”
Now these have been repeated by you a thousand times, and refuted by ours. But it is false which you say, that it is held in the Gospel that those only are good works which God commanded. For where, I ask, did God command virginity? Does not Paul say: Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord, 1 Corinthians 7 — and yet in the same place he says that it is a good work to remain a virgin: Therefore, he says, he that giveth his virgin in marriage doth well; and he that giveth her not doth better. Nor does that rule much help you: What I command thee, these only do to the Lord. For in that place God forbids nothing else than that we corrupt His precepts, but keep them whole, as He commanded, not declining to the right hand, nor to the left. And so Saint Augustine, in his book on holy virginity, chapter 30, distinguishing precepts from counsels: “For it cannot be said ‘thou shalt not marry,’ as ‘thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not kill’; those are exacted, these are offered. If these are done, they are praised; unless those are done, one is condemned. In those the Lord commands us a debt; in these, if you have spent anything more — note — in returning He will repay you.”
VIII.
“The Gospel teaches that both parts of the Sacrament of the Lord's supper are to be ministered to all Christians; and indeed of the chalice it expressly says: Drink ye all of this. The Papists on the contrary decree and define” [otherwise].
As yet we do not see that place of the Gospel where we are taught that both parts of the Sacrament of the Lord's supper are to be ministered to all Christians. For the Lord did not say of the chalice, Drink ye all of this, all Christians, but Drink ye all of this; and who those “all” were, Mark explained, when he added: And they all drank of it. But not all Christians drank, but all the Apostles, who alone then ate with the Lord.
IX.
“The Gospel teaches that true penance, or conversion to God, is a serious sorrow of heart for sins committed, and a Faith determining that sins are certainly remitted to it for Christ's sake, etc. The Papists on the contrary, although they number contrition among the parts of penance, yet feign that it merits this remission of sins; and they add auricular confession, not commanded by God, and satisfaction, or undue works, by which they feign that satisfaction is made for the eternal punishments of sins, and that these very things can be redeemed with money. Which whole doctrine is a blasphemy against the merit of the Son of God, who alone satisfied for our sins.”
Here I see nothing proved, no testimonies of the Gospel brought forward, only empty words mixed with lies poured out. For what you say of conversion, and serious sorrow of heart, you could have omitted. For we truly require conversion and serious sorrow of heart in penitents; whereas you have nothing else than I know not what terrors in place of contrition. What you add of a Faith determining that sins are remitted to us, was refuted above. What you say, that among the Papists contrition merits the remission of sins, is a lie, also refuted above. What you also say, that the Papists say satisfaction is made for eternal punishments by temporal satisfactions, is likewise a lie. For we do not think that we satisfy for the eternal punishments, which we do not doubt are remitted to us in justification, but for the temporal punishments, which either here or in purgatory God exacts of those who after Baptism come to penance and reconciliation. “The punishment,” says Augustine, Tract 124 on John, “is more prolonged than the guilt, lest the guilt be thought small, if the punishment too ended with it.”
What finally you add, that auricular confession is not commanded, and that satisfaction fights with the merit of Christ — you say indeed, but do not prove. But read, if you please, sermon 5 of blessed Cyprian on the lapsed, and you will find confession necessary, and satisfaction, and these very words often repeated. Moreover, that satisfaction is redeemed with money (lest perchance you suspect here some base traffic) is nothing else, among the Catholics, than that one kind of satisfaction can be changed into another by the judgment of the Priest — as fasting into almsgiving. Let us proceed to the rest.
X.
“The Gospel teaches that marriage is granted and free to all men, laymen and priests; and expressly says that the prohibition of marriage and of foods is a diabolical doctrine. The Papists on the contrary forbid marriage to a great part of men, to Priests and Monks, and command abstinence from certain foods on certain days.”
But where, I ask, does the Gospel teach that marriage is granted to those who have a vow of continence? Perhaps in Hebrews 13, where we read: Marriage honorable in all. But if by in all it comprises absolutely all men, marriage will be honorable also in father and daughter, in mother and son, in brother and sister. Or if this does not please you, let it also not please you that marriage ought to be called honorable between a Monk and a Nun, and the other men to whom it is not lawful to enter marriage by a vow. For the Apostle wills only this, that we honor marriage in all rightly and legitimately joined. But it remains for you to prove that those are rightly and legitimately joined who have vowed perpetual continence to God.
Hear Chrysostom, what he writes to Theodore the Monk, who wished to take a wife, or perhaps even had taken one, in letter 6: “Marriage is honorable, but it does not befit thee now to keep the privileges of marriage; though thou frequently call this very thing marriage, yet I esteem it worse than adultery.” Of the place of the Apostle, 1 Timothy 4, Forbidding to marry, etc., see what we said above, chapter 21, near the end.
XI.
“The Gospel teaches that there is one true and solid foundation upon which the Church of God is built, namely, our Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Corinthians 3, Acts 4; and the place Matthew 16 Augustine so interprets, saying: Upon this rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God — that is, upon myself, the Son of the living God, I will build my Church; upon me I will build thee, not me upon thee. The Pope on the contrary vociferates that upon the rock of the Roman Church and the ordinary succession of the Pontiffs the whole remaining Church of the Christian World is built.”
But Paul, I believe, does not contradict himself when he says, Ephesians 2: We are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets. Nor does John contradict Paul, who asserts that there is no foundation of the Church but Christ, 1 Corinthians 3, when he says, Apocalypse chapter 21, that the twelve Apostles are the twelve foundations of the Church. For Paul, 1 Corinthians 3, speaks of the primary foundation; but the same Paul, Ephesians 2, and John, Apocalypse 21, speak of the secondary foundations. Of which foundation Augustine too speaks, in the Psalm against the party of Donatus, where he says: “Number the Priests even from the very See of Peter. That is the rock which the proud gates of hell do not overcome.” But of this matter enough was said above, Book 1, chapter 10, on the Pontiff.
XII.
“The Gospel teaches that no Apostle or Bishop, or other minister of the Gospel, has a superior and greater power and domination over another, as regards ministry; but that all ministers obtain an equal power of teaching the Gospel, administering the Sacraments, binding the wicked, and absolving those who do penance, as the Scriptures clearly teach, Luke 22, 1 Corinthians 3 verse 4, John 20, and Matthew 18 — to all the Apostles alike the keys of the kingdom of heaven are delivered. The Roman Pontiff on the contrary boasts that he has the supreme power over all the rest of the Bishops and the whole Church, and indeed both swords, the spiritual and the political, by divine right, etc.”
That a Bishop or Minister has greater power than another, I have not yet been able to find; for the places which you cite plainly signify the contrary. For Luke 22, the Lord indeed exhorts His own to humility, and forbids royal and tyrannical domination to those who ought to preside over the Church; yet meanwhile He affirms that among the Apostles one is greater than the rest, nay the Leader of the rest. For He says: He that is the greater among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is the leader (in Greek [hēgoumenos], that is, Leader) as he that serveth. But the Apostle, 1 Corinthians 3, where he says that he planted, but Apollo watered, and again that he as an architect laid the foundation, but others build upon it — does he not signify plainly enough that he was greater than Apollo and the rest of his fellow-workers?
Moreover, John 20, it is said indeed to all the Apostles: Behold, I send you; and, Whose sins you shall forgive, etc.; yet chapter 21 the Apostles, and all the other Faithful, are subjected to Saint Peter, as sheep to their Pastor, when to Peter alone, in the presence of the other Apostles, it is said by the Lord: Feed my sheep. Finally, although Matthew 18 it is said to all the Apostles, Whatsoever you shall bind, etc., yet to Peter alone it is said, Matthew 16: To thee will I give the keys of the kingdom, etc.; and without doubt the Lord would not have promised him something singularly, unless He had also wished to bestow on him something singular. But of these we said much above, Book 1, chapters 12, 13, 14.
To what you object of both swords against the Extravagant of Boniface VIII, where you also deride the arguments of the Pontiff, this one thing it pleases me to answer in this place: that all those things are taken from blessed Bernard, whom Melanchthon, Calvin, and others of your side are wont to call both a holy man and to allege more than once. See Book 2 and 4 on Consideration; or if you please, see what we discoursed of this very matter in the last book on the Pontiff. And let these things concerning your antithesis suffice in this place.
Now it must be briefly demonstrated that this very vision of John most excellently squares with Luther and the Lutherans. For, first, that Luther can be signified by that star which fell from heaven to earth is plain, since he himself became from a Monk secular, from a celibate married, from poor rich, and exchanged a sober and slender diet for sumptuous suppers and dinners. For what is this else than to have fallen from the heavenly habit of life to the earthly?
Next, that the smoke of the pit of the abyss followed his fall, he is plainly blind and stupid who does not perceive. For before Luther fell away from the Catholic Church, almost the whole West was of the same Faith and religion; wherever anyone went, he straightway recognized his brethren; for all were in the light. But after Luther's fall so great a smoke of errors, sects, schisms arose that now not even in the same province, nay not in the same city, or house, does one recognize another.
This smoke also darkened (as is said in the Apocalypse) the Sun and the air. For by the Sun both ours and the adversaries expound Christ, and by the air the Scriptures, through which in this life we in a manner breathe. And indeed how vehemently this smoke darkened Christ, Transylvania and the neighboring regions testify, where the divinity of Christ is openly denied; Germany too testifies, where the Anabaptists openly, the Ubiquists more obscurely, deny the humanity of Christ. And truly there were of old many heretics who similarly assailed Christ, but none more impudently than the heretics of this time; for not only do many of them deny that Christ is God, but they add also that He cannot be invoked, nor know what we do. It is a horror to hear, or read, with how great rashness the mysteries of Christ are disputed at this time.
Moreover, it is incredible how vehemently this smoke darkened the Scriptures; for there are now so many versions, so many commentaries fighting among themselves, that even those things which were once most clear now seem most obscure. What can be said clearer than what Paul says, 1 Corinthians 7: Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord, but I give counsel? And yet all the heretics of this time constantly deny that there is any counsel of virginity, and that Paul in that place gives no counsel of embracing virginity, but rather wished to scare men away from it. What can be said plainer than that word of the Lord: This is my body? And yet nothing is at this time more obscure. What shall I say of the Transylvanians, who so pervert by their commentaries the Gospel of John — which it is established was written chiefly against Cerinthus and Ebion, who denied the Divinity of Christ — that from it they chiefly prove that Christ is not God?
Let us come to the locusts, which came forth from the smoke of the pit. Chytraeus indeed by the locusts understands Bishops, Clerics, and Monks, but expounds wrongly; for even before the times of Gregory there were Bishops, Clerics, and Monks in the Church, and yet those wonderful locusts had not yet arisen. But most aptly all that John says of the locusts squares with the Lutherans and the other heretics of this time. For, first, locusts are wont always to come in a great multitude, and to march in troops. Proverbs 30: The locust hath no king, and they all go out by their bands. So the Lutherans have properly no one head, because they deny that there ought to be one Head of the whole Church; nevertheless in a very short time they grew into a huge multitude — and no wonder, for they opened the door to all vicious men. The gluttonous run to them, because among the Lutherans there are no set fasts; the incontinent, because among them all vows of continence are disapproved, and marriages are granted even to Monks and Priests, and to any Nuns whatever. Likewise all Apostates, because among them all cloisters are unbarred and turned into palaces; avaricious and ambitious Princes, because the Ecclesiastical goods, and even the Ecclesiastical persons, are subjected to their power; the idle and enemies of good works, because among them Faith alone suffices, good works are not necessary. Finally all the wicked and the criminal, because among them the necessity is taken away of confessing sins and rendering an account to one's own Pastor — which is wont to be the greatest bridle to sinners. Hence therefore the locusts are so multiplied.
Now these locusts are wonderfully described by Saint John. For they are said to have a human face, nay even a womanly face, the tail of scorpions, the body of locusts; likewise on their head they bear a crown as it were of gold, they have the teeth of lions, the breast armed with an iron breastplate; finally they seemed as horses prepared for battle, and the sound of their wings was heard as the sound of chariots running to battle, and they had over them a king, the Angel of the abyss, who is called the exterminator. The bland face signifies the beginning of their preaching, which always begins from the Gospel; for they promise that they will say nothing but the most pure word of God. Thus they most easily allure the simpler sort. The scorpion's tail signifies the venomous and deadly end; for after they have proposed the word of God, they deprave it by a perverse interpretation, and in that way, as with a bent-back tail, they fix a sting, and pour in deadly poison. The body of the locust, which is almost nothing but the belly (for the locust is a big-bellied animal, and therefore can neither walk nor fly rightly, but by hopping raises itself on high, and soon falls back to earth), signifies that the heretics of this time are men addicted to the belly, enemies of fasting and continence, and therefore can neither walk in the way of the commandments, nor fly to contemplate heavenly things.
They try indeed sometimes to raise themselves and amend their morals, but, after the manner of locusts, soon fall back to earth. An example can be the Saxon visitation; for when Luther noticed that, because of the Evangelical liberty preached by him and all the laws of the Church abrogated, the peoples rushed into vices without any bridle, he instituted a visitation, and admonished the pastors to preach penance, the fear of God, obedience, good works, etc. But he availed nothing; see Cochlaeus, in the life and acts of Luther, of the year 1527. In like manner they try to fly by contemplation, and now everywhere write books on the Trinity, on the Incarnation, and on other such mysteries, but they fall into most grave errors, nay most pernicious heresies, as is plain of the Ubiquists, who destroy the whole mystery of the Incarnation and the Trinity.
The crowns on the head of the locusts signify the arrogance and pride by which they lift themselves above all men. There is extant a book of Luther to Duke George; in it he says thus: “From the time of the Apostles no Doctor or Writer, no Theologian or Jurist, has so signally and clearly confirmed, instructed, and consoled the consciences of the secular states as I have done. By a singular grace of God I know this for certain, that neither Augustine nor Ambrose, who yet are the best in this matter, are equal to me in this.” What of this, that not only Luther and Calvin make no account of a thousand Cyprians and a thousand Augustines, but even any petty Lutheran Minister holds all the Papists for asses and blockheads? But those crowns were as it were of gold — that is, they seemed golden, but were not, because they feign that they are impelled by zeal for the honor of God and for charity to the things they say, whereas they know nothing less than the zeal of God.
The lion-like teeth signify the detractions by which they continually, both in writings and in speeches, tear the reputation of Pontiffs, Clerics, Monks, and even of the Saints themselves, who reign happily with God. And truly they seem nourished on detractions, and say so many things which neither are, nor were, perhaps never will be, that they seem to have utterly put off all conscience. This is plain enough, both from other things which are everywhere read in their books, and from those which we cited a little before from the Smalcald Synod, Illyricus, Tilmann, Calvin, and Chytraeus.
The breast armed with an iron breastplate signifies obstinacy; for they are so hardened that, even if they be most plainly convinced, yet they never yield, and often had rather die than recede from their obstinacy. The likeness of horses which seemed prepared for battle signifies audacity and rashness; for they most boldly provoke all to battle, though afterward, for arguments, they mostly bring forward only lies. Luther, in the Assertion, article 25: “Come hither, all you Papists together; combine your studies into one, if perchance you can dissolve this bond.” In the same manner speak almost all the others. But the likeness of chariots flying signifies the speed which this new heresy uses in occupying various regions; for in a short time it occupied not only many kingdoms in the northern parts, but even dared to run out as far as the Indians — although God did not permit that it could stick there. For that Church of Christ, still new and tender, did not deserve so great a scourge.
Finally, the Angel of the abyss is called the king of those locusts, because, although the locusts have no visible king, as we said above, yet they cannot lack an invisible king, that is, the Devil; for he is King over all the sons of pride. And the king of the locusts is called the exterminator, because by no heresy or persecution ever did the Devil so exterminate and lay waste the Church as by the Lutherans. For the other heresies, for the most part, destroyed one or another article, but did not overturn the whole order and discipline of the Church; but the Lutheran heresy, partly of itself, partly through its offspring — the Anabaptists, Calvinists, Trinitarians, Libertines — utterly destroyed all the goods of the Church in those places where it could rage. For it took from God the Trinity through the new Samosatenes; from Christ the Deity through the same, and the humanity through the Anabaptists; from the Angels and all the Saints all worship and invocation; from purgatory the suffrages of the living, nay, purgatory itself it plainly exterminated. From the Church which is on earth it took away many books of divine Scripture, almost all the Sacraments, all traditions, the priesthood, the sacrifice, vows, fasts, feast days, temples, altars, relics, crosses, images, all the monuments of piety; likewise the Ecclesiastical laws, the discipline, and the whole order it plainly exterminated.
But perhaps it spared hell, lest it should do injury to its king, the Angel of the abyss. It is not so; for even a true and local hell many of the Lutherans deny, and feign I know not what imaginary hells, as we demonstrated above in the disputation on the descent of Christ to hell. Truly, therefore, this heresy can be called an exterminating one, and worthy of that leader who in Hebrew is Abaddon, in Greek Apollyon, in Latin the exterminator. And it would truly be a wonder if even the Lutherans themselves did not wonder at this extermination, were they not plainly blinded by that smoke of which we spoke above.
But one consolation there is in so many evils, that (as John says) those locusts do not hurt the herbs and living trees, but only the men who have not the sign of the living God. For since that heresy is wholly carnal, it cannot easily deceive good men, and those in whose souls religion and piety are green and flourishing. So we see that it has rarely or never happened that anyone fell away from the Church to the Lutherans who had not first begun to be of a corrupt and lost life among the Catholics. But of these things enough.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXIII. Refelluntur mendacia Chytrcei. David Chytraeus in Com. cap. IX Apocal. explicans visionem illam Joannis, qua quin¬ to Angelo tuba canente primum visa est in¬ gens stella de coelo cadere in terram, cui data est clavis putei abyssi : deinde visus est fumus ex abysso densissimus ascendere, qui Solem et aerem obscuravit : postremo ex fumo visae sunt prodire locustae quaedam admirabiles , quae paulo post etiam equo¬ rum, et leonum, et scorpionum, et homi¬ num armatorum speciem prae se ferebant. Hanc, inquam, , visionem Chytraeus expli¬ cans, ita eam Romano Pontifici convenire existimavit, atque ab aliis existimari voluit, ut diceret : « Antichristum, seu ordinem Papatus Romani in hac visione describi, non dubium est. » Et quidem initium hujus visionis ab anno Domini 600 sumendum esse docet, ac stel¬ lam illam de coelo cadentem Gregorium Magnum Romanum Pontificem, ejusque suc¬ cessores esse, qui abjectis clavibus regni coelorum, claves putei abyssi receperunt. Fumum ex puteo prodeuntem esse corrup¬ telas doctrinaj, variasque traditiones Ponti- (1) Joan. II, 22. — (2) II. Thessal. II, 3 et 4. — (3) Coloss. II, 4; Matth. XXIV, 24. — (4) Coloss. II, 8. ficum Romanorum. Denique examen locus¬ tarum vult esse Episcopos, Clericos, Mona¬ chos etc. ac ut fumum istum aliquo modo dissiparet , proposuit antithesim doctrinae Pontificiae et Evangelicae, seu Antichristianse et Christiani®, quae duodecim articulos quasi alterum Symbolum Apostolicum comprehen¬ dit. Sed haec ejus sententia multis modis re¬ felli potest. Primo, quoniam nullo teste niti¬ tur. Veteres enim Interpretes, ut Arethas, Beda, Primasius, Anselmus, Rupertus, et alii in hunc locum per stellam illam quae de coelo cecidit , Diabolum intelligunt , non Episcopum aliquem. De Diabolo enim dicitur Isa. XIV : Quomodo cecidisti de coelo Lucifer, qui mane oriebarisl (!) Et quia Diabolus multo ante cecidit quam Joannes Apocalyp- sim scriberet ; propterea notant Patres, non esse dictum a Joanne : Vidi stellam de coelo cadentem , sed, vidi stellam de coelo cecidisse in terram (2). Vidit enim stellam illam per ter¬ ram jam repentem, quae olim in co?lo claris¬ sime fulserat. Diabolo etiam aptissime con¬ venit, quod sequitur : Et data est ei clavis putei abyssi. Ut enim Christus habet et com¬ municat suis claves regni coelorum, et reg¬ nat in mentibus Fidelium et piorum : ita Diabolus habet claves putei abyssi, et reg¬ nat in filiis diffidentiae, et in Scripturis pas- sim vocatur : Princeps tenebrarum , Princeps hujus Mundi , Deus hujus sceculi , Joan. XII et XIV. II. Corinth. IV. Ephes. VI.Coloss. I, et alibi. Ipse quoque est, qui Deo permittente fumum ex puteo emittit errorum : et qui nova locustarum examina, id est, novos haeresiarchas cum exercitibus surs, singulis pene saeculis, in Ecclesiae fines immittit. Se¬ cundo , quia Chytraei sententiae repugnat quod ait Joannes in hoc eodem capite de sexto Angelo, et sexta persecutione. NamS. Joannes in VIII et IX cap. Apocal. describit per tubas sex Angelorum sex persecutiones haereticorum, quae futurae erant a tempore Apostolorum usque ad Mundi consummatio¬ nem. Et ipse idem Chytraeus per primam tubam intelligit non male haeresim Ebioni- tarum, quae tempore Apostolorum excitata est : per secundam intelligit haeresim, quae postea secuta est Gnosticorum : per tertiam, haeresim adhuc posteriorem Samosateni et Arii : per quartam, lneresim Pelagii, quae illis omnibus posterior fuit. Jam vero si per quintam intelligitur Anti- christi Romani persecutio, quae, ut ipsi etiam fatentur, novissima persecutio est, quid in- telligemus per sextam tubam? Respondet Chytraeus : per sextam tubam significari persecutionem Mahumeti et Turearum. Sed hoc non recte dicitur, tum quia Mahumetani non haeretici, sed pagani sunt, tum etiam quia Mahumeti persecutio non sequetur An- tichristi persecutionem, sed praecedet, ut nos existimamus, vel simul peragetur, ut Chytraeus dicit. Itaque confundere cogitur Chytraeus tubam quintam cum sexta, cum tamen reliquas ad diversa tempora satis aperte retulerit . Melius igitur Catholici per sextani tubam intelligunt Antichristi perse¬ cutionem, quae vere postrema, et gravissima erit : per quintam autem, haeresim aliquam valde perniciosam, quae Antichristi tempora proxime antecedet, quam quidem esse hae¬ resim Lutheranam multi valde probabiliter conjiciunt. Tertio, quia toto coelo aberrat Chytraeus, cum stellam cadentem S. Gregorium esse docet. Siquidem S. Gregorlus si ulla fides historicis haberi potest, non de coelo ad ter¬ ram cecidit, sed de terra ad coelum ascen¬ dit. Nam ex Praetore Monachus, ex Monacho Episcopus factus est, nec unquam. ab episco¬ patu ad praeturam, nec a monachatu ad sae- culum rediit. Quomodo etiam Basilius, Na- zianzenus, Chrysostomus Graeci : Martinus, Paulinus, et Augustinus Latini, ex saeculari¬ bus Monachi, ex Monachis Episcopi facti sunt, nec ullus dixit unquam eos propterea de coelo in terram cecidisse. Deinde Grego- rius continentia, sobrietate, amore rerum coelestium nulli fuit secundus : humilitate autem pene omnibus praestitit; et tamen au¬ det Chytraeus dicere, eum de coelo, id est, a vita coelesti ad terram, hoc est, ad vitam terrenam et deliciosam cecidisse. Denique ipse quoque Lutherus Gregorium sanctum Pontificem fuisse dicit in Supput. tempor. et Lutherum secutus Theodorus Bibliander tab. 10. Chronol. eurndem Gregorium miris laudibus effert, et quantum profecerit in studio pietatis et doctrinae, ex libris ejus cognosci posse dicit : quod sane verissimum est : spirant enim scripta ejus admirabilem sanctitatem. Nec minus vanum est, quod addit de fumo putei idem Chytraeus, quem interpretatur corruptelas doctrinae a Grego- (1) Isai. XIV, 12. — (2) Apoc. IX, 1. rio et successoribus in Ecclesiam introduc¬ tas. Gregorius enim nihil novavit, quod atti¬ net ad doctrinam : quod vero ad ritus et disciplinam pertinet, multa correxit quae per abusum irrepserant, multa restituit quae ne- gligentia temporum obliterata fuerant, pau¬ ca admodum, eaque maturo consilio insti¬ tuit nova, ut cognosci potest, tum ex libris quatuor de vita ipsius, a Joanne Diacono scriptis, tum ex epist. ejus 63. lib. VII, ubi rationem reddit rituum, quos renovavit, vel instituit. Sed maxime hoc ipsum planum fiet, si percurramus ipsam antithesim doc¬ trinae Evangelicae et Pontificiae, quam Chy- traeus proponit, et ad quam saepius postea lectores suos remittit. Sic igitur ait. I. De vera Dei agnitione , et invocatione . « Evangelion docet, unum solum Deum invocandum et colendum esse, sicut se in suo verbo coli praecepit, et omnem fiduciam salutis nostrae in sola bonitate et misericor¬ dia Dei collocandam esse. Pontificii jubent, non unum solum verum Deum, sed etiam homines mortuos, seu sanctos invocare, et in periculis opem et auxilium petere et ex- pectare etc. Deinde etiam, plane Ethnico more, alligant invocationem et cultum Dei ad certas statuas, perinde ac si ad hanc, aut illam statuam invocanti, Deus magis propi¬ tius sit, quam alibi. » Quoniam de his controversiis, quse in hac antithesi attinguntur, nos alibi copiose dis¬ seruimus ; hic solum brevissime demonstra¬ bimus, nec pugnare cum verbo Dei, nec coepisse tempore S. Gregorii eam doctrinam, quae a Ghytraeo pontificia nominatur. Igitur verbum Dei docet quidem, unum solum Deum colendum et invocandum , ea invocatione et adoratione, quee soli Deo de¬ betur : nec enim patitur Deus verus, qui est etiam Deus Zelotes, ut creaturam quamlibet pro creatore habeamus. Interim tamen idem ipsum verbum Dei jubet, ut creaturas excel¬ lentiores honoremus, quasdam etiam invo¬ cemus, non quidem ut Deos, sed ut Deo ca¬ ras et familiares. Quemadmodum Reges moleste quidem ferrent* si regios honores in servos suos conferri viderent : qui tamen libenter accipiunt, cum eosdem suos servos honorari et observari conspiciunt : Adorate , inquit David in Psal. XCVIII, scabellum pedis ejus. Et Job cap. V : Voca, inquit, si est qui tibi respondeat, et ad aliquem Sanctorum con¬ vertere (1). Quocirca Abdias, vir magnus et sanctus, adoravit Eliam pronus in terram, III. Reg. XVIII. Et filii Prophetarum cum audivissent requievisse spiritum Elia; super Elise um, accedentes, adoraverunt eum proni in terram. (2). Et Apostolus Paulus in sin¬ gulis fere epistolis implorat orationes Chris¬ tianorum, ut per eas liberetur a multis peri¬ culis. Nec ulla ratio reddi potest, cur minua¬ tur honor Deo debitus, si a Sanctorum spi¬ ritibus postulemus, ut pro nobis Deum orent, et non minuatur, si illud idem a viventibus postulemus. Denique R. Ambrosius annis 200 antiquior S. Gregorio fuit, et tamen in lib. de vid. ita loquitur : « Obsecrandi sunt Angeli, qui no¬ bis ad praesidium dati sunt : Martyres obse¬ crandi, quorum videmur nobis quoddam corporis pignore patrocinium vindicare. » Et infra : « Non erubescamus eos interces¬ sores nostrae infirmitatis adhibere etc. » Porro ad statuas Sanctorum, ad memorias Martyrum, et caetera monumenta religiosa non aliter alligamus cultum et invocationem, quam alligaverit olim Deus ad sanctuarium, sive ad templum Salomonis. Etsi enim ubi¬ que Deus nos audit, et in omni loco levare possumus manus ad Deum ; tamen non sine causa, Spiritus sanctus apud Isaiam cap. LVI et Christus apud Matth. cap. XXI Tem¬ plum Dei domum orationis vocarunt : nec sine causa piissimus Imperator Theodosius (ut interim plurima alia antiquitatis exem¬ pla prseteream) circuibat cum Sacerdotibus et populo omnia orationum loca, ante Mar¬ tyrum et Apostolorum thec4s jacebat cilicio prostratus, et auxilia sibi fida Sanctorum intercessione poscebat. Et certe Theodosius, qui hoc egit, et Ruffinus, qui hoo scribit lib. II hist. Eccles. cap. 33. S. Gregorium annis ferme ducentis praecesserunt. (1) Psal. CXVIII, 5; Job. V, 1. — (2) IV. Reg. II* 15* II. De officio et beneficiis Christi. « Evangelion docet, propter unicum et so¬ lum Filium Dei Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum pro nobis crucifixum, mortuum, et resuscitatum, gratis, non propter ulla nostra opera, aut merita, nobis remissionem pec^ catorum, et salutem aeternam donari. Et quidem hunc solius Dei honorem proprium esse, ut dicitur Isaiae XLIII. Ego sum, ego sum ipse, qui deleo iniquitates. Item : Non est in aliquo alio salus. Pontificii contra do¬ cent, non propter solius Christi meritum, sed partim propter Christum, partim prop¬ ter nostram contritionem, et obedientiam, seu bona opera nos justificari, et salvos fie¬ ri etc. n Non hoc habet Catholica doctrina, ut par¬ tim propter Christum, partim propter opera sua justificentur peccatores, quasi etiam sine Christo ipsa opera aliquid mereantur : si¬ quidem tria distinguimus operum genera. Unum eorum, quae fiunt ex solis viribus na¬ turae, sine Fide et gratia Dei, et de his aper¬ te pronuntiamus cum Apostolo, quia ex ope¬ ribus non justificatur homo, sed ex Fide, et si ex ejusmodi operibus quis justificaretur, haberet gloriam, sed non apud Deum, ut de Abraham B. Paulus dicit, ad Rom. IY. Ita¬ que de his operibus nulla est inter nos con¬ troversia , tametsi passim impudentissimo mendacio id nobis tribuitis, quod opera sine Christi Fide meritoria esse doceamus. Alterum est operum genus, quod ex Fide et gratia Dei procedit, et ad reconciliationem cum Deo, ac peccatorum remissionem dis¬ ponit, qualia sunt Oratio, Eleemosyna, Je¬ junia, Dolor de peccatis, et alia id genus. Quae quidem opera non dicimus esse meri¬ toria ex justitia ipsius reconciliationis, sed e contrario potius audimus Tridentinam Sy¬ nodum dicentem, sess. VI, cap. 8. ideo gra¬ tis justificari homines, quia nec Fides, nec opera quae justificationem praecedunt ipsam merentur, nimirum, ex justitia, quasi ejus¬ modi operibus esset debita justificatio : fa¬ temur tamen haec ipsa opera, quatenus ex Fide et adjutorio divino proficiscuntur, divi¬ na esse opera, et suo modo mereri, hoc est, impetrare peccatorum remissionem. Id enim, etsi vos non conceditis, concedit tamen ver¬ bum Dei. Quid enim est, quod ait Ezechiel, cap. XVIII : Cum averterit se impius ab im¬ pietate sua , ipse animam suam vivificabit ? Quid est quod ait Daniel, cap. IV : Peccata tua Eleemosynis redime? Quid est quod ait Jonas, cap. III : Vidit Deus opera eorum (jejunia et cilicium) et misertus est eis ? Quid est, quod ait Christus, Lue, VII : Remittuntur ei pec¬ cata multa , quoniam dilexit multum (1) ? Idipsum quoque non solum Gregorius, sed ante eum multi Patres docuerunt. Ambro¬ sius lib. X in Lucam : « Lacrymae, inquit, veniam non postulant, sed merentur. » Hie¬ ronymus lib. II advers. Pelagian. : «Qui peccata simpliciter confitentur , merentur humilitate clementiam Salvatoris. » Augus- tin. epist. 105 : « Nec ipsa remissio pecca¬ torum sine aliquo merito est , si fides hanc impetrat. Neque enim nullum est meritum fidei, qua fide ille dicebat : Deus propitius esto mihi peccatori, et descendit justificatus merito fidelis humiliatus etc. » Et epist. 106: « Si quis dixerit, quod gratiam bene operan¬ di fides mereatur, negare non possumus, imo gratissime confitemur. » Postremum denique genus operum est eorum, quee a justificato jam homine fiunt, et a Spiritu sancto inhabitante cor homi¬ nis , et charitatem in eo diffundente proce¬ dunt. Quibus operibus , velitis nolitis, meritum attribuimus ; non quo remissionem peccato¬ rum, quae praecessit , et quae sub meritum proprie cadere non potest , sed gloriam ac beatitudinem sempiternam vere et proprie mereantur , alioqui enim quomodo Paulus II. Timoth. IV, diceret : Bonum certamen cer¬ tavi , cursum consummavi, fidem servavi, in re¬ liquo reposita est mihi corona justitiae, quam reddet mihi in illa die justus Judex (2). Si enim vita aeterna non est vere merces ope¬ rum bonorum ; cur eam vocat coronam jus¬ titiae , et non potius donum clementiae ? Cur dicit reddendam, non donandam? Cur a jus¬ to Judice, non a liberali Rege? Recte igitur Augustinus in epist. 105 : « Unde, inquit, ipsa vita aeterna, quae utique in fine sine fi¬ ne habebitur, et ideo meritis praecedentibus redditur, tamen quia eadem merita, quibus redditur , non a nobis parata sunt per nos¬ ti) Ezech. XVIII, 27 ; Dan. IV, 24; Jon. III, 10; Luc. VII, 47. — (2) II. Timoth. IV, 7 et 8. tram sufficientiam , sed in nobis facta per gratiam, etiam ipsa gratia nuncupatur, ncc ideo , quia meritis non datur, sed quia data sunt et ipsa merita, quibus datur. » Neque vero terrent nos duo illa Scripturas testimonia : Ego sum qui deleo iniquitates. Et : Non est in alio aliquo salus (1). Nam ex¬ cludunt ejusmodi testimonia alium Deum, alium Christum, alium Salvatorem, et Medi¬ cum animarum, qui, Deo vero et Christo Je- su Salvatore excluso , salutem polliceatur : non tamen excludunt Fidem, Spem, Chari- tatem, Poenitentiam , Sacramenta , quibus veluti quibusdam mediis et instrumentis, ip¬ so Deo praecipue operante, Christi nobis me¬ ritum applicatur. Alio qui, qua ratione cum istis sententiis : Ego sum qui deleo iniquita¬ tes , Et : Non est in aliquo alio salus ; cohaerent illae : Fides tua te salvam fecit , Lucae VII : Salvabit eos , quia speraverunt in eo. Psalm. XXX YI : Ipse animam suam vivificabit, Ezech. XVIII : Timor Domini expellit peccatum, Ec- cles. I : Qui crediderit , et baptizatus fuerit , salvus erit , Marci ult. : Qui manducat hunc panem , vivet in ceternum, Joan. YI (2). Sed de his hactenus. Pergit Ghytraeus. III. « Evangelion docet, agentem poenitentiam, et audientem promissionem, debere credere promissioni ; et statuere , peccata non tan¬ tum aliis , Petro aut Paulo , sed etiam sibi propter Christum remitti ; se Deo placere, a Deo recipi, et exaudiri : et hac fide in quo¬ tidiana invocatione ad Deum accedendum esse. Pontificii contendunt, semper dubitan¬ dum esse, an habeamus remissionem pecca¬ torum : quae dubitatio simpliciter pugnat cum Fide, et plane Ethnica est. » Haec ille. Evangelium nostrum satis aperte docet, oportere fidem habere promissionibus Dei, nec de iis ulla ratione dubitandum esse, Ca¬ tholici omnes docent. At promitti hominibus a Deo absolute remissionem peccatorum in Evangelio nostro nusquam legitur. Multo vero minus legitur , debere unumquemque certo statuere, sibi peccata remitti , se Deo placere, a Deo recipi, et exaudiri. Et merito id non legitur, quia destrueret ceetera, quae in eo apertissime clarissimeque leguntur. Quid enim illo clarius, quod scribit Sapiens Eccles. IX : Sunt justi atque sapientes , et ope¬ ra eorum in manu Dei , et tamen nescit homo , utrum odio , vel amore dignus sit? Item illud quam est perspicuum, quod ait Job. c. IX : Etiamsi simplex fuero , hoc ipsum ignorabit anima mea ? Et infra : Verebar omnia opera mea , sciens quod non parceres delinquenti ? (3) Quid, quod promissiones divinae fere om¬ nes conditionem annexam habent, quam ne¬ mo certo nosse potest, an ut oportet imple¬ verit? Matth. XIX : Si vis ad vitam ingredi , serva mandata. Lucee XIV : Si quis venit ad me, et non odit patrem, et matrem, et uxorem , et filios, et fratres , et sorores , adhuc autem et animam suam, non potest meus esse discipulus. Rom. VIII : Ipse Spiritus testimonium reddit spiritui nostro, quod sumus flii Dei : si autem filii , et haeredes, hceredes quidem Dei, co haere¬ des autem Christi, si tamen compatimur, ut et conglorificemur (4). Denique , S. Ambrosius Gregorio (ut supra diximus) multo antiquior, in serm. 5. super Psalm. CXVIII : « Sui vo¬ lebat, inquit, auferri opprobrium, quod sus¬ picatus est, vel quia cogitaverat in corde, et non fecerat , et poenitentia licet abolitum, suspectus tamen erat, ne forte adhuc rema¬ neret ejus opprobrium, et ideo Deum preca¬ tur, ut illud auferat, qui solus novit , quod nescire potest etiam ipse, qui fecit. » IV. « Evangelion docet , unicum tantum in Mundo sacrificium propitiatorium esse etc. Hebr. VII : Christus semel oblatus est , ut tolleret peccatum etc. Pontificii docent, quo¬ tidie in sacrificio Missae Christum a Sacerdo¬ tibus Deo Patri offerri etc. » Evangelium quidem docet, unicum tantum in Mundo esse sacrificium propitiatorium. il¬ lud, videlicet, quod in cruce semel oblatum est : neque id Catholici negant. At illud uni¬ cum sacrificium non posse quotidie repeti in mysterio ab ipso eodem summo Pontifice Christo per manus Sacerdotum, Evangelium (1) Isai. XLIII, 25; Act. IV, 12. — (2) Luc. VII, 50; Psal. XXXVI. 40; Ezech. XVIII, 27; Eccl. I, 27; Mare. XVI, 16; Joan. VI. 59. — (3; Eccl. IX, 1 ; Job. IX, 21. — (4) Matth. XIX, 17; Luc. XIV, 26; Rom. VIII, 16 et 17. 5 nusquam docet , et hoc Catholici affirmant. Neque ii soli affirmant,' qui post Gregorii tempora fuerunt, sed omnes omnino Patres, etiam qui multis saeculis Gregorium praeces¬ serunt. Audi, nomine caeterorum, unum Au- gustin. in epist. 23. ad Bonifac. sic loquen- tem : « Nonne semel immolatus est Christus in seipso? et tamen in Sacramento non so¬ lum per omnes Pascha] solenmitates , sed omni die populis immolatur. » V. ct Evangelion docet , peccatum esse non tantum actiones externas pugnantes cum le¬ ge Dei , verum etiam dubitationes de Deo, securitatem carnalem, et contumaciam, ac concupiscentiam nobiscum nascentem, et in renatis reliquam , Rom. VII. Pontificii ne¬ gant, hsec mala in renatis reliqua, esse pec¬ cata pugnantia cum lege Dei. » Nusquam Pontificii, hoc est, Catholici do¬ cent, solum actiones externas esse peccata, sed vobis mentiri licet ; id enim a patre ves¬ tro didicistis, qui in veritate non stetit. Por¬ ro dubitationes de Deo , securitatem carna¬ lem, contumaciam, et concupiscentiam , si voluntarias sint, peccata esse minime dubita¬ mus : si vero sint involuntariae, quales erant cupiditates illae carnis contra spiritum, quas Paulus sentiebat , etsi eis non consentiret ; eas vero peccata esse, constanter negamus. Neque de Paulinis verbis vobiscum discep¬ tamus, quasi Pauli verba vobis vera , falsa nobis esse videantur , sed de eorum verbo¬ rum interpretatione. Nec moleste ferre debe¬ tis, si Augustinum, et omnem chorum Sanc¬ torum vobis novis hominibus praeponamus. Sic enim loquitur Augustin. lib. Icont. duas epist. Pelagianor. cap. 13 : « Sed de ista concupiscentia carnis falli eos credo , vel fallere, cum qua necesse est, ut etiam bapti- zatus, et hoc' si diligentissime proficit, et spi¬ ritu Dei agitur, pia mente confligat. Sed haec, etiamsi vocatur peccatum , non quia pecca¬ tum est, sed quiapeccato facta est, sic voca¬ tur, sicut scriptura manus cujusque dicitur, quod manus eam fecerit. » VI. « Evangelion docet, hominem in hac im¬ becillitate naturae nequaquam posse satisfa¬ cere legi Dei, et hac perfecta impletione le¬ gis justum, et omnis peccati expertem esse, Rom. VIII. Sensus carnis inimicitia est ad¬ versus Deum : legi enim Dei non obtempe¬ rat, ac ne quidem potest. Pontificii conten¬ dunt, hominem posse legi Dei satisfacere, et hac impletione legis justum esse , et vitam aeternam mereri. » Non dicunt Pontificii, hoc est , Catholica] Ecclesiae filii , hominem in hac imbecillitate naturae omnis peccati expertem esse. Agno¬ scimus enim et profitemur verissimum esse, quod ait Joannes, initio epist. I : Si dixeri¬ mus, quia peccatum non habemus , nos ipsos se¬ ducimus (1). Sed quoniam quotidiana ista peccata nec justitiam tollunt , nec tam con¬ tra legem , quam praeter legem Dei sunt, cum pro remissione ejiismodi delictorum oret omnis Sanctus in tempore opportuno (2), Psalm. XXXI, et omnes filii Dei justi utique et sancti quotidie dicere doceantur : Dimitte nobis debita nostra (3), Matth. VI, propterea non timemus asserere , posse hominem per gratiam Dei justificatum , ejusdem gratiae adjutorio, et legem implere, et ea impletio¬ ne vitam aeternam promereri ; scimus enim quis dixerit : Et mandata ejus gravia non sunt. I. Joan. V. Et quis item dixerit : Voca operarios , et redde illis mercedem. Matth. XX. Et rursum : Venite benedicti Patris mei , pos¬ sidete paratum vobis regnum etc. Esurivi enim , et dedistis mihi manducare (4). Quare Augustinus lib. de grat. et lib. ar- bit. cap. 16: u Certum est, inquit, nos man¬ data servare, si volumus, sed quia praepara¬ tur voluntas a Domino, ab illo petendum est, ut tantum velimus, quantum sufficit, ut vo¬ lendo faciamus. » Et de spir. et lit. cap. 10 : (i Ideo datur gratia , non quia legem imple¬ vimus , sed ut legem implere possimus, » Neque movet nos illud verbum Apostoli : Sensus carnis inimicitia est adversus Deum. Nam idem Apostolus antea dixerat ad Rom. VII : Igitur ego ipse mente servio legi Dei , carne autem legi peccati (5). Quod autem mente agi- (1) I. Joan, I, 8. — (2) Psal. XXXI, 6. - (3) Matth. VI, 12. — (4) I. Joau. V; 3 ; Matth. XX, 85 Matth. XXV, 35. — (5) Rom. VIII, 7; VII, 25 et 20. G7 mus, id vere nos agimus ; quod autem car¬ ne agimus, si mens repugnat , nostrum non est, sicut idem Apostolus ait : Si quod nolo , inquit, facio , jam non ego operor illud. YII. « Evangelion docet , bona opera esse illa tantum, quae a Deo praecepta sunt etc. juxta regulam, quae tibi praecipio, haec tantum fa¬ cito Domino, non addas, neque minuas. Pon¬ tificii e contra totam Ecclesiam obruerunt traditionibus etc. » Jam haec sunt millies a vobis repetita, et a nostris refutata. Falsum autem est quod ais , in Evangelio haberi , illa tantum esse opera bona, quae Deus praecepit. Ubi enim, quaeso, praecepit Deus virginitatem? Nonne Paulus ait : De virginibus autem praeceptum Domini non habeo , I. Cor. YII, et tamen ibi¬ dem ait, bonum esse opus, virginem perma¬ nere : Igitur , inquit, qui Matrimonio jungit virginem suam , bene facit ; et qui non jungit , melius facit (1). Neque multum te juvat regula illa : Quae tibi praecipio , haec tantum facito Domino. Non enim eo loco prohibetDeus aliud, quam ne corrumpamus ejus praecepta, sed integre ea servemus, ut ille praecepit, non declinan¬ tes ad dexteram, neque ad sinistram. Itaque S. Augustin. lib. de S. virginit. cap. 30. dis¬ tinguens a consiliis praecepta : « Neque enim, inquit, sicut non moechaberis, non oc¬ cides; ita dici potest, non nubes : illa exi¬ guntur, ista offeruntur. Si fiunt ista, laudan¬ tur i nisi fiant illa, damnatur : In illis Domi¬ nus debitum imperat nobis , in his si quid amplius (Nota) supererogaveritis, in redeun¬ do reddet vobis. » VIII. « Evangelion docet, utramque partem Sa¬ cramenti coenae Domini omnibus Christianis ministrandam esse ; et quidem de calice ex¬ presse inquit : Bibite ex hoc omnes. Pontifi¬ cii e contra decernunt, et definiunt. » Adhuc non videmus locum illum Evange- lii, ubi doceamur, utramque partem Sacra- i menti coenae Domini omnibus Christianis mi¬ nistrandam esse. Nec enim de calice Domi¬ nus ait : Bibite ex hoc omnes Christiani, sed, Bibite ex hoc omnes ; qui vero essent illi om¬ nes, Marcus explicuit, cum addidit : Et bi¬ berunt ex illo omnes. Non autem biberunt omnes Christiani, sed omnes Apostoli , qui soli tunc cum Domino vescebantur. IX. « Evangelion docet, veram poenitentiam, seu conversionem ad Deum esse serium do¬ lorem cordis de admissis peccatis, et Fidem statuentem sibi peccata propter Christum certo remitti etc. Pontificii contra, etsi con¬ tritionem inter partes poenitentiae numerant: tamen hanc remissionem peccatorum mereri fingunt ; et addunt confessionem auricula¬ rem non mandatam a Deo ; et satisfactio¬ nem, seu opera indebita, quibus pro aeternis peccatorum poenis satisfieri , et haec ipsa posse pecuniis redimi fingunt. Quae tota doc¬ trina in meritum Filii Dei , qui solus pro peccatis nostris satisfecit, blasphemia est. » Hic nihil probari, nulla testimonia Evan- gelii adferri, tantum inania verba mendaciis admixta fundi video. Nam quod dicis de conversione, et serio dolore cordis, omitte¬ re potuisses. Nos enim vere conversionem, et serium dolorem cordis in poenitentibus requirimus ; cum vos nihil aliud, quam nes¬ cio quos terrores pro contritione habeatis. Quod addis de Fide statuente nobis remitti peccata , supra refutatum est. Quod ais, apud Pontificios contritionem mereri remis¬ sionem peccatorum, mendacium est, supra etiam refutatum. Quod etiam dicis, Pontifi¬ cios dicere , satisfactionibus temporalibus pro poenis seternis satisfieri, pariter est men¬ dacium. Non enim satisfacere nos putamus pro seternis poenis , quas nobis in justifica¬ tione remitti non dubitamus, sed pro poenis temporalibus, quas vel hic, vel in purgato¬ rio Deus exigit ab iis , qui post Baptismum ad poenitentiam et reconciliationem veniunt; « Productior est, » inquit Augustinus Trac¬ tat. 124. in Joan. « poena , quam culpa, ne parva putaretur culpa, si cum ea finiretur et poena. » Quod denique addis, confessionem auri- (1) I. Cor. VII, 25 et 38; cularem non esse mandatam, et satisfactio¬ nem pugnare cum merito Christi : dicis qui¬ dem, sed non probas. Lege vero, si placet, serm. 5. B. Cypriani de lapsis, et invenies exomologesim necessariam, et satisfactio¬ nem : et has ipsas voces saepius repetitas. Porro pecunia redimi satisfactionem (ne forte hic turpem aliquam negotiationem su¬ spiceris) nihil est aliud apud Catholicos, quam unum genus satisfactionis in aliud posse mutari judicio Sacerdotis ; ut jejunium in eleemosynam. Pergamus ad caetera. \ X. « Evangelion docet, conjugium omnibus hominibus, laicis, et sacerdotibus concessum et liberum esse ; et diserte inquit, prohibi¬ tionem conjugii, et ciborum, doctrinam dia¬ bolicam esse. Pontificii e contra magnae parti hominum, Sacerdotibus, et Monachis, conjugium prohibent, et certis diebus a cer¬ tis cibis abstinere jubent. » At ubi, quaeso, Evangelium docet, con¬ cessum conjugium esse iis, qui votum con¬ tinentiae habent? fortasse ad Hebr. XIII ubi legimus : Honorabile conjugium inomnibus( I). Caeterum, si in qmnibus omnes omnino ho¬ mines comprehendit, honorabile etiam erit conjugium in patre et filia; in matre ct fi¬ lio ; in fratre et sorore : Yel si hoc vobis non placet, non placeat etiam honorabile debere conjugium dici inter Monachum et Sancti¬ monialem, et caeteros homines, quibus per votum conjugium inire non licet. Apostolus enim id solum vult, ut conjugium honore¬ mus in omnibus rite et legitime copulatis. Yobis autem probandum superest, rite et le¬ gitime eos copulari, qui perpetuam conti¬ nentiam Deo voverunt. Audi Chrysostomum, quid Theodoro Mo¬ nacho, qui uxorem ducere volebat, vel for¬ tasse etiam duxerat, scribit in epist. 6. « Ho¬ norabiles, inquit, nuptiae, sed te jam ser¬ vare non convenit privilegia nuptiarum : quamvis frequenter hoc ipsum nuptias vo¬ ces, ego tamen adulterio illud pejus existi¬ mo. » De loco Apostoli, I. Tim. IY : Prohi¬ bentes nubere etc. vide quae diximus supra, cap. 21. prope finem. XI. « Evangelion docet, unum esse verum et solidum fundamentum, supra quod aedificata sit Ecclesia Dei, videlicet, Dominum nos¬ trum Jesum Christum, I. Cor. III, Act. IV, et locum Matth. XIV. Augustinus ita inter¬ pretatur, super hanc petram quam cogno¬ visti dicens : Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi, hoc est, super meipsum Filium Dei vivi ae¬ dificabo Ecclesiam meam ; super me aedifi¬ cabo te, non me super te. Pontifex e contra vociferatur, supra petram Ecclesiae Roma¬ nae, et ordinariam successionem Pontificum, totam reliquam Christiani Orbis Ecclesiam esse aedificatam. » At non pugnat, credo, Paulus secum, cum ait ad Ephes. II : Nos supertedificari supra fundamentum Apostolorum et Propheta?mm(2). Nec pugnat cum Paulo asserente : Nullum esse fundamentum Ecclesiae , prceter Christum , I. Cor. III, Joannes in Apoc. cap. XXI, cum ait : Duodecim Apostolos , duodecim esse Ec- clesios fundamenta (3). Nam Paulus I. Cor. III de primario fun¬ damento. Idem vero Paulus Ephes. II, et Joannes Apoc. XXI de fundamentis secun¬ dariis loquuntur. De quali etiam fundamen¬ to Augustinus loquitur in Psalmo contra partem Donati, ubi ait : « Numerate Sacer¬ dotes, vel ab ipsa sede Petri. Ipsa est petra, quam non vincunt superbae inferorum por¬ tae. » Sed de hac re satis multa supra dicta sunt, lib. I. cap. 10. de Pontifice. « Evangelion docet, nullum Apostolum vel Episcopum, aut alium Evangelii minis¬ trum, alio superiorem, et majorem poten-' tiam, et dominationem habere, quod ad mi¬ nisterium attinet. Sed omnes ministros pa¬ rem potestatem docendi Evangelii, adminis¬ trandi Sacramenta, ligandi sceleratos, et ab¬ solvendi agentes poenitentiam obtinere, ut clare docent Scripturae, Lucae XXII, I. Cor. III, versu 4. Joan. XX et Matth. XVIII om¬ nibus Apostolis pariter traduntur claves (1) Hebr, XIII, 4. - (2) Eph. II, 20. - (3) I. Cor. III, 11 ; Apoc. XXI, 14. regni ccelorum. E contra Pontifex Romanus jactitat, se supremam potestatem in omnes reliquos Episcopos, et totam Ecclesiam, et quidem utrumque gladium spiritualem et politicum habere de jure divino, etc. » Episcopum, vel Ministrum majorem potes¬ tatem, quam alium, adhuc non potui repe- rire : nam loca quse citas, contrarium plane significant. Siquidem Lucse XXII hortatur quidem Dominus suos ad humilitatem, et prohibet dominatum regium, atque tyran¬ nicum iis, qui Ecclesiae preeesse debent : in- terim tamen inter Apostolos unum majorem caeteris, imo et Ducem cseterorum esse affir¬ mat. Ait enim / Qui major est vestrum , fiat sicut minor , et qui prcecessor (Graece rryovgsvo;, id est. Dux) fiat sicut ministrator (1) . Aposto¬ lus autem I. Cor. III, ubi se plantasse dicit, Apollo autem rigasse, et iterum, se ut archi¬ tectum fundamentum jecisse, alios autem superaedificare, nonne satis aperte se majo¬ rem Apollo et caeteris coadjutoribus suis fuisse significat? Porro, Joan. XX dicitur quidem omnibus Apostolis : Ecce> ego mitto vos : et. Quorum remiseritis peccata etc. tamen cap. XXI sub¬ jiciuntur Apostoli, et caeteri Fideles omnes S. Petro, ut oves suo Pastori, cum soli Pe¬ tro coram aliis Apostolis dicitur a Domino : Pasce oves meas. Denique etiamsi Mat. XVIII dicatur omnibus Apostolis : Qucecurnque alli¬ gaveritis etc. tamen soli Petro dicitur, Matt. XVI : Tibi dabo claves regni etc. et sine du¬ bio non promitteret illi aliquid Dominus sin¬ gulariter, nisi etiam illi aliquid singulare exhibere voluisset. Sed de his multa dixi¬ mus supra lib. I, cap. 12, 13, 14. Ad ea, quae objicis de utroque gladio con¬ tra Extravagantem Bonifacii VIII, ubi etiam rides argumenta Pontificis ; id unum hoc loco respondere libet : ea omnia ex B. Ber- nardo sumpta esse, quem virum et sanctum vocare et non semel allegare solent Melan- chthon, Calvinus, et alii ex vestris. Vide lib. II et IV de Considerat, vel si placet, vide quae de hac ipsa re in lib, postr. de Pontif. disseruimus. Atque haec deantithesi tua hoc loco sufficiant. Nunc breviter demonstrandum erit, hanc ipsam visionem Joannis in Lutherum et Lu- theranos optime quadrare. Nam in primis Lutherum significari posse per stellam il¬ lam, quae de coelo in terram cecidit, planum est : cum ipse ex Monacho saecularis ; ex coelibe conjugatus ; ex paupere dives factus sit, et victum sobrium ac tenuem cum opi¬ paris coenisac prandiis commutaverit. Quid enim est hoc aliud quam ex coelesti vitae consuetudine ad terrenam decidisse? Deinde fumum putei abyssi, qui ejus ca¬ sum consecutus est, plane est caecus et stu¬ pidus, qui non sentit. Siquidem antequam Lutherus ab Ecclesia Catholica deficeret, to¬ tus fere Occidens ejusdem Fidei et religio¬ nis erat ; quocumque aliquis iret , fratres suos continuo agnoscebat : omnes enim in lumine erant. At post Lutheri casum tantus fumus errorum, sectarum, schismatum, ex¬ ortus est, ut jam nec in eadem provincia, imo nec in eadem civitate, aut domo, unus alium agnoscat. Obscuravit quoque hic fumus' (ut in Apoc. dicitur) Solem et aerem. Nam per Solem Christum, per aerem Scripturas, per quas in hac vita quodammodo respiramus, et nos¬ tri, et adversarii exponunt. Et quidem Chri¬ stum quam vehementer iste fumus obscura¬ verit, testantur Transylvania, et vicinae re¬ giones, ubi palam negatur Christi divinitas : testatur etiam Germania, ubi Anabaptistae aperte, Ubiquistae obscurius negant Christi humanitatem. Et sane fuerunt olim multi haeretici, qui similiter Christum oppugna¬ runt, sed nulli impudentius, quam haeretici hujus temporis : nam non solum multi eo¬ rum negant esse Christum Deum, sed ad¬ dunt etiam, non posse invocari, nec scire eum quid nos agamus. Horror est audire, vel legere, quanta temeritate de Christi myste¬ riis hoc tempore disputetur. Porro. Scripturas, 'incredibile est, quam vehementer iste fumus obscuraverit : tot enim jam exstant versiones, tot commenta¬ ria inter se pugnantia, ut ea etiam quae olim clarissima erant, nunc obscurissima videantur. Quid potest dici clarius, quam quod Pau¬ lus ait? I. Cor. VII : De virginibus praeceptum Domini non habeo , consilium autem do? (2) Et tamen omnes hujus temporis haeretici constanter negant, ullum esse consilium vir¬ ginitatis, et Paulum non dare consilium eo loco amplectendae virginitatis, sed ab ea po¬ tius absterrere homines voluisse. Quid potest planius dici quam illud ver¬ ti) Luc. XXII, 26. — (2) I, Cor. VII, 25. bum Domini : Hoc est corpus meum ? Et ta¬ men nihil hoc tempore obscurius. Quicl de Transylvanis dicam, qui Joannis Evange- lium, quod constat praecipue adversus Ce¬ rinthum et Ebionem scriptum esse, qui ne¬ gabant Christi Divinitatem, ita suis com¬ mentariis perverterunt, ut inde maxime pro¬ bent, Christum non esse Deum? Veniamus ad locustas, quae de fumo putei exierunt. Chytraeus quidem per locustas, Episcopos, Clericos, et Monachos intelligit, sed perperam exponit : nam etiam ante Gre- gorii tempora erant Episcopi, Clerici et Mo¬ nachi in Ecclesia ; nec tamen adhuc exortae fuerant istae admirabiles locustae. Aptissime vero omnia, quae de locustis Joannes dicit, inLutheranos et caeteros hujus temporis hae¬ reticos quadrant. Primum enim locustae semper in magna multitudine venire, et tur- matiifi.incedere solent. Proverb. XXX : He~ gem locusta non habet , et egreditur universa per tw^mas suas (1). Ita Lutherani caput unum proprie non habent', quia negant, unum esse debere Caput totius Ecclesiae : nihilominus tamen brevissimo tempore in ingentem multitudinem creverunt, nec mi¬ rum, nam aperuerunt ostium omnibus vi¬ tiosis hominibus. Gulosi ad eos accurrunt, quia non sunt apud Lutheranos stata jeju¬ nia : incontinentes, quia apud eos vota om¬ nia continentiae improbantur : et Monachis etiam ac Sacerdotibus, necnon Sanctimonia¬ libus quibuscumque Matrimonia concedun¬ tur. Item Apostatae omnes, quia apud eos claustra omnia reserantur, et in palatia con¬ vertuntur : Principes avari et ambitiosi, quia bona Ecclesiastica, et personae etiam Eccle¬ siasticae eorum potestati subjiciuntur : otiosi et inimici bonorum operum, quia apud eos sola Fides sufficit, opera bona non sunt ne¬ cessaria. Denique omnes improbi et scelesti, quia sublata est apud eos necessitas confi¬ tendi peccata, et rationem reddendi proprio suo Pastori, quod maximum esse solet free- num peccatoribus. Hinc igitur ita multipli¬ cantur locustae. Describuntur autem hae locustae a sancto Jdanne mirabiliter. Nam dicuntur habere faciem humanam , imo etiam muliebrem, caudam scorpionum, corpus locustarum : item in capite gestant coronam quasi au¬ ream,' dentes habent leonum, pectus lorica ferrea armatum : denique videbantur tan- quam equi parati ad bellum, et sonitus ala¬ rum earum audiebatur quasi sonitus cur- roum currentium ad bellum, et habebant super se regem Angelum abyssi, qui dicitur exterminator. Facies blanda significat ini¬ tium praedicationis eorum, quae semper in¬ cipit ab Evangelio, nihil enim se dicturos pollicentur, nisi purissimum Dei verbum. Ita facillime alliciunt simpliciores. Cauda scorpionis significat exitum venenatum et lethiferum : nam posteaquam verbum Dei proposuerunt, perversa interpretatione illud depravant, et eo modo quasi retorta cauda aculeum infigunt, et virus lethale infundunt. Corpus locustae, quod nihil fere est aliud quam venter, (est enim locusta ventrosum animal, et ideo nec incedere, nec volare rec¬ te potest, sed saltitando se erigit in altum, et mox ad terram recidit) significat, heere- ti&os hujus temporis esse homines ventri ad¬ dictos, inimicos jejuniorum et continentiae, et ideo nec incedere posse per viam man¬ datorum, nec volare ad res coelestes con¬ templandas. Conantur quidem aliquando se erigere, et mores emendare, sed more locustarum, mox recidunt ad terram. Exemplo esse potest Saxonica visitatio, nam cum animadverteret Lutherus obEvan- gelicam libertatem a se praedicatam, et om¬ nes Ecclesiae leges abrogatas, populos sine ullo fraeno in vitia ruere ; instituit visitatio¬ nem, et monuit pastores, ut praedicarent poenitentiam, timorem Dei, obedientiam, opera bona etc. Sed nihil profecit : vide Cochlaeum, in vita et actis Lutheri, anni 1527. Pari ratione conantur volare per contem¬ plationem, et scribunt jam passim libros de Trinitate, de Incarnatione, deque aliis ejus¬ modi mysteriis, sed incidunt in errores gra¬ vissimos, imo haereses perniciosissimas, ut patet de Ubiquistis, qui totum mysterium Incarnationis et Trinitatis destruunt. Coronee in capite locustarum significant arrogantiam, et superbiam, qua sese effe¬ runt super omnes homines. Exstat liber Lu¬ theri ad Ducem Georgium ; in eo sic ait : « A tempore Apostolorum nullus Doctor, aut Scriptor, nullus Theologus, aut Jurisconsul¬ tus, tam insigniter et clare conscientias see- cularium statuum confirmavit, instruxit, ac consolatus est, sicut ego feci. Per singula- (1) Prov. XXX, 26. rem Dei gratiam hoc certo scio, quoniam neque Augustinus, neque Ambrosius, qui tamen in hac re optimi sunt, mihi in hoc aequales sunt. » Quid, quod non solum Lu- therus, et Calvinus nihili faciunt mille Cy¬ prianos, et mille Augustinos, sed etiam qui¬ vis Ministellus Lutheranus habet pro asinis, et stipitibus omnes Papistas? Erant autem coronae illae quasi aureae, id est, aureae vi¬ debantur, sed non erant, quia fingunt se ze¬ lo honoris Dei, et charitatis impelli ad ea quae dicunt, cum tamen nihil minus, quam zelum Dei noverint. Dentes leonini significant detractiones, quibus assidue, et litteris, et sermonibus lai- cerant famam Pontificum, Clericorum, Mo¬ nachorum. et ipsorum etiam Sanctorum, qui cum Deo feliciter regnant. Et sane detractionibus nutriti videntur, et tam multa dicunt, quae nec sunt, nec fue¬ runt, fortasse etiam nunquam erunt, ut vi¬ deantur omnem conscientiam penitus exuis¬ se. Id satis patet, tum ex aliis, quae in eorum libris passim leguntur, tum ex iis, quae pau¬ lo ante citavimus ex Synodo Smalchaldica, Illyrico, Tilmanno, Calvino et Chytraeo. Pectus lorica ferrea armatum, significat obstinationem : sunt enim ita obdurati, ut etiamsi apertissime convincantur, nunquam tamen cedant ; et saepe mori malint, quam ab obstinatione sua recedere. Similitudo equorum, qui parati videban¬ tur ad bellum, significat audaciam et teme¬ ritatem : provocant enim audacissime omnes ad bellum, cum tamen postea pro argumen¬ tis sola mendacia plerumque proferant. Lu- therus in Assert. art. 25 : « Adeste, inquit, huc omnes Papistae in unum : conflate studia vestra in unum, si forte possitis hoc vincu¬ lum dissolvere. » Quo eodem modo loquun- v tur fere omnes alii. Similitudo autem curruum volitantium significat velocitatem, qua nova ista haere- sis utitur in variis regionibus occupandis : nam brevi occupavit non solum multa regna in partibus septentrionalibus, sed etiam us¬ que ad Indos excurrere ausa est, quamquam non permisit Deus, ut ibi haerere posset. Nec enim tantum flagellum merebatur no¬ vella adhuc, et tenera illa Christi Ecclesia. Denique, Angelus abyssi dicitur rex locus¬ tarum istarum,- quia etsi regem visibilem locustae non habent, ut supra diximus, invi¬ sibili tamen rege, id est, Diabolo carere non possunt : Ipse enim est Rex super omnes filios superbies (1). Dicitur autem rex locustarum exterminator, quia per nullam unquam hae- 2’esim, aut persecutionem Diabolus ita exter¬ minavit, ac vastavit Ecclesiam, ut per Lu- theranos. Nam caeterae haereses, ut pluri¬ mum, unum aut alterum articulum destrue¬ bant, sed non evertebant omnem ordinem, et disciplinam Ecclesiae : at Lutherana hae- resis partim per se, partim per suas proles Anabaptistas, Calvinistas, Trinitarios, Liber¬ tinos, omnia omnino Ecclesiae bona perdidit in iis locis, ubi grassari potuit. Nam abstulit a Deo Trinitatem per novos Samosatenos ; a Christo Deitatem per eosdem ; et humanita¬ tem per Anabaptistas ; ab Angelis et Sanctis omnibus omnem cultum et invocationem ; a purgatorio suffragia vivorum, imo purgato¬ rium ipsum plane exterminavit. Ab Eccle¬ sia, quae est in terris, abstulit multos libros divinae Scripturae, omnia fere Sacramenta, omnes traditiones, sacerdotium, sacrificium, vota, jejunia, festos dies, templa, altaria, reliquias, cruces, imagines, monumenta om¬ nia pietatis ; item leges Ecclesiasticas, disci¬ plinam, atque ordinem universum plane ex¬ terminavit. Sed forte inferis pepercit, ne suo regi An¬ gelo abyssi injuriam faceret. Non ita est : nam etiam inferos veros et locales multi Lu- theranorum negant, et imaginarios nescio quos inferos fingunt ; ut supra in disputatio¬ ne de descensu Christi ad inferos demons¬ travimus. Yere igitur exterminatrix haere- sis haec dici potest, et eo duce digna, qui Hebraice Graece omoXkv «v, Latine ex¬ terminans dicitur. Et mirum sane esset, si non etiam Lutherani ipsi hoc exterminium mirarentur, nisi a fumo illo, de quo supra diximus, plane essent obcsecati. Sed una in tot malis consolatio est, qiiod (ut Joannes dicit) locustae istae non laedunt herbas, atque arbores viventes : sed solum homines, qui non habent signum Dei vivi. Cum enim haeresis ista tota carnalis sit, non facile viros- bonos, et in quorum animis vi¬ ret, ac floret religio, et pietas, decipere po¬ test. Ita videmus, raro, aut nunquam acci¬ disse, ut ad Lutheranos ab Ecclesia aliquis defecerit, qui non prius corruptae, etperditae vitae inter Catholicos esse cceperit. Sed de his hactenus. (1) Job. XLI, 25.