Saint Paul is within reason when he writes that "there must be factions in order that true Christians may thereby be recognized" (I Cor. 11:19). For the appearance of trouble among Christians or of any false teachings provides an occasion for discovering how and with what affection those who are called Christians have received the Word of God.

For some, steadfastly persevering in the truth [of God's Word] as declared to us, demonstrate through experience that it has taken living root in their hearts, while others, allowing themselves easily to be seduced and tossed about here and there by every wind, show by their inconstancy that they ave never received it except in a thoughtless manner.

I will not at this time develop this matter at any length, but I will only take examples that are openly known to us.

For twenty years now the devil, in order to extinguish or suffocate the holy teaching of the gospel, which he could see was coming again from above, or indeed in order to defame it and make it odious to the world, has given birth to a number of diverse heresies and wicked opinions. Many people who had formerly been faithfully instructed in the pure teaching of the Scriptures were immediately swept away. Others, being disposed to resist all of these scandals with firm constancy, have been so much the more strengthened by God and His Word.

Our Lord, as I have said, permits and arranges for this to happen, both for the approbation of His own as well as for exposing the hypocrisy or vanity of those who profess to be faithful, prior to any scandal that should bring their unfaithfulness to light. It is true that we find some who are surprised by pure ignorance and simplicity. Still, there is no doubt that our Lord permits them to fall in order to humble them in the future and to help them profit better, in order to have a firmer and more solid foundation in His Word, correcting their past indifference and presumption.

Thus none can excuse himself when he is led astray from the right path and clings to lies and falsehood. He cannot say that it is not his fault or that our Lord should not punish him for not loving and fearing Him as he ought, as will surely be said by and by.

Be that as it may, whenever any wicked and pernicious sect begins to multiply, and especially grow, the task of those whom our Lord has constituted for the edification of His church is to oppose and to repulse that sect vigorously, before it is strengthened and further taints and corrupts.

In fact, inasmuch as the church is provided with pastors, it is not enough for them to serve and administer the good pasture of Jesus Christ's flock, unless they also keep on the lookout for wolves and thieves, in order to cry out against them and to chase them away from the flock whenever they come too close.

However, strictly speaking, heretics are not only like thieves or wolves, but are much worse. For since they corrupt the holy Word of God, they are like poison, murdering poor souls under the pretext of grazing them and providing them with good pasturage.

Furthermore, inasmuch as Satan never ceases to plot by every means the dissipation of that holy unity which we have in our Lord Jesus by [means of] His Word, it is absolutely necessary, for the preservation of the church, that this very same Word should serve and be used as a sword and shield in order to resist such machinations.

Now insofar as it has pleased our Lord, by His infinite goodness, without consideration for what I was, to add me to the number of those fie has commissioned, not only to publish His truth to the world, but also to maintain it against all adversaries, I must engage myself in this charge according to the ability He has given me. Moreover, several of the faithful, being warned of and clearly seeing in part the horrible dissipation that these evildoers have created, have never ceased soliciting me until such time as I have promised them to take up the matter.

On the Perniciousness of the Libertine Sect

Although all heretical sects are mortal pests in Christianity, nevertheless we do not read anywhere in all the early histories where there was ever a sect as pernicious as that which is today called the Libertines.

Not only is it malicious, but it is so monstrous and churlish that there is not a man of sane judgment who can think of it without feeling horror. Still, one need hardly be astonished, as if it contained anything new. For the core of the doctrine, its origin, dates from the time of the apostles, at least in part, as I shall soon show. The rest of it is similar to what the Valentinians, Cerdonites and Manichees held, who have troubled the church for over fourteen hundred years.

Truly the Libertines are ignorant and stupid people who have neither engaged in careful research nor learned their nonsense from it. And in all likelihood, they do not even know that it has always existed. At all events, what they know has not come through [their] reading. But the same master, who has of old raised up ancient heretics, as I have said, has rarely taught such a lesson as he has taught them.

For since we know through our Lord's warning that this father of lies has existed from the beginning, there is no doubt that all the errors that have ever been and Presently are have been forged in his workshop. Thus it is hardly a surprise if he has stirred up anew this wretched sect and has raised up ignorant persons to put it in force. For it has never been necessary for a man to be instructed in a school other than his to know how to blaspheme against God in destroying His truth through malicious tricks. For the word "lies," of which he alone is the principal progenitor, comprises all forms of combat against the truth.

But since it is one thing to talk and another to demonstrate one's point, it will be expedient to see, by means of solid and clear proofs, whether what I have said is true, that is, that the Libertines introduce nothing new with respect to the principal articles of all their teachings, but rather since the time of the apostles there have existed similar heretics, who soon afterwards were joined by others who have held diabolical delusions, with which the Libertines today seek to infect the world. Also by this means we shall see what constitutes their sect in order to be able to pass judgment on it.

On the Similarity Between the Libertine Sect and the One Mentioned by Saint Peter and Saint Jude

We see in Saint Peter's Second Letter (chap. 2), and in that of Saint Jude, that in their time there existed a sect of evildoers who, under the name of Christianity, led simple folk into dissolute living, removing their discretion between good and evil and benumbing their consciences through flattery, in order that, without scruples, each might indulge his appetite, abusing Christian liberty in order to give free rein to every carnal license, and taking pleasure in introducing a confusion into the world that overturns all civil government, order, and human decency.

For Saint Peter uses these words: "Like brute beasts, who are born to be caught, they revile in matters of which they understand nothing, deriving their happiness from their decadent' pleasures" (11 Peter 2:12f.). Then he compares them to "mists driven about by a storm," to "water less springs." And because they have "boasted so loudly," as if to carry their hearers higher than heaven, they "entice them with carnal passions and cause them to fall into concupiscences, from which they had just been pulled out, by permitting them liberty while they themselves are slaves to every corruption" (11 Peter 2:17ff.).

And Saint Jude concurs, saying that "they revile whatever they do not understand and that they have no other understanding save their carnal attitude,' like brute beasts, corrupting themselves in all that they think" (Jude 10).

Whoever knows anything about the Libertines upon a careful study of these passages will be able to discern that in these passages the Holy Spirit wanted to provide us with a description of this sect in order to put us on guard. As for myself, I would never have fully and keenly understood all these things if I had not recognized them in this sect.

But because not everyone recognizes them, it would be wise if they would become familiar with these qualities insofar as they can recognize the truth. For, first of all, with regard to this "loud boasting" which is mentioned here, we ought to note that from the first time one hears them, it seems quite clear that they have been ecstatically entranced above the highest clouds. For beyond the fact that they only speak as if entranced,' they use a language so foreign that those who hear it for the first time are astonished. And they frequently use this method for the express purpose of arousing their hearers' admiration in order to win their hearts before anyone realizes how abominable their doctrine is.

But once they have frothed through their boastful prefaces, they immediately sink into the abyss of leading the world into a surly life, void of discernment. For they make believe that man needlessly torments himself whenever he is scrupulous about anything; rather each person ought to be led by his spirit [or fancy].

Thus confounding all order, they mock both the fear of God and the faithful and have as little respect for His judgment as they have for any decent human consideration. And they promise liberty, that a man might freely give himself to all that his heart desires and covets, without experiencing difficulty, as if he were subject neither to law nor reason. For in their view, law and reason constitute a bondage which they do not want to hear mentioned. If anyone thinks that I am attributing" false teachings to them, I shall demonstrate, within a finger's breadth," that I am only reciting their own ideas, using those manners of speech that are customary and understandable, instead of those which they disguise in their jargon," which will be deciphered in their place.

On the Similarity Between the Libertines and Several Early' Heretics

Wild heresies appeared so soon after the time of the apostles that it is amazing how such idiotic nonsense was ever able to enter into human understanding. Nevertheless the Christian church was for some time somewhat vexed by them. But since everyone recognized how absurd they were, they held them in horror. So much is this so that for the past twelve hundred years not a single person in the entire world has willed to adhere to a heresy-or at least has not dared to profess one-until today, when these wretches, who are called the Libertines, were incited by Satan to blaspheme, not simply in a way similar to the others, but by adding still further damnable errors.

To begin with there was a Cerdon who emphasized two principles, one which he called good, the other evil. He maintained that everything in the world came from the [good] one and shared its substance. in saying this he denied the resurrection, because he thought that everything that had come from the one returned to its origin. Thus he held that Jesus Christ had appeared and suffered only as a phantom.

Next came Marcion, who disguised somewhat Cerdon's ideas, as he wanted the glory of inventing new theories rather than being known for dressing up what his predecessor had said badly; he was similar to him.

Close to this same time appeared the Gnostics, who were thus called because they attributed to themselves a superior understanding. However, the faithful called them Borborites to denote that they respected them about as much as they did frogs on the bank of a marsh. The Borborites also held that the soul is of the substance of God, positing two principles, one good, the other evil, and maintaining that souls that are kept pure in the human body return to the nature of a good God, while those that are soiled by the impurities of the world return to an evil [nature]. Besides, they employed an obscure jargon for babbling9 spiritual things, which no one could understand.

There was not a great difference between Valentinus and Apelles, except that each added something of his own to what others had said in order to make himself appear as the author of a new sect so that he might attract attention.

Now because from earliest times the Manichean sect was already renowned among the others, enjoyed a multitude of followers, endured the longest, and picked up ideas from everywhere, filling itself with copious false doctrines, it is essential for us to treat it as a unique mirror in order to show what we maintain.

The Manichees, rejecting the Old Testament and scoffing at the law and the prophets, accused God, who is revealed there, of cruelty and an excessive harshness. From the New Testament they accepted here and there what was in agreement with their ideas and cut out whatever displeased them or was contrary to their views. Next they created two different gods: one the origin of good, the other the origin of evil.

Similarly they posited two souls in man, one which came from the good god and which they said had been tainted by inferior things, but which nevertheless they wanted to purify until by degrees it returned to its first origin. As for the other, they said it could not be corrected but would forever return to the realm of darkness," of which it consisted.

Now their purification amounted to wicked sorceries and damnable acts of shamefulness similar to the other heretics whom I have named above. As for the souls of those who were not of their sect, they said these would go into brute beasts.

Furthermore, their sect was divided into three orders or classes. They called their great teachers Macarians, which means "blessed ones." And when they exercised the function of priests," they called them Catharites. In addition they had two kinds of novices. The ones to whom they revealed the secrets of the school were called elect. The others, whom they enticed over a long period of time in order to win them, they called hearers.

Although this is still not the place to infer point for point the teachings of the Libertines, nevertheless at the moment we need to note that they have only revived these old heresies which I have reviewed. They have taken something from each, creating a mass of confusion, only in the end to outdo all the others, transcending them in folly and impudence.

At first they boldly rejected the Scriptures, even giving nicknames to each apostle in order to scoff at their authority Saint Paul was "Broken Pot," Saint Peter "Denier of God," Saint John "the Doting Lad" Saint Matthew "Usurer." And they were unashamed to blaspheme thus openly. But seeing that people were shocked to hear them speak in this way, they decided to operate more covertly.

For example, in order not to seem to be rejecting Scripture, they have changed it into allegories, going out of their way to find obscure meanings, turning a man into a horse and a cloud into a lantern's horns. Such guile they share with the Priscillianist who of old used such an approach and differed thereby from the Manichees.

We shall later examine how they manage to twist and turn the Scriptures by such allegories. My present comments are made simply to point out the path they have followed and to identify their predecessors.

As for God and the substance of souls, though the Libertines in no way speak as the Manichees do, nevertheless what they babble between their teeth is tantamount to what they say, that is, that there is only one spirit who is God, and on the other side is the world; that all creatures are nothing unless the spirit of God, indwelling men, sustains them until it is withdrawn from them; and that all else that men possess that is beyond this is either of the world, or of Satan, or nothing.

If a man belongs to their sect, they make him God, saying that his soul is God's spirit. If not, they disregard him, as if he were nothing more than a horse, because only the world would be in him, which is nothing.

If we were to observe their life, we would find that they build all their illusions on the foundation of the Manichees with regard to these two principles-except they have discovered an easier means for making themselves gods than the Manichees had.

For whereas the latter went to great lengths in their purification and exorcisms, the Libertines purify themselves by doing nothing other than closing their eyes to the distinction between good and evil and by lulling their consciences to sleep in order to overcome any fear of hell. And lo, they are purer than angels !

As for the different degrees of discipleship, they follow a form similar to the Manichees. For they are very careful not to move too quickly when explaining to anyone what they have on their stomach, but they take a long, suspended time and subject to equivocation those whom they hope to bring into their sect, without revealing to them the watch-word until they see that they have sufficiently bewitched them to the point that they will believe whatever they want them to. Only those who are under oath discover their mysteries, with the exception that their major teachers reserve to themselves several points in order to justify their position and to preserve their dignity

For the moment these comparisons will suffice. But the order we are following will require us to speak of them more fully later on.

On the Origin of the Libertine Sect and its principal Leaders

It is true that if in general I should hope to include and review everyone who goes under the title of Libertine, as well as those whose ideas are similar to their misguided fantasies, of which I ,plan to treat in this book, I could not do it. For the sect has comprised different groups, some in Holland, some in Belgium, and some in the other regions of Lower Germany. But because I shall write solely about those of the French tongue, shall desist from making a long account concerning what has appeared in these other countries, as if it were a superfluous thing. And I shall content myself to explain' briefly the means by

which this poison got into our tongue and who the first abettors were who spread it about.

Afterwards he was helped by another named Quintin, who created such a commotion that he obliterated the memory of the other, so much so that he is considered the [movement's] first and principal contriver. And he-as he is a fierce villain-is extremely pleased with this reputation and is careful not to mention his predecessor,' as if he had learned nothing from him. He is from the country of Hainaut or one of its quarters.

Now I do not know how it came about that he came to France, but I saw him there a little over ten years ago. He was accompanied by a Bertrand of Moulins, who since then has recently become either God or nothing, according to their view, since he has departed this world.

Now not only would I not want to attribute any crime to them, but I would want to prevent anyone else from doing the same. Nevertheless, I cannot close my eyes concerning what I have heard from the late Etienne de la Forge," whose memory ought to be hallowed among the faithful as a holy martyr of Jesus Christ. He said that they left their country owing to some crime rather than because of their message.

I also understand that a third person was part of their group, a man named Claude Perceval.

They have worked so successfully that they have infected many people in France, so much so that there is hardly a place where they have lived that ought not be completely afraid of their corruption. Still at the same time they have continued to plot and to practice in their own country in order to seduce every poor simple idiot, or any whom they can find, who might be disposed to follow them. And they have been so successful that it is a horror to hear about the infection there.

It is true that thev have had a helper whom I have not yet mentioned-a little priest named Monsieur Anthony Pocquet, whom I also met three years ago.

These then are their principal "scholars"" or patriarchs. Since then others have attempted to achieve a renown as great as theirs. But, as I have said, I shall refrain from speaking about the Flemish, Dutch, and Brabantine [Belgian] groups.

In the French tongue alone, one can find a number of their savants" who are good for about three days [of argument and teaching], all of whom want to be the greatest. But this is of no surprise, for it is not necessary to be a scholar or intelligent to attain esteem among them. It only takes impudence to acquire it. In fact, all whom I have mentioned are as ignorant as they can be. And their arguments are without rhyme or reason, containing about as much sense as herring fishermen's disputations on astrology.

As for Monsieur Anthony, he thought how nice it would be to ponder his speculations after chanting the Mass. For people in his occupation have little else to do. But once it has been shown below in what their wisdom consists, we will more clearly see how easy it is for one to do this in order to acquire instant and great renown.

There are two reasons that prompt me to name these wretches, who otherwise are unworthy of anyone giving them a single word of recognition, so much so that the paper would be soiled by their names. First of all, many who have no idea what the word "Libertine" means recognize the name of Quintin. Second, it is expedient that such dangerous beasts should be marked so that everyone might recognize them for fear of being hurl by them through lack of information.

Furthermore, I know quite well that I will not please everyone by publishing their names in this way.But what should I do when I see four scamps who are already the cause of the ruin of four thousand men and of whom at least three are still seeking constantly to overthrow God's truth, who scatter the poor church, who deceive all whom they trap in their nets, who sow damnable blasphemies, and, what is still worse, put everyone into a horrendous confusion? Am I to keep silent or conceal it?

What cruelty on my part it would be if, in order to spare them or to please everybody, I should allow them to destroy and ravage everyone without warning that we should be on guard against them? If I were to know of brigands who had seized a road, ought I not reveal them for fear that poor travelers might fall into their hands? Should I hide poisoners; who have conspired to murder an entire people?

Now there is no brigandage as evil, nor poison as pernicious to the world, as this accursed doctrine which tends to scatter and destroy not only Christianity but also all human propriety-not even among the Turks and pagans has such ever been!

But if I were to remain silent," then I would deserve being thought of as a murderer, since I should be consenting to evil. [Hence] should I not sound a word, seeing that they abuse the name of Jesus Christ in order to introduce under His shadow an abomination greater than any the world has known, and by means of which He is subjected to such disgrace that He is considered worse than a devil from hell? In remaining silent, I should be less faithful than a dog that doesn't care if its master is attacked, or at least does not bark.

Therefore I am compelled to cry out with a loud voice that if ever there were any heretics who overflowed with -I won't say simply perverse and false opinions but-excessively horrible blasphemies, these three have surpassed them. And never were there monsters whom one ought to hold in such abomination as Quintin and his gang.

Since I can only edify the church of God by fighting against those who machinate to destroy it, I would be cheating myself if, to the best of my ability, I were to discredit the pope and his accomplices, but should pardon those who are by far the more serious enemies of God and the greatest spoilers of His truth. For even the pope retains some form of religion. He does not remove hope in eternal life. He teaches the fear of God. He observes some distinction between good and evil. He recognizes our Lord Jesus as true God and true man. He attributes authority to the Word of God. But the goal of Quintin and his gang is to turn heaven and earth upside down, to annihilate all religion, to efface all knowledge of human understanding, to deaden consciences, and to leave no distinction between men and beasts.

I have waited long to address this because I had truly hoped that these absurd delusions might have peacefully disappeared without the world's having to be dazed by them. But since our Lord has permitted these vermin to multiply so extensively that there is almost a public epidemic," one can no longer keep silent.

Consequently no one must take pleasure in the fact that I am exposing such evildoers, unless they can demonstrate that they are prepared to prevent them from hiding their iniquity. If there were a way of not publishing their turpitude in order to oppose them, I would take it voluntarily. But since it is necessary to oppose them, I would take it voluntarily. But since it is necessary for me to single them out in order to prevent them from doing evil, none should be offended.

In fact, that I have delayed so long in doing this shows of necessity that I am constrained. If at the beginning I had been so excited as to write against them-although that would have been my fight-nevertheless some rudeness" might have miscolored my argument precipitously. But now, since such a long time has elapsed, I have no other choice. For if anyone is offended by this, how will he be able to free himself of the suspicion of being one of their accomplices?

Rather, whoever has a drop of true zeal must try to expose them, whether they are great or small. And everyone, including children, ought to spit in their face, as a sign of abomination whenever they see them pass on the street, in order to shame those who, in supporting them, have caused the perdition of ten thousand souls-beyond the scandal and loss they have caused the gospel and the greater harm they could still do if God by His infinite goodness were not intervening. And since they can cause so much harm, am I to protect the honor of those who have put the sacred name of God and His Word to the greatest shame that has ever been imagined since the beginning of the world?

In addition to all this, there is a still more urgent reason that presses me to act. For insofar as I have been able to perceive, these scum have the audacity to pass themselves off as servants of God in order to deceive the simple. As in the case of Monsieur Anthony Pocquet who, about twelve years ago, having lived in this city for awhile and spread his wicked teaching, so practiced from the start and sought by subtle means to gain my endorsement in order to advance himself among those who defer in some authority to me, as if I approved of his diabolical errors.

Now he did not act his part so well that I was at least not able to recognize him for a dreamer and madman, as I remonstrated at our congregation, though I did not know of his wickedness then, but have since been informed that he came from the country of Anois and Hainaut where he sowed his poison.

When he came he was unable to get anything out of me. He alleged to me that our brother Martin Bucer-whose name should be honored throughout Christendom-certainly accorded him what I was refusing. Of course, while concealing his venom he was attributing false teachings to this good servant of God in order to serve his own advantage later and for the purpose of gaining an entrance among those who have some fear of God.

I beg of you, ought I keep silent when I see with my own eves how these brazen villains parade their adulteries before us, without our realizing it, for the purpose of corrupting poor souls? Think of the benefit they derive from our silence, insofar as they are so shameless as to want to wrest our approval by their wicked teachings!

Consequently it is quite in order to remove their mask behind which they hide in order the more easily to conduct their accursed enterprise, which overturns both God's honor and the salvation of souls.

How It Is Possible for This Bestial Sect to Have Such a Large Following and on the Character of Such People

Now someone will say to me, "Since this doctrine is so absurd and repugnant, not only to the entire holy Scripture, but also to all humanity, and since its leaders are coarse and ignorant people, how have they managed to acquire so many followers' even from among persons who earlier tasted the simple doctrine of the gospel?"

First of all, [it has happened] because our Lord permits sects to emerge in order to test everyone's faithfulness and to distinguish the good from the evil. Also, it is essential that such come about so that those who appear to accept4 the gospel and appear to wear the Christian's robe may be shown to be what they are, in order that the Christian church might be purged of such filth and that they might become an example to others, to the end that we might learn never to play with God.

Now beyond this common factor, and almost the mother of all heresies-being arrogance or presumption-if we look closely at the matter, we will find that there are two reasons why so many people have fallen into this error. One is that many have given themselves to a foolish curiosity, applying their minds to vain and superfluous questions, instead of searching for those things that edify. Not being content with the simplicity of the Scriptures, they have fluttered about in the air by [indulging in] frivolous speculations in order to satisfy their foolish lusts, or in order to demonstrate their subtlety and high intelligence.

The other reason is that some, having had a partial beginning in the pure teaching of the gospel, have misused it, not only treating it as a profane science, but in order to give themselves up' to a carnal license and lead a dissolute life. Indeed, knowing that the gospel does not permit that, but rather serves as a bridle for restraint, they wanted to find an easier way out,' in which it would be permissible for them to indulge in every turpitude.

In fact, almost all the disciples of this sect are comprised by these two types, i.e., those who are fantastics, who only want to fidget around with extravagant questions and who derive all their pleasure by engaging in useless things, and those who are profane people, who have grown tired of carrying Jesus Christ's yoke, and instead have sought to put their consciences to sleep in order to serve Satan without any remorse or scruples.

Still someone might ask, "How does it come about that those whose studies and inquiries involve them in areas which are not theirs to know let themselves be stupefied by such puerile follies, which would not even deceive the most ignorant and coarse people of the world? Indeed, it seems a strange warning that those whose searchings divert them from God, in order to follow their own will, can accept such absurd delusions."

To that I reply that it is a just vengeance of God's to place them in such a reprobate condition, in which they differ in no way from beasts, except by retaining their human form. In fact, what a dishonor this first group does God! For they search across country for new questions, as if the heavenly wisdom He reveals to us in the gospel were too simple and too base for them.

Indeed, seeing that God is not good enough to be their master, is it not a just vengeance that He should deliver them over to Satan and send them to his school? When their understanding cannot be content with the limits of truth, is it not fitting that it should enter into a labyrinth of complete deception, void of any path or address?

As for those who have misused the teaching of the gospel in order to debauch themselves, or who have been unable to bear it because of its austerity, is it not fitting that even their natural sense should be taken away along with their distinction between good and evil?

Let us realize, therefore, that it is in this manner that our Lord avenges the outrage that has been committed against His Word, or the contemptuous way in which it has been treated, or the manner in which it has been polluted by dissolute living.

Now when men have accordingly barred themselves from the Word of God, which is the only light for guiding us in the fight path, it is appropriate that the judgment given by Saint Paul should be executed on them, i.e., that God give Satan the efficacv to do with them whatever he chooses [I Tim. 1:20].

In summary, those are the principal reasons that Quintin and his accomplices have such a long string of followers at their rear. Besides, the cunning with which they operate helps them too. For from the very first they speak such a strange language that simple folk are enraptured by them, as they are confident that they can raise them into heaven to be with the angels. And holding their hearers suspended in this condition for a long time, until they have bewitched them, they make them believe that the moon is made of green cheese.

Without a doubt they have enveloped many in this way. For they inordinately promenade about those who are easily led around, enthralling them with their obscure jargon of which one cannot understand a thing, almost dazzling their eyes, to the extent that they can no longer see either white or black. Nevertheless, being so grossly ignorant and advancing such idiotic and absurd dreams, thev would never succeed in winning people as much as they do except for the fact that our Lord has willed to punish those who allow themselves to become entrapped, as He cast them into a reprobate state since they have not willed to cling to Him or to His teaching.

Finally, there is a special reason which pertains to princes, or lords who govern in their name, and to all persons who administer justice. It is that whenever they attempt to prevent the holy teaching of God from entering their countries, persecute those who proclaim it or who provide the means of coming to its knowledge, strive to abolish and extinguish it, and suppress it by every means that they can, our Lord punishes them by causing their countries to be infected by these vermin.

And isn't that a fitting judgment? For since they reject the benediction [of God], His malediction comes upon them instead. They don't think about that. They are content to think that they will attain the goal of their enterprises through fire and sword. But they are self-deceived. For sometimes when they machinate and plot, the Word of God proves the stronger and overcomes and destroys all the impediments that they have put forward in an effort to block God's approach. And the church in the midst of persecutions grows.

In the meantime, God causes the wicked sects in their countries to multiply even more in order to deprave and corrupt all their subjects, until they arrive at a [state of] confusion that no living man can remedy. For as a consequence of the counsel they pursue, there follows the indifferent punishment of all who oppose the superstitions of the antichrist, so that they gain nothing. For the only way to exterminate wicked sects and heresies is to yield to God's pure truth, which is the unique fight that dispels darkness, as experience truly demonstrates.

On Remedies for Not Falling into the Errors of the Libertines, or on Remedies for Withdrawing If Anyone Has Already Succumbed

Since our Lord has promised to manifest Himself to those who seek Him in fear and humility, if we want to come to Him, then let us take this route. Let us strive to come to the knowledge of our Lord Jesus, not by presuming to mount so high by our own understanding, but by praying Him to render us capable of growing in His teaching. For we cannot do this if we have not renounced the presumption of wanting to be wise beyond measure.

Let us desire nothing save to know one sole God through our Lord Jesus, and to aspire to no other goal-as in truth God does not teach us any other knowledge by His Word.

Let us not have so quarrelsome a spirit, or such sensitive ears, that we cannot consent to this simple and pure truth in which the infinite treasures of God are enclosed.

Let us not profane the Word of God by changing it into a vain and unfruitful knowledge, or by using it in any other way than to edify.

Let us not receive it in vain by scorning either the threats of God's judgment that it contains or His grace which is presented to us in it.

In brief, let us realize the end for which the gospel has been given to us, and let us receive it as God intends us to do. Let us consider what our disposition ought to be, and pray God to create such within us.

Therefore, let us not be afraid that heretics might have the power to pierce our eyes and make us turn from God. And, above all, let us not fear that God will forsake us so much as to [allow us to] slip into the abyss of this bestial Libertine sect.

This admonition is addressed to everyone. Our Lord, by His infinite mercy, has already begun to visit our hearts through His Word. [But] some have decided to take the gospel as a pastime. Seeing what has happened to them, let us be warned by their example.

We have a similar mirror in counting-house clerks, in idle office and shop workers, as well as among merchants and artisans. Therefore, in order that we might not become like reeds buffeted by every wind, let us take root in our Lord Jesus. And lest we become like little children, being vulnerable to every deception, let us grow and be confirmed in Him.

I say, "in our Lord Jesus," such as He was proclaimed long ago by the prophets and is clearly conveyed to us in the gospel.

Now if there are some who have already been seduced by means of their thoughtlessness, let them take no pleasure in their wrong. May they not become hardened against God. May they not close their ears to the holy admonitions that they will hear in this tract. May they not become intoxicated with their own knowledge and thus be incapable of making judgments. May they not totally degrade their consciences, which are already benumbed. But may they be awakened by Him who is the sun of righteousness, who has come into the world to enlighten us.

May everyone together patiently note the warnings that I shall offer, to the end that they might serve them as guideposts in order that they might not be overtaken by impudence. For I truly hope, if it pleases God, to paint these monsters so vividly that everyone will be able to perceive them from afar in order to be on guard against them.

On the Quintinists' Language and Style of Speech

To begin with, in the same way that the "wandering beggars," as they are called, possess a unique jargon which is only understood by their brotherhood, so much so that they can deceive a man while speaking face to face with him without him rcalizing it, so also the Quintinists possess an unbelievable tongue in which they banter, to the extent that one understands it about as little as a bird's song. Not that thev do not use common words as others do! But they so disguise their meaning that one can neither determine what their subject matter is or whether they are affirming or denying something.

Now it is true that they do this out of malice in order to entrap the simple by treachery and stealth. For they never reveal the abominable mysteries which are hidden under their words except to those who are already under oath. In the meanwhile they take a novice and leave him to gape and wonder, his mouth agog, without understanding anything. Thus by using guile they hide behind such obscurities the way brigands lurk in caves.

Truly these are the "loud-mouthed boasters" whom Saint Peter and Saint Jude compare to scum and froth (11 Peter 2:18; Jude 16). For there is little else to them. But thinking that they have bewildered the good sense of others by their high style, they are carried away themselves, so that even they understand nothing of what they babble.

I remember once in a large group how Quintin, seeing that I was successfully rebutting his idle talk and wanting to obscure lucidity, told me that I found his ideas unacceptable owing to a lack of understanding. To which I replied that I understood better than he, since he knew nothing that he was saying and I at least recognized that he wanted to seduce the world by means of absurd and dangerous follies. In fact, one will thus find that they have delved so deeply into their silly speculations and so enveloped themselves that they do not know where they are, for they are still up in the clouds.

Therefore let this be a means of recognizing them. For when you hear them speak in this way, you will only be hearing high German. For God created the tongue for the purpose of expressing thought in order that we might be able to communicate with each other. Consequently, it is a perversion of God's order to pommel the air with a confused sound that cannot be understood, or to try by subtle means to go around one's elbow to get to one's thumb in order to awaken one's hearers and then leave them in such a state.

Besides, the Scriptures ought to be our guide with respect to how God's mysteries are handled. Therefore let us adopt the language that it uses without being lightheaded. For the Lord knows quite well that if He were to speak to us in a manner befitting His majesty, our intelligence would be incapable of reaching that high. Thus He accommodates Himself to our smallness. And as a wet nurse coos" to her baby, so He uses toward us an unrefined way of speaking in order to be understood.

Whoever, therefore, reverses this order on1v succeeds in burying God's truth, which can only be known in the manner that He wills to reveal it to us. That is why we must labor to unravel their obscurities in order to drag them if necessary by force into the light, so that their abominations, which they make a point of hiding, might be known to all the world.

Similarly, every Christian must be warned that when he hears them garbling as they do he must cut them off immediately at the spigot and say to them, "Either speak the language that the Lord has taught us and which He uses in His Scriptures, or go speak to the rocks and trees!"

On the Libertines' Great Malice and Impudence in Glorying in the Fact That They Have a Double Heart and a Double Tongue

But they overflow still more. For they have no difficulty in saying one thing first and then another thing later and in changing their position to the delight of their hearers. What is more, they are very proud of this and hold to it fiercely For one of the principal articles of their theology is the necessity of having the art to ape themselves in order to deceive the world.

I don't know if I ought to call that impudence or malice. For since simplicity is the highest virtue we can recommend, it is a sign of a completely perverse nature when a man is so given to bending himself about that, like a serpent, he slips out of the hands of those who are trying to hold him.

On the other hand, they must be incredibly impudent to feel no shame when they are accused of lacking constancy in their words. It is the same source for their double dealing which they permit themselves when they give the appearance of doing whatever it takes to please men. For example, they engage in idolatry without any scruples. They pretend to accept all the superstitions of the papists, since according to their view all external matters are within the liberty of Christians.

As for this topic, I will discuss it in a later chapter, only I would like to say one word about it here. For readers should be warned that, whether in their jests or words, the Libertines delight in scoffing at the world and in constantly changing their position, so much so that one is unable to tell exactly what they maintain.

In fact, if Quintin were held a prisoner today, whether by Christians or the papists, and one should want to get him to confess, he would only make a gesture of mockery. For he would surely escape, since he would grant either group whatever it wanted to hear. And in doing so he would not contradict their teachings. For the first article of their faith, as I have already said, is the necessity of the art of being able to disguise themselves and to speak with a double tongue-a practice that even pagans condemned. For even they recognized and declared that nothing is more contrary to nature than for a person to change his identity by guile. So much is this so that according to their view it would be better to resemble a lion than a fox.

But they are not content with this, for they dare claim that they have derived this principle from God, arming themselves with what is written in Psalm 2:4: "He who sits in the heavens laughs at them," citing this text as a proof that God is a simulator. That is how they use Scripture.

The prophet uses this expression to signify that God delays His judgment on the iniquitous and the persecutors of His church, leaving them unpunished for awhile, not because He is sleeping or is powerless to act, but because He is amused by their audacity while He awaits the coming time of their ruin. And this is done for our consolation in order that we might not lose courage when we see the wicked in authority and God's aid does not seem apparent. But these villains interpret it to make God into a scoffer who mimics Himself for the purpose of deceiving the world.

They attribute the same to Jesus Christ. To support this they cite the response He made to His apostles, that it was to them that He had clearly revealed the secrets of the kingdom of God, but since it was not fitting for the people to hear the simple and clear truth, He spoke in parables (Matt. 13:11; Mark 4:25; Luke 8:18; 19:26).

Thus they suggest that when our Lord Jesus used parables He was calling white black, or meant one thing for another, in order to kill time with His hearers or make them imagine what was farthest from His mind.

We know there is a question concerning what Christ intended His similitudes or parables to mean. But we know the purpose they served. In the first place, they gave color and majesty to His ideas by arousing the minds of His hearers and making them more attentive. Second, they gave the same hearers a point to consider and left it up to them to determine their meaning.

Doubtless they require exposition, since their contents are obliquely presented in figures. But what prevented the people from understanding them was their failure to make allowances for the figures and their preference to remain in their ignorance rather than to inquire and be taught.

As far back as the Old Testament, God solemnly affirmed through Isaiah His prophet that He never spoke by stealth nor in darkness, nor did He ever command the people of Israel to seek Him in vain (Isa. 45:19). Thus are we going to dishonor our Lord Jesus by saying that He came into the world to obscure, or rather to extinguish, the clarity that was already from of old? or to blur what was clear? or to confuse what was beyond doubt?

How does that harmonize with the fact that He is the "sun of righteousness" (Mal. 4:2)? and the "light of the world" (John 8:12)? and that His office is to enlighten darkness? Does it not constitute an outrageous blasphemy?

Besides, what Saint Paul says of the gospel is the opposite of what they pretend. For he testifies that the gospel is a clear and shining doctrine that manifests God's face for us in Jesus Christ without [containing] any veil to obscure our view II Cor. 3:14). Then he adds that if there is anyone who still cannot see anything in this great light, then he must be blinded by the devil.

I leave it to readers to consider how great the difference is between Saint Paul and these mischief makers.

We should take pride in possessing a doctrine that is clear, pure, certain, and open to everyone, and should say that those who use obscurity utilize a shameful veil in order to cover up their turpitude. They go to great lengths not onlV to distort their teaching in such a way that one can no longer discern its beginning or end, but they twist it about and subject it to sleight of hand.

As for Jesus Christ being an example with which they arm themselves, He would have to renounce Himself to adhere to them. For His nature is not contrary to His gospel. And as I have already pointed out, He did not speak in parables in order to maintain two meanings, or babble unintelligently, but rather the better to impress His teaching upon the hearts of the faithful and give it a greater luster. And although unbelievers might not have understood any of it, nor profited from it in any way, that does not make His parables confused enigmas: rather one must consider the source of their failure [to understand].

Now He explains this, as He so often reiterates, "Let him who has ears to hear, hear" (Matt. 13:9). By this He means that there are many who are deaf, with whom one must have the gift of gab before they begin to listen.

Finally, He concludes that, with regard to this matter, Isaiah's saying is verified: "For they are blind in their understanding and hardened in their hearts, to the end that they might perish in their unbelief" (Matt. 13:14; Isa. 6:9ff.).

Consequently, if the Libertines want to be esteemed as true imitators of our Lord, let them do as Saint Paul [did]. Let them remove and cast away all veils, which are signs of shame, and let them teach us a pure and clean gospel, one which is not difficult to understand, except for those who are alienated in their minds because of their own unbelief (II Cor. 4:3). Otherwise I accuse them of blaspheming Jesus Christ in their wanting to ape Him.

In addition they cite this passage: "Let us become as wise as serpents" (Matt. 10:16). But since in this same passage Christ requires us to be "innocent as doves," let us hold the two together, then it will be easy for us to see that He does not want us to have a malicious cunning for beating about the bush in order to deceive the world; rather He simply admonishes us to do nothing out of inconsideration.

If anyone desires a more ample exposition of this wisdom with respect to what it means, then let him seek it from Saint Paul where he says that since we live I in the midst of this world, which is completely perverse, let us be on guard lest we are deceived, and let us walk wisely, knowing what the will of God is (Eph. 5:6). But these scum, under the pretext of this sound teaching, boldly lie whenever it is to their advantage. And not only do they excuse themselves of all their simulations and fies, but they also glory in them, even to the point of putting an innocent man in danger of death, to see if he can escape it.

On the Authority the Libertines Give Holy Scripture

We have already said that from the very beginning the Libertines scoffed whenever anyone quoted Scripture to them, not concealing the fact that they accepted it as fable. Nevertheless, they readily made use of it when they found a passage they could turn to their advantage. But this did not mean that they believed in it. They did it only to trouble the simple and to unsettle them in order to win them more easily

If anyone replied to them by citing Scripture, they would respond that we shouldn't be subject to the "letter that kills but to the Spirit who gives life." In fact, the swine Quintin assigned' insulting nicknames' to each of the apostles in order to make them contemptible. For example, in his knavery he called Saint Paul "Broken Pot,"' Saint John "the Doting Lad,"' Saint Peter "Denier of God,"' and Saint Matthew "Usurer."

That is how this disgusting wretch dared to blaspheme with his own foul mouth! And those who should have punished him so severely as to have made him an example to all fed him and kept him. It is against my own will that I even mention it! But if I should spare them, certainly God would spare neither them nor me.

Now when they saw that all true believers considered it a detestable sacrilege to trample the sacred Word of God under foot, in accordance with their article of faith that permits them to speak with a double tongue, they put on that tight-fitting garment" under which they currently hide. They did this to give the impression that they accepted holy Scripture, but in accepting it they turned it [to their advantage] after the example of their predecessors, the Priscillianists, of whom we have spoken, and changed it into allegories.

In fact, they have so deformed it that they give about as much honor to the Word as if they denied it altogether. For they consistently maintain this principle: that Scripture, taken in its natural sense, is but a dead letter and only kills. Thus they abandon it in order to come to the life-giving Spirit.

Now in doing so, they pursue a double purpose. First of all [they mean] that one should not hold to the simple sense of Scripture, but one should play around with it by means of allegorical interpretation. Second, [they mean] that one should not be content with what is written, or acquiesce in it at all, but one should speculate higher and look for new revelations.

Although this sect is certainly different from the papists, inasmuch as it is a hundred times worse and more pernicious,

nevertheless both of them together hold this principle in common: to change Scripture into allegories and to long for a better and more perfect wisdom than we find in it. And together

both as a coverup appeal to Saint Paul , s statement that "the letter kills" (II Cor. 3:6).

Now in tearing out this passage and applying it to themselves they corrupt it terribly. Thus it is necessary, first of all, to point out the apostle's intention, and then we can look again at the conclusion's they deduce from it.

The apostle in this passage makes a comparison of the law and the gospel-if one separates Jesus Christ from the law. He calls the law "the letter," because without the grace of God it is a cold doctrine, without efficacy, inasmuch as it does not penetrate the heart. In the same way in another passage he calls circumcision "literal," insofar as it is done to the body and is only an external ceremony (Rom. 2:29).

On the contrary, he calls the gospel a "spiritual" doctrine, since Jesus Christ is included in it and vivifies the Word, making it efficacious in our hearts by His Spirit. Then he says that the law, remaining literal, "kills," inasmuch as we can only find condemnation in it. For he immediately adds that this is "a preaching of death" (II Cor. 3:7). While on the contrary, the gospel "gives fife," since it makes available the grace of Jesus Christ, by which it bears fruit in us to salvation.

That is Paul's simple sense from which nothing else should be drawn out, unless we ought to learn not to divide the Word of God so as to cut it off from Jesus Christ who is its soul, as he adds later, and by whom alone it has the power to become beneficial to us.

But these great [Libertine] expositors! What? They want to use this passage to introduce us to a method of making Scripture serve one's own advantage, or they want to make it read like a plot. For there is about as much substance to allegories as there is to bottles of water that babies drink with a straw.

Certainly Saint Paul never had their interpretation in mind. Thus let them refrain from citing this [text] as a witness to their method.

Their second understanding is even more diabolical. For they seek to turn us away from Scripture in order to make us err by following their imaginations, or rather in order to lead us beyond the limits of Scripture to the end that each might follow his own interests and the devil's illusions instead of followthe truth of God. [Thus] in order that every Christian might warned to resist such a pernicious temptation, we must note what end our Lord has promised us His Spirit.

Now He did not promise the Spirit for the purpose of forsaking Scripture, so that we might be led by Him and stroll amid the clouds, but in order to gain its true meaning and thus be satisfied. In Jesus Christ's own words: "When the Spirit of Truth comes, He will enable you to understand the things which you ve heard from Me" (John 14:26). [Hence] we see that He does not promise His apostles a spirit that will create new doctrines for them; rather the Spirit only confirms them in the gospel which was preached to them.

Furthermore, after His resurrection, when He opened the understanding of His two disciples (Luke 24:27,32), it was not in order to inspire them with strange subjects not found in Scripture but in order to help them understand Scripture itself.

In fact, to whom has been given the greatest abundance of the Spirit if not to the apostles? Nevertheless, the Spirit did not use them to lay aside Scripture or create in them mistrust for But on the contrary we see that the Scripture became the focus of their entire study and obedience. And we hold to the same obedience.

As for Saint Paul in particular, never once did he want to lay aside Scripture, for he found its authority so good that he commends it to us in order to persuade us to know and to hunger to know only what it contains. For he says, "It is useful for our instruction, exhortation, repentance, and for making us perfect in every good work" (II Tim. 3:16), saying that it is the foundation on which our consolation and patience would rest if would be firm in hope.

As for the word "Spirit," it appears from what he calls his ministerial preaching of the Spirit" (II Cor. 3:8) that Spirit and Scripture are one and the same. For after admonishing the Thessalonians not to "quench the Spirit," he adds that they ould "not despise the prophets" (I Thess. 5:19f.). By this he eans that we choke out the light of God's Spirit if we cut ourselves off from His Word. That is, provided it is [properly] preached to us. For preaching and Scripture are the true instruments of God's Spirit.

Therefore, let us consider anyone a devil who wants to lead us astray from it, whether directly or indirectly, and let us flee from them as we would a poison. Let us hold, I say, to the pure and plain Word of God, where He has clearly revealed His will to us. And let us pray that by His Holy Spirit He will want to implant it in our hearts, which is His true office. Let us say to Him with David: "Lord, open my eyes that I may behold the marvels of Thy law" (Ps. 119:18).

On the Libertines' Frequent Abuse of the Word Spirit Which Is Constantly in Their Mouth

Beyond what shall be said here, it should be noted that the Libertines do not know how to broach a subject without immediately using the word "Spirit," and with difficulty they cannot sustain two sentences without repeating it. And even in repeating it they change its meanings for in the same way that village priests frequently make a single marmouset which they have in their parishes, serve for five or six saints, so also these clowns apply the word "Spirit" to anything they choose in order to benefit themselves in every way. Indeed, they use it like a table gravy over all their food.

They say that the Word of God is "Spirit." It is true that our Lord Jesus once used this word when He said that His words were "spirit and life" (John 6:63). But we clearly know that what He meant was that His words were "spiritual" and "life giving." For the issue had to do with eating His body But the Capernaurnites thought He meant eating it in a physical way. Hence He explained to them that this was not the case.

Now there is no controversy over the point that all of God's teaching is "spiritual." Indeed, we teach as much. But these fantastics have something else in mind, whose meaning escapes us, unless they are trying to create a new Word, something I phantom. For they call Jesus Christ "Spirit."

True, Saint Paul in one passage (H Cor. 3:17) attribute this term to Him, but not that simply. For he calls Him "the Spirit that is to say, the soul of the law, because without Him the law is dead, as we have previously said. But these beasts confuse everything without reason, making no distinction between the Son of God and His Spirit.

I have not mentioned all the ways in which they use this Word , for there would be no end to that, only I have cited these examples in passing in order to warn the faithful that whenever they hear the word "Spirit," they should consider the way in which it is being used, lest they embroil themselves in confusions for which there is neither rhyme nor reason.

Furthermore, it should be noted that in their confused application of the word "Spirit" to whatever comes into their head not only do they confound their hearers' understanding by confusing matters that ought to be held distinct, but they also cajole them into believing that they are completely "spiritual' and "divine" and are almost as holy as angels. And the better ones frequently become "enraptured" at first, until they perceive true end of this spirituality.

I say the above because today it is a great scandal to all true believers to see a large number of fickle persons subjecting the Word of God to such a sensuous understanding, twisting ( Christian liberty into a dissolute license of the flesh, chatting casually about the gospel, living shamelessly, and blaspheming God in their deeds while praising Him with their lips (Titus 1:16).

Therefore when a zealous person falls into the hands of these suitors and hears them talking primarily about the "Spirit, and that the Word of God is nothing but "Spirit," and that Jesus

Christ is equally "Spirit," and that we must be "Spirits" with Him and that our life must be "spiritual itself," his first impression is that the Libertines are deeply zealous persons who are concerned lest the Word of God become polluted and compromised by the scandalous lives of false Christians. Being thus deceived, he forms a good impression of them and is won over by their friendliness and by the fact that they require nothing by way of faith.

But soon afterwards, the Libertines begin to disgorge their venom and fall from their lofty manner of speaking, as Saint Jude says (v. 10), to a churlish doctrine. For, as we shall see, there is no whoremonger or highwayman or even infamous desperado vho would ever be so unbridled as to approve of all the damnable crimes that these "great spirituals" commit.

"What then?" someone may ask. "Must we regard the word Spirit' with suspicion?" I would not say so, and I would be reluctant to think it. Hence at the very beginning I said that we must be very prudent and careful not to reject the word or scorn it but should discern how people make use of it.

Therefore if we see a man simply going about, pointing out that the Word of God is "spiritual" and can mold our hearts in faith and holy living, if he speaks of calling upon the name of God, of repentance, of good works, and of all the Christian practices according to their pure Scriptural usage, if he treats these matters clearly and frankly, if he reproves the vanity of those who only honor the Word of God with the tip of their tongue, and admonishes them to approach it differently, let us hear him with a good heart. Let us help him repair and correct all the corruptions that presently reign.

But whenever we hear anyone obscuring the Word, we ought to cut him off immediately and ask him what he means. If he continues to beat around the bush and to twist his words about, the way a snake coils its tails, then let us drag him into the light, even against his own will, as if we were dragging a thief or a malefactor out of his hiding place.

That is how we should differentiate between light and darkness, lest in trying to ascend to heaven by their method we tumble into an abyss of dreadful abominations. Thus we can now understand how and why they have acquired the title "Spirituals," of which they are so puffed up that the term "Christians" no longer means anything to them.

On the First Article of Libertine Doctrine: That There Is Only One Immortal Spirit. With a Statement Explaining How This Is Contrary to the Truth of Scripture

It is time to consider, the inference[s] that can be deduced from this wretched sect's general articles of faith. To begin with, they maintain that there is only one divine spirit that exists and indwells every creature. In saying this they eradicate the essence and nature of both human souls and angels. Even if I were not to sound a word of reproof against this error, there is not a person of sound judgment who would not hold this absurdity with horror. But it is essential to point out the hidden abomination of this position, along with showing to the contrary what the Scripture says.

It is true that among the ancient philosophers' there were a few who were fantastic enough to think that there was only one spirit, extended everywhere, and that all living creatures having movement and feeling were part of it, from which they had come and to which they would return. But inasmuch as experience and reason oppose this, there never was a man of sober judgment-even among the pagan philosophers-who did not reprove such a folly.

We have already singled out above4 several sects which from ancient time troubled the Christian church with musings which, if not exactly similar, were close to this view: that souls and heavenly spirits, being of God's very own substance, were taken like coals from a fire .

Now the Libertines, in order to surpass in impudence every heretic who has every lived, have returned to this ancient pagan supposition that there is only one spirit everywhere. Now we shall not here examine the objections which ensue from this position-objections which I shall examine in their proper place. But for the present I shall only touch on the essence.

Hence, when they posit a single spirit, they are supposing that angels are only inspirations or movements and not creatures possessing [their own] essence. Instead of our souls they say that it is God who lives in us, who gives strength to our bodies, who supports all those actions in us that pertain to life.

Now, beyond those other pretexts, of which we shall soon speak, they maintain as a principle that both Scripture and nature teach us that the eternal Spirit of God is the source and origin of everything. This we readily concede. But it does not follow from this that He did not give each creature a unique being and substance. It is quite another thing to say that every creature comes from God and that what God has created is God Himself.

Saint Paul says that "in Him we live and have our being," by virtue of which we are rightly called "His offspring" (Acts 17:28). But this does not mean that God is the spiritual nature that indwells man.

True, we subsist in Him, insofar as we do not have our foundation in ourselves [i.e., are not self-caused]. But there is a vast difference between being the "work" and the "worker" himself.

For the moment, I shall desist from speaking of angels. But to deny that man's soul is an authentic," created substance is another matter. And that Christians should doubt" this is a matter of grave alarm.

Nevertheless, since this is the case, let us listen to their grand arguments: there is only one God who [truly] exists. I admit that. But we do not cease to subsist in Him, as He created us at a specific time" for this purpose and upholds us by His power.

Saint Paul, they argue, calls God alone immortal (I Tim. 6:16). I certainly agree with Saint Paul. But he means that God alone has this privilege in Himself and by virtue of His own nature, so much so that He is the source of immortality. But what God has in Himself He has communicated to our souls by His grace when He formed them in His image.

That is their "valid argument" by means of which they so confuse everything that they change God into a creature and do away with the human soul.

Now when it comes to correcting this diabolical view, there are so many sound arguments that we only have to arm ourselves with the testimony of Scripture. The human soul is subject to ignorance, but God is not. It is subject to the passions, but God is not.

And what shall we say of [the souls] inconstancy and diversity? What of [its] fragile nature and weakness? And what finally shall we say of sin?

They gain nothing by quibbling that sin is an awareness in man but not [an awareness in] the Spirit of God. For whether Quintin himself or a similar apostate of their sect comes forward, is he really able to know and do everything? Certainly Quintin's jargon would lead you to think so, but I reject the notion that God knows what is going on in heaven but is Himself unaware of anything in man. But they fantasize that God is changeable,since He is completely different in this world than He is in heaven.

Should I not gain a great deal of spare time if I would refrain from refuting such monstrosities? But in order not to consume too much time in vain, I am satisfied with pointing at them in disgust.

Besides, the teaching of Scripture is simple and clear: that God has made our souls after His likeness and they so indwell our bodies that when they depart from them, each goes to the place which it has prepared for itself [by virlue of how it lived] in this world-some to consolation and rest, others to the anguish and torments of hell. And I have dealt with that so amply [in my tract] Against the Anabaptists that it would be superfluous to mention it any further.

On What the Libertines Think About the Devil, the World, and Man, Until the Latter Becomes a Member of Their Sect.' And on the Contrary, What Ought to Be Held

Someone might well ask, "What then is their opinion of the devil?" My reply is that they use the title and speak of him, but in accordance with their meaning. For they interpret' the "devil," the "world," and "sin" as imagining something to be real that is nonexistent. And they say that man is such until he is remolded in their sect.

For this reason they understand all of these things under a single word, i.e., imagination . By this they mean that whenever we think of the devil or of sin, these are only frivolous fantasies which we have conceived. And not only do they speak of devils as they do angels-taking them as inspirations without essencebut they think they are only vain thoughts which we ought to forget as dreams.

As for sin, they do not simply say that it is a privation of good, but in their estimation it is a notion that evaporates and is gone once we move on to something else.

In brief, they speak of these things in the same manner that Saint Paul speaks of idols. For when he says that "an idol is nothing" (I Cor. 8:4), he means that it exists only as a conception, without reason or foundation, in the minds of the ignorant. Therefore we can dismiss it.

In this way the Libertines, pretending to eliminate the distinction between good and evil, teach that we no longer have to be held back by such an ideal since sin has been abolished, and that it is a folly to be tormented by it any longer, as if it constituted something real. In a parallel manner they compose man of his body and of his suppositions, saying that natural man's soul is possessed with the devil and the world; consequently, it is only a smoke that passes and constitutes nothing lasting.

Let us now turn to the pure teaching of the Scripture. It teaches us that devils are evil spirits that constantly war against us in order to lead us into perdition. And as they are destined to eternal damnation, they continually machinate to drag us toward a similar ruin.

For example, they are instruments of the wrath of God, the executioners who punish unbelievers and rebels by blinding them to evil (Job 1:6, 12; 2:1, 7; Zech. 3:1; Matt. 4:1; Luke 8:29; 22:31; John 8:44; 13:2; Acts 7:51; 26:18; H Cor. 2:11; 1 Thess. 2:18; 1 John 3:8).

Beyond these the Scripture is full of other passages, and references are so common that we hardly need to cite them. The matter is clear enough, unless one chooses to renounce the

Scripture.

But we need to note Satan's craftiness here. There is nothing he wants more than to surprise us unawares. For what better means is there for making us believe that he does not exist than for us to doubt him?

Consequently we see how hateful this doctrine is, not simply because it is contrary to the truth, but because it is so per-nicious as to escape our thoughts. Thus it tends to expose poor souls to the devil as a prey inasmuch as it makes them believe that there is no spiritual enemy who battles against us, precisely when we are as sheep in the midst of wolves or, as the Scripture calls them, "roaring lions" (I Peter 5:8).

The word "world" is used in a variety of ways in Scripture. When it is used in a "bad" sense it means the corrupt nature in human beings which is the result of sin, from which proceed all those vices that are committed by men: ambition, avarice, hate, slander, gluttony, pride, lechery, conceit, and the fountain of all evil-unbelief.

To shroud all the concupiscences of our vicious nature and all the earth's perversity under the word "imagination"" is like wanting to inhale the sea in a single snort. But in the same way that they attempt to efface the memory of devils to the end that one no longer wills to be on guard against them, they also want to put under foot what is said in Scripture concerning those arms and weapons by means of which this enemy assaults us, not in order to destroy them, but only to the end that one no longer thinks about them, until one is mortally wounded by them and has received an incurable disease.

They even go further concerning sin. I beg of you, what does it mean to call sin "an imagination"" except to disguise it lest we should perceive the evil it causes?

The Scripture is quick to warn us how dangerous a poison sin is, thus it exhorts us to be diligent and to resist it. It carefully delineates its nature, root, and fruits. And not without cause, for the need is paramount.

Thus one can see by what "spirit" these wretches are led when they want not only to obscure this essential doctrine, but to annihilate it altogether.

As for man, the Scripture clearly teaches us that from the time he turned away from God his soul has been full of ignorance and vanity, full of perversity and rebellion against God, given over to evil, oppressed and vanquished by weakness. Nevertheless it continues to call him a creature of God, possessing in himself those natural conditions which God placed in him, unless all of it is corrupted and depraved by sin.

Consequently, according to Scripture, man's soul is a spiritual substance endowed with sense and reason, in order to understand and pass judgments, and endowed also with will, in order to choose and desire those things that his fife wants.

True, the Scripture immediately admonishes us that our intelligence is perverted because of sin-so much so that we are blind and that our will is corrupt, even to such an extent that only iniquity flows out of it. Nevertheless the soul continues to exist in its essence and to retain the inseparable qualities of its nature, according to the order that God has established.

Consequently, to reduce the soul to an imagination" is an impudent act of resisting the truth, beyond the fact that by doing so the Liber-tines cause man to misunderstand himself to the end that he no longer cares about his soul, which our Lord hoped we would prefer above all the world (Matt. 16:26).

On the Libertine View that a Spirit Comprises Everything. And what pestilence is hidden under this view.

After creating a single spirit among themselves, by means of which they destroy the nature of both the angels of heaven and the devils of hell, as well as human souls, the Libertines maintain that this single spirit constitutes everything. By this they do not mean what the Scripture means when it says that at the same time all creatures subsist in Him, are equally guided by Him, are subject to His providence, and serve His will, each according to its order. But they mean that everything in the world must be seen directly as His doing.

In making this claim they attribute nothing to the will of man, no more than if he were a stone. And they cast aside every distinction between good and evil, since nothing can be badly made in their view, seeing that God is its author.

Now in order for this to be more clearly understood, I shall cite several examples illustrative of their idea.

This notorious swine Quintin4 once found himself in a street where a man had just been killed. By chance a faithful believer was also there who said, 'Alas! Who has committed this wicked deed? "

Immediately he replied in a jesting way, "Since you want to know, it was I. The other being completely surprised said, "How can you be so flippant?" To which he replied, 'It isn't I, but God." "Why," asked the other, "must you attribute to God evils that He has commanded should be punished?" At which this swine disgorged even more forcefully his venom, saying, "Yes, it's you, it's I, it's God! For whatever you or I do is God's doing! And whatever God does, we do; for God is in us!"'

If you concede this point, then we must either attribute sin to God or dissolve the world of sin, inasmuch as God does everything. Thus, any distinction between good and evil is eliminated.

From which it follows that it is illicit of us to find anything wrong, seeing that everything is the work of God. Hence men can do whatever they wish without hesitation,' not only because they are beyond any danger of sinning, but because to restrain desire would be to limit God.

For example, if someone has committed lechery we must not reprimand him. For that would be to blaspheme God. If a man covets his neighbor's wife, let him enjoy it if he can. For he is certainly doing nothing other than the will of God. Indeed, what he does is a divine act.

As for goods, whoever can bamboozle them, whether by subtle or violent means, let him go at it boldly. For he does nothing of which God disapproves. Let whoever has seized whatever he can have no fear of retribution. For it is unfitting to correct God.

It is true that they then turn all these fantastic speculations to their profit and advantage. For, whatever might happen, if they do not want to be affected by it, they imagine that not even their God does anything prejudicial against them. If anyone suffers from either harm to himself or from a loss of his gloods, they scoff at it, saying that all of that is good. And if we should pity such a person, that would be to oppose God. But if anyone so much as hurts their little finger, they forget all of these lofty arguments and overflow with more anger than anyone else.

Let me recount a humorous incident that will serve to illustrate what possible profit their daydreams provide them. There was a certain cobbler in Paris who had been so cajoled by this sect that in his opinion nothing was any longer evil. Now it so happened one day, that, having decided to call upon Etienne de la Forge," with whom he had some acquaintance, he found him sorely vexed because his servant had run off and had stolen his money. But the main cause of de la Forge's sadness lay in his fear that the servant might deceitfully use his credit.

The cobbler asked what he thought he would do. He answered him in three words, as he was a man of few words. My cobbler immediately sprang back, prepared to bound over the clouds, and argued with Etienne de la Forge that he was blaspherning God by calling his works evil and that, since God causes everything," one ought not esteem anything as evil. Nienne de la Forge, knowing that he would gain nothing by reasoning with him or by entering into a dispute, immediately cut off his conversation with him.

Several days later God willed that this cobbler philosopher should be robbed by one of his own servants. Immediately he frantically ran about here and there, seeking some news of his whereabouts. Not finding him, he went to Lienne de la Forge's house in order to unburden his heart and to pour out his complaints.

As he was beginning to hurl strong insults at the thief and was already in the process of doing so, Etienne de la Forge interrupted him, saying, "What? Must you blaspheme so? Can we accuse God, since it is God who does evervthing? Instead we should praise Him."

The poor man, being confounded by his own words which he had used [earlier], went away completely crestfallen, his tail between his legs, and at the same time unreformed by it.

This example teaches us how our Lord confounds these madmen by experience itself, and yet it serves them to no avail as they only continue hardened in their folly, seeing that the devil possesses them and prevents them from seeing what is before their eyes.

Now it should be noted that three accursed consequences follow from this article. The first is that if this is the case there would be no difference whatsoever between God and the devil, as in fact the God whom thev invent for us is an idol worse than the devil of hell. The second is that men would no longer have a conscience for abstaining from evil, but like beasts would follow their sensual appetites, without any discretion. The third is that we would be unable to make any judgments, for it would be necessary to find everything good, whether lechery, murder, or stealing, and the worst crimes that we can imagine would have to be viewed as laudable works.

Therefore in order to discredit this view, these three consequences should be treated in succession and reproved by destroying the foundations on which they are mistakenly based.

On How We Ought to Understand the Providence of God' by Which He Does Everything, and How the Libertines Confound It All When Speaking of It. The First Consequence of the Preceding Article

For our part we do not deny that whatever comes to pass does so by the will of God. In fact when we explain why He is called all powerful," we attribute to Him a power active in all creatures, teaching that, having created the world, He also governs it, always keeping His hand in the work in order to maintain everything in its true state and to dispose of things as it seems best to Him. To explain more clearly what this means, I believe that we have to consider that God, when it comes to governing the world, works in a threefold manner.'

First of all, there is a universal operation by which He guides all creatures according to the condition and propriety which He had given each when He made them. This guidance is nothing other than what we call "the order of nature." For whereas unbelievers onlv recognize in the arrangement of the world what their eyes see and thus view nature as a design or essence that rules over all, we are compelled to give this praise to the will of God, as it alone governs and moderates all things.

Consequently, when we see the sun, the moon, and the stars making their course, let us realize that thev do so in obedience to God, according to His commandment, and not onlv that, but that the hand of God guides them, and by virtue of His power are all things done. In the same way, then, when we observe the ordinary course of earthly events, let us be advised to attribute all of it to God and to think of creatures as instruments in His hand for Him to use in His work as it pleases Him.

This universal providence is often touched upon in Scripture for us, to the end that we might glorify God in all His works. In particular the Lord enjoins us to recognize His own power in us in order to strip us of all presumption, which immediately arises in us whenever we fail to remember that we are in His hand.

Along these lines, Saint Paul says to the Athenians, "It is in Him that we five and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). For herein God admonishes us that we could not last a single minute if He were not upholding us by His hand; for indeed it is in Him that we subsist. And as the soul, spreading its vigor throughout the body, affects the members, in the same way God vivifies us and gives us whatever faculties and power we have."

Nevertheless, this universal operation of God's does not prevent each creature, heavenly or earthly, from having and retaining its own quality and nature and from following its own inclination.

The second way or manner in which God operates in His creatures is that He causes them to serve His goodness, righteousness, and judgment according to His present will to help

His servants, to punish the wicked, and to test the patience of His faithful, or to chastise them in His fatherly kindness.

Accordingly, when it pleases Him to bless us with an abundance of good things, it rains in its season, He gives warmth and good weather through His sun, and He uses all of the other natural means as instruments of His benediction. But when He withdraws His hand, the sky becomes as iron and the earth as fire. So much is this so that it is He who thunders, hails, sleets, and causes storms and sterility

Consequently, what pagans and the illiterate attribute to fortune we must assign to the providence of God, not simply because of this universal power," of which we have spoken, but because of a special ordinance by which He guides all things in accordance with what He deems to be expedient.

This is what is meant when He says through his prophets (Isa. 45:7; Amos 3:6; Prov. 16:1-4, 9, 33) that He creates darkness and light, that He sends death and life, that good and evil come only by His hand, even going so far as to say that He directs all those other things that seem to be fortuitous. And if anyone is killed accidentally in the process, it is He who is the cause of his death, indeed, has willed it, to the end that we might realize that nothing happens by chance, but only in accordance with His counsel and judgment. And He is sorely angry whenever we think that these things occur by other means or whenever we fail to look up to Him, recognizing Him not only as the principal cause of everything, but also as the author, who by His counsel disposes as He wills.

Therefore, let us adopt this resolution: that prosperity and adversity alike, rain, wind, sleet, hail, good weather, abundance, famine, war, and peace are all works of God's hand; and that creatures who constitute secondary causes are only means by which He fulfills His will; and consequently He commands and uses them as it pleases Him in order to bring them to that end which He has ordained should come to pass.

Furlhermore, we should note that not only does He avail Himself of insensible creatures in this way, in order to govern them and to put into effect His will through them, but He also avails Himself of men and even of devils. So much is this so that Satan and evildoers are executors of His will. For example, He used the Egyptians to afflict His people. Later He raised up the Assvrians to chastise them when they had transgressed, and so forth.

As for the devil, we know how He used him to torment Saul (I Sam. 16:14; 18:10), to deceive Ahab (I Kings 22:22), and to carry out His judgments against all the iniquitous whenever that is necessary (Ps. 78:49), or indeed on the contrary to test the faithfulness of his own, as we have in the example of Job.

Now when the Libertines hear these passages, they rush to them heedlessly, and without thinking them through they conclude that creatures no longer act for themselves. For not only do they thoroughly identify heaven and earth together, but also God and the devil.

This is owing to their failure to recognize two exceptions which are essential. The first is that Satan and evildoers are not so effectively the instruments of God that they do not also act in their own behalf. For we must not suppose that God works in an iniquitous man as if he were a stone or a piece of wood, but He uses him as a thinking creature, according to the quality of his nature which He has given him. Thus when we say that God works in evildoers, that does not prevent them from working also in their own behalf.

What the Scripture shows us is as clear as it is wonderful. For at the same time that it declares that God "whistles" (Isa. 5:26), and almost rings the tambourine that makes unbelievers flee their arms, and hardens or inflames their hearts, it also never fails to recount these evildoers own judgment and will, and it attributes to them the work which they have done by the ordinance of God.

The second exception for which these wretches have no regard is the enormous diversity between God's work and that of an evil man's when God makes use of it as an instrument. For the wicked man is motivated either by his avarice, or ambition, or envy, or cruelty to do what he does, and he disregards any other end. Consequently, according to the root which motivated his heart and the end toward which he strives, his work is qualified and with good reason is judged bad.

But God's intention is completely different. For His aim is to exercise His justice for the salvation and preservation of good, to pour out His goodness and grace on His faithful, and to chastise those who need it. Hence that is how we ought to distinguish between God and men; by separating in the same work His justice, His goodness, and His judgment from the evil of both the devil and the ungodly.

Let us pick up a good clear mirror to see what I am saying. When Job received news of the loss of his goods, of the death of his children, and of all those calamities that befell him, he acknowledged that it was God who was visiting him, saying, "The Lord has given me all these and takes them away" (Job 1:21). And in truth, God had. But at the same time did he not know that the devil had deceived him? Was he not aware that the Chaldeans had stolen and plundered his flocks? Did he praise the thieves and brigands, or did he blame the devil for the affliction that God had brought upon him? No! For he knew there was a great difference. Therefore while condemning the evil he said, "Blessed be the name of God" (Job 1:21).

Equally, when David was being tormented by Shimei, he acknowledged it as coming from God (II Sam. 16:11f.) and well understood that this evil man was a rod by which God was chastising him. But later, when praising God, he did not hesitate to condemn Shimei (I Kings 2:9).

We shall come back to this again, but for the moment let it suffice us to see that God truly makes use of His creatures and makes them serve His providence as instruments of which He avails Himself, though they may often be evil. And the fact that God turns the malice of Satan and of wicked men into good is not in order to excuse or sanctify them, though they might not have transgressed nor their works be evil or damnable. For every work is qualified by the intention of the one who performs it. And hence all who cannot discern this are like swine who uproot everything with their snouts and create a mire out of the most beautiful garden in the world.

Such are the Libertines, who not only make the devil God's companion, but who change him into God, making his works laudable under the pretext that he only does what God has ordained. And this heresy, if we believe the early church fathers,21 originated with Simon the magician.

On the contrary, we must observe that creatures here below do their works in accordance with their capacity, being judged good or evil based on whether they act in obedience to God or trespass against Him. Nonetheless, God is over all and directs things toward a good end and turns evil into good. Or at least He extracts good from what is evil, working according to His nature, that is, in [accordance with] justice and equity And He avails Himself of the devil in such a way as not to mix with him or have anything in common with him. Or He envelops Himself in a society of evil, effacing the nature of evil by His righteousness .

For in the same way that the sun shines on carrion and causes it to rot, neither being corrupted nor tainted by it, and by its purity is not the cause of the carrion's stench and infection, God also so truly performs His works through evildoers that His sanctity does not justify them nor does their infection contaminate anything in Him.

The third form of God's operation consists in the fact that He governs His faithful, living and reigning in them by His Holy Spirit. For inasmuch as we are corrupted by original sin, we are like a dry and barren ground that cannot produce any good fruit. For our judgment is perverse; our will is rebellious against God, inclined and given to evil: in sum, our entire nature is vicious.

Being such, not only do we not have the power to apply ourselves to good, but, still more, as Saint Paul says (11 Cor. 3:5), we are incapable" of conceiving of a single good thought, rather all our sufficiency must come from Him. Consequently, it is He who works in us "both to will and to work" (Phil. 2:13); it is He who illumines us that we might come to His knowledge; it is He who draws us up; it is He who creates new hearts in us, softening our hardness; it is He who inspires us to pray; it is He who gives us the grace and the strength to resist all of Satan's temptations; it is He who causes us to walk in His commandments (Ezek. 36:27).

Nevertheless, we must note the nature of our choice" and will. For although they are both depraved by sin, our Lord reforms them and changes them from evil into good. Thus whatever we are able to discern, to will, and to do belongs to a natural gift. But whatever we cannot choose, desire, or but do wrong is the result of the corruption of sin. What we will to do well and have the power to effect comes from the supernatural grace of the Spirit, which regenerates us in a divine fife.

That, accordingly, is how God works in His children. For in abolishing their perversity He guides them by His Spirit into His obedience.

Now these giddy people in warbling that God does everything make Him the author of all evil, then later, as if evil had changed nature, since it is covered under the cloak of God's name, they call it good. In doing so they blaspheme God more vilely than if they had transferred His power or justice elsewhere. For insofar as God has nothing more rightly than His goodness, it would be necessarv for Him to deny Himself and to change Himself into the devil in order to perform the evil they attribute to Him. In fact their God is an idol, which we must consider more odious than any idol the pagans knew.

But they think that they have washed their hands clean when they reply, "We say that everything is good, since God has done it." As if it were in their power to change black into white! That is how they acquit themselves when, after having called God a brigand, a lecher, and a thief, they add that there is no evil in any of that.

But, lo, hasn't God Himself condemned murder, lechery, and

stealing? Hence on this ground we should have to call God a liar in His Word in order to excuse Him in His works.

But the Scripture, they answer, universally declares that God works "all things in all" (I Cor. 12:6). 1 reply that in this instance they maliciously and falsely apply Scripture. For when Saint Paul uses this phrase, he is speaking only of the gifts" of the Holy Spirit. In any event, the passage makes this clear. For it exhorts the Corinthians to make good use of the "gifts" since they are gifts of God. So much is this so, as it declares, that no one can say a word in praise of Jesus Christ unless he speaks by the Holy Spirit, from whom every good proceeds (I Cor. 12:3).

But where can they show that God robs like a thief.) or that He murders the innocent like a brigand? Consequently the pretext they use does not purge blasphemy, but rather only redoubles it.

On the Second Consequence Which Follows from Saying That God Does Everything, That Is, That One's Conscience Need No Longer Be Concerned About Anything

We have said above that if one attributes everything to God, as the Libertines do, and says that man does nothing, then conscience ceases to be a matter of importance. For this would not keep one from sinning, but rather would curtail the work of God.

Now I do not merely say this because it would undermine their first proposal so that we would no longer be under pressure to dispute if such is the meaning or not, but I only repeat what they themselves confess. In fact, it is the principal end toward which they strive, that is, to put consciences to sleep, in order that without worrying each person can do whatever comes to him and whatever his heart desires. As if God had given His law in vain for discerning between good and evil.

I ask of them if in the law we don't have the declaration of God's will. For there He declares that adultery,' stealing, murder, and, by consequence, avarice, hatred, envy, ambition, and all similar things displease Him. Hence to say now that to Him these things are pleasing is contradictory. Moses solemnly affirms that the law has been given to us in order to teach us how to serve God, how to cling to Him, and how to obey His will, and how not to provoke His wrath by trespassing against Him (Deut. 4:10).

These wretches incite us to reject all such considerations. And to prevent us from seeing at all, they put this bandage over our eyes: that everything that happens does so by the will of God, and consequently nothing displeases Him. As if God were so changeable as to contradict Himself, or was a simulator when He says that He hates and despises what He wills and desires.

"Because of these things," says Saint Paul, "the wrath of God comes upon unbelievers" (Eph. 5:6). "You have grieved the Holy Spirit," says Isaiah (63:10). "You have transgressed against Me," says the Lord in another passage (Isa. 43:27). Again, "The Lord has poured out His anger upon him and His wrath has enveloped Israel" (Isa. 42:25).

I know quite well that God is not subject to human passions. But all these passages reveal that He reproves evil and condemns it. Consequently, sin is the cause of enmity between Him and us, and we cannot enjoy a covenant with Him when we do evil (Isa. 59:2; Ps. 5:5); rather He will punish us, seeing that He is a just judge who cannot tolerate iniquity.

One hardly sees anything else except these exhortations throughout Scripture: "Fear the Lord." "Beware lest you sin against Him."'Abstain from evil." But these madmen say to the contrary that it is a folly to be afraid of sinning against God, seeing that we do neither good nor evil since He does everything in us.

Saint Paul teaches that even pagans, being without doctrine and without Scripture, have a law printed upon their hearts, which is their conscience, by which they are excused or condemned in the presence of God (Rom. 2:14). These wretches want to efface that, saying that there is nothing in which one can be accused, since God does everything. Ought they not to be ashamed of reversing Scripture, inasmuch as they try so ardently to deprive the human heart of this persuasion [i.e., the conscience] that God has engraved by nature in us all?

When we want to cite ignorance in an effort to excuse ourselves, God refers us to our conscience, which is sufficient to testify against us. But these frantic people, in suppressing this voice, say that God would first of all have to accuse Himself if He wants to accuse us, seeing that He does everything in us.

Moses calls this "a root bearing poisonous and bitter fruit" (Deut. 29:18), whenever we attempt through flatteries to extinguish' all remorse and make believe that evil is only a joke. And in truth, what worse and more deadly poison could there be in the world? He also calls this "adding drunkenness to thirst." And with good reason. For our natural affection is nothing other than an inordinate appetite, aflame to do evil.

Thus when we come to bless ourselves, as he says there, and we make believe that we shall find peace in doing evil, it's as if a strong man should change himself by becoming so drunk that he loses consciousness, instead of preventing such alteration by sobriety and abstinence. It is a perfect passage for warning us against the gall that is hidden under the honey which these wretches offer us.

Nonetheless, they continually maintain this subterfuge: that nothing happens apart from the will of God. To this I reply that concerning our own works," we need to ponder the will of God in accordance with His revelation of it to us. For example, He commands us to look after each other, without wronging or harming anyone. That is His will as clear as it can be! Hence it is unnecessary to inquire further with respect to what pleases Him. For in doing this we know that we shall perform His will. Similarly, we know that the contrary displeases Him." Thus if a man steals and later claims that he has done nothing but the will of God, he lies with impudence, inasmuch as he has acted contrary to the commandment by which he was taught not to steal.

One might ask if we can ever do anything against God's will. I think not. But the whole of the matter is that we ought not inquire into His providence, which is a secret to us, since we know what He wants of us and what He approves and condemns.

Solomon is not without justification when he says that "he who seeks out too eagerly His majesty will be overwhelmed by His glory" (Prov. 25:27).11 It is fitting that this should happen and that God should punish in such a way the arrogance of the presumptuous. And we have certainly experienced how those who, desiring to transcend the clouds in their search for God's will, instead of holding to the revelation which contains His will in the Holy Scripture, have fallen into such churlish absurdities that it is a horror to hear them speak of them.

On the Third Consequence Which the Libertines Deduce from the View That God Does Everything, That Is, That It Is Not Lawful to Condemn Anything

After they have relaxed the reins on each other for each to do what seems best to him under the pretext of being led by God, they deduce from this same principle that it is wrong to pass judgment. Now they could not have chosen a better doctrine for uncovering their abominations.

Indeed have they scored well when they have so truly bandaged the eyes of their hearers, or rather punctured them, that they are no longer willing to judge whether what they say or what they do is good or bad. But if we grant them this point, then what becomes of God's statement where He curses all "who call evil good" (Isa. 5:20)? That is God pronouncing woe on us if we justify what He finds to be evil.

But on the contrary these Libertines do not want to tolerate our condemning anything. If they were sovereign princes over God, whose function was to give grace to His judgments, that would be something to consider. But who wants to be condemned by God in order to be absolved by Quintin?

Whenever they want to promote this fine idea, they use this statementA Christian ought to profit from everything."' For as I said at the beginning, they never speak plainly enough to explain their intention flat out, but they indirectly circumvent a subject altogether.

Now I freely admit to them that "a Christian ought to profit from everything" in the sense in which the Scripture points this out. That is, in adversity, he should think about what Saint Paul says, that afflictions are sent upon the believer in order to help him conform to the image of Jesus Christ, and thus aid him in salvation, and therein will he be comforted (Rom. 8:29).

If he sees his neighbor fail, let that serve as a mirror to him in order to understand the weakness of human nature to the end that he might walk in greater fear. if it should come about that he himself should fall, let that serve as a warning to him in order that he might denounce his own strength, humble himself, and empty himself of all presumption, and let it spur him to pray to God all the more ardently.

That is how a Christian may profit from everything, not by rejoicing in his evil deeds, nor by closing his eyes lest he see evil, but rather, in seeing that God is offended by himself and others, he becomes sorry and contrite and is taught repentance, humility, the fear of God, and solicitude in order to be on guard in the future.

That is how David profited from the sin which he committed, not by justifying it, but, after having received condemnation, by being confirmed' that much more in the goodness of God and by being warned never to fall again into such harm.

That is how Saint Paul admonishes us to profit from the sins which the children of Israel committed against God (I Cor. 10:11). That is, that in considering the punishments which came upon them we might be warned.

Finally, that is the reason why Scripture recalls for us all the sinS4 of both the faithful and the wicked and contemptuous of God. It is not in order to blind us so that we might not know what to say about them or how to define them, or should doubt if evil is good, but to the end that we might recognize evil and shun it. As it also declares to us how we should esteem it.

But the Libertines cite [the passage] where it is written, "Judge not." True, our Lord uses these words "Judge not" (Matt. 7:1). But why? In order to reprove the temerity of those who usurp the authority of God by judging things which are not known to them.

This same argument is treated by Saint Paul in Romans 14:10, where he reproves those who want to condemn their brothers in indifferent matters. "We all have one judge," he says. It is to Him that we must render account. And to Him also belongs the function of passing judgment.' Consequently, let us not subject our neighbors to our judgment.

This is a sound and useful doctrine, that as there is only one single spiritual lawgiver, viz., God, so He alone is competent to judge our souls. Nevertheless, this is not to say that His judgments, which He has already rendered, are no longer valid. Hence when we judge lechery, larceny, blasphemy, drunkenness, and ambition to be evil things, we are not making a judgment of our own, but are only ratifying what God has rendered.

These riffraff, on the contrary, in pretending not to want to judge, make themselves judges superior to God. I ask of you, if, after a sovereign judge should have pronounced his sentence, an individual should say, "We should leave the matter in doubt, as if nothing had been decided about it, and should not consider the matter that has been condemned as evil," should he not deserve strict punishment as a seditious and mutinous person, who wants to rescind all order of justice?

Now these mad dogs, under the pretext of saying that we ought not to judge, revoke all the decisions that God has made and published and say that all the condemnations that He has ever passed' are without effect. Nevertheless, we see how it is not lawful for us to attempt to make judgments on our own, but we should hold as good what God has judged and should ratify it by being in accord with it. Hence in order to testify in His behalf that He is a good and equitable judge, let us condemn with Him all wicked works, and equally, following His admonition, let us judge a tree's goodness or evil according to its fruits.

They further cite this passage: "Hypocrite, first take the dust out of your own eye and then you can take the straw" out of your brother's" (Matt. 7:5). But what do they hope to conclude from this? That warning is addressed to hypocrites who only see vices in others while hiding their own. As when He said to the accusers of the adulterous woman, "Whoever among you is without sin, let him cast the first stone at her" (John 8:7).

He does not mean that we ought not to punish malefactors. He only warns that when we reprove others we should begin with ourselves; when we correct offenders, we ought to be innocent of the crimes which we are correcting in them, in order to show that we are led by a true zeal for justice, hating evil in ourselves as much as in others, without excepting anyone.

Now there is a vast difference between not judging out of hypocrisy and not judging at all. Our Lord commands us to judge in truth, not being more severe on our neighbors than we are on ourselves. These scum, under that pretext, want to exclude and eliminate all judgments, however reasonable they might be. However, it does not follow that when a hypocrite reproves another by flattering him that a sinner is herein excused. For evil is always under condemnation. But the hypocrite's vice lies in his not keeping himself under an equal judgment, for while pardoning himself easily he employs an excessive rigor toward others.

Now, as I said at the beginning, it is not without cause that these clowns labor to gain this point, inasmuch as this would make a great starting place for them, once they have persuaded the world that it is not necessary to find anything evil. Besides, it is wise to observe Satan's guile behind this and to remember to what end he strives.

In addition to the sins of our neighbors and the chastisements that God brings against them, we must be all the more warned not to provoke the wrath of God. There is also another matter required: that we ought to deem it evil and feel a sadness in our hearts for God to be transgressed against and for a sinner's soul to fall into perdition. We should have such a zeal for the honor of God that when He is offended we feel an anguish burning in our hearts (Ps. 69:10). We should have such an affection for our neighbors that when we see them in danger of ruining themselves, and above all their souls, we should be moved with pity and compassion.

Satan through these wooers would like to render the world stupid, to the end that whatever confusion we might see would no longer matter to us, and we would no longer be upset to see God's name blasphemed, His holy commandments trespassed, souls lost, or iniquity reigning. For in truth these men are scoffersl6who do nothing but mock at everything that happens, taking nothing to heart, afraid of being killed by melancholy, unless things happen according to their will. But if not, then they forget these grand notions of not condemning [anything], and they become a hundred times more biting and harsher than others. As for those who feed them, they mock them behind their very backs and stick their tongues out at them. For their only pleasure is to have a good time and to be without care.

They have heard of this passage from Solomon: "that a sad spirit dries up bones" (Prov. 17:22). Thus out of fear of becoming downcast, 17 they find it possible to have a good time and to surmount their anger by finding good whatever afflicts and torments God's children. That is how-in finding as much pleasure in evil as in good-they are able "to profit from everything."

Now Saint Paul says that it is the height of iniquity when a man not only performs evil but consents to it by approving of it (Rom. 1:32). That is why, if Saint Paul is to be believed, we must consider these wretches the most desperate in the world, who, not being content to slumber in their evil, overflow to the point of applauding the vices of others.

On the Libertines' View of Christ, and How They Acknowledge Him as Their Redeemer

After having forged a God in their image, who is such a portraiture as to hide all their abominations, they forge a Jesus Christ in the same mold, who is not simply like an idol, falsely raised up against the Son of God, but a sack full of villainies and a public receptacle for receiving every kind of filth.

First of all, they create Him out of the Spirit of God which is in us all and from what they call "suppositions [cuider],"' or the world." That is the monster they invent for us instead of Him, who being the sole true and natural Son of God, of the same essence as the Father, took on our nature in order to have brotherly union with us.

Lest one think that I am only attributing this to them, two of them were executed at Valenciennes for having said that Jesus Christ was not dead on the cross but only seemed to be. Isn't that a fine beginning: to make Jesus Christ into a phantom about whom one knows nothing.)

When they come to speak of His office and of the grace which we have received from Him, it is even worse. For they all our redemption to this: that Jesus Christ was only like a model, in whom we should contemplate those things which Scripture requires for our salvation.

It is true that in order to disguise the villainy of their teaching they use a number of high-sounding statements, as they desire to enhance their doctrine's worth. But it all comes down to this: that what Christ has done and suffered is only a farce or a morality play, acted out upon a stage, which represents the mystery of our salvation for us.

For example when they say that Jesus Christ has abolished sin, they mean that Jesus Christ represented this abolition in Himself. When they say that death is vanquished, this is owing to Jesus Christ's having played on the cross the role of one who endured it. In His resurrection, He acted the role of a victorious captain. Moreover, according to their view we are all Christs, and what was done in Him He has performed in us. For as I have said, they make Jesus Christ into an image or a model who represents those things required for our salvation, yet they imagine that what was done in Him has also been done in us.

It is owing to this that Quintin becomes vexed whenever anyone asks him, "How are you doing?" He replies, "How can Jesus Christ not do well".

In brief, Jesus Christ is nothing but an idol for them which they carry about to the end that they might pretend that they are free of God and of the world and are absolved from doing

any good. As for having to endure evil, they exempt themselves from it as much as they can. When others suffer afflictions, they appear robust, saying that it is blasphemy to complain or to appear to be feeling anything from it.

For example, I was once present when Quintin said to a very ill man who had only said, "Alas, my God, how ill I feel, help me!" "What are you saying? Is that any way to speak? To say that Christ isn't well? Hasn't all evil passed away in Him? Is He not in glory with His Father? Is this then all you have learned ".

But when God tests them, they are completely surprised to discover in themselves men different from the Son of God, or at least surprised not to find in themselves this idol which they have forged in the air. As in the case of one who was tried" at Cologne, who said while weeping, "Why must I still suffer, since all is finished?"

That is how they profit from transforming the nature of things through their foul daydreams. And no doubt the Son of God avenges Himself of the harm they do Him by usurping His name and mocking Him in such a way.

As for ourselves, since we are warned that in their taking of Christ's name they maliciously profane it in order to make it serve their abominations, let us not be moved thereby when we hear them pronounce [it], except to view their sacrilege with the greatest horror.

Wherein Is Shown the Significance with Which the Libertines Hold the Word Regeneration, and on the Contrary What It Means According to the Truth of Scripture.

They confess with us that we cannot become children of God unless, first of all, we are reborn. And on the surface it would seem advisable to hear them speak so that we should form a common accord. For they use the authentic words wonderfully well in order to magnify regeneration.

In fact, who can be offended when we hear these words resounding in their mouth: "If we are of God, then our old man should be crucified in us, the old Adam should die, our flesh should be mortified, the world should be destroyed, and sin should no longer reign in us"? For this is the pure teaching of Scripture and the principal point of the Christian fife, so much so that with regard to these words we can only repeat them, as the angels of heaven do not speak any better. For God Himself has taught us to speak accordingly.

But when it comes to explaining' them, what they want these words to mean corrupts everything. For they begin to disgorge their stinking and detestable blasphemies in order to overturn-I won't say all fear of God and holiness of fife- but all uprightness which was even inviolable among pagans. And together they relax the reins on each other and permit each other to prostitute themselves in every form of churlish concupiscence.

Now the principle they hold is this: that regeneration is to return to that innocent state which Adam enjoyed before he sinned. And in their view this innocent state sees neither white nor black, because Adam's sin was to eat of the fruit of the knowledge ol good and evil. Hence to mortify the old Adam means to cease having to make judgments, as if one had knowledge of evil but like a child lets himself be led by his natural sense.

They even interpret this innocence in light of the passages where childlikeness is recommended to us. As if God's Spirit, in commanding us to become like children, did not at the same time mean this-not in the sense of having to resemble thembut in the sense of being gentle, sincere, and innocent (I Cor. 14:20). As if, furthermore, He did not exhort us to believe in Christ until we attain "mature manhood" (Eph. 4:13f.). As if it were not required of us to abound in spiritual prudence (Matt. 10:16). As if He did not wam us that we ought not walk heedlessly, but rather should understand "what the will of God is" (Eph. 5:17).

What clearer exposition could we want for censuring the impudence of these wicked persons in their bold attempt to falsify Scripture? Hence let us return to their principal theme.

That is, I say, the great regeneration that one learns in their school: no longer to be touched in their hearts by anything whatsoever, but to live for pleasure without difficulty. And those who are no longer troubled by sin are called "new creatures," because they have been delivered from having to make distinctions," and hence sin is no longer in them. That is what constitutes for them the entire benefit of the redemption accomplished in Jesus Christ: that He has destroyed this need to make distinctions which entered the world through Adam's guilt.

When this need to make distinctions is abolished, then in their view there is no longer any devil or world. For they have no other enemy to torment them than the devil. From which it appears that they will be in good company with Satan and the powers of hell, since they are [supposedly] no longer troubled by them.

Now God's Spirit speaks to us of a different sort of regeneration altogether. It is true that when we were without Scripture, human reason was sufficient enough. Now I do not mean that reason which is condemned as folly because of our blindness owing to sin. But I mean that intelligence that God implanted naturally in our hearts in order to render unbelievers inexcusable and to deny them every pretense of ignorance. This natural intelligence, which is like an edict engraved in us by the hand of God, suggests and shows us quite well that the holy and virtuous life, which everyone confesses to be the fruit of Christian regeneration, does not ignore good and evil, but rather discerns between them in order to keep itself pure of all iniquity and to have a good conscience before God and to bear a good testimony in its works before men. That is the natural intelligence that God gave from the very beginning to all pagans, as Saint Paul says (Rom. 2:15).

Scripture itself even more clearly teaches us what the state of the regenerate is. It is not one which makes us irresponsible so that we might follow without discretion whatever we want to do, but on the contrary it makes us more vigilant than ever and makes us proceed with greater prudence and thoughtfulness than before. For it admonishes us that our enemy, the devil, is always nearby, prowling about for some prey (I Peter 5:8). Consequently we must always be watchful, afraid that he might surprise us; and we must resist his temptations (Eph. 6:12). Similarly, we must continually wage war against our flesh and those vicious concupiscences that lure us toward evil (Gal. 5:17), and resist the sin that dwells within us.

Nor is its purpose to put us to sleep in order that we might be free of any further remorse or unhappiness over our sins. For the Scripture says that the righteous accuse themselves, and it pronounces the man happy indeed whose heart is afraid, who remembers in meekness the judgment of God, in order to humble and to take himself in hand (Prov. 28:14).

But still to have a brief and clear definition of it all, the teaching of the Scripture emphasizes that regeneration consists in repentance. For repentance, properly speaking, is nothing other than our denying ourselves in order to become new creatures who live according to God. Now everyone knows whether that implies living it up without worrying about anything by changing the names of things, or whether it means forcing our heart away from its natural inclination and redirecting it toward the obedience of God, blaming ourselves for all our evil affections.

But in order to avoid longwindedness, to which out of necessity I would willingly give myself in order to discuss this material at length, I shall produce only a few scriptural passages that are so clear that even the least learned will be able to understand and see with his eye that this word "regeneration," as misused by these wretches, is as contrary to true Christian regeneration as fire is to water.

In the first place, instead of what they babble about the Christian man being led by his affection without seeing sin again, Saint Paul exhorts all Christians to mortify their earthly members, i.e., as he also explains as their evil concupiscences, such as lechery, avarice, ambition, and the like (Col. 3:5ff.). In order to make them fearful, he refers them to the judgment of God, saying that His wrath comes upon the rebellious for such things. He commands them to be renewed day by day, denying the old man (Eph. 4:23). He admonishes that they must walk soberly as children of fight. He warns them not to be deceived by flattering words (Eph. 5:6ff.). He instructs them to walk in their calling "in fear and trembling" (Phil. 2:12; Eph. 4:1). He humbles them by reminding them that they are "not called to impurity,29 but to holiness" (I Thess. 4:7).

These exhortations are as common in Scripture as anything else, to turn us away from evil and to do good. In fact, as I have said, what did our Lord command His apostles to preach except repentance and remission of sins (Luke 24:47)? And this not simply for a day or at the outset but until the end. Consequently, Saint Paul, wishing to affirm that he has duly fulfilled his office, says that he has not ceased to teach both, as much among the Jews as among the Gentiles (Acts 20:21).

For this reason all who want to hold to the pure truth of God are advised to continue for the rest of their life in this doctrine of repentance, which implies, as Saint Paul points out, that by virtue of God's Spirit and by His grace we should mortify "the works of the flesh" (Rom. 8:13), that sin should no longer reign in us (Rom. 6:14ff.), that we should be transformed in our understanding and own heart in order to be reformed in the obedience of God, keeping ourselves from the defilements and corruptions of the world, in order to fulfill our calling.

As for that "perfect innocence" which the Libertines imagine, pretending that the regenerate man is exempt and free of all sin and that regeneration is like an angelic condition which man cannot help but attain, if that were the case, what would become of the prayer that our Lord has taught us to pray: that it is God who forgives our sins? That is not said for the ungodly But all who comprise the children of God must pray in that way, according to Jesus Christ's model (Matt. 6:12). [And] this prayer contains the affirmation that all believers are sinners. Whoever does not wish to be of this rank excludes himself from the number of God's children.

In order to cite a specific example, could we name a morial man as perfect as Saint Paul, or of a holiness as excellent? Now he confesses that throughout his life he always had to battle against the sin that indwelled him, and being held back by his weakness, he did not do the good he willed to do. And in the end as a final conclusion he writes, "Wretched man, who will deliver me from this body of death?" (Rom. 7:18, 24). In so doing he indicates that there is no other means of being put into a state of perfection and of being rescued from the bondage of sin except in departing from his body, where he was held captive as in a prison (H Cor. 5:6, 8; Phil. 1:23).

It is true that these mockers in altering what Saint Paul discusses there have a term, saying that when they are reprimanded for their evil actions, this isn't their fault, but the fault of others . Now although this is not in agreement with what they say about the perfect state of Christians, and although there is an obvious repugnance in their thesis, nevertheless it is still a detestable and villainous blasphemy to make such a shield out of this "fault of others" in order to absolve themselves of evil.

For when Saint Paul says, "It is not I who do evil, but sin that indwells me," he does so not in order to justify himself or in order to throw off the guilt of his sins by laughing at them, but he simply wants to point out that his principal affection should be his complete conformity to the will of God. And at the same time, if there is anything [more] to be said, it is not that he should become addicted to evil, but owing to the weakness of his flesh, he is so hampered that he cannot serve God as fully as he would like. According with what he later says, that those who are God's children ought to be led by His Spirit to the end that they cease to walk according to the flesh (Rom. 8:2).

Now certainly sin indwells the children of God as long as they live in this world, but it does not reign in them. True, they are hampered and troubled by their flesh, but they do not pursue it in order to become vanquished by it. In any case, after Saint Paul said that he did not consent to evil, he nevertheless considered himself unfortunate for being its captive. What is more, he presents himself to us as a living image of the state of the regenerate, saying that it is as if the believer's life is divided into two parts: that is, inasmuch as he is reformed by God's grace, he concurs with the good; but owing to the fact that he still possesses relics of his nature, he feels a contradiction. So much is this so that his flesh, i.e., that part of him which still indwells him and which has not yet been reformed by God, pushes him in the wrong direction.

If we ask the source of this contradiction, he provides as his reason that the law is spiritual, that is, it requires a perfect holiness and a pure and whole conscience, but we, on the contrary are carnal (Rom. 7:14).

Hence let us accept what he concludes, which is that all believers during this life should obey the law of God in that they are renewed by His grace, but according to the flesh they are subject to sin. Hence Christian perfection, to put it in three words, is to have a sincere affection to serve God, to be free of a double heart, and to possess a genuine openness, so much so that one can affirm that his principal desire is to please God. Neveriheless, as Saint Augustine says , the greatest perfection is to acknowledge and confess how imperfect one is and to confess without end one's weaknesses to God.

These fantastic people, however, to supporl their error arm themselves with this verse of Saint John's: "Let him who is bom of God sin no more" (I John 3:9).41 Now I readily concede that if there should be found a totally regenerated man, then there would not be any sin in him. But the point is to know whether regeneration has ever been perfected in a mortal life. I say that since the creation of the world not a single example has appeared.

Thus Saint John's words mean nothing other than that insofar as man is regenerated by God, he no longer sins. But inasmuch as that only partially occurs, so long as we five in this world, let us not fret that we have not yet come to the end of that road on which we travel.

Someone might reply that this advice seems to be contradictory, that is, to interpret Saint John's words in this way. And indeed it does appear that in context. Saint John's intention is different. To this I reply that Saint John does mean to signify that once a man is regenerate, sin no longer reigns. For the grace of God's Spirit ought to be superior to subdue carnal affection. Nevertheless we must always come back to this point, that a man is free of the bondage of sin according to the measure of grace which he has received, which is more in some and less in others. But this measure is never full in anyone, whoever he might be.

In fact Saint John's task is only to expound this, which is sufficiently declared when he commands us all to pray for the forgiveness of our sins, saying that "if anyone believes that he is without sin, he deceives himself, and makes God a liar" (I John 1:8, 10).49

What I have said ought indeed to be sufficient to show what the true regeneration of the children of God involves, what their perfection in this world entails, and how contrary are all the daydreams of these wretches. For Scripture teaches us about both. But whereas the Libertines base a believer's holiness on a churlish ignorance, pretending that the innocent state consists in governing oneself according to one's appetite, and that man is thus perfect when he has forgotten the judgment of God and no longer worries about good or evil, as long as everything happens according to His will, the Scripture thoroughly repudiates this [view].

On Christian Liberty. How the Libertines Interpret' It and What on the Contrary the Scripture Means by It

Following this fine renewal which they invent for us, they next extend Christian liberty to include everything lawful for man, without any exceptions. In fact, since man has been changed into a beast, why shouldn't he be permitted to follow his sensual affection? Though we hold other beasts in check, or chain them up, or shut them up! But these fiends give man full liberty so that nothing may hinder him or prevent him from having a good time.

Now to begin with, since according to the Scripture we have been set free from the curse of the law in order that we might no longer be subject to that horrible sentence where it declares that God will punish all transgressors, these frantic people without any distinction abolish all the law, saying that it is no longer necessary to keep it, since we have been set free from it.

I shall explain this point yet more easily. There are two things to consider in the law. That is to say, the teaching, which is the rule for right living.' For therein our Lord shows us what pleases Him and what He approves. Hence the doctrine of the law exists to show us how our life ought to conform to the will of God.

The second point is its rigor, since it declares to us that whoever fails in a single point will be cursed, and it promises salvation only to those who perfectly observe its commandments. As long as this rigor is in force, we are entirely bereft of the hope of life and are under the condemnation that the law announces. For there has never been found a single mortal man who has acquitted himself with respect to what it requires.

Hence if the law with its appendages has authority over us, then everyone is without hope. For to satisfy its requirements is impossible. Nor can its condemnation be avoided. For this reason, the only remedy that remains is to be set free from such a bondage. This deliverance is given to us in the gospel when it is said to us that we are no longer under the law.

Now the dispute is this: that these frantic people understand by these words that the law has been so truly abolished that we no longer need to regard what it teaches but can let it sleep like a doctrine that has nothing to do with us.

Now there is no doubt that God's intention and the sense of Scripture are totally different from this. That is to say, the doctrine remains in effect in order to guide in the right direction; only the curse is removed in such a way that in spite of our weakness we do not cease to be pleasing to God, who does not cease to accept the service which we render Him, although it is imperfect, inasmuch as He forgives us the shortcoming that is in us.

For Saint Paul, after having dealt with Christian liberty quite well in his letter to the Romans, and having said that we are free and absolved from the subjection of the law, nevertheless still leads us back to this doctrine, teaching that it is fitting for us to observe it. How then do we square these views: that the law no longer holds us in bondage, yet its doctrine still remains in effect for governing our life?

We clearly see that this liberty only has to do with the law's curse or its rigor. Such is the way Paul treats it in his letter to the Galatians. For after intensively exhorting believers to stand fast in their liberty, he immediately afterward commands them to observe love,

I since it is the "fulfillment of the law" (Gal. 5:1, 13). In brief, there is not a letter in which he does not refer believers to the law as a rule for right living, to which they must conform themselves. And if there should be nothing but this admonition, which he gives us in Galatians, [i.e.] not to abuse our liberty in order to overflow with carnal license, that would alreadv be a sufficient enough restriction to check the impudence of these dogs who accordingly reject every yoke, giving themselves permission to live without law or rules.

Saint Peter makes the same remonstrance to us when he says that the spiritual liberty which the Lord Jesus has acquired for us must not become "a pretext for evil" [I Peter 2:16]. Now how can that be done, except by being delivered from the rigor of the law, in order not to be cursed by it before God, we live at the same time in accordance with it. For it does not cease to be a good and salutary doctrine, although it no longer exercises such severity on us as it does the ungodly.

That is the fine beginning with which the Libertines treat Christian liberty.

Consequently the Scripture shows us that the ancient ceremonies have been abolished and that hence we are no longer required to observe them (Col. 2:16) and in general that our consciences are not restrained by external things, but rather they are entirely under our subjection; hence one cannot impose external things upon us as being necessary [But] these giddy people hold to the doctrine in general as if it applied to evervthing, even to matters which our Lord requires of us strictly and without which no holiness or integrity of life can exist.

For a clearer explanation, we shall look at" the passages of Scripture which they distort in their turning them to suit their fantasy Saint Paul says that "all things are lawful" for him (I Cor. 6:12; 10:23). Now anyone of sound reason understands in what way. Moreover, the context of the passage shows this clearly. For it is referring to external matters: as whether to eat meat that has been consecrated to idols, seeing that idols are a matter of superstition. Although that is immaterial, Saint Paul says that it is lawful for him, but its usage should be subject to the rule of edification.

These demoniacs turn this into a general statement, holding this pretext that nothing is forbidden a Christian man. As if Saint Paul meant that it was lawful to commit adultery, to rob, and to murder . But what? Although they mock at all of Scripture whenever they please, they seem here to be dwelling upon its words. They say that the word "all" excludes nothing. But it would be proper to keep in mind the subject which he treats, not wander beyond it.

Saint Paul discusses there a matter which is neither good nor bad in itself, but only in its consequence. After having taught how he abstained from what was lawful and permitted by God for him to do in order to avoid any scandal, after having furthermore shown how the action which was in question involved great scandal, he offers his conclusion: saying that it is not a matter of what is lawful, but of what is expedient, indeed, for the edification of our brothers.

These wild beasts want to infer from this that everything without exception is lawful for us. But we must not be astonished by this impudence, inasmuch as they are not ashamed to cite along similar lines what Paul later said: "Do not Barnabas and I have the right to take along our wives?" (I Cor. 9:5).

They are, I say, so shameless in their use of this passage as a shield in order to eliminate any distinction between good and evil. But of what is Saint Paul speaking? It isn't of things which God has forbidden. It's of marriage which God permits and approves of in any case. Saint Paul glories in not having used this right, or at least in not having brought his wife with him on the journeys which he was making, for fear that this might have impeded him. Even if he had done that, he would have done nothing wrong. But he voluntarily gave up that right, lest he support anyone's weakness.

Isn't it then a cock -and-bull story to tear out this passage in order to prove that everything is permissible to a Christian man and that nothing is forbidden him? These examples should suffice to warn readers how these riffraff impudently defame the Scripture in order to make it serve as a coverup for their diabolical liberty, which they attempt to advance.

They also cover under the cloak of this liberty the deception of consenting to every form of impiety and idolatry. For they permit a man to genuflect before an idol, to carry candles, to make pilgrimages, to sing Masses, and to go along with all the abominations of the papists, even though he mocks them in his heart. If one replies to them that we ought to glorify God in our bodies (I Cor. 6:20), that we ought to confess Jesus Christ before men, that we ought to affirm our faith before the world (Matt. 10:32), instead of replying they simply put forward this shield of liberty.

Now because I have amply written of this matter in another tract, I would rather refer readers to it than delay myself any longer at this point. At all events, this single warning is alone necessary to confound their impudence, that with regard to matters which God has commanded us or forbidden us to do, we are without liberty to change anything. For the necessity of those things is inviolable. Other matters are immaterial and are within our liberty but upon condition that we should always take care to use them for the purpose of edification."

On What the Libertines Understand by the Vocation' of Believers, and How Under This Guise They Excuse Every Form of Villainy

Saint Paul admonishes us that each person should continue in the vocation wherein he is called [I Cor. 7:17, 20, 24]. Now the word "vocation" signifies all kinds of living or estates which God has established and founded in His Word. For the Scripture, above all, wants us to have a recommendation concerning it, [viz.] to order our life not by choosing such a manner of work2 as seems good to us, but by adopting' what God approves and by holding ourselves within the limits of His Word.

Thus the apostle's intention is that each should serve God in the estate in which he is called and should be content with it; that he should not desire to change; that he should not meddle in another person's calling;4 and that he should not regret doing his own duty For he was speaking of the estate of marriage and of virginity and by chance of other things as well. And with respect to it he concludes that each person ought to continue in his state and rank,' providing of course that it is a legitimate vocation.

These wretches [however] overturn this passage in order to make it possible for each person to follow the inclination of his own nature and to work and live according to what advances his profit or pleases his heart. Although this proverb might be common in the world-"it is necessary to do as others do" nevertheless, even those who do, do not attempt to say that what they did was right, but they use the excuse, such as it is, in order to minimize their faults. These wretches [however] not only excuse iniquity by admitting that "to do as others do" is to be led astray by companions, but they also adorn it with the honorable title of "vocation," as if God were calling us to it.

Now we must note that this article contains three diabolical points. The first is that there is not a single manner of living in the world which they do not regard as good, in spite of the fact that God might condemn it in His Word.

For example, the papal priest[hood] is good in their view, and according to their fantasy a canon or another maleficel ought to continue in his calumny, devouring the offerings made to idols nourishing himself on sacrileges, singing Masses, and doing similar things, for that's his calling! A monk must remain in his cloister, like a hog in its trough, for that's his calling! Which explains why Quintin, assisting one time at a cardinal's solemn Mass, said that he had seen the glory of God.

And not only under this guise do they approve of all these vocations, which are repugnant to the truth of Scripture, but also of those which pagans condemn by their natural reason. Let a pimp, they say, do his job! Let a thief rob boldly! For it is right for everyone to pursue his calling. If anyone replies to the contrary how villainous these matters are, and that nature itself teaches us to regard them with horror, they respond that it is enough for everyone "to remain in his calling."

Now we have already shown the means for overcoming this blasphemy, which is to consider what God calls us to do and to take as a vocation any estate which He prizes and holds as legitimate. Any manner of life which does not have the support of His will consider as not only uncertain and perilous but as an erroneous course, like one that a man has taken when he wanders off his road and does not know where he is going. Furthermore, whatever is repugnant to the Word of God can be taken as reproved by it and held as a certain roadway to hell.

The second point is that in all of the abuses and corruptions that reign in all the estates of the world there is no evil. We know today that the world is so depraved that in all estates, even in those that are legitimate, there are so many bad incidents that it is a pity. Not because these estates cease to be good and legitimate, but because vices are not corrected.

For example, the nobility is full of vanity, of excessive pomp, of pride, of licentiousness and insolence, of blasphemy, and of ambition. Justice is full of favors, of avarice, of tricks, and even from time to time of fleecing people . Merchandising is full of lies, of crooked deals, of perjury, of deceptions, and of rapine and cruelty. In brief, there is no vocation in which a great deal of abuse is not committed.

These great theologians do not want anyone to distinguish between the pure ordinance of God and the corruption that results from the human side, but they want everything to pass under the title of "vocation." Hence according to their theology if a gentleman is insolent or indulges in adultery if he abandons himself to pomp and vanity, if he wraps himself in every form of folly, there is nothing to criticize. For his calling supports" it. Why? Because one governs oneself according to the world. As if the customs of men changed God's justice!

If an officer of justice sells the right19 for hard cash, if he supports one person in order to wrong another, if he suppresses a good cause in order to favor one that is wrong, there is nothing at fault. For it is right for everyone to pursue the train of his calling.

If merchants destroy the world through monopolies, if they counterfeit and disguise their merchandise, if they tell lies every hour in order to cheat and outwit, if they rob and devour anyone they can entrap, let it pass!'O For to speak out would be to blaspheme his calling from God.

What are we to think, I beg of you, when such a detestable view is uttered by the mouth of a man, or by a man who is so beyond his senses that he dares to advance such absurd and villainous things? Nevertheless, they glorify in it as if it were some profound subtlety

The third point is that every inclination in man, whether it is natural or a bad habit is a calling of God. As in the case of a man who is inclined toward drunkenness, it is not lawful to reprimand him for it. For that is his calling. If by nature someone is fond of playing, let it pass. For it is improper to deprive him of his calfing. In brief, they want each person to be governed by his own desires and for man's heart to be the master of his calfing, according to where it leads him.

From this source the most villainous debauchery,1 which anyone has ever heard mentioned in the world has gone out. For they permit a man and a woman to unite with each other in whatever form seems good to them. They call it a "spiritual marriage" when anyone is content with the other. Hence if a man takes no pleasure in his wife, in their view he may provide for himself elsewhere to solve his problem. At the same time, lest the woman remain destitute, they also grant her permission to meet her need and to accept it wherever it is offered to her.

If anyone asks, "What, then, will become of marriages that are held indissoluble, if it is lawful to retract them at will?" They reply that a marriage that has been contracted and solemnized before men is carnal, unless it contains a spirit of mutual compatibility. For that reason the Christian man is not bound by it unless both are content with each other, which alone ought to be [the norm] held among Christians.

But even at that, this union is not permanent. For if, the day after tomorrow, a bawd should become angry with her pimp, she can make an exchange, provided he can offer her someone new who pleases her better. Similarly, a philander can flirt about in order to acquire new "spiritual wives" and take them as he finds them. And they are so impudent as to cover such a villainy under the pretext of "calling," since they interpret it, as I have said, as following the inclination of the heart.

Now let everyone consider whether anything in the world will remain safe any longer. What order, loyalty, integrity, or assurance will remain if marriage, which is the holiest covenant and the one which ought to be the most faithfully kept, can be thus repudiated? For marriage, I say, as God instituted it (Gen. 2:24) and blessed it, transcends all natural unions, and should even be preferred to the union between a father and his son. Marriage, as Jesus Christ has promised, is indissoluble (Matt. 19:6). Marriage is consecrated in the name of God and is hence founded on His authority. Marriage is called a "divine covenant" by Solomon (Prov. 2:17) and is compared by Saint Paul to the spiritual union which we have with our Lord Jesus (Eph. 5:32). Must it not be that the devil surely possesses them when they dare to make such an enormous confusion as to jumble sky and earth together?

As for what they say about a marriage being carnal when a man's heart is not given to his wife or when a wife does not relish her husband, is it not an exceedingly villainous impudence to rnock as they do a promise solemnly made in the name of God in the presence of the church)

As for what they say about a Christian man being no longer under obligation, I ask in what sense, then, was our Lord speaking when He said, "What God has joined together, let man

not separate" (Matt. 19:6)? For He was not speaking" in that instance of this detestable pollution of "spiritual marriage. "

1 ask in what sense does Saint Paul exhort husbands to love their wives and command both to persevere through life together until death (Eph. 5:25; Col. 3:19)? And if any dissension should come about, he forbids the wife to remarry again. And whereas these riffraff say that whenever the wife is angry with her husband, a marriage is carnal and consequently without valor, Paul commands the wife, whenever there is any problem or difference between them, to be reconciled to her husband (I Cor. 7:11).

But [the Libertines allege that] it is written that when God made man "He made them male and female" (Gen. 1:27); hence it only remains to choose, since we are all one body. As if it were in vain that the Scripture says that "the two shall become one flesh"! It does not say "three" or "four," but only "two," adding that "man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife" (Gen. 2:24; Mark 10:7). As if our Lord gave His law in vain when He forbids the coveting of another's wife (Exod. 20:14,17)! As if He had condemned without purpose adulterers and lechers! As if Saint Paul had spoken in vain when he exhorts every man to be content with his wife J Cor. 7:2)!

For this reason, in the same way that I have shown above that this wretched sect has a license to commit every form of brigandage and murder against the body, to steal, pillage, and plunder the goods of others, as being so much prey, we also see at the present how it constitutes an opening for defiling every bed and home, exterminating every form of chastity in the world.

On the Fellowship of Believers According to the Fantasy of the Libertines

We have already seen how these wretches profane marriage, mingling men and women like dumb animals according to the lusts' that drive them. And how, under the name of "spiritual marriage," they disguise this churlish corruption, labeling' as a spiritual movement" that wild impetuosity that goads and inflames a man like a bull and a woman like a dog in heat.

Now in order not to leave any order among men, they create a similar confusion with respect to goods, saying that the communion of saints exists where no one possesses anything of his own but each may take whatever he is able to get. At the beginning, there were indeed a few giddy Anabaptist who spoke like this. But because such an absurdity was repudiated by everyone as repugnant to human intelligence, so much so that even the first authors' were ashamed of it, these Libertines have held it as a kind of refuge, since their sect is a cesspool, or a sewer, for receiving all the world's dung.

It is true that on the surface they have a good pretext in complaining about the avarice of those who are called Christians, since we see each so truly in pursuit of gain that the majority are generally like insatiable pits or greedy beasts. In fact, there is no doubt that our Lord permits and almost relaxes the reins on Satan in order to give birth to such furious persons who attempt thus to put goods in common in order to punish the ingratitude of those who abuse them-which is to say almost everyone.

We know how those who possess goods devour them all alone, or hold on to them tightly, without having pity on their poor brothers in order to provide for their indigence by sharing with them what they have in their hand. We do not want to hear the remonstrances that God makes to us in their behalf. It is right, then, that the devil should stir the coals of hell in order to double the disorder which we do not correct, concerning which God admonishes us.

For this reason it is necessary to begin at this point that we might know what attitude our Lord wants us to have with respect to goods, what the legitimate means are for acquiring them, and in what their fight and lawful usage consists.

Hence the first point is that we should not desire the world's goods through covetousness; that if we are in poverty we should bear it patiently; if we have riches, we should not put our heart or confidence in them; that we should be ready to give them up when that seems good to God; that, having them or not having them, we should mistrust them as fading things, esteeming more the blessing of God than the entire world and seeking the spiritual kingdom of Jesus Christ, without enveloping ourselves in wicked lusts.

The second point is that we should work with integrity in order to gain our life; that we should accept the gain that comes to us as coming from God's hand, not using evil means in order to take away another's goods, but serving our neighbors in good conscience; that we should enjoy the profit of our labor as a just salary; that in buying and selling we should not employ fraud, deceitful tricks, or lies, but we should go briskly about our business with honesty, in the same way that we require it of others.

The third point is that whoever has hardly anything should thank God and eat his bread with contentment; that whoever has a great deal should not misuse it by squandering it, or by being intemperate or sumptuous, or by [acquiring] superfluous things out of pride and vanity. Rather by using it moderately he should employ the properly that has been given to him in order to help and to provide for his neighbors, seeing himself as God's steward who possesses the goods he has on condition that he must one day render an account, continually keeping in mind the comparison which Saint Paul makes between the world's goods and manna (11 Cor. 8:15), that is, that whoever has a great quantity of it should only take enough to eat so that whoever has hardly enough might not be in want.

In brief, as Jesus Christ has given Himself to us, we too out of charity should share with our neighbors the benefits which He has given us, contributing by this means to their indigence, inasmuch as in doing so we help them. That is how we should proceed and that is the means we should use.

But because we do not do this, let us acknowledge that it is a just vengeance on God's part that these madmen should thus appear to over-throw all order, wanting to eliminate all differences of property, I turning all the world into a brigand's forest, where without counting or paying each takes on his own what he is able to get.

Now there are so many scriptural references that reprove this villainous confusion that if I wanted to recite them all there would be no end to the matter. Thus let us be content that our Lord does not command us to give up everything or that whoever has goods must abandon them, but simply exhorts us to use them well. He does not forbid human contracts and political means which men use among themselves in order to gain their life, but only redirects them toward justice and truth.

It would be, then, a superfluous exercise to cite here many references concerning this subject, since the entire Scripture is so clear on the matter that no one can be ignorant of the subject. But these frantic people, in order to cover up their error, cite what the monks have alleged in order to prove that their estate was perfect and angelic, i.e., thev cite what our Lord said to the young man who had asked Him what he must do in order to enter the kingdom of God: "Go and sell all that you have, and give it to the poor, and follow Me" (Matt. 19:21).

But the solution is simple. For our Lord in that passage is not proclaiming a general statement that is applicable to everyone, but only to the person with whom He is speaking. For inasmuch as he thought himself to be acquitted before God by observing all the commandments of the law, and thereby had deceived himself in hypocrisy, our Lord uncovers for him his hidden malady. For he was rich and had his heart on his goods and did not recognize that that was a vice. Hence our Lord reproached him for his vice to the end that he might recognize his fault" and stop boasting that from his childhood he had fulfilled all the commandments of the law. Which in reality was a long time! Hence it is sheer folly to extract a universal doctrine from a passage that was meant to test the heart of a particular man.

Furthermore, it is quite right for each of us to be ready not simply "to sell" but "to loose" what we have for the honor of God. And let those who have an abundance of goods in hand be at the same time poor in heart. But we know quite well that the actuality of having to sell one's goods is not required of all whom our Lord instructs in Christian perfection, that is to say, that they cannot be Christians unless they rid themselves of all their goods.

They also cite what is written in Acts 4:32ff., that "none of the disciples said that what he had was his own, but all brought their substance to the feet of the apostles. Even those who had fields and possessions sold them in order to make money to provide for the indigence of the poor. This is certainly a fine illustration, provided it is applied well. And would to God that there were today such an affection of charity in all those who are called Christians. Then everyone would be provided what is necessary, and the goods which God gives us would be distributed in a better way than they presently are. But these fools imagine it to mean something other than Luke intended to say. For this reason, in order not to fall into this illusion with which they deceive themselves and trouble the world, let us be advised as to what Saint Luke means by "the distribution of goods" when he says that "no one called what he possessed his own."

It is a manner of speaking common to all languages to say, when referring to a generous man, that he has "nothing of his own," since he always has an open hand in order to assist those in need. By an even stronger reason, when you have a company of friends of such a sound accord that one does not wish to fail another in need, but each is ready to help his neighbor, one could say that these people have "nothing of their own." And this would be true though each should hold onto his house, enjoy his goods, and retain the management of his possessions and natural riches, without any of it being placed in such a pile of confusion. Such was the fellowship of believers of which Saint Luke speaks. Each retained his household goods and governed them by himself. But they had such a fellowship that none suffered indigence.

Now, as I have said, this is a true mirror of Christian love and indeed one with which we ought to bring ourselves into conformity And would to God that Quintin and his accomplices could be put again under such a reformation! I would not oppose them.

But this is not what they seek to do nor what they aspire to. Their goal is to put everything into confusion. For they insist on this point: that no one may have anything of his own. And in place of accepting the explanation which I have made, they reply that it is written next that "those who had possessions sold them." Thus according to their fantasy no one can be a Christian unless he lays aside everything he has.

To this I reply that they are doubly mistaken. First of all, Saint Luke does not say that everyone" sold [his possessions]. And as for those who did sell, he does not say that they sold everything without leaving themselves something.

Now lest anyone allege that I am inventing a solution out of my head, I beg of you, is it very likely that if everyone had sold [his possessions], Saint Luke would have only given us two examples, of whom one was even a hypocrite who wanted to deceive God? [Rather] he mentions Barnabas, who sold a field truly out of a sincere affection. The second he mentions did it for vainglory and only brought part of the proceeds. Are we to believe that among the six thousand believers or thereabouts who were present then, that all who had possessions sold them, and that Saint Luke only produced one as an example?

In the second place I reply that even the believers who sold their possessions at that time in order to aid their poor brothers did not so effectively sell everything as to have had nothing left. For each did not cease owning his house, or feeding his family, or using the goods which God had given him.

In any case, it is said afterwards that Tabitha, a woman who excelled others in the excellence of charity, gave great alms (Acts 9:36).31 Whence could she have made them, if she had given up all her goods? It is said that Saint Peter lodged at the home of Simon the tanner (Acts 10:6). This could not have been possible, if Simon had not had a house and a family The same holds true for what is said next of Mary, John [Mark]s mother, i.e., that Saint Peter, being miraculously delivered from the prison by the angel, went into her house (Acts 12:12). The same for Lydia (Acts 16:15). For after being converted to Jesus Christ, she not only lodged the apostles once, but after they were released from prison, they returned to her house.

These people of whom I speak were the most perfect among the Christians. Nevertheless, they did not practice a confused "community of goods" among themselves. But it would be a superfluous matter and [would require] far too much time to collect all the specific examples in order to show that when the believers brought4l their goods together they did not mix into a pile4l what they had, but each retaining what was his in his own hands, they distributed them according as demand necessitated.

Hence we have [here] the general doctrine, with which it is always best to stop in order to be on the safe side. Only I shall produce one more specific example, and then we shall arrive at the conclusion, which follows from this general doctrine, which is the true rule by which we ought to measure everything else.

There is Philemon, whom Saint Paul rightly calls his companion in arms in the work of the Lord and whom he praises because of his faith and excellent love, known by all, toward God and toward all the saints [v. 5]. Nevertheless, he continues to possess not only his estate and his household goods but also his serfs and servants, who in those days were like slaves. For they were not servants whom one hires, but one owned them in order to be served by them all one's life, or in order to sell them and transfer them. Hence it would have been something quite strange for a master to have considered his servants, along with the rest of his goods, as anything more than natural possessions. Now Saint Paul does not require him whatsoever to cast this aside, but he begs him to receive Onesimus his serf, who had fled from him. If a man, who is like a mirror of perfection for others, enjoyed his possessions in good conscience in this way and is approved by Saint Paul for doing so, who will darc impose a completely different law on Christians?

Let us come to the general doctrine wherein lies the true solution . Saint Paul does not teach Timothy to require the world's rich to give up everything, but only not to be puffed up, not to put their hope in corruptible riches, and to be rich in good works (I Tim. 6:17). He [Paul] does not require masters to dismiss their slaves but only to treat them reasonably and with humanity (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). He does not forbid any more buying or selling but onlv that we not outwit or cheat our neighbors when buying or selling (I Thess. 4:6). For example, "Let those who buy be as those not buying" (I Cor. 7:30). He does not require the renunciation of property, but only that it be possessed as not being possessed. Finally, when speaking of alms, he does not require us to toss everything into a heap in order that each might take out what he needs, but says that each should give according to the devotion of his heart (11 Cor. 9:7): "not reluctantly or out of necessity, but out of a free and generous heart"; not that he who has goods should ruin himself in order to supply others, but in order to provide for his neighbor's want out of his abundance. Those are the very words of Paul. What more can we ask?

Thus let us learn to participate with,decency and order in the fellowship which believers exercise concerning goods, and consequently to reject and hold in abomination this diabolical delusion of wanting to heap all goods into a pile in order to introduce not only a labyrinth into the world but a terrible brigandage, as we can conceive it and would be able more clearly to see from experience.

As for Saint Luke's passages cited above, it appears that they no more serve these fantastics than thev do monks who want to feather their own nests in order to found their lovely communities of swine, such as we find in their cloisters. I neglect to say that their charity does not extend as far. For they hardly make their own condition worse in order to do good to others. Rather they are content to divest themselves in order to seize the goods of others. The only thing they understand is to give nothing to others.

For this reason I am wont to call them "theologians of passive charity" since they allow one to do as much good for them as one can. And still when one has done everything, they are never content but murmur continually. But when it comes to giving [in return], try to find the person who does! That isn't part of their understanding. And they are so far from being able to teach active charity" by example that one would never be able to learn it from them. In fact what they would teach would only point out the affection from which they operate.

I shall not pursue the matter beyond this point. I am satisfied with having shown how the doctrine in itself is wicked and damnable.

On the Libertines' View of the Resurrection

Saint Paul makes mention of Philetus and Hymenaeus (II Tim. 2:17f.), who were already saving in their time that "the resurrection is past," saving that this position is a wicked heresy that overturns faith. Nevertheless these dogs, in the face of such a clear statement, continue to maintain this detestable error. For thev scorn all our hope of being raised, saving that what we await has alreadv occurred.

If we ask them how, it is [owing to the fact] that man knows that his soul is nothing other than immortal spirit which is always living in heaven, and that Jesus Christ in His death has abolished the need to make judgments between good and evil,2 and has therebv restored' us to life, which means to know that we shall not die.

That is how these wretches, along with their predecessors Hymenaeus and Philetus, overturn the principal foundation of our faith, without which the gospel, as Saint Paul says (I Cor. 15:14), would consist of nothing. For outside the resurrection, what will continue our life? And to reduce it [i.e., the resurrection] to such an idea 4 would indeed be to eliminate it by destroying its truth.

Now it is certainly true that "whoever believes never dies, but has passed from death to life" (John 11:26; 5:24), that he is no longer under condemnation, nor does death reign any more, because the Spirit that raised Christ resides in him and is an immortal seed in him. But from this it does not follow that the beatitude which we await has alreadv been revealed, that we are enjoying it, and that we have entered into the actual possession of our inheritance.

But it is important to note the passage of Scripture with which they dazzle the eyes of the simple in order to believe that they have been raised. Solomon' speaking on death in his Ecclesiastes, says that "the spirit of man will return to God who made it, while the body will return to the earth from whence it came" (Eccles. 12:7). From this they conclude that the spirit is reunited with the essence of God, so much so that only a single spirit lives on.

But whom are they trying to persuade by such an interpretation: that the human soul upon returning to God becomes God? Our Lord Jesus when dying clearly said, "Father, I commend My spirit into Your hands" (Luke 23:46). Saint Stephen also made a similar prayer: "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (Acts 7:59). But far from favoring their error, these passages suffice to conquer them, purely and plainly For they expressly point out that God receives our souls into His keeping and preserves them until the time that they shall be reunited with their bodies.

If we ask in what condition and estate He holds them, it is shown to us clearly enough from other passages that He gives them joy and consolation, causes them to rest from all their miseries, and satisfies them with His blessings. That is [what it teaches] with respect to souls.

As for our bodies, Saint Paul, desiring to magnify the benefits' which we have received through Jesus Christ, says that "we are members of the household of God, citizens of His kingdom with the saints, seated in heavenly places" (Eph. 2:19). And in another passage (Col. 3:1) he says that "we are raised with Him." But they forget to speak of the end [of the passage] where he adds that "we are citizens of paradise, already having our residence there, in truth by hope" [Eph. 2:19, 22].

Hence everything that is said about the present happiness of Christians we must regard' as something which God assuredly gives them in their hearts, but we must not understand it as something which they already hold, or whose effects they see.

For it is fitting that what Saint Paul says elsewhere should be true: "that our salvation is still hidden, since our hope is based on things that are absent and yet to come" (Col. 3:3). Again, "that in appearance we are dead, and our life will not be manifested until Jesus Christ comes in judgment" [v. 4].

Thus we are confident of everything that God promises us. But we still await it.

As Saint John says, "Indeed we know that we are children of God, but this has not yet appeared" (I John 3:2). For this reason it is said that we carry the decree of life in our hearts, "while God's Spirit testifies to us that we are children of God" (11 Cor. 1:22; Rom. 8:16; Eph. 1:14). As for what Saint Paul says about our being raised, it is not in reference to the glorious life which has been promised us-and hence does not mean that we are already enjoying it-but only refers to regeneration, as the context seems to indicate.

Thus what are we to say? Nothing else, unless it is that in denying the world we should aspire to a heavenly life, meditating on the kingdom of God and seeking only to conform ourselves to His will.

And how can that possibly destroy the hope of the resurrection which God has given us? Is it likely that Saint Paul wanted to turn us away from it? He who condemns overtly as heretics those who held such a view? Or does he do so in order to speak to us of the novelty' of life? Certainly not! That is too impudent to attribute to him.

Therefore let us realize that as God has elected us and adopted us as His children before the creation of the world (Eph. 1:4), so also He confirms in us the testimony of our adoption through His gospel, and even partially' introduces us into our inheritance, but only through hope. And so long as we live in this world we are like strangers, who anticipate that the blessings which we have been promised will be revealed to us in effect and that we shall see face to face what we now behold in a mirror and in dim figures, as Saint Paul says (I Cor. 13:12). "We are away from God," as he says in another passage (11 Cor. 5:7), inasmuch as "we walk by faith and not by sight" and actual joy.

Hence we labor, hoping for rest after death. We battle, hoping later to receive the fruit of our victory We suffer, while awaiting our joy and consolation.

In brief, inasmuch as we should be the most unhappy people in the world if our hope were confined to this present life (I Cor. 15:19E), we hope in this highest happiness which transcends human understanding, in this happy life indeed into which our Lord Jesus has entered in order to guide us when our time comes. At the same time we believe what is said by Saint Paul, that "when this earthly house is destroyed, we shall have an eternal house in the heavens" (11 Cor. 5:1 f.). We also know that that is where the gospel calls us. That is why we long to leave this prison in order to be with the Lord. We know that being in His presence we shall have true contentment and fruition of all that is best.

Furthermore, insofar as the Scripture constantly directs us toward this last day, in which it promises that Jesus Christ will come to judge the world, our highest hope also lies in it. For even though the souls of believers, which are currently separated from their bodies, live with God and abide in the happy joy of His kingdom, nevertheless both the glory and the perfect happiness of all the children of God are different with the second coming of Christ. So much is this so that Abel, Noah, Abraham, and all the ancient fathers await us, "not having received their crowns, in order that we might be crowned together" (Heb. 11:40).

Hence it is imperative that the understanding of believers should be entirely pinned on this day and that their hearts should cling to it. For as we see, the Scripture is full of such exhortations. What then do these wretches want to say, who deny us the principal point of our Christianity.) The Scripture cries loud and clear (Luke 21:28) that if we want to contemplate our salvation, then we should lift up our hearts to the last day. These dogs velp that such is in vain and that we are already raised, without there being any further resurrection.

The references are so clear that nothing more [is needed] to show that our bodies, which are presently corruptible and su ect to every form of weakness, will be raised in glorious immortality, and that equally those of unbelievers will be raised in perpetual ignominy (John 5:29). If there were no resurrection for us, says Saint Paul (I Cor. 15:14,17), it would follow that Jesus Christ is not raised, that the gospel is only a lie, and that our faith is empty.

In a similar way the following doctrine is continually reiterated: that the Lord Jesus will then come in majesty with His angels in order to call the children of God into their full possession of their heavenly inheritance, and to send the wicked into hell in order to separate the goats from the sheep so that He might fulfill in His members the work of redemption which He has accomplished (Matt. 25:31).

These swine, on the contrary, uproot this entire doctrine with their snouts, saving that nothing else remains once the need to make judgments between good and evil has been abolished. Thus it is sufficient for the spirit, upon leaving the body, to return to God. For that, in their view, constitutes its proper place and perfection.

By this we see that they achieve with equal perversity what they began. For in the same way that they confuse God with the devil when they speak of the creation of men and of all God's works, so also when it comes to the restitution" of everything, they completely overturn what is said in the Scripture concerning the hope of our salvation, leaving us nothing but the present life, in order to pass on and then cease to be.

For this reason, being aware of this detestable blasphemy, let us live in the hope which God gives us so clearly and so certainly throughout Scripture. And that is that the Lord Jesus will appear in the heavens in His time, and that those who have died beforehand, whose bodies have rotted in the ground, will all be raised at the sound of the trumpet, i.e., by the voice of the archangel who will accompany them at the judgment, and that those who are still alive will be changed in an instant, and that all of them together, being resuscitated, will come before the judge in order to present themselves before His majesty (I Thess. 4:16f.; I Cor. 15:51). Then, at that time, the children of God will receive the reward of their hope, and the beatitude which they presently await will be revealed to them. They will see it fully, I say, face to face; whereas it is currently hidden to the human senses. Then, at that time, we shall enter into the possession of our inheritance, which is promised to us in the gospel [Matt. 25:21,23, 34]. At that time we shall enjoy full happiness, whereas we are currently in misery. Then we shall be with God and we shall see God such as He is, whereas we currently know Him only by faith. Then our bodies, which are presently subject to corruption and putrefaction, will be transfigured into the glory of our Lord Jesus.

Hence let us think of our resurrection to come as conforming to His. That is, that as He was raised in immortality, so also we should not doubt that when the time comes the same will be done in us as in His members. And let us be assured, according to the testimony of the apostle (Heb. 11:40), that all the holy fathers and prophets and other believers are awaiting us, not having yet received the crown of glory which God has prepared for them, in order that we might all receive it together. And not only that, but also that all creatures unite in company with us, as Saint Paul says (Rom. 8:19ff.), "longing for the day of our redemption," in order to be returned to their original state and to be delivered from their present bondage because of our sins.

Hence we all the better perceive how insane these miserable people are, since they have less understanding than dumb animals, or even than rocks, I say, and blocks of wood. Therein let us understand what it means to be made reprobate, and let us learn to fear the judgment of God.'

Wherein What Has Been Said About Both the Style and the False and Damnable Impiety of the Libertines Is Almost Demonstrated to the Letter in a Certain Cock-and-Bull Story by Monsieur Anthony Pocquet, One of the Proponents of the Sect

Since the things which I have inferred above (concerning both the detestable errors of the Quintinists and the cunning with which they obscure under disguised words the venom of their wicked and pernicious doctrine) can be much better understood when seen through examples, I have decided to inform the reader more amply by inserting here the ramblings of Monsieur Anthony Pocquet, the little priest of whom I spoke at the beginning, adding a few admonitions to alert the simple of things of which they might not possibly be able to warn themselves. I call these ramblings a "cock and bull story" because the proposals treated within it are maintained in any event as goat dung, as each will be able to see.

Now it should be noted that his ramblings are a sort of enticement for the purpose of attracting the uneducated. For he does not expose the great mysteries which they are accustomed to sharing' only with those who have already come to them to be instructed in their school. But as I said earlier, in the same way that monks, hoping to allure a poor simple novice, take care not to reveal to him the secrets of their order but begin by treating him as the greatest person in town, only divulging pleasant and sweet matters until they have entrapped him in their noose, so also these fiffraff at first cover themselves with pretty make-up in order to give a flavor of their doctrine to the simple. And they never expose the hidden side of their abominations until they are confident that a man is sufficiently seduced' to consent to their illusions.

Hence in the same way that poor novices after being bound in perpetual bondage by their promises find that the cloisters are a true hell and the honey has been changed into gall, so too these poor simple people, equally having thought at first that this loathsome sect was their gatewaV to paradise, are thrown into ruin before having caught sight of evil . Consequently, to the end that no one may be deceived for want of being warned, let us listen a little while this great theologian, Monsieur Anthony Pocquet, harangues us in their accustomed manner.

God be praised that in these last days it has pleased Him to make known to me bv His instrument the great error in which I stood, desiring to reprove and correct youl where it is written, "They shall all be taught by God" (Isa. 54:13; John 6:43).

Note that his principal wisdom consists in letting each person walk according to his own intelligence.' Hence it is fitting that all teaching and admonition should cease between men, which is the reverse of what Saint Paul says to all believers: "Mutually teach and admonish one another" (Col. 3:16). Again, "You are full of wisdom in order to admonish each other" (Rom. 15:14). Again, "Convince, admonish, rebuke" (11 Tim. 4:2). Again, as our Lord says, "If your brother has sinned, correct him between you and him" (Matt. 18:15).

He continues

And when I presume to understand, I understand nothing.9 For God is mv understanding, my strength, and my salvation. Even if I should want to judge you or murmur against you, keeping a close lookout on my neighbor and not on myself, that is forbidden. For He has made the nations of the world capable of salvation.

What does it mean to say that whoever has God for his understanding understands nothing? For if this were so, God would be making us blind, whereas His office is to enlighten us. It is true that a believer does not think of himself [alone] as coming to understand anything. But does this mean that he must close his eyes in order not to see anything, as this insane Pocquet pretends?

As for keeping an eye on our neighbor but not on ourselves, that is forbidden. But our Lord does not forbid us from doing both. Besides, let us carefully note the "sound" reason he adds: "All nations are capable of salvation." Hence it is not lawful to care about your neighbor. But I conclude the opposite. For since we are ministers of God and His fellow workers for the purpose of edifying our neighbors in salvation, it is fitting that we should work unceasingly in their behalf.

He continues,

In the first place I do not understand how we are created out of nothing and how our bodies will be reconstituted from extinguished ashes, while the spirit will be as clean air and dispersed as clouds, nor do I understand how I am [made] of an earthly species, that is to say, from him who was first of all made as a living soul (God does nothing without a purpose)," and how we are born from the womb of our mother earth, where all is woe. For this reason Job said (5:18f.), "God wounds and then heals; He brings one to hell and then retrieves; He delivers from six tribulations and no evil will touch you on the seventh."

I beg of you, is there any more substance to this proposal than there is to the daydreams of a man suffering from a high fever? Moreover he already begins to enter into this beautiful philosophy which we have already treated: that the spirit reenters God when man dies, when he says that it will be dispersed as the clouds.

He continues,

For it was my living soul that so presumed to speak. But thanks to God, by this spirit of renewal I am raised from death and revived with Christ, and I am dead to the works of the law,12 and I am called with the angels and made a son of God and an inheritor of immortality and a member of Christ, and our bodies [are made] temples of the Holy Spirit, and our souls the images and secret dwelling places of divinity. And this horrible beast, the serpent, called the devil, to whom we were obligated and serfs and from whom it was impossible for us to free ourselves, this then was pride or avarice or the world, which has already come to an end by fire, as I shall explain more clearly.

Now he begins to "froth at the mouth," as Saint Jude says (v. 16), that is, he uses boastful words which have the appearance of a wonderful spirituality. For who would not say that on the surface Monsieur Anthony Pocquet has become a demiangel, hearing him speak in such a lofty manner, as if he no longer had sensations of anything except heavenly matters? But when all this is said, it is nothing but a lie and a lot of wind, except that under the bombast of his froth are already hidden many of their blasphemies. For he already wants to introduce this fantastic resurrection of which I have spoken. And although he mentions the devil, nevertheless he denotes that this is only by way of imagination, explaining that he means nothing other than "pride," or "avarice," or "the world," which is their notion of cuider, which I have already treated. Hence that is what the devil means to them.

Finally, by taking what is said about the consummation of the world by fire as a silly allegory, he completely destroys that article of our faith which is so well expressed in Scripture, and removes our hope of the renewal of all creatures.

He continues,

The same is true of what is written about the transfiguration, where Jesus Christ was in the middle of Moses and Elijah. Moses was the ancient law, hard and unbearable. Jesus Christ was the law, gentle, gracious, tractable. Elijah was the last, meaning the end of the world, as he demonstrated by his departure in his fiery chariot, full of flames, called "double spirit,"" and by which we are consummated outside of this earthly world. And nevertheless, as Jesus Christ said through Saint John, I see a new heaven and a new earth." This was the world, which has already ended, not so entirely as not to be present, but the world has ended for those who are in Christ and who no longer live according to the flesh. For the wisdom of the flesh is dead and full of death.

You see the audacity of this rascal who shamelessly pretends to be a great theologian by recounting fables from the book of old wives' tales for mystical expositions of the Scripture. But Jesus Christ is shown in glory in the middle of Moses and Elijah (Matt. 17:3), i.e., of the law and the prophets, in order to denote that Moses and the prophets have witnessed to Him and that He is the true end toward which all their teaching ought to refer, and that He is in the middle, as a place of the highest honor, to demonstrate that He is the master of the house, as the apostle says (Heb. 3:2, 5), and that the others have only been His servants.

But this swine, overturning this beautiful mystery with his snout so that Christ is no longer the end at all, places Elijah in the highest position and makes him the perfection of everything, attributing nothing to Jesus Christ unless it is that He leads us up to the halfway point -which is Muhammad's doctrine.

As for what he says about the world having already ended, he disguises this blasphemy still more clearly in both their perfection which they imagine and in the resurrection which they preach. That is, that since it is an accomplished event, they are more glorious than the angels of paradise.

As for their interpreting the fiery chariot, in which Elijah was carried away from this world, as "double spirit," in the first place it is a manifest falsification of the text in which it is only stated that Elisha asked his master if after him he could have a double portion of God's Spirit, adding that this was granted to him (II Kings 2:9). Second, in this word ["double"] is hidden the abomination, which they practice" in their sect, of disguising themselves and feigning, whether in their words, jests, or works, saying that Christian perfection consists in being double [i.e., 11 two-faced"], to the end that one neither knows how to take them nor can attribute any substance or certainty to them.

He continues,

For it is written, "I have been made every man."" Since He has been made every man by taking on human nature and is dead, can He still die here below? It would be a grave mistake to believe so. For He is dead and raised, and it is necessary to believe that He has not left any of His members without being dead and also raised with Him. Thus for this reason it is written that "we are all members of Christ."

Where is what he alleges written? It is a blatant lie! For we do not find any such statement in Scripture. But above all let us note the consequence which he deduces from this false allegation, i.e., that we shall never again die, as if we should not differ in any way from Jesus Christ.

It is true that with respect to leading a holy life if we are members of Christ we should already be dead and raised, denying, I say, ourselves and living to God. But is that it? On the contrary, all of Scripture attests that that is only a part of it.

Is this to say that natural death has been abolished? Is this to say that there is no longer any hope of resurrection? On the contrary, Saint Paul says that the last enemy to be overcome on the last day will be death (I Cor. 15:26).

This "venerable" Monsieur Anthony seems quite pleased to prove all his silly notions by saying that we are "members of Christ," but he overlooks the fact that God extends His mercies within limits, granting each of us his portion in this world according to the excellence of each member, as Saint Paul says (I Cor. 12:7). Consequently, as Jesus Christ is not yet fully in us, so also His benefits and gifts are far from being entirely in us. Hence let us return again to what is written in another passage: that each will come to the resurrection quite happily "in his own order" (I Cor. 15:23).

He continues,

It is also written, "Bear one another's weaknesses." For if we criticize each other we will be siding with the serpent, called "the devil," accusing believers by constantly assuming them to be acting in pride. But God elevates the small and the humble and humbles the great and the proud. For this reason those who are in Christ, who have the wisdom of faith, recognize the works of God everywhere and are astonished at nothing, benefiting from everything, realizing that everything is [caused by] the will and providence of God.

I concur. But isn't there a great difference between criticizing our neighbor and reprimanding him for his shortcomings with the intention of helping him? Whenever we falsely slander our neighbor, or rail against him through backbiting, we are imitators of the devil. But when we reprimand the shortcomings which we see, in simplicity of heart, we are imitators of God.

Now this rogue overflows still more, adding that it is the wisdom of faith to judge everything good, as the work of God. He says that we ought not find fault with anything. The reason, he adds, is because nothing can be evil.

That is how he absolves murder, robbery, and adultery," under the ruse that we ought not to criticize. And what is worse, he commits the outrage of attributing all this malice to God in order to find it good.

He continues,

faith, without wishing to be avenged." For whoever wants to be avenged will find the vengeance of the Lord who will remember his sins. For this reason it is said, "Forgive your neighbor who harms you. And when you pray, your sins wift be forgiven you." For a man must not make his petition in anger. For how can he ask for forgiveness if he has no mercy on men like himself, if he is still in the flesh, not yet having memory of the last days, for he would continue to be the enemy, i.e., the devil, not having memory of the new covenant that shows him how to abstain from quarreling and contention, that abolishes all sin, and teaches him not to be concerned for his neighbor's ignorance? For the Lord has said, "I wound and heal; I put to death and make alive." Hence trust my words and be renewed in the renewal of your minds in order to understand the will of God, not returning evil for evil, but overcoming evil with good. For if you love your neighbor, you fulfill the law. The love of neighbor causes no evil. For it is the fulfillment of the law.

We see here with what impudence they confuse good with evil. Saint Paul, speaking in reference to foods, says that nothing is "unclean" or "to be rejected," "since they are good creations of God" (I Tim. 4:4). This scab" applies this statement to robbery, adultery, and murder in order to find them clean and holy. What follows is a confused jumble of impertinent statements. But in all events, underneath it contains hidden malice, since in saying that we ought to forgive their sins he means that we ought to flatter our neighbors. And he confuses the word "vengeance" with "reprehension," thus concluding that it is not lawful to condemn anyone for his evil, since we must forgive those who have trespassed against us. True! But the forgiveness we must render refers to love .40 But we are not to usurp the authority of God in order to call evil good.

Thus we see how these dogs make use of our Lord's Holy Word by their blasphemies.

He continues,

Moses says (Exod. 33:19), "1 will have mercy on whom I will have mercy." Consequently the Lord is merciful when it pleases Him and hardens when it pleases Him. Jesus also says, "Without me you can do nothing" (John 15:5).'And no one can come to Me unless it is given to Him by My Father" (John 6:44). Isn't this the infallible truth, seeing who has spoken it? Who, then, wants to contradict His Word? Is it not written that God knew, before He even created us, whether we would be bad or goocP and knew everything present and to come?

That is their lovely theology, to say that Jesus Christ came into the world that sin might be no more. it is true that He abolishes sin in His believers, but He does so by mortifying them through the grace of His Spirit in order that they might follow good and eschew evil. He also abolishes the curse of sin, so that it is not imputed to us before God. But this does not mean that believers do not sin or should not be condemned for their evil in order to obtain absolution from God; nor equally that they ought not correct one another in order to reclaim each other from sins.

"God has consigned everyone under unbelief" (Rom. 11:32~-that is, holds all men [as] confounded and damned by their unbelief, so much so that none is saved except by His mercy, which He gives, as Moses says (Exod. 33:19), to whom it pleases Him But this does not mean that by forgiving sin He justifies it.

Besides, I beg of you, what purpose is served by his amassing all these statements without order or reason, unless it is so to dazzle his readers'eyes that they cease to know where they are? [Making them] quite like a man who having strayed from his road, and having neither path nor track before him, travels aimlessly and tortuously about.

He continues,

It is written, "You shall not be adulterers of the Word, as some have." And such was 1. But all is forgiven. For it is written, "Abstain from unchastity so that you might enjoy your vessels in holiness and honor" (I Thess. 4:3f.). For since we are dead to the law through the body of Christ in order that we might be[long] to another, who has been raised from the dead so that we might bear fruit to the living God (Rom. 7:4), you are hence no longer in the flesh. The wisdom of the flesh is God's enemy and does not know how to please God (Rom. 8:7f.).Now if the Spirit of Christ is not in you, how can you be in Him? But if He is, though the body is dead because of sin, the spirit fives because of justification. That is to say, He has justified us since we are all of the same Spirit. Hence, the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus Christ from the dead lives in you. For He died for all and, as it is said, He became every man 46 and "died for all that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for Him who died for all and was raised for all" (II Cor. 5:15).

It hardly troubles Monsieur Anthony to cite Scripture in this way, falsifying one passage, corrupting another, and inventing in his head whatever seems good to him, pretending that whatever he imagines is [actually] written and astonishing all as if the Scripture existed in order to build a gross structure from every crude and ill-designed piece.

He continues,

For this reason "we now no longer regard anyone according to the flesh, and even though we knew Christ according to the flesh, we now no longer regard Him thus, because we are reigning and have been made new creatures in Christ" (111 Cor. 5:16f.). "Therefore the old and sterile have passed away, because all things have become renewed, and all these things are from God who has reconciled us to Himself through Christ. For God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their sin against them." Thus it is written, "Whoever sees sin, sin remains in him, and the truth is not in him" (John 9:41). And a little farther over still again: "Whoever fails in one [point], fails in all [the law]" (James 2:10).

Saint Paul, desiring to combat the pride of those who glory in external appearances, says that it is improper for us to regard any man "according to the flesh" in order to emphasize what he had said above. Rather we should regard with esteem those who are new creatures.

This seducer pretends to carry the simple away by imagining that they should no longer discern between good and evil, as if that would be judging "according to the flesh." And in order better to confirm his proposal, he falsifies without shame Saint John's passage where our Lord says to the Pharisees, "Because you say, 'We see,' your sin remains." And he completely changes it by saying, "Whoever sees sin, sin remains in him."

Indeed, up to this point has he [not] frothed with his lofty and inflated notions, so that now he has defined in a word what the fine innocence and holiness of their sect is? That is, to be no more consciouslO than swine.

He continues,

But when you behold God" you no longer see all these things. For sin does not dwell in God, yet He makes all things and everything He makes is good," and man's knowledge is folly to God. Will you thus behold in man, that is to say in the flesh, what is not in GocP Indeed they are not [in God].

We see here how in attributing evil to God, in order to judge it good, they blaspheme God as well as detract from His righteousness. And because there is no sensible human who would be villainous enough to say that since God creates everything there is no sin, he alleges that human knowledge" is folly. With this I agree, but I say to condemn evil and to see sin in order to hate it is the knowledge of God, unless he thinks that the devil spoke through Holy Scripture.

He continues,

And because everything that is outside of God is nothing, the Scripture says that all that we do or know to do is vanity. Thus it is said, "Deny yourself, and take up My cross, and follow Me. Whoever walks with Me is not in darkness but walks in light" (John 8:12).

There is no passage, however sacred, in Scripture that this impudent wretch does not misuse to suit his churlish affections in order to permit each to live as one pleases. But when the Scripture says that there is nothing but vanity in us and that we can do nothing good without Christ, its purpose in condemning us is that we might pray to God for Him to work in us by His grace.

This wretch derives a completely different conclusion: that we should do nothing, and that it suffices to think that God does everything, and that we are not doing any evil when we attribute everything to God.

He continues,

Remember the time that the disciple asked Elijah for a double [portion of] spirit. Such was the case when Jesus Christ said to His apostles, "I yet have something to give you, but now you are not able to bear it" (John 16:12). "But when the Spirit of truth comes, He will teach you the whole truth. For He will not speak of Himself but He will speak what He has heard and will declare to you the things that are to come; He will clarify Me. For He will take what is Mine and declare it to you, so that you will be as incorruptible as I. Moreover, I shall not speak again until that time comes.

It is quite necessary to guess in order to fathom the end of Monsieur Anthony's proposals. For it seems that he jumps from the first item of his Mass to the second. But we must note that herein he pretends to save the world from the simple and pure teaching of the Scripture, as if it were the wisdom of Christians to inquire into new revelations. And he now calls it "a double [portion of] spirit" to pass beyond the contents of Scripture. Still, whenever it suits them, they interpret Scripture in a totally different sense.

Furthermore, he maliciously falsifies Saint John's passage in order to confirm his blasphemy For instead of our Lord Jesus saying to His apostles that the Spirit will enable them to understand what they have heard from His mouth, this clown has our Lord say that He will "declare things to come." And then he makes Jesus say what He never thought by imposing his own ideas on Him.

But this is how they reverence the Scripture. For by pretending to use it they mislead poor simple people who do not know what it contains. He continues,

Let us consider then how the church was made and formed and that it was prefigured in Adam and Eve. Consequently Jesus Christ is the Bridegroom and we are the bride. As it is written in the Song of Songs, "Come my sister and my bride."

Whereas Saint Paul uses this simile of Adam and Eve to commend to us the spiritual union which we enjoy with our Lord Jesus in order to participate both in Him and in His benefits, this wicked seducer twists it to [suit] their diabolical imagination, viz., that we are the same person as Jesus Christ.

Moreover what he calls "the natural law of growing and multiplying," and what he adds about our having to return to that in order to experience original innocence, follows from their doctrine of "spiritual marriage," i.e., that each should unite with the other wherever it suits.

What he interpolates from the Apocalypse is purely cock and bull. And while he perverts the meaning of the passage by placing the consummation of the reign of God in the present time, for whose coming we daily pray, we confess that it is still to be accomplished.

He continues,

But we continue in sin unless we enter the garden of paradise where it is still forbidden to want to do anything but to let ourselves be led by the will of God, otherwise we shall not be divested of the old serpent, which is our first father Adam, and we will see sin as he and his wife saw it, though they thought they were covering their nakedness and sin, which they had just committed. And earlier they had not seen their will and were not ashamed of their nakedness. They had not seen their sin, but when they saw sin, sin was necessarily imputed to them and everything was changed. For their happiness was changed into labor and misery, and the earth and all that it produces was cursed. Man was changed into vanity.

Herein we see the kind of mortification these seducers teach, i.e., that man should be free to follow his own desire, without troubling his conscience in anything. For lo, in their opinion, God works in us when we cease to say that the work is ours.

We further see this blasphemy reiterated: that one must remove all scruples and that their entire innocence consists in closing their eyes so that they no longer see any good or evil, which, as Solomon says (Prov. 28:5), is the height of all iniquity And Saint Paul also says that when a man no longer has any compunction or regrets, it is a sign of his complete alienation from God (Eph. 4:19).

Furthermore, we must note how they overturn everything when they conclude that the origin of evil and man's perdition is the result of his having seen his sin, whereas his evil was the result of his unfaithfulness and disobedience which he had committed, and his awareness of his shame was an accompanying punishment, which our Lord nonetheless has changed into salvation.

Hence we see the impudence involved when this villain says that he saw sin and as a result sin was ascribed to him. For on the contrary, the moment he saw sin he began to obtain grace, as in truth it is required that the sinner must condemn himself in order to receive forgiveness from God. in fact, what would become of repentance, which all Christians must practice until death?

Besides, there is another malicious point to note: that Adam and the serpent are one, which according to their view means that sin, the devil, the world, the living soul and his conscious acts are all the same.

He continues,

Consequently, let us leave the old Adam, i.e., our living soul, and let us come to higher things, i.e., the spirit. For it was said of Adam that he would die. And he is dead. Now we are vivified with the second Adam, who is Christ, no longer seeing sin, since it is dead. For grace was made from sin by our Father in Jesus Christ. Whence then comes this fear and terror of death and of being cast into hell? In reality one can set it aside as an error; one can make fun of it as a vain thought.

We see here how these serpents twist the terms "old man" and "spirit." For whereas the Scripture means by "old man" the corruption that reigns in us due to sin, they mean "the living soul" which was given to man from the first moment of creation, before it had sinned or had acquired any vice.

"Spirit" to them is not derived from the grace of regeneration. Rather it is the fantasy that God is in us and that we must permit Him to do whatever He wants.

We also see what they mean by the fife which we have in Jesus Christ: i.e., that everything is lawful, and there is no evil, provided we are not conscious of it.

It is indeed true that a believer ought to fear neither death nor hell, truly realizing that he has been set free from both through his redemption in Jesus Christ, but not through a stupidity [such] as these wicked people claim, nor by eliminating the ideas of death and hell as if they were childish threats. For that is where Monsieur Anthony wants to come out, according to the common teaching of their sect.

He continues,

But He is always with us. Indeed we cannot be without Him, nor He without us. For as I have said, He married us on the cross and has been so attached that He neither can nor would want to separate Himself from us, because of the great love He has for us.

It is true that it would be quite difficult to expound everything Monsieur Anthony says. For this would be to look for reasons where none exists. But he does continually return to these two points: to make us into Jesus Christ so that we need not be afraid of sinning against God, having nothing in us but righteousness, and to argue that everything has been consummated so that we need not anticipate either paradise or hell. And further, we ought constantly note that for him the devil is nothing but the world, that is to say, his cuider [i.e., man's capacity to make judgments and to distinguish between good and evil].

As for the passage where he cites David (Ps. 24:7), we can forgive him this fault since all his knowledge is in his breviary" and since he has seen Palm Sunday acted out as a farce in his village, whereupon the priest strikes [the gates] with the cross, pretending to break the gates of hell.

Now in David's text there is nothing of this sort. For he addresses his words to the temple's gates, saying, "Lift up your heads that God might enter!" Consequently, it would be more appropriate if Monsieur Anthony would say his breviary, sing his Mass, and, after having raised the cloth, would lick up the plates in the kitchen, than try to be a theologian.

He continues,

And this love profits in everything without seeking its profit, and it exists not for itself but for all; it prays for its enemies and even gives them what they lack and covers a multitude of sins without seeing sin. For it has destroyed everything by the highest commandment which Christ said and decreed, viz., "Love one another as I have loved you. For I have not come for Myself but for all of you who believe in Me. And I will be in you and you in Me. As My Father and I are one, so shall you and I be one. You know that I have come68 from the Father and have come into the world. But I am leaving the world and am going to the Father again. Never-theless I am not alone. For My Father is with me."

Although he distorts his ideas in accordance with his custom, nevertheless his intended meaning briefly is this: that there is no longer any sin, since it has been forgiven -by the love of God, and we ought not ascribe sins [to ourselves and others], since love covers a multitude of sins between men.

Now it is true that God indeed covers our sins, provided we have our refuge in His mercy, but this does not mean that we do not sin. Otherwise what would forgiveness be if there were no sins? Nor does this mean that we ought not be conscious of our sins, since faith cannot exist without repentance.

I equally confess that the love of believers covers a multitude of their neighbors'sins, but Saint Paul did not cease to have love though he sharply reprimanded the vices of his brothers. Nor was he acting contrary to love when he said that he was glad to have saddened the Corinthians and to have caused them grief when he led them to repentance (11 Cor. 7:8f.).

Hence it is blasphemv to say that love is blind to sin.

He continues,

one another, that is to say, in Me. In ihe world you have tribulations. Have confidence, I have overcome the world." But those who are in the flesh cannot see God. For it is written, "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God." Then it is said, "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."

His conclusion is similar to all the rest: i.e., a mass of statements badly stitched [together]. Nevertheless the end is that we do not have to be in the flesh to see God. By which they mean that we do not have to trouble our conscience about anything but only need to consider ourselves already in paradise, since Jesus Christ, who is in us, is there.

Now in order to confirm such a silly suggestion he cites Saint Paul's reference that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" (I Cor. 15:50) completely contrary to the apostle's intention. For Paul was speaking there of the last resurrection. And this beggar refers to it as if it were already an accomplished event. But we should not be astonished, since it is the principal foundation of their sect, as I have said, that "all is finished," since we are in Jesus Christ and no longer have a carnal soul but the vivifying Spirit, in which not only our righteousness but also our resurrection and glory consist.

For this reason anyone can see and almost touch with his fingers how I have spoken the truth about these enraged beasts, without ascribing anything to them by way of calumny, in order to render them odious. For this grand masterpiece of Monsieur Anthony Pocquet's testifies both to their lofty rhetoric and manner of speaking as well as to their pretended meaning and intention.

On the other hand, those whom this mass-mouthing villain would like to seduce by his nonsense have a good lesson here for being warned as to what sort of spirit he represents. And not only him but also all those of his gang-although it is necessary that he should be specifically singled out from among the others, after his father Quintin. For beyond the access to many people, which some give him," so that he might sow his poison, and beyond the fact that he indeed diligently runs about everywhere in order to trouble poor souls wherever he can serve the devil without danger [to himself], he hides under the name of a Vaudois so that he might have better access among uneducated and God-fearing people who know the bounty of the people there.

Hence, since he is a wolf in sheepskin in order to devour and destroy, it is quite right to deprive him of this guise, as I think I have so effectively done that anyone can perceive what sort of a beast he is. Furthermore, we should not allow this wicked man to bring such shame on a Christian people who follow the pure teaching of the gospel in the simplicity of their hearts by calling himself one of them in order to discredit them and to commit slander among both the true servants of God and the ignorant. Indeed, it would even be a blasphemy to think that the Vaudois had anything in common with such a dog!

Wherein Readers Are Warned About Certain Printed Books Which Help the Libertines, Although They Are Not Written at All for Them

Inasmuch as once your mind' is confused by silly illusions one evil customarily leads to another, it seems wise' that all faithful readers should be warned about certain printed booklets, which are infected with fantastic opinions, which can serve as a gateway and an introduction to the Libertines' sect-as indeed they do serve to mislead the simple, making them even more vulnerable later.

Among others there is a little tract of only one sheet, falsely entitled, Instruction and salutary admonition for living perfectly in this world and how in all our adversity we can be patient.

If you ask me what I find objectionable, I would say first of all that the entire argument is so extravagant that one would not know how to take any clear resolve from it. Secondly, it contains silly and absurd speculations which only serve to unsettle minds and afterwards leave them suspended in the air. Thirdly, it contains proposals that far exceed the bounds of reason.' For example, that a believer is as comfortable in hell as he is in paradise, and similar such things. More could be said, but it is enough to have mentioned it, since my intention is not to argue against it.

There is another longer [tract], about four-teen quires in length, entitled, A Christian Telescope, which in truth is more likely to hinder than to enhance the view. Now it is true that whoever wrote it is not as great an ass as Quintin or Monsieur Anthony Pocquet, neither outwardly nor in effect, except for their ruse of using jargon in order to achieve a reputation by their obscuritv. But its author is a man of some intelligence and know-how and uses several methods of teaching. So much is this so that his work could have been quite prodigious were it not [for the fact] that he clutters it with foolish and pernicious ideas. But when everything is taken into consideration, the entire book, from beginning to end, does not contain a great deal of substance. And it would have nothing to present were it not for the silly daydreams with which it is crammed.

As a fine beginning, the author denies that the afflictions which we endure in this world are punishments from God. To prove this he adds that they are "spiritual medicaments"" which purge our vices. But this reason is invalid. For why does a father chastise his child except to improve it? Hence it is not inappropriate for the rod to be a remedy.

Furthermore we ought to note that as God chastises His faithful through war, pestilence, famine, and other adversities in order to improve and save them, so also He punishes unbelievers and the contemptuous, using His righteous vengeance against them. Hence in the same way that fire purges gold and silver and consumes straw and chaff, so also afflictions purge the good and destroy the reprobate.

Next he says that those who are members of Christ no longer live a corporal life, which is an exaggeration and reflects his delusion. I neglect to say that he badly expounds the passage in Saint John's letter on which he bases his principal thesis.

Then on the one hand he condemns all affairs of state that protect property, and on the other hand [the practice of] medicine which preserves corporal life. And although in a few places

he attempts to correct or at least moderate slightly his temerity, nonetheless he so perseveres in his course that all human laws concerning affairs of state are nothing but diabolical inventions and medicine nothing but an idolatry.

If he would take back the abuses he commits, I would be quite in accord with him and would have nothing more to say or add. But in reprimanding good and holy things he blasphemes God from whom they proceed.

Next he condemns in general all wars, without discerning if they are the result of a just cause or not, even when a prince should only go to war in defense of his people, without being driven by ambition or avarice, but only out of the duty of his office. To confirm this he cites that we are commanded to give way to wrath (Rom. 12:19). But by the word "wrath," Saint Paul means "the vengeance of God" and His just punishment which He has commanded princes to exercise.

With regard to the wars of the Old Testament, he says that it is not fitting for us to continue them, since we are under the law of love, as if that law did not exist then. In saying this he causes great injury not only to the holy fathers but to God who instructed them.

And he does not use simple and moderate reprimands, but he cries and storms as if he were battling against the devils of hell. For to him it is a detestable blasphemy, a great outrage against God, a wicked act of infidelity to make use of human laws for governing the world. And why? Because it is enough for God to govern us by His providence. True. But the providence of God cries in Solomon (Prov. 8:15) that human laws" come from His providence and that princes and their counselors make ordinances and statutes.

It is Satan, he says, who has put [it] in princes' hearts to arrogate to themselves what belongs to God alone, i.e., to put God's will into effect-as if human laws existed to serve.somc end other than to hold the world in good order and justice. For God has ordained the governing authorities," says Saint Paul (Rom. 13:1), to achieve what He wants and commands.

[But] the office of princes, he says, is not to hear their subjects' disputes, nor to decide lawsuits; for wherever lawsuits exist, transgressions exist on both sides.

First of all, I deny him this reason. For it is quite possible that one [of the party] might have a just cause, as [in the case of] a person who defends his right, having been unjustly assailed. And moreover I say that if evil exists it is proper for it to be settled.

He ascribes the cause of all the children of Israel's sufferings to the fact that they asked for a king-as if beforehand the people had not been afflicted as they were later. Hence we see the thoughtlessness with which he speaks and how great his ignorance of history is.

Still I ask him whether there wasn't previously a political order instituted by God similar to the one he condemns today. I ask him whether Moses and the judges did not hear the people's disputes and decide them. What sort of a scatterbrained man is it who plunges across country on the basis of badly founded speculations?

I only wanted to touch on this matter in passing so that one could herein judge what the entire book is like. I say "touch on" because it would require too much time to criticize the book completely and fully. Moreover it would seem to me to be superfluous to reiterate here what I have treated in my Institutes. Besides, his daydreams are so silly and absurd that among sane, intelligent people it is enough to have pointed them out so that one can be on guard.

As for the subject of medicine," he overflows even more, grinding his teeth and storming against it, in the manner of frantic people who hit, scratch, and bite those who are trying to help them for their own good. Now to list here all the praises of medicine and to explain in detail how it is not only a good and godly art but worthy of praise and honor would be too long a task. Equally to respond to all the scandalous things he brings against it would constitute too long a project to under-take. But forlunately there is no need to be longwinded to disprove the foolish reasons he musters and to maintain so certain and clear a cause as the one he impugns.

To begin with, it is a shame that he errs by debating" with those who call themselves Christians and who want to be esteemed such and who, even more, want to theologize on a matter which since the time of the pagans has been completely settled. For among the pagans it was a common proposition that medicine is a gift of God. However, I do not ask that this should prejudice his case, since the truth is clear to anyone.

He says that medicine came into the world through the suggestion of the evil spirit. I say and, what is more, I can prove that it came from God, inasmuch as it is a knowledge of carefully using the gifts of creation" which He gives us according to the necessities to which He subjects us. For in the same way that God, having subjected our bodies to hunger and thirst, provides us with an ability to eat and drink in order to overcome our need, and, having subjected us to cold and heat, provides us with means of remedying the problem, He equally, having subjected us to maladies, provides us with the capacity to attend to our illnesses.

Whoever would deny that maladies proceed from vicious qualities in the body and from accidents and tragic events which come about elsewhere deserves to be rejected by everyone as an insane man. The [healing] power of plants and other things is known through experience, so much so that anyone with an ounce of brains can see it with his eyes. The Scripture says that Solomon wrote a book in which he describes such things (I Kings 4:33).

Must such a natural knowledge that exists in clear reason and is approved by the Holv Scripture be taken as an enchantment and illusion of Satan? When Saint Paul mentions Saint Luke he calls him a "physician." He writes, "Luke the physician greets you" (Col. 4:14). Did he mean to dishonor him bv this title, as if he had called him a bandit or thief?

I therefore ask this master corrector for the proof of his saving that medicine is the invention of the devil. He claims that we ought be occupied night and day with meditating on God's law, and consequently we would find neither time nor leisure to devote to the knowledge of plants, since such is the speculation of useless people.

Such a fantastic person ought to be locked up in a room with his Bible, without food or clothing, to see how he would apply himself night and day to the reading of God's Word, without thinking of anything else.

He would say that we are allowed to eat. [But] I would reply that that would not be the case if he believed in his folly For what a distraction cultivating the ground, sowing, harvesting, beating the wheat, pounding it into flour, and cooking it can be! Think of how much time is required to learn the skills that are necessary for this present life and how much more time is required to engage in them!

Nevertheless I do not mean to detract from this meditation on God's Word, which is rightfully commended to us, but I am only showing that such notions were never intended by this injunction. For our Lord does not forbid us to engage in those occupations which are required for the maintenance of this ear-thly life, provided we always aspire toward the higher and do not subordinate it by making other things our principal goal.

To show that we do not tempt God by scorning medicine, he says that it is a diabolical word, [capable of] ruining all Christen -dom. And his reason? Because whoever puts his whole confidence in God does not tempt Him.

I agree. But I say that whoever does not take account of the means which God has ordained does not have confidence in Him but is puffed up with false pride and temerity.

Those are his grand arguments for condemning the gifts of creation to the dishonor of Him who destined them to our usage so that we might receive them with praise and thanksgiving.

I refrain from commenting on many [other] foolish and absurd propositions which abound in this book. As when he says that our Lord Jesus is the only man in whom we all are, and since He is the last there is no other man than He-which approaches the blasphemy of the Libertines which we have already reviewed above. Or again, that the living soul only

resides in man after sin. As if it were not this very same soul which earlier had been endowed with the gifts of God12 and is now repaired through Jesus Christ.

Or again, that it is a terrible blasphemy against the bounty of God to love our parents more than others. As if these commandments were given in vain: "Honor your father and mother", "Husbands, love your wives; and equally, wives, love your husbands" (Exod. 20:12; Matt. 15:4; Eph. 5:25 etc.). Rather he says we have "a spiritual fellowship"" which is more valuable. I concur, but neither detracts from the other so long as each stays within its bounds.

Or again, when he says that we are not obligated to do God's commandments because He commands us to do them, rather He was only giving us examples. Or again, when he says that to bear our cross is to bear patiently being made into vessels of ignominy. Whereas on the contrary God continually sets this consolation before us in order to exhort us to patience, as the cross which we endure forms a fellowship with Jesus Christ So that being conformed to His image we might share in His glorious resurrection, and consequently might be made into vessels of honor, not of ignominy.

I doubt if there is anyone who cannot see why such books, infected with such fantastic opinions, are to be avoided. That is all I wanted to point out, nothing more.

Conclusion of the Present Book

Now I pray that all those who seek God with their heart and who love to be obedient to His truth will consider, as if looking here into a mirror, what a pernicious plague it is to allow oneself to be diverted from the pure simplicity of Jesus Christ. For it is frightful example of God's wrath to see men, who are rational creatures and who have even been illuminated with some gifts of intelligence fall into such terrible darkness as to make themselves similar to dumb beasts.

To avoid such a possibility, let us be warned to pursue our calling in fear and anxiety, to take the trouble to learn from good and useful doctrine, having above all this end: that we hunger to know nothing except what it has pleased God to reveal to us in His Scripture. Let us not subject the sacred Word of God to our judgments or lusts, but rather let us align ourselves entirely with what it says to us.

Let us be on guard against profaning ourselves, since it has already pleased God to call us into sanctification. Do not covet new things and have tingling ears (H Tim. 4:3) that carry you away with curiosity, but seek what is profitable and edifying. Let us not be so fickle and unstable as to long each day for some change, but keeping to the true road, let us follow it; possessing the truth of God, let us firmly cling to it.

Moreover, let no one marvel at, or even bother to see, these errors which are so stray raw from the gospel. But rather let us be shaken loose or withd it might be a perpetual,

seek to be in conformity with it so that us in the midst sure, and faithful buttress for us, able to sustain us in the midst of all the troubles and scandals that can possibly assail us.

I do not ask for people to agree with me . Or with my opinion or my words , unless they have first realized that what I am teaching is useful. I do ask for them to reprove this loathsome teaching, against which I have written , unless they see that it is not only repugnant to God , but so full of detestable errors as to make one's hair stand on end.

In sum, let us use our eyes only to be on guar d by it, or be certainly no one would [then] be able to be seduce obate for made blind to God and numbered, among the reprobate for having scorned His Word and not having honored it.

it is for this reason that I have so strongly exhorted all believers constantly to remember the end of their calling so that they might never fall from it, as well as to consider why the Scripture has been given to us and how we are supposed to use it, so that we might not profane it by subjecting it to usages which God never ordained.