PREFATORY ADDRESS

TO HIS MOST CHRISTIAN MAJESTY,

THE MOST MIGHTY AND ILLUSTRIOUS MONARCH,

FRANCIS, KING OF THE FRENCH,

HIS SOVEREIGN;1

JOHN CALVIN PRAYS PEACE AND SALVATION IN CHRIST.2

Sire,.When I first engaged in this work, nothing was farther from my thoughts than

to write what should afterwards be presented to your Majesty. My intention was only to

furnish a kind of rudiments, by which those who feel some interest in religion might be

trained to true godliness. And I toiled at the task chiefly for the sake of my countrymen the

French, multitudes of whom I perceived to be hungering and thirsting after Christ, while

very few seemed to have been duly imbued with even a slender knowledge of him. That this

was the object which I had in view is apparent from the work itself, which is written in a

simple and elementary form adapted for instruction.

But when I perceived that the fury of certain bad men had risen to such a height in your

realm, that there was no place in it for sound doctrine, I thought it might be of service if I

were in the same work both to give instruction to my countrymen, and also lay before your

Majesty a Confession, from which you may learn what the doctrine is that so inflames the

rage of those madmen who are this day, with fire and sword, troubling your kingdom. For

I fear not to declare, that what I have here given may be regarded as a summary of the very

doctrine which, they vociferate, ought to be punished with confiscation, exile, imprisonment,

and flames, as well as exterminated by land and sea.

I am aware, indeed, how, in order to render our cause as hateful to your Majesty as

possible, they have filled your ears and mind with atrocious insinuations; but you will be

pleased, of your clemency, to reflect, that neither in word nor deed could there be any innocence,

were it sufficient merely to accuse. When any one, with the view of exciting prejudice,

observes that this doctrine, of which I am endeavouring to give your Majesty an account,

has been condemned by the suffrages of all the estates, and was long ago stabbed again and

again by partial sentences of courts of law, he undoubtedly says nothing more than that it

1 In the last edition by Calvin, the words are, as here translated, simply, “Principi suo.” In the edition published

at Basle in 1536, the words are, “Principi ac Domino suo sibiobservando.”

2 Ed. 1536. “In Domino.”

has sometimes been violently oppressed by the power and faction of adversaries, and

sometimes fraudulently and insidiously overwhelmed by lies, cavils, and calumny. While a

cause is unheard, it is violence to pass sanguinary sentences against it; it is fraud to charge

it, contrary to its deserts, with sedition and mischief.

That no one may suppose we are unjust in thus complaining, you yourself, most illustrious

Sovereign, can bear us witness with what lying calumnies it is daily traduced in your

presence, as aiming at nothing else than to wrest the sceptres of kings out of their hands, to

overturn all tribunals and seats of justice, to subvert all order and government, to disturb

the peace and quiet of society, to abolish all laws, destroy the distinctions of rank and

property, and, in short, turn all things upside down. And yet, that which you hear is but the

smallest portion of what is said; for among the common people are disseminated certain

horrible insinuations.insinuations which, if well founded, would justify the whole world

in condemning the doctrine with its authors to a thousand fires and gibbets. Who can

wonder that the popular hatred is inflamed against it, when credit is given to those most

iniquitous accusations? See, why all ranks unite with one accord in condemning our persons

and our doctrine!

Carried away by this feeling, those who sit in judgment merely give utterance to the

prejudices which they have imbibed at home, and think they have duly performed their part

if they do not order punishment to be inflicted on any one until convicted, either on his

own confession, or on legal evidence. But of what crime convicted? “Of that condemned

doctrine,” is the answer. But with what justice condemned? The very essence of the defence

was, not to abjure the doctrine itself, but to maintain its truth. On this subject, however, not

a whisper is allowed!

Justice, then, most invincible Sovereign, entitles me to demand that you will undertake

a thorough investigation of this cause, which has hitherto been tossed about in any kind of

way, and handled in the most irregular manner, without any order of law, and with passionate

heat rather than judicial gravity.

Let it not be imagined that I am here framing my own private defence, with the view of

obtaining a safe return to my native land. Though I cherish towards it the feelings which

become me as a man, still, as matters now are, I can be absent from it without regret. The

cause which I plead is the common cause of all the godly, and therefore the very cause of

Christ.a cause which, throughout your realm, now lies, as it were, in despair, torn and

trampled upon in all kinds of ways, and that more through the tyranny of certain Pharisees

than any sanction from yourself. But it matters not to inquire how the thing is done; the

fact that it is done cannot be denied. For so far have the wicked prevailed, that the truth of

Christ, if not utterly routed and dispersed, lurks as if it were ignobly buried; while the poor

Church, either wasted by cruel slaughter or driven into exile, or intimidated and terror.

struck, scarcely ventures to breathe. Still her enemies press on with their wonted rage

and fury over the ruins which they have made, strenuously assaulting the wall, which is

already giving way. Meanwhile, no man comes forth to offer his protection against such

furies. Any who would be thought most favourable to the truth, merely talk of pardoning

the error and imprudence of ignorant men For so those modest personages3 speak; giving

the name of error and imprudence to that which they know to be4 the infallible truth of God,

and of ignorant men to those whose intellect they see that Christ has not despised, seeing

he has deigned to intrust them with the mysteries of his heavenly wisdom.5 Thus all are

ashamed of the Gospel.

Your duty, most serene Prince, is, not to shut either your ears or mind against a cause

involving such mighty interests as these: how the glory of God is to be maintained on the

earth inviolate, how the truth of God is to preserve its dignity, how the kingdom of Christ

is to continue amongst us compact and secure. The cause is worthy of your ear, worthy of

your investigation, worthy of your throne.

The characteristic of a true sovereign is, to acknowledge that, in the administration of

his kingdom, he is a minister of God. He who does not make his reign subservient to the

divine glory, acts the part not of a king, but a robber. He, moreover, deceives himself who

anticipates long prosperity to any kingdom which is not ruled by the sceptre of God, that

is, by his divine word. For the heavenly oracle is infallible which has declared, that “where

there is no vision the people perish” (Prov. 29:18).

Let not a contemptuous idea of our insignificance dissuade you from the investigation

of this cause. We, indeed, are perfectly conscious how poor and abject we are: in the presence

of God we are miserable sinners, and in the sight of men most despised.we are (if you will)

the mere dregs and off.scourings of the world, or worse, if worse can be named: so that

before God there remains nothing of which we can glory save only his mercy, by which,

without any merit of our own, we are admitted to the hope of eternal salvation:6 and before

men not even this much remains,7 since we can glory only in our infirmity, a thing which,

in the estimation of men, it is the greatest ignominy even tacitly8 to confess. But our doctrine

must stand sublime above all the glory of the world, and invincible by all its power, because

it is not ours, but that of the living God and his Anointed, whom the Father has appointed

King, that he may rule from sea to sea, and from the rivers even to the ends of the earth;

and so rule as to smite the whole earth and its strength of iron and brass, its splendour of

old and silver, with the mere rod of his mouth, and break them in pieces like a potter’s

vessel; according to the magnificent predictions of the prophets respecting his kingdom

(Dan. 2:34; Isaiah 11:4; Psalm 2:9).

Our adversaries, indeed, clamorously maintain that our appeal to the word of God is a

mere pretext,.that we are, in fact, its worst corrupters. How far this is not only malicious

calumny, but also shameless effrontery, you will be able to decide, of your own knowledge,

by reading our Confession. Here, however, it may be necessary to make some observations

which may dispose, or at least assist, you to read and study it with attention.

When Paul declared that all prophecy ought to be according to the analogy of faith

(Rom. 12:6), he laid down the surest rule for determining the meaning of Scripture. Let our

doctrine be tested by this rule and our victory is secure. For what accords better and more

aptly with faith than to acknowledge ourselves divested of all virtue that we may be clothed

by God, devoid of all goodness that we may be filled by Him, the slaves of sin that he may

give us freedom, blind that he may enlighten, lame that he may cure, and feeble that he may

sustain us; to strip ourselves of all ground of glorying that he alone may shine forth glorious,

and we be glorified in him? When these things, and others to the same effect, are said by

us, they interpose, and querulously complain, that in this way we overturn some blind light

of nature, fancied preparatives, free will, and works meritorious of eternal salvation, with

their own supererogations also;9 because they cannot bear that the entire praise and glory

of all goodness, virtue, justice, and wisdom, should remain with God. But we read not of

any having been blamed for drinking too much of the fountain of living water; on the contrary,

those are severely reprimanded who “have hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns,

that can hold no water” (Jer. 2:13). Again, what more agreeable to faith than to feel assured

that God is a propitious Father when Christ is acknowledged as a brother and propitiator,

than confidently to expect all prosperity and gladness from Him, whose ineffable love towards

us was such that He “spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all” (Rom. 8:32),

than to rest in the sure hope of salvation and eternal life whenever Christ, in whom such

treasures are hid, is conceived to have been given by the Father? Here they attack us, and

loudly maintain that this sure confidence is not free from arrogance and presumption. But

as nothing is to be presumed of ourselves, so all things are to be presumed of God; nor are

we stript of vainglory for any other reason than that we may learn to glory in the Lord. Why

go farther? Take but a cursory view, most valiant King, of all the parts of our cause, and

count us of all wicked men the most iniquitous, if you do not discover plainly, that “therefore

we both labour and suffer reproach because we trust in the living God” (1 Tim. 4:10); because

we believe it to be “life eternal” to know “the only true God, and Jesus Christ,” whom he

has sent (John 17:3). For this hope some of us are in bonds, some beaten with rods, some

9 The only word in the Ed. 1536 after “free will,” is “merita.”

made a gazing.stock, some proscribed, some most cruelly tortured, some obliged to flee;

we are all pressed with straits, loaded with dire execrations, lacerated by slanders, and treated

with the greatest indignity.

Look now to our adversaries (I mean the priesthood, at whose beck and pleasure others

ply their enmity against us), and consider with me for a little by what zeal they are actuated.

The true religion which is delivered in the Scriptures, and which all ought to hold, they

readily permit both themselves and others to be ignorant of, to neglect and despise; and

they deem it of little moment what each man believes concerning God and Christ, or disbelieves,

provided he submits to the judgment of the Church with what they call10 implicit

faith; nor are they greatly concerned though they should see the glow of God dishonoured

by open blasphemies, provided not a finger is raised against the primacy of the Apostolic

See and the authority of holy mother Church.11 Why, then, do they war for the mass, purgatory,

pilgrimage, and similar follies, with such fierceness and acerbity, that though they

cannot prove one of them from the word of God, they deny godliness can be safe without

faith in these things.faith drawn out, if I may so express it, to its utmost stretch? Why? just

because their belly is their God, and their kitchen their religion; and they believe, that if

these were away they would not only not be Christians, but not even men. For although

some wallow in luxury, and others feed on slender crusts, still they all live by the same pot,

which without that fuel might not only cool, but altogether freeze. He, accordingly, who is

most anxious about his stomach, proves the fiercest champion of his faith. In short, the

object on which all to a man are bent, is to keep their kingdom safe or their belly filled; not

one gives even the smallest sign of sincere zeal.

Nevertheless, they cease not to assail our doctrine, and to accuse and defame it in what

terms they may, in order to render it either hated or suspected. They call it new, and of recent

birth; they carp at it as doubtful and uncertain; they bid us tell by what miracles it has been

confirmed; they ask if it be fair to receive it against the consent of so many holy Fathers and

the most ancient custom; they urge us to confess either that it is schismatical in giving battle

to the Church, or that the Church must have been without life during the many centuries

in which nothing of the kind was heard. Lastly, they say there is little need of argument, for

its quality may be known by its fruits, namely, the large number of sects, the many seditious

disturbances, and the great licentiousness which it has produced. No doubt, it is a very easy

matter for them, in presence of an ignorant and credulous multitude, to insult over an undefended

cause; but were an opportunity of mutual discussion afforded, that acrimony

which they now pour out upon us in frothy torrents, with as much license as impunity,12

would assuredly boil dry.

First, in calling it new, they are exceedingly injurious to God, whose sacred word deserved

not to be charged with novelty. To them, indeed, I very little doubt it is new, as Christ

is new, and the Gospel new; but those who are acquainted with the old saying of Paul, that

Christ Jesus “died for our sins, and rose again for our justification” (Rom. 4:25), will not

detect any novelty in us. That it long lay buried and unknown is the guilty consequence of

man’s impiety; but now when, by the kindness of God, it is restored to us, it ought to resume

its antiquity just as the returning citizen resumes his rights.

2. It is owing to the same ignorance that they hold it to be doubtful and uncertain; for

this is the very thing of which the Lord complains by his prophet, “The ox knoweth his

owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider”

(Isaiah 1:3). But however they may sport with its uncertainty, had they to seal their own

doctrine with their blood, and at the expense of life, it would be seen what value they put

upon it. Very different is our confidence.a confidence which is not appalled by the terrors

of death, and therefore not even by the judgment.seat of God.

3. In demanding miracles from us, they act dishonestly; for we have not coined some

new gospel, but retain the very one the truth of which is confirmed by all the miracles which

Christ and the apostles ever wrought. But they have a peculiarity which we have not.they

can confirm their faith by constant miracles down to the present day! Way rather, they allege

miracles which might produce wavering in minds otherwise well disposed; they are so

frivolous and ridiculous, so vain and false. But were they even exceedingly wonderful, they

could have no effect against the truth of God, whose name ought to be hallowed always, and

everywhere, whether by miracles, or by the natural course of events. The deception would

perhaps be more specious if Scripture did not admonish us of the legitimate end and use of

miracles. Mark tells us (Mark 16:20) that the signs which followed the preaching of the

apostles were wrought in confirmation of it; so Luke also relates that the Lord “gave testimony

to the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done” by the hands of the

apostles (Acts 14:3). Very much to the same effect are those words of the apostle, that salvation

by a preached gospel was confirmed, “The Lord bearing witness with signs and wonders,

and with divers miracles” (Heb. 2:4). Those things which we are told are seals of the gospel,

shall we pervert to the subversion of the gospel? What was destined only to confirm the

truth, shall we misapply to the confirmation of lies? The proper course, therefore, is, in the

first instance, to ascertain and examine the doctrine which is said by the Evangelist to precede;

then after it has been proved, but not till then, it may receive confirmation from miracles.

But the mark of sound doctrine given by our Saviour himself is its tendency to promote the

glory not of men, but of God (John 7:18; 8:50). Our Saviour having declared this to be test

of doctrine, we are in error if we regard as miraculous, works which are used for any other

purpose than to magnify the name of God.13 And it becomes us to remember that Satan

13 No part of the passage, beginning above, “The deception,” &c., is in Ed. 1536.

has his miracles, which, although they are tricks rather than true wonders, are still such as

to delude the ignorant and unwary. Magicians and enchanters have always been famous for

miracles, and miracles of an astonishing description have given support to idolatry: these,

however, do not make us converts to the superstitions either of magicians or idolaters. In

old times, too, the Donatists used their power of working miracles as a battering-ram, with

which they shook the simplicity of the common people. We now give to our opponents the

answer which Augustine then gave to the Donatists (in Joan. Tract. 23), “The Lord put us

on our guard against those wonder.workers, when he foretold that false prophets would

arise, who, by lying signs and divers wonders, would, if it were possible, deceive the very

elect” (Mt. 24:24). Paul, too, gave warning that the reign of antichrist would be “withall

power, and signs, and lying wonders” (2 Thess. 2:9).

But our opponents tell us that their miracles are wrought not by idols, not by sorcerers,

not by false prophets, but by saints: as if we did not know it to be one of Satan’s wiles to

transform himself “into an angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:14). The Egyptians, in whose neighbourhood

Jeremiah was buried, anciently sacrificed and paid other divine honours to him (Hieron.

in Praef. Jerem). Did they not make an idolatrous abuse of the holy prophet of God? and

yet, in recompense for so venerating his tomb, they thought14 that they were cured of the

bite of serpents. What, then, shall we say but that it has been, and always will be, a most just

punishment of God, to send on those who do not receive the truth in the love of it, “strong

delusion, that they should believe a lie”? (2 Thess. 2:11). We, then, have no lack of miracles,

sure miracles, that cannot be gainsaid; but those to which our opponents lay claim are mere

delusions of Satan, inasmuch as they draw off the people from the true worship of God to

vanity.

4. It is a calumny to represent us as opposed to the Fathers (I mean the ancient writers

of a purer age), as if the Fathers were supporters of their impiety. Were the contest to be

decided by such authority (to speak in the most moderate terms), the better part of the victory

would be ours.15 While there is much that is admirable and wise in the writings of those

Fathers, and while in some things it has fared with them as with ordinary men; these pious

sons, forsooth, with the peculiar acuteness of intellect, and judgment, and soul, which belongs

to them, adore only their slips and errors, while those things which are well said they either

overlook, or disguise, or corrupt; so that it may be truly said their only care has been to

gather dross among gold. Then, with dishonest clamour, they assail us as enemies and despisers

of the Fathers. So far are we from despising them, that if this were the proper place,

it would give us no trouble to support the greater part of the doctrines which we now hold

by their suffrages. Still, in studying their writings, we have endeavoured to remember (1

14 Instead of “thought they were cured,” the Ed. 1536 says simply, “they were cured” (curarentur).

15 “Ut modestissime etiam loquar,” not in the Ed. 1536.

Cor. 3:21-23; see also Augustin. Ep. 28), that all things are ours, to serve, not lord it over us,

but that we axe Christ’s only, and must obey him in all things without exception. He who

does not draw this distinction will not have any fixed principles in religion; for those holy

men were ignorant of many things, are often opposed to each other, and are sometimes at

variance with themselves.

It is not without cause (remark our opponents) we are thus warned by Solomon, “Remove

not the ancient landmarks which thy fathers have set” (Prov. 22:28). But the same rule applies

not to the measuring of fields and the obedience of faith. The rule applicable to the latter

is, “Forget also thine own people, and thy father’s house” (Ps. 45:10). But if they are so fond

of allegory, why do they not understand the apostles, rather than any other class of Fathers,

to be meant by those whose landmarks it is unlawful to remove? This is the interpretation

of Jerome, whose words they have quoted in their canons. But as regards those to whom

they apply the passage, if they wish the landmarks to be fixed, why do they, whenever it suits

their purpose, so freely overleap them?

Among the Fathers there were two, the one of whom said,16 “Our God neither eats nor

drinks, and therefore has no need of chalices and salvers;” and the other17 “Sacred rites do

not require gold, and things which are not bought with gold, please not by gold.” They step

beyond the boundary, therefore, when in sacred matters they are so much delighted with

gold, driver, ivory, marble, gems, and silks, that unless everything is overlaid with costly

show, or rather insane luxury18 , they think God is not duly worshipped.

It was a Father who said,19 “He ate flesh freely on the day on which others abstained

from it, because he was a Christian.” They overleap the boundaries, therefore, when they

doom to perdition every soul that, during Lent, shall have tasted flesh.

There were two Fathers, the one of whom said,20 “A monk not labouring with his own

hands is no better than a violent man and a robber;” and the other,21 “Monks, however assiduous

they may be in study, meditation, and prayer, must not live by others.” This

boundary, too, they transgressed, when they placed lazy gormandising monks in dens and

stews, to gorge themselves on other men’s substance.

It was a Father who said,22 “It is a horrid abomination to see in Christian temples a

painted image either of Christ or of any saint.” Nor was this pronounced by the voice era

single individual; but an Ecclesiastical Council also decreed,23 “Let nought that is worshipped

be depicted on walls.”24 Very far are they from keeping within these boundaries when they

leave not a corner without images.

Another Father counselled,25 “That after performing the office of humanity to the dead

in their burial, we should leave them at rest.” These limits they burst through when they

keep up a perpetual anxiety about the dead.

It is a Father who testifies,26 “That the substance of bread and wine in the Eucharist

does not cease but remains, just as the nature and substance of man remains united to the

Godhead in the Lord Jesus Christ.” This boundary they pass in pretending that, as soon as

the words of our Lord are pronounced, the substance of bread and wine ceases, and is

transubstantiated into body and blood.

They were Fathers, who, as they exhibited only one Eucharist to the whole Church,27

and kept back from it the profane and flagitious; so they, in the severest terms, censured all

those28 who, being present, did not communicate How far have they removed these landmarks,

in filling not churches only, but also private houses, with their masses, admitting all

and sundry to be present, each the more willingly the more largely he pays, however wicked

and impure he may be,.not inviting any one to faith in Christ and faithful communion in

the sacraments, but rather vending their own work for the grace and merits of Christ!29

There were two Fathers, the one of whom decided that those were to be excluded altogether

from partaking of Christ’s sacred supper,30 who, contented with communion in one

kind, abstained from the other; while the other Father strongly contends31 that the blood

of the Lord ought not to be denied to the Christian people, who, in confessing him, are enjoined

to shed their own blood. These landmarks, also, they removed, when, by an unalterable

law, they ordered the very thing which the former Father punished with excommunication,

and the latter condemned for a valid reason.

has the following sentence: “Ex patribus erat qui negavit in sacramento coenae esse verum corpus sed mysterium

duntaxat corporis; sic enim ad verbum loquitur.” On the margin, reference is made to the author of an unfinished

Tract on Matthew, forming the 11th Homil. among the works of Chrysostom.

It was a Father who pronounced it rashness,32 in an obscure question, to decide in either

way without clear and evident authority from Scripture. They forgot this landmark when

they enacted so many constitutions, so many canons, and so many dogmatical decisions,

without sanction from the word of God.

It was a Father who reproved Montanus, among other heresies,33 for being the first who

imposed laws of fasting. They have gone far beyond this landmark also in enjoining fasting

under the strictest laws.

It was a Father who denied34 that the ministers of the Church should be interdicted

from marrying, and pronounced married life to be a state of chastity; and there were other

Fathers who assented to his decision. These boundaries they overstepped in rigidly binding

their priests to celibacy.

It was a Father who thought35 that Christ only should be listened to, from its being said,

“hear him;” and that regard is due not to what others before us have said or done, but only

to what Christ, the head of all, has commanded. This landmark they neither observe themselves

nor allow to be observed by others, while they subject themselves and others to any

master whatever, rather than Christ.

There is a Father who contends36 that the Church ought not to prefer herself to Christ,

who always judges truly, whereas ecclesiastical judges, who are but men, are generally deceived.

Having burst through this barrier also, they hesitate not to suspend the whole authority

of Scripture on the judgment of the Church.37

All the Fathers with one heart execrated, and with one mouth protested38 against, contaminating

the word of God with the subtleties sophists, and involving it in the brawls of

dialecticians. Do they keep within these limits when the sole occupation of their lives is to

entwine and entangle the simplicity of Scripture with endless disputes, and worse than

sophistical jargon? So much so, that were the Fathers to rise from their graves, and listen to

the brawling art which bears the name of speculative theology, there is nothing they would

suppose it less to be than a discussion of a religious nature.

But my discourse would far exceed its just limits were I to show, in detail, how petulantly

those men shake off the yoke of the Fathers, while they wish to be thought their most

obedient sons. Months, nay, years would fail me; and yet so deplorable and desperate is

their effrontery, that they presume to chastise us for overstepping the ancient landmarks!

5. Then, again, it is to no purpose they call us to the bar of custom. To make everything

yield to custom would be to do the greatest injustice. Were the judgments of mankind correct,

custom would be regulated by the good. But it is often far otherwise in point of fact; for,

whatever the many are seen to do, forthwith obtains the force of custom. But human affairs

have scarcely ever been so happily constituted as that the better course pleased the greater

number. Hence the private vices of the multitude have generally resulted in public error, or

rather that common consent in vice which these worthy men would have to be law. Any

one with eyes may perceive that it is not one flood of evils which has deluged us; that many

fatal plagues have invaded the globe; that all things rush headlong; so that either the affairs

of men must be altogether despaired of, or we must not only resist, but boldly attack prevailing

evils. The cure is prevented by no other cause than the length of time during which we

have been accustomed to the disease. But be it so that public error must have a place in human

society, still, in the kingdom of God, we must look and listen only to his eternal truth, against

which no series of years, no custom, no conspiracy, can plead prescription. Thus Isaiah

formerly taught the people of God, “Say ye not, A confederacy, to all to whom this people

shall say, A confederacy;” i.e. do not unite with the people in an impious consent; “neither

fear ye their fear, nor be afraid. Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself; and let him be your fear,

and let him be your dread” (Is. 8:12). Now, therefore, let them, if they will, object to us both

past ages and present examples; if we sanctify the Lord of hosts, we shall not be greatly afraid.

Though many ages should have consented to like ungodliness, He is strong who taketh

vengeance to the third and fourth generation; or the whole world should league together in

the same iniquity. He taught experimentally what the end is of those who sin with the multitude,

when He destroyed the whole human race with a flood, saving Noah with his little

family, who, by putting his faith in Him alone, “condemned the world” (Heb. 11:7). In short,

depraved custom is just a kind of general pestilence in which men perish not the less that

they fall in a crowd. It were well, moreover, to ponder the observation of Cyprian,39 that

those who sin in ignorance, though they cannot be entirely exculpated, seem, however, to

be, in some sense, excusable; whereas those who obstinately reject the truth, when presented

to them by the kindness of God, have no defence to offer.40

6. Their dilemma does not push us so violently as to oblige us to confess, either that the

Church was a considerable time without life, or that we have now a quarrel with the Church.

The Church of Christ assuredly has lived, and will live, as long as Christ shall reign at the

right hand of the Father. By his hand it is sustained, by his protection defended, by his

mighty power preserved in safety. For what he once undertook he will undoubtedly perform,

he will be with his people always, “even to the end of the world” (Mt. 28:20). With the Church

we wage no war, since, with one consent, in common with the whole body of the faithful,

we worship and adore one God, and Christ Jesus the Lord, as all the pious have always adored

him. But they themselves err not a little from the truth in not recognising any church but

that which they behold with the bodily eye, and in endeavouring to circumscribe it by limits,

within which it cannot be confined.

The hinges on which the controversy turns are these: first, in their contending that the

form of the Church is always visible and apparent; and, secondly, in their placing this form

in the see of the Church of Rome and its hierarchy. We, on the contrary, maintain, both

that the Church may exist without any apparent form, and, moreover, that the form is not

ascertained by that external splendour which they foolishly admire, but by a very different

mark, namely, by the pure preaching of the word of God, and the due administration of the

sacraments. They make an outcry whenever the Church cannot be pointed to with the finger.

But how oft was it the fate of the Church among the Jews to be so defaced that no comeliness

appeared? What do we suppose to have been the splendid form when Elijah complained

that he was left alone? (1 Kings 19:14). How long after the advent of Christ did it lie hid

without form? How often since has it been so oppressed by wars, seditions, and heresies,

that it was nowhere seen in splendour? Had they lived at that time, would they have believed

there was any Church? But Elijah learned that there remained seven thousand men who

had not bowed the knee to Baal; nor ought we to doubt that Christ has always reigned on

earth ever since he ascended to heaven. Had the faithful at that time required some discernible

form, must they not have forthwith given way to despondency? And, indeed, Hilary accounted

it a very great fault in his day, that men were so possessed with a foolish admiration of

Episcopal dignity as not to perceive the deadly hydra lurking under that mask. His words

are (Cont. Auxentium), “One advice I give: Beware of Antichrist; for, unhappily, a love of

walls has seized you; unhappily, the Church of God which you venerate exists in houses and

buildings; unhappily, under these you find the name of peace. Is it doubtful that in these

Antichrist will have his seat? Safer to me are mountains, and woods, and lakes, and dungeons,

and whirlpools; since in these prophets, dwelling or immersed, did prophesy.”

And what is it at the present day that the world venerates in its horned bishops, unless

that it imagines those who are seen presiding over celebrated cities to be holy prelates of

religion? Away, then, with this absurd mode of judging!41 Let us rather reverently admit,

that as God alone knows who are his, so he may sometimes withdraw the external manifestation

of his Church from the view of men. This, I allow, is a fearful punishment which God

sends on the earth; but if the wickedness of men so deserves, why do we strive to oppose

41 No part of the passage beginning above is in the Ed. 1536.

the just vengeance of God?42 It was thus that God, in past ages, punished the ingratitude of

men; for after they had refused to obey his truth, and had extinguished his light, he allowed

them, when blinded by sense, both to be deluded by lying vanities and plunged in thick

darkness, so that no face of a true Church appeared. Meanwhile, however, though his own

people were dispersed and concealed amidst errors and darkness, he saved them from destruction.

No wonder; for he knew how to preserve them even in the confusion of Babylon

and the flame of the fiery furnace.

But as to the wish that the form of the Church should be ascertained by some kind of

vain pomp, how perilous it is I will briefly indicate, rather than explain, that I may not exceed

all bounds. What they say is, that the Pontiff,43 who holds the apostolic see, and the priests

who are anointed and consecrated by him,44 provided they have the insignia of fillets and

mitres, represent the Church, and ought to be considered as in the place of the Church, and

therefore cannot err. Why so? because they are pastors of the Church, and consecrated to

the Lord. And were not Aaron and other prefects of Israel pastors? But Aaron and his sons,

though already set apart to the priesthood, erred notwithstanding when they made the calf

(Exod. 32:4). Why, according to this view, should not the four hundred prophets who lied

to Ahab represent the Church? (1 Kings 22:11, &c.). The Church, however, stood on the

side of Micaiah. He was alone, indeed, and despised, but from his mouth the truth proceeded.

Did not the prophets also exhibit both the name and face of the Church, when, with one

accord, they rose up against Jeremiah, and with menaces boasted of it as a thing impossible

that the law should perish from the priest, or counsel from the wise, or the word from the

prophet? (Jer. 18:18). In opposition to the whole body of the prophets, Jeremiah is sent alone

to declare from the Lord (Jer. 4:9), that a time would come when the law would perish from

the priest, counsel from the wise, and the word from the prophet. Was not like splendour

displayed in that council when the chief priests, scribes, and Pharisees assembled to consult

how they might put Jesus to death? Let them go, then, and cling to the external mask, while

they make Christ and all the prophets of God schismatics, and, on the other hand, make

Satan’s ministers the organs of the Holy Spirit!

But if they are sincere, let them answer me in good faith,.in what place, and among

whom, do they think the Church resided, after the Council of Basle degraded and deposed

Eugenius from the popedom, and substituted Amadeus in his place? Do their utmost, they

cannot deny that that Council was legitimate as far as regards external forms, and was

summoned not only by one Pontiff, but by two. Eugenius, with the whole herd of cardinals

and bishops who had joined him in plotting the dissolution of the Council, was there condemned

of contumacy, rebellion, and schism. Afterwards, however, aided by the favour of

princes, he got back his popedom safe. The election of Amadeus, duly made by the authority

of a general holy synod, went to smoke; only he himself was appeased with a cardinal’s cap,

like a piece of offal thrown to a barking dog. Out of the lap of these rebellious and contumacious

schismatics proceeded all future popes, cardinals, bishops, abbots, and presbyters.

Here they are caught, and cannot escape. For, on which party will they bestow the name of

Church? Will they deny it to have been a general Council, though it lacked nothing as regards

external majesty, having been solemnly called by two bulls, consecrated by the legate of the

Roman See as its president, constituted regularly in all respects, and continuing in possession

of all its honours to the last? Will they admit that Eugenius, and his whole train, through

whom they have all been consecrated, were schismatical? Let them, then, either define the

form of the Church differently, or, however numerous they are, we will hold them all to be

schismatics in having knowingly and willingly received ordination from heretics. But had

it never been discovered before that the Church is not tied to external pomp, we are furnished

with a lengthened proof in their own conduct, in proudly vending themselves to the world

under the specious title of Church, notwithstanding that they are the deadly pests of the

Church. I speak not of their manners and of those tragical atrocities with which their whole

life teems, since it is said that they are Pharisees who should be heard, not imitated. By devoting

some portion of your leisure to our writings, you will see, not obscurely, that their

doctrine.the very doctrine to which they say it is owing that they are the Church.is a

deadly murderer of souls, the firebrand, ruin, and destruction of the Church.

7. Lastly, they are far from candid when they invidiously number up the disturbances,

tumults, and disputes, which the preaching of our doctrine has brought in its train, and the

fruits which, in many instances, it now produces; for the doctrine itself is undeservedly

charged with evils which ought to be ascribed to the malice of Satan. It is one of the characteristics

of the divine word, that whenever it appears, Satan ceases to slumber and sleep.

This is the surest and most unerring test for distinguishing it from false doctrines which

readily betray themselves, while they are received by all with willing ears, and welcomed by

an applauding world. Accordingly, for several ages, during which all things were immersed

in profound darkness, almost all mankind45 were mere jest and sport to the god of this

world, who, like any Sardanapalus, idled and luxuriated undisturbed. For what else could

he do but laugh and sport while in tranquil and undisputed possession of his kingdom? But

when light beaming from above somewhat dissipated the darkness.when the strong man

arose and aimed a blow at his kingdom.then, indeed, he began to shake off his wonted

torpor, and rush to arms. And first he stirred up the hands of men, that by them he might

violently suppress the dawning truth; but when this availed him not, he turned to snares,

exciting dissensions and disputes about doctrine by means of his Catabaptists, and other

portentous miscreants, that he might thus obscure, and, at length, extinguish the truth. And

now he persists in assailing it with both engines, endeavouring to pluck up the true seed by

the violent hand of man, and striving, as much as in him lies, to choke it with his tares, that

it may not grow and bear knit. But it will be in vain, if we listen to the admonition of the

Lord, who long ago disclosed his wiles, that we might not be taken unawares, and armed us

with full protection against all his machinations. But how malignant to throw upon the

word of God itself the blame either of the seditions which wicked men and rebels, or of the

sects which impostors stir up against it! The example, however, is not new. Elijah was interrogated

whether it were not he that troubled Israel. Christ was seditious, according to the

Jews; and the apostles were charged with the crime of popular commotion. What else do

those who, in the present day, impute to us all the disturbances, tumults, and contentions

which break out against us? Elijah, however, has taught us our answer (1 Kings 18:17, 18).

It is not we who disseminate errors or stir up tumults, but they who resist the mighty power

of God.

But while this single answer is sufficient to rebut the rash charges of these men, it is

necessary, on the other hand, to consult for the weakness of those who take the alarm at

such scandals, and not unfrequently waver in perplexity. But that they may not fall away in

this perplexity, and forfeit their good degree, let them know that the apostles in their day

experienced the very things which now befall us. There were then unlearned and unstable

men who, as Peter tells us (2 Pet. 3:16), wrested the inspired writings of Paul to their own

destruction. There were despisers of God, who, when they heard that sin abounded in order

that grace might more abound, immediately inferred, “We will continue in sin that grace

may abound” (Rom. 6:1); when they heard that believers were not under the law, but under

grace, forthwith sung out, “We will sin because we are not under the law, but under grace”

(Rom. 6:15). There were some who charged the apostle with being the minister of sin. Many

false prophets entered in privily to pull down the churches which he had reared. Some

preached the gospel through envy and strife, not sincerely (Phil. 1:15).maliciously

even.thinking to add affliction to his bonds. Elsewhere the gospel made little progress. All

sought their own, not the things which were Jesus Christ’s. Others went back like the dog

to his vomit, or the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. Great numbers perverted

their spiritual freedom to carnal licentiousness. False brethren crept in to the imminent

danger of the faithful. Among the brethren themselves various quarrels arose. What, then,

were the apostles to do? Were they either to dissemble for the time, or rather lay aside and

abandon that gospel which they saw to be the seed.bed of so many strifes, the source of

so many perils, the occasion of so many scandals? In straits of this kind, they remembered

that “Christ was a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence,” “set up for the fall and rising

again of many,” and “for a sign to be spoken against” (Luke 2:34); and, armed with this assurance,

they proceeded boldly through all perils from tumults and scandals. It becomes us

to be supported by the same consideration, since Paul declares that it is a neverfailing

characteristic of the gospel to be a “savour of death unto death in them that perish” (2 Cor.

2:16), although rather destined to us for the purpose of being a savour of life unto life, and

the power of God for the salvation of believers. This we should certainly experience it to be,

did we not by our ingratitude corrupt this unspeakable gift of God, and turn to our destruction

what ought to be our only saving defence.46

But to return, Sire.47 Be not moved by the absurd insinuations with which our adversaries

are striving to frighten you into the belief that nothing else is wished and aimed at by this

new gospel (for so they term it), than opportunity for sedition and impunity for all kinds

of vice. Our God48 is not the author of division, but of peace; and the Son of God, who came

to destroy the works of the devil, is not the minister of sin. We, too, are undeservedly charged

with desires of a kind for which we have never given even the smallest suspicion. We, forsooth,

meditate the subversion of kingdoms; we, whose voice was never heard in faction,

and whose life, while passed under you, is known to have been always quiet and simple;

even now, when exiled from our home, we nevertheless cease not to pray for all prosperity

to your person and your kingdom. We, forsooth, are aiming after an unchecked indulgence

in vice, in whose manners, though there is much to be blamed, there is nothing which deserves

such an imputation; nor (thank God) have we profited so little in the gospel that our

life may not be to these slanderers an example of chastity, kindness, pity, temperance, patience,

moderation, or any other virtue. It is plain, indeed, that we fear God sincerely, and

worship him in truth, since, whether by life or by death, we desire his name to be hallowed;

and hatred herself has been forced to bear testimony to the innocence and civil integrity of

some of our people on whom death was inflicted for the very thing which deserved the

highest praise. But if any, under pretext of the gospel, excite tumults (none such have as yet

been detected in your realm), if any use the liberty of the grace of God as a cloak for licentiousness

(I know of numbers who do), there are laws and legal punishments by which they may

be punished up to the measure of their deserts.only, in the mean time, let not the gospel

of God be evil spoken of because of the iniquities of evil men.

Sire,49 That you may not lend too credulous an ear to the accusations of our enemies,

their virulent injustice has been set before you at sufficient length; I fear even more than

however, was not to frame a defence, but only with a view to the hearing of our cause, to

mollify your mind, now indeed turned away and estranged from us.I add, even inflamed

against us.but whose good will, we are confident, we should regain, would you but once,

with calmness and composure, read this our Confession, which we desire your Majesty to

accept instead of a defence. But if the whispers of the malevolent so possess your ear, that

the accused are to have no opportunity of pleading their cause; if those vindictive furies,

with your connivance, are always to rage with bonds, scourgings, tortures, maimings, and

burnings, we, indeed, like sheep doomed to slaughter, shall be reduced to every extremity;

yet so that, in our patience, we will possess our souls, and wait for the strong hand of the

Lord, which, doubtless, will appear in its own time, and show itself armed, both to rescue

the poor from affliction, and also take vengeance on the despisers, who are now exulting so

securely.50

Most illustrious King, may the Lord, the King of kings, establish your throne in righteousness,

and your sceptre in equity.

Basle, 1st August 1536.