I have also appended a figure (combining two figures from the
same chapter) dealing with the structure of A Dialogue
Concerning Heresies to the end of the summaries below. A
partial summary of Books III and IV is also available.
- 15. Chap. 18 (101/5--110/23)
- 15. Chancellor More thanks (ch.18) the Messenger
for stoutly defending his part. Chancellor More replies
that since they are agreed that there are miracles done
at pilgrimages, either by God for the strengthening of
his Church or by the devil for our delusion and
damnation, then, if it is proved that they are not done
by the devil, they are done by God, or vice versa, if
they are proved to be done by God, they are not done by
the devil. Chancellor More, however, defers dealing
immediately with the Messenger's objections against
miracles and changes topics. Chancellor More argues that
since the 'some men,' whose opinions the Messenger is
reporting, are Christians, they must accept the authority
of Scripture though they may dispute its interpretation.
The Messenger agrees. Chancellor More asks the Messenger
if the things spoken by Christ to Saint Peter and the
Apostles were spoken only to them or also to their
successors in Christ's flock. The Messenger agrees that
there are many passages in the New Testament that also
apply to later generations, and that men are called to
obey bishops and prelates in such matters as are so
commanded in the Gospels. The Messenger, however, objects
that the laws of the Church are worse than the laws of
Moses, and that Christ's yoke is easy and light, and that
he came to call us into a law of liberty. Chancellor More
denies that the laws of the Church are as hard as the
laws of Moses. Many of Christ's own commands are harder
to keep than the laws of the Church---as when he
condemned all forswearing and all angry words, or when he
commanded his followers to watch and pray continually,
and finally when he forbade divorce. Christ calls us to
be ready to experience shameful death and martyrdom for
the profession of our faith. Christ called the apostles
to suffer many trials and tribulations, and even to be
put to death for his sake. We will not get to Heaven by
playing, when Christ did not come there without pain.
God's yoke is 'easy and light' because he gives us the
grace to bear it, not because he calls us to a false
liberty of slothful rest. Chancellor More asks the
Messenger whether Christ's promise to St. Peter in the
Gospels that his faith should not fail was made only to
St. Peter or else to his Church as a whole, as a promise
of God's perpetual help. The Messenger suggests that it
may have perhaps been made to St. Peter alone. Chancellor
More replies that St. Peter's faith later failed, but
that Christ's promise was fulfilled in Our Lady, who
remained constant throughout when all others fell away,
and thus this promise was made to the Church as a whole,
and not only to St. Peter. Chancellor More then cites
other promises made by Christ in the New Testament, that
he would send the Holy Spirit to instruct them in all
things, and that he would be with his Church until the
end of the world. The Messenger expresses doubt that God
is still guiding his Church, since there is so much
iniquity in the world. Chancellor More replies that
though there are many wicked people, the flock of Christ
will never lack good and devout virtuous people. And
further many who live wickedly still have faith, since it
is easier to keep the faith than to live well. God's
goodness is such that even if we fall away from virtue,
as long as we still keep the knowledge of virtue, God
still offers us the means to amend our lives, and turn
again by grace to His mercy.
- 16. Chaps. 19--20
(110/24--116/11)
- 16. The Messenger admits (ch.19) that the Church
of Christ is, has been, and ever shall be guided by God
and the secret inspiration of the Holy Spirit, both in
matters of faith and in doing good works. He further
admits that the Church does not err in what it believes.
Chancellor More asks the Messenger whether the Church
would be erring if it believed certain things to be true
which we are not bound to believe, e.g. in, say,
believing in a quaternity rather than a trinity. The
Messenger says it would. Chancellor More argues that one
can err by believing too much as well as too little, and
that the Church would be in the wrong, if it were not
lawful and well done to pray to Saints and reverence
their images and go on pilgrimages. The Messenger agrees.
Chancellor More concludes that since the Messenger has
already granted that the Church cannot err in any matter
of faith that is necessary to be believed, that the
Church is not deceived or in error when it advocates
praying to Saints, or venerating relics or going on
pilgrimages, and that the miracles done at pilgrimage
sites are not done by the devil, since the Church does
well in paying honour to Saints. If God keeps his Church
in the right faith, then he will not allow the devil to
work false miracles to bring the Church into a false
belief. The Messenger replies (ch.20) that he has
granted too much to Chancellor More, who then gives him
leave to go back and retrace his argument. The Messenger
states that he has heard 'some men say' that since God
has left his Church the Scriptures, in which they may see
what they should do and believe, the Church does not need
any special guidance from God in faith and belief.
Chancellor More asks him how Christ's promise to be with
his Church until the end of the world could then be
fulfilled. The Messenger replies that God is present in
his Scriptures. Chancellor More, however, replies that
Christ never left any book behind of his own making, and
that when he made his promise the New Testament had not
even been written. When Christ promised his words would
not pass away, he spoke of his faith and doctrine taught
by word of mouth and by inspiration, not of the written
Scriptures some parts of which have already been lost,
and others corrupted. The substance of Christ's teaching
is known even if a part remains unwritten. The gift of
the Holy Spirit and the presence of Christ in the
Eucharist would mean nothing if Christ only meant to be
present in the Scriptures. The Holy Spirit has taught the
Church many things, such as the perpetual virginity of
Our Lady, which have never been written in the
Scriptures. Christ also promised his apostles that when
they were accused that they should speak his words
without fear. He did not mean that they should quote the
Scriptures, which would hardly be likely to convince
their pagan judges, but rather such words as he would
newly give them in their hearts to speak, and would
confirm them also with acts of miracles. By such secret
help and inspiration is Christ present in his Church till
the end of the world, and not only present in the written
Scriptures.
- 17. Chap. 21 (116/12--121/35)
- 17. The Messenger replies (ch.21) that God does
not need to give the right understanding of the
Scriptures to the Church since the meaning can be arrived
at by collation of one text with another. Chancellor More
replies that some men do so and yet misunderstand the
text, so that they understand some parts rightly and
others wrongly. The parts they understand rightly, they
can do so either by chance, or by reason, or by faith.
Chancellor More first asks the Messenger whether the
Church can exist without faith. The Messenger denies
this. Chancellor More then defines the Church as the
congregation of people gathered together in Christ's
faith, and further asserts that in matters of faith, the
Church always has the right understanding of the
Scriptures. Chancellor More asks the Messenger how the
Church understands the Scriptures. The Messenger
dismisses chance and reason as possible means, leaving
only faith. Chancellor More then declares that the Holy
Spirit guides the Church in interpreting the Scriptures
not through writing or by word of mouth, but by secret
inspiration leading them to truth, and preserving them
from error. God has given the Church the right
understanding of the Scriptures, and thus the honour
given to Saints, relics and images is not erroneous. The
Messenger complains that they are going round in a maze.
Chancellor More admits that there is a way that the
Messenger can defeat his argument. The Messenger asks
what it is. Chancellor More replies that it is to claim
that God has not given the Church the right understanding
of the Scriptures necessary for salvation. The Messenger
agrees that this is a "blind mate." [i.e. he
can take no advantage of it, since it would undermine his
own position.] Chancellor More concludes with two
propositions that are as plain to any Christian man as
the axioms of Euclid are to a reasonable man: namely,
that the Church cannot err in any article of faith which
could lead to loss of heaven if not believed, and
secondly, that there is no text of Scripture that
properly understood forbids anything the Church allows as
lawful to do, and vice versa.
- 18. Chap. 22 (122/1--128/6)
- 18. Chancellor More expresses concern at the Messenger's
reliance on the bare text of Scripture without the aid of
the interpretations of the Church Fathers, and without
the help of any of the liberal arts or human sciences
except grammar. Chancellor More mentions that he has
known a number preachers who were led astray by spiritual
pride to set out paradoxes, and preach strange opinions
against the common faith of the Church, pretending to do
so for love of Holy Scripture alone. These men reject the
interpretations of the Fathers, and prefer their own
foolish glosses instead. The Messenger protests that
Chancellor More may be too harsh in accusing these men of
malice for God alone judges the heart. Chancellor More
replies that he is only speaking of those erroneous
opinions expressed in their preaching, and of their
obstinate pride in defending them. He cites examples of
preachers who have obstinately continued to preach even
after being prohibited by their prelates, claiming that
they were bound to do so by God, and that the sign that
it was God's will was that they were being persecuted,
and that their preaching was stirring up strife in the
Church. Chancellor More then gives as an example the
(first) trial of Thomas Bilney. [He is not mentioned
by name, but the account clearly fits the details of his
case.] Bilney first recanted, then when he was called
upon to acknowledge his erroneous opinions and do
penance, revoked his recantation, but finding that his
audience did not accept his erroneous views, after being
reasoned with by his ecclesiastical judges, revoked his
revocation and abjured his errors again. Bilney for all
his seeming meekness was led on by his spiritual pride.
Many abjure themselves only so that they can be allowed
to preach their false opinions again. This they do out of
a desire for vainglory.
19. The Messenger then asks
Chancellor More if he would condemn that manner of study
in which a man showed such great affection for Scripture
alone, that he had little desire to read anything else,
especially not philosophy, the mother of heresies.
Chancellor More replies that there was never anything
written in this world in any way comparable with Holy
Scriptures, but that the liberal arts and human sciences
are gifts of God also, and are fit to serve as handmaids
to divinity [theology], and so thought St. Jerome, St.
Basil, St. Augustine, and many other of the Church
Fathers. However, the best part of divinity is contained
in the Scriptures. Anyone who wishes to take on the
office of a preacher should devote himself to the study
of Scripture, provided he does so with grace and
meekness, and should flee the desire for praise and the
display of knowledge. The best antidote for the would-be
preacher against spiritual pride is to study the writings
and commentaries of the Holy Fathers of the Church. But
before this he should prepare himself by abstinence,
prayer and cleanness of living, and he should be prepared
to believe in all such points as the Church believes. If
any text of Scripture seems to be contrary to the faith
of the Church, then he should assume either some fault in
the translator or scribe, or nowadays in the printer, or
that finally for some reason he does not understand it
aright. He should stick to the faith of the Church,
leaving the text alone until such time as it pleases God
to reveal and disclose its meaning.
- 19. Chap. 23 (128/7--132/27)
- 20. The Messenger responds by attacking the three rules
put forward by Chancellor More: men's glosses, reason and
faith. As for the glosses, either they tell the same tale
as Scripture does, or else another in which case they
should not be believed. As for reason and faith, what
great enemies they are to each other. God has revealed
his doctrine for us clearly written in the Scriptures. We
should shape our faith to the Scriptures, and not the
Scriptures to our faith. Chancellor More replies that the
commentators tell us the same tale as the Scriptures but
more plainly. He also rejects the Messenger's claim that
reason and faith are opposed to each other. Reason,
except it be unreasonable, does not disdain to hear the
truth about any point of faith. The cause of many things
in nature is unknown, and appears contrary to the rules
of reason. The lodestone attracts iron to it against the
rule of reason that a heavy body should move downward.
Reason can believe that many things are true even though
all the rules she has learned tell her that these things
may not be. Nor can the evidence of the eyes always be
trusted, unless we believe all the tricks that a juggler
performs. [Brief appearence of Henry Pattenson, More's
fool (not named), to announce that dinner is almost
ready.] Chancellor More asks the Messenger how we
know that we should believe the Scriptures? The Messenger
replies by faith which tells us that the Scriptures are
made up of true matters written by the secret teaching of
God. By what means do we know we should believe God asks
Chancellor More in turn? The Messenger is surprised by
Chancellor More's strange question, and answers that
every man knows that God exists. Chancellor More in turn
asks if there is any horse or ass that may know this?
None, the Messenger replies, except Balaam's ass, who
spoke like a good reasonable ass. Chancellor More
concludes that man must needs have reason in order to
perceive what he should believe. Reason is a handmaid to
wait upon faith and serve her, and faith never goes
without her. Thus, in the study of Scripture, God's grace
and special help are very important, but God also makes
use of man's reason as an instrument as well. Reason is
in turn strengthened by the study of philosophy, logic
and the other liberal arts, and by the study of oratory,
laws, history and poetry. The Lutherans, who wish to cast
away all human learning save the Scriptures are mad,
rather as St. Jerome says, just as the Hebrews despoiled
the Egyptians, so also Christians should despoil the
riches, learning and god-given wisdom of pagan authors,
and use them in the service of divinity for the profit of
Christ's Church.
- 20. Chap. 24 (132/28--137/23)
- 21. The Messenger finally admits that reason is not as
great an enemy to faith as she first seemed, and can be
useful in intepreting Scripture. However, the Messenger
rejects the third point of Chancellor More's that we need
to have faith already as a rule to learn the Scriptures
by. Chancellor More asks him how old one should be before
he comes to the study of Scripture? The Messenger replies
that he should begin as a young child, and continue with
it all his life. Chancellor More agrees as long as the
Messenger does not mean that he will learn nothing else.
The Messenger replies that the child should at least know
the creed, but does not think that sufficient to judge
and examine Scripture by. Chancellor More then asks the
Messenger to examine an old pagan idolator who was given
the Bible for the first time in his own tongue. Would he
be able to learn all the articles of the faith from it?
He might replies the Messenger. What if he believed the
book were all lies, asked Chancellor More? The book
affirms its own tale and teaches that it is true, the
Messenger responds. That would be true, Chancellor More
answers, if it were the same thing to read something and
to learn it, but this one point of faith [that
Scripture is the word of God] is a great lesson,
taught either by God or men, which is taught us without
the book, and without which the whole book would do us
little service. Even if our old idolator believed the
whole book were true, how long would it take to learn the
articles of our faith? Certainly not in a week, responds
the Messenger. What about our little godson the child we
christened just now, is it enough for him to know his
creed? Chancellor More then cites some Scripture passages
whose literal meaning seem to contradict the creed. The
Messenger is forced to admit that reason and the articles
of faith are necessary rules for the discussion of
Scripture. Even Origen himself, great Scripture scholar
that he was, erred in interpreting the Scriptures by
denying the existence of Hell. If our child were to read
the Scriptures without the help of any commentaries or
instruction in the faith, he would in all likelihood fall
into the heresy of the Arians, since there are many
passages in Scripture that speak only of Christ's
manhood, that make him seem less than God. Without the
articles of our faith both our child with only his creed,
and our old idolator without any creed, are likely to
misinterpret the Scriptures.
- 21. Chap. 25 (137/24--153/18)
- 22. The Messenger objects that if this is so then God has
not written the Scriptures well, if men may be so easily
deceived in interpreting them, and that it would be
better in such a case if God had not given us the
Scriptures at all. Chancellor More replies that God, in
the writing of the Holy Scriptures, has used such great
wisdom and wonderful temperance, that the strange fashion
thereof, reveals that as God so dictated
("indited") it, so was it written down by men.
As to the Messenger's objections, many men have thought
that they could amend the works of God, but if they had
all been part of God's council at the making of the
world, it is unlikely that they would all agree to make
the same changes, and as likely as not the world would
have gone on in the same way till doomsday, except that
perhaps we would not all agree to be winged. [More
then gives a brief account (138/31--143/3) of the
Fall and of Salvation History up till the coming of
Christ, that anticipates Lecture 1 of the English
Treatise on the Passion (1533--1534).]
23. The law of
Christ's faith, the Holy Gospel, consists not only of
those words written in the books of the Evangelists, but
much more of the substance of our faith which Our Lord
said he would write in men's hearts by the secret
operation of God and of his Holy Spirit. He first without
writing revealed those heavenly mysteries to the apostles
and disciples by word of mouth into their hearts, or
sometimes, as in St. Peter's case, the faith was inwardly
infused by the secret inspiration of God without either
any writing or any outward word. They in turn at first
without writing by means only of spoken words and
preaching spread the Gospel abroad in the world, so that
by their words in men's ears, Christ wrote the Gospel in
men's hearts before ever any word was written about it in
the Scriptures. For so it was fitting that the law of
life should be first written in the living minds of men,
rather than on the dead skins of beasts. Even if nothing
had ever been written in the Gospels, the substance of
the faith would never have departed from Christian
hearts, but the same Spirit that planted it, should also
have watered it, and kept it, and increased it. Though
many things have been written in the Scriptures, other
things concerning Christ's life and doctrine have been
left out. Among the things that have been written down by
the secret counsel of the Holy Spirit, there are some too
profound to be grasped by human wisdom. The early
Christians, who had been instructed by Christ himself,
were better able to understand many of these texts, but
they never construed them in a way contrary to their
faith. The Evangelists and Apostles revealed many great
and secret mysteries much more openly and plainly by word
of mouth among the Christian people, than they put in the
written Scriptures, which were more than likely to fall
into the hands of pagans. St. Peter did not fully declare
the Godhead of Christ in his first sermon to the Jews,
neither did St. Paul teach all the the truths of the
Christian faith to the Corinthians all at once, but chose
first to feed them with milk and not strong meat. Many
things that, are now very obscure in Holy Scripture, were
undoubtedly at that time revealed by the apostles, though
not all---some matters such as the coming of the
antichrist and the last judgement would not have been
fully disclosed. Similarly, there are many things that
are known and have been done in the Church which were
inspired by the Holy Spirit who guided the Christian
people to consent and agree together on these matters.
The Holy Spirit will continue to guide the Church till
the world's end and will never allow Christ's Catholic
Church to make any law that would be displeasing to God.
The words of Our Lord need no other authority than
himself, and are to be believed and obeyed whether
written or not written. St. Paul made it clear that some
things are to be believed which are not in the
Scriptures, when he commanded the Thessalonians to keep
both the traditions which he had taught them in writing,
and also those taught only by word of mouth. St. Paul
also wrote to the Corinthians that they should keep the
manner of celebrating the sacrament of the altar, which
he had showed them and which had been taught to him by
Our Lord himself. The Apostles taught many more things
concerning the consecration and ceremonies of the Mass
than were ever written in the Scriptures. These
traditions have been revealed by God's pleasure to the
Church, and passed down from age to age from the
beginning without any mention ever being made in Holy
Scripture.
24. The foundation of all of Luther's heresies is
precisely his claim that one need not believe anything
unless it is evidently proved by Scripture. However, no
Scripture is so evident, no matter how evident it is, to
prove anything he wishes to deny. Furthermore, he
declares some texts to be evidently for him that are
against him, and others that are against him, like the Epistle
of St. James, he declares to be no Scripture at all.
He also rejects all the interpretations of the Church
Fathers, and by these means claims to have vanquished all
those who oppose him. What servant is so lewd that he
would obey nothing his master commands him unless his
master takes it to him in writing? This is how Luther
plays with Christ. There are many things that the Church
teaches or has done, that Luther condemns, that are not
written in the Scriptures, but which the Church Fathers
all agree were taught to the Apostles by Christ, and to
the Church by the Apostles, for example the change of the
Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, or that all Christian
men and women have the power to administer the sacrament
of baptism, or the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of
the Virgin Mary. The early Church was so taught by their
great master Christ and his Apostles that doubtless many
of the common people then had a better understanding of
the Gospel of St. John or the Epistles of St. Paul
than many who take themselves for great theologians now.
The Holy Scriptures are so marvellously constructed that
no man however lowly, who walks with the staff of his
faith in his hand, and takes the holy Fathers for his
guides and is led by God's grace, will ever fall into
peril, but will safely reach his journey's end. And at
the same time it is such that, if a man is led by
spiritual pride to trust in his own wit and despise the
old holy Fathers and reject the faith of Christ's Church,
that fellow will not fail to sink down over his ears and
drown. This is what happened to Arius, Pelagius, Faustus,
Manicheus, Donatus, Elvidius, and all the rabble of old
heretics, who drowned themselves in damnable heresies,
because they were led on by spiritual pride to put faith
only in their own learning, preferring their own gay
glosses to the common Catholic faith of Christ's Church.
- 22. Chap. 26 (153/19--162/11)
- 25. The Messenger replies that he would believe anything
in the Scriptures even if all the men in the whole world
spoke the contrary. Chancellor More then asks him what
would he do if God told him two things, and which would
he believe the best? The Messenger replies that he would
believe both firmly alike. What if these two things
seemed contrary to each other Chancellor More asks? I
would believe them both, replies the Messenger, but think
I did not understand one of them well. What if you were
commanded to believe them both Chancellor More continues?
I would believe them both to be true, responds the
Messenger, but not in the sense in which they appear to
contradict each other. Is the faith of the Church the
word of God spoken to his Church or not? Yes, replies the
Messenger, God speaks to his Church in the Scriptures.
Does God only speak in the Scriptures asks Chancellor
More? When God spoke to Moses were these not God's words,
or were the words of Christ spoken to his Apostles not
God's words until they were written down? The Messenger
is forced to admit that they are, but then claims that
with the completion of the canon of Holy Scripture, God
has revealed his mind sufficiently in Holy Scripture. And
not otherwise, asks Chancellor More? What about the
changing of the Sabbath day from Saturday to Sunday, or
what about the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Our
Lady? The Messenger is taking away all authority and
belief from every word of God spoken outside the
Scriptures.
26. What would you do, Chancellor More
asks, if two passages of Scripture appeared to contradict
each other, as when in one place Christ is described as
being less than his Father, and in another it is stated
that he and his Father are one? One applies to his
humanity, the other to his divinity, replies the
Messenger. But if you were living in the time of Arius,
he would have interpreted these two passages differently
to prove that Christ was not one substance with the
Father. The Messenger is confident that he could prove
Arius wrong. Chancellor More points out that many great
theologians and Scripture scholars supported Arius. What
would you have done if you had been moved by the
arguments of both sides, asks Chancellor More? [Merry
tale of King Henry VII's almoner and Potiphar's wife.]
The Messenger replies that he would have believed with
the best. What if you did not know which side were best
since both appeared to be grounded upon Scripture asks
Chancellor More? The Messenger replies that he would have
prayed to God for guidance and chosen the one side that
God put on his mind. Chancellor More then asks the
Messenger if, after making his prayers, he would entrust
his choice to the casting of lots. The Messenger answers
that, trusting God to guide his choice, he would indeed
cast lots as the Apostles did to find a replacement for
the traitor Judas. Lots are lawful, Chancellor More
replies, when both alternatives are good, but where one
of the choices is perilous and the other not it is
foolish to trust in lots. [John More's merry tale
about the bag of eels and snakes and the choice of wives.]
Returning to the case of the dispute about the nature of
Christ, what would the Messenger do if he were unable to
decide whether the Arian or Catholic sides were better?
What if God himself had revealed the truth to a certain
man, and told the Messenger to go to him? Would the
Messenger refuse to accept the guidance of this man? The
Messenger replies that he would thank God, and go to the
man as fast as he could. What if the man said that Arius
and all his followers were heretics? The Messenger
replies that he would believe the man. What if Arius were
to bring many Scripture passages forward to defend his
position, and the Messenger then in turn brought forth
his own texts of Scripture until there were no more to
bring forth, and at this point neither side could
persuade the other of the truth of their position from
Scripture? What would the Messenger do? Would he believe
the interpretations of Scripture put forward by Arius, or
interpretations of the man whom God sent the Messenger
to? The Messenger replies that he would believe the man.
Even if it was not clearly proved from Scripture? The
Messenger declares that he would still believe the
matters, taught by the man, to be true. Is it the same
thing if God commands something by his own mouth or by
the Holy Scriptures asks Chancellor More? The Messenger
replies that he would accept either except that the
commands of Scripture are more sure. What if it were a
woman instead of a man? It would not change anything,
replies the Messenger. Or a certain well-known company of
men and women together? It still would not make any
difference, answers the Messenger. Chancellor More
replies that in that case the Messenger is fully answered
since God has given his commandment that we should
believe his Church, and resort to it for the final answer
and solution of all points and doubts concerning the
salvation of our souls, including all such points that
depend on having the right understanding of Holy
Scripture.
- 23. Chap. 27 (162/12--166/29)
- 27. The Messenger, however, replies by asking where it
appears that God commands us in all such things to
believe the Church. For that would be in effect only to
command us to believe one another since we all together
are the Church. On the contrary only Christ himself is to
be believed, and not any congregation of men. Chancellor
More then asks the Messenger whether it is enough to hear
and believe Christ, or besides that also to obey him. To
obey him also, replies the Messenger. What if he commands
us to believe and obey his Church, are we not bound to do
so? Yes, replies the Messenger. Then there is no doubt,
responds Chancellor More, since Christ commanded us to
hear the Church, as his father commanded us to hear him.
What if there are diverse parties within the Church, whom
should we believe asks the Messenger? That is very plain,
replies Chancellor More. Either in the beginning, the
Church had the truth about certain doctrines, and all
believed the same doctrines, until some began to change
and by their obstinacy went out or were put out of the
Church, in which case if I would believe the Church, I
must believe those who still believe what all the whole
believed before. Or else, if at some time any doctrine
was doubted as unrevealed or unknown, which the Church
later came to accept either by common determination at a
general council, or by the consent of the Christian
people throughout Christendom, then, if after that some,
either many or few, should take a contrary position, it
is still clear which side one should take if one would
believe the Church. The Messenger replies that Chancellor
More still has not proved that God has commanded us to
believe the Church. Chancellor More asks him, did not
Christ say when he gathered together his Church of
Apostles and disciples and sent them out to preach, that
he who hears you hears me? Did he not also say that he
who would not hear the Church should be counted as a
pagan and a publican? Yes, answers the Messenger. Christ
commanded us to believe and obey the Church both in
matters of faith and of manners of living. Christ is not
only the man you are commanded by God to believe and
obey, but the Church is also the person whom we are
commanded by Christ to hear, believe and obey. Thus we
have been given a sure and infallible way to avoid
falling into any misunderstanding about Scripture. We are
bound to believe not only the points that God shows us in
Scripture but also that God teaches the Church without
Scripture, and we are also bound to accept the Church of
Christ's teaching concerning the sense and understanding
of Holy Scripture. God so inspired the holy Doctors of
his Church with the light of his grace for our
instruction that the doctrines that they agreed upon, and
that many ages have consented to are the true faith and
the right way to heaven. For these doctrines were put
into their minds by the holy hand of God who makes the
Church of Christ all of one mind.
- 24. Chap. 28 (166/30--176/7)
- 28. The Messenger replies that we should believe the
Church as we believe Christ, as long as they say what
Christ says. But if they tell me tales of their own,
never mentioned in the Holy Scriptures, should I believe
the Church above Christ? We ought rather to believe God
alone speaking in his Scriptures himself more than all
the glosses of the old Fathers. They arrived at their
interpretations by means of wisdom, study, diligence, and
the collation of one text with another, by which means
men can perceive the meaning of Scripture just as well
now as they did then. God's grace is not so worn out that
it cannot help us, as it helped them to arrive at the
right understanding of Scripture. And where they went
wrong God will guide us even to correct them. Chancellor
More replies that the Messenger pretends to believe the
Church in something, but in fact, since he does not
believe the Church in the interpretation of the
Scriptures, he believes it in nothing. There is hardly
any text so plain that it doesn't need a gloss. [Example
of 'twice two makes four'---even that needs a gloss since
twice two geese do not make four horses.] Further,
though the Messenger claims that he will have no glosses
used at all in studying the Scriptures, he insists that
one can collate one text with another, and show how they
agree together as if that were no gloss. The Messenger
objects that we should not believe the Church if it makes
a gloss that plainly does not agree with the text of the
Scriptures. To whom does it appear so plain, replies
Chancellor More, if it appears one way to you, and
another way to the whole Church? Chancellor More replies
to the Messenger that he clearly believes the Church in
nothing, and where it is God's will that the Church
should be his judge, he would now be judge over the
Church. It would be a great marvel if the Messenger could
interpret the Scriptures better than the old holy Doctors
and Christ's whole Church. We are not talking about one
or two Doctors, but of the consent and common agreement
of all the old holy Fathers, and of the common consent of
the Church, in such matters where it would be damnable to
take the Scriptures in a contrary sense. If the Church
Fathers interpreted the Scriptures one way and we
interpret them in a contrary way, then clearly either
they erred or we do, and that in matters that we are
bound by God to believe, this error is damnable. For
example the article of faith concerning the equality of
Christ as God with his Father, or the belief in the
justification of devotion to Saint's relics, images and
pilgrimages. It would be damnable and plain idolatry to
believe in these things if the contrary were true. But
the Church Fathers did not so err. To prove this consider
first that their wits were as much as our new men's [i.e.
the Lutherans], their diligence as great, their
erudition greater, their study as fervent, their devotion
hotter, their number far greater, their time continued
longer persevering through many ages, the contrary
opinions few and those quickly faded away, they being
always considered Catholic, and the contrary part
heretics. Here might I also lay before you the holiness
of their lives and the abundance of graces that appeared
thereby. In guiding them God did not use open miracles,
but rather the secret supernatural means by which his
grace assists good men in these labours, and guides them
to perceive the right sense of Holy Scripture. If they
had been deceived and guilty of damnable error, then they
would not have been made Saints, nor would God have shown
them to be so by working many thousands of miracles both
in their lifetimes and after their deaths. Since all
these holy Doctors and the Church were all of one
understanding, it is clear that they were not deceived in
the understanding of Holy Scripture. Nonetheless, God's
special care is first and foremost for the profit of his
Church by whose whole body he sets more than by any
member thereof whether Saint, apostle, evangelist or
others. When Christ promised St. Peter that his faith
would never fail, he meant not only the faith of St.
Peter himself, but also the faith of the whole Church.
The Messenger admits that he has already accepted this,
but reminds Chancellor More that he gave the Messenger
leave to raise any other objections as he saw fit.
Chancellor More asks the Messenger whether Christ
intended to gather a special flock and congregation of
people who should serve God and be his special people?
The Messenger says that this was indeed so. Was this
meant for His times only or was it meant to continue
afterwards? It was meant to continue till Doomsday. What
if this people should have the knowledge of how to please
God in the beginning, but later lose it? The Messenger is
thrown off by this point. Chancellor More continues that
it is one thing for Christians to fall into sin for they
can always repent afterwards, but how can they still be
God's people if they lose the knowledge of how to please
Him? The Messenger admits that this people must needs
have always the knowledge of how to serve and please God,
in all matters that we are bound to believe. But then he
immediately qualifies this admission by stating that this
knowledge has been left to the Church in the Holy
Scriptures. Chancellor More expresses extreme frustration
at this: "Are you there yet again." I thought
we had already proved and agreed that this knowledge came
before the Scriptures and many things that are necessary
to be believed are not in the Holy Scriptures. What if
God had left the Scriptures to the Church locked in a
chest and no one had the key? Would that have served? No.
What if he had left it open, but no man could read it?
The same. What if every man could read it, but none
understand it? It would serve just as little. Then
clearly the Church must also have the right understanding
of the Scriptures. And yet you would have everything
known by the Scriptures, and nothing otherwise. In
matters where doubt arises about the interpretation of
the Scriptures, you would, after making your bitter
prayers to God for His grace, take one part by chance [i.e.
by casting lots] and stick to it. But I have clearly
shown you that God has given his Church the knowledge of
the truth in all such things, and you would take the sure
way, if in all these points you take for the truth that
way that the Church teaches you therein.
- 25. Chaps. 29--30
(176/8--182/35)
- 29. The Messenger objects (ch.29) that Chancellor
More is proving his case not from Holy Scripture but from
man's reason. Chancellor More replies that this
reasoning, though it builds further thereon, has
Scripture for its foundation. Reason is not always to be
mistrusted unless you will not believe that twice two
makes four. God proved in Scripture that he would be with
his Church till the end of the world. Did not also Christ
promise in St. John's Gospel that he would not leave his
followers orphans but would come again to them himself,
and that the Father would send the Holy Spirit in
Christ's name to teach his followers all things and put
them in remembrance of everything which Christ has said
to them. The Holy Spirit was sent to be with them for
ever, not only to dwell with the Apostles. When Christ
promised them that the Holy Spirit would teach them all
things, he was referring to those things which we are
bound to know for our salvation. Christ did not promise
that the Holy Spirit would only reveal his words again,
but also that the Holy Spirit would teach them many
things that they were not yet ready to bear. Christ did
not say that the Holy Spirit would write them all truth,
but rather that the Holy Spirit would lead them by secret
inspiration in their hearts to the right belief in every
necessary article of faith, and to the right
interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. The Holy Trinity
will remain resident with the Church and continue to
assist it perpetually, and prevent it from falling into
false errors and heresies. Chancellor More then asks (ch.30)
the Messenger how, since he will believe nothing but
Scripture, he knows that Christ was born of a Virgin. The
Gospel told me. Which Gospel tells you this? The Gospel
of St. Luke. How do you know that? I read it in the book.
Yes, you read such a book, but how do you know that St.
Luke made it? Just as we know the authors of other books
by the names written on them. But many books have false
inscriptions (attributions), and are not written by those
named in them. It does not matter who wrote the book,
even if the Church mistook the name of some evangelist,
the gospel is never the less true. But how do you know
that the matter of the book is true? Because God shows me
that it is so. But he did not tell you it mouth to mouth.
No, he told it to others in the beginning, and it was
handed down from age to age and the whole Church believes
it is true. This is the very point I am making, replies
Chancellor More. We would not even know which were the
true gospels if it were not for the Church. There were
many that wrote gospels, but the Church by the secret
inspiration of God chose out of these only four, and
rejected the rest. As St. Augustine says, I would not
believe the Gospels, if it were not for the Church [which
accepted them as true]. Thus even Luther is forced to
admit that the Church can always discern the word of god
from the word of men. The Messenger would not believe the
Church in anything or accept the tradition of the Church,
unless it were proved by Scripture, but he cannot even
believe the Scriptures [as the word of God],
unless it were proved to be Scripture by the judgement
and tradition of the Church. Yes, replies the Messenger,
but once I have learned the Scriptures from the Church, I
will believe it better than the whole Church. Chancellor
More replies that the Church does not command you to
believe contrary to the Scriptures. In any point where
you would rather believe the Scriptures than the Church,
you do not understand the Scriptures for they do not mean
anything contrary to what the Church teaches you. How do
I know that objects the Messenger? Have you already
forgotten, Chancellor More replies, the perpetual
assistence of the Holy Trinity guiding the Church, or the
prayer of Christ to keep his Church from failing, the
sending of the Holy Spirit to guide the Church into all
truth, or the continual presence of Christ in the Holy
Sacrament.
- 26. Chap. 31 (182/36--186/7)
- 30. Chancellor More asks the Messenger (ch.31) why
he thinks that God will not allow the Church to consider
a book as part of the Holy Scriptures which was not so
indeed. Lest men should from this false book conceive
wrong doctrines about the faith, the Messenger replies.
What if God should allow the Church to mistake the
meaning of the real Scriptures, would that be as bad?
Yes, answers the Messenger. Even worse, responds
Chancellor More, since as long as the Church had a true
faith it could still take many good things from this
false book and still keep out the errors. But, if the
Church should falsely understand the real Scriptures,
there would be no way to escape from damnable errors. The
King in his book against Luther [Henry VIII's Assertio
septem sacramentorum] plainly proves, that since God
will not suffer his Church to mistake a book of Scripture
for peril of damnable error, and because a like peril
would ensue if the Church misinterpreted the meaning of
the Scriptures, it must follow that God will no more let
the Church misinterpret the Scriptures, than he would let
it take a false book for Scripture. The Messenger replies
that he is fully satisfied by Chancellor More's argument
that the faith of the Church is the right rule to carry
with one for the study of Scripture. Chancellor More
continues by claiming that in the necessary points of our
faith, where to believe falsely would be damnable, that
you must believe the Church since it is not their own
words that they speak, but the word of God even though it
is not in Scripture. The Messenger agrees. Chancellor
More adds further that wherever the Scriptures appear to
contradict the faith of the Church then the Scriptures in
question are being misinterpreted, and that the
Scriptures laid against the worship of images, devotion
to Saints and going on pilgrimages do not in fact condemn
these practices, and that these devotions are good
because the Church believes so, and the Church in this
has the special assistence of God, and the instruction of
the Holy Spirit preventing it from falling into error.
The Messenger, however, suddenly interjects that he has
another 'tale' to tell Chancellor More that will make
everything as uncertain as before. Chancellor More asks
what it is. The Messenger replies that they had better
dine first and then talk about it after dinner.
- 2. Chap. 1b (189/8--192/24)
- 32. Chancellor More agrees that the Messenger has
rehearsed his summary well. However, the Messenger
answers that even granting all these things, they are no
nearer a resolution, for, if a man believed that the
worship of images were wrong and unlawful, he might
indeed grant that the Church cannot err, and that the
Church has the right faith, but would perhaps deny the
Church to be the people you say it is, but say that the
Church consists of those people who believe as he does.
Chancellor More replies that if he and his company are
the Church, he must tell where his companions are. What
if he says the Church is in no one place but is spread
through many countries, asks the Messenger? Let him show
that there are some companies of known congregations
holding these beliefs in different countries, responds
Chancellor More. The Messenger replies that in the
beginning and for a long time afterwards the Church of
Christ in each place hid itself. Chancellor More replies
that that was while the persecution lasted, but when the
persecution ceased, the Church was soon known in every
country. If I were to defend that part, responds the
Messenger, I could say perhaps that the Church is that
company, which you who call yourselves the Church, call
heretics. These company is well-known to each other, but
they dare not profess it openly because you that call
yourselves the Church persecute them as the
"church" of the pagans persecuted the early
Christians at the beginning. Chancellor More replies that
the heretics may indeed be the sort of "church"
that David spoke of when he said "I hate the church
[assembly] of evil men" (Ps. 26), but they
are not the Church of Christ. The Church of Christ,
wheresoever it was throughout the period of persecutions,
used to gather together for preaching and prayer secretly
in woods and private houses. They also used the
sacraments and said mass, but these people do no such
things. The Church of Christ always used to flee from and
avoid the temples of idols, and took it as a denial of
their Christian faith to do any observance therein. But
these men [the Lollards?] whom you call the Church
come to the churches where images are, which they take
for idols, and make all the same religious observances
that we do, secretly mocking at the sacraments they
receive. The Church of Christ has always had one belief
and one faith. If these heretics are the Church you must
tell which ones, for among them there are almost as many
minds as there are men. The Church of Christ is something
which has always endured and lasted, but the sects of the
heretics shortly decayed and vanished completely away; to
such an extent that their books were also lost even
before there were laws to burn them. It is easy to see
that God himself destroyed them, and the world turned
against them, even though new heretics take up their
heresies again. If their opinions had anywhere
continually endured, their books, which have long since
disappeared, would have been continually preserved also.
Thus you can see that these folk are not the Church. The
Messenger replies that he can show a place and a company
of congregations which is the real Church, namely in
Bohemia [the Hussites], and in Saxony where Luther
is, and in a large part of the rest of Germany. Among the
Lutherans, Chancellor More replies, there are almost as
many sects as there are men, and their leaders themselves
change their minds and opinions every day. Bohemia is the
same case---one faith in the towns and another in the
fields; one in Prague and another in the next town. If
you assign the Church to Bohemia, you must say in what
town, and then also in what street. And yet all these
Bohemians receive the sacraments from priests under the
authority of the pope.
- 3. Chaps. 2--3 (192/25--197/34)
- 33. Chancellor More asks (ch.2) which came
first---some church of heretics or the Church of Christ.
The Messenger suggests the first, citing the example of
the Saducees as a Jewish heretical sect. Chancellor More
replies that by the same reckoning [including the Old
Testament Jews in the Church] the Church of Christ
could be said to begin with Adam, for from the first good
man till the last of all, all shall be part of Christ's
Church Triumphant in Heaven. But as for Christ's Church
on earth, that is the congregation bearing his name and
having his right faith, that was gathered together by
Christ himself, and spread abroad by his Apostles, and
that has continued since, still does and will do so till
the end of the world, was this Church, asks Chancellor
More, before all the Churches and congregations of
heretics or was some one of them first? It was before
them all, replies the Messenger, for always the heretics
came out of it. Chancellor More responds that heretics
are like dead limbs that hang on the body, until they are
cut off, but are useless. Those that by the profession of
heresies fall away from the body of the Church always
wither away. Christ is the Vine [John 15] and we
are the branches. Every branch that bears fruit he
prunes, but every branch taken from the tree is cast into
the fire. And cut off from the stock of the vine are all
those that are not grafted in by faith, or that are
fallen off by open profession of heresies, or that are
cut off for infidelity. Faith is the gate to God's
church, and misbelief the gate to the devil's church.
Anyone who professes a false belief has gone out of God's
church. Even if they keep their heresies secret, they are
in the church but not of it in much the same way that a
dead hand is a part of the body. When heretics depart
from the the Church they show that they were never truly
in it in the first place. Thus the Church of Christ is
before all the churches of the heretics and all the
congregations of the heretics have come out of the Church
of Christ. Nor can any sect in Bohemia [the Hussites]
be the right church, for the Church, which we call the
church, was before them all.
34. The Messenger objects
(ch.3) that it might be said that it is not
necessary to assign any place where the real church is,
but that in every place the church consists of all the
good men and chosen people of god that are predestined to
be saved wheresoever they are scattered, here one and
there one, here two and there two, and that these, though
they are as yet unknown in the world, are the very Church
of Christ. This grows from worse to worse, replies
Chancellor More. This is the very foundation of their
heresies. Since they must grant that the real Church
cannot be deceived in the right faith nor mistake the
Holy Scriptures, and since they see that the Church
condemns their ways, they are driven to deny as the
Church, the people that are known for the Church. And
instead they seek for another, they know not where or of
what nature, and build up in the air a church so
spiritual that they leave no room in it either for God or
good men. If they claim that the Church consists of all
the predestined, that can be well said of the Church
Triumphant in Heaven, but they are very far from the mark
in applying it to the Church Militant here on earth. If
the Church consists of none but the predestined, asks
Chancellor More, are all the predestined members thereof?
Yes. What if he is a sinner or a heretic but is
predestined? He is in the Church, replies the Messenger.
Then was St. Paul as much a member of the Church while he
was a persecutor as when he was an Apostle, and as truly
a member before he was born, as he is now in Heaven. The
Messenger replies that though perhaps not all those
predestined to be saved are in the Church, nonetheless,
there are no others in it but the predestined. Chancellor
More replies that, as men are changeable, a man that is
predestined may many times in his life be wicked. And
many that will finally fall into sin and wretchedness,
are good some of the time and thus for the time in God's
favour. And so by your argument there are good men
outside of Christ's Church and wicked men in it, faithful
men outside of it and heretics within it, and both
without any known reason or good cause why.
- 4. Chap. 4 (198/1--206/10)
- 35. The Messenger persists in arguing (ch.4) that
the true Church of Christ consists of all those who
believe aright and live well even though the world does
not know them, and few know each other. Christ says that
the gates of Hell will not prevail against his Church,
but the gates of Hell prevail against sinners, and
therefore it appears well that there are no sinners in
his Church but only good folk. And God is present to them
and keeps them free from errors, and gives them the right
understanding of Holy Scripture. It does not matter how
few they are, since Christ promised to be wherever two or
three are gathered in his name. When the children of
Israel fell into idolatry and worshipped the idols of
Baal, there were seven thousand that did not bend their
knees to Baal, as appears from the Third [i.e. First]
Book of Kings. Where the synagogue and church was then
was unknown to man but known to God. So it is today---the
true Church of Christ is not the people that seem to be
the Church, but some unknown good people scattered here
and there, and perhaps they are those who are opposed to
worshipping images, and whom we call heretics. Chancellor
More replies that this is an argument that Luther himself
makes. But, where Luther says that the church or
synagogue of the right belief was then unknown, this is
not true, for it was well-known in Jerusalem and Judea.
Scripture does not say that the seven thousand, who would
not bend the knee to Baal, were unknown, but only that
there was such a number. But even if we accept the
existence of a Church consisting of a secret, unknown,
scattered number of good men, would you, asks Chancellor
More, have those good men have the same faith that we
have that are reputed the Church, or else a different
faith? What if they have the same faith, replies the
Messenger? Then your newly-built Church will not help
your purpose since they will as quickly confirm the
worship of images, praying to Saints, and going on
pilgrimages as we do, and as deeply condemn as heresy
your opinion to the contrary. But what if the true
Church, responds the Messenger, believes that all these
beliefs are erroneous and as plainly idolatrous as was
the worshipping of Baal. If that were so then Christ had
not kept seven thousand from the worship of Baal in all
the countries of Christendom, except among these new folk
of Saxony and Bohemia, whom you yourself admit to be
heretics, since they are sects come out of the Church. It
would indeed be amazing if true believers were only found
among heretics and none in all the great unchangeable
countries of Christendom. For in all the countries of
Christendom, except among the heretics, those who believe
that the worship of images is wrong, come to Church and
bow their knees to Baal (if these images are Baals) just
as their neighbours do. If this secret, unknown Church is
the true Church, where are their preachers and priests
who administer the sacraments according to Christ's
commandment.
36. If a Turk or Saracen, who converted
to Christianity, were told that all the Christian nations
were openly idolatrous and believed wrongly, but that
there were yet a few good folk among them who believed
rightly, but no one could tell him who they were, how
could he come to the true faith? The Messenger replies
that he might take up the Scriptures. But then, responds
Chancellor More, he would be like the Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts
8) who could not understand without a reader, and if
he took a wrong reader of a wrong Church then all were
lost. Where are all the preachers of this church that
will teach us better? For it can be no church if it has
no preachers. They have preachers, answers the Messenger,
but you will not let them preach but instead you burn
them. They are too smart to get burned, replies
Chancellor More, for they always forswear their faith to
save their lives, unlike the early Christians who were
not afraid of martyrdom. This secret church will never
serve. The Church of Christ is a Church that is
well-known and not hidden. It is Christ's wish that his
faith be proclaimed and spread abroad, and not always
whispered about secretly. It is folly to claim that
Christ would have his Church scattered about secretly,
unknown to the world and to each other.
37. Luther is mad when he argues, in his book against
Ambrosius Catharina, that since Christ says that the
gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church, and
that since the gates of Hell are nothing but the devil,
and he prevails against sinners, therefore no folk that
sin can be in the Church. This is a very absurd argument
that a child of one week's sophistry [i.e training in
logic] would be ashamed to make. First, men could
deny that the gates of Hell in that place signify the
devil, and then Luther's argument is completely wiped
away. Many of the old commentators interpreted the gates
of Hell as the oppressions of great tyrants and heretics
by whose persecutions and heresies (as it were by two
gates) many men went to Hell. However, though they
destroyed many, the Church was always preserved by God
from destruction. Even if we grant Luther's premise that
the gates of Hell here signify the devil, we need not
grant him his conclusion, since the man that sins and
then rises again out of sin first comes within the gates
[of Hell] but then breaks out of them again, so that he
prevails against the gates, and not the gates against
him. By this frantic argument Luther tries to prove that
our Church, that is all the Christian people whom we call
the Church under the obedience of the Pope, are not the
Church, but instead he proves that there is no Church at
all, for what church can he find or imagine that does not
sin. Therefore, the Church must needs be the common known
multitude of Christian men both good and bad together.
Our Lord in his mystical body of the Church carries his
members, some sick and some whole, and does not cast out
anyone from the body for every sin, but only it they do
willingly separate, or are put out for their stubborn
adherence to heresy.
- 5. Chaps. 5--7 (206/11--210/27)
- 38. Since we are agreed, Chancellor More continues (ch.5),
that we know the Scriptures by the Church, which Church
is it by which we know the Scriptures? Is it not the
company and congregation of those nations, that without
factions and schism from the remnant, profess the name
and faith of Christ. It is by this Church that we know
the Scriptures. This Church began with Christ and had
after Christ for their head St. Peter, Christ's vicar,
and his successors, and by it we have had Christ's holy
faith and sacraments and the Scriptures delivered to us,
kept and conserved therein by God and his Holy Spirit. No
matter how many nations fall away, even if they are more
in number, they are all companies and sects of heretics
and schismatics cut off and severed from the stock of the
Church out of which they came.
39. When Chancellor
More has finished speaking (ch.6), the Messenger
declares that he agrees with the principal matter of
Chancellor More's argument except for one little doubt.
He raises the objection that if the Church is none other,
as Chancellor More says and as the Messenger now agrees,
than the whole common congregation of Christian people
both good and bad, except for those who separate
themselves out of willfulness, or are put out because of
their obstinate faults, it may nonetheless happen that
the good men in the Church are those that believe that
the worship of images and the praying to Saints are
idolatry, and that all the wicked men and those who are
deceived in their faith hold the contrary position.
Chancellor More finds this a strange argument. Are they
good men if they do evil things? No, the Messenger
replies. Do they do well that do an act of idolatry, even
if it be against their hearts? No again, replies the
Messenger. But they all come to church, responds
Chancellor More, and worship images, even those who hold
the contrary side do so for fear of being discovered.
Even if their opinion were good, they themselves do evil.
Rather than being condemned, they will first perjure
themselves and then abjure their opinion. If your opinion
is right, then are there none in the Church that are
good, but yet there must be some good men in the Church [if
God is truly preserving it from error]. Thus, since
those on your side are wicked, it must be that the good
are on the other side.
40. I have said nothing (ch.7) so far about all
the holy men and Saints that have written against your
opinion, nor of the General Councils that condemned your
part by the substantial authority of the whole body of
Christendom, guided by the secret operation of the Holy
Spirit, who would never allow the Church of Christ to
persist so long in damnable idolatry if this were truly
superstitious, and not a part of true belief and devout
religion. The Messenger declares that he can go no
further, that his back is to the wall, and he concedes
defeat to Chancellor More.
- 6. Chap. 8 (210/28--216/34)
- 41. Chancellor More now takes up again the charge [already
dealt with extensively in Book I] that the worship of
images is idolatry, and that the miracles done at images
or by invocations to the Saints are illusions of the
devil. He declares his intention first to begin with the
Saints themselves, and then afterwards to deal with
relics, images and pilgrimages. [This will be the
matter of the rest of Book II.] He starts off by
expressing astonishment at the madness of those heretics
who deny that Saints can hear us, and who further claim
that even if they do that they cannot help us, and
finally that even if the Saints could help us, it would
be folly to desire them to help us, when God can do it so
much better. Where they doubt that Saints can hear us, I
marvel, says Chancellor More, unless they think that the
Saints are dead in soul as well as in body. But if their
holy souls live then it is hardly likely they will now
show less charity in Heaven to men that need their help
than when they were on earth, for the worst there are
better than the best here. The nearer that folk draw to
Heaven the more good will they bear to men here. St.
Stephen prayed for those that maliciously killed him. But
the Saints in Heaven show even greater charity towards
these who honour them. It would be a great marvel to
suppose that the Saints in Heaven are unable to help us,
when they worked so many miracles here on earth, as we
read in the Acts of the Apostles. And since infirmity and
weakness are a part of our misery here on earth, and
strength and power are a great part of their wealth in
Heaven, the Saints are better able now to do good to
those that ask for help than they were before.
42. The
Messenger admits that the Saints are able to do much by
power and by prayer, but declares that he finds it hard
to believe that they can hear us and see us in so many
different places at once. Chancellor More responds by
arguing from analogy. Just as the human eye can see two
churches or towns in the distance that are separated from
each other and from the viewer by two miles, and also the
human ear can hear the voices of many men standing far
asunder coming into the ear all at once, even though we
do not fully understand how this happens [brief
digression on the physics of the eye and the ear], so
also the angels and Saints in Heaven being spiritual
substances can much more easily do the same, even though
we do not perceive by what means they do this. The
Messenger now objects that there is no cause or reason
why we should pray to Saints when God can as easily hear
us and help us. Chancellor More responds that by the same
argument there is no need to go to doctors, since God can
also much more cheaply and sooner heal us through prayer.
The Messenger replies that God wishes us to use them as
his instruments. Chancellor More responds by citing the
examples of the miracles performed by Elisha and by the
Apostles, to prove that God is pleased that we should ask
help of his Saints in the same way. God forbids no man to
pray for the help of another. When St. Paul exhorts each
of us to pray for the other, can it be wrong to pray to
the holy Saints in Heaven to do the same? The Messenger
objects that by that token we might pray not only to
Saints but also to every other dead man. Chancellor More
responds that we can both pray for and pray to the
suffering souls in Purgatory, but as for the Saints in
Heaven we may only pray to them for their intercession,
and not for them.
- 7. Chap. 9 (217/1--225/36)
- 43. The Messenger objects that we cannot be sure of the
authenticity of the relics of the Saints. Does the
putting of a man's bones in a shrine make a man a Saint?
There are some Saints who are unshrined and others that
seem to have two bodies, since the monks at different
pilgrimage shrines often claim that they have the bodies
of the same Saint. Nor is it unlikely that in some cases
the bones that are worshipped as the relics of some Saint
are, in fact, as Chaucer says, the bones of some holy
Jew's sheep. Many of the Saints we worship have no
shrines, and many that have shrines have never been
canonised. And even where they have been canonised, the
Church may be mistaken, since the men who spoke about
their lives and miracles at their canonisations may have
lied. St. Augustine says that there are many that are
worshipped here as Saints whose souls are buried in Hell.
Chancellor More replies that the Messenger has spoken
very stoutly, but that all that he has proved is that we
may be deceived about some we take for Saints, not that
there are no Saints, or that if there are any, that they
should not be worshipped or prayed to, unless he were to
argue that because we mistake some, therefore we should
worship none. By the same argument we should not go to a
doctor for fear that we might visit a veterinarian by
mistake.
44. Supposing that a great many of the king's
friends came into your country, and that you made them
great cheer. However, unknown to you some were spies, who
were his mortal enemies. Do you think the king would
thank you for welcoming his friends, or blame you for
giving good cheer to his enemies. He would surely thank
me, replies the Messenger, since they both seemed his
friends. What would you do if you knew that some, that
seemed his best friends, were in fact his worst enemies,
but that you did not know which ones. Would you treat
them all honourably or turn them all away? I would treat
the king's enemies as his friends, replies the Messenger,
rather than dishonourably treating his friends as his
enemies. The situation with the Saints is similar,
responds Chancellor More. But St. Augustine gives me
warning that many of the Saints are not Saints at all,
replies the Messenger. You are deceived therein, though I
have heard many others say the same, responds Chancellor
More, for in Book I of De civitate dei and in his
book on The Cure of Souls, St. Augustine is not
condemning the Saints as such, but is speaking only of
costly burial and the making of sumptuous tombs, and the
doing of worldly worship to the dead corpses of rich men
in their burial processions and funeral services. When
the Church, however, after careful searching, finds the
life of a man holy, as witnessed by the miracles that God
performs at his intercession, and declares a man a Saint,
either by canonisation or by the common acceptance of the
whole people of Christendom, we ought to trust that God's
grace and the aid of his Holy Spirit assisting his
Church, has guided the judgement of his ministers and has
inclined the minds of his people to consent to it.
45. You say that we should not pay honour to any
relics because some are doubtful, for sometimes a whole
body or a head is claimed by two or more shrines.
However, there are a number of possible explanations for
this. Where two shrines claim the same head, one may have
the skull and another the lower jaw. Where two or more
shrines claim the same Saint, the body may have been
translated from one shrine to another, but some of the
relics left in the original shrine; or it may happen that
two holy men in different countries have the same name,
or that in some places whom the relics may have
originally belonged to is unknown or mistaken, but that
God still wants their relics honoured, even though their
names are forgotten. [Digression on the relics from
the period of the Viking invasions found at Barking Abbey
outside London 'thirty years ago.'] But as for
mistaking pig's bones for relics, which nonetheless do no
harm to those who mistake them, though God might perhaps
allow such things to happen, yet he will not suffer such
a thing to last or endure in the Church. The assistance
of God and the Holy Spirit preserves the Church from
serious error in this matter, just as it does in the
matter of the reception and transmission of the Holy
Scriptures themselves. For it is God that guides the
Church when it comes to an agreement on any matter of
faith, and it is God's Holy Spirit that animates his
Church and does not suffer it to consent and agree
together on any damnable heresy. We know of no examples
of Saints in Christ's Church, or before Christ's days, of
prophets and patriarchs among the Jews, that were first
approved by the Church and later proved to be false. The
bones of the Old Testament patriarchs Jacob and Joseph
were held in honour by the Jews. The bones of the prophet
Elisha worked miracles. The finding of Christ's Cross was
proved by miracles. From all this it well appears that
God would have not only the souls of the Saints honoured,
but also their bodies as well. When God rewards us by
performing miracles when we worship the Saints, can we
doubt that he wants us to worship them?
- 8. Chaps. 10--11
(226/1--237/14)
- 46. The Messenger replies (ch.10) by raising the
further objection that neither God nor his Saints can be
content with the way in which they are worshipped.
Firstly, we detract from the worship of God when we offer
to Saints the same worship in every point that we do to
God. Secondly, we diminish the worship offered to Saints
when we worship the images of the Saints in the same way
that we worship the Saints themselves, so that the
worship we offer to images and to the Saints makes them
equals with God. Furthermore, going on pilgrimages is
often an excuse for engaging in revelling and ribaldry,
glottony, wantonness, waste and lechery. Surely God and
his Saints would rather men stayed at home than offered
him such worshipful service. What about superstitious
devotions to the Saints? St. Eligius and St. Hippolitus
we make horse doctors, St. Appolina a tooth-drawer, St.
Syth helps women find their keys, St. Rock and St.
Sebastian cure people of the plague, St. Germain looks
after children, and St. Wilgefortis, or 'St. Uncumber',
uncumbers women of their husbands. [The Messenger then
tells two merry tales; the first from Pontano's
Dialogues about a procession in honour of St. Martin
in which pisspots are poured on the head of his image;
and the second about the shrine of St. Walery in Picardy
where wax votive offerings of male and female genitalia
are hung up on the walls as a protection against
gallstones.] The Messenger concludes by asking
Chancellor More whether God can be pleased with such
superstitious forms of worship which are against all
reason, religion, and virtue.
47. Chancellor More
responds (ch.11) to the charges made by the
Messenger. Firstly, though men kneel and bow to Saints
and images, it is not true they worship them in every
point like God, since the only thing that makes this
worship latria [cf. Book I, chap. 17] is
that they worship God with the mind that he is God. If
the bodily observance were the thing that made it latria,
then we would be guilty of idolatry in the honours we pay
to princes, prelates, and popes, whom we often show as
great reverence to, as to the images of the Saints.
Touching the second point that the people take the images
for the Saints themselves, when they prefer one image of
Our Lady or one cross over another, all it means is that
Our Lord and Our Lady, or Our Lord for Our Lady, shows
more miracles at one place than another, and that they
intend to visit these shrines. If you ask any woman
whether Our Lady of Ipswich or Our Lady of Walsingham is
Our Lady, she will tell you that Our Lady is in Heaven,
and that an image is an image not the thing indeed. If
you ask her whether it was Our Lady of Walsingham or Our
Lady of Ipswich that was saluted by Gabriel, or fled into
Egypt with Joseph, or stood by the Cross at Christ's
Passion, she will tell you that it was neither of them
but Our Lady herself that is in Heaven. These things I
have already proved to you many times. As for the
superstitious manner of worshipping Saints. It is not
superstitious to pray to St. Appolina for toothache,
since she had her teeth pulled out for Christ's sake when
she was martyred. St. Eligius was a horse doctor. Well
then, replies the Messenger, we should pray to St.
Crispin and St. Crispinian to mend our shoes since they
were shoemakers, and to St. Dorathe for flowers since she
always carries a basketful. The two situations are not
the same. When we pray for health of our bodies or even
our horses, it is because doctors often fail in their
craft, and to many men the loss of these things causes
greater suffering than can be easily borne with. However,
the latter things do not pertain to our necessities.
Though our chief concern should be to seek Heaven, God
the Father, who cares even for the very birds of the air,
also cares for our other needs as well, and even wants us
to ask him for them. Since Christ did not consider it
breaking the Sabbath to pull an animal out of a pit, it
is surely lawful also to pray for the healing of a poor
man's horse on St. Eligius' day. If our teeth ached, we
would not hesitate to ask help of St. Appolina and of God
also. And the devil as well, answers the Messenger. [The
Messenger tell two merry tales: one about a Lombard who
called on the devil for help with his toothache, and the
second of a man who in confession admitted that he did
not believe in the devil, he had such a hard time
believing in God.]
48. Chancellor More finds nothing wrong in the food
offerings offered to St. Germain, since they are
afterwards given to children or poor people. As for St.
Wilgefortis, or 'Uncumber,' the monks are not to blame if
women pray in their peevish prayers to be uncumbered of
their husbands, since the monks cannot perceive what the
women pray for, nor do they greatly benefit from the
offerings left to the Saint. The question here is not
whether a thing can be done badly, but whether it may be
done well. The abuse of a thing does not diminish the
goodness of the thing itself. In some countries men go
hunting on Good Friday. Whitsuntide is often an excuse
for lewd processions. Men get drunk even in Lent, and
Christmas is taken commonly as a time of liberty for all
manner of lewdness. This does not mean that we should
abolish these holy days, but that Christian men be
admonished to amend their ways and celebrate these feasts
in a more Christian fashion. It would hardly be right to
abolish the worshipping of Saints, reverencing of holy
relics, and honouring of Saint's images which bring so
much benefit to good devout people, just because some
folk abuse these things. If men ask evil things of
Saints, they do the same to God also. Robbers often pray
to God to give them good speed in snatching purses, and
to keep them safe doing so. Shall we therefore condemn
every man's prayer because thieves pray for success in
robbery.
- 9. Chap. 12 (237/15--246/15)
- 49. We can be sure that we believe aright not only from
reason and authority, but also from all the old holy
Saints and Doctors of the Christ's Church, such as St.
Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Basil, St. Chrysostom, and St.
Gregory. That they believed as we do is obvious from
their books, and was confirmed by God himself through the
miracles he worked on their behalf. On the other hand,
among the many sects of obstinate heretics we see no
Saint, nor any miracles performed by them. The Messenger
objects that since some miracles may be false, it may be
that those performed at the intercession of the old holy
Doctors of the Church may all be false. For though the
assistence of God and his Holy Spirit will not suffer his
whole Church to consent to any damnable error, yet he may
well suffer them to err in the knowledge and worship of a
particular Saint. Chancellor More responds that though it
is not a damnable error to take for a Saint one that were
none, or a bone for a relic that were none, it would be a
damnable error to worship any if we should worship none
at all. Since the Church believes we should worship them,
that kind of belief cannot be erroneous but must be true,
and this kind of worship, therefore, is not idolatry but
is good and acceptable to God. Thus our principal matter
still stands sure and fast.
50. You dont deny that
there are some Saints, and some miracles. No. For what
purpose does God work miracles? Was it not to make his
messengers known, and establish the truth of his message?
Yes. When Christ sent his disciples to preach and gave
them the power to work miracles, was it not in order to
prove the doctrine they taught? Yes. In the same way of
all miracles, we can be most sure of those performed by
the Doctors of Christ's Church. But miracles may be
feigned, objects the Messenger. It may be so, responds
Chancellor More, but not all of them. In the Old
Testament Moses vanquished the false miracles of the
Egyptian magicians, Daniel discovered the fraud of the
priests of the idol Bel, and Elijah by a miracle
vanquished the false prophets of Baal. If all our
miracles are feigned, let the heretics do some true
miracles themselves. The simplest sect of heretics,
replies the Messenger, can more than match you with
miracles. They may feign them, responds Chancellor More,
but the truth will eventually come out. Are there not
many sects of heretics? Yes. Are there more Churches of
Christ than one? No. Are not all the sects of heretics
false? Yes. Then by your argument the false and feigned
miracles are much more likely to occur among the sects of
heretics than in the Church of Christ. So it seems,
replies the Messenger. How comes it then that among all
the sects of heretics, there are not any miracles spoken
of at all? There may perhaps be some done, replies the
Messenger, but they do not speak of them for fear of
persecution. If these were false miracles done by the
devil it would not help your cause, responds Chancellor
More, for then you must grant that the true miracles are
only done in Christ's Church. If there had been any true
miracles done for any sect of heretics, then that sect
had not been a sect of heretics but the true Church, or
else God had testified the truth of a false faith which
is impossible. Unless there are two Churches of Christ of
two contrary faiths, then all the miracles performed in
one must be feigned and done by the devil. If the
miracles of this sect were true, then all ours are false
and our Church is not the true Church, but a false sect
of heretics, which I have already proved to you is
impossible. To prove more clearly that our side is true,
recall that there have never been any miracles done by
the leaders of any sects of heretics, but only for the
Doctors of our Church. Since there are so many false
sects and one true Church, and miracles are not spoken of
in any but one, it is a good token that the church in
which the miracles are done is the true Church of Christ
to which his Holy Spirit gives his special assistence.
51. Among the many great miracles that God has done
for his Church, one of the greatest is that among all the
sects of heretics that have sprung up and parted out of
Christ's Church, none have worked any miracles. It would
be a wondrous thing indeed if all the Doctors of our
faith were no Saints or saved souls, but instead the
Saints in heaven were those who taught heretical
doctrines, for that would mean that God has worked
miracles only on behalf of those who interpret the
Scriptures wrongly and teach false errors, and that God
had not sent the Holy Spirit to teach the Church the
truth as he said he would, but rather that God himself
was deliberately destroying his people---a thing which is
impossible for God to do and blasphemy for man to think.
Thus the Church of Christ cannot be deceived in that they
take for Saints those holy Doctors of the Church. Nor can
the doctrine, which these holy Doctors agree and consent
to, be false, namely: the praying to Saints, worshipping
of images, reverencing of relics, or going on
pilgrimages. Since the books of these holy Doctors were
written in different regions and in sundry ages, it is
clear that these things have been part and parcel of the
rites, usages, and belief of Christ's Church continually
from the beginning down to the present. Since it has been
plainly proved to you that God will not suffer his Church
to fall into any damnable error, it is clear that these
things are not damnable errors. Consequently, it was
proved that no text of Scripture that seems to imply the
contrary view, can be so taken or understood, nor that in
any matter prejudicial to the faith that the Church can
misunderstand the Scriptures. It was also proved that the
substantial points of the faith learned from the Church,
were among the surest rules found for the right
interpretation of Holy Scripture, and that no sect of
heretics can be the Church of Christ, but that our Church
is the true Church. It was also proved that the miracles
daily done in the Church, are neither feigned by men nor
done by the devil, but only by the mighty hand of God.
All your objections as far as I can see have been
sufficiently answered. The Messenger replied that he felt
himself fully answered and contented therein, and that he
thought himself therewith able to content and satisfy any
man, that he should happen to meet with that would hold
contrary opinions. Therupon we departed for that day
until another time upon which we had agreed to take up
the remnant of the things which he had in the beginning
intended to raise.
